ing larger and more common at scientific meetings—a trend The Class Poster Conference that has continued unabated through the past three decades. as a Teaching Tool Davis et al. (1992) surveyed poster presenters at the 1990 meeting of the American Society of Agronomy, Crop George R. Hess* and Elizabeth N. Brooks Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America (ASA-CSSA-SSSA). Posters were preferred to slides for presenting by 79% of respondents; 73% preferred Abstract posters for viewing. Although this sample may be biased, We designed a semester-long biomathematical modeling Davis et al. (1992) noted that 83% of respondents had expe- project that culminated in a professional-style class poster con- rience presenting both posters and slides. For reasons of ference. This approach was chosen over the traditional term prevalence and preference, we feel it is important to incor- paper to increase the amount and sources of feedback each stu- porate experience with posters into graduate education. dent received, provide students with opportunities to share A well-executed class poster conference fosters the their work with a wider audience, and foster the development development of important professional communications of important communication skills. Students experienced the skills (e.g., Baird 1991; Farber and Penhale, 1995; whole range of activities required to prepare for and attend a Moneyham et al., 1996). The sheer novelty of creating a professional conference, including writing an abstract, prepar- poster can also increase interest and motivation among the ing and presenting a poster, and answering questions from fel- students. An effective poster is designed around visual pre- low scientists at the conference. Student evaluations of the con- sentation and uses a minimum of text (Fig. 1). A poster con- ference indicated that it was an excellent learning experience. ference forces students to articulate both the big picture and However, as instructors, it was difficult to maintain the intense focus needed to give consistent evaluations during the 3-h the details of their projects. Because of space limitations, poster session. Multiple sessions, multiple evaluators, or col- poster presenters must edit ruthlessly and communicate their lecting posters for final evaluation after the conference may main points clearly and concisely—they must address the improve the consistency of poster evaluations. “So what?” question. Yet, to succeed, the presenter must also be well prepared to discuss details in response to ques- tions from a diverse set of viewers. ODELING BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS is a first-semester grad- The poster conference, and the steps leading up to it, Muate course in North Carolina State University’s greatly increased the amount and sources of feedback each Biomathematics Program. The course is designed to teach student received. In addition to evaluation by the instructors, students about the different types of models biologists use, student presentations were evaluated by classmates and how to select the right type of model for a given problem, other students and faculty who attended the poster confer- and how to run, code, and analyze a simple mechanistic ence. On a completely pragmatic level, the poster approach model. In this course, we accommodate students with a wide significantly reduced our grading burden. Instead of spend- range of biological and mathematical backgrounds and ing hours reading lengthy papers we evaluated 17 posters interests. A major part of the course is the modeling project: during one intense 3-h period. each student develops and presents a mechanistic model of Table 1. Poster session evaluation. The survey instrument asked stu- a biological system of his or her choosing. dents to react to each statement by circling a number from 1 (strong- In the past, students presented the results of their project ly disagree) through 5 (strongly agree). Free-form comments were in a paper submitted to the instructor. Our goals were to requested at the bottom of the page. increase student interaction, and to provide students with Statement n Mean (SE) opportunities to learn from one another and share their work 1. The poster session increased interaction among students. 14 4.71 (0.16) with a wider audience. We ultimately designed a sequence 2. By viewing other students’ work I was able to gain more 14 4.29 (0.22) of written and oral presentations culminating in a profes- information about topics I’m interested in. 3. I valued the opportunity to present my work in a form 14 4.79 (0.11) sional-style poster conference at semester’s end. From all other than a written paper. accounts, including an evaluation completed by the students 4. I attended last week’s poster review and critique session. 9 N/A (Table 1), the conference was successful and an excellent 5. Last week’s poster review and critique session provided 9 4.88 (0.15) valuable feedback that I used to improve my poster. learning experience. 6. I appreciated the opportunity to formally evaluate 13 3.38 (0.43) other posters. Benefits of a Class Poster Conference 7. I like the idea of having other students formally evaluate 14 4.29 (0.22) my work. 8. The poster session was an effective format for presenting 14 4.36 (0.31) Poster sessions first appeared in Europe as a response to the results of my final project. lack of time to present papers in the conventional oral man- 9. I received an appropriate amount of guidance in the 14 4.86 (0.10) ner. The first poster session at a major meeting in the USA construction of a poster presentation. 10. Overall, the poster session was a valuable experience. 14 4.64 (0.17) was held during the Biochemistry/Biophysics 1974 meeting 11. I would have preferred a full-length term paper to a 14 2.71 (0.42) in Minneapolis (Maugh, 1974). Poster sessions are becom- poster presentation. 12. The poster grade is an appropriate portion (35%) 14 4.21 (0.21) of my final grade. G.R. Hess, Forestry Dep., North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh NC 27695- 8002; and E.N. Brooks, Biomathematics Program, North Carolina State Other comments Univ., Raleigh NC 27695-8203. Received 22 May 1998. *Corresponding 1. Provide name tags for presenters. author ([email protected]). Web site: http://www4.ncsu.edu/~grhess 2. Photograph the poster session and include these photographs on next year’s Web site. Published in J. Nat. Resour. Life Sci. Educ. 27:155–158 (1998). 3. The poster session is a good idea, especially with outside participation. http://www.agronomy.org/journals/jnrlse/1998/ 4. This was a valuable experience.

J. Nat. Resour. Life Sci. Educ., Vol. 27, 1998 • 155 Table 2. Criteria used by the instructors and students to evaluate posters. Instructions to reviewer: Use these criteria to rate the poster presentation on a scale of 1–5 (1 = strongly disagree; 3 = neutral; 5 = strongly agree). Appearance 1. Display attracts viewer’s attention. 1 2 3 4 5 2. Words are easy to read from an appropriate distance (1–2 m). 1 2 3 4 5 3. Poster is well organized and easy to follow. 1 2 3 4 5 4. Graphics and other visuals enhance presentation. 1 2 3 4 5 5. The poster is neat and appealing to look at. 1 2 3 4 5 Content 6. Content is clear and easy to understand. 1 2 3 4 5 7. Purpose of model (question being addressed) is stated clearly. 1 2 3 4 5 8. I understand why someone might be interested in the model results. 1 2 3 4 5 9. Key simplifying assumptions are identified. 1 2 3 4 5 10. There is enough detail about methods (e.g., deriving rate equations and parameter values) for me to understand the model and results. 1 2 3 4 5 11. The approach taken is appropriate for the problem and technically sound. 1 2 3 4 5 12. Poster is free of unnecessary detail. 1 2 3 4 5 13. Conclusions are stated clearly. 1 2 3 4 5 14. Conclusions are supported by model results. 1 2 3 4 5 Presentation 15. Presenter’s response to questions demonstrated knowledge of subject matter and project. 1 2 3 4 5 16. Overall, this was a really good poster presentation. 1 2 3 4 5 Other comments (use other side)

The Conference

Fig. 1. Tips for effective posters. The poster conference was organized like those of many professional meetings. Students were assigned a space 2.1 m tall by 1.2 m wide for their posters. The 3-h session was divided into two blocks. Half of the students were required The Trail to the Poster Conference to stand with their poster during each block while the other half viewed and evaluated posters. Every student was The sequence of events leading up to the conference was assigned two posters to evaluate formally, so that each stu- designed to increase interaction and minimize procrastina- dent received written feedback from four people: one from tion (Fig. 2). The conference was treated in a serious and each of us and two from fellow students. professional manner so that the students understood it was The meeting was open to the public and about 50 people to be an important event. We reserved a ballroom in the stu- attended, in addition to class members. The energy level was dent union for an evening at the end of the semester and very high during the session and we listened in on several announced the event widely. Students experienced the animated and intense conversations among presenters and whole range of activities required to prepare for and attend audience members. From what we overheard, and the com- a professional conference, from writing a cogent abstract ments of other faculty who attended, the students were artic- before final results are available, to answering questions ulate in answering questions about both the details and rele- from fellow scientists at the poster session. vance of their work. Visiting students and faculty reacted As the conference approached we held a poster guidance very positively, and it wouldn’t surprise us to see a flurry of laboratory and a poster critique session. During the poster class poster sessions at North Carolina State University over guidance laboratory, the qualities of effective poster presen- the next few semesters. tations (Fig. 1) were discussed using examples of posters presented by the senior author. Poster evaluation criteria Improving the Poster Conference as a Teaching Tool (Table 2) were discussed and posted on the class Web site. We also displayed the materials required to construct a Although the conference was a success, there are several poster, provided tips to simplify the construction process, opportunities for improvement. The student suggestions to and directed the students to literature and Web sites that can supply name tags and to photograph the poster conference help improve poster quality (Fig. 3). For the critique, each for future classes are excellent ones (Table 1). student was asked to hang a preliminary poster, without An option to consider is requiring that the 2-page sum- fancy mounting and graphics. Markers were provided and mary handout be prepared for the poster conference rather students were encouraged to mark up each other’s work with than due after the session. This approach emulates more constructive comments. The students who presented prelim- closely the time pressures of a professional poster confer- inary work at the critique benefited greatly from the feed- ence and would allow students to evaluate one another’s back they received. handouts. The disadvantages of this approach for the stu-

156 • J. Nat. Resour. Life Sci. Educ., Vol. 27, 1998 Fig. 2. Steps leading to the poster conference, including form of presentation, timing, benefits, and grading. The project was worth 60% of the course grade.

Resources for Poster Presenters dents are that they may feel overloaded and that they do not have the opportunity to incorporate feedback from the Books poster session into their summary handout. The decision Block, S.M. 1996. Do’s and don’ts of poster presentations. Biophysical Journal 71:3527–3529. depends on the teaching objective. If the objective is to emu- Briscoe, M.H. 1996. Preparing scientific illustrations: A guide to bet- late a poster conference as closely as possible, then the sum- ter posters, presentations, and publications. Springer, New York. mary should be completed for the poster session. If the sum- Davis, M. 1997. Scientific papers and presentations. Academic Press, mary is considered a small poster and the objective is to New York. Harms, M. 1995. How to prepare a poster presentation. allow students to improve their work, we recommend Physiotheraphy 81(5):276. requiring the summary after the poster session. Teixeira, A. 1997. Preparing posters for technical presentations. A final issue for consideration is evaluating the posters. Resource 4(4):15–16. Remaining consistently alert and giving even treatment to Tufte, E. 1983. The visual display of quantitative information. all 17 posters during the 3-h period was difficult. For a much Graphics Press, Cheshire, CT. Tufte, E. 1997. Visual explanations: Images and quantities, evidence larger class, covering all posters without an excessively long and narrative. Graphics Press, Cheshire, CT. conference would be impossible. A break between poster sessions—perhaps a split between morning and afternoon, Web sites or over multiple days—would allow instructors to refresh. University of Newcastle, Department of Chemical and Process Engineering However, this multiplies scheduling requirements and the http://lorien.ncl.ac.uk/ming/Dept/Tips/present/posters.htm. 28 Sept. amount of time devoted to the conference itself. Another 1998. alternative is to split evaluation duties among several col- Princeton University, Department of Molecular Biology (same as leagues, with the potential for uneven grading minimized by Block reference above) clear evaluation criteria. A third option is to collect the http://www.molbio.princeton.edu/block/poster.html. 28 Sept. 1998. posters and complete the evaluation after the conference. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Using this option, more time at the conference would be http://www.siam.org/siamnews/general/poster.htm. 28 Sept. 1998. devoted to talking to the students and probing the depth of American Anthropological Association their knowledge, with consideration of aesthetics and poster http://www.ameranthassn.org/poster.htm. 28 Sept. 1998. construction techniques postponed. Regardless of how you decide to confront these chal- Fig. 3. A variety of books, articles, and Web sites describe poster lenges, you and your students will find the class poster con- preparation and the effective use of visual information.

J. Nat. Resour. Life Sci. Educ., Vol. 27, 1998 • 157 ference to be an educational and rewarding experience. You Blank, Douglas Wellman, and two anonymous reviewers for can visit the 1997 poster conference Web page at their comments on the manuscript. http://www.stat.ncsu.edu/~bma567_info/project97/ses- sion.html. The current project page is at http://www. References stat.ncsu.edu/~bma567_info/project. The current course Baird, B.N. 1991. In-class poster sessions. Teaching of Psychology home page is at http://www.stat.ncsu.edu/~bma567_info. 18(1):27–29. Davis, M., K.J. Davis, and D.C. Wolf. 1992. Effective communication with poster displays. J. Nat. Resour. Life Sci. Educ. 21:156–160. Acknowledgments Farber, E., and S. Penhale. 1995. Term paper alternatives: Using poster ses- sions in introductory science courses: An example at Earlham. We thank the students taking our course for their patience Research Strategies 13(1):55–59. and enthusiasm. Thanks also to the faculty and students who Maugh II, T.H. 1974. Poster sessions: A new look at scientific meetings. Science (Washington, DC) 184:1361. took the time to attend the poster session and contribute to Moneyham, L., D. Ura, S. Ellwood, and B. Bruno. 1996. The poster pre- the students’ professional growth. Finally, thanks to Gary sentation as an educational tool. Nurse Educator 21(4):45–47.u

158 • J. Nat. Resour. Life Sci. Educ., Vol. 27, 1998