Presentations are a poor substitute for genuine student engagement

If transferable skills must be taught at all, an anxiety-ridden exercise frequently done very poorly is not the way, says Gary Thomas 

July 18, 2022
A student gives a presentation
Source: iStock

The heartbreaking news that University of Bristol student Natasha Abrahart preferred to take her own life rather than make a presentation to staff and students should prompt us to reflect on the value of this widespread method of teaching and assessment.

In my 40 years teaching in higher education, I have seen student presentations become if not ubiquitous, then very common. The general pattern is of a weekly four-hour module block broken into one or two hours of lecturer-centred presentation, with the remainder of the time comprising student-centred presentations or workshops of some sort.

I had assumed that this had become the default arrangement only in the social sciences, arts and humanities, but Natasha’s subject was physics. Her presentation was part of what was called a “laboratory conference” and, as is common, assessment was built into it.

Natasha’s fear arose out of a level of social anxiety that amounted to a disability. But, in my experience, assessed presentations induce unhealthy levels of anxiety in most students for days or weeks before. When they come to stand before their colleagues, many students shake with nerves.

This anxiety affects their performance: presentations are usually not very good, and often very poor. Despite the copious advice we give students on best forms of presentation, they rarely feel confident enough to extemporise or question ideas, preferring to plough through notes or read verbatim from densely packed PowerPoint slides. Their trembling voices are not easily heard, and despite their willingness to support their colleagues, fellow students often seem disengaged. The cynical among those colleagues might remark that they are not paying substantial sums in tuition fees to hear other students give weak presentations on the topic in hand.

Rather than demonstrating the criticality that we would wish to see, students invariably think the safest bet is to present an assortment of putative facts gleaned from websites and textbooks. To wean them off the deeply ingrained delusion that this is a good presentation strategy, tutors would have to spend inordinate amounts of time discussing epistemology and the value of critical thinking. On top of teaching presentation skills, that would leave a lot less time for the subject in question.

The practice of using student presentation usually sails through module validation exercises on the grounds that it helps develop “transferable skills”, mainly centring on communication. But why do we think we need to teach “skills”, transferable or otherwise, in the first place? Students come to university to study physics, psychology, English or whatever – not presentation or communication.

“But they jolly well should be learning these skills,” I can hear my critics saying. “It’s part of the university experience and, what’s more, these are skills they will need in life.” Well, there are plenty of skills that students would find useful in their work or home lives, from how to reset the consumer unit and organise a spreadsheet to tact in dealing with colleagues and making one’s voice heard in a meeting. But these, quite rightly, don’t make it on to the curriculum.

Communication and presentation skills: wonderful. But don’t pretend they’re a necessary part of a physics curriculum.

And don’t assess students on them. To do so is patently unfair. The qualities needed for confident, skilled presentation are far removed from those needed for gutting a topic – agility in thinking, factual retention, critical analysis – in any subject. The greatest name in my own field, education, is John Dewey. He was a famously dire lecturer and spoken communicator but this did not stop him making some of the most significant and long-lasting contributions to educational thinking in modern times.

The ubiquity of presentations, if we’re honest, has as much to do with the calculations behind teaching hours as with nurturing communication skills. It’s about management of face-to-face teaching time in such a way that there is student engagement and involvement. We all want student engagement – but let’s not confuse it with some notion of “transferable skill” in a pretence that the latter is a validly assessable feature of a university curriculum.

Gary Thomas is emeritus professor of inclusion and diversity at the University of Birmingham, and a chartered psychologist.

POSTSCRIPT:

Print headline: Presentation isn’t engagement

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Register
Please Login or Register to read this article.

Related articles

The pandemic has accelerated numerous experiments in assessment for the digital age, moving beyond simple knowledge recall. But is the traditional exam really obsolete? As the dust settles on another marking season, seven academics give their widely differing views

Reader's comments (2)

"Communication and presentation skills: wonderful. But don’t pretend they’re a necessary part of a physics curriculum." Communication and presentation are basic life skills. The art of the written word is a mode of communication and presentation. "The qualities needed for confident, skilled presentation are far removed from those needed for gutting a topic – agility in thinking, factual retention, critical analysis – in any subject." This is empirically incorrect. A study of applied psychology is linked below. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/acp.3410?campaign=wolearlyview I would expect better given the qualifications and background of the author. Presenting materials to others enhances their own understanding. I learnt this, teaching mathematics in my first undergrad year to others in economics who had never done A level maths (v few unis let you do econ without a maths A level). Socialising improves your retention. "assessed presentations induce unhealthy levels of anxiety" I understand that this is the case but we have a problem if nobody can present. We live in a democratic society where these people have influence over themselves and others by systematic means. The confidence to even speak to themselves is essential. When you are at University, you are not yet a productive member of society. The way to get over the anxiety is to keep on doing it. It is the case with actors or sportsmen. When you get used to the audience, the anxiety can be dampened or even go away entirely. "The cynical among those colleagues might remark that they are not paying substantial sums in tuition fees to hear other students give weak presentations on the topic in hand." You watch and learn what to and what not to do. You also learn the art of testing unclear presentations and learning to gain clarity on essential information during the feedback process. It certainly isn't dead weight. At any serious uni, students tend to give reasonable presentations with some effort. I understand the background of the author and the empathy displayed, however we shouldn't allow our empathy to cloud our judgement. University life is easy compared to the real world and everything can't be easy. It's a very maternal trait. Our mothers, even into adulthood want life to be easy for us by general case. Unfortunately, this isn't a world of fairytales and rainbows. We have to leave our comfort zones to become productive, satisfied members of society and that involves socialisation.
Sorry other respondents. I agree wholeheartedly with the writer. My husband taught English in Scottish comprehensive schools for 25 years. Over the years poetry, drama and novels were given reduced time on the curriculum in favour of communication. This apparently was in response to feedback from employers and business interests. So who is education really for? Parents don't appear to have been consulted or the trade union movement. Business has its nose in too much of what makes society work, as for example CEOs running health and education.

Sponsored