After spending the week at the #SXSWEDU conference I have some thoughts on what we’re doing with traditional academic conferences and what we could do to make them better.
A rambling thread while I’m at the bar after 8 hours of sessions🧵
FWIW to start, in my experience @improvingpsych has it most right.
They’re interactive, engaged, and have varied session formats.
But they are the outlier, not the norm.
In The Times Before The Internet™️ academic conferences served to expose people to new research results — useful!
But now? Academic conference sessions are only opportunities to add lines to a CV.
Why engage in a session when I can read the research you already posted online?
But NICOLE it’s about the networking! Yes, obviously. Just plan a group trip & do fun stuff then if it’s not about the research?!?
Oh bc we need cv lines? Boring. 😴
Our obsession with metrics in academia is expensive. Grad students spending 1000s for a line on a cv. Wtf.
#SXSWEDU instead has only a few standard “talk” sessions of 20 min. And these are for big impactful projects.
The rest are hour long panels where diverse education professionals are discussing key topics in education, creative practical workshops, and interactive roundtables.
#SXSWEDU has so many people from a variety of industries and roles. Academic conferences are a bunch of the same kind of people — researchers.
Get outside your box!
I’m interacting with researchers, presidents, higher ed, k12, tech founders, non-profits, teachers, etc.
Our standard academic conference is constrained by our hyper-focus on CV lines.
It’s why people find the sessions boring. Most don’t go to the talks and instead spend their time in the halls. It’s why many don’t love online conferences— bc it’s just hours of talks.
Let’s reimagine the academic conference. Let’s create programming that mimics our social interactions, brings diverse people and roles together. We can imagine better ways to share research that doesn’t just repeat what we already shared online.
Let’s innovate, not replicate.
- panel discussions on key topics
- bring in people that our research impacts & let them speak!
- brainstorming sessions
- poster roundtable sessions
- creative expression
- live podcast recording sessions
- collaborative activities
What else? Can we nix the 15 mintalk already?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Last week I gave my first invited, hour long talk at a conference and had a strange new experience.
I wasn’t nervous before. No increase in heart rate. Just calm energy.
And it was the best talk I’ve given.
Not sure when the transition occurred, but I have some thoughts. 1/
In grad school we practice tons of research presentations at conferences and in classes. But despite all those presentations I still got nervous before every talk.
Looking back, I realized that a limitation of this practice was that it’s just one form of presentation. 2/
Practice of course matters, but more important are consistency and varied types of practice.
This variability is key and means that practicing only research tasks isn’t the most effective way to make you a better presenter. 3/
Great question! What’s going on behind the scenes? I’ve been on the board of an academic society for 5+ years and hosted an online conference last year for 600 attendees.
1. I presume most societies are paying a LOT for fancy conference app licensing fees, like Whova for instance. Especially with big conferences 1000+ people, this can get expensive. You’re also paying for labor of those that are monitoring for tech issues, customization, etc.
BUT there are amazing start-ups out there too! @HumBehEvoSoc used @ohyayco last year and we had an amazing experience and our members loved it.
This Month's #BookmarkedReads📚 curated reading list provides eight of my favorite books on US education. These books will collectively provide a foundation from which to expand your understanding of both K12 and #HigherEd.
As the title suggests, The Missing Course: Everything They Never Taught You about College Teaching by @dgooblar, teaches you everything you were never taught about college teaching.
In How We Learn: Why Brains Learn Better Than Any Machine . . . for Now, Stanislas Dehaene explains four key pillars of learning that can be applied to how we teach and how learning environments are structured.
No. 2 – Introduction to Psychology with Better Readings where I give you a full reading list of popular books that are way better to read than your dated intro psych textbook
PhDs - if you’re not super into stats and data analysis and looking to shift to #altac/non-prof roles the skills you want to hone & excel at are:
- Writing (but not dense academic writing)
- Project management
- Strategic, big picture thinking
You have a leg up here ^^ use it.
Now two years out, I look on whether my PhD was “worth it”.
If only based on job requirements then no. Most roles I want don’t need a PhD.
BUT my PhD gave me the writing, PM & strategy skills I use everyday that will get me on a new path. So yes, it was worth it.
I did so many types of tasks during my PhD and it really is all about leveraging those things and being able to translate what you did for a new career audience.
Your PhD also gives you confidence and leadership skills that most just don’t have coming out of undergrad.