CMPT 773 (Fall 2006): Readings on presentations and slideware

Resources about presentations, slideware in general, and Microsoft PowerPoint in particular

Parker, I. (2001). Absolute PowerPoint: Can a software package edit our thoughts? New Yorker, May 28, 2001.

This is the best overall summary of how presentations may be degraded by slideware. The opening eight paragraphs capture the essence of the problem. Now, if I could only fit Parker's logic into bullet points...

Tufte, E. (2003). PowerPoint is evil. Wired, September, 2003.

Edward Tufte is the world's leading author on information presentation. In this editorial, he makes the case that PowerPoint is corrupting our presentations---and through them our thinking.

Tufte, E. (2005). PowerPoint does rocket science---and better techniques for technical reports. [Online document and discussion]. September 6, 2005, with ongoing discussion.

Tufte's analysis of key slides from Boeing's presentation to NASA on the damage level to the spacecraft Columbia. These slides were used in a discussion of the damage level to the space shuttle. The participants ultimately agreed to allow the Columbia to reenter the Earth's atmosphere, resulting in the destruction of the spacecraft. Tufte extends this discussion to more general principles of how to make a good technical presentation. For our class, I only ask that you read Tufte's comments. The discussion following Tufte's comments is also interesting, if you want to follow it. Careful, though! Following all the links from this thread can consume a lot of time.

Schukat, A. (2003). Kung fu secrets of the PowerPoint masters. Business 2.0, September 2003.

This slideware article (there's nothing specific to PowerPoint in the article) is written from deep inside the very culture that gave rise to slideware. Compare the way this article is organized with, say, Parker's article, or even Tufte's online discussion. Nonetheless, the seven tips will improve your presentations.

Optional readings

Swartz, A. (2003). PowerPoint remix. [Online document]. May 23, 2003.

A clever parody, not required reading for the class session but great fun. Swartz takes Tufte's argument against PowerPoint and, uh, recasts it into PowerPoint bullet points. A version of Peter Norvig's Gettysburg Address parody, but with a postmodern, self-referential twist.

Reading questions

1. What, if anything, is lost when an argument is reduced to bullet points?
2. Are some kinds of arguments more suited to bullet points? Less suited? Which ones?
3. Slideware has the merit of forcing presenters to think through presentations in advance. But it forces you (or strongly encourages you) to think about the presentation in a certain way. Might there be better ways of preparing?
4. How much is the ubiquity of slideware a cultural expectation rather than a natural advance in presentations? Do you think the ancient orators of Greece and Rome, or the advisors to the monarchs of ancient Persia, India, and China, would have benefitted from slideware? Would they even have understood its underlying assumptions?
5. All the slideware critiques in the readings approach the problem from a cognitive perspective, considering the arrangement of the argument. Make an additional argument from a basis of visual perception. Use one principle from Ware's book.

Acknowledgements