The Shallows

Pretend this was a 50-minute presentation to an adult audience. What slides or section would you cut to save time? Please leave your thoughts in the "comments" section below.
View more presentations from Spiro Bolos
Upvote Upvoted 0
31 responses
If you needed to cut out parts of this presentation, allow I really liked all the examples at the beginning and the science of the brain, I don't think it directly answers the question at the beginning and I think it takes focus off the main point. Also the examples of the other types of technology, were unnecessary.
— Margaret Oley
If any part had to be left out, I believe that it should be the Section "A History of Literacy" until the part, "A Universal Medium". The part about the history of literacy does not add to the presentation as much as the other sections do. It rather gives a background, and does not really supply statistics and facts towards answering your overall question. I believe that the evolution of writing and reading is important however, it is not necessary in order to understand your argument. The part about censuring is interesting and supports the argument, and I believe that the results of the two searches by the two people should be made aware to the reader. I was shocked when I saw how Google was censuring the material on the searches based of characteristics about a certain individual, and I believe everyone should know that fact about Google.
— Aaron
I think that it would lose meaning to remove the discussion. But, I think that some parts could be skipped such as some of the experiments towards the beginning like the violin experiment. Also, I think a little less time could be spent on the history of literacy. It is interesting but the main point can be made in fewer slides.
— Peter
I agree with Aaron that you should cut out the "History of Literacy" to around the picture with the winter forest. Although I think that section is very interesting, I don't think it supports your thesis as well as the other sections. I think it's necessary to include the information concerning the plasticity of the brain because it helps legitimize your claim-- it shows that our brains really can change, and it may be because of the tools we use. I also agree it's important to include the Google info, because it helps show how much the informational lens is narrowed when using the internet.
— Noor Qasim
I agree with the above posters that the "History of Literacy" section is a bit drawn out. Why not move briskly through it, then contrast the prior mediums you covered with the "universal" medium of the Internet? This could lead directly into how important technology is, and how it's causing some of the problems you believe a universal medium creates (for example, the parts about skimming information, and how information isn't absorbed as well from a screen).

Overall, I think the presentation has some really good information, but I think if you're pressed for time, the wisest thing to do would be to thin out your presentation so that only the parts you need to advance your argument get included. You could open with the history of these sorts of technologies, just make that part shorter. Then, that could lead into how important technology is to our lives (it reshapes our brains). Then that could go to your main point which is how it is detrimentally affecting our brains. I think this is the part you should spend the most time on, and the part where you should place the most emphasis on. You can then end it with your old ending (which I thought was really effective).

— Alex
I think that the slideshow is very good, but you have to many examples. Once, you use the piano player and the taxi cab driver to essentially solidify one point. There are other instances such as these that will help cut down on time, but still keep points that you are intending to prove. The one thing that I believe you should absolutely not cut is the analogy of the bathtub and the thimble. When you presented that analogy everything that you were trying to prove, regarding short term and long term memory, was very easy to understand
— Drew Fischer
I really like the slideshow the way that it is. I liked the historical build up from the cuneiform to the book, in the History of Literacy section. However, to shorten up the presentation I think you don't need to spend as much time on these slides, still without cutting them out. Also, you could cut out the first three types of technology and go straight to Mental Power. All together I thought the presentation was awesome, you used a lot of cool examples from studies that have been conducted, if you really have to you could narrow down the amount of examples. Maybe just include one of the musical studies. I think you should keep the video with the scroll and the book because its funny, and actually puts things in perspective. Lastly, you spent a good amount of time explaining what a medium is and I think with an adult audience you won't have to explain things in as much detail as you did with us. Really interesting overall, maybe you should just ask for more time to present
— Peter S
I really liked the presentation, and thought everything was very interesting. Everything in the presentation helped me understand the main point better, but when discussing about the taxi cab drivers and violinists, you really only need one. The history of literacy is really interesting, but you could do it in less time, with less detail and fewer slides.
— Jenny Bock
Although I loved the section on the history of literature and the Monk video, I am not sure how much relevance it had to the main point of your presentation. Don't cut it out, because I believe that your audience would enjoy the humor, however maybe try to spend less time on a few of those scenes. If need be, cut out the Monk video. I also don't think the cab driver (and hippocampus section) was that necessary. Again, I was very interested by it, but I think it distracts the audience of the main point. But besides this, I found your presentation to be very interesting and fun to listen to!
— Amanda N
I see what people are saying about the History of Literacy Section, and I agree that it could be shortened a little. However, I don’t think it should be cut completely. I felt like it gave a lot of important insight into why today’s technology affects us so strongly, and it helped me understand the specific ways that literacy has influenced our development. If that section were to be cut to save time, maybe some of the information could be summarized and incorporated into the previous section about the different types of technology. I think that the mediums for text could be considered examples of intellectual technology, which might also help us draw more connections about how technology shapes our brains.
— Lauren
I really liked the presentation, it was a very interesting topic to think about! I liked the slides about the different experiments (Edward Taub and Pascual Leone's experiment) because I think it is something many people can relate to, therefore making it easier to understand. Also, I liked how you included every once in a while how the brain works, and what parts of the brain cause different things. My only "constructive criticism" would have to do with the long quotes. Some times you paused to let the audience read the quotes, but not always. When you didn't give us time to read it, just simply put it up there while you continued talking, it made it difficult for me to concentrate on one thing, so I felt like I was missing something either way (whether I listened to you or read the slide). Besides that one detail, I think the presentation was very good, and I think everyone will enjoy listening to it! Thanks for sharing with us!
— Sidney Lind
I agree with shortening the History of Literacy section. It can be shortened, but definitely do not cut out the whole thing. It adds to the presentation and will still do so if shortened a tad. Over all I enjoyed the presentation and it left me thinking. Now every time I'm on the computer I think back to this. Thanks for letting us be your guinea pigs!
— Claudia DeTrempe
On the whole I really enjoyed the presentation. I think the topic is great because of how relevant it is to everyone in our society. I recommend that you keep all of the content from the last day of presenting because I thought it was the most interesting and it was what the whole presentation was building up to. I would shorten some of the History of Literacy section (slides 40-55). However I don't think this section was the biggest reason the presentation spanned three class periods. To reduce the presentation to 50 minutes, I would "get the ball rolling earlier" and not have as much Q&A at the start, so that you can introduce the topic more efficiently and begin to focus the audience in a particular direction before tangential discussions begin to pop up. To make it easier to digest for the audience, I would rearrange some of the slides, like the experiments described in the beginning, towards the end, just before the thimble and bathtub analogy. However, since the audience will be that consisting of adults who have more prior knowledge on the topic than us students, I think that will drastically lower the amount of questions, resulting in that it will not be necessary to remove huge amounts of the slideshow. I enjoyed the presentation a lot and (although unlikely) would like to hear it in its final form.
— Colin McCune
I agree with previous comments about the History of Literacy section. I thought it added a nice background which was helpful in our understanding of the way our society has changed and adapted to advancements in technology, but thought that it could be shortened. In doing this, you could still provide background info without making the presentation too long. I thought the section about the taxi driver was very interesting, but maybe you could put it in the final section when you explain your main point. It's a great example of how plastic our brains are, so it makes sense to present it alongside the advertisements section so you can show how much advertising can mold our brains. Overall, I enjoyed the presentation and thought it was very, very fascinating!
— Sabrina Fosse
As many people have mentioned above, I think you should definitely spend less time explaining the history of literacy, even though the examples really helped build up knowledge to understand how our brains work. There are just too many examples to fit everything in time. You should keep the video, however, because it adds humor and can be used to bring back anyone who may have lost focus. Also, you could consider shortening the technology section because you are just presenting an opposite side of your argument. Overall, your presentation completely blew my mind; it was full of great information and ideas that I would have never thought about and you really helped us comprehend the material. The fact that struck me the most was how the Internet is actually bringing us back to the caveman stage, to more distractedness, because we think that the medium is one of the most innovative and necessary technologies human beings have developed, but you refuted that myth. I really enjoyed your presentation!
— Ruth Lee
1) Expect a naturally shorter presentation based upon time spent on interruptions within the class.
2) Assure that when explaining the molding of the brain and the biology behind it (ex. the neuron) that some basic comprehension of the brain is known by your spectators and therefore do not slow down that section to make sure every single person is on track.
3) Try to clear up your "Plastic does not mean elastic" quote. While it makes sense that the brain changes and stays changed, you can also loose certain neuron connections with time (forgetting how to play the piano) if not exercised appropriately, which could possibly return the brain to its previous state. I guess what I'm saying is to tread lightly and be as specific as possible when explaining what the quote is really saying.
4) While the "History of Literacy" section is very good and well support, it ate through a very long time period. Try to cut down time on slides 44-50, 52-55.
5) The information on the "F" idea of reading on a computer is an interesting supporting point, it is just that. A supporting point. So, you should treat it as such and spend 25% of the time you did in class on it during the presentation.
6) In 8th period we had a large discussion over slide 80. Make sure that if you do have a similar discussion you budget your time and answer 3-4 questions or comments.
7) Spend more time on conclusion, if possible.

Overall, the presentation was enjoyable!

— Kevin Sokal
I think that you should definitely keep a majority of slides we covered on the last day of the presentation because they are the most relevant to the main idea, and more interesting ideas. The presentation will be shorter when shown to adults because they are more familiar with some of the ideas you are showing, and can see the change in children with the introduction of the internet and all of these gadgets that people my age have and still are growing up with.
I think that some time could be cut from the "4 Kinds of Technology" because hopefully people will understand what you mean by; Strength and Senses. Possibly less people will understand what you mean by just saying nature, so I think that those three images can be grouped together on one or two slides (Similar to the slide regarding mental power) instead of 6, and you could focus more on the fourth type of tech. I think that some time could also be cut from the instrument and taxi cab examples, by just grouping the two instruments into one slide and summarizing the experiments instead of polling the audience on if they think the right or left side of the brain is bigger after the violin experiment, and if the people staring at the piano got the same mental growth as the people that played it. I think you did a great job on the presentation and power point and not a large amount of change is needed.
— Aubrey Ellis
I would agree with what others have been saying above about the History of Literacy section. It's interesting, and the video was definitely a fun touch, but I'm not sure you needed it all there to make your point. I also feel like a lot of the stuff dealing with memory and the way our brains actually work was good, and that it was overall important to the message of the presentation, but that you could probably shorten some of it and use the main points with some supporting details/analogies (like the bathtub vs thimble, which I thought was particularly effective) instead of using a number of details surrounding the main points. The side stories were really interesting and useful, but I think they could have been shortened to make the presentation snappier. Overall, an excellent presentation.
— Brian Tsuru
I agree with the comments above. I thought the last day of the presentation related to your end argument the best and I also thought the first day was very interesting. I would say that without class questions the presentation will go by quicker. If you were to cut anything out I would not spend so much time on the "elastic not plastic brain" because learning about left-handed people and taxi drivers was interesting but did not directly support your end argument. I would also cut out some examples especially on the "history of literacy" but I would not take out too much.

Overall, I enjoyed the presentation and found it very interesting.

— Kelly f
I believe that although the "History of Literacy" portion is extremely interesting and entertaining, I don't think it's vitalin order to understand the brain and what effects it. I also think that by removing this section you would lose a lot of time, for the video, though hilarious, was probably a solid 5 minutes that wasn't necessarily necessary.

I also found the slide about college rather unnecessary, for it seems a bit random and also uses up time, for it involves a class discussion of sorts.

Lastly, I found the video / section about how Google and Facebook sensor what pops up, or attempts to make things "easier" or "more relevant" for you was also slightly off topic. I thought it was really interesting, but didn't understand how it related to the elasticity of our brains and how technology morphs it.

Overall, I really really loved the presentation and the discussions that went along with it. It allowed me to do the type of thinking I rarely use in school - the rather philosophical type of thinking.

— Laura D.
Great job all together i really enjoyed the whole thing. I think that you need the parts about the brain being plastic in order to further prove your final point. I like all of the examples and if there was one part i had to take out it would be the story of the cab drivers in London. Or just kind of skim over that part but I think the whole thing fits together well and the only reason you should take something out is to shorten it, not because some ideas are less in value to the main subject.
— Matt S
Absolutely fantastic comments so far, and I really appreciate the thoughtful + constructive feedback. If you feel that you are just repeating the comments of others at this point, why not go to another post and leave a comment or question. For example, does everything in The Mission post make sense? If not, leave some feedback.
— Spiro Bolos
I also thought that a few slides in the History of Literacy could be cut- while interesting, it is too much background information.

On a side note, when he mentioned the experiment where one group simply visualized themselves playing the piano, did anyone else have Professor Harold Hill (from The Music Man) and his "Think System" come to mind?

— Elizabeth W
I really enjoyed this presentation mostly because it makes me think about my everyday actions and interactions with the technologies, as I am currently. I feel as if most of your slides had a clear purpose, or at least intended purpose. Most of these I believe remain relevant as background and as a way to engage your audience.
I wonder if all of the historical connections you make actually dilute the argument you are trying to prove. I love how you show a progression, a change of technologies because it demonstrates that this isn’t our first major shift when t comes to literacy. However, talking about the cost reduction as a result of the printing press or why spaces were added between words seems a bit irrelevant to me.
When it comes to your neurological examples, I was greatly intrigued (as neuroscience is a passion of mine), however, I don’t think your audience needs to know specific examples of how the brain is reshaped. Perhaps you could mention the neuron, how its dendrites continue to branch, and then describe that new neural pathways re formed- I think that example is important. However, mentioning music, cab drivers, and the hippocampus might be going a bit too off topic. I loved your plastic- elastic quote because I believe that is an important distinction (that once we are changed- we are changed for good).
The next section that I believe could be shortened and not take away from the presentation is the four kinds of technology. You can easily motional all four, but you may not need to give examples for the first three- to me the ideas seemed pretty self explanatory and I didn’t feel like much explanation was necessary.
Overall however, I believe your argument is well supported and clearly explained. Everything you said was great, but with time some points were more relevant than others.
— Emily Isaacson
Fist I'd like to say if the presentation could be longer than 50 minutes I wouldn't take out anything. The presentation was also drawn out due to the discussion, so hopefully you'll be able to keep some more of the slides and limit the amount of Q & A. I liked how you related each topic between humans today vs. humans before modern technology, showing how little the human brain has evolved. This comparison clearly shows how modern technology has adapted to attract attention towards and make money off of human nature. This is also why I think it's important you keep the "A History of Literacy" section, because it shows how mediums have changed, yet they always relate to our natural tendencies (simplicity, efficiency, distractions, thirst for knowledge, etc.). However, I do agree with the other comments that this section could be shortened by taking out some of the examples. I don't think the "effect on the writer" is worth mentioning either, because the presentation is designed to portray the ways people (students) perceive different mediums. Maybe it's because I love science, but I thought referring back to the human brain and how it's effected by different occupations or experiments (Taub's and Pascual Leone's) was a good way to show how different people use their brains. Because you wanted to focus on technology that effects mental power, I don't think you need to give examples of the other three types of technology; simply mentioning them is good enough. I also think you could take away several examples like the notion that humans read internet sites in an "F" formation, because many of your most interesting examples are loosely connected to the main topic. I loved the STM vs. LTM metaphor with the thimble and the bathtub, and I wish there was more information on the shallows and what it means to use mediums wisely. Above all, I think it's important to keep information that shows which mediums convey information most efficiently, in order to stay out of the shallows. Overall I loved the presentation.
— Danny Hines
The presentation was amazing!
I think a couple of the slides did not relate to your main point. Although interesting, I didn’t quite see how learning about the major focuses points on a website, the “F-shape”, pertained to your point of technology shaping our brains. I think you shouldn’t cut out any of your example slides, because they extremely interesting and give your audience something to think about. However, I do think that they sometimes distract from your main point; if you could find a way to relate your example slides to how technology affects us throughout the presentation, it might help the audience as a reminder to what your main point is.
I really enjoyed the presentation and the discussions that followed because they really made me think about technology and the impact it has on us!
— Helen D
Overall, I really enjoyed this presentation because I felt like I could relate to it so easily- many of the points applied directly to my life. Besides the content, what I really liked about it was how visually appealing it was, and also how the slides transitioned from topic to topic smoothly. Not necessarily something that needs to be cut out, but maybe changed, is how some of the quotes and text you have on the slides are long. I found myself struggling to decide whether to listen to what you were saying, or to try and read the slide.
Like others have mentioned, I feel that the four kinds of technology was extra background information that can definitely be cut out. There is a lot of background information overall, and I think that though it is necessary to include, spend less time speaking about that since the audience is different and likely has more previous knowledge on the topics.
— Hannah B
Really interesting!
Unfortunately I have been absent and was not able to see the presentation in its entirety. However, what I did see was good. The overall material is excellent, because it establishes a relationship with the viewer. It displays information and ideas that we can connect with, for example how many hours the average person stares at at screen per day (scary!). The difficult task ahead may be shortening it down to the 50 minute limit. However, the length may be due to the fact that you were explaining a lot of stuff to us that possibly people at the conference may already know, in which case you might not have to shorten it very much. I think that if you stay on your main argument and support it with a lot of the quotes and evidence you have it will be a very strong and successful presentation.
— Molly F
Your presentation was really great! I thought the material you were talking about was very intriguing becuase it all pertained to my own life. I thought that all of your slides were "eye catching" and the way you moved from one point to another was very smotth. I also really liked how interactive you were with the audience. I thought that made it much more entertaining and personal than if you were just talking to us the whole time; although, you might need to explain less background information to us, and skip a couple of questions/discussions with the audience to shorten it a bit. I thought that the bit about the taxi driver, although interesting, was not necessary to proveyour final point.Overall I really enjoyed it and thought that you had a very valid point. I agree with you that technology is definately warping our brains, and it might be hurting us along with helping us.
— Meg Sadera
I would first like to say, that the part of the presentation which explained the interenets effect on our STM and LTM was very interesting. It seems as though the interenet in a way, is becoming an extension of our LTM. What i mean by this, is that having all this information at our disposal (on the internet,) causes students to no longer feel the need to truly, and extensivly read and comprhend all of the information that they encounter on the internet. It is like the old saying, "why memorize phoen numbers if you have a contact list?" Now it is in a way becoming, " Why truly learn, and comprehend all of this information, and commit it to our LTM, if it will always be available and accesible online?" I found that intriguing. However, in terms of the powerpoint, it was overall very interesting. Like many of the comments above, i too believe that it can be presented in only 50 minutes, for when it was presented to us, there was lots of class interaction and questions. However if this presentation were to be presented to a group of adult educators, and was more of a presentation, and less of a class disscussion and interaction then it easily could be done in 50 minutes. However I do think all of the information and slides are very important, and would not reccomend cutting too much information out of the presentation, for i think all of the information presented was important to the topic and interesting. Many people seem to believe the "history of literacy" section should be shortned, however I think that this was important, and helped the audience further understand the nature of writing, the nature of the internet, and how they compare.
— Ben
This presentation was fascinating and thought-provoking, and it's unfortunate to have to cut parts out from it. I agree with the general point of the comments; that the history of literacy section, and some of the history leading up to the formation of the Internet, and hypertext, and how it affects our brains, might be made more concise. Although, I think that the overall argument, while really interesting, didn't *always* connect to some of the history leading up to the end. Or rather, I feel that maybe some information could be added, discussing how the Internet affects not only our brains but makes for a potentially "shallow" society; maybe including some more analysis of the *dangers* of the brain plasticity, etc., not only the reasons and causes but maybe some potential effects. Overall it was a great presentation and I enjoyed watching it.
— George A
Add Website URL »