10.8.2020

 For this class, we listened to the final 2 presentations by those who came to this school from the second semester. First of all, I really enjoyed both of them, as they were very eloquent in their use of language, and despite the circumstances of having to learn in a social distanced environment, their presentation quality was top notch. For example, their speech was very articulated by showing little sign of hesitation, making it engaging for the audience to listen to. In fact, I was drawn into one of the books showcased, which shows just how professional they sounded. Moreover, their slides also were fashioned well, as they chose pictures that matched the content of their speech, like using graphics to visualize the story and also, utilizing humor as an icebreaker to increase the dopamine level. I was impressed by the natural and witty use of humor that was useful in bringing the focus back onto the presenter. Since I didn't intend to impose a funny atmosphere for my presentation and thus the book itself, I didn't include as much humor, and even if I did try, I would probably feel very awkward afterward. For someone like me who doesn't view English as a native language, English humor for me is an intense gamble of audience reactions, which is why I am nervous to add anything that can be considered comedic. However, seeing how today's presenters were able to incorporate such a technique made me reconsider how I construct my presentation next time.

After finishing the presentations, Mr. Paterson showcased the presentation that we used last Saturday as a model. It was a great honor that our slides were shown, but as the teacher started pointing out the greatness of it, I realized that some of the things he said weren't on my own book review presentation, which was embarrassing since I was one of the members who created that same presentation that Mr. Paterson demonstrated. For example, I had not included one keyword for each of the slides as I thought my message would be clear enough to convey without one. Yet, when I look back and compare with the one shown, I could see a vivid difference in the coherency. Not only do keywords help project the context but with the right adjustments in font and color, it can serve as a string that can pull all the slides into one methodical bundle, meaning that when audiences see the slides, they know which slides belong to a particular presentation. Looking back at the pictures, I acknowledged that this was necessary since the pictures that I used during the last half were all individually saturated differently and thus looked very random overall. By adding text which is consistent throughout, I thought it could help differentiate and link all the slides into one comprehensively organized piece of work.

However, Mr. Paterson also pointed out how he doesn't prefer the boxed out letter since it hides a part of the picture, and I did use that way of design on my presentation. Some of the text did look distant with the picture because of the colored boxes, but I was willing to sacrifice the aesthetic for a more coherent look. Now, without the blue text boxes, I wouldn't have had matching slides. Moreover, if I did take off the highlights, then I would need to change the font and color for every picture since they all emit different color levels, and so although only the text could fit well, I thought that the result would become too messy to compromise. I feel like since it's intentional, then it should be okay to do so, and I would like to point that fact out during the feedback session net week.