MURC Resources

Preparing your proposal and presentation can be challenging. Here are the tools you'll need to make it a success.

Submitting a proposal

Reviewers of conference proposals read a large number of submissions to determine whether the proposed paper or poster meets the requirements of the conference and how the submission might best be combined with other presentations in oral sessions or poster displays. They may or may not be experts in your area of study. Reviewers need to understand clearly:

  • the importance of the research project
  • the existing state of knowledge
  • the research question
  • the method or methods used
  • the main findings

Since MURC is not a specialized conference, reviewers will also be assessing whether an interested non-specialist audience will be able to follow the presentation. Including brief definitions or explanations and using concrete “real world” examples helps non-specialists understand what your study is addressing and why.

The research project

  • Did it clearly and convincingly communicate the demonstrated location of the project in the research field? (What is existing research/work in this field, and where is project located vis-à-vis existing knowledge?)
  • Did it demonstrate clarity of method in a fashion that is easy to understand? Did it clearly link method to the research question?
  • Did it support claims by findings? Was this clearly and convincingly communicated?
  • Did it investigate the significance of the research, and its contribution to the advancement in discipline and/or understanding of ‘the world’?

Making your presentation a success

Effective oral presentation criteria

The adjudication process

  • Presentations are to be 10 minutes in length, with a follow up of approximately 5 minutes for questions.
  • PowerPoint files are expected.
  • The decision of the adjudicating panel is final.

The oral presentation

  • Was the audiovisual presentation professional in manner and visually pleasing?
  • Does the text, and any graphics, videos or other media enhance understanding of the research?
  • Was the talk clearly organized and logical? Was there an introduction that provided a roadmap for the presentation? Were there natural and well positioned transitions between sections?
  • Did the presenter(s) engage the audience in a highly-articulate manner? Did they speaks confidently, rarely needs to utilize notes, maintain consistent eye contact with audience, vary their tone of speech regularly, and adheres to time limit with excellent pacing?
  • Were they able to hold the attention of the audience through the presentation and question period?
  • During the presentation and question period, did the presenter(s) show comprehensive knowledge of research issue and responds to questions confidently, thoroughly and appropriately?
  • Did the presenter(s) show comprehensive awareness of MURC demographics by presenting research in a manner that is completely accessible to a scholarly non-specialist/multi-disciplinary audience?