By: Abigail Morrow and Isaiah Coleman

Our Presentation:

Content-

Covered the broad strokes really well, but could have also focused more on why it is a Grand Challenge. We think we covered our topics really well and used very current and relevant facts and studies. Although we could have made our point about why making solar energy economical is a grand challenge. We definitely could have tied back to the main point more from each of our subtopics.

Style

We think our presentation had a very professional feel, and had no graphical errors. But we needed to add sources. Our presentation was very clean and precise, but subjectively could have included more images. We feel our organization flowed really well.

Other’s presentations:

1st Presentation Carbon Sequestration

Addressed why it was a grand challenge and then two case studies/ methods, was very clear in their stance and argument. But was not organized in the best manner. Good informative graphic’s that helped their presentation. Needed to balance speakers out more, we only seemed to focus on one person.

2nd Presentation Solar Energy Economics

This presentation had plenty of graphics although they were not always implemented well and addressed why their topic was an engineering grand challenge and why. They focused on the same subtopics as us but spread their presenting out differently. As the presented we could only really hear and focus on one of their presenters, but they were not as extreme as the first presentation we watched. They also seemed to rush the last part of their presentation, it was not as detailed and they seemed pressed for time. But they gave very detailed explanations when they answered questions.

Other Questions

• The other presentation with our topic came to very similar conclusions, and even focused on the same three subtopics, economics politics and technology.
• We don’t feel we had too many preconceptions for presentations. Although we did think we would have more questions after the presentation.
• After seeing other presentations, we would have added sources and possibly more images. For our written report, we will make our argument about the grand challenge much more clear, especially in the introduction. None of the other presentations were particularly striking, they were fine and had well rounded speeches but not stand out. For our presentation we felt we spread the talking out the best in regards to the other presentations we saw.
• We definitely saw some presentation pitfalls, especially with covering text with images, which can be resolved by proofreading presentations before submitting them. Our group has some pitfalls delivering orally with unnatural pauses and slight deviations from the presentation. There were also a lot of different presentation paces either to fast or too slow, although we preferred slow to too fast.
• We found slides with changing text colors very unprofessional but we liked slides that had concise text that was easy to read. In the darkened classroom we found a darker color scheme with light text to be more pleasing to look at.

• A definite strong point for this slide is our informative graph. As well as main points in text that were then elaborated by the speaker. This slide could be improved by adding more explanations to the main point as sub bullet points and adding sources to facts and the image.

• Notes taken by Abigail Morrow
• Research
  • Abigail found 5 sources (journals/newspaper, environmental economic & political)
  • Isaiah found ~3 sources(newspaper/scientific study report, technical & economic)
  • Hannah found ~
• Paper
  • 750 to 1000 words
  • ~250 each leaving 250 for intro and conclusion
  • How strict are they going to be grading word count?
    • For Lauren
  • Isaiah’s technical -> Hannah’s economics -> Abigail’s political
  • Information blocks first
  • Turn into presentation
  • Make paper
  • 5 sources minimum
    • 2 of those will be peer reviewed academic journal
  • Rough draft done by Thursday
  • Editing of the rough draft
    • Save for power office hours

• Presentation
  • Do we want to start on Google slides or Power Point
    • Start in google slides then convert to Power Point
  • Need to meet to practice
    • Sunday possible Monday
    • Thinking afternoon
  • 5 min presentation
  • Need tether diagram
  • Presentation done by Sunday to practice with
• Memo
  • Putting off until presentation is finished
• Make a google doc and a google slides
• Share sources

Notes taken by Abigail Morrow

Your mission in this assignment is to research and analyze the significance of

your assigned EGC and construct a critical argument with compelling

evidence about why this topic is or is not one of the “game-changing goals for

improving life on the planet.”

What is our stance?

• Appropriate goal but consequences
• Short term major consequences but long terms should achieve goal
  • Not easy to get there
  • Time consuming and expensive

WHY SHOULD WE ACHIEVE THIS GOAL?

• Current scientific stands
• Not necessarily solar solutions

WHY SOLAR ABOVE OTHER POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS?

• Not an ultimatum
• Solar energy is more consistent
  • Factual backing
• Should the answer be no instead making more forms of renewable energy more economical?
• How do we make this a viable alternative
  • This being forms of renewable energy

You will write a paper, deliver an oral presentation, and reflect on the experience of completing the project in a team.

The purpose of this assignment is to research, understand, and synthesize the

information related to your assigned EGC and develop your own conclusion

while giving evidence to support your response.

• Create a graphical tether diagram that links your EGC to an array of

contexts (social, cultural, technical, scientific, geological, ecological,

environmental, political, economic, etc.)

●Identify tradeoffs between the contexts listed above.

●Define sustainability in relation to your EGC and use it as a criterion

for analysis.

●Analyze the rhetoric that is used by the NAE to identify and validate its

choices of EGCs.

●Reference relevant ethical theories necessary for defining and solving

problems within your EGC.

Discussed goals and checkmarks(things we need to do)

Time line

Everyone gets at least one source per specific subtopic and then sends via GroupMe or Email a specific subtopic that really interests them (pick subtopic(s) by end of day Thursday)

• *Trying to ovoid overlap and cover our broad topic*

“Solar is very important and would be life changing if it was made more economical but don’t forget about any of the others.” Hannah

Balance between all forms of energy

Put links to all sources in one doc on google doc

IEEE type citations

 Plan to meet next Tuesday