Kjeldsen, J. E. (2006). The rhetoric of PowerPoint. Seminar.net: Media, Technology and Lifelong Learning, 2(1).
Dr. Kjeldsen makes some interesting points in his article about PowerPoint. He seems to go back and forth between negative and positive criticisms. I agree with some of his negative criticisms. People use the phrase “Death by PowerPoint,” in reference to those interminable, mind-numbing presentations we have all experienced. In addition, many of the presentations used in educational settings are a waste of the audience’s time. Case in point: an administrator I have worked with insists on using PowerPoint for every meeting. Little time and effort goes into the construction of the presentation; therefore, it detracts from the productivity of the meeting. The examples given by Kjeldsen are a little alarming. Is he serious when he reports that the Columbia Space Shuttle may have broken up because of a flawed PPt presentation? It’s also scary when he claims that “Microsoft’s presentation software is a technology which fundamentally changes our way of communicating and thereby of thinking – even without our being aware of the change” (p. 4). Any comments about this, fellow bloggers? Do we think differently because of PPt?
I agree that the templates, clip art, and formatting can be limiting, but there are other options. The software offers flexibility for the writer to be as creative as he/she wants to be. Kjeldsen never really addresses this option; instead, focusing on the problem of fixed formats that create students who are mindless notetakers, passively copying the text from the slides without processing the information. It is important for the speaker to think about the audience and make the presentation effective and engaging. Kjeldsen’s argument that “we need Media Rhetoracy to be conscious communicators” (p. 2) is true of any speaking context, not just PowerPoint presentations. However, he is correct that people misuse the software and do not choose the creative path. His example is Peter Norvig’s parody of “The Gettysburg Address.” http://norvig.com/Gettysburg/sld001.htm
Regarding our project for class about culture and language, I’m not sure where this article fits except to say that it’s important to be aware of how information is presented effectively.
Entries (RSS)
February 13th, 2007 at 2:34 pm
Rebecca,
your reaction to Kjeldsen’s article reminds me of all the flaws usually noticed in some powerpoint presentations. I remember one when the presenter just read for the slides. It was not too much exciting.After the presentation,I asked myself: Won’t be useful and productive not to use the powerpoint at all?In my opinion, powerpoint presentation is not always useful. lt is when it displays the major points to discuss and the questions the presenter wants to discuss with her/his audience along with some illustrations and figures.
As for your question whether Microsoft’s presentation software changes our thinking as argued by Kjeldsen, I think that we need to understand what Kjeldsen means by “thinking change”. Does he want to mean “how we really think”? Or does he want to mean “how the use of powerpoint presentation structures our thinking when we try to present”?
April 6th, 2007 at 2:52 pm
I just read Dr. Kjeldsen’s message on Lori’s blog. He referred to an article that analyzes Al Gore’s documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, as an exemplary presentation. It’s VERY interesting. Here is the address:
http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/dec2006/sb20061220_144107.htm?campaign_id=rss_topStories