BIOM40001 JULY 2023 | Assessment Brief: 3-Minute Research Presentation Page 1 of 5
—
BIOM40001 JULY 2023
School of Biomedical Sciences | Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences
Assessment Brief: 3-Minute
Research Presentation
BIOM40001 JULY 2023 | Assessment Brief: 3-Minute Research Presentation Page 2 of 5
Scientific Communication –3-minute research presentation
General information
This assessment task is worth 20% of your overall mark for the subject and will be presented as part of the
Honours/Masters 3-Minute Research Presentation (3-MRP) conference. This conference will be held on
Thursday September 28. The order of presentations will be confirmed closer to the conference date.
Task scaffolding
In the lead up to the conference, you will need to submit via Canvas:
• The title of your presentation; and
• A high-resolution PDF of the overhead slide you will be presenting (highest possible resolution). This will
facilitate smooth running of the 3-MRP conference, and avoid delays associated with the switch over of
presenters. The co-ordinators will preload all the slides to the seminar room computer.
Submission is due by Wednesday September 20, 11:59 pm.
Assessment rationale
The ability to engage and clearly communicate complex scientific ideas via a live presentation is a key
research skill. This often takes the form of an oral presentation to colleagues within your research field.
Indeed, many of you will deliver an oral presentation to your department as part of the research component
of your degree. Effectively communicating your research to friends, family, and the wider community,
requires a different set of skills to those required to present to your colleagues in the department – skills you
will develop while preparing a 3-minute summary of your research.
The three-minute research presentation (3-MRP)
The 3-MRP is inspired by the 3MT competition that was founded by The University of Queensland. As with the
lay proposal, the purpose of the 3-MRP is to provide an exposition of your research work in an
engaging manner targeted at an audience that is not expert in your field of specialty. The University of
Melbourne, as do many other institutions, has a 3MT competition for PhD Candidates. The stated purpose of
the 3MT is:
“The 3MT® is a professional and highly engaging international competition that challenges [research
students] to present their research in appropriate language to an intelligent but non-specialist audience in the
space of three minutes. The competition is based on the premise that the capacity to present a clear, concise,
and engaging description of their research is an essential skill that all graduate researchers should develop. It
also brings our graduate research community together in a spirited and research-focused activity, inspiring
them to share their findings with the wider community.”
BIOM40001 JULY 2023 | Assessment Brief: 3-Minute Research Presentation Page 3 of 5
Rules
For the purposes of the 3-MRP as an assessment activity in BIOM40001, we will follow the same rules and
judging criteria as the University of Melbourne 3MT:
• Presentations are limited to 3 minutes and competitors exceeding 3 minutes will be penalised 10% of
their assessment mark for every 15 seconds over 3 minutes of presentation.
• Presentations are considered to have commenced when a presenter starts their presentation through
speech.
• A single static PowerPoint slide is permitted (no slide transitions, animations, or 'movement' of any
description.
• No additional electronic media (e.g., sound and video files) are permitted.
• No props (e.g., costumes, musical instruments, laboratory equipment and animate backgrounds) are
permitted.
• Presentations are to be spoken word (e.g., no poems, raps, or songs).
Judging Criteria
You will be evaluated against two criteria: i) comprehension and content, and ii) engagement and
communication.
1. Comprehension and Content
• Did the presentation provide an understanding of the background and significance to the
research question being addressed while explaining terminology and avoiding jargon?
• Did the presentation clearly describe the impact, results and/or conclusions of the research
(intended or actual)
• Did the presentation follow a clear and logical sequence?
• Was the thesis topic, research significance, results/impact and outcomes communicated in
language appropriate to a non-specialist audience?
• Did the presenter spend adequate time on each element of their presentation - or did they
elaborate for too long on one aspect or was the presentation rushed?
2. Engagement and Communication
• Did the oration make the audience want to know more?
• Was the presenter careful not to trivialise or generalise their research?
• Did the presenter convey enthusiasm for their research?
• Did the presenter capture and maintain their audience's attention?
• Did the speaker have sufficient stage presence, eye contact and vocal range; maintain a steady
pace, and have a confident stance?
• Did the PowerPoint slide enhance the presentation - was it clear, legible, and concise?
BIOM40001 JULY 2023 | Assessment Brief: 3-Minute Research Presentation Page 4 of 5
Resources
You should watch Associate Professor Jennifer Martin’s videos on oral scientific communication. You may also
find the following resources helpful:
• 3MT Competitor guide
https://threeminutethesis.uq.edu.au/resources/3mt-competitor-guide
• The 3MT – Cornell University
https://gradschool.cornell.edu/academic-progress/office-of-academic-and-student-affairs/three-
minute-thesis/
• Preparing your 3MT presentation
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/internal/doctoralschool/researcherdev/threeminthesis/preparing3mt
• 11 Tips for preparing the 3MT
https://pipettegazette.uthscsa.edu/2020/08/21/10-tips-for-3-minute-thesis-competition/
BIOM40001 JULY 2023 | Assessment Brief: 3-Minute Research Presentation Page 5 of 5
Grading rubric for 3-MRP
Scoring Calibration
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Does not meet
expectations
Demonstrates
competency but
some major weaknesses
Demonstrates competency
but
some significant weaknesses
Good
but some flaws
Very good,
only very
minor flaws
Excellent, almost
flawless
Outstanding, no
flaws
Comprehension and content
Presentation provided clear background and significance to the research question /7
Presentation clearly described the research strategy/design (preliminary result can be included) /7
Presentation clearly described the expected research outcomes, and impact. /7
Score out of 21
Engagement and communications
The oration was delivered clearly, and the language was appropriate for a non-specialist audience /7
The overhead slide was well-defined and enhanced the presentation /7
The presenter conveyed enthusiasm for the research and captured & maintained the audience’s attention /7
Score out of 21
OVERALL SCORE OUT OF 42