PowerPoint - Innocent until proven guilty - the case for the defence

Marijana Vucic-Pecnik,Natalija Andracovic-Kostanjevac, Phil Dexter, Zagreb, Croatia

We were intrigued by Mario's 'The Bane of PowerPoint Presentations' editorial in the September issue of HLT and the follow-up article by Rick Cooper in the November issue, The good the bad and the powerpoint. We feel prompted to respond as regular (and, we believe, effective) users of PowerPoint. Before presenting our case for the defence there are a few points we'd like to make. The first is that we completely agree with the points mentioned on the 'bad PowerPoint presentations we have seen' - and we have seen many. We also believe strongly that PowerPoint for many presenters has become a sole visual mode of presentation that is extremely one dimensional and boring and have also wished on many occasions, as Rick mentioned, for a power failure during 'a death by PowerPoint' presentation. In fact, on one occasion this wish was granted with a general sigh of relief all round. However, we feel that is wrong to blame the tool when the problem really lies elsewhere.

Imagine an architect who sets out to design the interior of someone's apartment. She is using 3D design software to help her visualise and manage the space more quickly and more efficiently. She is using her expertise, taking into account the needs of customer, the potential and confinements of the space in creating the final product. Somewhere else in the world, another architect is using the same software in designing a kindergarten. He is using his expertise, taking into account the needs of users, the potential and confinements of the space in creating the final product. Even though they were using the same software, their products were not the same, because of the existence of so many different factors that determine the final outcome. This design software is a tool used in the creative process, and it can be used by engineers, mechanics, landscape artists etc., for purposes ranging from electrical wiring to garden design.
PowerPoint is another example of software and it is advertised as a product that in the words of Microsoft:

…lets you create, present and share powerful presentations. Support for additional file types gives you enhanced capabilities while new features help you broaden the reach of your work.

We have no wish to advertise for Microsoft but it seems to be worth giving this some closer inspection - 'Lets you create' cannot be mistaken by 'creates for you' or 'makes you create contrary to your intention'. It implies the presence of a conscious and active agent. If we were to follow the argument in articles that focus on the misuse of PowerPoint, it would mean that all products of PowerPoint software are, by default, essentially the same. This software is simply a tool and does not determine how it will be used. It doesn't tell you how to organise your content, whether to apply a hierarchical structure of organising your ideas or a different mode. It doesn't dictate your tempo or the choice of visuals/sounds. And above all it doesn't dictate how the final product will be used in your communication with the audience. A conscious and active agent will use the PowerPoint guided by the awareness of the audience and their needs, his/her content knowledge, self-awareness (confidence levels, knowing one's strengths and weaknesses in communication, public speaking, and using IT). We disagree with the argument that PowerPoint offers a fixed frame that impedes real communication with the audience. It actually facilitates the speaker's capability to react to an immediate need of the audience by making it possible for the speaker to flexibly digress from the sequence of slides by exploiting the multitude of hyperlinks to sound files, graphics, movie clips, internet web pages, other slides within the presentation etc. There needn't be any slavery to the hierarchy of slides.
The choice of lateral exploration, spatial analysis, speed of delivery, reading from the slides or skipping through slides, allowing for questions anytime or only at the end is entirely up to the speaker and is accentuated by his/her level of improvisational performance. The feature of PowerPoint is that it makes all these decisions more apparent, doubly advantaging those who use it well, but also doubly disadvantaging those who use it poorly. This we feel applies equally in using any methodological approach or training process. Many times we have delivered training session with trainees saying afterwards that these ideas were great. But sometimes when used in a different context they don't have the same impact? Why is this so? We think it is for one basic reason that it is not the content or even the process of a training session that works any magic but the energy between the trainer and the audience - this is what really matters and the rest (including PowerPoint) are merely tools to facilitate developing this energy.

For example, in a conference session, the PowerPoint product is only one of the elements of communication and not the communication itself. In our experience of using it, the PowerPoint presentation has been an anchor for both us and the audience - presented in bullet points!

- We strongly believe in the usefulness of applying concepts and tools implicit in Multiple Intelligences and NLP. PowerPoint is a tool where we have integrated a multi-dimensional and multi-sensory approach when presenting. While we detest the templated sound files such as 'clapping' and 'machine gun fire' we do use music and video files to enhance this multi-sensory approach;
- Auditory comprehension may pre-date writing but visual representation certainly predates both and we make the most of this;
- A PowerPoint Presentation, for us, is like a lesson/training plan. In planning we think of the audience, what we'd like to present and what we might do. What we actually do depends entirely on the dynamic between ourselves and the audience. Sometimes it's a straight presentation, sometimes it is more interactive and other times we just bin the presentation after 5 minutes…;
- PowerPoint (and other visual presentations) has for us been a wonderful tool to use for some presenters lacking in confidence in verbal skills where they have a visual back up which they can share with the audience. - While 'Death by PowerPoint' is deathly - it isn't anywhere near as deathly as a conference paper that is just read aloud;

Much of the argument against PowerPoint has relied heavily on the view of Edward Tufte. We would suggest readers of HLT also look at some of the criticism of Tufte's views. Don Norman, Gene Zalezny, Seth Godwin and Rich Meyer - to name but a few. Take a look at 'Five Experts Dispute Edward Tufte on PowerPoint' by Cliff Atkinson in which all the above are interviewed. Gene Zalezny's view is one we strongly support - "With incredible and due respect to Edward Tufte, and I mean incredible and due respect for his books, his role as a teacher, his ideas, I disagree with his criticisms of PowerPoint. Going back some 45 years, and having lived though the eras of producing visuals with pencils and varityping machines, and India ink and ruling pens and protractors and slide rules and zip-a-tone and Dr Martin's washes and speedball pens and……, PowerPoint is one of the most advanced and sophisticated production tools on the market, which deserves a standing ovation…."

We're very pleased that Mario fired off on this as it prompted us to think about this (and write this article). We do not believe in new innovations or fashions for the sake of it whether technological or not. However, we do believe in developing an effective ELT methodology for what is a technological age (HLT is a great example of this in reaching thousands around the globe). The issue, for us, regarding PowerPoint (or any other technological device) is how do we harness and control it to work for us and not leave it in the hands of those who would deliver 'death by boredom' presentations whichever tools they use.

Marijana Vucic-Pecnik, Natalija Andrakovic-Kostanjevac and Phil Dexter

All three of us live and work in Croatia. Marijana and Natalija are teacher trainers working for the Croatian Ministry of Defence and leading trainers in the British Council Peacekeeping English Project. Phil is currently the British Council Peacekeeping English Project Manager in Croatia.