Close
today i learned (til)

How to Create Effective STEM Presentation Materials

April 19, 2022

Last month our STEMComm Team put together an event called MindCraft which focused on the science of arts and crafts. This involved setting up several tables, each of which was dedicated to a different craft. In order to create effective and engaging tables, each cohort also created materials such as posters and interactive worksheets. My table focused on the eye and how it works to perceive different colors while also relating it to color blindness. Below I include the poster, flyer, and interactive worksheet we created for this station along with tips and things to keep in mind when creating your own!

 

  • Poster 
    • Colorful 
      • It is important to create eye-catching materials so that people are drawn to your topic. (To read more about this, check out part 1 of this series where I give the top 5 tips to planning a STEM communications event!)
    • Not too wordy 
      • You do not want to overwhelm or bore your audience by making materials that are too wordy. Too many words will also draw the attention away from what you are saying as people will begin trying to read the content on the materials.
    • Images 
      • To aid in making your audience interested and also keeping them engaged while not taking the attention away from your presentation, include images! Choose images that reflect what you are presenting and act as an aid and supplement to your presentation. It could even be an image that you refer to in your oral speech so that you keep them engaged in what you are saying.
    • Neat 
      • It is also important to make sure that any material you are presenting is neat and organized so that your audience can take in the information effectively and efficiently. By doing this, you again are avoiding anything that takes away from your presentation. It also helps your audience be less confused about your topic so that you can answer engaging questions rather than clarification questions.
  • Flyer 
    • More detailed 
      • When presenting a smaller piece of material such as a flyer, you can include more detailed information than your large poster. This allows the audience members that are interested to look further into what you are presenting without overwhelming casual viewers.
    • Still includes images 
      • Despite having more details, you can see that including images is still important. By including this, you can more effectively present your concepts in a way that can easily be taken in by your audience.
    • Clearly labeled 
      • With this, it is imperative that if you include a diagram as we did, that it is all clearly labeled. If you do not, you risk confusing your audience and not having a clear understanding of the diagram so you cannot effectively speak on it. It is also important that you know how to speak on the parts of the diagrama and explain everything effectively (read more about rehearsing and being prepared in part 1).
  • Interactive Worksheet 
    • One side with supplemental information 
      • By providing supplemental information to your presentation in the format of a worksheet, you give the audience something they can take with them. This keeps them engaged with your topic past the time of your actual presentation and also allows them to continue learning.
    • One side with fun coloring activity 
      • Interactive 
        • This provides something interactive for the audience to engage in that is fun. This again keeps them engaged and interested in your topic area.
      • Way for people to connect to the content presented 
        • Additionally, it provides a way for them to apply the information they learned from your presentation which is known to be one of the most effective learning strategies.

Thank you for reading and best of luck to you on your future material creation and presentations!

0Likes
About Author

You May Also Like

today i learned (til)
Fast Fashion and Greek Life: Overconsumption in Style
today i learned (til)
Would a Victorian-era child survive the miracles of the modern day?
today i learned (til)
How The Science of Neuroplasticity Can Help You
today i learned (til), vintage science
A Chemist, a Vegetable, and Iron Oxide Walk into a Bar

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.