©Copyright 2005, Association for Institutional Research

Using Advanced Tools, Techniques, and Methodologies

Association forInstitutional Research

Enhancing knowledge. Expanding networks.Professional Development, Informational Resources & Networking

IR Applications

Best Visual Presentation –Observations from the Award Committee*

Volume 4, April 6, 2005

In 2003, the Association for Institutional Research(AIR) initiated the Best Visual Presentation (BVP) awardto acknowledge the contributions made through newways of professional communication, in addition to thosemade through more traditional scholarly formats. Fueledin part by advanced technologies, as well as by changingnotions of organizational decision-making processes andindividual learning, visual presentations are increasinglyimportant in enhancing our understanding of issuesrelevant to the higher education enterprise. The ability todevelop effective visual presentations is an importantaddition to the narrative and quantitative techniques moretraditionally employed in scholarly and professionalsettings. Visual presentations are important forcommunicating with various audiences. The awardrecognizes expertise in this area, and is expected to helpelevate professional norms surrounding this importantinstitutional research function.

A BVP subcommittee of the AIR PublicationsCommittee issued a call for submissions and evaluatedthem. In 2003, nine presentations were submitted and in2004, 13 presentations were submitted. The purpose ofthis IR Applications is to provide observations from theBVP Award Committee about attributes of presentationsthat we found to be particularly good as well as those thatwere especially problematic. This publication is notintended to be a comprehensive discussion of what makesa good visual presentation (other publications providemore information; see list of references). Moreover, theinclusion (or lack) of techniques articulated here doesnot automatically ensure a high quality visual presentation,as there are issues related to the balanced use oftechniques that we observed in our reviews. Our goalhere is to share what we’ve observed in order to foster

improved visual presentations at subsequent AIR Forumsand in other venues in which institutional researchersprepare and present data and information.

To reach our conclusions, we reviewed BVPsubmissions in both electronic and paper formats,discussed them together, and reached consensus aboutwhat made for excellent or poor contributions. We usedthese criteria, which were articulated in the proposal toAIR to initiate the BVP award:

l Properly chosen format and design appropriatefor the identified audience.

l Focus on the effective presentation of data andinformation rather than visual effects for their ownsake.

l Design quality, such as clarity of data/informationpresented; visual attractiveness; use of color, whitespace, graphics and other design elements; ·and readability, including font size and style.

l Display of an accessible complexity of detail.l Narrative quality that effectively tells a story about

the data being presented.l Design execution (e.g., sharpness of visual

images).l Paper color and stock (if appropriate).l Appropriateness for identified audience.

In addition, we acknowledge some of our judgmentswere based on more subjective, aesthetic criteria. Forthe most part, our observations are derived from thereview of electronic PowerPoint presentations, as this isthe medium most frequently used in the BVP submissionswe received.

Before presenting our examples, we note that the BVPaward focuses on presentation materials in isolation fromtheir use. Therefore, there is an assumption that thematerials need to ‘stand alone;’ that is, to be interpretableand sensible in isolation from the manner in which the

*Committee members 2003-2005: Trudy Bers, Susan Broyles,Martin Carroll, Bob Daly, Rene Cheskis-Gold, Eric Dey, DonaldQuirk, Andreea Serban, Jeffrey Seybert, Fred Volkwein

Trudy Bers, Oakton Community College with Susan Broyles, Martin Carroll, Bob Daly, Rene Cheskis-Gold,Eric Dey, Donald Quirk, Andreea Serban, Jeffrey Seybert and Fred Volkwein

IR Applications, Number 4, Best Visual Presentation . . .

2

presenter interacts with these materials during thepresentation. While this certainly holds true for aconference presentation that is intended for subsequentpublication, it is perhaps a more stringent requirementthan is the norm for most presentation materials, whichare typically evaluated in conjunction with the presenterand the content.

The slides used below are provided with the consentof their creators. It should be noted that a slide might beused to illustrate the specific attribute we wish to highlight,even if the slide in totality includes attributes we do notadvise. Now, in the spirit of collegiality, we offer ourperspectives.

Attributes of ExcellenceThe excellent visual presentations we reviewed have

these attributes, though not every presentation has all ofthem. We have included examples of slides we assessedto be excellent illustrations of our points.

l Use visual balance and apply sound artistic andgraphic composition principles. What does thismean?

l Large, simple, bold fonts, (and we meanlarge).

l Good use of color, including color contrasts.

l Judicious use of templates and backgrounddesigns; this also means not devoting adisproportionate amount of space to logos orother design elements that reduce spaceavailable for or detract from presenting dataand information.

We believe this slide, from a 2003 IPEDS presentationthat was recognized for good practice, is a good example.

l Provide appropriate visual focus and draw the eyeto the key point(s). The following slide, from a 2004presentation about the use of GIS systems, providesa good illustration of our point. The presenterswanted to highlight data from three communities inparticular, and used a lighter color in the table todraw attention to them. (At the same time, thesmall font size and amount of data presented heredetracts somewhat from the overall visual quality ofthe slide.) Note the highlighted data would be evenmore salient if the background were white ratherthan light blue.

l Rather than presenting a page full of numbersshowing the frequency distributions and means ofresponses to survey items, use a bar chart to showthose scoring above and below the scale midpoint.For example, the following chart from an AlbanyAlumni study draws the viewer’s eyes to the contrastbetween those responding YES versus thoseresponding NO to three different survey items andthree different populations. It shows the meanresponses to the 5-point scale in the center column,and asterisks the significant differences, thuspacking a good deal of digestible information intoone display. The chart was created essentially bydoing the left hand bar (from a spreadsheet), thendoing the right hand bar and copying them onto thesame slide and adding the means and scales.

l Draw viewers into the presentation throughpedagogical devices such as quizzes and rhetoricalquestions that help engage the viewer in the materialupon which the presentation is based. Doneeffectively, this can move the audience toward adeeper understanding of the material presentedthan would be likely with a simple display of datapoints. The following two slides were part of a 2003

IR Applications, Number 4, Best Visual Presentation . . .

3

presentation about the IPEDS Help Desk; thepresentation was recognized for good practice.

l Use of humor. Some researchers seem reluctant touse humor to punctuate their presentations, perhapsout of concern that it might weaken the perceptionof the quality of work being presented or fear of

trying – but failing – to be funny. Humor in visualpresentations can be useful in engaging anaudience, by strengthening a point, making it morememorable, and enhancing the enjoyability andmemorability of not just a presentation, but thematerial being presented. The following slidesillustrate the use of humor; they come from a 2004BVP submission that was recognized for goodpractice.

l Marriage of the medium and the message. Ourfirst BVP award winner, created by Martin Carroll,exemplified this attribute. Available on the AIRWeb site for members (look for paper 648, Track 6,Tampa Forum papers), the presentation usesdifferent renditions of da Vinci’s Mona Lisa as ametaphor for the important point Carroll makes: todemonstrate excellence, different approaches areneeded that go beyond “objective measurements”and “minimum control standards.” By displayingdifferent renditions of this famous portrait that buildfrom a dotted outline, to a fill in the blank picture, tothe masterpiece itself, the visual presentation runparallel and is well integrated with the line ofargument that Carroll offers.

IR Applications, Number 4, Best Visual Presentation . . .

4

Problematic AttributesAs we evaluated Best Visual Presentation submissions,

we noticed recurring characteristics of presentations that,in our view, detracted from the quality and effectiveness.As with our attributes of excellence, this compendium ofproblems is not exhaustive, but reflects common “mistakes”we found during the two years of the BVP awards.

l Avoid using small (unreadable) tables and charts. Asresearchers, we are often zealous to present all ofour data, and often do so in the same format we usein print publications and reports. Tables and smallcharts are rarely readable in PowerPoint presentations,however. We suggest these alternatives:

IR Applications, Number 4, Best Visual Presentation . . .

5

l If your purpose is for participants to see/understand the data, put the table in a handoutand bullet key points in the PowerPoint.

l If your purpose is to display how a table isorganized, use large fonts to label the columnsand rows and don’t fill in the cells with numbers.

l Avoid allocating disproportionate space to logos,headers, and graphics that don’t advance the contentof the presentation. We saw slides that allocatedone-third of the space to design devices, leavingbarely two-thirds of the slide space for substantivematerial.

l Avoid poor choices of colors, such as colors thatclash, provide too little contrast, or shimmer whenplaced adjacent to one another. (Kosslyn’s Elementsof graph design, 1994, provides an excellentdiscussion of color.)

l Avoid the use of 3-D bars or pies when only twodimensions of data are presented. Such graphicdisplays of data actually distort the meaning. Toillustrate, we’ve created a simple example. Thereare two dimensions of data, fall semester enrollment(by year) and number of students in each timecategory: online, weekend, evening and day. Howmany online students were there in 1999? Was thetotal 2003 enrollment approximately 11,000 or closerto 11,500? The third dimension simply muddies thedata.

l Avoid excessive repetition of design and/ortransitions. A design and color scheme that iseffective and appealing for several slides canbecome tedious when used too much. Likewise,slide transitions can interfere with the visualeffectiveness of a presentation and, when the same

transition is repeated over and over, can becomemonotonous.

Thinking about Visual PresentationsIn addition to the observations offered above, the

literature on graphics and information design can providea useful set of frameworks to plan and implement yourown work related to developing visual presentations.There are many excellent Web resources available onthis topic (including the “Guidelines for Forum Presenters”available on the AIR Web site), as well as more traditionalscholarly and professional outlets. A comprehensivereview of this literature is beyond the scope of this article,but we highlight below ideas, insights, and resources thatshould prove useful to the AIR community in preparingvisual presentations (and some of which also helpedinform the development of the BVP award itself).

Among those working in this area, Edward Tufte is awell-recognized name in both scholarly and professionalfields. Professor Emeritus at Yale University, Tufte is theauthor of seven acclaimed books and taught courses onstatistical evidence, information design, and interfacedesign. Tufte recently wrote an influential essay titled“The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint,” in which he arguesvociferously that such programs reduce the analyticalquality of most presentations, and that “the popularPowerPoint templates (ready-made designs) usuallyweaken verbal and spatial reasoning, and almost alwayscorrupt statistical analysis” (http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/powerpoint).

Writing in Wired magazine (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/ppt2.html ), Tufte summarizes hisconcerns about PowerPoint-driven presentations in thisway:

Presentations largely stand or fall on the quality,relevance, and integrity of the content. If yournumbers are boring, then you’ve got the wrongnumbers. If your words or images are not onpoint, making them dance in color won’t makethem relevant. Audience boredom is usually acontent failure, not a decoration failure.

At a minimum, a presentation format should dono harm. Yet the PowerPoint style routinelydisrupts, dominates, and trivializes content. ThusPowerPoint presentations too often resemble aschool play – very loud, very slow, and very simple.

The practical conclusions are clear. PowerPointis a competent slide manager and projector. Butrather than supplementing a presentation, it hasbecome a substitute for it. Such misuse ignoresthe most important rule of speaking: Respectyour audience.

Was 2003enrollment11,500 or11,000?

IR Applications, Number 4, Best Visual Presentation . . .

6

So how might we best develop and organizepresentation content? In another work, Tufte identifiedprinciples of graphical excellence useful to those creatingvisual presentations (Tufte, 2001). To quote (p. 51):

“Graphical excellence is the well-designedpresentation of interesting data—a matter ofsubstance, of statistics, and of design.

Graphical excellence consists of complex ideascommunicated with clarity, precision, andefficiency.

Graphical excellence is that which gives to theviewer the greatest number of ideas in the shortesttime with the least ink in the smallest space.”

These principles are important touchstones againstwhich to evaluate both the visual and substantive qualityof presentations. Presented as statements of logic andargument, they force the presenter to think through whatit is she wants her audience to learn, whether and howevidence supports assumptions or conclusions, andwhether visual material helps or hinders making thesepoints. Put another way, adherence to the graphicalprinciples sharpens the substance of the presentation.

In addition to observations useful for organizingpresentations, Tufte (1983) has contributed to ourunderstanding of effective and efficient displays of datathat are often incorporated into visual presentations. Heasserts that such displays are those that have eliminatedchartjunk (graphical elements that are really cleverflourishes, but not useful contributors to the display orunderstanding of data), maximized the ratio of data to inkor pixels (which implies the reduction or elimination ofgratuitous graphical decoration), included multifunctioninggraphical elements (ones that simultaneously servemultiple purposes), and demonstrated high data density(e.g., the ratio of data points to area created by therelated graphic). Bounford’s book on “Digital Diagrams”(2000) is a useful supplement to the work of Tufte, as itserves as a useful reference to ideas and examples thatcan guide effective practice in this area.

Concluding CommentsGiven the growing importance that information plays

in organizational analysis and decision-making, it is ourhope that these comments will be useful to the AIRcommunity. Developing professional skills related to thecreation of visual presentations will be an ever-increasingcomponent of the repertoire of institutional researchersin our view, and we intend these observations andresources to be useful in helping create such skills,which will be displayed over time at professionalconference presentations and within colleges anduniversities with increasing routine.

Presentations recognized by the AIR Best VisualPresentation Award Committee

2003

Martin Carroll, Audit Director, Australian UniversitiesQuality Agency (AUQA), “Australian HE Quality Assurance– Domestic and Abroad” (winner).

Susan Broyles, National Center for EducationStatistics, “IPEDS” (recognized for good practice).

Janice Ennis Kelly, Senior Survey Director, RTIInternational, “IPEDS Helpdesk” (recognized for goodpractice).

2004

Nick Roberts, George Mason University and SohamBhatt, Kennesaw State University, “A Systems Approachto Constructing a Fact Book Information System” (winner)

Daina Henry, College of William and Mary, “7 Habits of Highly Effective Institutional Researchers

(and other pearls of wisdom)” (recognized for goodpractice).

Editor’s Notes“Practice doesn’t make perfect, because you canpractice bad habits and never get any better.... Youplay like you practice, and if you practice correctly,you’ll play correctly.” Attributed to Cal Ripken Sr. ,(h t t p : / / e teamz .ac t i ve . com/h i l t on /news /index.cfm?cat=217459, accessed March 2005)

Several years ago, AIR reported “The first selectionfor the award for the Best Visual Presentations at the2003 AIR Forum. The winning entry, by Martin Carroll ofthe Australian Universities Quality Agency, is on the AIRWeb site. The winner was acknowledged at the 2004 AIRForum in Boston.” (http://airweb.org/images/2004annualreport.pdf, accessed March 2005) With thisannouncement, the Association initiated the Best VisualPresentation Award.

It would seem that two thoughts frame the purpose ofthis IR Applications with the observations from themembers of the Best Forum Visual Presentation AwardCommittee and make it an extremely valuable addition toour publications. First, the presentations we need to doas part of our profession have some unique needs basedon our profession. Second we can get better by makingour “Best” work more visible. On the first note, ourprofession places a great deal of emphasis on developingand using analytical methodologies, some quantitativeand some qualitative. It does so in the context of the

IR Applications, Number 4, Best Visual Presentation . . .

7

complex and often political issues of higher education.Having gotten to the point of application, our work, ourmethodologies, and our results must be delivered toindividuals, frequently within an interpretative presentation.This presentation occurs within two of the uniquechallenges of our profession. Much of what we deal withis data based and data do not tend to be exciting. Anotherunique part of our profession is that many of our resultscome from methodologies that are rather complex andare not, in general, amenable to explanation in a 15-30minute presentation much less a five minute summary.This then identifies the need for many of us to dopresentations and to do them as effectively as possible.

The Forum is where we practice our craft and wherewe seek to improve. Certainly not all of us every year –but several hundred of us share our work ever year.Furthermore these contributions range across the tracks ofor profession. Dr Bers and her colleagues give us some“do’s” and some “don’ts.” These recommendations seemto be made more necessary by the ease of graphics asevidenced by PowerPoint, Adobe, plots from Excel andSPSS, and numerous other packages. The needs for “BestVisual Presentations” practices are also evidenced by theweb site versions – but that is another discussion.

The combined thinking goes beyond the does anddon’ts to apply many of them to our methodologies andour presentations. It gives examples of thosepresentations selected as best.. It shows and tells whywhile leaving some latitude for your judgment of what youwant to do and how you want to do your presentation. Itlooks at both projected and printed presentations butfocuses mostly on the projected. It does not make youand expert but it gives you the start to improve the qualityof your presentation.

I hope you will take some of the presentations youhave seen, and perhaps some you have given, and usethis as a template. How many words on the slide? Howwas contrast used? How much room was taken by thestandard format before the message was presented?

SummaryIt is obvious that our profession puts a lot of emphasis

on the importance of delivering the results of our researchand our reports in as effective manner as possible. TheBest Visual Presentation award has given us theopportunity to compete for recognition of the quality ofour work. In establishing this award, the Association hasfollowed the advice of General Douglas MacArthur. whenhe had the following verse inscribed on the portal of theWest Point gymnasium: “Upon the fields of friendly strifeare sown the seeds that, upon other fields, on other dayswill bear the fruits of victory.” Stephen E. Ambrose, Duty,Honor, Country: A History of West Point (Baltimore: TheJohns Hopkins Press, 1966, p. 275), as cited in http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/saas/ohalloran.pdf

But even more than the fact that the competition forbest visual presentation gives us the opportunity to practiceand to compete, by sharing their thinking with you, in thisarticle Dr Bers and the committee are reminding you ofthe fact that just practice is not enough. If you want toimprove the way you apply our craft you need to “practicecorrectly.”

References and ResourcesBounford, Trevor. (2000). Digital diagrams. New York:

Watson-Guptill Publications.Harris, Robert L. (1999). Information graphics: A

comprehensive illustrated reference. New York/London:Oxford University Press.

Kosslyn, Stephen M. (1994). Elements of graphdesign. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.

Levens, A.S. (1968). Graphics, analysis and conceptualdesign. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Stovall, James Glen. (1997). Infographics: A journalist’sguide. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Tufte, Edward. (2003). The cognitive style ofPowerPoint. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.

Tufte, Edward. (1997). Envisioning information.Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.

Tufte, Edward. (1970). The quantitative analysis ofsocial problems. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Tufte, Edward. (2001). The visual display of quantitativeinformation. Second edition. Cheshire, CT: GraphicsPress.

Tufte, Edward. (1997). Visual explanations: imagesand quantities, evidence and narrative. Cheshire, CT:Graphics Press.

Wildbur, Peter, & Burke, Michael. (1998). Informationgraphics: Innovative solutions in contemporary design.London: Thames and Hudson.

IR Applications, Number 4, Best Visual Presentation . . .

8

Dr. Anne Marie DelaneyDirector

Institutional ResearchBabson College

Babson Park, MA

Dr. Gerald H. GaitherDirector

Institutional ResearchPrairie View A&M University

Prairie View, TX

Dr. David Jamieson-DrakeDirector

Institutional ResearchDuke University

Durham, NC

Dr. Anne MachungPrincipal Policy Analyst

Policy and AnalysisUniversity of California

Oakland, CA

Editor:Gerald W. McLaughlin

Director of Planning and InstitutionalResearch

DePaul University1 East Jackson, Suite 1501

Chicago, IL 60604-2216Phone: 312/362-8403

Fax: 312/362-5918gmclaugh@depaul.edu

AIR IR Applications EditorialBoard

Managing Editor:Dr. Terrence R. Russell

Executive DirectorAssociation for Institutional Research

222 Stone BuildingFlorida State University

Tallahassee, FL 32306-4462Phone: 850/644-4470

Fax: 850/644-8824air@mailer.fsu.edu

Authors can submit contributions from various sources such as a Forum presentation or an individual article. Thearticles should be 10-15 double-spaced pages, and include an abstract and references. Reviewers will rate the qualityof an article as well as indicate the appropriateness for the alternatives. For articles accepted for IR Applications, theauthor and reviewers may be asked for comments and considerations on the application of the methodologies the articlesdiscuss.

Articles accepted for IR Applications will be published on the AIR Web site and will be available for download by AIRmembers as a PDF document. Because of the characteristics of Web-publishing, articles will be published uponavailability providing members timely access to the material.

Please send manuscripts and/or inquiries regarding IR Applications to Dr. Gerald McLaughlin.

IR Applications is an AIR refereed publication that publishes articles focused on the application of advanced andspecialized methodologies. The articles address applying qualitative and quantitative techniques to the processes usedto support higher education management.

Dr. Philip GarciaDirector of

Analytical StudiesCalifornia State University-Long Beach

Long Beach, CA

Dr. David Jamieson-DrakeDirector of

Institutional ResearchDuke University

Durham, NC

Dr. Anne MachungPrincipal Policy AnalystUniversity of California

Oakland, CA

Dr. Marie RichmanAssistant Director of

Analytical StudiesUniversity of California-Irvine

Irvine, CA

Dr. Jeffrey A. SeybertDirector of

Institutional ResearchJohnson County Community College

Overland Park, KS

Dr. Bruce SzelestAssociate Director ofInstitutional Research

SUNY-AlbanyAlbany, NY

Dr. Glenn W. JamesDirector of

Institutional ResearchTennessee Technological University

Cookeville, TN

Dr. Trudy H. BersSenior Director of

Research, Curriculum and Planning

Oakton Community CollegeDes Plaines, IL