I spent the majority of last week mapping out and researching the topics I wanted to include in my research speech. When I first saw the 8–10 minute requirement, I assumed it would be too long and that I wouldn't have enough material for a discussion. I discovered that this was not the case as I began to outline my slides and my points because the speech amounted to hours, pages, and articles of effort that were condensed into just eight minutes. I went back through my assessments and underlined the topics I wanted to really concentrate on or had been concentrating on in my original research to make sure everything I said was well expressed and relevant to the main premise of my research.
I used this opportunity to talk about medical autopsies, my personal subtopic, the shortage of pathologists, and malpractice in forensic pathology as well as its function in criminal justice. I talked about a case involving this field's malpractice that resulted in a mistrial and the operation of the expert witness system. I talked about the dearth of pathologists and how I intended to address the gap by including it in my initial work. I discussed in brief the role autopsies play in furthering our understanding of cancer and tumors. Overall, I believe that my research speech was comprehensive and that I covered the topics that I intended to. I want to focus on making sure my words are clear and concise. Apart from that, I am eagerly awaiting other opportunities to speak and to improve in what I lack.
Comments