Avainsana-arkisto: presentation

From MSc to PhD – how the process goes at UEF! Part 2.

Public examination

Public examination, or defense, starts always precisely at noon. Rather strict dress code is taken into consideration. Audience enters to the auditorium at 12, and fifteen minutes later, the PhD candidate walks in, together with the custos and the opponent. The examination begins with lectio praecursia, a short introductory lecture about the topic of the dissertation.  After that, the opponent gives a short introduction into the topic. Custos, sitting between the candidate and the opponent, has an important role in the defense: he opens the public examination and is responsible that everything goes by the protocol. Also, he has to make sure that the opponent and candidate do not end up in a fight. During the examination, the opponent makes questions to the candidate – sometimes very easy ones, sometimes rather difficult. The candidate’s task is to answer to the questions as well as he/she can, and to have interactive conversation upon the topic with the opponent.

Some tough questions in Krista’s public examination.

Finally, after opponent’s final statement, the custos closes the examination. But before that, the doctoral candidate must turn to the audience to ask, if someone has something to say against the thesis. Usually no one raises the hand. In case someone does,  the PhD candidate should politely invite him/her to the karonkka party later in the evening (and the person making the question should politely reject the invitation). Duration of the public examination is normally 2-3 hours, but in the official rules, the opponent can spend up to 5 hours for examining the thesis. After examination, the audience is invited for coffee and cake, or sparkling wine and snacks.  This is normally the moment, when the PhD candidate can breath freely for the first time!!

It is time for some snacs after the public defence.

Karonkka

Karonkka is a well-prepared dinner party in the honor of the opponent, usually held in a restaurant or ball room with a fancy dinner and appropriate drinks. The evening begins with a toast proposed by the PhD candidate, followed by a dinner. Later on, it is time for the speeches. The PhD candidate is  the first one to give a speech and thank everyone who have had a role in the process of thesis making, such as the opponent, custos, supervisors, colleagues, co-authors, friends and family. In this order. There is also an unwritten rule saying that everyone whose name has been mentioned in the speech, must give a speech too. Family members may, however, skip giving the speeches, if they wish. Toasts are proposed between every speech, and the PhD candidate must make sure that the opponent’s glass is never empty. At the same time it is good to take care that your opponent does not drink too much! (Yes, we have also experienced this).

Take enough time for your Karonkka preparations! Krista is preparing her decorations.

Degree certificate

Finally, after the public examination and karonkka are over, the opponent has two weeks to give his or her statement on the thesis and defense. The faculty board must accept the defense and decide on a note: accepted or accepted with honor, which approximately 5% of of the doctoral theses are awarded with. Only after this the candidate can apply for a degree certificate and call him/herself  a doctor.

Universities arrange conferment ceremonies every now and then, approximately once every 5 years. The next ceremony at UEF in Joensuu will take place in 2019. These are 3-day-long celebrations of appreciation for persons who have completed their doctoral degree. Participation is not compulsory, but at least in the past a doctor received a permission to use the doctoral hat (or sword in some faculties) only after being ”promoted” in a doctoral conferment ceremony.

Let us introduce our two newest doctors: Kaisa and Kristiina! (they do not yet have the fancy, doctoral hats) Congratulations!! Who shall be the next?

Kaisa and Krista got their doctorates!

 

Text and pictures by Kaisa Figueiredo and Kristiina Väänänen

 

SETAC went to Brazil

Whenever we ecotoxicologists have something to present to the big audience, we participate the meetings organized by the society of environmental toxicology and chemistry SETAC.  The mission of the society is to support the development of principles and practices for protection, enhancement and management of sustainable environmental quality and ecosystem integrity. Additionally, SETAC promotes the advancement and application of scientific research related to contaminants and other stressors in the environment, education in the environmental sciences, and the use of science in environmental policy and decision-making. The society also provides a forum where scientists, managers, and other professionals exchange information and ideas for the development and use of multidisciplinary scientific principles and practices leading to sustainable environmental quality.

SETAC audience discussing microplastic pollution in Santos, Brazil.

Annual meetings of SETAC take place annually or biennially in different geographical regions, and our group members mostly participate the European and North American annual meetings held every year, as was the case also in 2016 and 2017. SETAC Latin America organized a biennial meeting in September 2017, and I had an opportunity to participate such an event for the first time. My previous SETAC experiences were from three North American meetings, so I thought I could somehow imagine what to expect. But after all, the experience was far beyond that I could ever have imagined beforehand.

SETAC Latin America 12th Biennial Meeting is about to start.

Whereas the North American and European SETAC meetings have about 2000-3000 participants yearly, SETAC Latin America 12th Biennial Meeting this year gathered just about 500 participants. Altogether 17 countries were represented, and a few participants, like myself, came across the ocean from Europe and Asia – me being the only one representative from UEF and the whole Finland. The conference was held in Santos, a coastal city in São Paulo state in Brazil. Everything was smaller and simpler compared to the NA and European meetings – more intimate and informal somehow. In my opinion it was easier to meet new people, get to know them, and talk about science and beyond. Just the fact that I came from Finland, already created an interesting base for various discussions during the sessions, lunch breaks or just in an elevator going from the 1st floor up to the 5th. I got so much courage and confidence about myself by traveling alone and being forced to integrate to the community beginning from the inaugural session. I did not know anyone from there before traveling, but when I came back, I had many new friends and experiences to take home. Who knows, maybe we will have some co-operation with our Brazilian colleagues in the future!?

Definitely not the worst place in the world to attend a scientific conference!

This was the first time ever that I participated in a conference with three official languages: English, Spanish and Portuguese. Most Latin Americans gave their presentations in their own language, mostly in Portuguese, naturally, because the conference was held in Brazil where most of the participants came from. Fortunately I could understand all three languages, but I felt pity for the North American, European and Asian participants who could only follow the slides, which in most cases were in English though. Q&A part was a mixture of all three.  Extremely confusing, but interesting. The actual conference days consisted of platform presentations in the morning, lectures and round table discussions in the afternoon, and poster sessions at 6-8 pm. Lunch breaks were long and gave a nice opportunity to have a little runaway to the beachfront closeby before the next session.

Poster session of the 2nd conference day.

My impression was that the hot topics in ecotoxicology in Latin America are the effects of pesticides to the environment (agriculture is strong in LA) and topics related to pollution of the ocean. Metals and nanomaterials are only now making its way to the Latin American field of ecotoxicology, whereas in Europe and North America they have been a hot topic already for several years. I took with me two posters from Finland, one about my own research about PCB bioaccumulation and passive samplers, and another of Kukka’s and mine, about joint effects of traditional xenobiotics and nanoparticles on aquatic species. The poster session was a success: many interesting dialogues I had, and many new friends I made. This was also the first time that I could present something in my second best language: Portuguese. Everything went better than I excepted, and next time in SETAC Latin America Biennial Meeting, which will be held in 2019, in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, I will definitely encourage myself to have a platform presentation in that language, too. This experience was a wonderful experience as a researcher and gave an interesting insight into ecotoxicology in Latin America. This was also a prefect getaway from my daily routines in order start preparing for my PhD defense, which was about to follow soon after coming back home.

Me and my posters.

The conference trip was financed by Unipid FinCEAL+ program for international mobility between Finland, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), financed by the Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture. The great adventure has also been documented on Instagram and Twitter @uef_ecotox.

Text and photos by Kaisa Figueiredo

 

 

 

Surviving conference in record-breaking heat – even a panda falls into trance!

In August last year we wrote a blog post about the 2nd IIES work-shop that took place in Kuopio, Finland. To refresh your memory, you can click yourself to the post HERE.

This year was the 3rd year that this kind of a conference is held, and the location changed from chilly Kuopio in Finland to super-hot Shanghai in China. Yes, truly overheated…. during the conference week, we experienced the hottest day in Shanghai in its recorded history, which is 145 years.

The conference was held at the Shanghai Jiao Tong University, which everyone knows for its Shanghai list of top universities in the world. SJTU is the university that originally compiled and issued the list in 2003, which is not known as renowned Academic Ranking of World Universities, ARWU, being among the most prestigious ones globally. More than 1,200 universities from around the world are evaluated in ARWU ranking. The criteria include, among other things, Nobel and Fields prizes, articles published in Nature and Science, and citations. In the latest 2017 ARWU the University of Helsinki was ranked 56th, being the leader among the Finnish universities. The University of Eastern Finland (UEF) maintained its position and was ranked among the leading 301–400 universities in the world, thus being ranked once again as the second best Finnish university. Aalto University, the University of Oulu and the University of Turku were ranked in the rank range 401–500. Congratulations! Like in the previous years, the top of Shanghai Ranking comprises Harvard University, Stanford University, the University of California, Berkeley, the University of Cambridge, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT. Here is more information about The Shanghai Ranking.

The locations of top 100 universities in the world, by www.shanghairanking.com.

Okay, back to the IIES annual workshop. This year the 3rd Annual IIES Science and Policy Workshop was held simultaneously with International Conference on Low Carbon Development—Responding Post-Paris Agreement on Climate Change: Energy Transmission and Innovation which was also being sponsored by the IIES, and Shanghai Jiao Tong University with the GlobalTech Alliance. The two meetings were held simultaneously and offered participants the opportunity to meet colleagues from a wider range of institutions and to participate in both meetings. The participants came from Asia (mostly China, naturally), Europe and North America. There were sessions on atmospheric pollution – health Interactions, collaborative projects – ongoing or prospective, green technology, low carbon economies – technology and policy, soil resources – contamination and remediation, water resources – contamination and remediation. The workshop lasted four days and consisted of interesting presentations, fruitful discussions, conference dinners and informal get-togethers. IIES welcomes everyone to join the workshop next year – although the location remains unknown yet. You can read more about IIES.

Kaisa giving her presentation at IIES meeting in Shanghai.

The Finnish delegation representing UEF this year at the workshop included four PhD students and three senior researchers complemented with two professors. Two researchers from the Finnish Meteorological Institute (FMI) added their forces to the Finnish delegation. Our ecotox group sent two final stage PhD students, Kristiina and Kaisa, to the venue with great success! They both had interesting oral presentation regarding their own research areas: Kristiina about metals in environments, and Kaisa about PCBs in aquatic food webs. Both of them had obviously learned the lesson HERE ) and managed to speak and discuss their topics and co-operate with others with great success. IIES is now starting a post-doc program together with Nanjing University, and who knows, maybe this would be a great possibility in the future also for our soon-to-be PhDs at ecotox research group!

Kristiina visiting the world 2nd tallest building, Shanghai Tower.

Photos and text by Kaisa Figueiredo

How to make a (better) poster?

We have all been there. You have done your research for a while, got your first results and want to go to a conference to present your work. What then? At least I and my colleagues wanted to start with having a poster presentation. I did not have enough data (or confidence) for an oral presentation, so poster it is! These are my opinions and experiences about making a poster, feel free to disagree :).

Think about your title

For larger conferences, you need to send your abstract months beforehand. It is really difficult to prepare it so early, since you may not even have all the data by that time. With an abstract, you need to come up with at title. I would advise to use a lot of effort in planning your title. It is the first step where audience decides, if they want to see your poster or not. Use keywords in your title and be precise enough. Think in advance, what kind of audience you would like to attract.

How to do it?

Conferences usually have guidelines for posters – check them! In Europe, posters are usually smaller than in North America, most often size A0. Also, European posters are typically as portrait, compared to American counterparts in landscape. It is really disappointing to prepare a poster just to find out that it doesn’t fit in the poster stand at all.

Typical poster types in Europe and North America.
Typical poster types in Europe and North America.

What would you like to tell in your poster? As a young scientist, it is tempting to present everything you have done. For my first poster, I was feeling a bit insecure and embarrassed to be such a newbie, so I wanted to show all my work in order to appear more professional. Stop right there, it’s the worst plan ever! Think about your most important/interesting result and focus on that. It is better to highlight an exciting point than tell a little bit of everything.

This leads to the next step – compress, compress and compress. A text overload is a common mistake and it makes the poster look dull and scare the audience away. Leave only the most important content to your poster. Use columns, figures and pictures to make it more readable. Use different colors and font sizes, play with layout to emphasize your main message.

If there was a poster like the one below, it would have to have an extremely interesting title for me to stay and read. And even in that case, I’d prefer to have a handout and read it back home. If I have hundreds of posters to see, the time spent on one poster is something between few seconds and couple of minutes.

Technical tips

Fonts Use large enough fonts. I would think twice before going below 30 pt (and I would use this small font only for footnotes, captions etc.). Things you want to highlight could be with a larger font, e.g. conclusions. Print a colored A4 copy of your poster and put it in front of you, arms straight. If you think your professor might have even slightest difficulties reading the text – make it larger! Another tip is to set screen to 100 % and look at your poster from 1.5-2 m away. For body text, serif fonts are easier to read. Titles are ok with sans-serifs.

Figures can help you a lot. You can use them to balance your layout and to convince your audience. But be careful with the figures, they have to be self-explanatory. You are not standing next to your poster for the whole day, people need to understand it without explanations. And they need to be understood without reading the whole poster. Show a figure to a friend or a colleague that doesn’t know your work that well. If he/she understands it in no time, you are fine to go. Also, it is not the best idea to use red and green to separate “good and bad” in your results, quite many people have problem with distinguishing red from green.

Colors As we noted in our earlier post (Here), it is advisable to use colors. A dull poster does not attract the attention. However, you don’t have to overdo it. I think I had a bit of that problem with my first poster shown below. Make few different color versions, ask opinions from other people. And remember that the colors in the final poster may not print exactly the same as in your printer.

Kristiina Väänänen's first and (over)colorful poster at SETAC Basel 2014.
Kristiina Väänänen’s first and (over)colorful poster at SETAC Basel 2014.

Software Use the software you are familiar with. If you have an opportunity to learn a new one (e.g. Adobe Illustration), go for it. But don’t do like me and waste too many hours struggling with too difficult software, finally giving up. With Power Point, you can actually go quite far.

The final touch

Finally, proof reading. Read your poster carefully for several times. Let other people read it as well. Print a copy and read that, sometimes you spot the mistakes better from a print. Note that in final printing, bits from the edges of your poster may be cut out (trimming edge). Therefore it’s good to have margins not to lose any of your important content. Make sure that you have your contact information on the poster (email and postal address). It is also a kind gesture to mention your sponsors somewhere on the poster.

Have enough time for printing and possible errors in the process. In our group, we have sometimes needed two re-dos for a poster and that may take a lot of time. Maybe you have made too many spelling errors or something has gone wrong in the printing company. When you finally get your poster from printing, check everything one more time. Hopefully, you don’t find any mistakes at this point. Additionally, print A4-sized handouts to give out in the conference.

For me, making posters is not an easy task. I don’t have a natural eye for making interesting and practical layout. My sense of color is non-existent and I get easily stuck with my initial (often bad) ideas. Time, practice and friends help though. I was actually a bit proud of my latest poster. But, a great way to get better is to follow the more talented colleagues. Our research group used to have a “Master of Great Posters” researcher Inna Nybom, who has won best poster prizes with several of her poster. I don’t know yet, how she always manages to create such delicate, beautiful and informative posters. But I continue to look her work closely, hoping to get to her level one day.

Inna Nybom's poster. Setting the bar high for the rest of us!
Inna Nybom’s poster. Setting the bar high for the rest of us!

Text by Kristiina Väänänen