Blog 2 – Presentations

Sandro Hernandez Maza

=========================================================================

            To begin with, I believe that all of the groups did an excellent job, both in terms of presentation and in terms of the slides. To summarize, there were three topics, and each group chose one. Group 3: selected infrastructure, Group 2: gender equality, and Group 1: climate change. Each topic had a subtopic that the team had to decide on before creating an agenda with all of the information. In addition, each topic was assigned chapters of the book, and we were required to create a study guide. Finally, and most importantly, I believe there was a significant improvement over the first presentation. The groups appeared to be more organized, and everyone appeared to be better prepared.

Group 3– Infrastructure.

First, I'll introduce Group 3, which happens to be the group I'm in. We had not yet decided on a leader when our group was formed; in fact, the first presentation we gave was without a leader. Even though we lacked a leader, we managed to get by. This presentation required more organization, and even though we hadn't decided on a leader, I believe Mayte stood out the most from our group; I believe she did a great job organizing the group, and I believe at this point we all consider her the group's leader. There was a significant improvement over the first presentation, and I believe we did an excellent job. I believe that our team still has some things to work on. For example, I believe that we should agree on a general design for the slides. During the presentation, I think we made a mistake by leaving a video on for too long. In addition, I believe we should have included more statistics in the slides and interviews. Finally, we present infrastructure as a subject. Rayvia and I were assigned the final subtopic, "Economics Infrastructure." I sent Rayvia a message several days before the presentation, and we agreed that I would explain and provide information about economic infrastructure, while she would provide examples of disasters caused by poor economic infrastructure. I think I did a good job of providing examples of economic infrastructure, and even though I was nervous, I know I did better than in the first presentation.

Group 2– Gender Inequality.

The second group to present was group 2, which presented gender inequality. In the first presentation, I think it was the team that did the best, and in this one, I also think the same. I think it is the most organized team and the one with the most communication because, although they did well in the first presentation, they did even better in this one. The introduction was quick and direct to the point. They agreed to use the same design for the slides. There were data and graphs. They also included several interviews, and it was understood at all times what they were saying. I don't see anything wrong with this presentation, and all I can say is that not everyone on the team presented, but even the person who didn't present went out of his way to record himself presenting, so I don't see anything wrong with it, and it is without a doubt the best presentation, in my opinion.

Group 1– Climate Change.

Lastly, we have Group 1, which presented climate change. Group 3 also did an excellent job of presenting and providing information on the subject. For example, they discussed how pollution might affect you and how we can address the issue. What I liked best about this presentation was that it was short and to the point, especially when compared to group 2's presentation, which lasted about 40 minutes. I also liked how they chose to use the same design for all of the slides. What I think the presentation lacked was more graphs and statistics, as I believe this topic necessitates a lot of this type of information. I also believe that at least one interview or something similar should have been included. To summarize, I believe that, as in the other groups, there was a significant improvement and that they did an excellent job.

            In conclusion, all the groups did a great job presenting the topics, and most importantly, there was a great improvement compared to the first presentations.