Hello all!

To follow Dr. Chang’s comment, I recently presented a poster at the American Society for Engineering Education conference where posters were grouped by division (e.g., mechanical engineering division, student division, etc.). The poster session was 1.5 hrs long and each division had ~5 posters.

For the student division, the first hour was scheduled such that 1 to 2 mentors were assigned to a student’s poster every 20 minutes. This was great for getting feedback, as sometimes a group would assemble at a poster and it almost becomes a mini-thematic poster discussion. It also avoided the risk of a situation in which only a couple people stop by a poster over an entire session.

Part of the perceptions surrounding podiums (e.g. “featured”) and posters (e.g. “second tier”) may be due to the large variability in attention/feedback participants receive from a poster presentation. I really like the suggestions to increase exposure via youtube videos or more awards for posters! Since part of the ASB mission is "to encourage and foster the exchange of information and ideas among biomechanists working in different disciplines," perhaps a suggestion is to have poster divisions organized by a mix of career stage, membership level, and theme area (as opposed to theme area alone).

This growth in membership seems like a great opportunity to combat some existing perceptions of poster presentations (especially for students early in their career)! So exciting!


Anahid Ebrahimi
PhD Candidate, Mechanical Engineering
University of Delaware