APOGEE — the technical festival of BITS Pilani — witnesses a large number of project and paper presentations from its students every year. The event has seen a steady increase in number of submissions since its inception. The Department of Controls and the Paper Evaluation and Presentation (PEP) Department invite faculty members from various departments as judges for the event. In an interview with the APOGEE English Press, Dr. Aniruddha Roy from the Department of Pharmacy spoke at length about the benchmark of a good project and certain guidelines while presenting the same.   

Dr. Aniruddha Roy is an Assistant Professor at BITS Pilani and an accomplished scientist in the field of Nanotherapeutics. Having been a part of the Evaluation Panel for APOGEE Project Presentation for many years, Dr. Roy had a number of suggestions to make. Clarity in thought and words, conciseness and precision, and well structured content are some characteristics that he believes sets apart an excellent project from the mediocre ones.

Dr. Roy revealed that the common mistakes students tend to make include not marking the slide numbers in a PowerPoint Presentation, lack of proper indentation, failure to highlight headings, and ill-organized content. When it comes to the presentation itself, he has seen students fumble for words mid-sentence, and are thus unable to communicate with the audience effectively. He also expects students to be more professional in their demeanour and attire.While these might seem trivial, Dr. Roy maintains that such simple errors can prove to be a bad experience for the evaluator and thus gets reflected poorly on the final grade sheet.

Apart from the standard guidelines, Dr. Roy suggested a few simple aids which he believes might assist the aspirants in their efforts. He was firm in suggesting that students should try to stick to the set duration. Aspirants must make an effort to explain the theory behind their idea in greater detail as it can facilitate a greater understanding for the evaluator. Dr Roy surmised that lack of rehearsal can be the biggest hindrance to delivering a good presentation. ‘Students spend so much time on design and implementation that they are left with none for the rehearsal’, commented the professor.

‘Aspirants must also realise that for a successful project, a functional prototype is mandatory’, says Dr. Roy. It is expected of the evaluators to judge the teams with a working model as the better ones, despite the brilliance and innovative ideas from the other teams without these models.

Commenting on plagiarism in such events, Dr Roy asserts the importance of presenting one’s original work. ‘Stricter guidelines must be enforced by the organisers and the fact that plagiarism shall not be tolerated must be made clear’, he adds. He also praised the student body’s decision to involve faculty members in the process. Starting this year, PEP and Controls have decided to send the project abstracts to the Evaluation Team beforehand, so as to identify any acts of plagiarism. ‘Our expertise in a subject is limited in size. As a result it would benefit the event if we were allowed some time to research the rest of the topics’, says Dr. Roy welcoming the move.