Three Minute Thesis Competition
Graduate Research School
- 1st place: Susan Ireland, Healthy or Happy? Finding the Best of Both with Alternative Sweeteners- Click here to see the presentation on UNSWTV
- Runner-up: Kejia Wang, Striding towards fewer falls: new insights into elderly gait - Click here to see the presentation on UNSWTV
- People's Choice Prize and ASPIRE Award: Scott Youlten, Skeletal Marriage Counselling - Click here to see the presentation on UNSWTV
What is 3MT?
The 3 Minute Thesis (3MT) is an academic competition developed by the University of Queensland for PhD and Research Masters candidates. With just three minutes to give a compelling presentation on their thesis topic and its significance, the 3MT competition forces research candidates to consolidate their ideas and crystallise their research discoveries.
3MT: Where do I start?
Tues 17 or Thurs 26 May, 9.30am - 11.30am
Thinking about entering your Faculty's 3MT heat? The Researcher Development Unit is offering this workshop to provide you with essential principles for an effective 3MT presentation to help you get started with your first draft. Register now for the 17th or 26th of May, as numbers are limited.
UNSW 3MT 2016 Interfaculty Final
4:30pm to 7:30pm
Leighton Hall, Scientia
Click here for event detail
UNSW Prizes 2016 Prizes
- First prize $3,000 plus entry into the 2016 Trans-Tasman Competition at the University of Queensland as well as the U21 final, a virtual event with judges watching video entries rather than live presentations
- Runner-up prize $1,500
- People’s Choice prize $1,000
- ASPIRE prize $500
ASPIRE is a UNSW widening participation program that works with school students to support their educational aspirations. This year at 3MT we will have some of the school students from this program as VIP guests, and they will be awarding a special ASPIRE Prize for the presentation they enjoy the most.
UNSW 3MT 2016 Faculty Heat details
|UNSW Art and Design||Jo Elliotemail@example.com||UNSW Paddington Campus|
|Arts and Social Sciences||Amy Stansfieldfirstname.lastname@example.org||
|John B Reid Theatre, AGSM Building|
|UNSW Business School||Jenny Hislopemail@example.com||17 August
Business School Lounge, West Foyer, Level 6 Business School
|Old Main Building G31|
Engineering Design Studio, Level 5, Mechanical Engineering Building (J17)
Staff Common Room, Level 2
Law Faculty Building
|Medicine||Sue Gertyfirstname.lastname@example.org||20 June
|Wallace Wurth’s Lower Ground Theatre 3|
|Science||Morgan Suttonemail@example.com||Leighton Hall, Scientia|
|UNSW Canberra||Luke Garner||L.Garner@adfa.edu.au||LT1, Lecture TheatreSouth, Building 30|
UNSW 3MT 2016 - Eligibility, Rules and Judging Criteria
- All active PhD candidates - from those who have passed their Confirmation review to those whose thesis is under examination - are eligible
- Candidates must be on track for timely completion
- Graduates are not eligible
- Active Masters of Philosophy, Masters by Research and pre-confirmation PhD candidates are eligible to participate in the UNSW faculty heats BUT cannot advance to the UNSW Interfaculty Final.
- A single static PowerPoint slide is permitted. No slide transitions, animations or 'movement' of any description are allowed. The slide is to be presented from the beginning of the oration.
- No additional electronic media (e.g. sound and video files) are permitted.
- No additional props (e.g. costumes, musical instruments, laboratory equipment) are permitted.
- Presentations are limited to 3 minutes maximum and competitors exceeding 3 minutes are disqualified.
- Presentations are to be spoken word (eg. no poems, raps or songs).
- Presentations are to commence from the stage.
- Presentations are considered to have commenced when a presenter starts their presentation through either movement or speech.
- The decision of the adjudicating panel is final.
- Did the presentation provide an understanding of the background to the research question being addressed and its significance?
- Did the presentation clearly describe the key results of the research including conclusions and outcomes?
- Did the presentation follow a clear and logical sequence?
- Was the thesis topic, key results and research significance and outcomes communicated in language appropriate to a non-specialist audience?
- Did the speaker avoid scientific jargon, explain terminology and provide adequate background information to illustrate points?
- Did the presenter spend adequate time on each element of their presentation - or did they elaborate for too long on one aspect or was the presentation rushed?
- Did the oration make the audience want to know more?
- Was the presenter careful not to trivialise or generalise their research?
- Did the presenter convey enthusiasm for their research?
- Did the presenter capture and maintain their audience's attention?
- Did the speaker have sufficient stage presence, eye contact and vocal range; maintain a steady pace, and have a confident stance?
- Did the PowerPoint slide enhance the presentation - was it clear, legible, and concise?