conference-materials

name

conference-materials

description

Use this skill whenever a user needs help preparing materials for an anthropology conference presentation. Triggers include: any mention of "conference abstract," "AAA abstract," "organized session," "roundtable proposal," "poster session," "workshop proposal," "slide deck," "conference presentation," "conference talk," "academic poster," "speaker notes," "20-minute talk," "15-minute talk," "CASCA abstract," "AES presentation," "SfAA abstract," "help with my AAA panel," "poster design," or "oral delivery." Covers abstract writing for individual papers, organized sessions, roundtables, poster sessions, and workshop proposals; slide deck design for 15-20 minute conference talks; academic poster design including content structure and visual hierarchy; and speaker notes with oral delivery preparation. Do NOT use for job talks (use job-materials skill), public talks for non-academic audiences (use public-engagement skill), or full paper writing (use research-writing skill).

Conference Materials for Anthropology

Produce conference-ready materials — abstracts, slide decks, posters, and speaker notes — for anthropology conferences that make a clear argument, respect format constraints, and communicate effectively to the specific audience in the room. Conference materials are not miniature papers. They are persuasive performances with strict time and space limits, and every element must earn its place.

An abstract is a promise: it tells the audience what argument you will make and why it matters. A slide deck is a visual scaffold for a spoken argument, not a document projected on a wall. A poster is a standalone visual argument that must be scannable in two minutes. Speaker notes are timing instruments and transition maps, not scripts to read aloud. This skill treats each format as a distinct rhetorical genre with its own design logic.

Quick Reference

Task	Reference
Abstract writing: architecture, formats, word limits, failure modes, organized sessions	Read references/abstract-writing-guide.md
Slide design, poster design, speaker notes, oral delivery, accessibility	Read references/presentation-design-guide.md

Workflow

Step 1: Identify What the User Needs

Determine the entry point. Conference materials span several distinct genres, and the user may need one or several:

• Abstract writing. The user needs to write an abstract for submission to a conference. Determine the abstract type: individual paper, organized session proposal, roundtable, poster session, or workshop. Load the abstract writing guide.
• Organized session proposal. The user is assembling a panel. This requires a session rationale, individual abstracts, and often a discussant framing. Load the abstract writing guide and focus on the organized session sections.
• Slide deck design. The user has an accepted paper and needs to build a presentation. Determine the time limit (15 or 20 minutes is standard). Load the presentation design guide.
• Poster design. The user needs to structure content for an academic poster. Load the presentation design guide and focus on the poster design sections.
• Speaker notes and delivery preparation. The user has slides but needs help with timing, transitions, and oral delivery. Load the presentation design guide and focus on the speaker notes sections.
• Combined request. The user needs an abstract and a slide deck (common when a talk is accepted and they need both). Load both reference files.

Ask the user if not immediately clear:

• Which conference? (AAA, a regional association, interdisciplinary, international) — this determines word limits, format expectations, and audience composition.
• What format? Individual paper, organized session, roundtable, poster, workshop, lightning talk.
• What time limit? 15 minutes, 20 minutes, poster session, lightning talk (5 minutes).

Step 2: Gather Context

Collect the information needed to produce effective materials. Not all of this is needed upfront — gather what you can and note gaps for the user to fill.

Essential context (cannot proceed without these):

• The argument or contribution — what does the user want to claim, not just what topic they are studying. Push for specificity: "This paper argues that X reveals Y" rather than "This paper examines X."
• The evidence base — what data, fieldwork, analysis, or case material supports the argument.
• The conference and format — which conference, which session type, what word or time limits apply.

Important context (strengthens the output significantly):

• Theoretical framework and key interlocutors in the literature
• Subfield and disciplinary positioning (cultural, archaeological, linguistic, biological, medical, applied)
• Audience composition — will the room be specialists in your subfield, general anthropologists, or interdisciplinary?
• Career stage — graduate student, early career, or senior scholar. This affects rhetorical positioning and what a discussant or audience will expect.

Helpful context (improves tailoring):

• Whether this is part of an organized session (if so, the session theme and other panelists' topics)
• Prior versions of the abstract or slides that need revision
• Visual materials the user wants to incorporate (fieldwork photos, maps, diagrams, data visualizations)
• Specific anxieties about delivery (timing, Q&A, technology)

Step 3: Load Appropriate References

• For abstracts (any type): Load references/abstract-writing-guide.md for architecture, format requirements, word limits, failure modes, organized session strategy, and subfield examples.
• For slides, posters, or delivery: Load references/presentation-design-guide.md for slide design principles, poster layout, speaker notes, timing strategy, and accessibility.
• For combined requests (abstract + presentation): Load both files.

Step 4: Generate Content

Follow the argument-first principle across all formats:

For abstracts:

• Start with the contribution statement — what this paper argues, demonstrates, or reveals. Not "this paper examines" or "this paper explores," which describe a topic without making a claim.
• Build the abstract around the argument-evidence-contribution structure: (1) what you are arguing, (2) what evidence supports it, (3) why it matters to the audience.
• For organized sessions: develop the unifying intellectual rationale first, then ensure each individual abstract speaks to the shared theme while making its own distinct contribution.
• Respect word limits precisely. AAA individual paper abstracts are 250 words. Do not go over.

For slide decks:

• Use the assertion-evidence model: each slide title is a complete sentence stating a claim; the slide body provides visual evidence for that claim.
• Target roughly 1 slide per minute. A 20-minute talk should have 15-20 slides, not 40.
• Minimize text. If a slide has more than 25 words of body text, it needs redesign. The argument lives in the speaker's voice, not on the screen.
• Build a narrative arc: opening hook, problem/gap, argument, evidence (2-3 key moves), implications, closing.

For posters:

• Design for the 2-minute scan: a viewer walking by should grasp the argument in two minutes without the presenter explaining.
• Establish visual hierarchy: title and key finding are visible from 10 feet away; methods and evidence are readable at 3 feet; details and references are available for close inspection.
• Use a clear layout grid (columns or Z-pattern flow). A poster is not a paper pasted on a board.

For speaker notes:

• Provide timing cues at regular intervals (5-minute marks).
• Write transition sentences between slides — these are the connective tissue of the talk.
• Include a strong opening hook (first 30 seconds) and a clear closing move (argument recap + broader implications).
• Prepare 3-5 anticipated Q&A questions with concise response frameworks.

Step 5: Generate Output

Produce one or more of these deliverables depending on user needs:

• Abstract. Complete text within word limits, with the argument front-loaded and the contribution statement explicit. Include keywords if required by the conference.
• Organized session proposal. Session title, session rationale (300-500 words), individual abstracts for each panelist, and discussant framing.
• Slide deck outline. Slide-by-slide structure with title (as assertion), content notes, and visual suggestions for each slide. Include timing estimates.
• Poster content structure. Section-by-section content organized for visual hierarchy, with text length calibrated to poster format (not paper format).
• Speaker notes. Slide-by-slide notes with timing cues, transition language, opening hook, closing move, and Q&A preparation.
• Delivery coaching notes. Pacing guidance, technology backup plan, and strategies for managing nerves and Q&A.

Step 6: Quality Check

Before presenting the output, verify:

• Argument presence: Does every abstract contain an explicit contribution statement — not just a topic description? Can you identify what the paper argues in one sentence?
• Word/time limits: Does the abstract fall within the stated word limit? Does the slide count match the time allocation (roughly 1 slide per minute)?
• Audience calibration: Is the language appropriate for the expected audience? Specialist jargon is fine for a subfield panel; general anthropology or interdisciplinary audiences need accessible framing.
• Internal coherence: Do the slides tell a single coherent story? Does the poster have a clear visual flow? Do the speaker notes match the slides?
• Visual design principles: Are slides minimal-text? Is the poster scannable in 2 minutes? Are fonts legible from appropriate distances (24pt minimum for slides, 36pt minimum for poster body)?
• Organized session coherence: If this is a panel proposal, does the session rationale articulate a unifying intellectual theme? Does each abstract contribute distinctly to that theme?
• Accessibility: Are high-contrast colors used? Is alt text provided for images? Is information not encoded by color alone?
• Timing and transitions: Do speaker notes include timing checkpoints? Are transitions between slides explicit? Is there a clear opening hook and closing move?
• Q&A readiness: Are 3-5 likely audience questions anticipated with concise response frameworks?

Parameters

• Conference: AAA (American Anthropological Association), regional associations (AES, SCA, CASCA, SfAA), interdisciplinary conferences (e.g., STS, medical humanities, area studies), international (IUAES, EASA). Determines word limits, audience composition, and format norms.
• Format: Individual paper, organized session, roundtable, poster session, workshop proposal, lightning talk. Each has distinct structural requirements.
• Time limit: 15-minute talk, 20-minute talk, poster session (typically 2-hour block), lightning talk (5 minutes). Determines slide count, depth of argument, and pacing strategy.
• Audience: Specialist subfield (can assume shared vocabulary), general anthropology (define theoretical terms), interdisciplinary (define disciplinary assumptions). Shapes register and framing.
• Career stage: Graduate student, early career, senior scholar. Affects rhetorical positioning — a graduate student presents findings from a specific project; a senior scholar may frame a broader theoretical intervention.
• Subfield: Cultural, archaeological, linguistic, biological, medical, applied, design, computational. Affects conventions for evidence presentation, slide design norms, and poster expectations.
• Epistemic stance: Shapes the framing of the argument and what counts as a contribution. An interpretivist frames meaning-making; a critical scholar frames power relations; an applied anthropologist frames actionable outcomes. See DESIGN.md for the full stance list.

Guardrails

• Abstracts must state an argument or contribution, not just describe a topic. "This paper examines X" is not enough; "This paper argues that X reveals Y" is the standard. If the user cannot articulate an argument, help them develop one before writing the abstract. An abstract without an argument is a topic description, and topic descriptions get rejected or ignored.
• Organized session proposals need a unifying theme and intellectual rationale, not just a collection of individual papers. The session rationale must articulate why these papers belong together and what intellectual problem the session as a whole addresses. A panel that is merely "four papers about health" will not be competitive.
• Slides must have minimal text, strong visuals, and be legible from the back of a large conference room. 24-point font minimum for all projected text. If a slide requires the audience to read a paragraph, it is a document, not a slide. The speaker's voice carries the argument; the slides provide visual evidence and structure.
• Posters must have visual hierarchy and be scannable in 2 minutes. A poster is not a paper pasted on a board. If the poster requires continuous reading of dense text blocks, it fails as a poster. Use visual hierarchy, white space, and clear flow to guide the viewer's eye from the key finding to supporting evidence.
• Speaker notes should provide timing cues and transitions, not be a full script to read aloud. Reading from a script destroys audience engagement. Notes should be prompts and signposts, not verbatim text. Include timing checkpoints so the speaker can self-regulate pacing.
• Do not produce materials that exceed stated word or time limits. A 250-word limit means 250 words, not 275. A 20-minute talk means the speaker must finish in 20 minutes, leaving time for Q&A if applicable. Respect limits precisely.
• Accessibility is not optional. Provide alt text descriptions for all images in slides and posters. Use high-contrast color combinations. Do not encode meaning through color alone (use shape, pattern, or label in addition). Choose readable fonts — sans-serif for projected text, minimum sizes enforced by format.
• Do not fabricate citations or data. If the user references specific literature or fieldwork, incorporate it. If not, use clear placeholders (e.g., "[Author Year]," "[fieldwork finding]") rather than inventing references.

Common Failure Modes

Failure mode	Prevention
Topic description without argument — "This paper examines X" with no claim about what X reveals	Require an explicit contribution statement before drafting; push for "argues that," "demonstrates," or "reveals"
Organized session as disconnected papers — four abstracts on vaguely related topics with no unifying rationale	Draft the session rationale first; each abstract must explicitly connect to the shared intellectual problem
Text-heavy slides — paragraphs projected on screen that the speaker reads aloud	Enforce the assertion-evidence model: title = claim sentence, body = visual evidence; 25-word maximum for body text
Poster as pasted paper — dense text blocks in small font with no visual hierarchy	Require the 2-minute scan test: key finding visible from 10 feet, methods readable at 3 feet, details at arm's length
Reading a script — speaker notes written as full prose that the presenter reads verbatim	Write notes as prompts and timing cues, not paragraphs; include transition sentences but not full text
Running over time — too many slides, too much content, no timing checkpoints	Enforce 1 slide per minute guideline; include timing marks in speaker notes at 5-minute intervals
Abstract that promises more than the paper delivers — grand claims unsupported by the actual evidence	Match the contribution statement to the actual evidence base; flag overpromises during quality check
Poster with no visual hierarchy — all text blocks the same size, no clear entry point or flow	Require explicit hierarchy: title band (visible from 10 feet) > key finding > methods > evidence > contact

Examples

Example 1: AAA individual paper abstract and slide deck outline

Input: "I need to write a 250-word abstract for AAA and then build a 20-minute slide deck. My paper is about how Zapotec weavers in Oaxaca use social media to market their textiles while negotiating authenticity claims from tourists and fair-trade intermediaries. I'm coming from a practice theory / economic anthropology perspective."

Output approach: Load both reference files. Set parameters: conference = AAA; format = individual paper abstract + 20-minute slide deck; audience = general anthropology (AAA sessions draw mixed audiences); epistemic stance = practice theory (primary), economic anthropology (secondary); subfield = cultural. For the abstract: lead with the argument — "This paper argues that Zapotec weavers' social media practices constitute a new form of value negotiation in which authenticity becomes a strategic resource deployed differently across tourist, fair-trade, and local market audiences." Follow with evidence summary (12 months ethnographic fieldwork, participant observation in workshops and online, semi-structured interviews with weavers and intermediaries) and contribution (extends practice theory accounts of value creation to digital-material hybrid economies). Confirm the abstract is at or below 250 words. For the slide deck: outline 18-20 slides following a narrative arc — opening with a compelling fieldwork image and the research puzzle, moving through theoretical framing (2 slides), methods and site (2 slides), three analytical moves with ethnographic evidence (3-4 slides each), and closing with implications for practice theory and economic anthropology. Include speaker notes with timing cues at 5, 10, and 15 minutes.

Example 2: Organized session proposal

Input: "I'm organizing a panel for AAA on 'Digital Infrastructures and Care Work.' I have four panelists and need a session abstract, individual abstracts for each paper, and framing for a discussant. The panelists are studying: (1) telehealth platforms in rural Appalachia, (2) AI triage systems in South African emergency rooms, (3) care coordination apps for elderly care in Japan, and (4) mental health chatbots among college students in the US."

Output approach: Load the abstract writing guide with focus on organized session sections. Set parameters: conference = AAA; format = organized session; audience = general anthropology / medical anthropology / STS crossover. Draft the session rationale first — articulate the unifying intellectual problem: how digital infrastructures reshape the social relations of care, who bears the costs of digital mediation, and what happens to embodied care practices when they are platformed. The rationale should argue that these four cases, spanning different technologies and care contexts, collectively reveal that digital care infrastructures do not merely deliver existing care more efficiently but restructure what counts as care, who is recognized as a caregiver, and how care labor is valued. Then draft each individual abstract (250 words each) ensuring every paper explicitly engages the session theme while making its own distinct contribution. Finally, frame the discussant's role: synthesize across the four cases, identify shared patterns and productive tensions, and raise the question of whether "care" remains a useful analytic category when its practices are increasingly mediated by algorithmic systems. Suggest a discussant profile (senior scholar working at the intersection of STS and medical anthropology).

Example 3: Academic poster for an ethnographic methods project

Input: "I'm presenting a poster at the SfAA meetings about a community-based participatory research project on food sovereignty in an urban Indigenous community in Minneapolis. I need help structuring the poster content — I have photos from community gardens and a map of food access points."

Output approach: Load the presentation design guide with focus on poster design sections. Set parameters: conference = SfAA; format = poster session; audience = applied anthropology (SfAA draws practitioners and community-engaged researchers); subfield = applied; career stage = determine from user. Structure the poster for the 2-minute scan: title band with project name and key finding visible from 10 feet; visual centerpiece using the community garden photos and food access map; left column for research context (why food sovereignty, why this community, CBPR approach); center for methods and key findings (participatory mapping results, garden outcomes, community voice); right column for implications and community impact. Recommend a QR code linking to the full report or community organization website. Typography: 48-72pt headers, 36pt body text, high-contrast color scheme that respects the community partner's visual identity if applicable. Ensure the poster foregrounds community voice and partnership — SfAA audiences will evaluate whether the research relationship is genuinely participatory. Provide alt text descriptions for all visual elements. Flag that any photos of community members require explicit consent for poster display and suggest confirming permissions before finalizing.