Presenting at the Macaulay Conference was very different from our classroom presentations because the audience was not acquainted with the material we presented throughout the semester. Although we managed to explore some of the data from our research, the full content was not completely extracted because of time constraints. Nonetheless, the conference proved to be a good place to exchange ideas about solving the issues that plague our city.
The most frustrating part of the presentation was the time restriction. Since our audience was not familiar with our topic, we felt it was vital to explain the foundation of certain terms and ideas before presenting the problem. For example, before I spoke about how eminent domain has been abused in the acquisition of land for the development of the Atlantic Yards, I first had to brief our peers on what eminent domain meant. Furthermore, because our presentation was more quantitative than others, it was a bit difficult to give full context behind the numbers we presented. Nonetheless, the presentation went smoothly. We managed to complete it in the allotted time without any major mishaps. By the conclusion, I believe most of the audience realized that the Atlantic Yards project had a significant impact on both current and future housing.
One of the great benefits of cross campus events at Macaulay is that we have a chance to see the work of our peers. It seemed that many groups lacked the major aspect of a research project: a focus question. In addition, some presentations deviated from the typical trend of PowerPoint slides. Instead, they built a website which gave greater detail, but at the same time, made it difficult to follow their main points. Still, I acknowledge that the content on some of these websites were very scholarly. For example, the group who presented on Bushwick did a phenomenal job of exploring all facets of the neighborhood. They covered areas such as politics, business, community, education, transportation, health, and most importantly, the future. I was also intrigued by another presentation that focused on bike lane safety. This group made its own proposal for reducing bike-automobile accidents at intersections by requiring a safe zone where cars cannot block the view of bikes. Overall, I admired the creativity of some presentations and the detailed research done for others.
This conference marked our last formal presentation at Macaulay. Although I would have preferred to see a stronger or more organized structure to many presentations, I still believe the content proved interesting. In addition, I was pleased with the way our group managed to be detailed, yet focused, in the time given. Altogether, I hope Macaulay continues to foster an environment of research exploration that is focused on the future of our city.
