Developed by The University of Queensland, 3MT cultivates students’ academic, presentation, and research communication skills. The competition supports their capacity to effectively explain their research in three minutes, in a language appropriate to a non-specialist audience. Also, see the National 3MT Handbook which the Ontario 3MT rules are modelled after.
- Students must be registered in a master’s (Thesis or MRP) or PhD program at the time of the 3MT competition and must have made substantial progress on their research and analysis. Course-based master’s students are ineligible.
- PhD and master’s students who have defended, but have not yet convocated, are eligible to participate.
- 3MT presentations must represent the primary research the student conducted in their graduate program.
- Competitors must present in person and agree to be video-recorded and photographed. They must also allow those video-recordings and photographs to be made public.
- 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) is permitted.
- No additional props (e.g. costumes, musical instruments, laboratory equipment) are permitted.
- Presentations are limited to three minutes maximum and competitors exceeding three minutes are disqualified.
- Presentations are to be spoken word (e.g. 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 judging panel is final.
Presentations will be judged on the basis of the following:
- Did the presenter use language and terminology that was clear and understandable?
- Was the pace of the talk effective?
- Did the presenter use non-verbal communication (i.e. eye contact, voice modulation, body language, etc.) effectively?
- Did the slide enhance, rather than detract from, the talk – was it clear, legible, and concise?
- Did the talk help you to understand the scholarly research and creativity?
- Did the presenter clearly outline the nature and purpose of scholarly research and creativity?
- Did the presenter clearly indicate what is interesting about scholarly research and creativity?
- Did the talk follow a logical sequence?
- Was the talk engaging?
- Did the talk inspire you to want to know more?
- Did the presenter convey enthusiasm for their work?
- Did the presenter capture and maintain your attention?