Research produces information. A presentation requires an argument.

This distinction is one of the most important in academic work, and it is one that students at every level — including graduate students and professional scholars — frequently struggle with. Understanding it is central to producing a strong symposium presentation.

Information Versus Argument

Information is what you found. Argument is what you think it means.

A presentation that consists of information — “Here are facts about the prize money gap in women’s golf” — is a report. It demonstrates that you found things. It does not demonstrate that you thought about them.

A presentation that makes an argument — “The prize money gap in women’s golf is primarily the result of structural discrimination rather than market forces, and here is the evidence that leads me to that conclusion” — demonstrates both that you found things and that you evaluated them, weighed them against competing interpretations, and committed to a position.

The difference between a report and an argument is a thesis statement — a clear, specific, defensible claim that your evidence supports and that someone could reasonably disagree with.

What Makes a Strong Thesis Statement

A strong thesis statement for your symposium presentation has three characteristics:

• It is specific. “Golf has an interesting history” is not a thesis. “The removal of the PGA’s Caucasian-only clause in 1961 did not produce meaningful integration because Augusta National maintained functionally equivalent exclusion through its invitation practices until 1975” is a thesis.
• It is arguable. A good thesis is a claim that someone could dispute. If everyone would immediately agree with your statement, it is not an argument — it is an observation. “Golf expanded globally between 1960 and 2000” is an observation. “Seve Ballesteros was a more important catalyst for European golf’s growth than any structural development in European golf infrastructure during the same period” is an argument.
• It is supported by your evidence. You need to be able to point to specific things you found in your research and show how they support your claim. A thesis you cannot support is speculation, not argument.

Developing Your Thesis

Here is a process for developing your thesis that works for most research questions:

Start by writing everything you found in your research as a list — facts, patterns, quotations, data points, specific events. Do not organize it yet. Just get it down.

Then look at the list and ask: what is the most surprising thing here? What is the thing I found that I did not expect? What is the pattern that appears most consistently? What is the thing I most want to tell someone?

That feeling — of wanting to tell someone something — is usually pointing toward your thesis. It is the thing your research has convinced you is true, interesting, and not obvious.

Write a draft thesis statement. It will probably be too broad or too vague at first. Sharpen it by asking: can I be more specific? Can I make this more arguable? Can I make this more directly supported by what I found?

Revise it. Write a second draft. Then test it: if someone said “I disagree with that” — what would they say? If you can articulate the strongest version of the disagreement with your thesis, you understand your argument well enough to defend it.

Structuring Your 10-minute Presentation

A 10-minute presentation has limited time. Use it with discipline.

• Opening (1-2 minutes): State your research question and your thesis. Do not warm up slowly or spend time explaining what you are going to say. State your argument immediately. “I am going to argue that…” is a perfectly good opening. Your audience should know within the first 90 seconds what you are claiming.
• Evidence section (5-6 minutes): Present 3-4 pieces of evidence that support your thesis. Each piece of evidence should be introduced, explained, and connected explicitly to your argument. “This matters because…” and “This supports my argument that…” are useful connective phrases. Do not just present evidence — explain why it means what you say it means.
• Counterargument (1-2 minutes): Acknowledge the strongest objection to your argument. This is not weakness — it is intellectual honesty. A presenter who acknowledges what their argument does not explain, or what evidence might challenge it, is demonstrating genuine analytical maturity. Then respond to the objection: explain why your argument still holds despite this challenge, or what additional evidence would be needed to resolve the uncertainty.
• Conclusion (30-60 seconds): Restate your thesis in light of the evidence you have presented. What do you now know that you did not know before? What question does your research open up that it cannot answer?

Building Your Exhibition Board

Your exhibition board is a visual argument. It should communicate your central claim to someone who has not heard your presentation — clearly, accurately, and in a format that can be read in 3-5 minutes.

A strong exhibition board has five components:

1. A clear title that states your research question or thesis — not just a topic label.
2. A thesis statement displayed prominently — the argument your board is making, in 1-3 sentences.
3. Three pieces of supporting evidence — each presented visually or in brief text with a clear connection to your thesis. These can be quotes, data points, photographs, timelines, or diagrams — but each one should be labeled with an explanation of what it shows and why it matters.
4. An acknowledgment of complexity — one section that presents the strongest counterargument or complicating factor your research identified. This shows that your thinking is honest about what your argument does not fully resolve.
5. Sources — a brief list of the sources you used, displayed at the bottom of the board.

The physical format of your exhibition board is flexible. A large piece of poster board works well. A tri-fold display board gives you more surface area. A digital display is acceptable if printing is not available. What matters is that it is readable, organized, and genuinely communicates your argument rather than just decorating a surface with golf-related images.