Monday Questioin 4/8

Part Two:
How accurate were you in part one? Do you have a different idea of what an academic conference is or does now that you've attended? What surprised or interested you about the McMaster Symposium? If it is not required attendance next year, will you attend the symposium? Why or why not?

I would say that I was close on part one. I thought that the presentations were going to talk more about the McMaster program but neither of the two that I attended talked about the McMaster program much. I was not sure how the presentations that were on Thursday related to the McMaster program but after attending the Modern Slavery presentation, I can say that I now understand. Tim Wedge, who gave the presentation, talked about how we can help save those who are being slaved. The McMaster program is for the advancement of humanity, which is what Wedge was talking about.
My idea of the academic conference has changed. I was expecting it to be boring and uninteresting to me, however, I found both presentations I attended to be interesting and I almost wanted to stay to hear more. I was surprised by the impact the stories the presenters told. They were both interesting and emotional and I wanted to listen to them talk longer. The stories were personal and really got me thinking that I want to make a difference in the world.
If I am not required to go next year, I will probably make it to see at least one of the presentations. They were interesting and I wish I could have made it to more this year. I'm hoping that in a few years I can be apart of the symposium if I make it into the McMaster program.