Your presentation is not a tutorial, product demo, or documentation summary. It is an analytical examination of a database technology or concept that demonstrates system-level understanding. You must explain not only what a technology does but why it exists, when it is appropriate, and what trade-offs it involves.
Read your topic page carefully. Each bullet point in your "Required Coverage" section uses language like "must explain," "must compare," "must justify," or "must analyze." These verbs indicate the level of reasoning required. "Explain" means provide clear technical description. "Compare" means analyze differences and trade-offs. "Justify" means provide reasoning for design decisions. "Analyze" means break down into components and evaluate.
Start with the recommended references on your topic page. Official documentation provides accurate technical details. Academic textbooks and survey papers provide conceptual frameworks. Engineering blogs from reputable sources provide real-world context.
Avoid sources that only summarize or list features without analysis. Wikipedia articles, Medium posts without citations, and AI-generated explanations are not sufficient primary sources. Use multiple sources and cross-reference information. If sources conflict, analyze why and present both perspectives with your evaluation.
For real-world examples, seek out engineering blog posts, postmortems, or case studies from companies that have deployed these technologies at scale. These provide concrete context for trade-offs and limitations that documentation often omits.
Begin by clearly stating what problem this technology addresses. Why do traditional databases struggle with this problem? Use concrete examples. For instance, if discussing graph databases, show a query that requires multiple joins in SQL and explain why this becomes expensive at scale.
Explain the fundamental model or mechanism. Use precise technical terminology. Include diagrams or examples that illustrate the concept, but ensure you interpret them rather than just showing them. Explain why the design choices were made.
Describe how it works in practice. This might include architecture, query models, or execution mechanisms. Use concrete examples: executable queries, code snippets, or architectural diagrams with explanation. Avoid generic diagrams copied from documentation without interpretation.
This is critical. Discuss strengths and limitations. Compare with alternatives. Explain when this technology is appropriate and when it is not. Provide concrete scenarios. For example, don't just say "graph databases are good for relationships" — explain when relationship traversal depth makes graph databases necessary versus when relational joins suffice.
Present at least one realistic application scenario. Discuss production considerations: operational complexity, scaling challenges, failure modes. If possible, reference a real-world deployment. Analyze what worked, what didn't, and why.
Slides that only define terms or list features will receive low marks. Every definition should be followed by analysis: why does this matter? How does it differ from alternatives? What are the implications?
Your slides should support your presentation, not be your presentation. If you read slides word-for-word, you demonstrate that you don't understand the material deeply enough to explain it in your own words. Use slides as visual aids, not scripts.
Avoid turning your presentation into a "how to use X" tutorial. Focus on system design and trade-offs, not API usage. If you show code or queries, explain the underlying mechanisms and design decisions, not just syntax.
Don't simply list features or capabilities. Instead, analyze why those features exist, what problems they solve, and what trade-offs they involve. Compare features across systems to understand design differences.
Every technology has limitations. If your presentation only discusses benefits, you haven't demonstrated sufficient understanding. Explicitly identify when the technology is inappropriate and why alternatives are preferable.
Expect questions about trade-offs, limitations, and comparisons. Be prepared to discuss scenarios where your technology might not be appropriate. Think about edge cases and failure modes. Consider how your technology would perform under different workload patterns or scale requirements.
If you don't know the answer to a question, say so. It's better to acknowledge gaps in knowledge than to speculate. However, you should be able to answer questions about the core concepts and trade-offs you've presented.
Practice your presentation and time it. Aim for 22–23 minutes to leave buffer for questions or minor delays. If you consistently run over 25 minutes, you need to cut content. Prioritize depth over breadth: it's better to cover fewer points thoroughly than many points superficially.
If you finish significantly under 20 minutes, you likely haven't provided sufficient depth. Review your topic page's required coverage and ensure you're addressing each point with adequate analysis.
A good seminar presentation demonstrates that you understand not just what a technology does, but why it exists, how it works, when to use it, and what trade-offs it involves. Focus on analytical reasoning rather than comprehensive coverage. Depth and clarity are more valuable than breadth and speed.
Remember: you are teaching your peers. Your goal is to help them understand the technology well enough to evaluate it for their own projects. This requires explaining trade-offs, limitations, and design decisions, not just listing capabilities.