Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

hw05 ready for grading #6

Open
arthursunbao opened this issue Oct 20, 2017 · 4 comments
Open

hw05 ready for grading #6

arthursunbao opened this issue Oct 20, 2017 · 4 comments

Comments

@arthursunbao
Copy link
Owner

No description provided.

@arthursunbao
Copy link
Owner Author

@estennw
Copy link

estennw commented Oct 24, 2017

Hi @arthursunbao

Great job! Here are some specific comments on your work:

Question 1 Factores etc.

Nice drop of Oceania. Note that if there were 10000 continents it might would have been easier to do h_result <- gapminder %>% filter(continent != "Oceania"). Nice use of fct_infreq(), straight forward. If you want to order by something else than number of observations look at fct_reorder() from the same package.

I missed plots showing the effect of reordering the data. I would encourage you to test reordering and not reordering the data before plotting, and observe the differences. When reordering, the arrangement of the factor variables change, as one would expect.

Question 2 Reading and writing to file

Good job! As you probably understood, writing to and reading from csv does not preserve factor ordering.

Question 3 Remake figure

I do believe the intent with this question was to use some of the concepts that Tamara Munzner introduced in the guest lecture, and I don't believe that labeling the colors you used was one of those concepts. I agree that it might be helpful to label the points in the plot, but wouldn't it make more sense to use the country as the label? And I would advice you to not make the labels overlap. Concerning the colors, maybe it would be nice to use distinct colors to specify the continent?

You save the figures to file correctly! Also try including them in the md file!

Question 4 Repo cleanup

Nice done! Also consider naming the homeworks by the topics in the homework. And personally, I prefer adding one subfolder for md files, one for figures, one for tables etc.

To summarize, good job! Hope you learned something from this class that you can use in other settings!

@shadowforti
Copy link
Collaborator

Hello

Good job!

  • The homework folder is well organized. I could easily find the homework
  • The readme file clearly summarized the content
  • Oceania was successfully dropped
  • Factor level was successfully removed
  • Factors were reordered perfectly
  • The figure was improved by having colors and names
    Some suggestions
  • The plot picture somehow cannot be loaded
  • It would be better if you have included a summary in the drop section to indicate that "Oceania" was successfully being dropped.
  • Maybe to include the arrange and reorder part would be a plus
  • Maybe you forgot to clean up and rename the folder? or I did not check correctly.

Overall, the homework is great and I can see that you have learned a lot in the class.

Thanks

Jian

@ksedivyhaley
Copy link
Collaborator

Factor management (drop & reorder): Partial (see comments)
File I/O (data): Yes (but see comments)
Visualization design: Partial (see comments)
File I/O (write figure): Partial (does not load saved file)
Organized GitHub: Partial (see comments)
Bonus (more forcats, eg relevel): No
Reflection: Yes

Comments:

  • For your repo, add “slugs” to the files, eg hw05_FactorsFigures, so you know what is in each assignment – especially since you don't have this info in the table of contents. I also recommend using subfolders in each assignment to store saved files (hw05 is a bit crowded).
  • The factor management section included a “common part” discussing the effect of arrange vs factor rearranging on a figure.
  • Your exploration of data I/O is odd. You wouldn't usually chain the save functions in this way – instead we were expecting a comparison of the effects of each function, and perhaps comments on when you would want to use the different save formats.
  • Similarly, the visualization design is not what we were looking for. First, the graphing is supposed to be done in ggplot, not base R. Second, the plot is supposed to demonstrate something about the gapminder data. Exploring colours and labels is nice, but the point of visualization design is to convey information in an easily understandable way.

Your mark will be distributed later. If you would like more feedback, please feel free to message me on slack.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants