Summary

[driskerr]

Overall: great job! For the most part, your code is impeccable, everything runs smoothly and generates as expected. I made one small comment on how you execute chi-squared tests to ensure that you understand that the statistic of interest is the p-value (when p-value < 0.10, we call that statistically significant!). Everything else was smooth sailing!

I appreciated your efforts to provide more context to an outside audience in your slides. Your summary slide that acted as a table of contents is much appreciated. As is your definition of the conservation statuses. I also appreciated that you provided the counts next to your tables because, let's face it, some of those values are too small to read. You had the correct solutions to all the conservation and the foot-and-mouth-disease exercise.

I see in your slides that you kinda skirted the p-value question. You are correct that the correct that there is no statistical difference between mammals and birds, but you never explicitly said why. It is because the p-value of that chi-square test =0.68 which is > 0.10. But didn't you also run a chi-squared test on mammals vs. reptiles? Could you use the p-value from this second test to also inform your recommendation for conservation efforts? I think this gap in supporting evidence here may stem from the code comment I made on executing chi-squared tests.

Anywho, overall: be proud of your work! You created a very fine sample of code and slide deck.

[MichaelHixon]

Thank you very much for the thorough review and the constructive criticism!