STA9750 YantingZhao11 MiniProject #01

[YantingZhao11]

Hi @michaelweylandt!

I've uploaded my work for MiniProject #01 - check it out!

https://yantingzhao11.github.io/STA9750-2024-FALL/mp01.html

[michaelweylandt]

Thanks @YantingZhao11 !

Peer Feedback:

• @annaol
• @Victor-Louie
• @cndy17
• @thanhtdao922

It is now time for the peer feedback round for Mini-Project #01. Please review @YantingZhao11's submission for this mini-project and provide peer feedback.

Using the rubric at https://michael-weylandt.com/STA9750/miniprojects/mini01.html#rubric, please grade their submission out of a total of 50 points.

For each of the five categories, please give them a separate score and provide a total (sum) score across the entire assignment. Feel free to assign extra credit if you feel it is warranted (following the rubric).

If you give a score of less than 5 for any category, please provide a suggestion for improvement. (You can also give suggestions for any element they did well - more feedback is always great!)

As you go through this peer feedback exercise, think about what you particularly like about this submission and how you can incorporate that approach in your future work. If something is particularly insightful or creative, give some kudos!

Evaluators: This should take you around 15 minutes per peer feedback. You are not required to engage in substantial back-and-forth with @YantingZhao11, but you are of course welcome to initiate a discussion.

@YantingZhao11: please engage fully with your peers. They are here to help you!

Submission URL should be: https://YantingZhao11.github.io/STA9750-2024-FALL/mp01.html

Feel free to link to other repos, the course documentation, or other useful examples.

Thanks! @michaelweylandt

CC: @charles-ramirez

[thanhtdao922]

Hi @YantingZhao11 !

I just looked through your project, and here are my comments.

Written Communication: 9/10

Your report flows well, and you address all of the questions asked along with your own analysis.

Project Skeleton: 7/10

You completed all of the tasks, except for building the table. Also, it would have been better to display the code in the corresponding, rather than at the bottom.

Formatting & Display: 3/10

Unfortunately, you didn’t display any tables in your report, and I didn’t see the code for any in your code section. Next time, I recommend displaying them. Also, aesthetically, it was a bit difficult to read some of your code due to the color of the text against the dark background. It would be better if you had a light text on a dark background or a dark text on a light background, not dark text on a dark background.

Code Quality: 8/10

Your code includes properly named variables, as well as guiding comments. It was just hard to read due to the font colors.

Data Preparation: 10/10

I would give you 37/50. Overall, good job! Thanh

[Victor-Louie]

Written Communication - 9 Try to explain the code in a more narrative style rather than jumping directly to task answers Project Skeleton - 8 few areas where additional detail or explanations would have helped Formatting & Display -7 The table and background colors made it a bit difficult to read. Consider adjusting these. Code Quality - 10 Appropriate naming and good comments! Data prep - 10 Total: 44

[cndy17]

Hi YantingZhao11! Great work! Written Communication: 9 I appreciated that you included explanations of what the numbers you found indicate and highlight about the transit system. This made it accessible and provided context. Project Skeleton: 8 Great statistics found using the data. You included ridership and finance findings as well as your own additional insights. However, the project did ask for tables and that was missing from the page. Formatting & Display: 3 The code portion of the report includes view of the data. However, the report is missing tables using the DT library to display the data visually as shown in the assignment. I would suggest including them in the report, for example, when you start to discuss the creation of a new table USAGE_2022_ANNUAL. The background and font color also made the report, especially the code, difficult to read, although this might just be due to the chosen theme - just something to consider. Code Quality: 10 Code has appropriate variable names and comments provide context about what question the code is answering. Data prep: 10 Total: 40

[annaol]

Written Communication: 10 I think you did a really good job here - you address all questions and your writing is clear and concise.

Project Skeleton: 7 I believe we were supposed to include all of our code in the report and I was not able to find it for Tasks 1 (renaming the 'UZA Name' column) and 2 (recoding the values in the Mode column).

Formatting and Display: 6 You displayed all data frames as tibbles in your report so I would recommend changing this using the sample code for data tables provided in the assignment. Additionally, you can consider displaying formatted code snippets in the appropriate sections of the report vs including them at the very end and adjusting the font colors to achieve higher contrast.

Code Quality: 6 Your code has well-chosen variable names and clear comments. I think once you include the code that’s omitted now, it will be very easy for you to showcase your approach and walk us through your dealings with data.

Data Prep: 10/10

Total: 39/50

[charles-ramirez]

Hi, @annaol @Victor-Louie, 



My name is Charles, and I’m your TA for this semester. I’m going to encourage you to re-do your peer review for @YantingZhao11. Please share additional constructive feedback in each section of your peer review while closely following the rubric for MP01.   Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you!

[annaol]

@charles-ramirez done!