STA/OPR 9750 Bleuuuz MiniProject #03

[bleuuuz]

Hi @michaelweylandt!

I've uploaded my work for MiniProject https://github.com/bleuuuz/STA9750-2024-FALL/issues/3 - check it out!

https://bleuuuz.github.io/STA9750-2024-FALL/mp03.html

[michaelweylandt]

Thanks @bleuuuz !

Peer Feedback:

• @aaronkcooper
• @nikitagtm
• @plnrbrt
• @doreenmurekerisoni

It is now time for the peer feedback round for Mini-Project 03. Please review @bleuuuz's submission for this mini-project and provide peer feedback.

Using the rubric at https://michael-weylandt.com/STA9750/miniprojects/mini03.html#rubric, please grade their submission out of a total of 50 points. Note that this rubric is slightly different than that used for Mini-Projects 01 and 02.

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 @bleuuuz, but you are of course welcome to initiate a discussion.

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

Submission URL should be: https://bleuuuz.github.io/STA9750-2024-FALL/mp03.html

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

Thanks! @michaelweylandt

CC: @charles-ramirez

[nikitagtm]

Congratulations @bleuuuz for completing your #Mini03

What I Liked: Data Visualization: The chloropleth maps are well-designed and effectively convey the geographic distribution of Electoral College results. Comprehensive Analysis: The project thoroughly examines multiple allocation methods, with conclusions backed by solid data. Code Presentation: The code is clean and well-structured

Suggestions for Improvement:

Project Skeleton: In Question 6, it would be better to show maps for all relevant elections rather than focusing on a single year. Including maps for additional years would provide a more comprehensive view of trends over time.

Code Output: Suppress unnecessary messages such as {r} A tibble: 1 × 4 to make the report cleaner and more polished.

Written Communication : Break down sections with multiple questions into subsections.

Ratings: Written Communication: 9/10 Project Skeleton: 9/10 Formatting & Display: 9/10 Code Quality: 9/10 Data Preparation: 46/10

[aaronkcooper]

Hi @bleuuuz , Here is my breakdown of feedback: Written Communication: 9/10 The written report flows really well and does a great job outlining the motivations behind each step. It was easy to follow and engaging throughout. My only suggestion would be to highlight the important findings, or make the big sections better demarcated by different headers.

Project Skeleton: 10/10 All tasks were completed and throughly explored.

Formatting and Display: 8/10 Overall, the displays were done well. However a few things I would have liked to see. More visuals as opposed to tables, and especially at the end when calculating the different electoral vote systems. Some tables only included the winners of their respective election. I think its helpful to see how both candidates fared in each system, and if any third party candidates received any votes.

Code Quality: 9/10 Overall the code is well done. There are a few suggestions I would make, for the chloropleth, the congressional districts are still visible. It is possible to simplify the plot to only include the state outlines. Secondly the data automation functions seem to be a bit convoluted, requiring a for loop to be called to iteratively call the function over and over. Why not have the for loop in the function itself?

Data Preparation: 10/10

Total Score: 46/50

[plnrbrt]

Hi @bleuuuz Thank you for sharing your project! Here are my feedbacks:

Written Communication: 10/10 The mini project flows, easy to understand and has a good structure. You also did not forget to mention the citations at the end of your project so good point for that!

Project Skeleton: 10/10 All the tasks are well answered

Formatting and Display: 8/10 I would have maybe the head and tail into tables so that it looks a bit prettier and easier to understand with a first look at it. Also it was a bit dustrbing to have the map of the US fragmented for the Presidential Election of 2000 task, a whole map of the US would have been visually more pleasant and readable.

Code Quality: 9/10 There is table in your mini-project showing NA column (fusion table) that could have been dropped

Data Preparation: 10/10

Total: 47/50