edebroux
commented
6 years ago Thank you for your input.
You are absolutely correct about adding information or a segment on how the calculations are made or how the significance tests are run. It was something I would gladly have added as I have covered these tests in my coursework, but I considered the hypothetical audience and thought it would be better to leave that out. If I was asked about it, I would have shown how the calculations for a chi-square test are carried out on one of the contingency tables I had to analyze.
I must have forgotten to add more analysis on the significance tests. I also realized after I submitted that adding the graphs at the end really made no sense. The instructions said there should have been a section with the figures produced from the program, but I should have used my common sense and added that with the appropriate sections
Great work! I probably won’t have much to say here because you pretty much nailed it all the way through.
Your Python work was excellent and very readable. There are a couple points where your code could be accomplished a bit more efficiently, but everything worked the way it was supposed to.
Presentation: I think your graphs look excellent. You presented the dataset and the results of the tests very well. Also, your conclusions were succinct and on point, so great work there. I liked the pesticide and penalty conclusion but I was more interested in the conclusions drawn from this data analysis. Birds and Mammals have a significant chi-square than reptiles which shows the need for better protection for those species. I would have loved to see a little bit more explanation about the calculations you made to reach them (perhaps include p-values, etc). I totally understand the inclination to not want to include too much technical information, but adding a bit in for context can go a long way.
The figures do not really belong in the end by themselves. I would add some context on what those actually mean.
Excellent work overall. 👏