I've been assigned to your group to give peer feedback. I really enjoyed reading your report.
The project is very aesthetically pleasing. From the little things like the background colour, interactive tables, the table of the contents to the quality of the graphs presented - the report was very easy on the eyes.
The level of external research (outside of the base data) was very high and provided nice context and possible explanations for trends in the data.
The narrative of the report was clear and well structured. The preamble set out well how the report was to be structured. In addition to this, the broad view of the history of space exploration followed by a deep dive into the impact of the Cold War and women's involvement in space exploration struck a great balance between the big and little details.
My favourite part of the report - by far - was the 'The Cold War Rivalry (1957 - 1991)' section. I thought the use of the bar plot showing proportion of single country missions slowly decreasing over time set up the narrative of this section well. The following text gave proper context to why the effect seen in the graph may have been true. The subsequent network graph blew me away. In my opinion, it was the best part of the report. It really hammered home the point of how the Cold War affected collaboration in space. The use of pre and post Cold War faceting really made this graph compelling.
There are a couple of minor areas which I think could be improved however.
Occasionally, I felt the amount of text was slightly excessive and duplicative - I think there's an opportunity to use more concise sentences where possible. Especially given the narrative implicitly communicated through the high quality graphics in the report.
In figure 2, I thought using a boxplot for every single year meant that there was a bit too much information in one figure. Maybe this could be improved by grouping years into 5 or 10 year groups and then constructing boxplots.
Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed your report and was impressed by the quality of your graphics and attention to detail in your research.
Hi team quoll,
I've been assigned to your group to give peer feedback. I really enjoyed reading your report.
The project is very aesthetically pleasing. From the little things like the background colour, interactive tables, the table of the contents to the quality of the graphs presented - the report was very easy on the eyes.
The level of external research (outside of the base data) was very high and provided nice context and possible explanations for trends in the data.
The narrative of the report was clear and well structured. The preamble set out well how the report was to be structured. In addition to this, the broad view of the history of space exploration followed by a deep dive into the impact of the Cold War and women's involvement in space exploration struck a great balance between the big and little details.
My favourite part of the report - by far - was the 'The Cold War Rivalry (1957 - 1991)' section. I thought the use of the bar plot showing proportion of single country missions slowly decreasing over time set up the narrative of this section well. The following text gave proper context to why the effect seen in the graph may have been true. The subsequent network graph blew me away. In my opinion, it was the best part of the report. It really hammered home the point of how the Cold War affected collaboration in space. The use of pre and post Cold War faceting really made this graph compelling.
There are a couple of minor areas which I think could be improved however.
Occasionally, I felt the amount of text was slightly excessive and duplicative - I think there's an opportunity to use more concise sentences where possible. Especially given the narrative implicitly communicated through the high quality graphics in the report.
In figure 2, I thought using a boxplot for every single year meant that there was a bit too much information in one figure. Maybe this could be improved by grouping years into 5 or 10 year groups and then constructing boxplots.
Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed your report and was impressed by the quality of your graphics and attention to detail in your research.
Thanks,
Mayunk