Summary

[bengalspice]

Criteria 1: Presentation: Are all required slides present?

• Score Level: 3/4
• Comment(s): There isn't a clear recommendation/conclusion slide

Criteria 2: Code Accuracy: Does the Python code do what it is supposed to?

• Score Level: 4/4
• Comment(s): coding was done in Learning Environment

Criteria 3: Understanding hypothesis testing and interpreting the p-value

• Score Level: 4/4
• Comment(s): the hypothesis statement is not stated correctly, but correct hypothesis testing is demonstrated.

Criteria 4: Ability to interpret the Objective & Outcome of the analysis in context

• Score Level: 4/4

• Comment(s): learner demonstrated that they understood the objects and what analysis needed to be done to get the outcomes needed to answer the research questions (which species is more endangered; how long will it take to run the study)

  Overall Score: 15/16

  Overall, Great job!

My only critiques are: I wish you had chosen a theme for your slide deck. It would have made the slide deck more appealing and more professional-looking. I would also break things up into more slides to make them easier to read. Graphs could be on a separate slide.

I would also have liked to see some robust recommendations for the conservation of mammals, reptiles, and birds, or even other species in the table.

I did appreciate that you identified that No Intervention was such an outlier that they made looking at the other statuses hard to analyze from the graph. Kudos! It is not often I see someone take the time to think of that!

[simonkuu]

Thank you for the review, Sharmeen!