Graph 1

In 2015, 42.2 million people lived in food-insecure households

  1. The chart is colorful, green, dark blue and light blue. It is clearly labeled and easy to read and follow. This graph is visually appealing because of its easiness to read. 
  2. The chart is conveying the fact that 42.2 million people are in “food insecure households.” The use of the pie graph shows that a prominent chunk of people in the United States are in food insecure households. The chart should include that this is United States – I only infer this because the study was conducted by the USDA. 
  3. I really like this graph because it is very easy to follow and clearly labeled. The explanatory paragraph was very straight forward and informative. I also like that the food insecure houses are broken up into moderately insecure and very insecure, to better explain the severity of the situation. The information was also posted on 9/27/
  4. Three things I’d change: Include percentages on each chunk of the pie chart. I would include something that states where these people are (United States), maybe use more distinct colors so that readers can tell an obvious difference in the colors when the graph may be printed in black and white.

Graph 2

Imports supply about a third of U.S. watermelon consumption

  1. The chart is bright and very visually appealing. 
  2. The chart is a little misleading because the green that represents imports is not actually one third of the graph.
  3. I like the visual appeal of making the graph look like a watermelon. 
  4. One thing i would change is the amount of dates used, as the years are cluttered. While making the graph look like a watermelon, at first glance the reader may think that the seeds signify something else in the graph, like an additional spread of data. I would also include an overall mean percentage for imports vs exports on the graph to show a more overall trend in the data. 


Screen Shot 2016-09-30 at 11.33.05 PM.pngThis graph depicts the decline of percentage of insect-resistant (Bt) genetically engineered corn in 4 states. There is an overall decreasing trend in all four states, meaning the percentage of insect-resistant corn has lowered from 2000 to 2016. I chose to use these four states because the data showed a drastic decline in insect-resistant corn percentages. Generally speaking, all four states saw a dramatic decline in the percentage of insect-resistant corn throughout those 16 years, to the point that they are no longer prevalent percentages of types of corn grown in these states. 

Source: USDA, Economic Research Service using data from USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service, June Agricultural Survey. (Blackboard)


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s