Prevalence of Food Insecurity, Average 2013-15
1. At first glance, I noticed the map stood out because of its colors. It made me feel like it would be easy to read, especially because the key is presented directly under the map, so you know what the different colors mean right off the bat.
2. The amount of food in a household in a particular state tends to be close to the amount in surrounding states. For example, much of the Midwest has food insecurity below the National average, while many states in the South East have a food insecurity level that is above the National average. The chart is pretty self-explanatory and conveys just what the title suggests.
3. Overall, I liked that the Map of the United states was clear enough to read. I also liked how states were all filled in with different shades of the same color, because it all represents the same concept. This helped create unity throughout the different states. However, I wish that there was an explanation of what they considered as food insecurity.
4. One thing I would change, is the size of the title. Right now, it seems small and does not catch your attention the way it should. I would also change the amount of years included in the study. Currently, the graph only represents an average of the years from 2013 through 2015. If more years were represented, of if there was another graph from a different time period to compare these results to, then viewers would have a better idea about if the problem is getting worse or improving over time. Lastly, I would add another category, so that the results would be more precise. With only three options to choose from, many states are shown as being the same, but there is much variation between them.
No-till or Strip-till use on acres of four major crops, 2010-11
1. The first thing I noticed about this graph was the background. The image of a farm behind the bar graphs immediately told me that this graph was going to be related to farming, which was nice because I knew what I was going to be looking at.
2. Based on the title, I thought that the graph would be comparing the differences between the amount of no-till and the amount strip-till used by farmers. However, the graph combines the percentage of times the two processes were used. The chart was misleading because it uses the word “or” in the title which usually implies a comparison of two variables.
3. I liked how the chart’s image and style of the bars really matched the topic it was describing. I also liked how neatly the information was organized.
4. The first thing I would change about this chart is the title. I would use the word “and” instead of “or” because I feel as though that would make more sense. The second thing I would change is the color of the bars on the bar graph. The color green presented there is too similar to the background color, and it makes it challenging to tell the difference. Lastly, I would change the graph from being tilted to being straight up and down. The way that it is currently slanted, makes some of the bars appear longer or shorter than they actually are.
In my own graph, I redesigned the “No-till or Strip-till use on acres of four major crops” graph discussed above. I renamed the chart using the word “and” instead of “or” for clarity. I also presented the information in the form of vertical bars rather than slanted bars. I kept the same design, because I think that a bar graph is the best way to represent the data gathered. Although my graph does not have the cool background image as the original one did, I believe that the graph I have created is easier to read and is a better representation of what the information is actually saying.