The news page – or a list of announcements that seem important. Please also check out the BasicInfo page for basic course information.
Maureen Stone’s course on color for vis
http://www.stonesc.com/Vis06/
The “expert color choices” – should be a required reading
the course notes are amazing at showing what color can do, can’t do, the perceptual issues, ….
Milestones in viz http://datavis.ca/milestones/ A Periodic Table of viz: http://www.visual-literacy.org/periodic_table/periodic_table.html
Pencil & Paper designs
Thought Provoking Papers category
Hullman papers (retoric, difficulties), chartjunk, whiteboards
HIVE (Dykes)
Visual Salience
Wiki/Web support
Set inclusion design w/pencil sketching
Aspect ration paper (to emphasize how important basic concepts are)
Lighting comparison paper (to get DVR cues across)
Scagnostics
Survey of Hi-D techniques (SPLOM, Projections, Embeddings, Parallel Coords)
Visual Inference
Ballot Maps as a good case study
Maureen blog tutorials
tufte color chapter in envisioning information (maureen)
synthesis lectures
Hanspeter: 5 step process
Haspeter: process in class, learn materials from reading
critiques
GOMS models (or some other thing)
Process: design notebooks (mariah)
Great getting started reading:
Data Visualization for Human Perception by Stephen Few
Counterpoint to Tufte
The “Chartjunk” paper at CHI
Be sure to read the Cleveland an McGill Graphical perception paper (short version for 638, long version for 838). And maybe a more modern follow up
infographics design post: some makes me mad, other is good – makes you realize what these people are about
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2011/10/14/the-dos-and-donts-of-infographic-design/
A Visualization class will be offered again in the Spring of 2012. Check here for the official announcement (or maybe even the course web)
I had to do the final grades in a hurry. Information about how we did them is available here.
We will give you more feedback (for example on the projects) next week.
I want to thank everyone for taking part in this class. It was an interesting adventure for me. I hope you had a good experience as well.
mike
We had to get grades done quickly. We followed what I said at:
http://graphics.cs.wisc.edu/Courses/Visualization10/archives/1187-how-to-do-grading-in-this-class
We will send more detailed information next week.
Participation:
– A=consistently contributed to class
– B=sometimes contributed to class
– C=contributed only if called upon
(this was done by Michael C and I agreeing subjectively, which
happened to agree with some objective metrics Michael was tracking)
Participation includes extra posts (like the "cool stuff" posts)
Your participation score is hurt by not being in class (since you
can’t contribute if you’re not there).
Readings: There were 12 readings to comment on, but because of
confusion, many people missed 1.
– A = commented on 10 or more
– AB = commented on 8 or 9
– C = commented on at least half
– 0 = commented on less than 1/4
Critiques: Everyone gets an A. The person who didn’t do the critiques
gets a B since they didn’t even offer to make it up.
Design Challenge:
Everyone gets an A for the presentation part (and trying to do
something with it)
Commenting on Others:
– A = 5-7 comments provided
– AB = 4 comments provided
– D = 1 comment provided
Design Challenge Writeups:
OK, I never gave you feedback. Whoops. All the ones we received were
great. Some of them were a bit long. So all the ones we received get
an A (actually that’s everyone).
Final Projects:
I’ve been doing a lot of reading, and intend to give more detailed
feedback. But I need to get grades back to people quickly.
Basically:
In terms of the work, the presentations, and the writeups: I think
everyone did well. Especially given the lack of guidance about
expectations, and the lack of feedback along the way. Basically, all
projects are As, except for places where you didn’t turn in pieces.
Everyone will get a purple crayoned (well, using the pen annotation
tool with a purple pen) version of their writeup back.
While I have some disappointment that some projects didn’t really
reflect what I would have hoped you learned in the class, this would
have been better had we had an iteration of design. So for the project
content (including the writeups), I will give everyone an A.
The postmortems vary, but if you turned one in, you get an A.
Status reports were check/no check – you either sent 0, 1 or
2. (A,C,F)
Reading lists and summaries:
While there was dynamic range here, we’re generally just giving people
check/no check. Or half a check if you turned in a bibliography
without summaries
Scoring
– 30% Final Content (A)
– 30% Final Presentation/Writeup (A)
– 10% Initial Parts (A – everyone did it)
– 10% Intermediate phases (status reports)
– 10% Post-Mortem
– 10% Readings (summaries)
—–
Final Grading
– Final Project: 1/4
– Participation: 1/6
– Readings: 1/6
– DC: 1/6
– Free: 1/4