Review

From ImpVis Wiki
Revision as of 19:05, 16 July 2021 by Mark Thomas (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The writers and peers

Any particular visualisation must be reviewed before it is incorporated into the website. This keeps up the quality of the content! Here is a set of questions a vis writer can ask as an initial review:

  1. Has the vis achieved the primary learning outcome?
  2. Is the vis physically correct or at least visually giving the right intuition?
  3. Is it intuitive to use?

And for a suite:

  1. Has the suite achieved secondary learning outcomes?
  2. Does every vis work correctly/the way you want?
  3. Does it flow?
  4. Is it easy to follow through?

(Bug check: Have you looked into exceptional cases if they exist?)

At this point, it’s best if you can get someone with “clean eyes,” either someone who has not seen the subject you’re trying to teach yet or someone who has not seen your visualization trying to teach the content you’re doing. Peers are an excellent choice! This peer review gives you feedback on how easy it is to understand what’s been said.


Consulting an academic

This document is not quite complete, needs expanidng on the sections of

  • 1.) How to ask for help
  • 2.) What to ask them to consider
  • 3.) Dealing with feedback

By now, lecturers for the course you’re teaching, or people who may be interested in showing this content to students should be contacted, asking if they’re interested in hearing your ideas on how you’re visualizing the content of the suites. Showing them what you have/what you’re planning to have at this sort of stage is crucial, as it stops you moving too far without any misconceptions. You might find it surprising how many incorrect ideas make it this far, where it takes a lecturer to catch out any inconsistencies!