1. Recreating the original bar chart
2. How to create a bump chart
3. How to use a diverging color palette and alias country names
4. How to create a ranked dot plot
5. How to use parameter actions to sort the view
6. How to use a filter action to remove the highlighting

• The data by region is ordered alphabetically, making it easy to find each region.
• The bar chart is sorted by largest to smallest.
• Nice filtering options

• A diverging color palette should only be used when there is a logical midpoint or goal. I don't see those in this viz.
• The squares are hard to understand.
• I don't find the map very useful. It would be more useful if it zoomed in when a region is selected.
• There's no title.
• There's too much text.
• The bar chart seems to go out past the edge, or at least visually it appears that way.

• I created a KPI scorecard so that I could understand the patterns for the overall or an individual country. Are literacy rates improving or regressing?
• Show the distribution of the rates of the countries within each region
• Within each region, which countries are above or below the median for that region?
• How has the literacy rate changed over time?
• Allow simple filtering options.

• Really good explanations for how they define overtourism and undertourism and examples for each
• Providing the exact figures for each country
• Colors are easy enough to distinguish
• Sorting the countries from lowest to highest
• Splitting the view between the highest 9 and the lowest 9

• Circles are inherently difficult for comparisons. Are they measure by area or diameter? Either way, the circle in a circle in overkill.
• Why does the size of the light green circle change once the dark green circle is a larger value? That makes no sense at all.
• If the exact numbers were not included, it would be impossible to compare countries.
• Why show the top 9? That seems like an unusual way to select the countries.

• Focus on either the raw values or the percentages. I'll figure this out once I explore the data.
• Make it easier to compare countries.

• Resizing the continents by their overall exports makes it obvious that Europe is the largest exporter.
• I hate packed bubbles, however in this view, the largest countries stand out by double encoding with color.
• Including the percentages for each continent provides needed context

What could be improved?

• The packed bubbles make comparisons overly difficult.
• The color legend uses unequal intervals.
• Plotting the data on a map doesn't add any context.
• There's no sense of overall ranking across all countries.
• If you ask "so what?", there's no answer.

1. Has an informative title and subtitle
2. Provides context
3. Provides insight
4. Uses color effectively

• People understand and like maps so this will capture their attention
• Using a consistent color scale for all countries
• Ensuring countries with no data are white (kind of like blanking them out)
• Simple tooltips

What could be improved?

• Red has a negative connotation, is this the best use for red? I'd say not.
• It can be difficult to compare countries.
• Using a filled map can make smaller countries impossible to find. Take Europe as an example; it's nearly impossible to see European countries without zooming in.
• Using the search and entering a continent zooms you in way too far. This is completely broken.
• There's no title. If you saw this independently of the article, you would have no idea what it's about.

• Make comparing countries easier
• Consider supplementing the viz with additional data
• Use story points for a step-by-step makeover
• Answer a simple question: does more public holidays mean a happier country?

• Nice interactivity
• Informative tooltips
• Summary in the subtitle provides some context
• Including a definition of an internet user
• Highlighting on the timeline the block for the year you are seeing
• Providing the context of "per 100 people"
• Per 100 people makes it easy to understand because you can think of them like percentages

What could be improved?

• Include a more engaging title.
• Stoplight colors work ok for me, but not for the color-blind folks.
• The color scale in this case makes anything below 75% look bad. Is that really the case? Isn't providing more access over the years more important?
• Why are years without data included on the timeline?
• Having to flick through the years prevents you from seeing the change over time.
• Smaller countries get lost on filled maps
• Needs more context

What were my goals?

1. Splitting the countries apart makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. That totally ruins the reason for using a map in the first place.
   To Do: Put the map back together and let the map serve its purpose.
2. Each country is sized by a combination of its GDP and debt, but I only realized that in the super tiny note at the bottom left.
   To Do: Make the sizing more obvious and easier to understand.
3. The author used a stop light colour scheme. This would be terrible to read for a colour-blind person.
   To Do: Change the colour scale to something more effective that appeals to everyone.
4. The colour scale is not even. There’s only one colour on the negative side and three on the positive side.
   To Do: Make the ranges equivalent.
5. Not every country is included, so is a map even the right choice in the first place?
   To Do: Consider alternative charts, e.g., bars.
6. There’s no need to label every country and the metric labels are overly precise. Does it make much difference if Germany is 74.70% or 75%?
   To Do: Clean up the clutter.