Hi Please look into the document. Details given in the document. let me know if your interested to help I need this homework with in 5 hours from now.
Topic: Olympic Medalist Research Paper
Working With Data
Provide at least a 10-page paper and a 10-15 slide presentation of your findings.
For each dataset:
Examination: Articulate the meaning of the data (its representativeness and phenomenon) and thoroughly examine the physical properties (type, size, condition) noting down your descriptions in each case. Compare what the datasets offer and contrast their differences.
Transformation: What could you do/would you need to do to clean or modify the existing data? What other data could you imagine would be valuable to consolidate the existing data?
Exploration: Use a tool of your choice (common recommendations would be Excel, Tableau, R) to visually explore the two datasets separately in order to deepen your appreciation of their physical properties and their discoverable qualities (insights) to help you cement your understanding of their respective value.
1. Make the data stand out. The focus here is on revealing the structure of the data. It includes discussion of how to fill the data region, transform data, choose an appropriate scale for an axis, eliminate chart junk and other superfluous material, and avoid having graph elements interfere with data, which includes topics such as over plotting, jittering, and transparency.
2. Add information. In addition to the usual conveyance of the importance of labeling axes and using legends, we also discuss how to: use color and plotting symbols to convey additional information; add context with reference markers and labels; and write comprehensive captions that are self-contained, describe the important features, and summarize the conclusions drawn from the graph.
3. Key Questions and Interpretations of Data Analysis...
| No. | Question | Interpretation |
| What is the message? | Get past the presentation to the facts | |
| Is the source reliable? | Think about the information’s quality. | |
| How strong is the evidence overall? | Understand how this information fits with other evidence. | |
| Does the information matter? | Determine whether the information changes your thinking and leads you to respond. | |
| What do the numbers mean? | Remember that understanding the importance of risk requires that you understand the numbers. | |
| How does the risk compare to others? | Put the risk into context. | |
| What actions can be taken to reduce risk? | Identify the ways you can mitigate the risk to improve your situation. | |
| What are the trade-offs? | Make sure you can live with the trade-offs associated with different actions. | |
| What else do I need to know? | Focus on identifying the information that would help you make a better decision. | |
| 10 | Where can I get more information? | Find the information you need to make a better decision. |
Project Evaluation Rubric
| Component | Exemplary (3) | Adequate (2) | Inadequate (1) | Score |
| Project overview | Effectively and insightfully develops a set of testable, supportable and impactful study hypotheses. | Develops a set of testable and supportable hypotheses. | Hypotheses are not testable or justifiable. | 10 |
| Justification for hypotheses | The introduction section provides a cogent overview of conceptual and theoretical issues related to the study hypotheses. Demonstrates outstanding critical thinking. | The introduction section provides a logical overview of conceptual and theoretical issues related to the study hypotheses. Demonstrates competent critical thinking. | Very little support for the conceptual and theoretical relevant to the study hypotheses was provided. Provides little evidence of sound critical thinking. | 10 |
| Supporting evidence | Provides clearly appropriate evidence to support position | Provides adequate evidence to support position | Provides little or no evidence to support position | 20 |
| Review of relevant research | Sophisticated integration, synthesis, and critique of literature from related fields. Places work within larger context. | Provides a meaningful summary of the literature. Shows understanding of relevant literature | Provides little or no relevant scholarship. | 10 |
| Maintains purpose/focus | The project is well organized and has a tight and cohesive focus that is integrated throughout the document | The project has an organizational structure and the focus is clear throughout. | The document lacks focus or contains major drifts in focus | 10 |
| Methodology
| Identifies appropriate methodologies and research techniques (e.g., justifies the sample, procedures, and measures). Data analytic plan is suitable to test study hypotheses. Provides appropriate justification for controls. Project is feasible | Identifies appropriate methodologies and research techniques but some details are missing or vague. | The methodologies described are either not suited or poorly suited to test hypotheses. The methodology is under-developed and/or is not feasible. | 10 |
| Grammar, clarity, and organization | The manuscript is well written and ideas are well developed and explained. Sentences and paragraphs are grammatically correct. Uses subheadings appropriately. | The manuscript effectively communicates ideas. The writing is grammatically correct, but some sections lack clarity. | The manuscript is poorly written and confusing. Ideas are not communicated effectively. | 10 |
| References and citations | Properly and explicitly cited. Reference list matches citations | Properly cited. May have a few instances in which proper citations are missing. | The manuscript lacks proper citations or includes no citations. | 20 |
