« R power, math stats power | Main | A Harvard mess 2 »



Looks like you've swapped the data from the two original charts in your bar chart reinterpretations.

I don't see why having a common scale is important here, since the two charts show qualitatively different kinds of information: one chart measures % of the whole, while the other has a metric that is independent for each school. That this metric is also expressed as a percentage seems beside the point to me; using a common scale suggests a relationship where there isn't one.

Also, it might read better to sort by % of operations funded by endowment, since there's more interesting variation in that series. Or alternatively, the % of total endowment chart could be expressed in endowment dollars, allowing us to use a log axis to fit the wide range of data.

Jon Peltier

A very good first cut at straightening out the mess. I didn't even notice the bar chart mislabeling, because I went right to the XY chart.


Jon - thanks for noticing the mislabeling. I have fixed the problem now.

Agree with your point about the scale and the metrics. That's why I put up a second post to talk about their choice of metrics.

Sorting is always an issue when two data series are displayed. There can only be one order and you can only make half the people happy.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Kaiser Fung. Business analytics and data visualization expert. Author and Speaker.
Visit my website. Follow my Twitter. See my articles at Daily Beast, 538, HBR.

See my Youtube and Flickr.

Book Blog

Link to junkcharts

Graphics design by Amanda Lee

The Read

Keep in Touch

follow me on Twitter