You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Geoff and I have subdivided the questions according to the page headings we had initially spoken about. Within these, we discussed the type of questions we should be asking of the data, and planned a rough approximation of how we’d like to visualize things.
To start with, as we went along we felt like it would be important to have at least two consistent icons on each page – a data dictionary or explanation of the terms, and a ‘caveat’ note. These could be icons with pop-out windows, and would appear through-out the site.
You are here/spatial slide:
The question we answered
To what degree does the pool of those convicted vary spatially?
Community Area - City and suburbs
Proposed lay-out:
Page one:
[Tracy’s introductory text]
A map of absolute number of convictions in Chicago by community area, controlled for population.
[MAP]
A map of Chicago and the suburbs, showing absolute number of convictions controlled for population. Readers will be able to click on a community area and find the conviction count.
The map will be color-coded to show variations in conviction numbers, and there will be a line, or a spatial separation between the city and the suburbs, since the map of Chicago is so iconic.
We will work on a way for users to find themselves/their areas on the map. (this will be the interactive element)
Page two:
Compare income in Cook County and the absolute number of convictions. Rather than making this interactive, we will place the income map and conviction map side-by-side for a strong visual comparison.
Either in Tracy’s text or the caveat section, we want to make sure we don’t reinforce people’s beliefs that just poor people commit crimes.
Page three:
One level of depth further. We will analyze three neighborhoods, or two city neighborhoods and a suburb, to show the bounds of what our conviction data found. We may also be able to introduce some analysis about these differences in Tracy’s text.
Conclusion note: On the last page, we will also include a note letting people know that there are many ways to analyze this data, including by police district or census block. We will remind readers that they will be able to explore the data on their own.
Ongoing questions:
Should we use the 2000 census? 2010 census? 2005-2009 5-year ACS estimates?
We decided community areas are the ideal way for readers to understand our data, but have so far only collected data using census tracts.
Youth violence slide:
The questions we answered:
What crime type results in the most convictions by age?
How do the convictions given by Cook County Criminal Court vary by crime type & age?
We chose age buckets, based on the age of an individual at the time of their conviction. [E.g. 18-24, 25-29, 30-34… 65, and over]
We will compare absolute convictions
Index crime convictions by age buckets
Index crime convictions by age (for <= 24)
Proposed lay-out:
First slide:
A breakdown, by age buckets, of all convictions given by the court. This will be a bar graph.
Second slide:
One level of detail closer. The breakdown by age buckets will remain, but for this slide we will add the index of crime convictions using Tracy’s suggestions of how to group offenses. Now a stacked bar char.
Caveat: This is different to the total number of convictions, since we are picking specific groupings.
Third slide:
Remove the age buckets, and show index crime convictions year-by-year.
Four slide:
On the fourth slide, we want to look more closely at the 18-24 age bracket, since the focus of this slide is the extent to which crime skews young. We haven’t yet decided what we will analyze, but some suggestions include differences in conviction by sex, the high rates of youth homicide, youth with convictions who live in high-poverty community areas, and drug crime vs. other offenses.
Ongoing questions:
Do we have people under 18. Yet, since some will likely have committed a crime when they were 17 and turned 18 by the time they are convicted.
How do we define youth/young people/young adults? Use the criminologists definition, court’s definition, or media parlance?
Cook County calls them adults if they commit a crime at over-18
Other sections:
Possible intro or summary section
Total convictions female vs. male
Index convictions female vs. male
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Geoff and I have subdivided the questions according to the page headings we had initially spoken about. Within these, we discussed the type of questions we should be asking of the data, and planned a rough approximation of how we’d like to visualize things.
To start with, as we went along we felt like it would be important to have at least two consistent icons on each page – a data dictionary or explanation of the terms, and a ‘caveat’ note. These could be icons with pop-out windows, and would appear through-out the site.
You are here/spatial slide:
The question we answered
To what degree does the pool of those convicted vary spatially?
Community Area - City and suburbs
Proposed lay-out:
Page one:
[Tracy’s introductory text]
A map of absolute number of convictions in Chicago by community area, controlled for population.
[MAP]
A map of Chicago and the suburbs, showing absolute number of convictions controlled for population. Readers will be able to click on a community area and find the conviction count.
The map will be color-coded to show variations in conviction numbers, and there will be a line, or a spatial separation between the city and the suburbs, since the map of Chicago is so iconic.
Page two:
Compare income in Cook County and the absolute number of convictions. Rather than making this interactive, we will place the income map and conviction map side-by-side for a strong visual comparison.
Either in Tracy’s text or the caveat section, we want to make sure we don’t reinforce people’s beliefs that just poor people commit crimes.
Page three:
One level of depth further. We will analyze three neighborhoods, or two city neighborhoods and a suburb, to show the bounds of what our conviction data found. We may also be able to introduce some analysis about these differences in Tracy’s text.
Conclusion note: On the last page, we will also include a note letting people know that there are many ways to analyze this data, including by police district or census block. We will remind readers that they will be able to explore the data on their own.
Ongoing questions:
Should we use the 2000 census? 2010 census? 2005-2009 5-year ACS estimates?
We decided community areas are the ideal way for readers to understand our data, but have so far only collected data using census tracts.
Youth violence slide:
The questions we answered:
What crime type results in the most convictions by age?
How do the convictions given by Cook County Criminal Court vary by crime type & age?
We chose age buckets, based on the age of an individual at the time of their conviction. [E.g. 18-24, 25-29, 30-34… 65, and over]
We will compare absolute convictions
Index crime convictions by age buckets
Index crime convictions by age (for <= 24)
Proposed lay-out:
First slide:
A breakdown, by age buckets, of all convictions given by the court. This will be a bar graph.
Second slide:
One level of detail closer. The breakdown by age buckets will remain, but for this slide we will add the index of crime convictions using Tracy’s suggestions of how to group offenses. Now a stacked bar char.
Caveat: This is different to the total number of convictions, since we are picking specific groupings.
Third slide:
Remove the age buckets, and show index crime convictions year-by-year.
Four slide:
On the fourth slide, we want to look more closely at the 18-24 age bracket, since the focus of this slide is the extent to which crime skews young. We haven’t yet decided what we will analyze, but some suggestions include differences in conviction by sex, the high rates of youth homicide, youth with convictions who live in high-poverty community areas, and drug crime vs. other offenses.
Ongoing questions:
Do we have people under 18. Yet, since some will likely have committed a crime when they were 17 and turned 18 by the time they are convicted.
How do we define youth/young people/young adults? Use the criminologists definition, court’s definition, or media parlance?
Cook County calls them adults if they commit a crime at over-18
Other sections:
Possible intro or summary section
Total convictions female vs. male
Index convictions female vs. male
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: