Module 1: Map Evaluations

 Well-Designed Map:

General

-          What is the purpose (substantive objective) of the map?

o   The purpose of the map is to represent the ancestry with the largest populations within the counties of the United States and Puerto Rico.

-          What is the “look and feel” (affective objective) of the map?

o   The look of the map is clean, and the color scheme blends well together but highlights what color each ancestry represents. The map goes in-depth by using the counties within each state versus just the states themselves. It is descriptive and informative but not crowded or overwhelming.

-          Who is the intended audience for the map (include expected educational level)?

o   I believe it may be for researchers who are studying ancestral data and where they have migrated to the most. I think it would be expected at a high school and up a level.

Cartographic Design

-          Is there an appropriate visual emphasis on important themes?

o   Yes, the color scheme highlights the different ancestries in each county. They are easily recognizable.

-          Is the symbology for qualitative and quantitative data effectively applied?

o   The symbology is qualitative and is successfully used by the color scheme and county data. This allowed for an in-depth look at what ancestry is the largest in each county and area in the United States.

-          Do the colors and symbols support the substantive and affective objectives?

o   Yes, they are different enough to identify but not too busy to be distracting or overwhelming.

-          Are the symbols and labels legible?

o   Yes, they are easy to read and decipher and the legend is large enough to read with ease.

-          Are the symbols intuitive and easy to decipher or do they have good explanations?

o   They showcase each ancestry easily by the contrast in colors.

-          Is there appropriate use of graphics, images, text blocks, or other supporting information?

o   Yes, the map is dispersed evenly and does not look cluttered. The main focus of counties within the United States is in the center drawing the viewer’s eye there first. The legend is to the right for easy access and the other graphics of Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and even a map of ancestry data via state surround the map. Altogether it is neat and the cartographer made excellent use of empty spaces and organized the map to be easily understood.  

Map Elements & Page layout

-          Does the page look balanced—are the map and map elements aligned to the page and each other?

o   Yes, it flows cohesively and allows for the eye to naturally follow what to look at and what is important.  

-          Do all the map elements support the substantive and affective objectives?

o   Yes, they dictate the different ancestries that are the largest in each county for either research or information for the public.

-          Are the map elements placed logically on the page?

o   Yes, they fill up space without wasting it or overcrowding the map.

-          Does the map have appropriate borders?

o   Yes, the United States has bolded state lines and county lines that are easy to decipher.

Scale

-          Is the scale (map extent) appropriate to the map?

o   For the small maps, the size is fine and understandable but for the United States scale, it seemed small and lost a little bit. I think It should have been increased in size and length.  

-          Is the scale bar appropriately designed, positioned, and sized?

o   It is appropriately designed and positioned but could be bigger.

-          Are the scale units logical?

o   The scale units are logical to me but I think for this purpose of the map, it does not seem that important.   

Legend

-          Have all the necessary symbols and details been included in the legend as they appear on the map (size, color, etc)? 

o   The legend has every ancestry and its respective color shown clearly and can be easily read. There is even a portion describing the subgroups of “other”.  

-          Is there a logical structure related to the function of the legend?

o   Yes, the ancestries are in alphabetical order and the colors are properly paired with its color.

-          Are the legend labels logical?

o   Yes, it is logical and is easy to read so most individuals can read it and understand what it is representing.

Titles and Subtitles

-          Are the titles and/or subtitles present and suitably descriptive (area mapped, subject, date, etc)?

o   The title is present and easy to see but I think it could have been more descriptive. The current title seems to be representing the largest Ancestry but not where precisely. Maybe a title like “United States Largest Ancestral Populations” would be clearly understood. I did not find a date or author but citations were present at the bottom.

-          Are the titles and/or subtitles suitably positioned and sized?

o   They are and they fill empty spaces without overcrowding the entire map.

Poorly-Designed Map:

General

-          What is the purpose (substantive objective) of the map?

o   I don’t know for sure, there is no title or clear reasoning for what this map is for. The pins look like they were just placed on top of each other but they could represent ships or rigs of some sort.

-          What is the “look and feel” (affective objective) of the map?

o   The look is dark and cluttered with no focal point besides a mass of pins. The image quality is subpar and grainy and if a person did not recognize the gulf coast or read New Orleans then there would be no telling of where these pins are located.

-          Who is the intended audience for the map (include expected educational level)?

o   If it is for rigs or ships then I am guessing for those that work the ships and rigs or those that oversee it. The expected education level is hard to decide since this map is incomplete and not the greatest.

Cartographic Design

-          Is there an appropriate visual emphasis on important themes?

o   No, there is a substantial amount of pins clustered together and what looks like in the Gulf of Mexico.

-          Is the symbology for qualitative and quantitative data effectively applied?

o   I could not find a definitive approach to what this map’s symbology is. It could be quantitative since then there are several single pins present but there is no way of knowing what the pins are representing.

-          Do the colors and symbols support the substantive and affective objectives?

o   No, it is dark and cluttered and pretty boring to look at.

-          Are the symbols and labels legible?

o   Not at all, there are few shown but they still do not show what they are representing.

-          Are the symbols intuitive and easy to decipher or do they have good explanations?

o   No, they are clustered together and there is no legend or note as to what they represent.

-          Is there appropriate use of graphics, images, text blocks, or other supporting information?

o   Not really, they don’t have any other graphics besides the background map.

Map Elements & Page layout

-          Does the page look balanced—are the map and map elements aligned to the page and each other?

o   No, it is very center-heavy and cluttered. It is like staring at a blob.  

-          Do all the map elements support the substantive and affective objectives?

o   No, it does not because there are hardly any map elements present to support a substantive and effective objective.

-          Are the map elements placed logically on the page?

o   No, because there is none present besides the pins that have no label or reasoning present.

-          Does the map have appropriate borders?

o   There is none present and the image is too grainy to know.

Scale

-          Is the scale (map extent) appropriate to the map?

o   There is no scale present on the map.

-          Is the scale bar appropriately designed, positioned, and sized?

o   There is no scale present but I think it should be placed in the bottom left/center of the map, designed simply.

-          Are the scale units logical?

o   There are no scale units present but measurements in miles would be best suited.

Legend

-          Have all the necessary symbols and details been included in the legend as they appear on the map (size, color, etc)? 

o   There is no legend present. The legend could be placed in the bottom right corner showcasing what each pin represents.

-          Is there a logical structure related to the function of the legend?

o   There is no legend present.

-          Are the legend labels logical?

o   There is no legend present.

Titles and Subtitles

-          Are the titles and/or subtitles present and suitably descriptive (area mapped, subject, date, etc)?

o   There is no title/ subtitles present and I would need more information on what the pins represent to think of a suitable title.

-          Are the titles and/or subtitles suitably positioned and sized?

o   There is none present.

Takeaways: 

Something I have learned from this is that having a map that is easily understood and makes sense will flow together. The well-made maps still had some errors but they were minor and would not be noticed by the average observer. There were some challenges when I thought about evaluating a map as to whether it was bad or not and I look forward to learning more about what I should expect in a map but once I started comparing the various maps and what drew my attention the most, I got a better understanding to what makes a good map and what doesn't.