Data MARKGENDERCLASSSTATUS 84.84111 GENDER 1FEMALE 63.64121 2MALE 54.43131 55.65131 CLASS1CLASS 1 66.40121 2CLASS 2 74.51111 3CLASS 3 58.73131 43.64131...

1 answer below »



Data MARKGENDERCLASSSTATUS 84.84111GENDER 1FEMALE 63.641212MALE 54.43131 55.65131CLASS1CLASS 1 66.401212CLASS 2 74.511113CLASS 3 58.73131 43.64131STATUS1DOMESTIC 70.201212INTERNATIONAL 73.30121 98.23111 27.90131 33.67131 58.37121 56.72121 76.18112 76.27112 78.13112 45.53132 37.06132 51.96122 26.18132 56.73112 54.24122 51.07122 39.82132 98.66112 91.04112 90.11112 68.00122 42.77231 43.98231 52.37211 44.38231 48.91221 46.57221 67.58211 55.50221 48.15231 38.63221 64.82211 45.24231 54.31211 53.38211 40.48231 50.84212 52.15232 40.60222 63.43212 45.92232 47.89232 43.65222 47.12222 60.18212 42.52232 46.70222 42.44222 49.19222 59.71212 66.11212 STATISTICS FOR DECISION MAKING BUSINESS REPORT Name: Tejas Kaja Student no: 5957989 Campus: Wollongong Executive Summary: With (F=27.37, p<0.05), one-way anova="" along="" with="" the="" post="" hoc="" analysis="" concludes="" that="" there="" is="" a="" significant="" difference="" in="" the="" mean="" marks="" between="" (class1,="" class2),="" (class1,="" class3),="" and="" (class2,="" class3). with="" (t="-0.25," p="">0.05), the T-test of independent samples indicates that there is 79.9% probability that there is no significant difference in the mean marks between two types of student status namely domestic and international. It is recommended to give equal priority to the domestic and international type of students regarding faculty and teaching methods. With (Chi(2)=1.6, p>0.05), the Chi square test of Independence indicates that there is 44.9% chance that type of class and type of student status are independent of each other. With (z=0.5346, p>5%), one sample Z test indicates that there is 29.6% chance that the mean marks of students are less or equal to 55. adopting a practical method of teaching, proper invigilation on students regarding their homework an assignment might be helpful to improve the proportion of students whose mean marks are greater than 55. With (F=5.93, p<0.05), the f="" test="" for="" variance="" indicate="" that there="" is="" a="" significant="" difference="" in="" the="" variants="" marks="" between="" male="" and="" female="" students. with="" (t="3.04,"><0.05), the t-test="" of="" independent="" samples="" indicates="" that="" there="" is="" sufficient="" evidence="" to="" conclude="" that="" there="" is="" a="" significant="" difference="" in="" the="" mean="" marks="" of="" male="" and="" female="" students. with="" (z="3.126,"><5%), the="" z="" test="" for="" difference="" in="" proportion="" indicates="" that proportion="" of="" marks="" greater="" than="" 55="" for="" females="" is="" higher="" than="" male="" students.="" checking="" attendance="" on="" a="" regular="" basis="" and="" an="" introduction="" of="" the="" penalty="" for="" missing="" classes="" can="" improve="" the="" proportion="" of="" marks="" greater="" than="" 55="" for="" male="" students.="" table="" of="" contents="" executive="" summary="" 1="" business="" problem="" 3="" statistical="" problem="" 4="" analysis="" 5="" hypothesis="" 1="" 5="" hypothesis="" 2="" 8="" hypothesis="" 3="" 10="" hypothesis="" 4="" 12="" hypothesis="" 5="" 13="" hypothesis="" 6="" 15="" hypothesis="" 7="" 17="" conclusions="" 19="" implications="" 20="" business="" problem="" the="" data="" for="" marks="" of="" 60="" students="" along="" with="" their="" gender,="" class,="" and="" status="" is="" to="" be="" analyzed.="" the="" main="" area="" of="" concern="" is="" to="" test="" the="" proportion="" of="" students="" with="" their="" marks="" less="" than="" 55.="" comparison="" of="" the="" proportion="" of="" male="" and="" female="" students="" with="" marks="" greater="" than="" 55="" is="" also="" an="" objective.="" other="" objectives="" include="" knowing="" the="" independence="" of="" type="" of="" student="" status="" and="" gender. lastly="" the="" test="" for="" difference="" in="" the="" mean="" marks="" between="" the="" type="" of="" student="" as="" well="" as="" the="" type="" of="" gender="" might="" be="" beneficial.=""  ="" statistical="" problem="" various="" types="" of="" parametric="" hypothesis="" testing="" are="" used="" to="" analyze="" my="" objective. one="" way="" anova="" is="" used="" for="" testing="" difference="" between="" the="" mean="" marks="" of="" various="" classes. t-test="" for="" independent="" samples are="" helpful="" for="" testing the="" mean="" difference="" in="" marks="" between="" two="" categories="" of="" student="" status="" as="" well="" as="" between="" genders. ="" chi="" square="" test="" of="" independence="" is="" used="" to="" test="" the="" dependence="" of type="" of="" class="" and="" the="" type="" of="" student="" status. sample="" z="" test="" seems="" appropriate="" for="" testing="" if mean="" marks="" of="" students="" are="" greater="" than="" 55. f="" test="" to="" test="" the="" equality="" of="" variances of="" marks="" between="" male="" and="" female="" students. z="" test="" for="" difference="" in="" proportions="" is="" beneficial="" for="" testing="" if="" the="" proportion="" of="" marks="" greater="" than="" 55="" for="" females="" is="" higher="" than="" male="" students.="" analysis="" hypothesis="" 1="" the="" null="" hypothesis,="" ho:="" the="" mean="" marks="" of="" various="" classes="" namely="" class="" 1,="" class="" 2="" and="" class="" 3="" don’t="" differ="" significantly.="" the="" alternative="" hypothesis,="" h1:="" at="" least="" one="" of="" the="" mean="" marks="" of="" various="" classes="" namely="" class="" 1,="" class="" 2="" and="" class="" 3="" differs="" significantly.="" for="" the="" application="" of="" one="" way="" anova,="" the="" dependent="" variable="" should="" be="" measured="" by="" ratio="" scale="" of="" measurement.="" and="" the="" independent="" variable="" is="" categorized="" into="" three="" or="" more="" than="" three="" groups.="" in="" this="" case,="" my="" dependent="" variable="" is="" marks="" of="" students.="" the="" independent="" variable="" is="" different="" categories="" of="" class="" (1,="" 2,="" and="" 3). the="" calculation="" of="" f="" test="" statistic="" on="" the="" basis="" of="" anova="" is="" done="" with="" the="" help="" of="" following="" formula.="" carlin,="" b.p.="" and="" louis,="" t.a.,="" 2010. ="" source="" df="" ss="" mss="" f="" between="" dfb="k" -="" 1="" ssb="∑_j" {nj="" (xbar_j-xbar)2}="" msb="SSB" dfb="" f="MSB" msw="" within="" dfw="n" -="" k="" ssw="∑_j∑_i(xij-xbar_j" )2=""  ="" msw="SSW" dfw=""  ="" total="" dft="n" -="" 1="" sst="∑_j∑_i(xij-xbar)2 "  =""  ="" the="" output="" as="" obtained="" from="" excel="" for="" the="" analysis="" of="" one="" way="" anova="" is="" given="" below.="" anova:="" single="" factor="" summary="" groups="" count="" sum="" average="" variance="" class1_marks="" 20="" 1417.43="" 70.8715="" 237.0588="" class2_marks="" 20="" 1073.21="" 53.6605="" 104.1205="" class3_marks="" 20="" 876.09="" 43.8045="" 70.1333="" anova="" source="" of="" variation="" ss="" df="" ms="" f="" p-value="" f="" crit="" between="" groups="" 7506.5450="" 2="" 3753.2725="" 27.3753="" 0.0000="" 3.1588="" within="" groups="" 7814.9416="" 57="" 137.1042="" total="" 15321.4866="" 59="" level="" of="" significance="" 0.05="" with="" (f="27.37,"><0.05), i="" reject the="" null="" hypothesis="" 5%="" level="" of="" significance. hence="" there="" is="" enough="" evidence="" to="" support="" the="" claim="" that="" at="" least="" one="" of="" the="" mean="" marks="" between="" three="" categories="" of="" classes="" differs="" significantly.="" to="" test="" which="" pair="" of="" classes="" differ="" significantly="" i="" use="" post="" hoc="" analysis,="" turkey="" crammer="" test. the="" formula="" for="" turkey="" crammer="" test="" is="" shown="" below.="" critical="" range="QU(c,n-c)" *="" sqrt{(msw/2)="" *="" (1/nj="" +1/nj')}="" where="" n="total" number="" of="" values="" in="" that="" group="" nj="number" of="" values="" in="" jth="" group="" c="number" of="" groups="" a="" specific="" pair="" is="" said="" to="" be="" significantly="" different="" if="" the="" absolute="" mean="" difference="" is="" greater="" than="" the="" critical="" range.="" the="" excel="" output="" of="" turkey="" crammer="" analysis="" is="" obtained="" from="" excel="" is="" given="" below.="" wilcox,="" r.r.,="" 1996. ="" tukey-kramer="" multiple="" comparisons="" sample="" sample="" group="" mean="" size="" 1:="" class1_marks="" 70.8715="" 20="" 2:="" class2_marks="" 53.6605="" 20="" 3:="" class3_marks="" 43.8045="" 20="" other="" data="" level="" of="" significance="" 0.05="" numerator="" d.f.="" 3="" denominator="" d.f.="" 57="" msw="" 137.1042="" q="" statistic="" 3.403="" absolute="" std.="" error="" critical="" comparison="" difference="" of="" difference="" range="" results="" group="" 1="" to="" group="" 2="" 17.211="" 2.61824597="" 8.9099="" means="" are="" different="" group="" 1="" to="" group="" 3="" 27.067="" 2.61824597="" 8.9099="" means="" are="" different="" group="" 2="" to="" group="" 3="" 9.856="" 2.61824597="" 8.9099="" means="" are="" different="" there="" is="" a="" significant="" difference="" in="" the="" mean="" marks="" between="" (class1,="" class2),="" (class1,="" class3),="" and="" (class2,="" class3).="" box,="" g.e.,="" hunter,="" j.s.="" and="" hunter,="" w.g.,="" 2005. ="" hypothesis="" 2="" the="" null="" hypothesis,="" ho:="" the="" mean="" marks="" between="" two="" types="" of="" student="" status="" namely="" domestic="" and="" international="" don’t="" differ="" significantly.="" the alternative="" hypothesis,="" h1:="" the="" mean="" marks="" between="" two="" types="" of="" student="" status="" namely="" domestic="" and="" international="" differs="" significantly.="" box,="" g.e.,="" hunter,="" j.s.="" and="" hunter,="" w.g.,="" 2005. ="" t-test="" for="" independent="" samples="" with="" unequal="" variances="" is="" applied="" to="" test="" this="" hypothesis.="" the="" dependent="" variable="" is="" marks="" of="" students.="" independent="" variable="" is="" the="" type="" of="" student="" status="" which="" is="" categorized="" as="" domestic="" and="" international.="" since="" domestic="" and="" international="" group="" is="" independent="" of="" each="" other,="" it="" is="" sufficient="" to="" apply="" the="" t-test="" for="" independent="" samples.="" the="" test="" statistic="" for="" t-test="" of="" independent="" samples="" with="" unequal="" variances="" is="" given="" below.="" wilcox,="" r.r.,="" 1996. ="" t="(Xbar1-Xbar2)" √((s12)/n1="" +(s22)/n2="" )="" degrees="" of="" freedom,="" df="((s12)/n1" +(s22)/n2="" )2="" (1/(n1-1)="" ((s12)/n1)2+1/(n2-1)="" ((s22)/n2)2)="" the="" excel="" generated="" output="" for="" testing="" the="" difference="" in="" mean="" marks="" between="" two="" types="" of="" student="" status="" is="" given="" below.="" separate-variances="" t="" test="" for="" the="" difference="" between="" two="" means="" (assumes="" unequal="" population="" variances)="" data="" hypothesized="" difference="" 0="" level="" of="" significance="" 0.05="" population="" 1="" sample=""  ="" sample="" size="" 30="" sample="" mean="" 55.57666667="" sample="" standard="" deviation="" 15.1154="" population="" 2="" sample=""  ="" sample="" size="" 30="" sample="" mean="" 56.64766667="" sample="" standard="" deviation="" 17.2991="" intermediate="" calculations="" numerator="" of="" degrees="" of="" freedom="" 309.4478="" denominator="" of="" degrees="" of="" freedom="" 5.4313="" total="" degrees="" of="" freedom="" 56.9750="" degrees="" of="" freedom="" 56="" standard="" error="" 4.1942="" difference="" in="" sample="" means="" -1.0710="" separate-variance="" t="" test="" statistic="" -0.2554="" two-tail="" test=""  ="" lower="" critical="" value="" -2.0032="" upper="" critical="" value="" 2.0032="" p-value="" 0.7994="" do="" not="" reject="" the="" null="" hypothesis=""  ="" with="" (t="-0.25," p="">0.05), I fail to reject the null hypothesis at 5% level of significance. There is no evidence to support the claim that the mean marks between two types of student status namely domestic and international differs significantly. The P value is equal to 0.7994. There is 79.9% probability that the mean marks between two types of student status namely domestic and international differs significantly. Huck, S.W., Cormier, W.H. and Bounds, W.G., 1974.  Hypothesis 3 The null hypothesis, Ho: types of class and status of student is independent of each other. The alternative hypothesis, H1: types of class and status of student are dependent on each other. Lancaster, H.O., 1969.  Chi-square test of Independence is used to test the above hypothesis. The dependent variable is marks of the student. The independent variables are the type of class and this type of student status. For the application of Chi-square test of Independence, it is required that two variables are measured on the nominal scale of measurement. In this case, the type of student status and the type of class is a categorical variable measured by the nominal scale of measurement. The test statistic for chi-square test of Independence is given below. Lancaster, H.O., 1969.  Chi square=Sum {(Oi-Ei)^2/Ei} Where, Oi is the observed frequency Ei is the expected frequency Ei= (ri_total*ci_total)/(grand_total ) Degrees of
Answered Same DayApr 04, 2020

Answer To: Data MARKGENDERCLASSSTATUS 84.84111 GENDER 1FEMALE 63.64121 2MALE 54.43131 55.65131...

Pooja answered on Apr 06 2020
145 Votes
Executive Summary
The objective of this report is to test if there is any significant difference in the marks of student on the basis of their gender, status and class. I also want to test if (gender, student status) as well as (gender, type of class) are independent of each other. Another area of concern is to test if mean marks of all students is greater than 50.  Lastly I want to know if the main effect of Gender and status as well as the interaction effect between them has a significant effect on marks. Techniques of hypothesis testing are used in order to analyze the data and make inferences.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary    1
Business
Problem    3
Statistical Problem    4
Analysis    5
Different Classes    5
Output    5
Analysis    6
Different types of Students    8
Output    8
Analysis    9
Marks for different types of students    10
Output    10
Analysis    13
Hypothesis testing question 4    14
Output    14
Analysis    17
Hypothesis testing question 5    18
Output    18
Analysis    20
Hypothesis Question 6    21
Output    21
Analysis    22
Hypothesis Question 7    23
Output    23
Analysis    23
Conclusion    25
Business Problem
I want to analyze the marks of students on the basis of their gender, status and class.  The dependent variable is student marks.  The independent variables are gender, student status, and type of class. 
Statistical Problem
To test the difference of mean marks between Three Types of classes, the technique of descriptive statistics and one way anova is applied. To test the independence of Gender and student status, Chi square test of Independence is used. For testing the difference in mid marks for different type of students, T test for independent sample is explained. To know if the mean marks between domestic and international student status before I use T test for independent samples. One sample Z test is used to check if the mean marks of all students of greater than 50. To check the independence of gender and type of class, Chi square test of Independence is used. To check the significance of main effect of Gender and status as well as interaction effect between them, univariate analysis method is used.
Analysis
Different Classes
Output
    Descriptives
    MARK
    
    N
    Mean
    Std. Deviation
    Std. Error
    95% Confidence Interval for Mean
    Minimum
    Maximum
    
    
    
    
    
    Lower Bound
    Upper Bound
    
    
    CLASS 1
    20
    70.8715
    15.39672
    3.44281
    63.6656
    78.0774
    50.84
    98.66
    CLASS 2
    20
    53.6605
    10.20395
    2.28167
    48.8849
    58.4361
    38.63
    73.30
    CLASS 3
    20
    43.8045
    8.37456
    1.87261
    39.8851
    47.7239
    26.18
    58.73
    Total
    60
    56.1122
    16.11478
    2.08041
    51.9493
    60.2751
    26.18
    98.66
    ANOVA
    MARK
    
    Sum of Squares
    df
    Mean Square
    F
    Sig.
    Between Groups
    7506.545
    2
    3753.272
    27.375
    .000
    Within Groups
    7814.942
    57
    137.104
    
    
    Total
    15321.487
    59
    
    
    
    Multiple Comparisons
    Dependent Variable: MARK
Tukey HSD
    (I) CLASS
    (J) CLASS
    Mean Difference (I-J)
    Std. Error
    Sig.
    95% Confidence Interval
    
    
    
    
    
    Lower Bound
    Upper Bound
    CLASS 1
    CLASS 2
    17.21100*
    3.70276
    .000
    8.3006
    26.1214
    
    CLASS 3
    27.06700*
    3.70276
    .000
    18.1566
    35.9774
    CLASS 2
    CLASS 1
    -17.21100*
    3.70276
    .000
    -26.1214
    -8.3006
    
    CLASS 3
    9.85600*
    3.70276
    .027
    .9456
    18.7664
    CLASS 3
    CLASS 1
    -27.06700*
    3.70276
    .000
    -35.9774
    -18.1566
    
    CLASS 2
    -9.85600*
    3.70276
    .027
    -18.7664
    -.9456
    *. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
    MARK
    Tukey HSD
    CLASS
    N
    Subset for alpha = 0.05
    
    
    1
    2
    3
    CLASS 3
    20
    43.8045
    
    
    CLASS 2
    20
    
    53.6605
    
    CLASS 1
    20
    
    
    70.8715
    Sig.
    
    1.000
    1.000
    1.000
    Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
    a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 20.000.
Analysis
From the means lot of marks between Three Types of classes I observe that class 1 has the highest mean mark followed by class 2. Class 3 has the least mean marks.
From the table of descriptive statistics, the mean marks for class 1 is the highest with value of 70.8 along with the standard deviation of 15.39.  This is followed by the mean marks for class 2 with value of 53.6605 along with the standard deviation of 10.20395. Class 3 has the least mean marks with average of 43.8045 and standard deviation equal to 8.37456. The low value of standard deviation indicates that the mean is reliable.
I am 95% confident that estimated population mean marks for class 1 lies in an interval (63.6656, 78.0774).  I am 95% confident that estimated population mean marks for class 2 lies in an interval (48.8849, 58.4361).  I am 95% confident that estimated population mean marks for class 3 lies in the range of (39.8851, 47.7239).
Null hypothesis, ho:  there is significant difference in the mean marks between class 1, class 2 and class 3. The alternative hypothesis, H1: at least one of the mean marks between class 1 class 2 and class 3 differ significantly. With (F=27.37, p<0.05), I reject the null hypothesis 5% level of significance and conclude that at least one of the mean marks between class 1 class 2 and class 3 differ significantly.
The post Hoc analysis, Turkey Crammer test is used to know which pair of classes differ significantly with respect to the mean marks. There is a significant difference in the mean marks between (class1, class2), (class1, class3), and (class2, class3). 
Different types of Students
Output
    Case Processing Summary
    
    Cases
    
    Valid
    Missing
    Total
    
    N
    Percent
    N
    Percent
    N
    Percent
    GENDER * STATUS
    60
    100.0%
    0
    0.0%
    60
    100.0%
    GENDER * STATUS Crosstabulation
    
    STATUS
    Total
    
    DOMESTIC
    INTERNATIONAL
    
    GENDER
    FEMALE
    Count
    15
    15
    30
    
    
    Expected Count
    15.0
    15.0
    30.0
    
    MALE
    Count
    15
    15
    30
    
    
    Expected Count
    15.0
    15.0
    30.0
    Total
    Count
    30
    30
    60
    
    Expected Count
    30.0
    30.0
    60.0
    Chi-Square Tests
    
    Value
    df
    Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
    Exact Sig. (2-sided)
    Exact Sig. (1-sided)
    Pearson Chi-Square
    .000a
    1
    1.000
    
    
    Continuity Correctionb
    .000
    1
    1.000
    
    
    Likelihood Ratio
    .000
    1
    1.000
    
    
    Fisher's Exact Test
    
    
    
    1.000
    .602
    Linear-by-Linear Association
    .000
    1
    1.000
    
    
    N of Valid Cases
    60
    
    
    
    
    a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 15.00.
    b. Computed only for a 2x2 table
Analysis
From the bar chart of Gender and status depicting their accounts, I...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here