Maths Folio Stats Probs
Maths Folio Stats Probs
STATISTICS
CML 2 FOLIO
TASK
ANGAS SMITH
SACE A MAT G JO
KELLAWAY
LSG15 KAY GILLET
INTRODUCTION
Last
year
5
13.2
This
year
6
18.6
Media
n
Mode
13
19
11, 14
15
Max
30
32
Min
Mean
The mean will give us the most reliable evidence for this set of data about whether the
year 11 class as a whole has made a significant change or not but it is also useful to look
at the mode seeing as it represents the most common score received.
The mean for this year shows that the year 11 students have been making good progress
in the external maths competition and there is a clear increase in average test score from
the previous year. The mode for this year has also increased which looks positive except
Page 1
INTRODUCTION
for the fact that it now falls on the lower half of the data. In the previous year the mode
fell on either side of the median.
10
15
20
25
30
35
Frequency
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Frequency
Figure 2
Figure 3
The Histograms shown above (Figure 2, Figure 3) display the results of each tests. Firstly,
you can quite quickly see that the spread of this years test is smaller and no student
received a score lower than 5. This year more people received higher scores with two
Page 2
INTRODUCTION
students managing to reach the 30<=35 band. The scores most frequently received this
year were also higher, in the 16<=20 band as opposed to the 11<=15 band that was
most frequently reached last year. This data points to the fact that more students are
capable of receiving higher scores meaning that the Tryhard High students are making
progress.
Figure 4 (red is this year, blue is last year)
The box and whisker plot above (Figure 4) paints a similar picture to the histograms and
so we can draw similar conclusions.
Standard
Deviation
Range
Last
year
4.8
5.6
This
Year
30
26
Figure 5
The standard deviation of the test data (figure 5) doesnt really tell us much about the
progress of the students. Of course a smaller standard deviation would be optimal but
because there is no blatant change between the two it would not be just to come to
conclusions.
The science and maths staff at Tryhard High hardly ever talk to each other. In the staffroom there is an
argument about the success of the different departments. Our students do just fine in maths, but not in
science, claims a maths teacher. I dont think so! Our science program teaches them heaps more!
retorts a science teacher. Do you have any evidence of that? asks an English teacher.
The students also sit external science competitions. The total scores for the year 11 students in the
science competition are given in the provided file. Also supplied are the state average scores for the
science and maths competitions.
Page 3
INTRODUCTION
Maths
Mean
Median
Mode
18.6
19
15
Scienc
e
Mean
23.6
Median
Modes
24
21, 22,
26, 27,
28
Page 4
INTRODUCTION
Frequency 15
10
5
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Received Scores
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Received Scores
The two histograms shown above show the scores at Tryhard High for the external year 11
maths and science tests. The maths results have a more consistent spread meaning that
students are receiving a range of scores which is probably something you could expect to
see in a test for a subject like maths. The science histogram skews to the right meaning
that a larger amount of students received higher scores and also a higher maximum
score.
It should be obvious that the Science students at Tryhard High perform much better than
the Maths students and there is a large amount of clear evidence supporting that fact but
to make the claim that the maths students are not making progress is a little out of hand.
The maths students have been making progress and although small, if they were not
Page 5
INTRODUCTION
making any progress you would most likely see a steady drop in maths scores. This does
not mean that the Maths students at Tryhard High are doing as well as they could and if
there was an actual improvement you would probably see a larger spike in test results. It
is not completely fair to come to these conclusions though seeing as we are only
observing the data from the past two years and having something larger to work with like
5 years would produce a clearer conclusion.
Page 6