Proficient – Performs the following with no more than one error: identification of the null and alternate hypotheses, identification of the test to use, correct data, identification of where data used is located, set-up for the test, answers to the questions, and
Teacher notes to errors made
( 2.64 / 3.00) Performs and Interprets an ANOVA Test on Performance Data
Proficient – Performs the following with no more than one error: identification of the null and alternate hypotheses, identification of the test to use, correct data, identification of where data used is located, set-up for the test, answers to the questions, and a clear and accurate interpretation of the results.
Comments:
The complete (all 50) data values are used or are not accurately listed under each grade level heading.
The rejection of the null hypothesis means that grades/salary levels impact the average compa-ratios.
( 2.28 / 3.00) Performs and Interprets an ANOVA Test on Performance Data
Basic – Has errors in only two or three areas: identification of the correct pairs to compare, mean differences, and the correct t-value; calculation of the +/- values; and identification of the significantly different pairs of means.
Comments:
The t value is not correct. For 50 values, t = tinv.2t(0.05, 44) = 2.015
Some or all of the +/- terms were not calculated correctly. It is t * sqrt(MSW * (1/n1 +1/n2), where n1 and n2 are from the respective groups being compared. MSW comes from the ANVOA table.
( 1.76 / 2.00) Conclusions and Interpretations
Proficient – Has errors in only one area: identification of the correct pairs to compare, mean differences, and the correct t-value; calculation of the +/- values; and identification of the significantly different pairs of means.
Comments:
The results do say that compa-ratios are different for some salary levels.
Differences in the compa-ratios could be due to poorly aligned midpoints.
Since salary has a grade impact, the results really do not change our findings.
Overall Score: 6.68 / 8.00
Overall Grade: 6.68