Posted by **Hamilton** on Friday, November 18, 2011 at 7:59pm.

Suppose you devised a training program to raise student scores on a standardized test, such as ACT, or AIMS (like in Arizona). You first administer the test to a random sample of students, record their scores, administer the training to these students, and then administer the test a second time to each of the same students. For each student you record their score for the second test. (I am deliberately leaving out additional parameters, as you will see why in item b)

a. What would the null and alternate hypothesis be?

b. Assuming there was an increase in scores, do you think that only the training method was responsible? What other factors could explain the changes?

## Answer This Question

## Related Questions

- Res/342 - Suppose you devised a training program to raise student scores on a ...
- statistics - 10th grade New York public school students taking a standardized ...
- statistics - Suppose that the population standard deviation (รณ) for a normally ...
- statistics - the admissions policy at a certain university requires that ...
- statistics - the admissions policy at a certain university requires that ...
- Math - 105 91 82 59 97 72 72 88 81 What is the mode of these scores? A.46 B.72 C...
- maths - the mean of a set of test scores is 64. a new student takes the same ...
- Math - The scores of students on standardized test are normally distributed with...
- Math - Averages - The test average for Louis' calculus class is found by taking ...
- statistics - below is the test scores for students in a statistics class.80,65,...

More Related Questions