On 27 Feb 2002 17:16:26 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dennis Roberts) wrote: > i thought of a related data situation ...but at the opposite end > what if you were interested in the relationship between the time it takes > students to take a test AND their test score > > so, you have maybe 35 students in your 1 hour class that starts at 9AM ... > > you decide to note (by your watch) the time they turn in the test ... and > about 9:20 the first person turns it in ... then 9:35 the second .... 9:45 > the 3rd .... 9:47 the 4th ... and then, as you get to 10, when the time > limit is up ... the rest sort of come up to the desk at the same time > > for about 1/2 of the students, you can pretty accurately write down the > time ... but, as it gets closer to the time limit, you have more of a > (literal) rush .... and, at the end ... you probably put down the same time > on the last 8 students > > you could decide just to put the order of the answer sheet as it sits in > the pile ... or, you might collapse the set to 3 groupings ... quick turner > iners, middle time turner iners ... and slow turner iners BUT, this clouds > the data [ snip, rest]
Looks to me like it might be reasonable to re-sort and re-score the speed as reciprocal, "questions per hour" -- instead of the original, hours per question. That emphasizes something you (perhaps) omitted: some tests at the end were incomplete. Also, Q/H accommodates that early test that was nearly blank. -- Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =================================================================
