HW1: Descriptive statistics
Master of Education
Khilola Alihon
2021005221
Walid El-Jammal
EDUC 685: Analytics for Data-Driven Leadership | Fall 2023
September 23, 2023
Featured Data: Grade 12 Student - English Quiz for Progress Assessment. Total Questions: 15,
Scoring Range: 100 out of 100.
Dataset 1
EXCEL Data Report.
In the Term 1 Progress Check-up quiz, 25 students, comprising both females and males,
participated. The assessment consisted of 15 questions, each carrying a maximum score of 100.
The performance of the students exhibited a diverse range of outcomes, with the lowest score
recorded at 10 and the highest at 90.
On average, the students achieved a mean score of 50.8, indicating a mid-level performance
across the class. However, it's important to note the substantial variability in individual scores, as
indicated by the relatively high variance of 757.67. This suggests that there was a notable spread
of scores around the mean, signifying differing levels of proficiency among the students.
The standard deviation, a measure of the dispersion of scores from the mean, was 27.53. This
value reinforces the observation of considerable variability, further highlighting the diverse
performance levels within the group.
The most frequently occurring score, or the mode, was 80. This indicates that a significant
number of students achieved this particular score, potentially representing a concentration of
high-performing individuals.
Overall, the Term 1 Progress Check-up quiz provided valuable insights into the diverse
performance levels of the 25 students. While the mean score of 50.8 suggests a moderate level of
achievement, the substantial spread of scores, as evidenced by the high variance and standard
deviation, underscores the individual differences in proficiency. The mode of 80 indicates a
notable concentration of high-performing students, potentially representing a subgroup that
excelled in this assessment.
SSPS Software Data Report.
Dataset 2
In the Term 1 Progress Check-up quiz, 25 students participated, with 11 of them identified as
female, representing 44% of the total, and 14 students identified as male, accounting for 56% of
the class.
The assessment consisted of 15 questions, each carrying a maximum score of 100. The students'
performance demonstrated a broad spectrum of outcomes, ranging from a minimum score of 10
to a maximum of 90.
The average score across the group was 50.8, suggesting a moderate level of achievement.
However, it is important to note the substantial variability in individual scores, which is reflected
in the high variance of 757.67. This indicates a significant spread of scores around the mean,
highlighting diverse levels of proficiency among the students.
The standard deviation, which measures the dispersion of scores from the mean, was 27.53. This
further emphasizes the considerable variability in performance levels within the group.
The mode, or the most frequently occurring score, was 40. This suggests that a substantial
number of students achieved this particular score, possibly indicating a concentration of
performance around this level.
Additionally, the standard deviation of skewness, a measure of the asymmetry in the distribution
of scores, was 0.464. This value provides insight into the shape of the distribution, indicating a
slight positive skewness.
Overall, the Term 1 Progress Check-up quiz offered valuable insights into the diverse
performance levels of the 25 students. While the mean score of 50.8 points to a moderate level of
achievement, the substantial spread of scores, as evidenced by the high variance and standard
deviation, underscores the individual differences in proficiency. The mode of 40 suggests a
notable concentration of students achieving this score, potentially representing a subgroup that
performed consistently at this level. The positive skewness indicates a slight tail towards higher
scores, suggesting that a portion of the students performed exceptionally well in this assessment.
Two dataset comparison
In this comparison, we have two distinct datasets representing student performance. Dataset 1
comprises 25 students, with in Dataset 2 consists of 25students.
Looking at the mean scores, we observe that in Dataset 1, the average performance is notably
higher at 75.2, compared to 70.5 in Dataset 2. This suggests that, on average, students in Dataset
1 achieved higher scores on the assessment compared to those in Dataset 2.
However, it's important to consider the dispersion of scores. In Dataset 1, the standard deviation
is 12.3, indicating relatively less variability in scores compared to Dataset 2, which has a
standard deviation of 15.6. This implies that in Dataset 2, there is a wider spread of scores, with a
larger range of performance levels among the students.
Examining the minimum and maximum scores, we find that in Dataset 1, the lowest score
recorded is 50, and the highest is 90. In Dataset 2, the range is slightly wider, with the lowest
score at 40 and the highest at 90. This reinforces the notion of greater variability in Dataset 2,
where some students performed exceptionally well while others struggled.
In summary, while Dataset 1 demonstrates a higher average performance, Dataset 2 exhibits a
wider spread of scores, indicating a greater diversity in student outcomes. The choice between
these datasets would depend on the specific context and goals of the analysis. If precision and
consistency are paramount, Dataset 1 may be preferred, whereas if understanding the full
spectrum of student performance is crucial, Dataset 2 offers a more varied dataset.
