Pendleton, K.L. (2010). Investigating the randomness of numbers. Mathematics Teacher, 103(5), 364-370.
In this article, Pendleton writes about the need to test the randomness of samples using statistical methods that are well known to those who study statistics. He explains that it is hard to test the randomness of a large sample, but fairly simple to test the randomness of a small sample. He goes through two tests to use in testing randomness. In the first you compare the sample mean with its population, and in the second you compare the sample's distribution with that of its population. He explains how these tests could be used in a classroom to teach finding the mean and standard deviation. Pendleton says testing samples for randomness will add to more confidence in the results found.
I agree that random samples should be tested for randomness. Nearly every time I read or hear the results of a study that included a random sample I can't help but wonder how random the sample was and how they can be sure of that it is. This article explained how such things can be tested and how they will add validity to results, and I believe this to be true. I also agree that it would be beneficial to do an activity such as this in a statistics classroom because students could pick random students from within their own classroom and then test the randomness of it. This would be teaching them to find the mean and standard deviation in a way that is more real to them.
You did a nice job at relating the importance of randomness to your results. Additionally, you connected randomness to sample mean and distribution, which clarified what you were talking about.
ReplyDeleteI was a little confused by your topic sentence. I understood the first part about the need to test randomness of samples, but I found the wording of the second half to be unclear. Were you emphasizing the idea that this concept applies to statisticians?
Great job!
It seems you do well to stick with the topic. You also do well to use a scholarly tone.
ReplyDeleteI'm a little confused by some of the words you use when describing the methods he used. I would have helped if you would have explained the methods in a little more detail. For example, what do you mean by "randomness" or "distribution"?
Good job keeping a professional tone. Sometimes I was a little confused what the main idea meant. I know that this was an article on statistics but I didn't exactly understand what the author was arguing for.
ReplyDeleteYou had very clear topic sentences and had points to support them.
ReplyDeleteI would have liked a little more description about why randomness is so important.
Good job!