At 01:12 PM 1/12/01 +0000, Gene Gallagher wrote:
>I do believe that regression to the mean is involved here.
i just reiterate that regression in this case ... involves a correlation
between two columns of MEANS ... means for schools OR means for districts
... and means do NOT change that much .... from year to year ... and
certainly ... schools with low or high means one year just CANNOT change
their position much
(this is certainly not true of individual students but ... none of this
discussion has anything directly to do with individual students ... only
means of schools or districts)
does anyone have any information from mass. directly in their reports ...
as to what the correlation is/was between the (for example) 4th grade means
for the schools 1 year and 4th grade means for the same schools the next
year??? or the same r value based on district means?
unless we know either of these two correlations ... we cannot talk
meaningfully about whether regression is important in this discussion ...
or not
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
