Your English is better than that of many of my born-in-USA students;-)

I work regularly with high school teachers of AP Statistics -- a
program that allows high school students to get college credit for
college courses taken in high school -- in this case, an introductory
statistics course.  If I understand you then this is a question that
comes up regularly in AP Stats. (where the students use graphing
calculators with many statistical functions).

Should we work with the given units and technology that has normal
tables for any mu and sigma OR should we standardize everything?  When
we have the option, using the given units seems more natural.  OTOH,
standardizing provides review and practice of an important idea.  In
addition, if we introduce the t distrtibutin later, we will have to do
a kind of standardization there, so doing things different ways in
different chapters hides the essential difference behind a surface
difference. If we standardize in both cases students see that the
difference is whether we know sigma, not whether we standarize or
not. 


----- Forwarded message from David Monterde <[email protected]> -----

Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 17:07:45 +0200
From: David Monterde <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: [R-sig-teaching] About the standard gaussian distribution
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (14E304)

First of all I have to apologize because my english is horrible. 

I am working in a basic and practical statistic course. 

I will speak about confidence intervals, of course. 

But when I was preparing this chapter I had a doubt: I wonder if it has sence 
today to explain the confidence intervals for a mean in terms of the standard 
normal distribution. 

If we show that the mean follows a normal distribution with variance/n then it 
is easy to explain (and to understand) that the confidence interval is due to 
two percentiles, the percentile alpha/2 and the percentile 1-alpha/2 from a 
normal distribution with the sample mean and the sample variance/n. 

I think that the standard gaussian distribution was usefull when we had to 
calculate CI in the past. 
That is, it was a simple way to have all possibilities in a single table (in 
paper). 

But now, we have R functions that let us to obtain the exact values for any 
normal distribution. 

I think that is not necessary to explain how to work with transformations if we 
can explain that a CI is simply to identify percentiles. 

What do you think?

Thanks

PD I know that the normal distribution for CI need some hipothesis. But I have 
focused the question

_________________________

David Monterde

Lo dif??cil se hace. 
Lo imposible se intenta. 
_________________________
        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-teaching

----- End forwarded message -----

-- 

------->  First-time AP Stats. teacher?  Help is on the way! See
http://courses.ncssm.edu/math/Stat_Inst/Stats2007/Bob%20Hayden/Relief.html
      _
     | |          Robert W. Hayden
     | |          5 Howard Street, Apartment 206
    /  |          Wilton, New Hampshire 03086  USA
   |   |          
   |   |          email: bob@ the site below
  /  x |          website: http://statland.org
 |     /          
 ''''''

_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-teaching

Reply via email to