Part 2
One of the important issues that this type of statistical sampling conducted by the substitute teacher was her choice of students to inquire about their test results. In a class size of 30, 5 students hardly represent the whole class; in fact, in order to accurately determine the performance of the class as a whole, it is recommended that all students be asked of their test results. The sub-teacher can also generate a sample, group of students who will represent the total population, which is the whole class. The sample should be objectively chosen, and since the method of choosing the students to report on their exam performance was based only on the fact that they all belonged to the front row of the class, then the sample generated by the teacher is biased. An alternative to this problematic method of sampling would be to choose one student every row, grouping all the scores of each...
The average of the students' performances would then become the teacher's basis in assessing the class's performance.
Another consideration that should have been observed is that the teacher should have taken into account the fact that possibly, all front row students have a better grasp of class lessons because they are able to focus their full attention in the class, as compared to the students from other rows. This hypothesis can be proven by assigning student performance as the dependent variable, and classroom seating placement as the independent variable. With the help of inferential statistics, the teacher can prove that indeed, the reason why front row students are better performers than the back row students was due to the full attention that students give to lessons, which is inevitable if students are seated in front of the class.
