Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2023 Year 9 PSMTDraft
2023 Year 9 PSMTDraft
2023 Year 9 PSMTDraft
2.1 Observations
The time in the table is in seconds.
In the data sets, there are some outliers.
There is 25-30 people per group.
The shape of data distribution is different for the different groups.
2.2 Assumptions
Each student should be consistently able to achieve the time they have on the table.
All students are present during the events.
The events are trialed in the same conditions.
The data has been recorded accurately.
2.3 Translation
I intend to find a solution to this problem by using mathematics such as calculating the mean, median and mode of
the data set, comparing the data distributions and doing a statistical analysis of the data provided. By doing so, I can
compare the strengths and weaknesses of each group and analyse the probability of their success in the three
different events. Ultimately allowing me to decide which event is best for what group, using mathematics.
2.4 Justification
Using the mathematics stated in the translation would allow for me to decide which event each one of my groups
should participate in. For example, calculating the mean, median and mode. The mean, mode and median can be
used to figure out if I have a positively or negatively skewed distribution. Recognising distribution, I can make
informed decisions, which can overall improve performance and success.
1. Whole Class Endurance: In this event, an entire class participates in a wall sit together. The team is
eliminated when exactly 50% of the team members have given up, and their time is recorded. The team with
the highest score (longest wall sit time) wins.
2. Random Draw: In this event, a single student is chosen at random from the entering team and must
complete their wall sit. The team whose individual student holds the longest wall sit time is the winner.
3. Beat the Mean: In this event, the entire class holds a wall sit together, and the mean time for the class is
calculated. Each competitor earns points based on their performance relative to the mean time.
In event number 1, whole class endurance, the event measures the team's ability to wall-sit as a group.
Team number 3 (zebra) has the lowest minimum of (48), and 2nd highest mean of (140.7). This shows that a
majority of the class has average wall-sit times, which means that 50% of the team members will finish with
the longest wall sit times compared to the other teams. Event number 2, random draw tests an individual
student’s ability to wall sit the longest. Therefore, team number 1 (bat) would have the highest chance of
success. The high mean (171.14) and low range (216) show that this class has the most consistent data,
and it also is shown from the data distribution that this group has the most consistent data. This
demonstrates that any individual selected for this from team number 1 has the most likelihood to get the
highest time. Event number 3, beat the mean, evaluates the entire classes performance compared to the
class mean. Team number 2 (kookaburra) has the lowest mean of (123.59), this would allow them to win
this event the easiest as they have the lowest time to beat. Additionally, while they have a lower median
and mode of (100), each competitor only requires getting within 1 minute of the mean to earn 1 point as
indicated by the point system. Therefore, making this the easiest event for team number 2. Overall, team 3
is strong as a group, team 1 is strong individually, and team 2 is strong in terms of the class mean.
4.0 Evaluation
Team strengths such as mean, median, mode, range, min and max have been taken into account and
used to successfully analyze the problem.
Logical explanation as to why which team is assigned to which event.
Team’s weaknesses have also been evaluated to determine which team does what event.
Limitations
Not each student is taken to account, as the solution was only analysed using the averages.
For some events the outliers could affect the class success rate. Individual outliers were not taken into
account.
Use mean, median and mode does not allow for the full range of analysis of the data.
While the solution aims to be fair, it may not account for individual differences.
Does not analyze the full strengths and weaknesses of the individual students.
5.0 Conclusion
The aim of this report is to evaluate which events my teams should participate in the wall-sit competition.
To solve this, I compared the data distributions and averages of the teams, then allocated them in the
events that suited them the best. In conclusion, this report required me to choose what events my teams
should participate in.