A frequency table is a method of displaying data in which ...



A frequency table is a method of displaying data in which tally marks are used to show how often each element in the set occurs. The following frequency table shows the scores that were made on a 100-point quiz in a teacher’s math class. Use the frequency table to answer the following questions:

|Score |50 |

|What is the content of the text about? What is the | |

|overall message? | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

|In the text, it says, “It is extremely difficult to | |

|establish causality between two correlated events or| |

|observances,” but what does that mean? | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

|How does bias play a part in relating a correlation | |

|to a causation relationship? | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

|Causation is very difficult to establish when using | |

|an observational study. Does that make sense? Is | |

|this explained clearly? Why or why not? | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

Process Guide Questions for Correlation vs. Causation: (Possible Answers)

|Question to Consider |Student Response |

|What is the content of the text about? What is the |The overall message is that many times in the media, there are studies that mis-represent|

|overall message? |cause/effect relationships when really all a study has done is shown a correlation |

| |between two things (when there really may not be one thing causing the other). |

| | |

| | |

| | |

|In the text, it says, “It is extremely difficult to |To truly show a cause/effect relationship between two variables, all other variables must|

|establish causality between two correlated events or|be eliminated to then assure there is really more than just a correlation between the two|

|observances,” but what does that mean? |events. This is almost impossible to do. |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

| | |

|How does bias play a part in relating a correlation |Many times, human beings jump to conclusions because it “seems” as though one thing may |

|to a causation relationship? |cause another because it “just makes sense,” when in reality this may not be the case, |

| |even though it appears to be true. For example, when dealing with chemicals and |

| |pollution, people jump to conclusions that some chemical may be responsible for some |

| |disease (as with autism and vaccinations), but this belief does not make it true, and |

| |until SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN beyond any doubt, really can’t be considered a true |

| |causation, only a correlation can be considered. |

| | |

|Causation is very difficult to establish when using |An observational study alone (seeing two things showing up at the same time) is not |

|an observational study. Does that make sense? Is |enough to PROVE causation. To prove that one thing causes another, a more controlled |

|this explained clearly? Why or why not? |study must be done where two groups of individuals are alike in every way but are given |

| |two different sets of experiences (such as one group watching soap operas and the other |

| |game shows), and the outcome is compared. If the two groups have substantially different |

| |outcomes, then the different experiences may have caused the different outcome. |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download