Answer:
Yes, there is evidence to support that claim that instructor 1 is more effective than instructor 2
Step-by-step explanation:
We can conduct a hypothesis test for the difference of 2 proportions. If there is no difference in instructor quality, then the difference in proportions will be zero. That makes the null hypothesis
H0: p1 - p2 = 0
The question is asking whether instructor 1 is more effective, so if he is, his proportion will be larger than instructor 2, so the difference would result in a positive number. This makes the alternate hypothesis
Ha: p1 - p2 > 0
This is a right tailed test (the > or < sign always point to the critical region like an arrowhead)
We will use a significance level of 95% to conduct our test. This makes the critical values for our test statistic: z > 1.645.
If our test statistic falls in this region, we will reject the null hypothesis.
<u>See the attached photo for the hypothesis test and conclusion</u>
Answer:
See below
Step-by-step explanation:
the common ratio, r <1 so it CONVERGES (r = 1/2 in this series)
sum = a1 ( 1-r^n) / (1-r) = 1000(1-.5^10)/(1-1/2) = ~1998
for n= 30 this results in ~~2000
As it continues, the terms get smaller and smaller and the SUM converges on 2000.
Answer:
4 cups
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
0.675
Step-by-step explanation:
27/40
- Divide each number by 10
2.7/4
- Multiply each number by 25
67.5/100
Convert that into a decimal. :)
9514 1404 393
Answer:
12/x^5
Step-by-step explanation:
The fractions are multiplied in the usual way. The applicable rule of exponents is ...
(x^a)(x^b) = x^(a+b)
__
