英華第一輪派彩之統計 (I)

Daniel-Florence

小黑咪 發表於 12-10-10 23:38
邊個可以 2nd interview 完全都係憑老師既主觀意見. 咁樓主點可以用客觀既數據黎分析呢D主觀既結果呢. make ...

hm ... 我試用"韋氏兒童智能評估"解釋.

智能, IQ, 聰明..., 全都是主觀(不可量度的). 點解韋氏兒童智能評估會有"分數 / IQ 幾高 如100, 110, 120...200" 變為數字 (可量度的) ???


妳的問題就是問..."主觀"點可以用"客觀"既數據黎分析兒童的智能/IQ...? 妳明白嗎 ?


韋氏, 他就是用數字, 統計科學的方法將智能(主觀不可量度的)變為有意思的數據.


如果學校單憑主觀意見收生, 沒有做similar 統計/數字方法. 您有何想法? By Fate la.

小小山

回復 Daniel-Florence 的帖子


睇完

Miffybb

我相信1-35是sibiling, 因為沒有間斷, 這群是不要1st in的
另一方面, 雖然話小組面試, 不過是3張枱3個位(中英數), 小朋友逐一埋位答問題,所以都應該係計個人分數, 同組別未必有關係, 小小愚見

Ryan_baba

首先我地唔會知學校有冇分析這些數據，我傾向冇嘅。再加上背後有很多資料我地係唔知，如世襲生、考生出生月份分佈等等，單憑咁表面又有限嘅數據，根本不能得出一個有說服力嘅報告。
再加上，係學校嘅立場，佢有佢一套收生標準，就是這點，家長們已沒有可挑戰學校嘅空間。

Daniel-Florence

Miffybb 發表於 12-10-11 11:19
我相信1-35是sibiling, 因為沒有間斷, 這群是不要1st in的
另一方面, 雖然話小組面試, 不過是3張枱3個位(中 ...

我其實沒有去interview的, 不知道他們面試形式.我只是手癢計下數

Daniel-Florence

Ryan_baba 發表於 12-10-11 11:25
首先我地唔會知學校有冇分析這些數據，我傾向冇嘅。再加上背後有很多資料我地係唔知，如世襲生、考生出生月 ...

我們從小老師就教我們要有科學頭腦, 尋根究底.(我已無話可說了), 居然有家長認為用數字統計是唔理性的分折.
我由始至於不是挑戰學校, 而是用手上數據提出懷疑.
科學頭腦, 尋根究底, 應是提出懷疑開始. 理性的人, 應該是用數字/客觀理據"反"懷疑.
好的學校不是要有科學頭腦, 尋根究底的精神?
妳們的子女, 唔需教他們有科學頭腦, 尋根究底的精神? Every things are by fate? Simply follow the game rule?

fion_yinyin

點解一定要假設每一百個人既成功率一定要一樣？呢個假期有d問題

Daniel-Florence

fion_yinyin 發表於 12-10-12 10:39
點解一定要假設每一百個人既成功率一定要一樣？呢個假期有d問題

我沒有假設成功率一定要一樣.但差距大, 是否需要分析較恰當?

mummyWai

回復 Daniel-Florence 的帖子

Hi Daniel-Florence.

Let take a look at another way. Relationship between the two variables, the # of applicant can go 2nd interview of every 100 applicant.

First, the application # assinged to student is seems "Random", but not really. First I beleive the first 30 has the relationship like the brother are studing in YW or Old boy's kid who go 2nd interivew directly. Then the number is assinged according to the submission date of the form. The forms were collected during the seminar and then some weekdays and weekend.  IF the parent alreay prepared the form and submitted during seminar,  they might also well prepared for YW's interview. Then next, the parents sent form on weekdays, those may be FTM, then they might have more time to train up their kid.

If the number assiged is really "Random", then I guess the result may be different.

bigboy129

回復 Charlotte_mom 的帖子

真係什麼人都有,入唔到就話學校面試唔公平。

bigboy129

回復 Daniel-Florence 的帖子

政府有很多不公平,我建議你咁科學嘅方法去幫我哋反映。

LuLuKiuKiu

Daniel-Florence 發表於 12-10-12 10:35
我們從小老師就教我們要有科學頭腦, 尋根究底.(我已無話可說了), 居然有家長認為用數字統計是唔理性的分折 ...

Every things are by fate? Simply follow the game rule?  Not fully agree but it is the truth! Did you see the grandchildren of '+x' or 'Uncle 4' to play this game?

Fushia

回復 mandor 的帖子

我係第1場簡介會的,而且好早入禮堂門口取入表號. 我亦坐第2排.簡介會完了已經非常早地入表,但號碼巳過30人.我前排絕不過30人.故有理由相信1-30號係有兄長關係的.

bigboy129

回復 Ernest爸爸 的帖子

不如叫英華做一部機器用嚟面試,我諗數據夠科學。

gigi812

這樣樓主應該可以解開心裡鬱結了, 第1-100裡, 有59名入圍, 當中30個是兄長位, 實質第1-100名裡, 只有29個入圍.

hyto

校長真好，竟然甘快為做呢度的小小言論作迅速的回應。給她一個"讚"

hyto

回復 fion_yinyin 的帖子

同意。得的小朋友可以考二十間都有OFFER。

cornelius

回復 Daniel-Florence 的帖子

Your efforts in research and skepticism are well appreciated!

Well, let's look at it from a different angle.  I've tried to plot the distribution of the no. of instances admitted (among groups of 100) as follows (the group 001-100 is not included due to its apparent skewness):

It can be seen that there are 4 instances of "15 to 20 kids given a 2nd interview among a group of 100" (i.e. 801-900, 1501-1600, 2101-2200 & 3101-3200) and 2 instances of "41 to 45 kids given a 2nd interview among a group of 100" (i.e. 101-200 & 401-500).  It is shown that it grossly follows a normal distribution without seemingly any abnormalities.

In fact, there are many factors unknown to us which can affect the no. of kids being selected for the 2nd interview.  The most obvious, and fundamental I must say, factor is the character and ability of the kids.  For example, I know there are kids able to do simple arithmetics at the age of 5, while some still mess up with numbers.  Some 5-year-olds can read chapter books (e.g. Roald Dahl's series) while some can't even pronounce the 26 letters properly.  Indeed there exists a huge disparity among the kids cognitively speaking and so does the way parents nurture their kids.