1.

A university wants to increase its retention rate by 4% for graduation students from the
previous year. After implementing several new programs during the last two years, the
university reevaluated its retention rate using a random sample of 352 students and
found the retention rate at 5%. Test an appropriate hypothesis and state your conclusion
in the context of this question. Be sure the appropriate assumptions and conditions are
satisfied before you proceed. Assume p-value = 0.1685.

Null Hypothesis: The retention rate is 4%, p = 0.04

Alternative Hypothesis: The retention rate is greater than 4%, p > 0.04

Randomness ✔
Success failure condition:
352 x 0.04 = 14.08 ✔
352 x (1 - 0.04) =
352 x 0.96 = 337.92 ✔
Both are greater than 10

Test Stat:
0.05−0.04
𝑍= 0.04×0.96
352
0.01
= 0.0384
352
0.01
=
0.0001091
0.01
≈ 0.01044
≈ 0. 957

P-value = 0.1695 > 0.05

There isn't enough evidence that the university’s retention rate has increased significantly from
4%. We do not reject the Null Hypothesis

3. A company with a large fleet of cars hopes to keep gasoline costs down and sets
a goal of attaining a fleet average of at most 9 litres per 100km. To see if the goal is being
met, they check the gasoline usage for 50 company trips chosen at random, finding a
mean
of 9.4 L/100km and a standard deviation of 1.81 L/100km. Is this strong evidence that they
have failed to attain their fuel economy goal?
a. Please conclude a hypothesis test about the fuel economy goal of this company.
Make sure to test appropriate conditions and state your conclusion in the context of this
 question (p-value = 0.12345).
Null Hypothesis: The fleet average is at most 9 litres per 100km, μ ≤ 9
Alternative Hypothesis: The fleet average is more than 9 litres per 100km, μ > 9

Randomness ✔
Sample size > 30 ✔

Test Stat:
9.4−9
𝑍= 1.81
50
0.4
= 1.81
7.071
0.4
= 0.2558
≈ 1. 563
P-value = 0.12345 > 0.05

There isn't enough evidence to conclude that the company's fleet average fuel consumption is
more than 9 L/1. We fail to reject the null hypothesis.

b. Estimate the true mean of the fuel economy. Use a 95% confidence interval with
t*=2.01. Does the confidence interval support your answer in part a?

Margin of Error:
1.81
𝑀𝐸 = 2. 01( 7.071 )
= 2. 01 × 0. 2558
≈ 0. 514
95% confidence interval:
CI = (9. 4 − 0. 514, 9. 4 + 0. 514)
CI = (8. 886, 9. 914)

The 95% confidence interval for the mean fuel economy of the company's fleet is approximately
(8.886, 9.914) L/100km. We can be 95% confident that the true mean fuel consumption of the fleet
is within this range.

The confidence interval supports the conclusion in part a because the interval has the goal of 9
L/100km, there isn't conclusive evidence that the company has failed to meet its fuel economy
goal.
4.

a) Note which conditions should be met even if you can’t directly check them

Independence ✔
Normality ✔

b) State hypotheses

Null Hypothesis: There is no difference in mean scores between rifle type 1 and rifle type 2 for all
Olympian-level shooters, mean of the difference in scores = 0

Alternative Hypothesis: There is a difference in mean scores between rifle type 1 and rifle type 2
for all Olympian-level shooters, the mean of the difference in scores ≠ 0

c) Calculate the test statistic

Mean difference:
(93−89)+(99−93)+(90−86)+(87−92)+(85−78)+(94−90)+(88−91)+(91−87)
= 8
= 2. 625

Test Stat:
2.625
𝑡= 4.27
8
2.625
𝑡= 1.510
𝑡 ≈ 1. 739

d) Make conclusions in context, assuming a final p-value of 0.1256.

Since the p-value is greater than 0.05, we fail to reject the null hypothesis.

Conclusion:
There isn't enough evidence to conclude that there is a significant difference in mean scores
between the two types of rifles for all Olympian-level shooters.