Monthly Salary of the Program Chairs Problem: Is there a significant d

(in Thousand Peso) of the program chairs of St. M

SMA - Laguna SMA - Bulacan SMA - QC sign
51 23 56
45 43 76 μ =SMA Laguna μ

33 23 74
45 43 87
67 45 56
43 33 66
Problem: Is there a significant difference between the monthly salary
of the program chairs of St. Michael Academy using 5% level of
significance?

μ =SMA Laguna μ =SMA Bulacan μ =SMA QC

Null Hypothesis (Ho): μSMA Laguna=Μsma Bulacan= μSMA QC

Alternative Hypothesis (Ha): μSMA Laguna≠Μsma Bulacan≠ μSMA QC

Anova: Single Factor

SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average Variance
SMA - Laguna 6 284 47.333333 127.06667
SMA - Bulacan 6 210 35 104
SMA - QC 6 415 69.166667 148.96667

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 3592.333 2 1796.1667 14.179019 0.000349 3.68232
Within Groups 1900.167 15 126.67778

Total 5492.5 17
 Variables Mn SD F value F critical Decision

SMA Laguna 47.33 11.27

SMA Bulacan 35.00 10.20 ±14.18 ±0.0003 Reject the null
hypothesis
SMA QC 69.17 12.21
Interpretation: Write your interpretation here…

The researcher reject the null hyphothesis since the computed F value is
±14.18 is more than the critical value of ±0.0003. Rejecting the null hypothesis
means that there is significant difference between the monthly salary of the
program chairs of St. Michael Academy using the 5% level of significance.
Mathematics Quiz Scores of the Eight Students under Problem 1: Is th
Three Modes of Learning eight students usin
Pro
Students Online Learning Modular Learning Flexible Learning scores of the stu

1 51 35 49
Ho1 = There is no s
2 76 45 55
3 33 43 23
4 43 43 43
Ho2 = There is no
5 56 67 48
6 43 23 33
7 56 67 43
8 46 56 33
 Problem 1: Is there a significant difference between the quiz scores of the
eight students using 1% level of significance?
Problem 2: Is there a significant difference between the quiz
scores of the students under the three modes of learning using 1% level of
significance?

Ho1 = There is no significant difference between the quiz scores of eight students using 1% level
of significance.

Ho2 = There is no significant difference between the quiz scores of students under the three
modes of learning using 1% level of significance.

Anova: Two-Factor Without Replication

SUMMARY Count Sum Average Variance

1 3 135 45 76
2 3 176 58.666667 250.33333
3 3 99 33 100
4 3 129 43 0
5 3 171 57 91
6 3 99 33 100
7 3 166 55.333333 144.33333
8 3 135 45 133

Online Learning 8 404 50.5 164.28571

Modular Learning 8 379 47.375 233.69643
Flexible Learning 8 327 40.875 109.83929

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 2151.167 7 307.30952 3.0652497 0.03538 4.277882
Columns 385.75 2 192.875 1.9238259 0.182738 6.514884
Error 1403.583 14 100.25595

Total 3940.5 23
 Variables Mn SD F value F Crit Decision
Student 1 45.00 8.72
Student 2 58.67 15.82
Student 3 33.00 10.00
Student 4 43.00 0.00 Failed to reject
±0.04 ±4.28 the null
Student 5 57.00 9.54 hypothesis
Student 6 33.00 10.00
Student 7 55.33 12.01
Student 8 45.00 11.53
Online Learning 50.50 12.82 Failed to reject
Modular Learning 47.38 15.29 ±0.18 ±6.51 the null
Flexible Learning 40.88 10.48 hypothesis
Interpretation: Write your interpretation focusing only on the INFERENTIAL STATISTICS The
researcher was failed to reject the first null hypothesis since the computed F value ±0.04 is
less than the critical value of ±4.28. Failed to reject the null hypothesis means that there is
no significant difference between the quiz scores of eight students using the 1% level of
significance. Also, the resercher failed to reject the second null hypothesis since the
computed F value ±0.18 is less than the critical value of ±6.51 Failed to reject the null
hypothesis means that there is no significant difference between the quiz scores of students
under the three modes of learning using the 1% level of significance.
Mathematics Quiz Scores of the Eight Students under
Three Modes of Learning
Grouped of
Students Online Learning Modular Learning Flexible Learning

51 35 55
76 67 23
Grade 8 48 43 33
43 56 56
43 23 46
33 67 43
56 56 67
Grade 9 46 56 56
86 56 33
38 67 77
61 45 65
66 57 13
Grade 10 77 86 33
33 38 23
43 43 43
Problem 1: Is there a significant difference between the quiz scores of the students grouped
in terms of grade level using 5% level of significance?

Problem 2: Is there a significant difference between the quiz scores of the students under
the three modes of learning using 5% level of significance?

Problem 3: Is there a significant interaction between the grade level and modes of learning
using 5% level of significance?

Ho1 = There is no significant difference between the quiz scores of the students grouped in
terms of grade level using 5% level of significance.

Ho2 = There is no significant difference between the quiz scores of the students under the three
modes of learning using 5% level of significance.

Ho3 = There is no significant interaction between the grade level of and modes of learning using
5% level of signifiance.

Anova: Two-Factor With Replication

SUMMARY Online LeaModular LeFlexible Lea Total

Grade 8

Count 3 3 3 9

Sum 175 145 111 431

Average 58.33333 48.33333 37 47.888889
Variance 236.3333 277.3333 268 280.86111

Grade 9
Count 3 3 3 9
Sum 119 146 145 410
Average 39.66667 48.66667 48.333333 45.555556
Variance 33.33333 524.3333 46.333333 170.52778

Grade 10
Count 3 3 3 9
Sum 188 168 156 512
Average 62.66667 56 52 56.888889
Variance 433.3333 0 301 205.36111

Count 3 3 3 9
Sum 165 169 155 489
Average 55 56.33333 51.666667 54.333333
Variance 223 121.3333 1157.3333 379.75

Count 3 3 3 9
Sum 153 167 99 419
Average 51 55.66667 33 46.555556
Variance 532 696.3333 100 439.52778

Total
Count 15 15 15
Sum 800 795 666
Average 53.33333 53 44.4
Variance 274.0952 245.8571 334.11429

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value
Sample 918.0889 4 229.52222 0.6955219 0.60099
Columns 769.3778 2 384.68889 1.1657239 0.325418
Interaction 1138.844 8 142.35556 0.4313805 0.892734
Within 9900 30 330

Total 12726.31 44
 Variables Mn SD F value F Crit
Grade 8 47.89 16.76
Grade 9 45.56 13.06 ±0.69 ± 2.69
Grade 10 489.00 14.33
Online Learning 53.33 16.56
Modular Learning 53.00 15.68 ±1.17 ± 3.32
Flexible Learning 44.40 18.28
Interpretation: Write your interpretation focusing only on the INFERENTIAL STATISTICS
The reearcher failed to reject the first null hyphothesis since
the computed F value ±0.69 is lower than the critical vaue of ±2.69. Failure to reject the first
Ho mean that the quiz scores of the students grouped in terms of grade level has no
significant difference using 5% level of significance.
The second null hypothesis was also failed to
reject since the computed F value ±1.17 is lower than the critical vaue of ±3.32. It means that
the quiz scores of the students under three modes of learning has no significant difference
using 5% level of significance. Lastly, the researcher also failed to reject the third
null hypothesis since the computed F value ±0.43 is lower than the critical vaue of ±0.89. It
means that there is no interaction between the grade level and modes of learning using 5%
level of significance.
 F crit
2.689628
3.31583
2.266163
 Decision

Failed to Reject
the Ho

Failed to Reject
the Ho

FERENTIAL STATISTICS
rst null hyphothesis since
9. Failure to reject the first
grade level has no

thesis was also failed to

vaue of ±3.32. It means that
no significant difference
so failed to reject the third
e critical vaue of ±0.89. It
modes of learning using 5%