AP Poll: Stanford #4 - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: AP Poll: Stanford #4 (/thread-5492.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: AP Poll: Stanford #4 (/thread-5492.html)
Pages:
1
2
Re: AP Poll: Stanford #4 - Roberton3 - 08-20-2013
(08-20-2013, 12:55 PM)FarmBoy link Wrote:Robertson,
Were you testing whether the difference between 6.3 or 4.5 is statistically significant or whether the difference between 33% (5 of 15 #2 preseason teams ended up ranked #1) and 13% (2 of 15 #1's) is statistically significant?
The test I reported was whether the difference in average finish (6.3 vs. 4.5) was statistically significant. But testing significance for the difference in the probability of finishing #1 (2 of 15 vs. 5 of 15) gives a very similar result (a 39% chance of a difference at least this big happening by chance). Again, not close to being statistically significant. It's really hard to draw solid conclusions based on this small a data set.
[Details for the stats geeks: This p-value comes from Fisher's exact test. If you're one of the folks who believes that test is too conservative, a Pearson Chi-squared gives a p-value of 0.195.]
Re: AP Poll: Stanford #4 - yvonne - 08-20-2013
(08-20-2013, 01:47 PM)CompSci87 link Wrote:[quote author=FarmBoy link=topic=8245.msg66054#msg66054 date=1377014090]
Hey, I just noticed I graduated from "Dolly" to "Tree"!
Woohoo!
What's the next "status" level for volume posting? I need a goal I can focus on.
I made someone a "Doily" once, but Yvonne undid that. ;D
[/quote]
Um, wut?
Re: AP Poll: Stanford #4 - CompSci87 - 08-20-2013
(08-20-2013, 03:10 PM)Yvonne link Wrote:[quote author=CompSci87 link=topic=8245.msg66075#msg66075 date=1377031667]
[quote author=FarmBoy link=topic=8245.msg66054#msg66054 date=1377014090]
Hey, I just noticed I graduated from "Dolly" to "Tree"!
Woohoo!
What's the next "status" level for volume posting? I need a goal I can focus on.
I made someone a "Doily" once, but Yvonne undid that. ;D
[/quote]
Um, wut?
[/quote]
I was joking with someone who wanted to be a Dolly but didn't have enough posts yet. (Sorry, forgot who.) I created a membergroup named "Doily" and put him in it. A while later, that membergroup was gone. I assumed you were the one who deleted it.
Same opponents, new poll...average mid-career salary - Mick - 08-20-2013
Here are our opponents, league members and one arbitrarily chosen school by average mid-career salary (10 years after graduation):
Army, #5 (no misprint, $120,000)
Stanford, #10 ($114,000)
Northern Indiana Parochial College, #13 ($111,000)
Santa Clara, #19 ($108,000)
Cal, #31 ($103,000)
Under Stanford Control, #54 ($98,900)
UCLA, #89 ($91,500)
Washington, #98 ($90,300)
San Jose State, #103 ($90,100)
Oregon State, #148 ($86,300)
Arizona, #232, ($81,800)
Washington State, #252 ($80,800)
Arizona State, #310 ($78,500)
Utah, #314, ($78,300)
Oregon, #349 ($76,600)
Source is payscale.com
http://www.payscale.com/college-salary-report-2013/full-list-of-schools
Re: Same opponents, new poll...average mid-career salary - CowboyIndian - 08-20-2013
(08-20-2013, 04:54 PM)Mick link Wrote:Stanford, #10 ($114,000)
It's all those f'ing teachers and public defenders from the 60's that are dragging us down.
Re: Same opponents, new poll...average mid-career salary - terry - 08-20-2013
(08-20-2013, 04:54 PM)Mick link Wrote:Here are our opponents, league members and one arbitrarily chosen school by average mid-career salary (10 years after graduation):
Army, #5 (no misprint, $120,000)
Stanford, #10 ($114,000)
Northern Indiana Parochial College, #13 ($111,000)
Santa Clara, #19 ($108,000)
Low APR U, #31 ($103,000)
Under Stanford Control, #54 ($98,900)
UCLA, #89 ($91,500)
Washington, #98 ($90,300)
San Jose State, #103 ($90,100)
Oregon State, #148 ($86,300)
Arizona, #232, ($81,800)
Washington State, #252 ($80,800)
Arizona State, #310 ($78,500)
Utah, #314, ($78,300)
Oregon, #349 ($76,600)
Source is payscale.com
http://www.payscale.com/college-salary-report-2013/full-list-of-schools
What's the methodology of payscale.com? Is it based on people self-reporting their salaries on the payscale.com website?
Re: AP Poll: Stanford #4 - oman - 08-21-2013
Hmm. Always regretted slightly my decision not to go to West Point. I could have been a bitter mid-manager at this point of my career instead of a bitter, lonely scrivener. And the $6K could have come in handy.
Re: AP Poll: Stanford #4 - Bruce Wang - 08-21-2013
(08-20-2013, 04:39 PM)CompSci87 link Wrote:I was joking with someone who wanted to be a Dolly but didn't have enough posts yet. (Sorry, forgot who.)
That would be yours truly. And with this post, I am now a Tree. 8)
Re: AP Poll: Stanford #4 - CowboyIndian - 08-21-2013
(08-21-2013, 08:05 AM)garvin link Wrote:Quote:It's all those f'ing teachers and public defenders from the 60's that are dragging us down.
Let me note proudly that journalists are doing our part -- more than our part -- to depress the average salary.
Not to mention the reading public. :P
Re: AP Poll: Stanford #4 - washingtonismoney - 08-21-2013
(08-21-2013, 08:18 AM)CowboyIndian link Wrote:Not to mention the reading public. :P
People have never read as much quality journalism as they are doing today.
Re: Same opponents, new poll...average mid-career salary - Roberton3 - 08-21-2013
(08-20-2013, 07:23 PM)terry link Wrote:What's the methodology of payscale.com? Is it based on people self-reporting their salaries on the payscale.com website?
Yep, and I'm sure that people who self-report salaries are a highly non-representative sample. Moreover, that's only one of the problems with the data. Another big one is that they only include people who don't have a graduate degree, and who are full-time private-sector employees. There's a good argument for doing that, but it causes brobdingnagian problems when you're looking at top schools (lots of people who go on to grad school) or military academies (very few graduates in private-sector jobs).
See http://goo.gl/ZRGkfX for Payscale's description of the methodology.
Re: Same opponents, new poll...average mid-career salary - Bruce Wang - 08-21-2013
(08-20-2013, 04:54 PM)Mick link Wrote:Army, #5 (no misprint, $120,000)
This is not surprising at all, not to mention that Navy is #4. Graduates from the service academies are all officers. And post-military careers for officers can be quite lucrative in the industrial part of the congressional-military-industrial complex. Even outside defense contractors, former officers are prized for their leadership experience and technical training.
What is surprising is Air Force all the way down to #46, perhaps due it being the last among equals in the post-Cold War military.
Re: Same opponents, new poll...average mid-career salary - terry - 08-21-2013
(08-21-2013, 08:29 AM)Roberton3 link Wrote:[quote author=terry link=topic=8245.msg66110#msg66110 date=1377051800]
What's the methodology of payscale.com? Is it based on people self-reporting their salaries on the payscale.com website?
Yep, and I'm sure that people who self-report salaries are a highly non-representative sample. Moreover, that's only one of the problems with the data. Another big one is that they only include people who don't have a graduate degree, and who are full-time private-sector employees.
[/quote]
I'll bet there aren't many CEOs, venture capitalists, investment bankers, etc. who waste their time self-reporting their salaries on payscale.com.
And excluding everyone with a graduate degree makes the data completely worthless, IMO.