An analysis of consultants
Or, that moment when I write fic about my stats homework instead of actually completing my stats homework.
--------
Background: Campus Student Union is "considering issuing an advisory to students enrolled in Mgtsc 312 that attending the lectures is unimportant" and hired two statistical consultants, Pat and Leslie, to advise them on this.
My advisory memo, based on the information provided in the assignment:
I think in this case we can disregard the numbers and look at the consultants themselves in order to arrive at an answer to our problem. Consultant A (Pat) advises for students not to attend class - it can be assumed that as he came to this decision quickly and with minimal work, he had not attended lectures when taking the course himself and was therefore biased. On the other hand, Consultant B (Leslie) advises for students to attend lectures regularly and supports her analysis with nine different regressions. It can be assumed from her stance and excessive proofs that Leslie attended the lectures when taking the course herself. Therefore, taking into account the fact that Pat did not attend lectures and put lesser effort into his analysis and that Leslie did attend lectures and put in excessive effort, attending lectures instills work-ethic that will better serve students in the real world.
However, more assumptions can be made about the characters of the consultants. Pat handed in his report early and stated that "the job had proven so simple" - akin to bragging. Leslie had taken more time and provided excessive data before coming to a conclusion that she knew directly opposed Pat. It is clear that Pat and Leslie are at odds, and one must ask whether this is simply because of the results of their analyses or if there is history between the two of them. If so, it can be determined that Pat is trying to ignore the past relationship and get his work done quickly and efficiently; Leslie, on the other hand, still feels anger at what must have been a bitter end to their relationship and makes up for it in setting out to prove Pat wrong at all costs. Her emotional state and misplaced motive make her analysis unreliable. However, as stated above, Pat's lazy analysis is also unreliable due to bias from personal experience.
Therefore, it is advised that the CSU hire a new consultant with proper motives and no bias to analyse on the situation; it is also advised that Pat and Leslie be sent to couples therapy.
-------
Now I really want to write prompts for Pat/Leslie in the 3 sentence ficathon when really I should be analysing all this statistical data provided instead. :/
--------
Background: Campus Student Union is "considering issuing an advisory to students enrolled in Mgtsc 312 that attending the lectures is unimportant" and hired two statistical consultants, Pat and Leslie, to advise them on this.
My advisory memo, based on the information provided in the assignment:
I think in this case we can disregard the numbers and look at the consultants themselves in order to arrive at an answer to our problem. Consultant A (Pat) advises for students not to attend class - it can be assumed that as he came to this decision quickly and with minimal work, he had not attended lectures when taking the course himself and was therefore biased. On the other hand, Consultant B (Leslie) advises for students to attend lectures regularly and supports her analysis with nine different regressions. It can be assumed from her stance and excessive proofs that Leslie attended the lectures when taking the course herself. Therefore, taking into account the fact that Pat did not attend lectures and put lesser effort into his analysis and that Leslie did attend lectures and put in excessive effort, attending lectures instills work-ethic that will better serve students in the real world.
However, more assumptions can be made about the characters of the consultants. Pat handed in his report early and stated that "the job had proven so simple" - akin to bragging. Leslie had taken more time and provided excessive data before coming to a conclusion that she knew directly opposed Pat. It is clear that Pat and Leslie are at odds, and one must ask whether this is simply because of the results of their analyses or if there is history between the two of them. If so, it can be determined that Pat is trying to ignore the past relationship and get his work done quickly and efficiently; Leslie, on the other hand, still feels anger at what must have been a bitter end to their relationship and makes up for it in setting out to prove Pat wrong at all costs. Her emotional state and misplaced motive make her analysis unreliable. However, as stated above, Pat's lazy analysis is also unreliable due to bias from personal experience.
Therefore, it is advised that the CSU hire a new consultant with proper motives and no bias to analyse on the situation; it is also advised that Pat and Leslie be sent to couples therapy.
-------
Now I really want to write prompts for Pat/Leslie in the 3 sentence ficathon when really I should be analysing all this statistical data provided instead. :/