Null hypothesis:
The student performance in rural and urban areas measured by PISA scores 2012 is not affected by the adequacy of school educational resources.
Alternative hypothesis:
The student performance measured by PISA scores 2012 in rural areas are more affected by the adequacy of school educational resources than urban areas.
The student performance in rural and urban areas measured by PISA scores 2012 is not affected by the adequacy of school educational resources.
Alternative hypothesis:
The student performance measured by PISA scores 2012 in rural areas are more affected by the adequacy of school educational resources than urban areas.
Hypothesis testing:
DV: Student Performance: PISA Math – Reading - Science Scores
IV: Quality of school resources in urban vs. rural areas
Hypothesis test: Correlation coefficient
DV: Student Performance: PISA Math – Reading - Science Scores
IV: Quality of school resources in urban vs. rural areas
Hypothesis test: Correlation coefficient
Covariation:
Bivariate regression:
The coefficient for resource quality for math scores is 4.67, the coefficient for resource quality for reading scores is 5.11, and the coefficient for resource quality for science scores is 4.36. These positive coefficients tell us that as resource quality improves, math, reading, and science scores improve.
The p-value is close to 0 in all three models, and therefore it is significant.
Our coefficient is greater than 0 in all three models, and therefore resource quality and student performance have a correlation association and produce a positive slope.
The intercept is 405.74 for math scores, 421.05 for reading scores, and 414.99 for science scores. These are the scores of students if the resource quality, or the x variable, is 0.