Posted by
Dennis Deck on
Sep 25, 2006; 11:47pm
URL: http://spssx-discussion.165.s1.nabble.com/Association-between-two-nominal-variables-tp1071026p1071030.html
While you could define a weighted rate easily enough, it is not clear:
a) on what basis you would establish the weights for levels 1, 2, & 3
b) does your policy or research question demand a weighted rate
Depending on what your policy or reporting concerns are, I would argue
that it might make more sense to define two or three rates such as:
Type 1 pass rate
Type 1 and 2 pass rate
Type 1, 2 and 3 pass rate (this is the current unweighted pass rate)
For some purposes, you might instead define:
Type 1 rate
Type 2 rate
Type 3 rate
Dennis Deck, PhD
RMC Research Corporation
[hidden email]
-----Original Message-----
From: russell [mailto:
[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 5:59 AM
Subject: School Pass rates
Dear Listers,
I am going to risk being called stupid, but I am nonetheless going to
ask for some help.
Assume X number of primary schools having primary school leaving
examinations. Those who pass go on to three different types of secondary
schools. Entry to one of the three secondary schools is based on the
final mark-the highest prestige is accorded secondary school type 1,
followed by secondary school type 2 and then secondary school type 3.
Normal pass rates are calculated per primary schools as simply (those
who passed/those who sat)*100. This is fine, but then two schools may
achieve the same pass rate (let's say 75%), but have their learners
placed in secondary schools of opposite quality. In a real sense, the
ordinary pass rate does not take the quality of the pass rate into
account. I would like to do so
Here is an imaginary data matrix
Learn sat
Learn pass
unweightpasrate
school type 1
school type 2
school type 3
weighted passrate??
Prim 1
20
15
75.0%
15
0
0
Prim 2
20
15
75.0%
0
0
15
Prim 3
20
10
50.0%
5
3
2
Prim 4
20
8
40.0%
2
2
4
Prim 5
20
20
100.0%
5
8
7
Totals
100
68
27
13
28
Many thanks,
Russell