During the recovery from the Great Recession of 2007-2009, the economic situation for many families improved.However, in 2011 the recovery was slow and it was uncertain as to how much had really changed on the national level.To estimate the national average of the percent of low-income working families, a representative simple random sample of the percent of low-income working families from each of the country's reporting jurisdictions could be used to calculate a point estimate and make a related confidence interval.With this confidence interval a better picture of the nation's recovery can be had and legislative decisions can be made.

1.Describe in two or three sentences how a simple random sample of size n=20 could be obtained from the full list of jurisdictions provided for use with this assignment.

2.A researcher reported that a sample of size n=30 produced a sample mean of 32.56% and a sample standard deviation of 6.56%.Use this information to calculate a 90% confidence interval for the national average for the "percent of low-income working families".Provide the upper and lower limits of the confidence interval and the margin of error.(Round the limits to two decimal places.)

3.Provide an explanation as to why it would be very unlikely that a different sample of size n=30 would produce the same confidence interval.

4.Provide an appropriate statistical interpretation of the 90% confidence interval found in number 7.

5.If a limited amount of federal funds have been allocated to assist jurisdictions whose "percent of low-income working families" exceeds a threshold based on the upper limit of a confidence interval, what would be the effect of using a confidence level that is higher than 90%?

6.If a public official requests funds based on a confidence interval provided by constituents in his/her district, would this raise any ethical concerns, or constitute a misuse of statistics, or both? Provide at least two sentences to respond to the situation presented.

Part 3: Hypothesis Testing [Optional, 5 points extra credits]

In 2011, the national percent of low-income working families had an approximately normal distribution with a mean of 31.3% and a standard deviation of 6.2% (The Working Poor Families Project, 2011).Although it remained slow, some politicians claimed that the recovery from the Great Recession was steady and noticeable.As a result, it was believed that the national percent of low-income working families was significantly lower in 2014 than it was in 2011.To support this belief, a spring 2014 sample of n=16 jurisdictions produced a sample mean of 29.8% for the percent of low-income working families, with a sample standard deviation of 4.1%.Using =0.10 significance level, test the claim that the national average percent of low-income working families had improved by 2014.

7.Clearly restate the claim associated with this test, and state the null and alternate hypotheses.

8.Provide two or three sentences to state the type of test that should be performed based on the hypotheses. Additionally, state the assumptions and conditions that justify the appropriateness of the test.

9.Use technology to identify, and then provide the test statistic and the resulting P-value associated with the given sample results. Provide a statement that explains the interpretation of the P-value.(Print or copy-and-paste the output that identified these values, or any other form of evidence that technology was used.)

10.State, separately, both the decision/result of the hypothesis test, and the appropriate conclusion/statement about the claim.