The single most misapplied theorem in the course, and the two-graph figure that fixes it.
Point at the top graph and say "this one never changes" before you press anything.
Students arrive believing the central limit theorem makes data normal. The population graph stays stubbornly skewed at every value of n while the lower graph becomes a bell, and the two being on screen at once is what makes the distinction stick.
At n = 1 the lower graph is the population, which is worth pausing on. Everything after that is the theorem doing work.
It is a statement about the distribution of X̅, the sample mean, and about nothing else. Incomes stay skewed however many people you survey.
Every confidence interval and every test in this topic rests on it, which is why it is worth getting exactly right rather than approximately. If they think it applies to the data, they will use σ where they need σ/√n for the rest of the course.
| 1. se with σ = 6, n = 36 | 6 over √36 = 6/6 = 1. |
| 2. Factor to halve the se | 4. The root of 4 is 2, so the standard error is divided by 2. |
| 3. Which is normal | B, the distribution of the sample mean. The 100 incomes keep the shape of the population they came from. |
1 markWriting X̅ ~ N(μ, σ²/n) with the numbers substituted.
1 markUsing σ/√n and not σ. This single slip invalidates every probability after it.
1 markJustifying normality: either the population is normal, or n is large enough.
| They give | What it means |
|---|---|
| 6 (Q1) | Gave σ itself. They have not distinguished the spread of individual values from the spread of the mean, which is the whole sub-topic. |
| 0.1667 (Q1) | Divided by n rather than by √n. |
| 36 (Q1) | Gave n. |
| 2 (Q2) | Doubling n divides the standard error by √2, about 1.41. A reasonable guess that the square root punishes. |
| 16 (Q2) | That quarters it. They have the right idea one step too far. |
| "Both" or "the 100 incomes" (Q3) | The core misconception. If sampling made data normal, skewed data would not exist; that sentence usually ends it. |
"How large is large?" More than 30 for examination purposes, more if the parent is very skewed, and exactly normal for any n at all if the parent is normal. Say all three, because questions use all three.
"Why the square root?" Because variances add and standard deviations do not. It is also why precision is expensive: ten times as precise costs a hundred times the data.
"Does it work for proportions?" Yes, and that is where they will meet it again. Worth flagging without developing it here.
| What is happening | |
|---|---|
| 1 | The two graphs, with the top one named as the one that never changes. |
| 2 | The statement of the theorem, written out with X̅ in it. |
| 3 | Standard error, the square root, and the three questions. |
| 4 | A probability question about a sample mean, done wrong with σ first, deliberately, then right. |
| 5 | Say out loud that confidence intervals next lesson are this theorem with brackets round it. |
Do not say “everything becomes normal”. It is the sentence that creates the misconception this entire page exists to remove.
Do not introduce the standard error without naming it. Questions use the term and students who have only seen “sigma over root n” freeze at it.
Three tiers, ramping the way practice should: the method on its own, then the method inside something real, then a challenge. Set the tier the class in front of you needs rather than one undifferentiated sheet. Answers are given so these can go straight onto a board.
The method on its own, with friendly numbers. Set these first and move on quickly once they are secure.
The same skill inside a real situation, where the first job is working out what is being asked.
Reasoning, working backwards, or spotting an error. These are where the top grades are decided.
Works on a phone. Nothing is loaded from any other site, so it runs behind a school firewall, and nothing a student does is saved or sent anywhere.