Use appropriate analyses to investigate the relationships between each of the following pairs of variables.(a) Water absorption and fibre type. You may assume that the underlying distribution of water absorption is Normal. - StudyAce – Custom Writing & Research Support for All Levels

M22319 / M33098 Numerical Skills & Economics

M22319 / M33098 Assessment Coursework

School of Civil Engineering and Surveying				Date Set:	22/10/25
				Date Due:	2/12/25
Module Name and Code	M22319 NUMERICAL SKILLS & ECONOMICS M33098 NUMERICAL SKILLS AND ECONOMICS
Lecturer	Rebecca Lodwick
Artefact Number	1	Artefact Title	Coursework

Task

Use Minitab to analyse the coursework dataset, completing all analysis tasks and writing up your results and conclusions for each task (word limit: 2000 words). The Minitab dataset that you are required to analyse is available under the ‘Assessments & Support Materials’ section on Moodle.

Learning outcomes

LO1 Summarise and present data using the mean, median, standard deviation, histograms, box plots, and bar charts.LO2 Analyse and interpret data using t-tests, ANOVA, non-parametric tests, Chi-squared tests, correlation, and linear regression.

Submission Instructions

Your work must be submitted to the submission box by 4pm on 2nd December 2025.You must submit your work as a PDF.The filename should be your student ID number, e.g. UP1234567.Your name should not appear anywhere on or within your submission.You should also upload your Minitab Project File with your submission.

Coursework Dataset

Note that there are several versions of the coursework dataset, but only one dataset will be visible on your Moodle: you must analyse your dataset. Using a dataset from another student’s Moodle may result in a plagiarism investigation.

DATA

The dataset contains observations from a sample of soil blocks. Each block has been reinforced with a type of organic fibre. A water absorption test has been performed on each block.There are four variables: Fibre typeWater absorption (%)Soil typeFibre content (% by volume)

Part 1

(a) Present appropriate numerical and graphical summaries for each of the variables. Comment on their distributions, and (where appropriate) the presence or absence of any outliers.(b) Report the 95% confidence interval for the mean water absorption, then use an appropriate hypothesis test to determine whether there is any evidence that the mean water absorption is not equal to 20%. You may assume that the underlying distribution of water absorption is Normal.(c) Evaluate whether the data is consistent with the claim that the median fibre content is 1.0%. Justify your choice of method.

Part 2

Use appropriate analyses to investigate the relationships between each of the following pairs of variables.(a) Water absorption and fibre type.
You may assume that the underlying distribution of water absorption is Normal.(b) Fibre type and soil type.(c) Water absorption and soil type.You may assume that the underlying distribution of water absorption is Normal.(d) Water absorption and fibre content.

Part 3

(a) Determine whether the relationship between water absorption and fibre content varies by fibre type.(b) Develop a multivariable linear regression model for water absorption, with fibre type, soil type and fibre content as potential predictors. Include all steps of your modelling process and fully justify your choice of final model.(c) For your final model, explain the effect of each predictor on the outcome variable by interpreting each of the regression coefficients and their p-values.

M22319/M33098 Categorical Marking Descriptor

Classification	Categorical Marking Scale	Detailed Assessment Description
First Classification (Publishable/ professional standard)	100 Upper 95 Middle 92 Lower	Learning Outcomes: Exceptional in all aspects, substantially exceeding expectations for this level. Assessment Criteria: Inclusion of multiple elements beyond those required, demonstrating a mastery of the subject and an ability to engage with advanced concepts in an innovative way. Work that is typically characterised by evidence of the following: Exceptional level of knowledge and understanding of complex, cutting-edge issues, theories, and principles Extensive and original independent thought, demonstrating deep and innovative critical engagement with the subject matter. Exceptional synthesis of ideas, critically challenging conventional views or existing knowledge with fresh perspectives or approaches. Novel insights or well-substantiated propositions that have the potential for publication. Exceptionally well-structured and coherent argumentation, clearly demonstrating a deep understanding of the complexity of the topic and presenting it in a highly accessible manner. Extensive use of a wide range of sources, incorporating both foundational and highly specialized materials to support arguments, accurately referenced and deeply integrated into the work. The work’s quality is at a level that is publishable or could meet professional standards for dissemination or implementation, potentially pushing the boundaries of the field. Excellent communication with clear, concise, and accurate expression that enhances the understanding of complex ideas.
First Classification (Outstanding)	88 Upper 85 Middle 82 Lower	Learning Outcomes: Outstanding in most/all aspects, substantially exceeding expectations for this level. Assessment Criteria: Underpinned by originality and/or novel ideas in thinking and a strong critical appreciation of the topic. No improvement could reasonably be expected. Work that is typically characterised by evidence of the following: An outstanding level of knowledge and understanding of complex issues, key concepts and principles at the forefront of the discipline Outstanding awareness of subject and/or practice Outstanding evidence of original, independent and critical thought A strong, well-structured argument that is convincing and well supported by an outstanding range of sources and/or evidence Pushes the boundaries of existing knowledge Evidence of extensive and discriminating reading/use of source material, accurately used in support of the work Clearly structured, robust and persuasive arguments, lucidly written, uses clear and accurate expression
First Classification (Meets criteria)	78 Upper 75 Middle 72 Lower	Learning Outcomes: Excellent quality, exceeding expectations for this level in many aspects. Assessment Criteria: Inclusion of elements beyond those required. Work that is typically characterised by evidence of the following: A very good to excellent level of knowledge and understanding of complex issues, key concepts and principles at the forefront of the discipline A very good to excellent awareness of subject and/or practice Evidence of original, independent, and critical thought A strong, well-structured argument that is convincing and well-supported by a wide range of sources and/or evidence Explores the boundaries of existing knowledge Evidence of extensive and discriminating reading/use of source material, accurately used in support of the work Clearly structured, robust and persuasive arguments, lucidly written, uses clear and accurate expression
2.1 Classification	68 Upper 65 Middle 62 Lower	Learning Outcomes: Meets all the intended learning outcomes and exceeds the threshold expectations for this level in several of them. Assessment Criteria: Complete with no important omissions. Work that is typically characterised by evidence of the following: A good or very good level of knowledge and understanding of key concepts and principles Good or very good awareness of subject and/or practice Able to describe and use a range of major concepts, theories and methodologies in a good or very good level of detail Strong arguments which offer good analysis of key issues Use of a broad/wide range of sources and/or evidence to support work May contain some minor errors and/or minor areas for improvement Clearly structured, robust and persuasive arguments, lucidly written, uses clear and accurate expression
2.2 Classification	58 Upper 55 Middle 52 Lower	Learning Outcomes: Meets all the intended learning outcomes for this level and exceeds the threshold expectations for this level in some of them. Assessment Criteria: Addresses the question/assignment. Some omissions. Work that is typically characterised by evidence of the following: A satisfactory level of knowledge and understanding of key concepts and principles Sufficient awareness of the subject and/or practice Able to describe and use a range of major concepts, theories and methodologies Some critical judgement offered Arguments offer some analysis of key issues, but they may lack coherence and/or supporting evidence Evidence of familiarity with the key sources and/or evidence but may contain questionable interpretation of critical materials May contain some errors and/or areas for improvement Organisation and clarity of writing are of sufficient standard for the reader to engage easily Needs some improvement in one or more areas
3rd Classification	48 Upper 45 Middle 42 Lower	Learning Outcome: Meets all of the intended learning outcomes but rarely exceeds the threshold expectations for this level. Assessment Criteria: Addresses some aspects of question/assignment, but with some important omissions. Work that is typically characterised by evidence of the following: A minimum threshold level of knowledge and understanding of a more restricted range of issues. Demonstrates awareness of the subject but may not fully engage with all aspects of the task. Demonstrates limited ability to critically evaluate key concepts or theories, with arguments that may be underdeveloped or simplistic. Organisation and clarity are sufficient for the reader to follow most aspects of the work. Some familiarity with basic reading material but little evidence of the use of sources and/or evidence, or overreliance on very basic resources
Fail	38 35 32 28 25 22 15 10	Learning Outcome: Fails to meet the majority or all of the intended learning outcomes and is inadequate for this level. Assessment Criteria: Fails to address much of the question/assignment. Lots of omissions. Unsatisfactory work e.g. lacks coherent argument, contains major errors, and fails to engage with key concepts; that is typically characterised by evidence of the following: Varying degrees of limited level of knowledge and understanding of a restricted range of issues. Poorly conceived and poorly directed to the question/task Limited understanding of empirical or theoretical issues but is not able to develop them further Limited evidence of argument and/or contains irrelevant or unrelated elements. Limited familiarity with basic reading materials and little evidence of the use of sources and/or evidence, or overreliance on very basic resources Likely to contain repetition, inconsistencies and/or some major errors Organisation and clarity of writing may be limited but will be sufficient for the reader to engage with most aspects of the work Needs significant improvement to meet pass threshold at undergraduate level
Nonsubmission or no adequate attempt		No submission, token submission (e.g