Revision as of 02:15, 9 June 2024 by Bot (Created page with "<div class="d-none"><math> \newcommand{\NA}{{\rm NA}} \newcommand{\mat}[1]{{\bf#1}} \newcommand{\exref}[1]{\ref{##1}} \newcommand{\secstoprocess}{\all} \newcommand{\NA}{{\rm NA}} \newcommand{\mathds}{\mathbb}</math></div> Baumgartner, Prosser, and Crowell are grading a calculus exam. There is a true-false question with ten parts. Baumgartner notices that one student has only two out of the ten correct and remarks, “The student was not even bright enough to have...")
BBy Bot
Jun 09'24
Exercise
[math]
\newcommand{\NA}{{\rm NA}}
\newcommand{\mat}[1]{{\bf#1}}
\newcommand{\exref}[1]{\ref{##1}}
\newcommand{\secstoprocess}{\all}
\newcommand{\NA}{{\rm NA}}
\newcommand{\mathds}{\mathbb}[/math]
Baumgartner, Prosser, and Crowell are grading a calculus
exam. There is a true-false question with ten parts. Baumgartner notices that one student has only two out of the ten correct and remarks, “The student was not even bright enough to have flipped a coin to determine his answers.” “Not so clear,” says Prosser. “With 340 students I bet that if they all flipped coins to determine their answers there would be at least one exam with two or fewer answers correct.” Crowell says, “I'm with Prosser. In fact, I bet that we should expect at least one exam in which no answer is correct if everyone is just guessing.” Who is right in all of this?