Q: The text covers all areas and ideas of the subject appropriately and provides an effective index and/or glossary
The text covers all areas and ideas of the subject appropriately, however there is no table of contents, glossary of terms, list of formulae, chapter wise table of contents. A chapter wise table of contents and glossary would have added value to the book. Although this is an online textbook, some students may not be familiar even with analogous terms such as sample standard deviation and population standard deviation, sample mean, population mean etc.
Comprehensiveness Rating: 4 out of 5
Q: Content is accurate, error-free and unbiased
The author wrote everything in an unbiased manner. The content can be improved by being more specific regarding tables and figures, such as:
Table in exercises 1 and 2 (page 16) is not perfectly represented.
In example 5, 6, 7 (page 40, 41) and 9 (page 44), respectively, the author wrote, “Compute the ……….”; data is missing in the questions.
On page 41 it is written, “The relationship between ….is shown in”; the figure number is missing in this case.
Some examples are in decimals such as examples 14 and 15 (page 67), which makes the text hard to understand for some students. If possible, decimal problems should be added in exercises instead of examples.
Content Accuracy Rating: 3 out of 5
Q: Content is up-to-date, but not in a way that will quickly make the text obsolete within a short period of time. The text is written and/or arranged in such a way that necessary updates will be relatively easy and straightforward to implement
Yes, the content is up to date. Only one thing may be added, viz. different types of sampling methods.
Relevance Rating: 5 out of 5
Q: The text is written in lucid, accessible prose, and provides adequate context for any jargon/technical terminology used
Yes, the text is written in a clear way. However, I have cited one problem below:
For the equal to sign (=), the authors have used a dash sign (-), which may confuse some readers as this is generally used to denote the negative (-) values in mathematics. To cite an example, in the solution to exercise 8 (page 660), it is written df1-K-1-4-1-3, it is difficult to understand, it is df1= K-1= 4-1= 3.
Clarity Rating: 4 out of 5
Q: The text is internally consistent in terms of terminology and framework
The terminology and symbols are explained coherently. Each section has specific learning objectives and key take-away concepts. Nevertheless, a few errors and possible changes are cited below:
In two sample tests, for t- test ‘s’= sample standard deviation is used and for a Z test, ‘σ’ = population standard deviation is used. But on the formula pages 425,427, 428, and 429, it is typed wrongly (instead of σ, s is written).
In some cases, for the t-test, ‘t’ is capitalized (page 448, 449), although in most of the cases ‘t’ is in lower case. I would recommend consistency regarding notation.
Consistency Rating: 4 out of 5
Q: The text is easily and readily divisible into smaller reading sections that can be assigned at different points within the course (i.e., enormous blocks of text without subheadings should be avoided). The text should not be overly self-referential, and should be easily reorganized and realigned with various subunits of a course without presenting much disruption to the reader.
Yes, I agree.
Modularity Rating: 5 out of 5
Q: The topics in the text are presented in a logical, clear fashion
The text is written in a lucid manner.
Organization Rating: 5 out of 5
Q: The text is free of significant interface issues, including navigation problems, distortion of images/charts, and any other display features that may distract or confuse the reader
Yes, I agree to the above point. Figures are numbered as per the chapters such as for Chapter 2, figures are cited as 2.1 through 2.19, I really appreciate the authors’ approach to this part of the book. Some suggestions might be:
Figure 11.4 (page 615) is a mirror image of the figure itself, which may confuse some readers.
A few figures are very small and difficult to read, such as 11.10 (page 645) and 11.11(page 647); the font size should be enlarged for better readably.
Interface Rating: 4 out of 5
Q: The text contains no grammatical errors
No grammatical or spelling error was found.
Grammar Rating: 5 out of 5
Q: The text is not culturally insensitive or offensive in any way. It should make use of examples that are inclusive of a variety of races, ethnicities, and backgrounds
The text does not have an inherent cultural bias.
Cultural Relevance Rating: 5 out of 5
Q: Are there any other comments you would like to make about this book, for example, its appropriateness in a Canadian context or specific updates you think need to be made?
Yes, I would strongly recommend this book and I hope that this review will promote awareness about this text.