PROBLEM 2.

Number GPAi GPAHAT ACTi Ui GPAi - GPAtb

1 2.8 2.7143 21 0.0857 -0.4125
2 3.4 3.0209 24 0.3791 0.1875
3 3 3.2253 26 -0.2253 -0.2125
4 3.5 3.3275 27 0.1725 0.2875
5 3.6 3.5319 29 0.0681 0.3875
6 3 3.1231 25 -0.1231 -0.2125
7 2.7 3.1231 25 -0.4231 -0.5125
8 3.7 3.6341 30 0.0659 0.4875
3.2125 25.875 -0.0002 1.0288

The intercept does not have a useful i

B0 0.5681 population of interest. If ACT is 5 poin
B1 0.1022
U^2 0.4347 The residuals, as reported in the table
R SQUARE 0.5774 to zero given the inherent rounding er

57.7% of the variation in GPA is expla

 ACTi - ACTtb G*H (GPAi - GPAtb)^2
-4.875 2.0109375 23.765625
-1.875 -0.3515625 3.515625
0.125 -0.0265625 0.015625
1.125 0.3234375 1.265625
3.125 1.2109375 9.765625
-0.875 0.1859375 0.765625
-0.875 0.4484375 0.765625
4.125 2.0109375 17.015625
5.8125 56.875

tercept does not have a useful interpretation because ACT is not close to zero for the
ation of interest. If ACT is 5 points higher,PREDICTED GPA increases by 0.1022(5) = 0.511.

esiduals, as reported in the table, sum to −0.0002, which is pretty close

o given the inherent rounding error.

% of the variation in GPA is explained by ACT in this small sample of students