I recently had a conversation with another statistician about the Z score and the person responds ‘that’s the old way…people use computers’. The comments stopped me in my tracks because it is my point of view that the ‘old way’ explains the details in the new methods. How can you appreciate probability if you are not sure how it connects to the original data sample? As the sea of the new generation plays with their ipads and video games, I wonder what will become of statistics when their generation is using it? Do you really need to know that the likelihood of obtaining a particular value requires some mental acrobatics? For a second, let’s assume we can come up with a fancy algorithm that takes care of it all for generations to come… history has shown us that even computers are faulty . Statistical programs are constantly being updated and re-validated by HUMANS. Humans make mistakes and so do computers. It is a vicious cycle and a necessary one. You need people that can use computers, you also need people that know how to count without them. I am team OLD WAY with the knowledge of both ways.
-Moore to follow-Amy