The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Z-Scores, Weighted Averages, and Application Rankings
I do hope the title is somewhat helpful, but I've basically got a question about z-scores VS raw scores when building Application scores to rank applicants for acceptance into our dental program.
What we do now is we judge applicants on three scores:
Academic Average is worth 65% of their Application Score
Dental Aptitude Test (DAT) is worth 15%
Interview scores is worth 20%
We add all the portions together and get their final Applicant score, which we rank against the other applicants.
Someone has mentioned that we may be doing things wrong and that we should be z-transforming all our scores before adding them together, because the way we do it now is like adding apples to oranges to grapefruits. This person also mentioned that there is the possibility that our weighting is not playing out the way we want it to and say it will--the DAT, for example, may be playing a larger part than we think.
Now, I sort of understand z-scores and deriving them, and I get how they can be used to determine who actually did "better" compared to his peers if you're looking at Bob's 97 in Geography and Sam's 93 in English. What I'm not getting is how the z-scores will actually help our process here, and it may just be that I'm not applying them correctly.