Proficiency Rate as a Function of Subject With Bans
Model equations: grades 3–8 all subjects
\[
\text{Louisiana: } \widehat{\text{Proficiency Rate}} = 29.27 + 0.76 \cdot \text{PostBan}
\]
\[
\text{South Carolina: } \widehat{\text{Proficiency Rate}} = 39.44 + 3.63 \cdot \text{PostBan}
\]
The estimate of the intercept is the predicted score for that row. The other rows estimates show the net difference between that row and the intercept. So, a positive number means it is that much more than the intercept, and a negative means that much less.
Grades 3–8 Models: State Comparison
Red = negative change
Grey = no statistical change
Green = positive change
All subjects
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
29.27 |
28.24 |
30.31 |
| Post-Ban Change |
0.76 |
−1.98 |
3.49 |
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
39.44 |
38.15 |
40.73 |
| Post-Ban Change |
3.62 |
0.74 |
6.51 |
ELA
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
38.08 |
36.94 |
39.23 |
| Post-Ban Change |
0.57 |
−2.47 |
3.60 |
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
44.70 |
43.47 |
45.94 |
| Post-Ban Change |
3.63 |
0.87 |
6.38 |
Math
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
28.48 |
27.44 |
29.51 |
| Post-Ban Change |
1.65 |
−1.09 |
4.39 |
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
33.89 |
32.49 |
35.28 |
| Post-Ban Change |
3.62 |
0.51 |
6.74 |
Science
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
24.90 |
23.92 |
25.87 |
| Post-Ban Change |
0.30 |
−2.26 |
2.86 |
No matching South Carolina district data available for Science.
Social Studies
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
23.56 |
22.51 |
24.60 |
| Post-Ban Change |
4.12 |
1.55 |
6.68 |
No matching South Carolina district data available for Social Studies.
This is the only statistically significant difference as the confidence interval does not incude 0 change. The other subjects have (within a 95% certainty range) a non-zero chance that the impact is 0.
Grades 3–12 Models (Louisiana)
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
29.84 |
28.79 |
30.90 |
| Post-Ban Change |
0.35 |
−2.43 |
3.13 |
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
38.60 |
37.46 |
39.75 |
| Post-Ban Change |
0.48 |
−2.56 |
3.52 |
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
29.03 |
27.96 |
30.11 |
| Post-Ban Change |
1.38 |
−1.44 |
4.20 |
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
24.34 |
23.19 |
25.49 |
| Post-Ban Change |
0.58 |
−1.97 |
3.12 |
| Variable |
Estimate |
95% CI Lower |
95% CI Upper |
| Pre-Ban (Intercept) |
23.70 |
22.73 |
24.67 |
| Post-Ban Change |
2.59 |
0.06 |
5.12 |
This is also the only viable model becuase you can say with 95% certainty that there is a positive effect.
Cell Phone Ban Effects by Grade Group (Louisiana)
Cell Phone Ban Effects by Grade Level & Subject
Social Studies
No matching South Carolina district data available for Social Studies.
This is the only statistically significant difference as the confidence interval does not incude 0 change. The other subjects have (within a 95% certainty range) a non-zero chance that the impact is 0.