Presenting Data

in Tables and Charts

In first place, it refers to numerical facts. State as well as
Central, Statistical department and various other
agencies can be seen engaged in collecting valuable
statistics (numerical facts concerning the birth and
death, school attendance, employment market, output
of Industrial plants and Agriculture fields etc.
As a second meaning, word statistics refers. to the
method or methods of dealing with numerical facts. In
this sense, statistics is taken as science of collecting,
classifying, summarizing, analysing and, interpreting of
numerical facts.
In its third meaning, statistics refers to the summarized
figures of numerical facts such as percentage, averages,
means, medians, modes, standard deviations etc. Each
of these figures separately, (average or mean etc.) is
referred to as ‘Statistics’ .
= facts (plural of datum, meaning fact).

Thus, in wider sense the term data designates the

evidence or facts for describing a group or a situation,
but in a particular sense it is generally used for
numerical facts such as heights, weights, scores on
achievement tests and intelligence test, etc.
 Organizing Numerical Data

Numerical Data 41, 24, 32, 26, 27, 27, 30, 24, 38, 21

Frequency Distributions
Ordered Array
21, 24, 24, 26, 27, 27, 30, 32, 38, 41 Cumulative Distributions

Stem and Leaf Histograms Ogive

Display 2 144677
3 028 Tables Polygons
4 1
 Organizing Numerical Data:

•Data in Raw form (as collected):

24, 26, 24, 21, 27, 27, 30, 41, 32, 38
•Date Ordered from Smallest to Largest:
21, 24, 24, 26, 27, 27, 30, 32, 38, 41

•Stem and Leaf display: 2 144677

3 028
4 1
 Organizing Numerical Data

Numerical Data 41, 24, 32, 26, 27, 27, 30, 24, 38, 21

Ordered Array Frequency Distributions O give

21, 24, 24, 26, 27, 27, 30, 32, 38, 41 Cumulative Distributions 120

100

80

60

40

20

0
10 20 30 40 50 60

Stem and Leaf Histograms Ogive

7

Display
6

2 144677 3

2
Polygons
Tables 1

3 028 10 20 30 40 50 60

4 1
 Tabulating Numerical Data:
•Sort Raw Data in Ascending Order:
12, 13, 17, 21, 24, 24, 26, 27, 27, 30, 32, 35, 37, 38, 41, 43, 44, 46, 53, 58

•Find Range: 58 - 12 = 46

•Select Number of Classes: 5 (usually between 5 and 15)

•Compute Class Interval (width): 10 (46/5 then round up)
•Determine Class Boundaries (limits): 10, 20, 30, 40, 50
•Compute Class Midpoints: 15, 25, 35, 45, 55

•Count Observations & Assign to Classes

 Tabulating Numerical Data:
Frequency Distributions
Data in ordered array:
12, 13, 17, 21, 24, 24, 26, 27, 27, 30, 32, 35, 37, 38, 41, 43, 44, 46, 53, 58

Relative
Class Frequency Frequency Percentage
10 but under 20 3 .15 15
20 but under 30 6 .30 30
30 but under 40 5 .25 25
40 but under 50 4 .20 20
50 but under 60 2 .10 10
Total 20 1 100
 Graphing Numerical Data:
The Histogram
Data in ordered array:
12, 13, 17, 21, 24, 24, 26, 27, 27, 30, 32, 35, 37, 38, 41, 43, 44, 46, 53, 58
H is t o g r a m

7 6
6 5
Fr e que ncy

5 4 No Gaps
4 3
3 2
Between
2 Bars
1 0 0
0
5 15 25 36 45 55 M ore

Class Midpoints
Graphing Numerical Data:
The Frequency Polygon
Data in ordered array:
12, 13, 17, 21, 24, 24, 26, 27, 27, 30, 32, 35, 37, 38, 41, 43, 44, 46, 53, 58
Frequenc y

4
3

0
5 15 25 36 45 55 M ore

Class Midpoints
 Tabulating Numerical Data:
Cumulative Frequency

Data in ordered array:

12, 13, 17, 21, 24, 24, 26, 27, 27, 30, 32, 35, 37, 38, 41, 43, 44, 46, 53, 58
Cumulative Cumulative
Class Frequency % Frequency
10 but under 20 3 15
20 but under 30 9 45
30 but under 40 14 70
40 but under 50 18 90
50 but under 60 20 100
 Graphing Numerical Data:
The Ogive (Cumulative % Polygon)
Data in ordered array:
12, 13, 17, 21, 24, 24, 26, 27, 27, 30, 32, 35, 37, 38, 41, 43, 44, 46, 53, 58
O g iv e

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
10 20 30 40 50 60

Class Boundaries
 Organizing Categorical Data
Univariate Data:
Categorical Data

Graphing Data
Tabulating Data
The Summary Table
Pie Charts

Bar Charts Pareto Diagram

 Summary Table
(for an investor’s portfolio)

Investment Category Amount Percentage

(in thousands $)

Stocks 46.5 42.27

Bonds 32 29.09
CD 15.5 14.09
Savings 16 14.55
Total 110 100

Variables are Categorical.

 Organizing Categorical Data
Univariate Data:
Categorical Data

Graphing Data
Tabulating Data
The Summary Table
Pie Charts

Bar Charts Pareto Diagram

45 120
40
100
CD 35
30 80
25
S a vin g s 60
20
15 40
B onds
10
20
5
S toc k s
0 0
S toc k s B onds S a vin g s CD
0 10 20 30 40 50
 Bar Chart
(for an investor’s portfolio)

In v e s to r ' s P o r fo lio

S a vi n g s

CD

B onds

S to c k s

0 10 20 30 40 50

A m o u n t in K $
 Pie Chart
(for an investor’s portfolio)

Amount Invested in K$

Savings
15%

Stocks
CD 42%
14%

Percentages are
rounded to the
Bonds
nearest percent.
29%
 Pareto Diagram
Pareto diagram
Axis for bar
50 120
chart shows
100
% invested 40
80
in each 30
60
category. 20
40
10 20
Axis for line
0 0
graph shows
S toc k s B onds S avings CD
cumulative
% invested.
 Organizing
Bivariate Categorical Data

•Contingency Tables
•Side by Side Charts
 Organizing Categorical Data
Bivariate Data:
Contingency Table: Investment in Thousands of Dollars

Investment Investor A Investor B Investor C Total

Category

Stocks 46.5 55 27.5 129

Bonds 32 44 19 95
CD 15.5 20 13.5 49
Savings 16 28 7 51
Total 110 147 67 324
 Organizing Categorical Data
Bivariate Data:
Side by Side C omparing Investors
Chart
S avings

CD

B onds

S toc k s

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Inves tor A Inves tor B Inves tor C

• Well Designed Presentation of Data that Provides:
 Substance
 Statistics
 Design
• Communicates Complex Ideas with Clarity,
Precision and Efficiency
• Gives the largest Number of Ideas in the Most
Efficient Manner
• Almost Always Involves Several Dimensions
• Requires Telling the Truth About the Data
 Employability of BLIS Graduates

A subtotal of 41.98% of the LIS graduates are currently employed in academic

libraries with an additional 2.47% working in academic special libraries, this gives a
subtotal of 44.45% of the graduates. This means that nearly half of the graduates are
place in universities and colleges. Moreover, 38.27% of the graduates are placed in
school libraries, which means they are employed in grade schools catering
preschoolers to Grade 12 library users. The forgoing data gives an overall total 82.2%
of the respondents working in academic settings. Only 11.11% works in special
libraries (4.94% in private organization and 6.17% in government agencies) and 3.7%
are currently employed in public libraries.
 Employability of BLIS Graduates

As presented in the finding of LIS Tracer Study Research,

majority of the BLIS graduates found employment, right after
graduation with 56.1% of them being employed less than one
month after leaving the university. It is interesting to note that
7.6% of them were already employed even before they earned
their degree.
Results and Discussions
Public and Private HEI Faculty Members Extent and Levels on Three Variables
Results Discussion
s extent of work-family
This table shows the
conflict and levels of life stress and job burnout
of CALABARZON public and private higher
education institutions’ faculty members. Public
and private HEI faculty members both obtained
a moderate extent of work-family conflict
(x=3.11 and x=2.89 respectively) as well as on
the level of life stress (x=2.55 and x=2.74
respectively). In terms of job burnout under
Emotional Exhaustion both public and private
HEI faculty members experienced an average
level of burnout, which happened in a monthly
basis. The level of personal accomplishment is
being experienced every week, which mean the
HEI faculty members obtained a low level of
burnout. However, private HEI faculty members
experienced an average level of burnout
compared to public HEI faculty members,
specifically on Depersonalization category, on a
low level of burnout as a result.
Results and Discussions
Effect of Demographic Profile to Work-Family Conflict, Life Stress and Job Burnout (School)

Results Discussion
s
This shows significance effects of work-
family conflict, life stress and job
burnout as grouped according to the
school/university/college. Having the set
of path coefficient values of school
profile to work-family conflict (F=12;
R2=0.04), life stress (F=10; R2=0.03) and
job burnout (F=22; R2=0.07), (β = 0.207,
0.187 and 0.261 respectively) and p-
value of 0.001 which is less than 0.05
level of significance. The null hypothesis
is rejected. The results revealed that there
is significant or direct effect on faculty
respondents’ extent of work-family
conflict and levels of life stress and job
burnout with the schools in which they
are employed.