This page holds a finished UNIV-401 Week 6 base rate audit example, taking reported likelihoods apart into what was counted, among which people, and how long the counting ran. Searches like "univ 401 week 6 assignment example", "univ401 week 6 sample" and "univ-401 week 6 example" land here.
What a finished UNIV-401 Week 6 base rate audit looks like
The audit is a working document, and the example does not dress it up as prose. Figures appear in the order they appear in the draft being audited, each one quoted exactly as it was written, with four things filled in beside it: what is being counted, the people it is counted among, the stretch of time behind it, and the source with its year. Some rows end with a correction and some end with the word unchanged, which is a real result and not a wasted row. Underneath the table sit the rewritten sentences, showing the same claim said accurately, shorter and less loud than the original. A final paragraph names the one claim that did not survive the audit at all.
How a UNIV-401 Week 6 example is structured
Document order drives the whole thing, so nothing gets skipped: the writer walks the draft top to bottom and lifts each figure in turn. Every row is then filled from the source rather than from memory, which is where most corrections actually come from. Once the rows exist, figures that were compared in the draft get checked against each other for a shared base and a shared collection year, since two numbers can both be right and still not belong in the same sentence. The rewritten sentences come next and stay close to the original wording so a grader can see what changed. The claim that collapsed is handled last, in prose, with a line on what the draft now argues instead.
Four columns per figure
What is counted, among whom, over how long, and by whom in which year. A figure missing any of the four cannot be defended, however confidently the draft sentence used it.
Percent against percentage point
The sample writes both versions of a change side by side and picks the one the source supports. Sliding between them is the single most common arithmetic loss in this week.
Rows that end unchanged
Not every figure is wrong. The sample keeps the rows that survive, because an audit that only reports errors looks like a hunt rather than a check of everything present.
Comparisons need a shared base
Two correct numbers can still be uncomparable. The sample tests each pairing for the same people, the same counting rule and the same years before letting the draft keep the sentence.
The claim that collapsed
One argument in the draft rarely survives intact. Saying so plainly, and saying what the draft argues instead, is worth more than deleting the sentence and hoping nobody looks.
Where marks go in UNIV-401 Week 6
A rise from four in a hundred to six in a hundred is both a fifty percent change and a two point change, and a draft that picks whichever sounds larger loses more here than anywhere else in the week. Reading a lifetime figure as though it described a year costs nearly as much and is harder to spot. Setting two numbers side by side when they come from different collection years or count different people undoes the comparison the draft was built on. A table filled in beautifully while the draft's original sentences stay untouched earns the description row and nothing else. And auditing a figure against a table that covers different people repeats an earlier week's error.
Get a UNIV-401 Week 6 example written to your instructions
Send the draft you want audited, or just the assignment and rubric if the figures are still to be chosen, and a custom example is built on your numbers rather than borrowed ones. It comes back inside 24-48h, first one free. If your section supplies a fixed reading with figures in it, send that too and the sample audits from it.
UNIV-401 Week 6 questions, answered
The source does not state the period. What goes in that column?
Write that it is unstated and say what the figure would mean under two readings, one year and a lifetime, because the difference is often large enough to change the argument. The sample then marks the claim as provisional rather than dropping it. An empty column reads as work not done, while a named gap reads as a finding.
Can I audit figures I used in earlier weeks?
Yes, and most sections prefer it, since the audit then has consequences for documents you have already submitted. The sample pulls its figures from its own earlier brief, finds two that were quoted without their base, and corrects them. Auditing a stranger's article is safer and earns less, because nothing downstream has to change.
Do figures printed in the assignment itself get audited?
Check your instructions first, since some sections supply numbers deliberately and expect them used as given. Where the audit is open, the sample includes them and treats them exactly like any other figure. A supplied number with no base stated is a legitimate finding and is usually the one a grader is waiting to see raised.