<p>Looking back at my career, I realize the best math course I took was a Problem Seminar course. In that course, we were given ten problems to solve per week. During a good week, I could solve maybe 8 of 10 problems. That taught me how to solve a problem without a textbook context to hint as to how to find a solution. This site does the same thing within the context of statistics. That is, practice makes perfect, and if one can increasingly better answer arbitrary questions, then one has increased the ability to use statistics in one's work.</p>
<p>This differs from a Problem Seminar because creative answers can be downvoted here, and there is an overlay of conventionality applied here that is particular to statistics. On the plus side, even when the insular thinking of those who review answers is apparent, one at least gleans the boundaries of conventional statistical thinking. That is important for writing multidisciplinary work in that it indicates which concepts should be avoided as they mean something else in other fields. For example, a &quot;sample&quot; for statistics is not a blood &quot;sample&quot; for medicine, so one winds up using alternative concepts more generally, e.g., dataset instead of &quot;sample.&quot;</p>
<p>Finally, answering a question here is like taking an oral certification exam as a single candidate being reviewed by a dozen specialists. In such a setting, the question that the specialists have is, &quot;Is this candidate one of us or not.&quot; So it matters HOW one answers a question, i.e., like a specialist statistician or NOT. Either way, it is a profound learning experience.</p>
