Sentences with phrase «likely than losers»

Students who won the lottery are more than 55 percentage points more likely than losers to attend their first - choice school in the first year, and on average spend an additional 1 to 1.5 years enrolled in that school overall.

Not exact matches

As a friend of mine pointed out long ago, the winners don't get a lot more money than the losers in high school sports, so why would anyone risk their health for a victory that will most likely be forgotten in a few months?

The Conservatives, though, were thought likely to be the bigger losers, having done well in 2011 and therefore defending far more seats than Labour, and having also been more damaged by UKIP's dramatic rise.

For example, high - risk middle - school lottery winners are 18 percentage points more likely than lottery losers to be enrolled in CMS in their 10th - grade year.

This table shows that charter lottery winners are about 15 percentage points less likely to switch than losers.

Among charter high school applicants, lottery winners are 5 percentage points less likely to be Hispanic and about 6 percentage points more likely to be black than losers.

Among high school applicants, charter lottery winners are more likely to switch schools than losers, a marginally significant difference of 5 — 6 percentage points.

At pilot middle schools, winners are less likely to switch than losers, but this difference is not significantly different from 0.

Economists from MIT and Harvard, among other co-authors, found in one paper that voucher winners «were about 10 percentage points more likely than (lottery) losers to have completed eighth grade, primarily because they repeated fewer grades,» and that «on average, lottery winners scored about 0.2 standard deviations higher than losers.»

Let's say that it is «likely» (> 66 %) that there would be more losers than winners, but «extremely unlikely» (99 % certain to occur, > 90 % certain to be catastrophic for humanity and > 90 % certain that this will occur in the next 5 million years.

It is reasonably likely that SO2 climate engineering would have unacceptable costs because many more people would be precipitation losers than winners, since a very large fraction of people are farmers in India and China who rely on rain.

The elements are: (1) the amount of temperaturechange since 1850; (2) whether the change is in the range of natural variability or is attributable to humans; (3) the amount of warming that greenhouse gases (CO2 and equivalents) will warm the Earth in the future; and whether for the most likely scenarios, there are more losers than winners and if the change is just different.