From the Classroom to the Capitol: Bringing Statistical Insight to Oklahoma Lawmakers

When Oklahoma legislators gather at the Capitol, they are often presented with a steady stream of numbers—estimates, projections, percentages and claims meant to inform policy decisions that affect communities across the state. Earlier this year, they turned to the Hudson College of Public Health to help make sense of it all.

In early December 2025, members of the Oklahoma Senate reached out to Dr. Michael Anderson, Professor of Biostatistics in the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, to request a one-hour “Statistics 101” session for their colleagues. Their goal was clear: sharpen their ability to interpret statistical information presented during session and strengthen their decision-making with a deeper understanding of data.

After an initial conversation to better understand their needs, Dr. Anderson reviewed examples of the materials legislators regularly receive—primarily estimates of means, totals and proportions, often accompanied by strong claims. He then tailored a session specifically designed to help lawmakers critically evaluate what those numbers do—and do not—say.

At the Capitol, Dr. Anderson focused on foundational principles with real-world implications:

• Samples are used to understand populations—but how those samples are taken matters. A non-representative sample can lead to misleading conclusions.
• All statistical estimates carry uncertainty. That uncertainty should be part of the conversation, often expressed through confidence intervals.
• Evidence-based decision-making represents the highest standard of decision-making and should guide policy whenever possible.
• Strong claims require strong evidence. Many study designs only allow for cautious, limited conclusions.
• Data should come with receipts—clear references and transparent methods.
• Measures like the median may be more appropriate than the mean when outliers are present, a concept that resonated during discussions about reported wages in certain districts.
• Variation in data is not noise—it is essential to understanding what the data are telling us.

The session was highly interactive. Legislators frequently shared examples from their own experience, connecting statistical concepts directly to real policy discussions. By the end of the hour, Dr. Anderson’s sense was that participants felt more equipped to probe the data presented to them—asking questions such as: How were these data collected? Who is the intended population? What is the variability around these estimates? What evidence supports this claim?

This engagement reflects the broader mission of the Hudson College of Public Health: advancing evidence-based practice to improve the health and well-being of Oklahomans. While biostatistics is often associated with research laboratories and academic journals, its impact extends far beyond campus. When policymakers are better prepared to critically evaluate data, the decisions they make are more likely to be informed, responsible and grounded in evidence.

By bringing statistical literacy directly to the state Capitol, Dr. Anderson exemplified the college’s commitment to service, education, and the translation of knowledge into action. In doing so, he demonstrated that public health is not only about generating data—it is about empowering leaders to use that data wisely for the benefit of the communities they serve.