The Normal Distribution
Heights, exam scores, measurement errors — countless natural phenomena follow the bell-shaped normal curve. Master the empirical rule (68–95–99.7%) and the z-score, and you unlock every normal probability problem without a calculator.
Practise this lesson
Three printable worksheets that build from foundations to mastery — or build your own from any module’s questions.
Suppose exam scores are normally distributed with mean $\mu = 70$ and standard deviation $\sigma = 10$. Without any calculations — estimate what proportion of students scored between 60 and 80. What about between 50 and 90?
Two ideas unlock every normal distribution problem. Memorise the empirical rule for quick estimates and the z-score formula for comparisons between different distributions.
The empirical rule: 68% of values lie within $\mu \pm \sigma$, 95% within $\mu \pm 2\sigma$, and 99.7% within $\mu \pm 3\sigma$. Every normal probability problem starts here.
Key facts
- Normal curve is symmetric, bell-shaped, asymptotic to the axis
- Mean = Median = Mode at the peak; $\sigma$ controls spread
- Empirical rule: 68–95–99.7% within 1, 2, 3 standard deviations
Concepts
- Why the normal distribution models so many natural phenomena
- How standardising preserves probabilities while simplifying calculations
- The difference between a raw score $x$ and a standardised score $z$
Skills
- Calculate z-scores given $\mu$ and $\sigma$
- Use the empirical rule to estimate proportions
- Compare scores from different normal distributions using z-scores
A random variable $X$ follows a normal distribution with mean $\mu$ and variance $\sigma^2$ if its probability density function has the characteristic bell shape. We write $X \sim N(\mu, \sigma^2)$.
Normal distribution bell curve with empirical rule: 68% within $\mu \pm \sigma$ (green), 95% within $\mu \pm 2\sigma$ (orange). Inflection points at $\mu \pm \sigma$.
Key properties:
- Symmetric about the mean $\mu$ — left half mirrors the right
- Mean = Median = Mode — all three coincide at the peak
- Asymptotic — the curve approaches but never touches the horizontal axis
- Total area = 1 — the entire area represents 100% of probability
- Inflection points at $\mu - \sigma$ and $\mu + \sigma$ — where the curve changes from concave down to concave up
The parameter $\mu$ centres the curve. The parameter $\sigma$ controls spread: larger $\sigma$ → wider, flatter bell; smaller $\sigma$ → narrower, taller bell.
Real-world examples modelled by the normal distribution:
- Heights of adult males in a homogeneous population
- Measurement errors in laboratory experiments
- IQ scores (standardised to $\mu = 100$, $\sigma = 15$)
- Exam scores in large, well-designed assessments
- Manufacturing tolerances when a process is in control
$X \sim N(\mu, \sigma^2)$: mean $\mu$, variance $\sigma^2$, standard deviation $\sigma$; Symmetric bell curve: Mean = Median = Mode; asymptotic to the $x$-axis
Pause — copy the notation $X \sim N(\mu, \sigma^2)$, the three-in-one property (Mean = Median = Mode $= \mu$), and the fact that inflection points occur at $\mu \pm \sigma$ into your book.
Did you get this? True or false: for a normal distribution, the mean, median, and mode are all equal.
Empirical Rule · worked examples, reveal as you go
We just saw that a normal distribution is fully characterised by $\mu$ and $\sigma$, and that inflection points occur at $\mu \pm \sigma$. That raises a question: can we calculate specific probabilities without calculus, just by knowing where a value sits relative to $\mu$? This card answers it → the 68–95–99.7 rule, which gives exact percentages for intervals within 1, 2, and 3 standard deviations of the mean.
For any normal distribution, the empirical rule gives the approximate percentage of data within 1, 2, and 3 standard deviations of the mean:
| Interval | Approx % | Tail % (each side) |
|---|---|---|
| $\mu \pm \sigma$ | 68% | 16% |
| $\mu \pm 2\sigma$ | 95% | 2.5% |
| $\mu \pm 3\sigma$ | 99.7% | 0.15% |
HSC precision note: The exact percentages are 68.27%, 95.45%, and 99.73%. In the HSC, "approximately 68%", "approximately 95%", and "approximately 99.7%" are all acceptable.
One-sided probabilities from symmetry:
- $P(X < \mu) = 50\%$ — half the distribution is below the mean
- $P(X < \mu + \sigma) \approx 84\%$ (50% + 34%)
- $P(X < \mu + 2\sigma) \approx 97.5\%$ (50% + 47.5%)
- $P(X > \mu + 2\sigma) \approx 2.5\%$ — upper tail only
Heights of Year 12 students: $H \sim N(170, 8^2)$ cm. Find (a) $P(162 < H < 178)$, (b) $P(H > 186)$, (c) the height below which 97.5% of students fall.
Empirical rule: 68% in $\mu \pm \sigma$; 95% in $\mu \pm 2\sigma$; 99.7% in $\mu \pm 3\sigma$; Always check: is the given value at $\mu \pm k\sigma$ for $k = 1, 2,$ or $3$?
Pause — copy the three intervals (68%: $\mu \pm \sigma$; 95%: $\mu \pm 2\sigma$; 99.7%: $\mu \pm 3\sigma$) and the one-sided derivations (e.g., $P(X < \mu + 2\sigma) \approx 97.5\%$) into your book.
Quick check: IQ scores are $N(100, 15^2)$. Approximately what percentage of the population has IQ above 130?
z-scores · standardising any normal variable
We just saw the empirical rule works only when values happen to land exactly at $\mu \pm k\sigma$. That raises a question: what if the value doesn't land on a whole-SD boundary — or we need to compare scores from two different distributions? This card answers it → the z-score $z = (x-\mu)/\sigma$, which standardises any normal variable to $Z \sim N(0,1)$ so any probability can be looked up from tables.
Every normal distribution can be transformed into the standard normal distribution $Z \sim N(0, 1)$ using the z-score formula:
The z-score tells you how many standard deviations $x$ is above or below the mean:
- $z = 0$ means $x = \mu$ (exactly average)
- $z = 1$ means $x$ is one SD above the mean
- $z = -2$ means $x$ is two SDs below the mean
- $|z| > 3$ is typically considered unusual or an outlier
Why standardise? Converting to z-scores lets us compare values from completely different normal distributions on the same scale. A z-score of 1.5 means the same thing whether you are talking about IQ scores, exam results, or manufacturing dimensions.
Example — are these performances equally good?
In a Maths exam: $\mu = 72$, $\sigma = 12$; student scores 84. In Physics: $\mu = 65$, $\sigma = 10$; same student scores 75.
Maths: $z = \dfrac{84 - 72}{12} = \dfrac{12}{12} = 1.0$; Physics: $z = \dfrac{75 - 65}{10} = \dfrac{10}{10} = 1.0$
Both scores are exactly 1 SD above their respective means. The performances are equally good relative to each cohort.
Comparing two different students:
Student A scores 78 in Chemistry ($\mu = 70$, $\sigma = 8$). Student B scores 82 in Biology ($\mu = 75$, $\sigma = 6$). Who performed better relative to their class?
Student A: $z = \dfrac{78-70}{8} = 1.0$; Student B: $z = \dfrac{82-75}{6} = \dfrac{7}{6} \approx 1.17$
Student B's z-score is higher — Student B performed better relative to their class.
For $X \sim N(60, 9)$ (note: variance = 9, so $\sigma = 3$), calculate the z-scores for $x = 66$, $x = 54$, and $x = 72$.
Find the raw score $x$ corresponding to $z = -1.5$ if $\mu = 80$ and $\sigma = 6$.
z-score formula: $z = \dfrac{x - \mu}{\sigma}$; reverse: $x = \mu + z\sigma$; z-score = number of standard deviations from the mean (+ above, − below)
Pause — copy the z-score formula $z = \dfrac{x-\mu}{\sigma}$ and its reverse $x = \mu + z\sigma$, plus the comparison rule (higher z-score = better relative performance regardless of distribution) into your book.
Fill in the blank: The z-score $z = \dfrac{x - \mu}{\sigma}$ measures how many a value is from the . After standardising, $Z \sim N($$, $$)$.
Common errors · traps that cost marks
Odd one out: Three of these are properties of a normal distribution; one is not. Which is the odd one out?
Quick-fire practice · empirical rule and z-scores
For $X \sim N(60, 9)$, calculate the z-score for $x = 66$, $x = 54$, $x = 72$. (Note: $\sigma^2 = 9$)
IQ ~ $N(100, 15^2)$. Use the empirical rule: what percentage of the population has IQ between 85 and 115?
$X \sim N(50, 100)$. Find $P(X < 30)$ and $P(X > 70)$ using the empirical rule. (Note: $\sigma^2 = 100$)
A machine fills bottles with $\mu = 500$ mL, $\sigma = 5$ mL. Between what two volumes do approximately 95% of bottles fall?
A student scores 75% in Maths ($\mu = 65$, $\sigma = 10$) and 70% in English ($\mu = 60$, $\sigma = 8$). In which subject did they perform better relative to the cohort?
Match each interval to its approximate percentage:
- $\mu \pm \sigma$
- $\mu \pm 2\sigma$
- $\mu \pm 3\sigma$
- $P(X > \mu + 2\sigma)$
- 2.5%
- 99.7%
- 95%
- 68%
For $X \sim N(70, 10^2)$: the interval 60 to 80 is $\mu \pm \sigma$, so approximately 68% of students scored in this range. The interval 50 to 90 is $\mu \pm 2\sigma$, so approximately 95%. These come directly from the empirical rule — no calculator needed. The power of the normal distribution is that knowing $\mu$ and $\sigma$ instantly gives you proportion estimates for any symmetric interval around the mean.
Pick your answer, then rate your confidence — that tells the system what to drill next. Each retry pulls a fresh mix from the bank.
Q1. The weights of apples from an orchard are normally distributed with $\mu = 150$ g and $\sigma = 15$ g. (a) Calculate the z-score for an apple weighing 180 g. (b) Use the empirical rule to estimate the percentage of apples weighing between 120 g and 180 g. (c) Estimate the percentage of apples weighing more than 195 g. (3 marks)
Q2. Two students sit different exams. Alex scores 72 in Mathematics ($\mu = 60$, $\sigma = 12$). Blake scores 68 in English ($\mu = 55$, $\sigma = 10$). (a) Calculate the z-score for each student. (b) Determine which student performed better relative to their cohort. (c) What percentage of the Mathematics cohort scored below Alex? Use the empirical rule to estimate. (3 marks)
Q3. A manufacturer produces bolts with lengths $N(50, 0.5^2)$ mm. Bolts are rejected if their length differs from the target by more than 1 mm. (a) Find the z-scores for the upper and lower rejection boundaries. (b) Use the empirical rule to estimate the percentage of bolts rejected. (c) The manufacturer wants to reduce the rejection rate to approximately 0.3%. Explain, with calculations, what the new standard deviation should be. (3 marks)
Comprehensive answers (click to reveal)
Drill 1: $\sigma = 3$; $z_{66} = 2$; $z_{54} = -2$; $z_{72} = 4$.
Drill 2: $85 = \mu - \sigma$; $115 = \mu + \sigma$; approximately $68\%$.
Drill 3: $\sigma = 10$; $P(X < 30) \approx 2.5\%$; $P(X > 70) \approx 2.5\%$.
Drill 4: $95\%$ within $500 \pm 10$, so between 490 mL and 510 mL.
Drill 5: Maths $z = 1.0$; English $z = 1.25$. Better in English (higher z-score).
Q1 (3 marks): (a) $z = \frac{180-150}{15} = 2$ [0.5]. (b) $120 = \mu - 2\sigma$ and $180 = \mu + 2\sigma$, so $P(120 < X < 180) \approx 95\%$ [1]. (c) $195 = \mu + 3\sigma$, so $P(X > 195) \approx \frac{100-99.7}{2} = 0.15\%$ [1+0.5].
Q2 (3 marks): (a) Alex: $z = \frac{72-60}{12} = 1.0$ [0.5]. Blake: $z = \frac{68-55}{10} = 1.3$ [0.5]. (b) Blake performed better ($1.3 > 1.0$) [0.5]. (c) $z = 1$ means Alex is 1 SD above mean. By symmetry, $50\% + 34\% \approx 84\%$ scored below Alex [1+0.5].
Q3 (3 marks): (a) Upper: $z = \frac{51-50}{0.5} = 2$; Lower: $z = \frac{49-50}{0.5} = -2$ [0.5+0.5]. (b) Outside $\mu \pm 2\sigma$ is approximately $5\%$ — so rejection rate $\approx 5\%$ [0.5+0.5]. (c) For $0.3\%$ rejection, we need the $\pm 1$ mm boundaries to fall at $\mu \pm 3\sigma_\text{new}$: $3\sigma_\text{new} = 1$, so $\sigma_\text{new} = \frac{1}{3} \approx 0.33$ mm [0.5+0.5].
Five timed questions. Beat the boss to bank a tier — gold (90% + speed), silver (75%), or bronze (50%). Replays welcome.
Enter the arenaClimb platforms by answering normal distribution and z-score questions. Lighter alternative to the boss.
Mark lesson as complete
Tick when you've finished the practice and review.