1

The instructor for the course, Brandon Theiss, is a Senior Member of ASQ and

a Graduate student at Rutgers University. Currently there is not a course

offered in the undergraduate Industrial and Systems Engineering Program at

Rutgers. This course provided an opportunity for students to not only be

exposed to the material but also to earn a nationally recognized certification in

the tools techniques and methods of Six Sigma. It represented a first of its kind

partnership between the student chapter of the IIE and ASQ Princeton section.

Part of the proceeds for the course were used to fund the IIE trip to their

national conference in Orlando.

2

3

A 78% Score is required for passing.

4

Gemba is a Japanese term meaning "the real place“ popularized in Lean

Manufacturing by Imai in Gemba Kaizen

5

6

7

8

The cost of the course for students included the textbook and ASQ student

membership

The professional rate only included the text.

The ASQ Certified Six Sigma Green Belt Requires 3 or more years of work

experience in one of more areas of the Body of Knowledge. There was a very

long and at times heated exchange with the ASQ certification committee about

what constitutes work experience. A compromise was ultimately reached

however there were still a large number of qualified students that were denied

the right to sit for the exam

9

This is a unique pedagogical approach and from philosophically is quite

“meta”. The objective under examination is in fact the actor performing the

examination.

The most brilliant of teacher can write the most profound equation on a

chalkboard, and the most diligent of students can take pristine notes. However

learning only occurs when the student is able to apply the material. Johann

Wolfgang von Goethe was correct when he said “Knowing is not enough; we

must apply.”

Given the diversity of the composition of the students in terms of education, life experience, income and industry finding a common task in which to apply the LSS would have been impossible. The only true commonality between the group was that they were all humans and wanted to earn their greenbelt. We were able to leverage this fact in developing the instructional roadmap for course.

Also the utilization of Shewhart Control Charts which are used to differentiate between common cause and special cause variation, is fairly novel in academic settings.

10

Students were notified via email prior to the first night of the course that an

exam would be administered on the first night.

This provided both a baseline for the future improvement as well as showing

students directly the level of mastery they would need to obtain to become

certified.

11

12

A simple histogram of the exam results from the Monday section with a normal

distribution fit. It does appear to be normal but has a very large standard

deviation 11.8%

13

The probability plot indicates that there is insufficient data to reject the null

hypothesis that the data is normally distributed. This is indicated by the P value

which indicates the probability that the difference between the measured data

and the model occurred by pure chance. The null hypothesis of normality

would have been rejected if the value had been less than alpha (5%)

representing a 95% confidence level.

14

It is technically debatable if the test scores are continuous or discrete variable

and if a I chart is appropriate. However the point is to introduce students to

control charts and an Individuals chart.

Since no point lies about the Upper or Lower Control Limit, the process is in a

state of “statistical control”. However common sense shows that this is

nonsensical as the range of the limits is between 17% and 95%. This was

caused by the large standard deviation observed.

This was used as an opportunity to discuss the difference between statistical

significance and actual significance. This reinforces the concept that the math

does not know where the numbers came from and can at best direct teams to

derive the true underlying meaning.

15

Again there is a technical point if the test scores are discrete or continuous.

The above Process Capability study requires that the data be considered

continuous.

Process capability is essentially the probability of producing a product that will

meet your customers specification. In this case the passing score (78%) sets

that limit. As you can see in the above chart for every 1,000,000 students from

the Monday population that took the pre-test exam ~970,000 students will fail.

16

Everyone has taken a test where the test taker believes there was a question

that either had the wrong answer or was too difficult. By using a NP (or P)

control chart, one can easily distinguish if a question was statistically

significantly too difficult above the UCL or too easy below the LCL

17

There were several students who handed in their exams very quickly. We

wanted to see if the amount of time a student spent on the exam effected their

scores. And for the Monday data set it appears it did.

18

19

A histogram of the Tuesday data set

20

Again the data is normal as indicated by a P value greater than 5%. It is

however notable in the above plot that there is a clear outlier.

21

Again we can see that there is clearly an outlier in the data set.

22

The Tuesday process is very similar in its inability to produce a unit meeting

customers expectations and again will generate ~970,000 failures for every

million students from the population that take the exam

23

In the above graph it does appear that there were questions that a statistically

significant number of students got wrong.

24

Interestingly, the order in which a student turned in their exam did not have an

effect on the Tuesday data set.

25

26

Combined Histogram of the results

27

Both distributions look somewhat similar.

28

The above shows a box plot comparing the two classes. The median appears

to be higher in the Tuesday class. However is the difference significant?

29

An ANOVA analysis was performed which results in a very high p value which

means that there is not a statistically significant difference between the two

population means.

30

A Pareto Chart of the topic involved for each of the Out of Control Data points

from the combined P Chart

31

The course met once per week over an 11 week period from 6:30 to 9:30PM.

There were two sessions per week and students were free to attend either the

Monday or Tuesday class based upon which ever was more convenient for

their schedule

32

Nominal Group -> when individuals over power a group

Multi-Voting -> Reduce a large list of items to a workable number quickly

Affinity Diagram -> Group solutions

Force Field Analysis -> Overcome Resistance to Change

Tree Diagram -> Breaks complex into simple

Cause- Effect Diagram -> identify root causes

33

34

35

36

37

38

Most Common Model of group Development was proposed by Bruce Tuckman

in 1965.

In order for the team to grow, to face up to challenges, to tackle problems, to

find solutions, to plan work, and to deliver results. They must go through the

cycle

Forming

Team members getting to know each other

Trying to please each other

May tend to agree too much on initial discussion topics

Not much work accomplished

Members orientation on the team goals

Group is going through “honeymoon period”

Storming

Voice their idea

Understand project scope and responsibilities

Ideas and understanding cause conflict

Not much work gets accomplished

39

Disagreement slows down the team

Norming

Resolve own conflicts

Come to mutually agreed plan

Some work gets done

Start to trust each other

Performing

Large amount of work gets done

Synergy realized

Competent and autonomous decisions are made

Adjourning

Team is disbanded, restructured or project re-scoped.

Regression to Forming stage

39

40

41

Control Charts are used to differentiate between common cause (normal) and

special cause (abnormal) variation.

42

43

44

45

46

There does not appear to be a large change between the Pre Test and the Mid

Term

47

A T-Test indicates that there is significant improvement, as indicated by the

one tail P value.

48

ANOVA on the other hand indicates that there is not a difference between the

two means.

49

Displays a histogram of the changes in scores, about 40% of the students

went down and 60% increased their score.

50

This is a somewhat novel adaptation of a C chart that allows for negative

values. However there appear to be students that did much better and much

worse than the other students.

51

Looking at a Paired-T test there was absolutely a statistically significant

improvement.

52

Why did the test scores not improve more dramatically? Well the exams cover

all of the material in the CSSGB BoK the course was only half complete. When

we looked at the material covered up to the midterm on both the pre-test and

the mid term the above pie charts show the percentage of the covered material

on each exam.

53

Not surprisingly students performed better on the material that was covered as

compared to the material that was not covered.

54

However the students also scored better on that same material on the pre test.

55

So was there actual improvement?

56

The change in the means indicates a ~8% improvement. However is that

statistically significant?

57

ANOVA does indicates that there is a difference in the means. The students

did in fact learn the material that was covered.

58

There was a small increase in the means ~2% is that significant?

59

No. There is not a statistically significant difference between the pre-test and

mid-term scores on the material that was not covered. As a result it would

indicate that the exams were roughly the same difficulty.

60

The process is still incapable of generating a passing score on the test.

61

Minitab is the de facto industry standard for statistical process control.

Unfortunately the undergraduate program at Rutgers does not include any

training in the software suite. It is fairly intuitive however students needed

additional instruction.

62

63

64

Unfortunately, as this courses primary purpose was to act preparation for the

Greenbelt Exam a larger focus could not placed on this material. However in

an industrial setting most projects fail in the control phase. Regression to the

mean is the natural trend. Anyone that has ever tried to lose weight or quit

smoking knows that the trouble is always in sustaining the improvement.

65

Feedback in any system is critically important. With a course that only meets

once per week, having students wait a week would be to long. By providing

students immediate feedback they were able to best utilize their time to study

as well as not mis-learn material thinking that they had been correct on a

question when in fact they were not.

66

67

The above histogram does not quite look normal and has a very large

standard deviation 14%.

68

A dot plot again shows a strange pattern.

69

The distribution is in fact bimodal. Unfortunately due to ASQ’s interpretation of

the meaning of work, a large number of qualified application were unable to sit

for the actual Greenbelt exam and became disenchanted with the course and

represent the lower distribution. This assumption was supported by a post hoc

online survey.

70

However the test scores did appear to approve (even with the lower

distribution)

71

And the improvement was very significant as indicated P value of 4.91 x 10^-

13

72

On average the students improved 19.4% only a few students scores

decreased,

73

The Paired T Test Results also confirm that the students test scores improved!

74

A P Chart was again used to detect difficult questions.

75

A Pareto Chart above shows the topics that generated that special cause

variation in the prior P chart.

76

The initial process capability was quite poor, producing defects ~970,000

failures per 1,000,0000

77

The final process capability though still not best in class, is much better,

producing 475,000 failures per million (the observed is used since the data

was already proven to be non normal as it is bimodal)

78

79

80

81

Students were able to pass the June 2nd exam at a rate (76%) that was greater

than the national average of 68%. However the increase was not statistically

significant. (P value greater than .05), however it does indicate that there is an

80% change that the results are in fact better.

82

A total of 37 students attempted to take the test

83

*Actual data has not yet been released for the national average yet

As Confucius says “I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand.”

84

85

86