I hope this message helps people that developing a course in Introductory Statistics. SAS is a computer package that is used extensively for Statistical Analysis. Dr. Jim Goodnight is the President of SAS (his PhD is in Statistics). This quote came from SAS-L (a SAS newsgroup):

Jim Goodnight says he takes life easy. "I try not to get emotional
about things," he says. "You very seldom get me fired up and mad."
But something that really gets his goat is the way universities
teach introductory statistics. "It's like the statistics professionals
got together and said, 'How can we turn off every possible student who
ever takes a course so that nobody is ever interested in statistics?' "
he says. "Maybe it's something they do for job security."

I feel the advice is to introduce Statistical Thinking before introducing the equations.

Happy Hollidays,

Tom

That makes sense. If one doesn't have the basic concepts, one would find it difficult to apply the equations.

I agree,
It's almost criminal in the manner and format that Stats are introduced to genuinely intersted seekers.
If I'm ever in the position of introducing anyone to the basic tools of stats, I introduce them to the three most basic and powerful stat (Quality) tools; Run chart, Pareto and Ishikawa.
Wallace.

I'm not quite sure I understand the statistical significance of an Ishikawa (or fishbone) chart. I see it as an aid in sorting out factors which affect a process in looking for the root cause of nonconformance. Help me out here.

That makes sense. If one doesn't have the basic concepts, one would find it difficult to apply the equations.

How many of us have ever sat in a class where the instructor was more interested in trying to bedazzle us with "his" brilliance, instead of actually teaching?

Also, it is one thing to have walked the halls of academia for one's entire life versus being in the fray all day long. Just because somebody passed the tests, wrote the papers, etc., it doesn't necessarily make them a good instructor. Knowing the material and being able to make others understand it are two very different animals.

Wayne

I think you hit it right on the head, Wes. Other than identifying some possible causes for a specific problem or performing some sort of root cause analysis, I'm wondering what stats could be derived from it (fishbone).

I introduce them to the three most basic and powerful stat (Quality) tools; Run chart, Pareto and Ishikawa.
Wallace.

OK, I'll bite, to clear up the word smithing.
If you picked up my post wording order, I quoted the above. I bracketed ( ) Quality.
So to make it more clear; two (2) of the tools mentioned were statistical in nature and one was Quality in nature. The inclusion of the Ishikawa was intentional to make the correlation between stats and quality root cause.

Wes, I'm sure you'll agree (As a notable systems thinker) that, the three mentioned tools are a decent genesis for systems thinking and, to be a reasonable systems thinker, statistical thiking (Grounding) would IMO be an excellent compliment to the pursuit of a grounding of systems thinking.

Respectfully
Wallace. ;)

Yep. I knew, Wallace. I was just pulling your chain a little. :D Our responsibility as gurus is to avoid ambiguity. Thanks for your input and clarification.

On a related vein:
Doesn't it get you really P***ed off though, when you see stats being given an almost esoteric aura to the onlookers and seekers?
I was thrown a curve ball many years ago by a very well meaning teacher who said "Wallace, one day you'll understand stats". I said to him, "well sir, I would really like to understand stats right now, as my final exams are due next month".
OK that was during my school days yet, It's the same for many folk I speak to regarding, getting an initial genesis of understanding of stats and how they can and do influence our understanding of system.
It's not the "Holy Grail" yet, many would like to get to the "AHA" moment sooner rather than later and, I firmly believe, the school system holds most of the cards when it comes to revealing stats in a friendly and understandable format.
Good foundations of knowledge mean much.
Wallace.

I agree,
It's almost criminal in the manner and format that Stats are introduced to genuinely interested seekers.


:topic:. Or perhaps not so off topic. This reminded me of a passage I has seen once from "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintainence" - mostly because of the phrase "genuinely interested seekers". I admit I have never read the whole thing, but when I found it on-line I got hooked and will probably read it this weekend. It actually talks a lot about "Quality" but in a more philosophical sense. Anyway, here is an abbreviated exerpt from Part III (which can be found at http://virtualschool.edu/mon/Quality/PirsigZen/ )

Phædrus' argument for the abolition of the degree-and- grading system produced a nonplussed or negative reaction in all but a few students at first, since it seemed, on first judgment, to destroy the whole University system. One student laid it wide open when she said with complete candor, "Of course you can't eliminate the degree and grading system. After all, that's what we're here for."

… [We consider] the specific career of an imaginary student who more or less typified what was found in the classroom, a student completely conditioned to work for a grade rather than for the knowledge the grade was supposed to represent.

Such a student, the demonstrator hypothesized, would go to his first class, get his first assignment and probably do it out of habit. He might go to his second and third as well. But eventually the novelty of the course would wear off and, because his academic life was not his only life, the pressure of other obligations or desires would create circumstances where he just would not be able to get an assignment in.

…Eventually he would see he wasn't learning much; and facing the continual pressure of outside obligations, he would stop studying, feel guilty about this and stop attending class. Again, no penalty would be attached.

… He would get another kind of education quite as valuable as the one he'd abandoned, in what used to be called the "school of hard knocks." …

In time...six months; five years, perhaps...a change could easily begin to take place. He would become less and less satisfied with a kind of dumb, day-to-day shopwork. His creative intelligence, stifled by too much theory and too many grades in college, would now become reawakened by the boredom of the shop. … He would try modifying a few engines, meet with success, look for more success, but feel blocked because he didn't have the theoretical information. …

So he would come back to our degreeless and gradeless school, but with a difference. He'd no longer be a grade-motivated person. He'd be a knowledge-motivated person. He would need no external pushing to learn. His push would come from inside. He'd be a free man. He wouldn't need a lot of discipline to shape him up. In fact, if the instructors assigned him were slacking on the job he would be likely to shape them up by asking rude questions. …


When you get someone coming to you begging for knowledge of statistics (or history or music!) with a specific goal in mind, then the teaching becomes easy - it becomes a pleasure.

Tim F

I agree MOTIVATION is a very powerful force.

Just to add my own experience to the mix.

My last Stats instructor was a certifiable genius. PhD in mathematics, taught at UofW, numerous papers to his credit, wrote textbooks...the whole 9 yards.

His FIRST class with us (this was, btw, the CQE refresher) he wrote out a simple equation (as I recall, for determining the variance, and thus the standard deviation of a sample) on one line. He then turned to the class and said "To extrapolate from this equation, it is obvious that.....and filled FOUR @#(*&%$^ BLACKBOARDS with calculus!!!!

That was also my LAST class...I didn't waste time going back there.

To contrast to him, my previous Stats instructor was Bernie Mara (sp), whose name I am sure anyone from the K-W area will recognize. Bernie is almost as well qualified (I don't THINK he has a PhD, but I do, and it only cost me $50), and he somehow managed to make Stats not only interesting, but exciting! I actually looked forward to classes with him, to learn a little more about how mean, nominal and standard deviation could be used to explain so many things.

The biggest problem I see with Stats professors/instructors today is that (as someone has already pointed out) they treat it like it is some great mystical Grail. Only the anointed are worthy to drink from the cup; the rest of the peasants can grovel at their feet and hope to lick up the drops that fall.

We need more Bernie's in the world. A breath of cool calm air in a tempestous storm.

Hey this is great! I didn't think my original post was going anywhere.

Since the original post, I'm commiting to creating a talk on "Managing 6 Sigma Resources". I would call it "Managing Statistical Resources", but nobody would come. :D

A few years ago the Statistics Division of ASQ created a Power Point presentations called "Statistical Thinking". The concept of that all work is a process and all processes have variability that can cloud decision making. It teaches everyone could benefit from recognizing varibility (or even recognizing processes for that matter).

This talk would take some slides the ASQ presentation to demonstrate how practioners could create their own Statistical Thinking training in their organization. The talk would discuss the strategies (what sequence, training, team dynamics) of using statistical tools. There won't be a sigle equation. I've not seen this subject presented.

Any suggestions for other things to include would be greatly appreciated,


Tom

Tom.
could you please update on changed position. While I agree with you we have seen that operating with basics decade old companies have blocked draining of losses of five millions a year- we were the guide. Imagine the opportunities those are recurring.

Regards.

progressive post.

Tom.
could you please update on changed position.while
I agree with you we have seen that operating with basics decade old companies have blocked draining of losses of five millions a year- we were the guide.imagine the opportunities those are recurring.
regards.progressive post.

:confused::confused::confused: WHAT?

:topic:Progressive post, please use basic grammatic rules when replying to threads. This simply does not make sense to me.:thanx:

A guide to new users.

Date of original post - found at the left hand corner of the dark-blue bar on top of each post. In this case, Tom Slack made the post on 29th Jan 2005. About 2 1/2 years ago.

Is poster still active? - Click on the name of the poster at the top left hand corner. A drop down menu will appear. Click on 'view public profile'. A new page appears and at the top right hand corner, it showed that Tom was last active on 7th September 2005. As he had not dropped by since then, there is no point posing a question to him.

Thanks for reading.

A guide to new users.

Date of original post - found at the left hand corner of the dark-blue bar on top of each post. In this case, Tom Slack made the post on 29th Jan 2005. About 2 1/2 years ago.

Is poster still active? - Click on the name of the poster at the top left hand corner. A drop down menu will appear. Click on 'view public profile'. A new page appears and at the top right hand corner, it showed that Tom was last active on 7th September 2005. As he had not dropped by since then, there is no point posing a question to him.

Thanks for reading.

Good advice. Actually, the original post to which progressive post respond dates even further back--to 2003.

[QUOTE=Gert Sorensen;209247]:

we will take care.Stat, apllied with basics, have great potential to benefit.we have experienced the same.it helped to save 5 million a year on recurring basis.we were guide to this project. hence stress on the same is a welcome move dear.
regards.progressive post