Hal

This paper explains the 1.5 nonsense :
http://www.qualitydigest.com/inside/six-sigma-article/six-sigma-lessons-deming-part-1
 … and this one for more detail on the origins of the 1.5:
http://www.qualitydigest.com/node/5900

It was invented by Mikel Harry.  Read his original derivation and you will find that it was based on stacks of disks !!!  Incredible but true.
The 1.5 drift (and later “correction” then “dynamic mean offset”) is pure rubbish ! 

All questions are impossible to answer because in real world situations it is impossible to ever know the data distribution.
It takes 3200 measurements to determine the distribution to 2.95 sigma but by the time you do this, the distribution will have changed.
Tell your tutor the questions are meaningless.

ISSSP is very good with lots of presentations from various customer segments, video, case studies, and articles.

It is one thing to have snake oil merchants flogging the nonsense of six sigma to the naive, but it is quite pathetic to hear that a professor is actually teaching it. 
Read the truth here:  http://users.bigpond.net.au/SixSigmaFallacies/

It would be nice, just for ince, to see someone here who knows how to describe a problem.  SS training gets so lost in numbers it forgets what it is trying to achieve.

You are confused (or perhaps trying to mislead readers).  Your links make no mention of Honda using six sigma.  Honda uses Quality Circles. 
“Honda Cars Makati, Inc. (HCMI) scored a major victory when it won the Gold Award in the 2005 Productivity Improvement Circles National Convention “…[Read more]

Remember the Ford Edge story … 10,000 dedicated black belts couldn’t make it work … and they had to call in outside help.

BritW,
“Making the leap that all we need to do (or that Smith was advocating) is to widen specs and we all look better, sell more, and make more money, is rediculous.”
Good to see that you have realized the stupidity of six sigma !!!!!!!!!!!!

With reference to processes, and not surveys of people and other such enumerative studies that are frequently quoted here, how many processes do you actually think are perfectly normally distributed ?
Have you ever used a Pearson lack of fit test ?

One of six sigma’s many flaws is it’s obsession with normal distributions.  This appears to stem from six sigma tables which require data to be normal.
There is no need for data transforms.  Control charts don’t need them, nor do histograms.  Transformed data loses its meaning.  Transforms will also require inverse transforms that become too com…[Read more]

Higher staff turnover is an inevitable consequence of six sigma. Compare the two approaches:
1. “In short, numbers-oriented thinking applies to people as much as it applies to processes and products. ” – Mikel Harry
2. “Remove barriers that rob the hourly worker of their right to pride of workmanship. The responsibility of supervisors must be…[Read more]

“I thought six sigma is teachable science.”
You must be kidding !!!
Science doesn’t enter into it … read all the papers on SS … all it’s “facts” are fabrications.

You could start with the Cambridge Mental Institute to see who they have certified.

Read “Normality and the Process Behaviour Chart”.
It will give you a new (non normal) way of looking at processes.

Readers will also notice the attempts at personal attack, when six sigma consultants like Stan are caught out preaching their nonsense.

When six sigma’s failures are discussed and when the success of non six sigma companies like Toyota are discussed, I’m sure that intelligent readers here will notice the fear (terror ?) response from six sigma consultants like “No Child”.

Slow driving, slow talking, slow thinking … a bit slow all around

Bright eyes,
Whats the difference between sigma in a six sigma table and sigma in control charts ?

Bill Smith did not “discover” 1.5.  You can’t “discover” something that doesn’t exist.  Read his paper.  He pulls it out of thin air without reference or justification.