Switch or Stay? A Learning Object for the Monty Hall Dilemma David Di. Battista and Mike Laurence Brock University MERLOT 2006
Overview Ø Introducing Ø Structure the Monty Hall Dilemma and content of the LO Ø Evaluation of the LO Ø Development of the LO MERLOT 2006
Introducing the Monty Hall Dilemma ØA very difficult probability problem with a counterintuitive solution Ø Paper-and-pencil version of the MHD Data for Year 2 undergraduates (n=31) Stay Switch No difference 2/31 (6%) 27/31 (87%) MERLOT 2006
So what is the best strategy? It is best to SWITCH! Probability of winning the car Stay Switch 1/3 2/3 So why do people get it wrong? Because they tend to rely on the “number-of-cases” heuristic MERLOT 2006
Overview Ø Introducing Ø Structure the Monty Hall Dilemma and content of the LO Ø Evaluation of the LO Ø Development of the LO MERLOT 2006
Introductory material Demonstration of MHD game 3 -door interactive 3 -door automated 3 -door explanation 20 -door interactive 20 -door automated 20 -door explanation Test of knowledge MERLOT 2006
MHD MERLOT 2006
Overview Ø Introducing Ø Structure the Monty Hall Dilemma and content of the LO Ø Evaluation of the LO Ø Development of the LO MERLOT 2006
Usability Questionnaire Ø Completed online after using the LO Ø Participation Ø 47 optional of 130 users of the LO responded MERLOT 2006
Disagree strongly Agree strongly MERLOT 2006
Learning Outcomes Ø LO assigned as homework, but MHD was never covered in class Ø No-credit pop quiz given during class Ø Students read MHD problem, made choice, and explained reasoning Ø 26 of 31 original participants responded MERLOT 2006
Stay 0/26 (0%) Switch 25/26 (96%) No difference 1/26* (4%) *This student had not accessed the LO. MERLOT 2006
MERLOT 2006
MERLOT 2006
MERLOT 2006
Overview Ø Introducing Ø Structure the Monty Hall Dilemma and content of the LO Ø Evaluation of the LO Ø Development of the LO MERLOT 2006
Multimedia Production & Innovation Centre
Multimedia Production & Innovation Centre Support provided across campus for: Ø Research Ø Teaching and Learning Ø Promotion Ø Presentations Ø Remote Collaboration and Smart Room
Multimedia Production Team
Multimedia Production Team Ø Illustration and graphic art production Ø Digital video and photography, including QTVR, and streaming video and images. Ø Animations Ø Simulations Ø Database resources Ø Web supported e. Learning & e. Training Services
At Brock we develop e. Learning resources such as Monty Hall Dilemma in close adherence to the IMS LD Specification Our process consists of eight phases of interactions between the subject matter expert (in this case, David Di. Battista), the instructional designer, and the multimedia production team. MERLOT 2006
Developers request design and production support using Brock’s online proposal system. Design collaboration is accomplished using Brock’s network-based BUILD Tool Production proceeds upon acceptance of the project "Paper Prototype“, with the signed off scope statement. MERLOT 2006
All learning objects produced by MPIC require clearly stated learning outcomes, given our “learner-centric” approach to learning object development. MERLOT 2006
Usability testing begins with the paper prototype and is revisited at several stages of digital prototypes / versions. SME reviews are usually accomplished, typically by an external reviewer. Metadata Generation requires about 15 minutes of the developer's time just prior to the end of testing MERLOT 2006
Finally the developer conducts a learning impact study, such as that defined by David earlier in this presentation. If the object is to be submitted to CLOE, instructional design and content expert reviews are requested from members of that community. MERLOT 2006
Questions / Discussion MERLOT 2006
Thank You! David Di. Battista david. dibattista@brocku. ca Mike Laurence mlaurence@brocku. ca MERLOT 2006
Скачать презентацию Switch or Stay A Learning Object for the
8a39fe0baeedec2dcb32a0e57de5334b.ppt