1 / 27

David DiBattista and Mike Laurence

Switch or Stay? A Learning Object for the Monty Hall Dilemma. David DiBattista and Mike Laurence. Brock University. MERLOT 2006. Overview. Introducing the Monty Hall Dilemma Structure and content of the LO Evaluation of the LO Development of the LO. MERLOT 2006. 2/31 (6%). 2/31 (6%).

monifa
Download Presentation

David DiBattista and Mike Laurence

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Switch or Stay?A Learning Object forthe Monty Hall Dilemma David DiBattistaandMike Laurence Brock University MERLOT 2006

  2. Overview • Introducing the Monty Hall Dilemma • Structure and content of the LO • Evaluation of the LO • Development of the LO MERLOT 2006

  3. 2/31 (6%) 2/31 (6%) 27/31 (87%) Introducing theMonty Hall Dilemma • A very difficult probability problem with a counterintuitive solution • Paper-and-pencil version of the MHD • Data for Year 2 undergraduates (n=31) MERLOT 2006

  4. Probability of winning the car Stay Switch 1/3 2/3 So what is the best strategy? It is best to SWITCH! So why do people get it wrong? Because they tend to rely on the “number-of-cases” heuristic MERLOT 2006

  5. Overview • Introducing the Monty Hall Dilemma • Structure and content of the LO • Evaluation of the LO • Development of the LO MERLOT 2006

  6. 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

  7. To access the Monty Hall Dilemma Learning Object, click here: MHD LO

  8. Overview • Introducing the Monty Hall Dilemma • Structure and content of the LO • Evaluation of the LO • Development of the LO MERLOT 2006

  9. Usability Questionnaire • Completed online after using the LO • Participation optional • 47 of 130 users of the LO responded MERLOT 2006

  10. Disagree strongly Agree strongly Disagree strongly MERLOT 2006

  11. Learning Outcomes • LO assigned as homework, but MHD was never covered in class • No-credit pop quiz given during class • Students read MHD problem, made choice, and explained reasoning • 26 of 31 original participants responded MERLOT 2006

  12. 0/26 (0%) 25/26 (96%) 1/26* (4%) *This student had not accessed the LO. MERLOT 2006

  13. MERLOT 2006

  14. MERLOT 2006

  15. MERLOT 2006

  16. Overview • Introducing the Monty Hall Dilemma • Structure and content of the LO • Evaluation of the LO • Development of the LO MERLOT 2006

  17. Multimedia Production & Innovation Centre

  18. Support provided across campus for: • Research • Teaching and Learning • Promotion • Presentations • Remote Collaboration and Smart Room Multimedia Production & Innovation Centre

  19. Multimedia Production Team

  20. Illustration and graphic art production • Digital video and photography, including QTVR, and streaming video and images. • Animations • Simulations • Database supported eLearning & eTraining resources • Web Services Multimedia Production Team

  21. At Brock we develop eLearning 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 DiBattista), the instructional designer, and the multimedia production team. MERLOT 2006

  22. 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

  23. All learning objects produced by MPIC require clearly stated learning outcomes, given our “learner-centric” approach to learning object development. MERLOT 2006

  24. 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

  25. 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

  26. Questions / Discussion MERLOT 2006

  27. Thank You! David DiBattista david.dibattista@brocku.ca Mike Laurence mlaurence@brocku.ca MERLOT 2006

More Related