1. David DiBattista and Mike Laurence Switch or Stay? A Learning Object for the Monty Hall Dilemma MERLOT 2006 Brock University

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

3. Introducing the Monty 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) StaySwitch No difference MERLOT 20062/31(6%)2/31(6%) 27/31(87%)

4. So what is the best strategy? Probability of winning the car 2/31/3 SwitchStay It is best to SWITCH! MERLOT 2006 So why do people get it wrong? Because they tend to rely on the “number-of-cases” heuristic

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

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 MHD LO

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

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

10. Disagree strongly MERLOT 2006 Disagree strongly Agree strongly

11.   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 Learning Outcomes

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

13. MERLOT 2006

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

17. Multimedia Production & Innovation Centre

18. Support provided across campus for:  Research  Teaching and Learning  Promotion  Presentations  Remote Collaboration and Smart Room

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

21. MERLOT 2006 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.IMS LD Specification

22. MERLOT 2006 Developers request design and production support using Brock’s online proposal system.online proposal system Design collaboration is accomplished using Brock’s network-based BUILD ToolBUILD Tool Production proceeds upon acceptance of the project "Paper Prototype“, with the signed off scope statement.

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

24. 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

25. 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.

26. MERLOT 2006 Questions / Discussion

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