|
|
 Ratings
|
|
|
| Reviewed: |
Jun 23, 2012 by Psychology |
| Overview: |
The Monty Hall Problem, or the Three Doors of Serendip, is an old problem that sparks much controversy. The learning material provides hands-on examples and explanations regarding what is meant by "understanding" using a simulation of the "Monty Hall" or "Three Doors" problem to illustrate points and motivate further questions. It provides three separate simulations to discuss three cognitive strategies one might use to solve a problem. It also includes details explaining the operations of each, such as explanations of “right” versus “less right” choices one may have made during the simulation. It would appeal to a wide range of academic disciplines, and would be useful with students from the beginning of the study of cognition and beyond. |
| Learning Goals: |
• Learners will understand how a problem can be approached through multiple pathways, or different perspectives (such as the intuitive, experimental, and broader understandings of the Three Doors Problem).
• Learners will understand how inference, empiricism, logic, and rationality impact problem solving and decision making.
• Learners will understand metacognition-- the process of thinking about their own thinking processes. |
| Target Student Population: |
Students in any level of study from middle school through graduate school as well as professionals would benefit from this simulation. It is most appropriate for users interested in learning about metacognition, and any academic discipline with this focus would find the simulation useful. |
| Prerequisite Knowledge or Skills: |
No prerequisite knowledge is needed; however, a basic understanding of logic and decision-making is helpful for following the discussions and explanations that are presented as part of the learning material. |
| Type of Material: |
Simulation |
| Recommended Uses: |
The simulation would be useful as either an introduction to or advanced study of problem solving regardless of discipline. The hands-on aspect allows participants to work through their own ideas as well as achieve a heightened understanding of the correct solution; thus, students should run the simulation outside of class to allow more in-depth discussion in class. |
| Technical Requirements: |
A basic web browser is needed; the simulation was successfully reviewed using IE 8 and Mozilla Firefox 11. The Three Doors of Serendip runs on Java, and this software must be updated to run the simulation correctly. |
|
|
|
| Strengths: |
• The content allows one to go through the typical pathways one follows when trying to solve this particular problem.
• In both explanation as well as simulation presentation, the content is relevant and clearly presented. The simulation approach very much aids the development of the abstract concept into something more concrete and easily understood. |
| Concerns: |
• The site does not provide linkages to supporting resources for the information that it presents. For example, it needs citations on original materials from which this simulation was created. In addition, providing information that is both elemental and that also further expands the subject matter would be beneficial for learners.
• One of the reasons logic fails is that we typically fail to see the importance of the door that is removed, which is always a losing door. This is critical. Logic does allow one to go through the options and prove that the odds are 67% in favor of switching IF one always removes a losing door. The site does not go into this issue. |
|
|
Potential Effectiveness as a Teaching Tool |
Rating:    |
|
| Strengths: |
• This tool provides three separate means for students to learn cognitive processes used in decision-making. It provides a good basic example (i.e., the three-door problem) for understanding the logic and reasoning that underlie the process of choosing among multiple options. It also provides strong explanations at the end of each simulation that are useful for further understanding the material presented.
• The hands-on aspect really gives those who are struggling with the concepts the chance to continually try their ideas. One of the pages allows the user to simply select a solution and let the site run it on auto-play while the user watches. This saves time while allowing one to see the effect of the same response: stay, switch, or random.
• The tool provides concise information that may be presented as an individual lesson. |
| Concerns: |
• Learning objectives for the three presented modules are not explicitly specified, and the material could have more strongly interconnected the three chains of reasoning that the modules address.
• Those using the site should be cautioned that they need to run more than a few trials to actually see the benefits or problems associated with selecting a particular answer. |
|
|
Ease of Use for Both Students and Faculty |
Rating:   |
|
| Strengths: |
• The design is very intuitive, and links to simulations are clearly laid out. Overall, the site is relatively easy to use and allows users to go through quickly if they want, or take their time.
• The site engages users by encouraging them to earn $40 as a stepping stone in the process—without this instruction, the simulation might be more difficult to follow. |
| Concerns: |
• At the time of this review, Section 3, Achieving Broader Understanding, has a dead link (i.e., the simulation for the third door does not function).
• Some of the graphical presentation appears to be dated or nearing end-of-life. As well, the enabled comment function appears to be unmonitored and serves to date the simulation.
• Someone who already understands the problems has to read through all the material to get to the final page link. |
|
|
