Cognitive load

The educational technology and digital learning wiki
Revision as of 16:53, 29 August 2006 by Daniel K. Schneider (talk | contribs) (using an external editor)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Draft

Definition

Cognitive load


Sweller's guidelines for instructional designers

According to Rebetez (2006:12-13) Sweller, based on his cognitive load theory, describes a series of effects and guidelines to create learning materials:

  1. Goal free effect: novice learners with a specific learning goal (like a precise question to answer) focus on the goal and pay no attention to other information. This is detrimental to learning.
  2. Worked examples effect: using known and resolved examples diminish cognitive load and improves comprehension.
  3. Problem completion effect: the worked out example should be followed by a similar but unresolved problem to maximise motivation.
  4. Modality effect: two messages on similar elements should be provided through different sensory modalities.
  5. Split-attention effect: occurs when learners have to process and integrate multiple and separated sources of information. For instance, a geometrical sketch is better understood when textual information is spatially integrated rather than separated . This effect is very similar to Mayer spatial and temporal contiguity principles.
  6. Redundancy effect: when the same information is presented more than once the multiple processing is negative for comprehension since it increases external cognitive load. If novices can benefit from partially redundant information (integrated text and picture for example), expert's performances can be impaired . These six first effects try to minimize extraneous cognitive load (to reduce the number of cognitive processes involved that are unnecessary for learning).
  7. Element interactivity effect: interactivity with the material increases negative effects such as split-attention and redundancy effects.
  8. Isolated interacting elements effect: with complex models containing multiple interacting elements it is advisable to begin with presenting every element separately.
  9. Imagination effect: mentally simulating the functioning and interaction of elements allow experts to obtain better results.
  10. Expertise reversal effect: with experts, several effects are inversed. In this case, classical design rules are advisable instead of those funded on cognitive load.
  11. Guidance fading effect: as expertise is obtained, learners should be less guided in their exercises.

References

  • Sweller, J. (2003). Evolution of human cognitive architecture. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 43, pp. 215-266). New-York: Academic Press.
  • Sweller, J., Chandler, P., Tierney, J., & Cooper, M. (1990). Cognitive load as a factor in the structuring of technical material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 176-192.
  • Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296.