COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

Cognitive Load Theory: Strategies and Technological Tools to Support Effective Instructional Design By: Sara Ballantine & Derick Marshall Boise State University Fall, 2012

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

Abstract The nature of learning has been a subject that humans have grappled with for centuries. Technological advancements of the 21st century have given rise to new learning theories and insights into the architecture of the human brain. Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) addresses both; learning and the inner workings of the mind. This paper discusses the theoretical framework of Cognitive Load Theory, the role of memory in learning, and the instructional strategies and technological tools that can support effective instructional design based upon principles of Cognitive Load Theory.

KEYWORDS: Cognitive Load Theory, Working Memory, Cognitive Strategies, Technological Tools

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

An inherent paradox of the human brain is that despite its indeterminate capacity, the confines of the mind must be continually observed. This is evidenced repeatedly in our daily lives; in the learning process, as we must first learn to identify letters before we can read words; in the laws that are created to prevent texting while driving; in the self-impositions exercised by some to refrain from walking while chewing gum. Ultimately, in order to expand learning, we must abridge information. Cognitive load theory (CLT) was generated on this premise, and its implications enable instructional designers to further enhance the learning process.

Theoretical Framework Cognitivism involves the examination of mental processes associated with learning. While cognitivists acknowledge the role of environment in learning, it is the metacognitive processes that are emphasized. Ertmer and Newby (1993) note the real focus of the cognitive approach is on changing the learner by encouraging him/her to use appropriate learning strategies (p. 59). This is achieved through designing instruction in such a way that prior knowledge is activated in order to draw associations with past learning, actively involving the learner in the learning process, and organizing information in ways that are conducive to efficient processing (Ertmer & Newby, 1993, p. 60). Ideally, an awareness of the strategies for processing and organizing information will allow the learner to apply the techniques when working independently. The evolution of cognitivism has spawned further investigation into memory, and more specifically, cognitive load theory, which stresses the threshold of working memory and applications for consideration in the instructional design process. The crux of cognitive load theory lies in the idea that working memory is limited, and therefore ineffective for problem solving; efficient problem solving requires the ability to solicit knowledge from long-term memory. Human intellectual prowess comes from this stored

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

knowledge, not from an ability to engage in long, complex chains of reasoning, (Sweller, van Merrienboer & Paas, 1998, p. 254). Pass, Renkl and Sweller (2003) identify three types of cognitive input from which cognitive load is comprised; these include: intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Intrinsic cognitive load ascertains that learning materials are inherently demanding and their complexity as such cannot be modified through instructional design. Also taken into consideration is the learners level of expertise. It can be expected that novice learners will experience greater difficulty with novel concepts than more experienced learners who have developed schemata associated with the content (Artino, 2008, p. 429). This is of particular importance when working with content matter that has high element interactivity. Cooper (1998), defines element interactivity as the degree to which the elements of some to-be-learned information can, or cannot, be understood in isolation. For example, a distinction can be made between vocabulary, which has low element interactivity since words can be learned in isolation, and grammar, because several elements (tense, syntax, etc.) factor into whether or not a sentence is grammatically correct (Cooper, 1998). For a novice learner, the complexity of grammatical structure may surpass the available working memory resources. When evaluating the inherent difficulty of content, instructional designers must take into consideration the level(s) of expertise of the learners and adjust accordingly. Conversely, extraneous load impedes learning because the learner must attend to tasks that do not enhance learning. Extraneous load is malleable, and thereby cognitive load can be reduced via the instructional design process by discerning relevant and necessary components in the given material. When learners are exposed to or conduct activities that do not support schema development, learning is hampered because of the extraneous material (Sweller, 1994).

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

Kalyuga (2011), identifies five causes of extraneous cognitive load: 1.Split-attention situations: The separation of interacting elements that require the learner to search for and recall information. An example might include text and graphics that are not comprehensible independently, but not formatted in an integrated manner (e.g. a worked example in math where the problem and solution are presented in succession rather than concurrently). When text is included within the graphic, the learner is able to identify correlations more efficiently, and subsequently, effectively (Cooper, 1998).

2. Redundancy situations: Information that could be understood autonomously is presented using multiple formats (e.g. spoken and written or textual and graphic representations), requiring the learner to process additional information unnecessarily.

3.Transiency situations: Information is removed before it can be sufficiently processed (e.g. spoken word or animated material). Consequently, learners must retain the information in their working memory in order for it to be applied to impending information.

4. Advanced learners situations: Similar to the redundancy effect, learners who have already developed schemata will have to process additional information unnecessarily if the level of learner expertise is not taken into account when presenting the information and prior learning is repeated.

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

5.Inadequate prior knowledge situations: Conversely, if learners have not developed schemata related to the new information, cognitive overload is possible due to the inability to draw on prior knowledge and problem-solving methods. While these situations are not the only circumstances under which extraneous load may occur, they outline important considerations for instructional designers, as an effective and efficient instructional design creates learning conditions under which learner working memory load is kept within its capacity limits, (Kalyuga, 2011, p.36). Although intrinsic cognitive load is fixed, and extraneous load is unnecessary, some cognitive load is inevitable when processing new information. Germane cognitive load is optimal, since it is oriented toward the construction of schemata, allowing for information to be recalled through association and consequently freeing up working memory (Paas, Renkl & Sweller, 2003, p.2). Germane load contributes to learning because it is the result of beneficial cognitive processes such as abstractions and elaborations that are promoted by the instructional presentation (Artino, 2008, p. 429). A key element of establishing germane cognitive load, however, is an understanding of the nature and capacity of working memory.

The Role of Memory Without memory, learning does not occur. Facilitating the transfer of knowledge into long-term memory is the goal of most instruction; however, it must first be kept in working memory for transfer to take place. It is widely held that long-term memory is unlimited. People may be able to remember a nearly infinite number of facts, but only a handful of items--held in working memory--can be accessed and considered at any given momentIn fact, working memory could be the basis for general intelligence and reasoning: Those who can hold many items in their mind may be well equipped to consider different angles of a complex problem

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

simultaneously, (Dingfelder, 2005). Working memory is limited by both space and time. Adults and teens are able to hold information in working memory for ten to twenty minutes, and can keep approximately four to seven items at a time. In order for transfer to occur in long-term memory, the brain must be able to use the information held in working memory or link it to preexisting knowledge (Williams & Dunn, 2008, p.9). In effect, it is the role of the instructional designer to facilitate this process. Instructional design means much more than simply creating and delivering new information to the learner. It is a systematic approach that has clearly defined goals which helps focus learners on the right things (Berger & Kam, 1996). With CLT in mind a course designer, or a teacher for that matter, must find ways to optimize working memory and be cognizant of the limitations of students when designing courses or training materials. The designer must determine whether the glass half full or half empty. However it is viewed, the fact remains that it can only be filled to a certain point before it spills over. To prevent this spillage, the contents within the glass need to be transferred into a bigger container. Relatively speaking, our minds operate the same way. The glass represents working memory, the content within the glass is new information, and the larger container is long-term memory. The challenge teachers and designers are faced with is realizing when the glass is full so it can be transferred to the larger container (long-term memory). George A. Miller, one of the founders in cognitive psychology, claimed that the largest number of unique pieces of new information the brain could handle was seven, plus or minus two (Miller, 1956). This critically acclaimed theory became what is now known as Millers Law or The Magic number 7. His research and professional insight play a vital role with regard to designing instruction. With his theory in mind, instructional designers can maximize the

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

effectiveness of instructional tools and deliver content that lessens the burden (load) on working memory, thus managing cognitive load more effectively.

Strategies for Designing Instruction Based on Cognitive Load Theory In order to manage working memory more effectively the key aspects of cognitive load must be explored. According to CLT, the three categories of cognitive load are: intrinsic, extraneous, and germane. Instructional designers should focus on reducing extraneous cognitive load for the learners and have them focus available brain power (memory) to advance cognitive processes relevant to germane cognitive load (Gerjets & Scheiter, 2003). Instructional designers must learn (a) effective management of intrinsic cognitive load, (b) reducing extraneous cognitive load and (c) take advantage of germane cognitive load (Vayuvegula, 2012). Since intrinsic load cannot be altered and the inherent complexity of the learning instruction is different from person to person, instructions that are presented need to be simplified and grouped accordingly. For example, a learner tasked to create a PowerPoint presentation could be guided through chunking. In order to manage the intrinsic load, simplify the process by creating step-by-step instructions, introduce only one concept at a time and ensure the information is communicated accurately (Vayuvegula, 2012). Furthermore, reducing extraneous load can be accomplished by only presenting information that is significant or has added value for the learner. As Vayuvegula explains in the PowerPoint example, the program itself has many features to create a presentation but what the instructional designer should focus on at first is the simplest way to create a PowerPoint and go from there (Vayuvegula, 2012). Instructional designers can master this by discovering tools that assist in the learning process. With regard to the PowerPoint example, instead of the teacher demonstrating how to create a

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

slide deck from their computer, have the learners physically sit down in front of a computer and accomplish it (hands-on exercises). A flow chart of the steps hanging in front of the class could also help reiterate the learning process (Vayuvegula, 2012) . The following table, which was derived from Anthony Artinos Cognitive Load Theory and the Role of Learner Experience: An Abbreviated Review for Educational Practitioners journal article (adapted from Sweller et al., 1998) reveals some cognitive load effects and how with proper instruction educators can reduce extraneous load; this is crucial in order to deliver effective instructional content to minimize unwanted cognitive load. Strategies for effective instruction are provided in table 1.1 on the following page:

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

10

Table 1.1 Strategies for Effective Instruction

CLT Effect Goal-free effect Instructional Description Replace conventional problems with goal-free problems that provide learners with a non-specific goal Extraneous Load Reduces extraneous load caused by relating a current problem state to a goal state and attempting to reduce the difference between them Reduces extraneous load caused by weak-method problem solving

Worked example effect

Replace conventional problems with worked examples that must be carefully studied Replace conventional problems with completion problems, providing a partial solution that must be completed by the learner Replace multiple sources of information (i.e., separate pictures and text) with a single, integrated source of information Replace a written explanatory text and another source of visual information (e.g., a diagram) with a spoken explanatory text and a visual source of information (i.e., use multiple modalities) Replace multiple sources of information that are selfcontained (i.e., they can be understood on their own) with one source of information

Completion problem effect

Reduces extraneous load because giving part of the solution reduces the size of the problem space

Split attention effect

Reduces extraneous load because there is no need to mentally integrate the information sources Reduces extraneous load because multimodal presentation uses both the visual and auditory processors of working memory

Modality effect

Redundancy effect

Reduces extraneous load caused by unnecessary processing of redundant information

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

11

Additionally, Dr. Jane Bozarth, educational expert from North Carolina, offers some advice and guidance to assist instructional designers in her online article titled Nuts and Bolts: Brain Bandwidth Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design. It is explained that while considering the rule of 7 (Millers Law) chunking information can greatly add to the schema or framework for organizing and understanding of the information (Bozarth, 2010). Furthermore, Bozarth mentions that using modules to group lessons will help lessen cognitive load instead of packing everything into a single lesson which can create extraneous cognitive load. The method of delivery and information content are both vital components of the instructional and design process. An equally important aspect of this process is the learner profile. Not everybody thinks or learns at the same rate or modality. Instructional designers must challenge the beginning learner, but not overload them, and at the same time challenge the expert learner, but not bore them. Bozarth suggests instructional designers provide multiple levels of learning or different learning tracks that would challenge all skill levels of the learner (Bozarth, 2010). Fortunately, there are several technological tools available to help facilitate the reduction of extraneous cognitive load and enhance the delivery of germane load. Technological Tools to Support CLT Cognitive tools are defined as instruments that aid in the cognitive process for learners to support the learning process (van Joolingen, 1999). Cognitive tools today, such as computers and the world wide web (www), have greatly simplified instructional design and lessened the cognitive load on learners. Databases, search engines, and web forums, are a few resources today that can store infinite information for learners so they do not have to memorize the information themselves, thus freeing up working memory to accomplish other processes.

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

12

The table provided below, adapted from Iyoshi, Hannifin, and Wang (2005), maps out five roles of cognitive tools and provides some of todays technology that can assist the instructional designer and the learner by lessening cognitive load: Table 1.2 Technological Tools to Support Cognitive Functioning Cognitive Role Information seeking Information Presentation Example Databases Search engines Graphic organizers Concept maps Spreadsheets Presentation tools Mapping tools Simulations Technology Oracle, SQL, Sybase Google, Bing, Yahoo, Lycos PowerPoint, Keynote, Knoodle Simple Mapper, Mindjet, Excel, Google Docs, OpenOffice SlideRocket, Prezi, YouTube SpiderScribe, Edistorm, Bubbl.us Educational Simulations, Techtrekers, Toporopa Adobe captivate, MatchWare ActivInspire, SMART

Knowledge Organization

Knowledge Integration

Knowledge Generation

Authoring Software Collaborative Learning

Conclusion Instructional design, when coupled with CLT, is a very challenging task to say the least. Understanding the types of cognitive load and how to design instruction to avoid the negative effects of cognitive load can burden any designer. However, managing intrinsic load, reducing extraneous load and taking advantage of germane cognitive load properly, will enhance the design of instruction. If designers take into consideration the role and function of memory in the learning process and utilize strategies and tools to support learning and cognition, they will likely experience more effective learning outcomes.

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

13

References Artino, A. R., Jr. (2008). Cognitive load theory and the role of learner experience: An abbreviated review for educational practitioners. AACE, 16(4), 425-439. Berger, C., & Kam, R. (1996, October 18). Definitions of instructional design. Retrieved from http://www.umich.edu/~ed626/define.html Bozarth, J. (2010, August 3). Nuts and bolts: Brain bandwidth cognitive load theory and instructional design. Learning solutions magazine, Retrieved from http://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/498/nuts-and-bolts-brain-bandwidth--cognitive-load-theory-and-instructional-design Cooper, G. (1998). Research into cognitive load theory and instructional design at unsw. Informally published manuscript, School of Education, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. Retrieved from http://dwb4.unl.edu/Diss/Cooper/UNSW.htm Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance improvement quarterly, 6(4), 50-72. Gerjets, P., & Scheiter, K. (2003). Goal configurations and processing strategies as moderators between instructional design and cognitive load: Evidence from hypertext-based instruction. Educational psychologist, 38, 33-41 Iiyoshi, T., Hannifin, M. J., & Wang, F. (2005). Cognitive tools and student-centered learning: Rethinking tools, functions, and applications. Educational media international, 42, 281296. Kalyuga, S. (2011). Informing: A cognitive load perspective. Informing science: The international journal of an emerging transdiscipline, 14, 33-45. Retrieved from http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol14/ISJv14p033-045Kalyuga586.pdf Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological review 63 (2): 8197.

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY AND STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT DESIGN

14

Paas, R., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 1-4. Retrieved from http://cis.msjc.edu/evoc/637/References/Pass-CognitiveLoadTheoryAndID.pdf Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295-312. Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instruction. Educational psychology review, 10(3), 251-296. doi: 1040-726X/98/09000251S15.00/0 van Joolingen, W., (1999). Cognitive tools for discovery learning. International journal of artificial intelligence in education, 10, 385-397.

Vayuvegula, A. (2012, May 10). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://blog.commlabindia.com/elearning/instructional-strategy-cognitive-load