Cognitive Load Theory

1. Theorist : Dr. J. Sweller Lecturer : Dr. BalaKrishnanMuniandy Prepared by : Rosli Bin Che Din Matrix : s-qm0027/10 Cognitive Load Theory

2. Background of the proponent

3. Background of the proponent • Dr. John Sweller is currently working at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. He leads a team investigating cognitive processes and their applications for teaching techniques and instructional design, with cognitive load theory being the major framework (UNSW, 2006).

4. The main principles and concepts involved

5. Principles of Cognitive Learning (Cipperfield, 2006) According to Chipperfield (2006), CLT is based on the following principles of cognitive learning: • Capacity of STM (working memory) is limited -7 informational units. • LTM is unlimited in capacity - where all information and knowledge is stored. • Knowledge stored in LTM - schemas or schemata • Schemas, no matter how large or how complex, are treated as a single entity in working memory. • Schemas can become automated

6. Principles of cognitive load theory application to instructional design (Copper, 1998) • - Working memory is extremely limited. • - Long term memory is essentially unlimited. • - The process of learning requires working memory to be actively engaged in the comprehension (and processing) of instructional material to encode to-be-learned information into long term memory. • - If the resources of working memory are exceeded then learning will be ineffective

7. Principles of cognitive load theory application to instructional design (Copper, 1998) • Redesigning instructional materials to reduce the levels of extraneous cognitive load may enhance learning

8. Situation or subject most suitable for its application:

9. Situation or subject most suitable for its application: • According to Kearsley (2006), cognitive load theory can be best applied in the areas of instructional design of cognitively difficult and technically challenging material. • According to Kearsley (2006) - to maintain effective learning environment we need to keep the cognitive load of the learners at a minimum during the learning process.

10. Diagram :

11. + + = Figure : By Chipperfield (2006)

12. Cipperfield (2006) states that for a given problem or task, ‘I’ cannot be changed. But ‘G’ and ‘E’ can vary and are inversely proportional to each other. Because according to Chipperfield (2006), the more extraneous load the less room for germane load.

13. Some sources of extraneous cognitive load

14. Some sources of extraneous cognitive load (Sweller, 1999) • CLT is concerned with the distribution and use of working memory resources during learning and problem –solving . • All cognitive activities will impose cognitive load. • Schema acquisition is an important ingredient of learning and problem-solving. • There are differences between schema-using experts and novices using means-end strategy.

15. Some sources of extraneous cognitive load (Sweller, 1999) • If instruction is designed without consideration of schema acquisition, we might expect it to generate cognitive activities that are incompatible with learning on some occasions • Problem solving, split attention and redundancy - instructional procedures that impose an unnecessary working memory load

16. Suggestion byMiller(2006) from Sweller (1999) • Change problem solving methods to avoid means-ends approaches • Physically integrate multiple sources - to eliminate the need for learners to have to mentally integrate that information • Reduce redundancy - repetitive information whenever possible • Use auditory and visual information - under conditions where both sources of information are essential

17. Theory implications • Remembering information (Cooper, 1998) • Chunking information (Cooper, 1998) • Use Goal free problems (Cooper, 1998) • Modality effect - People learn better when words are presented as speech rather than onscreen text • Multimedia effect- People learn better when both words and graphics are included, as long as the graph is not self-explanatory

18. Contiguity effect -People learn better when you place print words near corresponding graphics • Redundancy effect - Simultaneous presentations of similar (redundant) content must be avoided • Coherence effect - learning is hindered when extraneous sound, pictures, and words are used in teaching.

19. Split attention effect - integrate the text into the graphic in such a way that the relationships between textual components and graphical components are clearly indicated. • Worked example effect - This strategy is highly effective for teaching math based content (Cooper, 1998).

20. Conclusion

21. Conclusion • Cognitive load theory uses knowledge of our cognitive architecture to suggest that many commonly used instructional procedures impose a heavy working memory load that interfere with the very learning intended by the instructional procedure. (sweller,1999)

22. Conclusion • keep the cognitive load of the learners at a minimum during the learning process to maintain effective learning environment.(Kearsley,2006)

23. Referrences • Instructional Design In Technical Areas, J.Sweller (1999).Cognitive Load Theory,3,36-55 • http://usaoll.org/iddtheorywb/htmlcognitiveload/theorists1.htm • http://education.arts.unsw.edu.au/research-education/cognitive-load-theory/ • http://www.southalabama.edu/oll/mobile/theory_workbook/cognitive_load_theory.htm#theory • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtXtYNOiEIU&feature=related • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyuOU2RasRQ