Instructional Design and Human Cognitive Architecture February 20, 2011Posted by Editor21C in Engaging Learning Environments, Primary Education, Secondary Education.
Tags: curriculum, learning and the brain, learning theories
add a comment
from Dr José Hanham
In this post José Hanham explores contemporary research on the human brain and memory to identify effective pedagogical approaches which enhance the learning of young people.
In my previous blog (see Minimal Guidance and Direct Instruction – July 2010) I mentioned that educational theories, such as constructivism (Bruner, 1961), were developed at a time when we had a very limited understanding of the human brain and human memory. Empirical evidence to support the efficacy of constructivist teaching has never been strong (see Mayer 2004), which, in part, may be attributed to the fact that constructivist theory does not take into account the memory structures that comprise human cognitive architecture.
The term ‘human cognitive architecture’ refers to the memory structures, sensory memory, working (short-term) memory, and long term memory, which have been hypothesized as fundamental to how learners think, learn and solve problems. A key feature of human cognitive architecture is that it comprises a limited working memory (our consciousness), which can only deal with 2 to 3 elements of new information at time, and a long term memory (our unconsciousness), which can hold an unlimited of number of elements (schemas) on a relatively permanent basis (Sweller, 2004). Over the last two decades a number of educational researchers (e.g., Sweller, 1999) have carried out a large number of experimental studies on how best to overcome the limitations of working memory. In the remainder of this blog I am going to share some of the findings that have emerged from research on human cognitive architecture.
In the early 1990s, Chandler and Sweller (1991, 1992) found that when learners were required to split their attention between two related sources of information, that is, two pieces of information that are unintelligible in isolation, this process placed a heavy load on a learner’s already limited working memory resources. Examples of split-attention include learners having to mentally integrate information contained in diagrams, which are placed separately from their associated formulas (see Year 9 Maths textbooks), or a second language learner having to look up a word in a glossary placed in the back of the textbook in order to understand a sentence in an earlier part of the book. Physically integrating information previously placed separately was identified by Chandler and Sweller (1991, 1992), as a superior alternative to split-source instructions.
Another alternative approach to dealing with the split-attention phenomenon is the dual modality approach, which has been shown to be particularly effective in multimedia learning (Mousavi, Low, & Sweller, 1995; Tindall-Ford, Chandler & Sweller, 1997). As mentioned previously, human working memory is limited. The dual modality approach is an instructional technique designed specifically for increasing the effective capacity of working memory. Our working memory contains two partially separate sub-systems (or channels), one for dealing with audio information, and one for processing visual information. Researchers (e.g., Baddeley, 1992) have hypothesized that working memory can process a considerably larger amount of information when information is presented in a dual mode format (i.e., some information is presented in audio form and some information is presented in visual form) than when information presented using in a single mode. However, it is important to note that dual mode instruction is unlikely to be effective if the audio component is too complex or when one source of information is intelligible in isolation and the other source is simply redundant (for example, presenting a visual image of a square to a Year 3 student and having an associated audio message explicitly stating that the image being viewed is in fact a square).
The redundancy effect (Sweller & Chandler, 1994) is another instructional phenomenon identified in research on human cognitive architecture. The redundancy effect usually occurs when two sources of information, which are intelligible in isolation, are presented in slightly different forms. A familiar example would be when an instructor simply reads, word for word, the contents of an overhead or Power-point slide. It is often mistakenly believed that reading from an overhead consolidates student learning. Yet, research (Sweller & Chandler, 1994) has found that this process requires the learner to deal with extraneous information, which places an unnecessary burden on working memory. The most effective way to deal with redundancy is to simply remove the identified redundant information. Please note, some texts such as poems or excerpts of plays need to be visually presented, and read aloud, in order to be effectively understood.
It is important to note that two of the instructional design effects briefly described here, split-attention (integrated instruction) and dual-mode instruction are most effective when instructing novices. Integrated instruction and dual-mode instruction have been shown to be problematic when used on expert learners (Kalyuga, Chandler & Sweller, 2000). In my next blog I will focus on instructional techniques developed specifically to cater for expert learners.
Baddeley, A. (1992). Working Memory, Science, 255, 556-559. Bruner, J. S. (1961). The art of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31,21–32. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293-332. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1992). The split-attention effect as a factor in instructional design. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 233-246. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2000). Incorporating learner experience into the design of multimedia instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 126-136. Mayer, R. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 59, 14–19. Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 319-334. Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell, Australia: ACER Press. Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32, 9–31. Sweller, J. & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12, 185-233. Tindall-Ford, S. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). When two sensory modes are better than one. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 3, 257-287.
José Hanham is a Lecturer in Educational Psychology and Youth Studies at the University of Western Sydney, Australia. He primarily teaches in the secondary education program.
“When am I ever going to use this?” Making middle years mathematics relevant for 21st century learners February 6, 2011Posted by Editor21C in Engaging Learning Environments, Primary Education, Secondary Education, Teacher, Adult and Higher Education.
Tags: curriculum, mathematics education
from Cathy Attard
Cathy’s previous post, “If you like the teacher, you’ll ‘get’ maths more”: Students talk about good mathematics teachers, was one of our most popular to date. In her new post she argues that it is necessary to provide students with mathematics tasks that relate to real world applications but which also provide intellectual challenge. She provides an example of one such task in her post below.
How many times have your students asked ‘why do I have to know this?’ or ‘when am I ever going to use this?’ Current Australian frameworks for quality teaching stress the importance of making mathematics learning relevant for students in today’s classrooms (Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers [AAMT], 2006; NSW Department of Education and Training, 2003), and perhaps now is the perfect time, with the introduction of the Australian Curriculum, for we as teachers to reflect upon how our pedagogies are highlighting the links between school mathematics and students’ ‘real world’ mathematics.
In addition to the call to makie mathematics relevant, recent research has highlighted the need for students to develop a more critical understanding of mathematics and its use in our world. Building on the work of Newmann et al. (1996), and the Productive Pedagogies (Atweh & Bland, 2005), a different view of the intellectual quality of mathematics pedagogy – a critical perspective on learning mathematics – has been explored (Atweh, 2007). A limitation of the intellectual quality of mathematics is that it is measured from within the discipline itself, rather than the usefulness of the knowledge in the current and future lives of the student. It is believed mathematics education can contribute to the ability of students to function as effective citizens in the world. This has been labelled this as a conforming ideal, consistent with the dominant justification of mathematics curriculum as developing skills and knowledge as preparation for future employment (Down, Ditchburn, & Lee, 2008). Atweh argues that “mathematics can also be used to enable students to understand how the world works in order to change aspects of the world” (2007, p.6). This has been labelled as the reforming capacity(Down et al., 2008). In addition, mathematics also has the capacity for transforming, to create the world in a new way – a focus on mathematics education consistent with a critical mathematics movement.
Consider this example of a mathematics task that has the potential to engage students in using ‘school’ mathematics applied to a ‘real-world’ context:
“You have just been given permission from your parents to choose a new mobile phone and select a new phone plan. Because you now have a casual job and are earning $52.00 a week, you need to select a phone and a plan that you can afford (remember you need to have money left over for other expenses).
Prepare a proposal to your parents and include the following:
- The selected phone and plan
- A list of your needs (calls, SMS, downloads, etc.)
- The criteria you used to select the phone and plan
- A comparison with at least 3 other phones and plans
- Any mathematics you used to help make your decision
- A monthly budget proving you can afford the phone and plan of your choice.”
At face value, the task appears straight forward. However, if we take into account the complexities involved in today’s mobile phone market, students have the opportunity to use a wide range of mathematics to critique the many options available and the value being offered by the various providers. In addition, tasks such as the one above provide the opportunity for students to use technology to assist in their investigations and in the presentation of their findings. The phone task is able to be differentiated in various ways, allowing the diversity of learners’ opportunities to achieve success and opportunities for the development of mathematical knowledge within a meaningful context, therefore promoting positive engagement with mathematics.
Developing mathematical knowledge engages students whilst demonstrating the usefulness and relevance of mathematical knowledge. “The usefulness of mathematics should not only be demonstrated by using examples from the real world of the student as applications of mathematics, but also mathematical knowledge should be developed through such activities” (Atweh, 2007, p. 9). This engagement should incorporate the physical, economic and social world of students now and in their adult lives.
References: Atweh, B. (2007). Pedagogy for socially response-able mathematics education. Paper presented at the Australian Association of Research in Education Conference. Atweh, B., & Bland, D. (2005). Mathematics through/for understanding social life: productive pedagogies meets critical mathematics [Electronic Version]. Retrieved October 14 from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00003001/01/MES2005%2520Atweh.pdf. Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers [AAMT]. (2006). Standards of Excellence in Teaching Mathematics in Australian Schools. Adelaide: Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers. Down, B., Ditchburn, G., & Lee, L. (2008). Teachers’ idealogical discourses and hte enactment of citizenship education. Curriculum Perspectives, 28(3), Go to library and check actual page numbers. Call number Q375.0005. Newmann, F. M., Marks, H. M., & Gamoran, A. (1996). Authentic pedagogy and student performance. American Journal of Education, 104. NSW Department of Education and Training. (2003). Quality Teaching in NSW Public Schools. Sydney: Professional Support and Curriculum Directorate.
Cathy Attard is a Lecturer in the School of Education at the University of Western Sydney, Australia.