An integrative Review of Cognitive Learning Theories

Olena Chambers

Introduction

Learning is a lifelong process which begins in embryonic stage and continues throughout

life. Obviously pre-school learning and post-academic self-study (like learning a hobby)

are very informal and are less important in terms of efficiency of learning for a number of

reasons. Also the tasks in acquiring competency rarely match the complexity of academic

tasks. For these reasons, this assignment is focused on the formal learning only – from

school age to University and other tertiary study. This essay-integrative review is based

on the last four of the five given theories where the researchers focus on effective

learning: Schema development, Cognitive load theory, Skill learning and the

development of expertise and Metacognition.

While students try to make their learning more efficient by using their preferred learning

styles and adopting more appropriate learning techniques (e.g. memorisation), it is

arguably their instructors’ job to make their learning more efficient by reducing the effort

they spend on the acquisition of the new material and on placing this new material in the

appropriate niche, linking it with the existing concepts and enriching their understanding

of how things work.

Throughout years of practice, teachers, guided by their experience, would improve the

design of the material they give to their students based on the students’ performance, time

and effort the students spend to acquire the new knowledge, e.g. regardless of prior

studying of Cognitive Load Theory, an expert teacher, before giving the class a text with

a diagram over the page, would most likely photocopy the diagram, especially, if the

students need to constantly flip the page to answer questions on the diagram. However,

knowledge and understanding of effective learning theories gives a huge advantage to

those teachers who really want to get to the bottom line of how not only expertise in

learning develops, but how we, teachers, can optimise this process the best possible way

– not driven by trial and error and just using common sense, like in case with the diagram

over the page, but equipped with sound knowledge of the theoretical principles and

understanding of how they work..

Even if we possess excellent knowledge of our subject and its teaching methodologies,

very often these methodologies, anecdotally, do not fully take into account the very

closely linked process of students’ learning. When a teacher knows, for example, that our

short-term memory can only hold 7 +-2 units of information, s/he will be able to design a

list of new vocabulary chunking it better; knowledge and understanding of

Metacognition, for example, will help to structure revision and evaluation sessions.

In this assignment the interrelationships between the four abovementioned theories are

analysed in the form of explanation of one theory, merged with an explanation of another

theory, focusing on the similarities of approaches and the parts of the Information

Processing Model they focus on.

The original version of the assignment had to be significantly shortened as it exceeded

the recommended volume.

Research in Cognitive Learning Theories

Before we proceed with the development of an integrated whole theory of how cognitive

learning theories can be used to create more effective learning, we need to look at the

way the brain works in regard to the construction of knowledge from both auditory and

visual sources. To do this we need to review the research on human cognitive architecture

and cognitive load theory. This review is necessary for 2 reasons:

1. The recognition of auditory information takes place within the brain. This decoding

and integration of audio information into existing schemata is extremely complex and

ultimately has an impact on the way students assimilate and integrate both audio and

visual information. This assimilation is known to be a complex process. It is also known

(through research) that this processing can be enhanced by manipulating the instructional

design methodology.

2. Cognitive learning theories play a part in redefining learning and the process of

Instructional Design. As Cooper (1998) states in his review of cognitive load theory “The

fundamental tenet of cognitive load theory is that the quality of instructional design will

be raised if greater consideration is given to the role and limitations, of working

memory.” If we can enhance the instructional design methods used will we then see a

follow on enhancement of student learning outcomes and the promotion of more

effective learning?

Human Cognitive Architecture

According to the modal model of human memory (attributed to Atkinson & Shiffrin,

1968), human memory can be divided into 3 memory sub-systems. These are the sensory

store, short term memory and long term memory. As will be seen each of these types of

memory systems have attributes that can and do affect the way material to be learned is

perceived and processed.

The Modal Model. (Cooper, 1998)

As can be seen from the modal model diagram, there are 3 forms of memory with

separate processors for audio and visual information. As will be discussed these

processing systems and their associated limitations directly influence learning.

Sensory memory

The first memory that receives information from the senses is called sensory memory.

Information in sensory memory is essentially uninterpreted however it:

a. holds information for basic processing of features

b. can hold many items at once

c. has a large capacity

d. allows for very brief retention of images.

Testing carried out by researchers has revealed retention of information in this

memory system to be about .3 seconds and about 3 seconds for hearing.

It has been theorized that there are several types of sensory memories:

iconic memory – for visual and textual information

echoic memory – auditory – Sperling, 1960

Haptic memory – touch

Transfer of information from sensory memory to working memory occurs via attention.

Attention is a selective selection process that takes place in working memory. Once

working memory has determined what requires attention the information is moved from

the sensory memory to the Working memory.

Students learning in lectures for example will use both iconic (PowerPoint and/or notes)

and echoic memory (Lecturers voice) and will need to selectively attend to appropriate

information from both information streams. Enhancing the students’ ability to attend and

process this information can be theorized to positively impact on the students’ integration

and retention of material to be learned.

Cues used by instructors to assist in integrating the auditory and visual information may

form a valuable attention directing device during this process.

Working Memory

Working memory has often been equated to consciousness by cognitive researchers (see

Cooper, Tindall-Ford et al, 2001). That is the conscious processing of information occurs

within this memory system.

Unfortunately working memory has been found to have limitations. These limitations

have in turn been shown to greatly affect the process of learning. The first limit is a limit

on information capacity. In a review of research at the time Miller (1956) found that for

simple one dimensional stimuli that our “span of absolute judgement” (essentially what

one can recall after being presented information) was equal to about 7 +- 2 elements.

The second limit is a limited duration for the holding of information. Research has shown

that this limit is approximately 30 seconds.

If a person cannot use rehearsal or if there is interference, for instance from a competing

task, then information in short term memory decays very quickly. For example counting

backwards while memorizing something will cause interference and thus an inability to

rehearse. This problem was first identified by Peterson & Peterson in 1959 where they

asked learners to count backwards in 3’s while attempting to memorise a ‘Trigram” of 3

consonents. Interestingly this was a test of the working memory auditory processor. The

so called Brown-Peterson task is still used as a standard test of working memory.

What happens if we want to hold more than 7 bits of information? In this case simple

memory expansion techniques such as chunking can be used. This expands working

memory. E.g. phone numbers are often broken into clumps, Miller (1956)

Maintenance rehearsal can also be used to extend the time that items can be held in

memory and will aide “memorization” that is encoding and transferal of the information

into long term memory.

Working memory capacity may also be expanded by presenting some information

visually and the remainder of the information auditorily than it is when all of the

information is presented through a single sense (either all visually or all auditorily).

In the Baddely and Hitch (1974) working memory model, working memory is seen as

having two processing systems: One for visual information and the other for auditory

information. This separation of the processing systems is similar to that in the sensory

memory. In addition a central executive controls the handling and processing of

information in working memory.

Baddeley's working memory model. Baddeley and Hitch, 1974, Cited in Bruning et al (2004)

Let us look at each component in turn:

Visuospatial sketchpad – processes and holds visual and spatial information brought in

from sensory visual memory. Once the information has been stored it will then undergo

processing in order for the processor of the information to reach the necessary outcome.

For example a pilot will make use of this memory for estimating distance from the

runway when landing. His eyes will perceive the runway, and in addition he will attend to

Central Executive

Visuospatial Sketchpad

Phonological Loop

the height and speed measurement from the controls and then his attention system/central

executive will direct this information to Working Memory where it will be processed to

determine an expected touchdown time, plus allow him/her to make judgements on

required speed, direction and height. Information will be pulled from Long Term

Memory to permit the calculation of the distance and time till touchdown. This form of 3

dimensional processing is the specialty area of the visuospatial sketchpad.

In face to face teaching the use of this memory subsystem will depend on the

information/subject area to be learned. Students may need to attend to a visual

presentation of information such as a 2 dimensional chart, a worked example, a graphic

all while integrating information from the audio stream where the lecturer is describing

the graphic image. This is a complex cognitive processing task. Any interference while

attempting this task will have an impact on the learning.

Phonological loop – holds and processes verbal information

Relating to our pilot example above our pilot may at the same time as watching the

approaching runway receive auditory information from instruments or a co-pilot in

regards to the state of the landing. This information will be held in the phonological loop

long enough for integration with the visuospatial information.

Likewise students listening to the lecturer will make use of the phonological loop. While

the loop will hold the lecturers words it may at times also be used for memorisation.

Memorisation in the phonological loop is usually carried out by deliberate repeated

repetition of key information. This repetition can take the form of deliberate repeating by

way of internal verbalization or by repeatedly revising material. Repeated internal

verbalization can usually not occur during live lectures due to the pace of the lectures and

the volume of information to be attended to. Hence the need for a revision process by

most students.

Students should be advised that revision i.e. repeatedly listening to the material (by

means of digital recording) OR listening to the presentation followed by reading of the

transcript will lead to improved retention of material.

Central executive – coordinates activities of Working Memory. Brings information in

from the sensory store and encodes it for storage into Long Term Memory (LTM). The

central executive is theorized to be involved in planning, focusing attention and switching

between tasks.

Two advanced mechanisms to overcome the limits or working memory are:

Schema acquisition, which allows us to work with ever larger more meaningful units of

information and, automation of procedural knowledge i.e. automation of skills.

The first mechanism, schema acquisition, deals primarily with processing and

understanding information; the second deals with the acquisition of skills. Each

mechanism helps us overcome the limits of working memory by allowing us to draw

down the contents of our long-term memories, which contain detailed schemas. Schemas

when loaded from long term memory into working memory are loaded in total and form

1 element. Hence schemas can greatly expand working memory by allowing the learner

to work with large chunks of information.

Long Term Memory

Long Term Memory (LTM) organizes and stores information received from working

memory. The relationship between long term and working memory can be defined in

terms of 2 main processes: Encoding and Retrieval.

Encoding - the process that controls movement of information from WM to LTM

Retrieval – the process that controls flow of information from LTM to WM

Control processes of Attention, maintenance rehearsal, encoding and retrieval govern

movement of information between stores. The central executive is theorized to be one of

the controlling structures involved in this processing.

General theoretical characteristics of LTM include that it is a more passive form of

storage than working memory, has unlimited capacity and information can be retained in

it almost indefinitely.

Defining Learning

For information to be stored in long term memory there needs to be a structure in which

to store the information. One theory is that Schemas are used to store information long

term. A schema can be defined as a mental representation of information, concepts or

anything stored in long term memory. Schemas are thought to be related to each other by

means of a hierarchical structure. This structure is also thought to aide in the retrieval of

information from LTM.

Learning in turn may be defined as the encoding (storage) of knowledge and/or skills into

long term memory in such a way that information can be recalled from the learner's long-

term memory and utilized in practice (applied as a skill).

Mayer (2005) also importantly outlines 3 other major requirements of effective learning:

Knowledge construction, Understanding, Meaningful learning.

Understanding and meaningful learning both relate to the ability of the user to transfer

learning to new situations. This is one of the ultimate measures of effective learning.

Schemas

First attributed to Bartlett in 1932, schemas are now a widely accepted model for long

term memory organization. Rumelhart (1977) defines schema as “generalized knowledge

about a sequence of events”. Rumelhart suggests that comprehension relies on finding a

schema in memory that accounts for perceived information. At the time of writing this

there was no extended modal model. In light of the modal model this equates to finding a

schema in long term memory that relates to the information passed into working memory

from short term memory.

Once this related schema is found in long term memory and retrieved into working

memory a comparison can occur and the information or concept can either be assimilated

into the existing schema if the two are related or accommodated as a new schema if the

new concept does not fit into the existing schema. For example:

Automation and the Novice vs Expert Debate

Recalling information and applying it on demand is called automation. Automation is the

ability to apply learned skills, information and processing models automatically. Ulric

Neisser (Quoted in Bruning et al, pg 25) first conceived of automaticity. Automation is

only believed to be obtained if there is repeated practice. While automaticity was

originally thought to be only related to skill acquisition recent research suggests that

automaticity can also be applied to cognitive skills. (Cooper and Sweller, 1987)

Automation of schemas along with schema acquisition are believed to form the

cornerstones of learning. An instructional designers role is to develop learning materials

that enhance the ability of the learner to acquire schemas and to automate these schemas.

Repeated practice and revision can lead to schema automation. (REFERENCE). Once

schemas have been acquired and automation is evident then a learner can be expected to

have graduated to expert status.

Repeated practice is often aided in the form of examples, worked examples, diagrams or

simulations. Additionally the use of followup tests and self tests aide in repeated practice

and revision.

If one has enough repeated practice and hold automated schemas then one may be

considered an expert. Holding advanced schemas allows experts to move in a forward

direction when solving problems as they can pull schemas from LTM and use this to

apply to the seek a solution. Novices instead must use a means-end strategy and work

using subgoals and often working from goal state back to initial state. This is an

inefficient strategy.

Cognitive theorists postulate that the only two distinguishing features of expertise in a

subject area are:

1 . the schemas that experts hold, and

2 . the high level of automation that experts demonstrate.

(REFERENCE)

Recommendation for iLecture: Ensure students understand how learning can occur using

these new mediums. A student understanding the metacognitive processes involved in

learning and how simple learning can be will be at an advantage to a student who does

not understand the metacognitive learning processes.

Effects on Learning

As has been shown learning occurs in the memory systems of the learner. If these

memory systems are affected in any way by the type of material to be learned or its

delivery there may be negative consequences for the learning processes occurring in the

brain. One of the major effects that can occur is cognitive load.

Cognitive Load

Learners studying any new material are constantly processing information and integrating

it into schemas using the mechanisms outlined earlier in this paper. This information can

often be 1. poorly organized 2. in too large a quantity or simply 3. irrelevant. 4. A

duplicate of information already provided. Cognitive researchers have defined several

theories outlining more exactly how such problems with information and learning

materials can impact on learners. One of these theories is cognitive load theory.

Cognitive load theory promoted by Sweller (1999) is based on the limited cognitive

capacity available in working memory during the learning process. If any of the above

instructional design issues are present then a learners working memory may become

overloaded. This overload is defined according to Sweller (date) to be caused by the level

of interactivity between elements in working memory. High levels of interactivity equal

high levels of cognitive load. As defined by Mein (2005) cognitive load is “the amount of

effort expended by a learner when he or she is participating in instruction”.

Intrinsic, Extrinsic, Germane cognitive load

There are 3 types of cognitive load that can be placed on learners:

 

Intrinsic

Extraneous

Germaine

These loads all relate to the effect learning on working memory

Intrinsic cognitive load comes from the complexity of the material to be learned. Some

material is easy to comprehend, some is more complex.

 

Word pairs learned as part of learning vocabulary in a foreign language is easy compared

with learning word order in a foreign language.

 

Element Interactivity

One of the things that leads to intrinsic cognitive load is element interactivity. For

example when learning vocabulary it is easy as we can learn elements/words individually

and can relate these to existing words in our native language but when learning word

order many elements/words must be thought of together and manipulated in working

memory to determine correct order. Combined with needing to consider other rules of the

language simultaneously our working memory is stretched.

 

Working memory is known to be limited to about 7 elements (+- 2) Miller (1956). This is

not a particularly large number and in a large number of learning situations the number of

elements and their combinations can easily exceed this number and thus working memory

is overloaded.

 

Extraneous cognitive load is any extra unnecessary information or material presented to

the learner while they are trying to solve a problem/task/memorisation. Extraneous load

often comes from the way the learning material has been designed. E.g. it may contain

duplicate/repeated information or it may have some material reworded to hopefully offer

an alternative explanation. This may not offer anything new to the learner and may

simply form another element (or set of elements) requiring comparison with the existing

elements in working memory.

 

Germaine cognitive load is the load  on working memory from the material that also

needs to be learned in order to solve a problem/complete an exercise. A learner may need

a definition of a term, a suitable formulae pertinent to a task etc. It is related to “time on

task”.

 

In order for a learner to avoid cognitive overload it is important that the combined

intrinsic and extraneous cognitive load do not exceed the capacity of working memory –

hence the combination of these two loads must be minimised. Also it is important that the

germane load is maximised to ensure cognitive resources are only used on the necessary

tasks to aide schema acquisition.

 

Cognitive load for an expert will be less as they pull schema and information/solutions

from Long Term Memory (LTM) that novices do not have. This allows information to be

interpreted in larger chunks in working memory.

 

Anyone designing instruction needs to minimise extraneous cognitive load and maximise

germane cognitive load. Nothing can be done in regard to intrinsic cognitive load as this

load is inherent to the complexity of the material.

The Split Attention Effect

Sweller (1999) outlines a number of examples where presentation of related information

used during the learning process is unnecessarily separated. For example in worked

examples for kinematics problems an example is used to illustrate how separating out

variables from the problem statement produces increased cognitive load.

Figure 4 Split-attention and integrated kinematics problems

a.

A car moving from rest reaches a speed of 20 m/s after 10 seconds. What is the

acceleration of the car?

u = 0 m/s

v = 20 m/s

t = 10 s

v = u =at

a = (v-u)/t

a = (20-0)/10

a = 2 m/s

b.

A car moving from rest (u) reaches a speed of 20 m/s (v) after 10 seconds (t): [v=u+at,

a=(v-u)/t=(20-0)/10=2 m/s]. What is the acceleration of the car?

Taken from Sweller (1999, pg. 51)

Figure 4 illustrates the kinds of problems that can require learners to mentally integrate

disparate information. In this example the equations and variables being separate can

only be understood by mentally moving back and forth between the problem and the

variables. Only in this way can the variables be associated with the problem statement.

This causes increased cognitive load. The reworked example at b. illustrates an integrated

approach which is much easier to handle cognitively as no mental gymnastics are

required.

Research has shown that experts do not have a problem with the split attention effect

(Kalyuga et. al, 2003). Thus this effect is only applicable to novices. Of course at the start

of any new course a large number of the student body are likely to fit into the category of

novice regardless of level of the course i.e. year 1 verse post grad.

Integration of All 4 theories and research areas to form a meta theory

Conclusion

References

Bruning, H. Roger, Schraw, Norby, M. Monica, J. Gregory, Ronning, R. Royce, (1990). Cognitive Psychology aand Instruction. Prentice Hall, Inc.

Cooper, G. Research into Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design at UNSW,

1998 Web: http://education.arts.unsw.edu.au/CLT_NET_Aug_97.HTML

Kalyuga, S. (2000) When using sound with a text or picture is not beneficial for learning

Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(2), 161-172.

Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). Expertise reversal effect.

Educational Psychologist, 38, 23-31.

Mayer, R. E. Multimedia Learning; PowerPoint presentation

Miller G. A. The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our

Capacity for Processing Information Web: http://www.well.com/user/smalin/miller.html

Rumelhart, D.E., and Ortony, A. (1977). The representation of knowledge in memory. In

R.C. Anderson, R.J. Spiro and W.E. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the Acquisition of

Knowledge. (pp 99-136). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.

Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional Design in Technical Areas, ACER Press