Effects of the Cognitive Level of Thought on Learning Complex Material

The main goal here is to introduce a new perspective through which cognitive learning theory plays an active role in instructional hypermedia design and evaluation through testing educational mediums that elicit two distinct levels of cognitive processing for materials of different levels of complexity. Results indicate that if the cognitive level required is high and the materials are more complex, then a retardation effect occurs to learning, while a lower cognitive level requirement achieves better results will all types of materials. This highlights the importance of taking cognitive requirements into consideration during the design of instructional hypermedia to produce “Cognitively Informed Systems”. This perspective will allow a designer to analyze the same system from the perspective of how the presentation style and medium are likely to interact with students’ cognitive processes during learning. This perspective is predicted to help lower the cognitive load demands of various instructional hypermedia systems in order to increase the educational impact of these systems and avoid any learning inhibitors to arise.

[1]  B. Bloom Taxonomy of educational objectives , 1956 .

[2]  Ana Paiva,et al.  TAGUS — A user and learner modeling workbench , 2005, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[3]  Wouter van Joolingen,et al.  Cognitive tools for discovery learning , 1999 .

[4]  D. Marr,et al.  Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three-dimensional shapes , 1978, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[5]  D. Jonassen Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? , 1991 .

[6]  Keith Stenning,et al.  A little logic goes a long way: basing experiment on semantic theory in the cognitive science of conditional reasoning , 2004, Cogn. Sci..

[7]  K. Rayner,et al.  Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[8]  D. Broadbent Perception and communication , 1958 .

[9]  Alan D. Baddeley,et al.  Verbal Reasoning and Working Memory , 1976 .

[10]  D. Spalding The Principles of Psychology , 1873, Nature.

[11]  J. Sweller COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY, LEARNING DIFFICULTY, AND INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN , 1994 .

[12]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge. , 1979 .

[13]  J. Deutsch,et al.  Attention: Some theoretical considerations. , 1963 .

[14]  Kurt VanLehn,et al.  Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Cognitive Tutor for Fundamental Physics Concepts , 2000 .

[15]  G. Hitch The role of short-term working memory in mental arithmetic , 1978, Cognitive Psychology.

[16]  I. Biederman Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. , 1987, Psychological review.

[17]  Stephen G. Gilligan,et al.  Cognitive consequences of emotional arousal. , 1985 .

[18]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Toward a model of text comprehension and production. , 1978 .

[19]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. , 1957 .

[20]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  Models and deductive rationality. , 1993 .

[21]  Albert T. Corbett,et al.  Assessing dynamics in computer-based instruction , 1996, CHI.

[22]  M. Eysenck Anxiety: The Cognitive Perspective , 1992 .

[23]  A. Young,et al.  Understanding face recognition. , 1986, British journal of psychology.

[24]  Paul Brna,et al.  Extending the scope of the student model , 1995, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[25]  M. Ross Quillian,et al.  Retrieval time from semantic memory , 1969 .

[26]  A. Treisman VERBAL CUES, LANGUAGE, AND MEANING IN SELECTIVE ATTENTION. , 1964, The American journal of psychology.

[27]  Susanne P. Lajoie,et al.  Computers As Cognitive Tools , 2020 .

[28]  Richard C. Atkinson,et al.  Human Memory: A Proposed System and its Control Processes , 1968, Psychology of Learning and Motivation.

[29]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge , 1978 .

[30]  Eshaa M. Alkhalifa,et al.  Multimedia as a Cognitive Tool , 2002, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[31]  Paul Brna,et al.  Involving the Learner in Diagnosis – Potentials and Problems , 2000 .

[32]  B. Bloom The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring , 1984 .

[33]  D. Suthers,et al.  Belvedere: Engaging students in critical discussion of science and public policy issues. , 1995 .

[34]  Kurt VanLehn,et al.  The Conceptual Helper: An Intelligent Tutoring System for Teaching Fundamental Physics Concepts , 2000, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.