Expertise reversal effect and sequencing of learning tasks in online English as a second language learning environment

The aim of this paper is to examine the effects of sequencing instructional materials and learners' prior knowledge on learning ESL (English as a second language) through an online learning course. 121 fifth-grade students from an elementary school in Korea participated in the study. Each participant was allocated to one cell of a 2 × 2 between-subjects factorial design, with an instructional format (i.e. sequential or concurrent) as a first factor, and prior knowledge (i.e. high or low) as a second factor. Instructions of the words and grammar rules were allocated to each page for the sequential group, whereas integrated on a single page for the concurrent group. The result indicates that the sequential instruction of words followed by grammar explanations was more effective for the students with higher levels of prior knowledge than the concurrent presentation. The reverse was also found for the students with lower levels of prior knowledge in English. There are four possible explanations for the results. First, split-attention effect, temporal-contiguity effect, or transient information effect might occur. Second, worked-example effect might occur and over-ride the effect of sequencing. Third, intrinsic and extraneous cognitive load might intertwine each other. Last, the levels of element interactivity in two instructional formats might be different from each other. The implications for instructional designers and future research are discussed.

[1]  R. Moreno.  Cognitive load theory: more food for thought , 2010 .

[2]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory: Instructional Implications of the Interaction between Information Structures and Cognitive Architecture , 2004 .

[3]  Dorothea P. Simon,et al.  Expert and Novice Performance in Solving Physics Problems , 1980, Science.

[4]  R. A. Tarmizi,et al.  Guidance during Mathematical Problem Solving. , 1988 .

[5]  T. Gog,et al.  Timing and Frequency of Mental Effort Measurement: Evidence in Favour of Repeated Measures , 2012 .

[6]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[7]  John Sweller,et al.  Interactions between the isolated–interactive elements effect and levels of learner expertise: experimental evidence from an accountancy class , 2010 .

[8]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Long-term working memory. , 1995, Psychological review.

[9]  John Sweller,et al.  The impact of sequencing and prior knowledge on learning mathematics through spreadsheet applications , 2005 .

[10]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design , 1998 .

[11]  R. Moreno,et al.  Cognitive load and learning effects of having students organize pictures and words in multimedia environments: The role of student interactivity and feedback , 2005 .

[12]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning: Principles for Reducing Extraneous Processing in Multimedia Learning : Coherence, Signaling, Redundancy, Spatial Contiguity, and Temporal Contiguity Principles , 2005 .

[13]  Wolfgang Schnotz,et al.  Enabling, facilitating, and inhibiting effects of animations in multimedia learning: Why reduction of cognitive load can have negative results on learning , 2005 .

[14]  Alfred Bork,et al.  Multimedia in Learning , 2001 .

[15]  Michelene T. H. Chi,et al.  Expertise in Problem Solving. , 1981 .

[16]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Measuring Knowledge to Optimize Cognitive Load Factors During Instruction. , 2004 .

[17]  R. Atkinson,et al.  Structuring the Transition From Example Study to Problem Solving in Cognitive Skill Acquisition: A Cognitive Load Perspective , 2003 .

[18]  Tamara van Gog,et al.  An expertise reversal effect of segmentation in learning from animated worked-out examples , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[19]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  Cognitive load theory: implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning , 2002 .

[20]  John Sweller,et al.  The Split-Attention Principle in Multimedia Learning , 2021, The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning.

[21]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  The Expertise Reversal Effect , 2003 .

[22]  R. Moreno,et al.  Do Multiple Representations Need Explanations? The Role of Verbal Guidance and Individual Differences in Multimedia Mathematics Learning , 2004 .

[23]  Liesbeth Kester,et al.  Timing of Information Presentation in Learning Statistics , 2004 .

[24]  Jens F. Beckmann,et al.  Taming a Beast of Burden--On Some Issues with the Conceptualisation and Operationalisation of Cognitive Load. , 2010 .

[25]  Fethi Calisir,et al.  Influence of text structure and prior knowledge of the learner on reading comprehension, browsing and perceived control , 2003, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[26]  Logan Fiorella,et al.  Principles for Reducing Extraneous Processing in Multimedia Learning: Coherence, Signaling, Redundancy, Spatial Contiguity and Temporal Contiguity Principles. , 2014 .

[27]  J. Sweller,et al.  Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect. , 2011 .

[28]  H. Simon,et al.  Why are some problems hard? Evidence from Tower of Hanoi , 1985, Cognitive Psychology.

[29]  Slava Kalyuga.  Expertise Reversal Effect and Its Implications for Learner-Tailored Instruction , 2007 .

[30]  Michael Levy,et al.  Computer applications in second language acquisition : Foundations for teaching , testing and research , 2009 .

[31]  F. Paas,et al.  A motivational perspective on the relation between mental effort and performance: Optimizing learner involvement in instruction , 2005 .

[32]  F. Paas,et al.  Variability of Worked Examples and Transfer of Geometrical Problem-Solving Skills: A Cognitive-Load Approach , 1994 .

[33]  Liesbeth Kester,et al.  Just-in-time information presentation and the acquisition of complex cognitive skills , 2001, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[34]  J. Sweller,et al.  The Use of Worked Examples as a Substitute for Problem Solving in Learning Algebra , 1985 .

[35]  J. Merriënboer,et al.  Research on cognitive load theory and its design implications for e-learning , 2005 .

[36]  P. Chandler,et al.  Cognitive Load While Learning to Use a Computer Program , 1996 .

[37]  J. Sweller.  Element Interactivity and Intrinsic, Extraneous, and Germane Cognitive Load , 2010 .

[38]  A. Baddeley.  The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[39]  R. Mayer,et al.  Cognitive Principles of Multimedia Learning: The Role of Modality and Contiguity , 1999 .

[40]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Taking the Load Off a Learner's Mind: Instructional Design for Complex Learning , 2003 .

[41]  P. Chandler,et al.  Assimilating complex information , 2002 .

[42]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Learner Experience and Efficiency of Instructional Guidance , 2001 .

[43]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  The expertise reversal effect and worked examples in tutored problem solving , 2010 .

[44]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Load Measurement as a Means to Advance Cognitive Load Theory , 2003 .

[45]  Nadine Marcus,et al.  The Transient Information Effect: Investigating the Impact of Segmentation on Spoken and Written text , 2012 .

[46]  M. D’Esposito.  Working memory. , 2008, Handbook of clinical neurology.

[47]  Richard Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning , 2001, Visible Learning Guide to Student Achievement.