Flipping the Assessment of Cognitive Load: Why and How

Cognitive load theory is typically used to evaluate and improve learning materials, with the goal of optimising students' opportunity to acquire new knowledge and understanding. The cognitive load on a student is typically assessed either objectively, by taking physiological measurements while the student is learning, or subjectively, by asking the student to complete an appropriate questionnaire after the learning experience. However, there are circumstances in which a decision on learning materials must be made before those materials are developed and deployed, whereupon it is not helpful to measure the students during learning or to survey them after learning. Such circumstances necessitate a completely different approach, in which the assessment of the likely imposition of cognitive load is made by the instructors and informs the development of the learning materials. This paper explores such a situation: the choice of a programming language and integrated development environment for an introductory programming course. The paper explains the impracticality of addressing this choice by way of the usual measures of cognitive load. It then presents the approach that was used, flipping the assessment of expected cognitive load from the students to the instructors. The paper explains how this was done, presents the findings, and concludes by suggesting possibilities for future work in the area.

[1]  R. Mayer,et al.  When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? , 2001 .

[2]  P. Chandler,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction , 1991 .

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

[4]  Graham Cooper,et al.  Introductory programming courses in Australia and New Zealand in 2013 - trends and reasons , 2014, ACE.

[5]  Carsten Schulte,et al.  What do teachers teach in introductory programming? , 2006, ICER '06.

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

[7]  Benedict duBoulay,et al.  Some Difficulties of Learning to Program , 1986 .

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

[9]  N. Cowan The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[10]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction, 5 Edition , 2009 .

[11]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  When problem solving is superior to studying worked examples. , 2001 .

[12]  Mark Guzdial,et al.  Subgoal-labeled instructional material improves performance and transfer in learning to develop mobile applications , 2012, ICER '12.

[13]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction , 1999 .

[14]  Graham Cooper,et al.  Research into Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design at UNSW , 2008 .

[15]  Frederick W. B. Li,et al.  Failure rates in introductory programming revisited , 2014, ITiCSE '14.

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

[17]  F. Marton,et al.  ON QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING: I—OUTCOME AND PROCESS* , 1976 .

[18]  Graham Cooper,et al.  Using Cognitive Load Theory to select an Environment for Teaching Mobile Apps Development , 2015, ACE.

[19]  J. Sweller,et al.  Effects of schema acquisition and rule automation on mathematical problem-solving transfer. , 1987 .

[20]  Jens Bennedsen,et al.  Failure rates in introductory programming , 2007, SGCS.

[21]  R. Catrambone The subgoal learning model: Creating better examples so that students can solve novel problems. , 1998 .

[22]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory , 2020, Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies.

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

[24]  Graham Cooper,et al.  Trends in introductory programming courses in Australian universities: languages, environments and pedagogy , 2012, ACE 2012.

[25]  Caitlin Kelleher,et al.  Using storytelling to motivate programming , 2007, CACM.

[26]  Duane Buck,et al.  Design early considered harmful: graduated exposure to complexity and structure based on levels of cognitive development , 2000, SIGCSE '00.

[27]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction , 1998 .

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

[29]  Mark Guzdial,et al.  Measuring cognitive load in introductory CS: adaptation of an instrument , 2014, ICER '14.

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

[31]  Michael Kölling,et al.  The BlueJ System and its Pedagogy , 2003, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[32]  David Cornforth,et al.  Teaching mobile apps for windows devices using TouchDevelop , 2014, ACE.

[33]  Michael P. Rogers,et al.  Smart smartphone development: iOS versus android , 2011, SIGCSE.

[34]  Sharon K Tindall-Ford,et al.  Learning by imagining. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[35]  J. Sweller,et al.  Locus of Difficulty in Multistage Mathematics Problems , 1990 .

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

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

[38]  G. A. Miller THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

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

[40]  P. Chandler,et al.  Why Some Material Is Difficult to Learn , 1994 .