How do we Learn? Exploring Cognitive Architecture in the Light of Cognitive Load Theory
In many ways, English as a second language teachers have always been slightly ahead of the curve when it comes to rooting classroom practice in theory. Exploring theories of second language acquisition is par for the course on any ESL initial teacher training course (such as the Celta), with deeper study necessitated by master’s degrees or the Delta. This is not something that is often replicated in non-ESL teacher training courses, although it is beginning to become more common. During my PGCE, I did not explore how students learn, except perhaps a cursory interaction with the questionable theory of learning styles. If, as educators, we are in the business of helping students to learn, it is fundamental that we have access to the latest developments in cognitive psychology. If we are going to maximise students’ learning in our classrooms, it is crucial that we have a working understanding of what is termed ‘cognitive architecture’. This refers to the theorised structure of the human mind. Providing an introduction to cognitive architecture is the objective of this article. It must be noted that the concept of cognitive architecture is not biological. Rather, it is a symbolic (but highly accurate) representation of the human capacity to memorise and learn.
Working Memory, Long-Term Memory, and Learning
Learning is connected to memory. It is questionable whether we can claim to have learnt that which we cannot remember. It has long been recognised that there is a distinction between ‘working’ and ‘long-term’ memory. Working memory can be considered the store in which information is retained for a brief period while performing a particular function. It is where you (used to) store a phone number before writing it down, or where newly introduced information goes while you are reading a book. It is limited in size. Unless you have an unusually strong working memory (which is possible), you will struggle to store more than five pieces of information in it. Once you reach the limit of your working memory, you will experience cognitive overload. Therefore, much like a very small USB storage device, it only has a certain quantity of space in which to place ideas. Once it begins to be overloaded, working memory will erase (or release) information so as to make space for incoming content. Furthermore, working memory is not permanent. Information cannot be stored in working memory for long, as, due to its limited capacity, it will be soon be wiped so as to be used for another task.
Long-term memory on the other hand is potentially limitless. It is where you store embarrassing memories, the capital cities that you learnt as a child, or even the way back to your house. It is possible for information stored in the long-term memory to be released if it is not used, but this takes place over an extended period of time. The meanings of the vast majority of words you know are stored in your long-term memory. Due to the fact that information placed in long-term memory can potentially be stored indefinitely compared to the fleeting recollection of concepts stored in the working memory, Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006) define learning as ‘a change in long-term memory’. The recollection of information stored in the working memory is termed ‘performance’. Therefore, when, at the plenary stage of a lesson, a student is able to recall all of the key information presented during the class, this is not evidence of learning. This is ‘performance’, as the student is merely regurgitating the information stored in her working memory. According to Willingham (2008), memory is the remnants of our thoughts. Therefore, storing information in working memory is the beginning of the learning process, as a nascent memory of the new information will be encoded in the long-term memory. However, should this nascent memory not be revisited swiftly after the initial encoding (within a few days at most), it will fade and eventually disappear. That is why retrieval practice is so crucial. According to this understanding of cognitive architecture, it is practically impossible for a student to learn a new concept following a single exposure to it. Therefore, practice and repetition are a central element of the learning process. By facilitating the retrieval of information presented in previous lessons from long-term memory to working memory, the encoding of this information in the long-term memory is strengthened. Furthermore, multiple opportunities to practice using newly presented information also aids the encoding process.
Cognitive Load Theory
Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) refers to a number of ideas initially developed by Sweller (1988), all of which relate to the amount of information that working memory can hold at any one time. Its application in education is designed to reduce unnecessary cognitive load on students, providing them with the mental space to focus on the content being presented. As teachers, we frequently yet unknowingly overload students’ working memory. For example, when tasks or activities are sufficiently complicated to require students to ask questions about how to do them, we must realise that their working memories are filling up with the instructions rather than the information that the task is designed to teach them. When students are expending energy considering how to do an activity, there is less space in their working memory to store the crucial target knowledge that is the objective of the task. Hence, to avoid cognitive overload, keep tasks simple, keep instructions concise, and place emphasis at the design stage upon ensuring students engage with the target knowledge as swiftly as possible. It is meaningful interaction with the content, not complicated tasks, that best serve the learning of students.
Another aspect of CLT is avoiding the split attention effect. Projectors and PowerPoint presentations are a ubiquitous presence in classrooms these days, and many teachers spend hours producing slides that they believe will aid the learning process. Once again, with the best intentions, this practice may be overloading students’ working memory. Firstly, presenting large amounts of information all at once is almost certain to overwhelm students. Hence, breaking new concepts and ideas down into manageable chunks helps to reduce cognitive load. Furthermore, the common practice of reading the information contained on PowerPoint slides to the class splits student attention. Students have to work out whether to read the text presented on the screen or listen to the teacher, further dividing their already limited working memory. Therefore, keeping slides content-light and explicitly directing students as to where their attention should be placed (on the teacher or on the slides) further reduces cognitive load.
Finally, the quantity and nature of teacher talk also impacts upon cognitive load. Presenting additional but unnecessary details or anecdotes can be attractive, but it can also be entirely counterproductive. When students are provided with too much information, they are required to sift through the content in order to find that which is relevant, wasting valuable working memory. As a result, it is useful for teachers to be absolutely certain of the key information that they wish to present to students prior to the lesson. When clarifying complex grammatical concepts or the meaning of challenging vocabulary, it may be worthwhile scripting explanations beforehand. Scripting enables the teacher to produce succinct, accurate explanations away from the pressured environment of the classroom. By presenting the key points in simple and easy-to-understand language, cognitive load is reduced, and space is freed up in the working memory for students to store new information.
Kirschner, P., Sweller, J., and Clark, R. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction does not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist 41(2).
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning. Cognitive Science (April, 1988).
Willingham, D. (2008). What Will Improve a Student’s Memory? American Educator Winter 2008–2009.
Available from: https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/periodicals/willingham_0.pdf
