,
6 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
Several interesting tensions between Sweller et al. (2006 -Left) and Sweller et al. (2019 -Rigth) in relation to Cognitive Load Theory.
1) The notion that complete information is always best (2006) contrasts the importance of problem solving to more expert learners (2019)
1) The notion that complete information is always best (2006) contrasts the importance of problem solving to more expert learners (2019)
2) Compounded in 2006 with the strong statement that everything points towards strong guidance (am skimming the fact that the contrast with no/minimal guidance seems somewhat silly). Contrasting guidance fading effect. Note that a few years of study may constitute expertise!
3) Big tension between the idea that problem solving places too heavy a demand on a learner (2006) to the idea that self explanation or even imagination activities might well have impact
4) Point made that knowledge is most important and learning rules of problem solving less so (2006). Tensions here with the idea that students might learn how to manage cognitive load (2019).
5) More implicit criticisms of group-type activities as inherently problematic (2006) are brought into question (2019)
6) Crucially CLT sees learning as divorced from other psychological factors like motivation, emotion etc (2006) but this is now a key research area (2019)
6) Crucially CLT sees learning as divorced from other psychological factors like motivation, emotion etc (2006) but this is now a key research area (2019)
Moral: CLT is a theory so we shouldn't expect it to provide concrete or universal educational solutions.
That said, it would have been better for Sweller et al to be less bullish with their findings.
If you've not read Sweller et al (2019), I would: link.springer.com/article/10.100…
That said, it would have been better for Sweller et al to be less bullish with their findings.
If you've not read Sweller et al (2019), I would: link.springer.com/article/10.100…
