Introduction
The topic of cognitive load relates to the cognitive psychology school of thought. According to Whade (2017), the cognitive load theory (CLT) was pioneered by John Sweller, a University of New South Whales education psychologist, in 1988. Whade (2017) further opines that the CLT is an instructional design approach that reflects human beings’ cognitive architecture, addressing the ways and conditions under which the brain processes multiple pieces of information. The cognitive load theory is paramount because it addresses the different instructional design strategies which both learners and educators can adapt to ensure academic excellence. Therefore, cognitive psychology supports the cognitive load topic. It helps fix the working memory resource depletion and creates an environment-memorability understanding, and the traditional experimental methods and brain-based studies will lead to the actualization.
Main body
The main issue involved in the cognitive load topic is that wrong strategies are incorporated into the teaching and learning process, making students use their working memory. According to de Jong (2010), learning requires maximum use of limited active memory. Internal and external factors, including depression and a distractive learning environment, make it hard for learners to concentrate on the necessary information, making learning complex. As a result, Kirschner (2002) asserts that CLT aids in postulating standards to help data introduction support scholars’ exercises, which subsequently improve academic performance. Chen et al. (2018) reiterate that intensive mental efforts drastically reduce a person’s limited working memory. Therefore, the retrogressive strategies incorporated in the teaching and learning process are the main barriers affecting the limited working memory, preventing learners from achieving epitome educational outcomes.
Cognitive psychology aligns and supports cognitive load considering that it helps to fix the working memory resource depletion. Fraser et al. (2018) assert that cognitive psychology incorporates the power of debriefing simulation to promote learners’ cognitive load capacity. It is one of the critical catalysts which accelerates learning among learners. Simulation promotes the extraneous load, which consequently affects the overall capacity of the working memory. Leppink (2017) alludes that extraneous activities reduce the functionality of the working memory. Waude (2017) advises teachers that they should avoid extraneous distractions in the classroom to ensure that students develop excellent memories and grasp different topical concepts effectively. When disturbances that divert the learners’ attention are eliminated, there is a high chance that the student will be active in class, reckoning the information and storing it in long-term memory. Zambrano et al. (2018) mention that cognitive psychology activates the brain to perform various tasks. Learners will develop a sufficient interest in learning, hence performing exemplarily in their respective subjects and courses. Thus, the cognitive psychology school of thought supports and aligns with the cognitive load because it aids in depleted memory fixation among students.
Cognitive psychology supports and aligns with the cognitive load topic since it develops a critical understanding of the relationship between the surroundings and the student’s memory ability. According to Sewell et al. (2017), parents, environment, and the learner’s general well-being determine their performance. For instance, fatigue can reduce the level of performance among students. Moreover, a noisy environment tends to be destructive, hence decreasing the concentration degree in a learner. There are surroundings that are unconducive, making it hectic for a learner to concentrate in class. Mitra et al. (2017) add that the cognitive psychology approach allows instructors to comprehend the prudence of stimulating the analysis of complex tasks among learners. Teachers apply the philosophy of moving from the known to the unknown, whereby they introduce what students know first and subsequently continue to move toward what learners do not know. As a result, scholars easily relate the unknown information to the already acquired data, hence understanding the whole topic comprehensively. Holistically, the cognitive psychology school of thought affiliates with the cognitive load because it gives instructors a glimpse of the partnership between the surrounding environment and students’ memorability potential.
Distinctively, the applied and philosophical elements of the cognitive psychology school of thought will guide this study’s design and develop a better understanding of the cognitive load topic. The principles and values of cognitive psychology involve understanding how the different parts of the brain coordinate to enhance information’s effective storage. Instructors will effectively comprehend how students learn and remember information through meaningful learning and information processing. Hadie and Yusoff (2016) depict that the learning environment determines the level of data dispensation among learners, and adopting the cognitive load design aids in accelerating memorability among individuals. Moreover, the two applied elements which can enhance effective findings on the topic include traditional experimental methods and brain-based studies (Capella, n.d.). According to Kalyuga and Singh (2016), the traditional approaches, including experiments, have attained critical results that have enhanced the attainment of domain-unique schemas, hence meeting the conforming cognitive processes. Different traditional approaches and comprehending the brain’s functionality in information acquisition are the applied and philosophical elements, respectively, which will elaborate and guide more regarding this research study.
Conclusion
In conclusion, cognitive load is a critical topic that requires authentic and in-depth research to enable instructors to comprehend the best instructional designs they can apply. Cognitive psychology ropes cognitive load topic gives a solution to the working memory resource depletion. It creates a relationship between the environment and memorability. This study will be actualized through traditional experimental methods and brain-based studies. Above all, the research will develop a comprehensive outcome regarding the strategies that teachers need to employ to make excellent use of the learners’ limited working memory.
References
Capella. (n.d.). Current Psychological Schools of Thought. Web.
Chen, O., Castro-Alonso, J. C., Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2018). Extending cognitive load theory to incorporate working memory resource depletion: Evidence from the Spacing Effect. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 483-501. Web.
De Jong, T. (2010). Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: Some Food for Thought. Instructional Science, 38(2), 105-134. Web.
Fraser, K. L., Meguerdichian, M. J., Haws, J. T., Grant, V. J., Bajaj, K., & Cheng, A. (2018). Cognitive Load Theory for debriefing simulations: Implications for Faculty Development. Advances in Simulation, 3(1), 28. Web.
Hadie, S. N., & Yusoff, M. S. (2016). Assessing the validity of the cognitive load scale in a problem-based learning setting.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 11(3), 194-202. Web.
Kalyuga, S., & Singh, A. M. (2016). Rethinking the boundaries of cognitive load theory in complex learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 831-852. Web.
Leppink, J. (2017). Cognitive load theory: Practical implications and an important challenge. Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 12(5), 385-391. Web.
Mitra, R., McNeal, K. S., & Bondell, H. D. (2017). Pupillary response to complex interdependent tasks: A cognitive-load Theory Perspective. Behavior Research Methods, 49(5), 1905-1919. Web.
Sewell, J. L., Boscardin, C. K., Young, J. Q., ten Cate, O., & O’Sullivan, P. S. (2017). Learner, patient, and supervisor features are associated with different cognitive load types during procedural skills training: Implications for teaching and instructional design. Academic Medicine, 92(11), 1622-1631. Web.
Waude, A. (2017). Cognitive Load Theory: How ‘cognitive load’ affects memory. Psychologist World Online Journal. 12. Web.
Zambrano, J., Kirschner, P., Kirschner, F., & Sweller, J. (2018). From cognitive load theory to collaborative cognitive load theory. 13(1), 213-233. Web.