Archives
Current issue
About
About us
Aims and Scope
Abstracting and Indexing
Editorial Office
Open Access Policy
Publication Ethics
Journal History
Publisher
Follow us: Twitter
Contact
For Authors
Editorial Policy
Peer Review Policy
Manuscript Preparation Guidelines
Copyright & Licencing
Publication Fees
Fee Waiver Policy for Doctoral Students
EJMSTE Language Editing Service
More
Statistics
Special Issues
Special Issue Announcements
Published Special Issues
RESEARCH PAPER
A Practical New 21st Century Learning Theory for Significantly Improving STEM Learning Outcomes at all Educational Levels
1
SPM Consulting, AUSTRALIA
2
Assumption University, THAILAND
Publication date: 2022-01-10
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2022;18(2):em2073
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Current educational theories, such as Constructivism, are based on subjective principles which are
open to interpretation and may result in wide variations in the quality of learning outcomes.
Cognitive Load Optimization is a new quantitative, Science of Learning theory. Using this method,
it is possible to define schemas (mental patterns of knowledge) with the quantitatively optimized
minimum cognitive load which are the basis of instructional material development. Such materials
represent the easiest possible learning paths. In one proof of concept experiment this new method
was used to teach first year undergraduate mathematics to mature students in online mode. The
pass rate and retention rates were both 100% and all learning objectives were met. Extensive
evaluations strongly suggest that Cognitive Load Optimization can significantly improve teaching
and learning outcomes in all STEM disciplines at all educational levels – primary and secondary
school, college and university.
REFERENCES (44)
1.
Bannert, M. (2002). Managing cognitive load - recent trends in cognitive load theory. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 139-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-....
2.
Berliner, D. C. (2002). Educational research: The hardest science of all. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 18-20. https://doi.org/10.3102/001318....
3.
Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy (Structure of the observed learning outcome). Academic Press.
4.
Cheng, E. W. L. (2016). Learning through variation theory: A case study. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 28(2), 283-292.
5.
de Jong, T. (2010). Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: some food for thought. Instructional Science, 38, 105-134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251....
6.
Diekhoff, G. M. (1983). Relationship judgements in the evaluation of structural understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 227-233. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0....
7.
Education. (2006). The research agenda for the new discipline of engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(4), 259-261. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168....
8.
Grover, D., & Winton, S. (2017). Digital technologies for the Australian curriculum. A project-based approach for years 7 and 8. Cengage.
9.
Halford, G. S., Wilson, W. H., & Phillips, S. (1998). Processing capacity defined by relational complexity: Implications for comparative, developmental, and cognitive psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21(6), 803-831. https://doi.org/10.1017/S01405....
10.
Happs, J. C. (1985). Cognitive learning theory and classroom complexity. Research in Science and Technology Education, 3, 159-174. https://doi.org/10.1080/026351....
11.
Hattie, J. (2004). Cognitive processes in AsTTle: The SOLO taxonomy. Ministry of Education.
12.
Holkner, B., Romeo, G., Henderson, M., Auld, G., Russell, G., Seah, W. T., & Fernando, A. (2008). Exemplar schools using innovative learning technologies. https://research.monash.edu/en....
15.
Keppens, J., & Hay, D. (2008). Concept map assessment for teaching computer science programming. Computer Science Education, 18(1), 31-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/089934....
16.
Klausmeirer, H. J. (1992). Concept learning and concept teaching. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 267-289. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326....
17.
Kolling, M. (2010). The greenfoot programming environment. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 10(4), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1145/186835....
19.
Lyons, T. (2004). Choosing physical science courses: The importance of cultural and social capital in enrolment decisions of high achieving students [Paper presentation]. IOSTE X1 Symposium, Lublin, Poland.
20.
Maj, S. P. (2018). Cognitive load optimization - A new, practical, easy-to-use method for enhancing STEM educational outcomes based on the science of learning [Paper presentation]. 2018 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering, Wollongong, Australia. https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE.2....
21.
Maj, S. P. (2020). Cognitive load optimization - A statistical evaluation for three STEM disciplines [Paper presentation]. IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering, Takamatsu, Japan. https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE48....
22.
Maj, S. P. (2021a). Benchmarking educational quality - An independent analysis and alternative approach [Paper presentation]. 38th International Conference on Innovation, Practice & Research in the use of Educational Technologies in Tertiary Education, On line. https://doi.org/10.14742/ascil....
23.
Maj, S. P. (2021b). A new 21st century quantitative learning theory for improving STEM education in both face to face and online modes [Paper presentation]. STEM 2021, Vancouver, Canada.
24.
Maj, S. P. (2021c). World class STEM – Benchmarking and delivering based on evidence based cognitive science [Paper presentation]. IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering, Wuhan, China.
25.
Maj, S. P., & Nuangjamnong, C. (2020). Using cognitive load optimization to teach STEM disciplines to business students [Paper presentation]. IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering, Takamatsu, Japan. https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE48....
26.
Maj, S. P., & Veal, D. (2007). State model diagrams as a pedagogical tool - An international evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Education, 50(3), 204-207. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.200....
27.
Maj, S. P., Kohli, G., & Fetherston, T. (2005). A pedagogical evaluation of new state model diagrams for teaching internetwork technologies [Paper presentation]. 28th Australasian Computer Science Conference, Newcastle, Australia.
28.
Merrill, M. D., & Tennyson, R. D. (1977). Teaching concepts: An instructional design guide. Educational Technology Publications.
29.
Meyer, B. J. F. (1985). Signalling the structure of text. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Technology of text (Vol. 2). Educational Technology Publications.
30.
Nagy, P. (1984). Cognitive structure and the spatial metaphor. In N. P. (Ed.), The representation of cognitive structure. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
32.
Nuangjamnong, C., & Maj, S. P. (2022). Students behaviour intention to adopt cognitive load optimization to teach STEM in graduate studies. Journal of Education Naresan University, 24(3).
33.
PCAST. (2012). Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. https://obamawhitehouse.archiv....
35.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1979). In search of a better way of organising instruction: The elaboration theory. Journal of Instructional Development, 2, 8-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0298....
36.
Skinner, B. F. (1950). Are theories of learning necessary. Psychological Review, 57, 193-216. https://doi.org/10.1037/h00543....
38.
Thickett, G., & Stamell, J. (2012). Science study guide year 8. Get the results you want. Pascal Press.
39.
Thomas, M. S. C., & McClelland, J. L. (2008). Connectionist models of cognition. In Cambridge handbook of computational psychology (pp. 23-58). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978....
40.
Thomson, W. (1889). Electrical units of measurements. In Popular lectures and addresses (pp. 73-136). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978....
41.
Valcke, M. (2002). Cognitive load: Updating the theory. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 147-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-....
42.
Weinstein, Y., Madan, C. R., & Sumeracki, M.A. (2018). Teaching the science of learning. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 3, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235....
44.
Williamson, K., & Garton, A. (2020). Science essentials 8 (Australian curriculum ed.). Colin McNeil.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1305-8223 |
| ISSN: | 1305-8215 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
