Annotated Bibliographies for Module 3
Reading #1
Driscoll, M. (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (3rd ed.). 77-91. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
This chapter continues a previous discussion by the author of the human Information Processing System. It has been experimentally demonstrated that a storage area exists in this system that registers and holds incoming information for extremely brief periods of time. This area is known as the sensory memory. Experiments, such as those conducted by Sperling (1960), suggest that brief exposures to visual inputs (even just milliseconds in length) is enough to reach sensory memory. While this information registers in sensory memory very quickly, it will decay equally as quick without additional processing. The concept of attention, both selective and automatic, relates to the function of sensory memory. With selective attention, the learner is directly involved in selecting and processing certain pieces of information while simultaneously ignoring other pieces. A desirable goal for educators is for attention to become so habitual and well-learned that it reaches a stage of automaticity.
One way this occurs is by pattern recognition. This is a process where stimuli are recognized by the learner as related to concepts already in memory. Two models of pattern recognition are discussed in the article: the prototype model and the feature analysis model. While separate models, both feature a great deal of similarity in that they explain how learners process incoming information and define meaning by comparing the input to schemas already in memory. Information selected for additional processing proceeds to working memory. It is here that concepts already in long-term memory are activated to process the new information. There is a limit as to how long information can remain in this part of memory, with seven bits of information seeming to be the standard memory span for a variety of materials. By combing these bits of information into larger chunks, it is possible to expand the amount of material contained in working memory. The processes of rehearsal and encoding are successful in preventing the loss of information from working memory.
Reading #2
Baddeley, A.D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559.
This article presents the changing scientific perspectives on working memory structures with an emphasis on how this theoretical framework is thought to function based on current research. Early scholarship suggested working memory existed as a single short-term memory structure; however, by the 1970s researchers began to put forth a dichotomous model for working memory that exhibits storage and processing functions simultaneously. This complex model divides the working memory into three areas: the central executive (which serves an attentional control function), the visuospatial sketchpad (for processing of visual images), and the phonological loop (which stores and rehearses auditory and speech-based information). Additional research in this area suggests that overall coordination of resources between storage and processing is the main function of the working memory structure. The author constructs working memory as a coordination between the subordinate slave structures of the visuospatial sketchpad and phonological loop, controlled by the functioning of the central executive. Whereas the model of working memory described in this model is a major advancement over previous scholarship centered on a single short-term memory structure, the author clearly states that more research into the links between these three areas is still necessary.
Reading #3
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81.
In a classic article from the field of psychology, Miller (1956) examines experimental research exploring the limits of information that can be effectively processed and stored in working memory. Many of the studies cited in the article revolve around the concept of absolute judgment, which is judgment based on a single stimulus. This principle says that as input information is increased, there will be a steady increase in the response demonstrated by a subject until a certain point at which the increase will level off. This point is known as the channel capacity of the subject. Cited studies examining the absolute judgment of unidimensional stimuli all reflect a similar magnitude of results, with capacity for unidimensional judgments being rather small (somewhere near seven bits of information) no matter which sense is involved in the stimulus. In studies examining multidimensional stimuli, results suggest that the second variable expands the overall channel capacity, but not significantly so. Rather, it seems that as more variables are added, total capacity increases but overall accuracy decreases. This limitation is part of a principle described as the span of immediate memory. This limit in accuracy is also found to be somewhere around seven bits of information. People can get around this limitation a number of ways (such as specifically arranging the elements of a task in order to facilitate a greater memory or by making judgments more relative instead of absolute) but the fact remains that there are limitations to the immediate memory of people. The author returns to his thesis that the integer of seven appears many times in research of working memory. Immediate memory, span of attention, and absolute judgment all seem to have a magnitude of (or very close to) seven. Miler states that assuming a correlation between these factors and the number seven is tempting, but incorrect, and represents a fundamental flaw of analyzing this number as it relates to working memory.
Reading #4:
Kalyuga, S. (2010). Schema acquisition and sources of cognitive load. In J.L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken, Cognitive Load Theory (pp. 48-64). New York: Cambridge.
This article explains the impact of cognitive load on schematic acquisition in working memory structures. Schemas can be thought of as prior knowledge or understanding, created and stored in long-term memory through prior experiences and the construction of meaningful relationships between the elements of a skill or task. Essentially, learning is the process of schema acquisition. Miller (1956) describes the concept of schematic structures as “chunks” in his article from this week’s assigned readings. Schemas are constructed by organizing bits of information into related chunks for easy recall and long-term storage. Well-developed schematic structures serve to reduce the cognitive demands on working memory. This positive impact on cognitive functioning leads to improved task performance, which explains why experts do so well within specified domains of expertise. The magnitude of cognitive load felt by a learner is determined by the interaction between the learning elements of the task and their degree of expertise in the domain. Intrinsic cognitive load can lead to the development of long-term schematic structures of memory through learning new material; extraneous or excessive cognitive loads can interfere or completely stop the learning process. To minimize extraneous cognitive load, the author suggests three principles that should be followed when designing learning sequences: (a) the direct initial instruction principle, which entails providing worked examples to novice learners that build up knowledge at cognitively appropriate intervals; (b) the expertise principle, which calls for adapting instruction to the changing levels of learner expertise; and (c) the small step-size of knowledge change principle, which states that the instructor should avoid providing too much information before the learner is ready in order to avoid excessive cognitive load.
Reading #5:
Kalyuga, S. (2006). Rapid cognitive assessment of learners’ knowledge structures. Learning and Instruction, 16, 1-11.
After years of teaching, one area that I always struggle with is how to effectively measure the background knowledge of my students prior to beginning instruction. The importance of students' background knowledge has been clearly stated in the literature related to cognitive load, but outside of traditional means of assessment (such as a written test), my knowledge of how to effectively measure these schematic structures is limited. I selected this article to learn more about this method of assessment. The author uses a rapid diagnostic method in this research study to assess learner’s knowledge structures with mathematic word problems. Two classes of 55 eighth-grade students in Australia made up the subject group of this study. First, students were presented with a set of 20 math word problems. They were directed to only write the initial step they would take to solve the problems; they did not completely work-out the problem to find the solution. The reason for this is so the author could determine the schematic knowledge and level of the student. It is theorized that students with well-developed levels of knowledge in the schematic area being assessed by a particular problem would indicate their advanced knowledge level with a well-designed response. Students with weak schematic knowledge would indicate an inefficient first-step towards finding a solution by their response. Secondly, students were given a “traditional” assessment in which they were to work out each problem and find a solution. Analysis of the results suggests that the first-step assessment approach could be successfully implemented in this domain of math word problems and statistical measurement of results could yield relevant information for educators. As a side benefit, the first-step assessment was significantly faster than the traditional method. Additional research is necessary in other disciplines to determine its effectiveness in other subject areas.
Driscoll, M. (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (3rd ed.). 77-91. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
This chapter continues a previous discussion by the author of the human Information Processing System. It has been experimentally demonstrated that a storage area exists in this system that registers and holds incoming information for extremely brief periods of time. This area is known as the sensory memory. Experiments, such as those conducted by Sperling (1960), suggest that brief exposures to visual inputs (even just milliseconds in length) is enough to reach sensory memory. While this information registers in sensory memory very quickly, it will decay equally as quick without additional processing. The concept of attention, both selective and automatic, relates to the function of sensory memory. With selective attention, the learner is directly involved in selecting and processing certain pieces of information while simultaneously ignoring other pieces. A desirable goal for educators is for attention to become so habitual and well-learned that it reaches a stage of automaticity.
One way this occurs is by pattern recognition. This is a process where stimuli are recognized by the learner as related to concepts already in memory. Two models of pattern recognition are discussed in the article: the prototype model and the feature analysis model. While separate models, both feature a great deal of similarity in that they explain how learners process incoming information and define meaning by comparing the input to schemas already in memory. Information selected for additional processing proceeds to working memory. It is here that concepts already in long-term memory are activated to process the new information. There is a limit as to how long information can remain in this part of memory, with seven bits of information seeming to be the standard memory span for a variety of materials. By combing these bits of information into larger chunks, it is possible to expand the amount of material contained in working memory. The processes of rehearsal and encoding are successful in preventing the loss of information from working memory.
Reading #2
Baddeley, A.D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559.
This article presents the changing scientific perspectives on working memory structures with an emphasis on how this theoretical framework is thought to function based on current research. Early scholarship suggested working memory existed as a single short-term memory structure; however, by the 1970s researchers began to put forth a dichotomous model for working memory that exhibits storage and processing functions simultaneously. This complex model divides the working memory into three areas: the central executive (which serves an attentional control function), the visuospatial sketchpad (for processing of visual images), and the phonological loop (which stores and rehearses auditory and speech-based information). Additional research in this area suggests that overall coordination of resources between storage and processing is the main function of the working memory structure. The author constructs working memory as a coordination between the subordinate slave structures of the visuospatial sketchpad and phonological loop, controlled by the functioning of the central executive. Whereas the model of working memory described in this model is a major advancement over previous scholarship centered on a single short-term memory structure, the author clearly states that more research into the links between these three areas is still necessary.
Reading #3
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81.
In a classic article from the field of psychology, Miller (1956) examines experimental research exploring the limits of information that can be effectively processed and stored in working memory. Many of the studies cited in the article revolve around the concept of absolute judgment, which is judgment based on a single stimulus. This principle says that as input information is increased, there will be a steady increase in the response demonstrated by a subject until a certain point at which the increase will level off. This point is known as the channel capacity of the subject. Cited studies examining the absolute judgment of unidimensional stimuli all reflect a similar magnitude of results, with capacity for unidimensional judgments being rather small (somewhere near seven bits of information) no matter which sense is involved in the stimulus. In studies examining multidimensional stimuli, results suggest that the second variable expands the overall channel capacity, but not significantly so. Rather, it seems that as more variables are added, total capacity increases but overall accuracy decreases. This limitation is part of a principle described as the span of immediate memory. This limit in accuracy is also found to be somewhere around seven bits of information. People can get around this limitation a number of ways (such as specifically arranging the elements of a task in order to facilitate a greater memory or by making judgments more relative instead of absolute) but the fact remains that there are limitations to the immediate memory of people. The author returns to his thesis that the integer of seven appears many times in research of working memory. Immediate memory, span of attention, and absolute judgment all seem to have a magnitude of (or very close to) seven. Miler states that assuming a correlation between these factors and the number seven is tempting, but incorrect, and represents a fundamental flaw of analyzing this number as it relates to working memory.
Reading #4:
Kalyuga, S. (2010). Schema acquisition and sources of cognitive load. In J.L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken, Cognitive Load Theory (pp. 48-64). New York: Cambridge.
This article explains the impact of cognitive load on schematic acquisition in working memory structures. Schemas can be thought of as prior knowledge or understanding, created and stored in long-term memory through prior experiences and the construction of meaningful relationships between the elements of a skill or task. Essentially, learning is the process of schema acquisition. Miller (1956) describes the concept of schematic structures as “chunks” in his article from this week’s assigned readings. Schemas are constructed by organizing bits of information into related chunks for easy recall and long-term storage. Well-developed schematic structures serve to reduce the cognitive demands on working memory. This positive impact on cognitive functioning leads to improved task performance, which explains why experts do so well within specified domains of expertise. The magnitude of cognitive load felt by a learner is determined by the interaction between the learning elements of the task and their degree of expertise in the domain. Intrinsic cognitive load can lead to the development of long-term schematic structures of memory through learning new material; extraneous or excessive cognitive loads can interfere or completely stop the learning process. To minimize extraneous cognitive load, the author suggests three principles that should be followed when designing learning sequences: (a) the direct initial instruction principle, which entails providing worked examples to novice learners that build up knowledge at cognitively appropriate intervals; (b) the expertise principle, which calls for adapting instruction to the changing levels of learner expertise; and (c) the small step-size of knowledge change principle, which states that the instructor should avoid providing too much information before the learner is ready in order to avoid excessive cognitive load.
Reading #5:
Kalyuga, S. (2006). Rapid cognitive assessment of learners’ knowledge structures. Learning and Instruction, 16, 1-11.
After years of teaching, one area that I always struggle with is how to effectively measure the background knowledge of my students prior to beginning instruction. The importance of students' background knowledge has been clearly stated in the literature related to cognitive load, but outside of traditional means of assessment (such as a written test), my knowledge of how to effectively measure these schematic structures is limited. I selected this article to learn more about this method of assessment. The author uses a rapid diagnostic method in this research study to assess learner’s knowledge structures with mathematic word problems. Two classes of 55 eighth-grade students in Australia made up the subject group of this study. First, students were presented with a set of 20 math word problems. They were directed to only write the initial step they would take to solve the problems; they did not completely work-out the problem to find the solution. The reason for this is so the author could determine the schematic knowledge and level of the student. It is theorized that students with well-developed levels of knowledge in the schematic area being assessed by a particular problem would indicate their advanced knowledge level with a well-designed response. Students with weak schematic knowledge would indicate an inefficient first-step towards finding a solution by their response. Secondly, students were given a “traditional” assessment in which they were to work out each problem and find a solution. Analysis of the results suggests that the first-step assessment approach could be successfully implemented in this domain of math word problems and statistical measurement of results could yield relevant information for educators. As a side benefit, the first-step assessment was significantly faster than the traditional method. Additional research is necessary in other disciplines to determine its effectiveness in other subject areas.