What is Cognitive Load Theory?

Cognitive Load Theory:
10 Things You Need to Know.

In 2017 Dylan Wiliam tweeted to the education world that he had ‘come to the conclusion Sweller’s Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) is the single most important thing for teachers to know’. Back came a tweet, ‘shouldn’t they know their students?’. I’m not sure if that was a wisecrack or a serious challenge to CLT. Either way, it shows how easy it is to misunderstand the offering that CLT provides to teachers. The great thing about CLT is that it is a lens through which to view learning before teaching. CLT provides the door into a new age of teaching that allows us to leave behind any teaching strategies that weren’t in alignment with the research into how the human brain learns. For too long teachers have been blind to the architecture of the human brain…the only place where learning actually happens! According to CLT, when it comes to providing a productive and yet manageable cognitive challenge to students, then we need to know students’ brains. Indeed, it is CLT that invites us to really know our students. CLT invites us all to consider the brain first, learning second and teaching third. Further to this, the CLT door isn’t just the end of the ‘teaching-blind journey’, it’s also the beginning of a new journey. If you’re just stepping through this door and you wish to know what CLT is, then you might find it useful to read what I consider to be the 10 things you need to know about CLT. I ’ve written a short ‘start-up’ booklet that unpacks these 10 things. It can be found here. My aim is that on reading this document you will quickly grasp the key principles of CLT. There is more to be said for each aspect of CLT, and there is a wealth of research to read, so, enjoy! It’s a wonderful journey and, by traveling with intellectual humility, we can all travel it together!

The 10 things you need to know are:

  1. The working memory of the brain is very limited.
  2. Use explicit instruction for new content.
  3. New knowledge needs to then be stored in the long term memory, ready for retrieval and transfer.
  4. Learning happens through schema extension and connection.
  5. Break the curriculum down into very small chronological parts.
  6. Know the learners’ background knowledge.
  7. Focus the attention of learners on the new content…only!
  8. Teaching becomes redefined as ‘focussing, guiding and responding’
  9. Identify the key schemas operating across the bigger learning journey.
  10. Systemise CLT across the school to maintain CLT principles and reduce workload.

Cognitive Load Theory Download

Download your FREE Cognitive Load Theory booklet here

Share this:

Yes, Zero Marking!

Yes, Zero Marking!

Big Maths Beat That isn’t like any other assessment and tracking system. It is at the very centre of the school’s entire maths curriculum. It is the engine room of the pedagogy, as opposed to ‘bolt on tracking’. If you were told to throw out all your tracking systems, unless you desperately wanted to keep them for your own purpose, then BMBT would remain. When the curriculum, pedagogy and tracking are one, then you have an easy and natural response to the question, ‘What impact is our curriculum having on our children’s learning?’

The progression and the content of the BMBT challenges are at one with the curriculum design and the age-related expectations from the national curriculum, this means that at any moment in time we can see if a child is on track, off track or ahead of track. This all happens through a simple scoring system. If we take the 19 progressive ‘CLIC Challenges’, we can see that if a child is currently on CLIC Challenge 12 (i.e. CLIC Challenge 11 is too easy and CLIC Challenge 13 is, as yet, too difficult) and has attained 6 out of 10, they would score 12.6. If they carry out the same challenge next week (with only slightly different numbers involved in the questions) and score 7 out of 10 their score goes up to 12.7.

Continue reading
Share this:

The CLT-Driven Curriculum

The CLT-Driven Curriculum

The implications of Cognitive Load Theory for teachers are becoming well established. However, the end result for busy teachers can end up looking like a list of ‘tips for teachers’ (‘remember not to have unnecessary animations in your powerpoint slides’, ‘remember to wait in silence while learners are processing new information before talking again’ etc.). This would be a serious watering down of the extensive research that has gone into CLT and the profound implications for teachers that has come out of that research. So, can CLT actually transform teaching in the way that it promises, and, if so, how?

Continue reading
Share this:

Adaptive Teaching is Alive!

Adaptive Teaching is Alive!

In my previous post I noted that exploring adaptive teaching can lead schools into advancements with their curriculum design, quality of teaching, and, crucially, the joining of the two. Here, I present 2 basic features of curriculum design that spring out of adaptive teaching, and then 3 broad modes for approaching adapting teaching, and finally 3 classic implementation errors.

Curriculum Design: 2 Basic Features

There are two basic requirements of a curriculum designed for adaptive teaching (i.e. one that empowers the teacher to be constantly responding to learners in a purposeful way).

Continue reading
Share this:

Differentiation is Dead!

Differentiation is Dead!

I was an NQT in 1993. I can still recall the mixture of emotion in the last week of the summer holidays, preparing to launch into my teaching career proper. The usual format was to spend the day excitedly cutting out giant letters for display and writing names on books/pegs/trays etc. only to be followed by a night of waking up in a cold sweat, having dreamt – yet again – that I’d lost control of the class. Except, one night I slept really well; I was so happy because, I’d had the brilliant idea to call my higher ability group ‘Smarties’! Of course this meant calling my middle ability group ‘Skittles’ and my low ability group ‘M&Ms’. By definition, I had already told two of my groups that I didn’t consider them ‘smart’. I shudder to think of the long term damage being a member of ‘The M&Ms Group’ had on those poor children (now aged 34); but that was the way of it at that time. Every primary teacher had fixed ability groups, notwithstanding the occasional battle for individual promotion/relegation from group to group.

Continue reading
Share this: