The role of memory, knowledge and

understanding in learning
HomeSchool resourcesScience of learning

March 2, 2021

While we may intuitively understand the crucial role of memory, knowledge and understanding in
learning, it is useful to unpack in more detail the building blocks of the learning process and
consider how we can use this information to support the learning and development of higher-
order thinking skills such as creativity and critical thinking.

Learning in the brain

The brain is composed of nerve cells, and their basic function is to communicate with each other
by transmitting and receiving signals. Our knowledge base is represented in networks of neurons,
and the ability to recall any given concept (a word, an object, a procedure) is based on a
synchronous activity of a specific neuronal network in response to a certain cue. The most
important feature of neuronal networks is plasticity – the ability to constantly change and create
new connections and patterns. This feature enables us to learn and remember. When we
experience something new, our neurons respond in a certain pattern, after which they undergo
consolidation to stabilise the newly activated pattern and newly created connections. This process
potentially enables us to recall this piece of new information in the future.

There are a number of factors that influence the quality of learning and have implications for
classroom practice:

• A new concept is always learned in association with existing knowledge

• The quantity of existing knowledge and the level to which it is interconnected influence the
quality of learning (more interconnected knowledge leads to easier and faster learning)
• Connections between new and old are formed following a mutual activation – the new
concept and the relevant existing knowledge are active and connected during learning
• The connections between the new concept and the prior knowledge need to be meaningful to
the learner
What is meaning?
Research shows that information is much better recalled if it is processed meaningfully during
learning. A new concept is considered to have meaning once it enables the brain to respond or, in
other words, once the new concept is integrated with existing knowledge in a way that supports an
action or a decision. For example, when a child learns the word ‘shoe’, it only becomes useful once
an effective association is made with the already familiar object. Once this connection has been
made, the child can understand the sentence ‘put on your shoe’ and respond to it: the new concept
can now be used to execute an action.

At the basic level, learning involves attaching a concrete meaning to a meaningless concept like a
word, such as the name of a person (‘Eli’), an action (‘play’) or an object (‘ball’). In order to be able
to attach meaning to a new concept, we need to be able to use it – for example, to ask Eli to play
ball. The recurrent successful use of a word reinforces the associations within the network, and
the concept becomes more robust. Creating meaning at this basic level of learning relies on
concrete experiences.

At higher levels of learning, concepts with concrete meaning are used as examples for more
abstract or more general concepts. For example, if we wish to teach what ‘equal’ means, we can
say ‘If Eli has one ball and Sam has one ball, then they have an equal number of balls’. We
establish the meaning of the new concept ‘equal’ on the basis of already known concepts (‘ball’,
‘Eli’, ‘has’, and so on). Later, we can connect ‘equal’ with more abstract concepts such as ‘equality’
or ‘equity’.

The relationship between memorising and understanding

When we memorise, we are able to recite a certain fact like ‘4 x 3 = 12’. A student who is able to do
this has a basic understanding of ‘four times three’ that allows them to use that information at a
low level and in a very specific context (such as answering a question in a maths quiz), but would
not demonstrate deep understanding of the concept of multiplication. To create a higher level of
understanding, we need to use concrete examples (‘Eli has three baskets, and there are four balls
in each basket’) and connect them explicitly (‘so we can say Eli has three times four balls’). If we
repeat this example and add others, making sure that the student is practising them repeatedly
and effectively, we establish an understanding of the concept of multiplication as opposed to a
rote memorisation of the fact ‘4 x 3 = 12’. As a higher-level concept, it will now be useful in various
situations, and can serve as a basis for future learning. Every time multiplication is used is an
opportunity to practise and to receive positive feedback that helps to anchor the concept in the
brain. Eventually, the student will master the concept and be able to use it effortlessly.

Memorising and understanding are not opposites but rather two components of the same thing.
We can map the common terms ‘memorising’ and ‘understanding’ on to lower and higher levels of
understanding respectively. Achieving understanding at each level is based on available
background knowledge and the meaningful connections that are learned and practised.

Knowledge versus understanding

Knowledge is the collection of concepts represented in the brain, and understanding is the
connections that they form, such that they are interrelated and dependent on each other. This
highlights two important features of the way our brains learn:

• It is hierarchical: new knowledge must be built on existing knowledge

• It is based on meaning: the glue that puts the pieces together is our ability to use the new in
the context of the existing
The learning process can be thought of as a pyramid, where the knowledge pieces are the bricks
and the structure they form depends on understanding. The final product is dependent on both:

As we learn more, we create more pyramids and more opportunities for higher-order learning
(where a whole pyramid becomes just a brick in a new one) and interdisciplinary learning (that is
supported by several other pyramids), as illustrated in the upper section of the diagram below.
When foundational knowledge and understanding are not in place, as in the lower section of the
diagram, learning will not be successful because the new information cannot connect with
existing knowledge.

Understanding the nature of this hierarchical and interconnected structure directs our attention to
two important issues:

• The ability to engage in higher-order learning is dependent on the solid structure of well-
established knowledge. This means that teaching wide and deep knowledge in meaningful
ways is a crucial goal of education, especially in the age of technology and readily available
information. Knowledge must be carefully learned and encoded in an individual’s brain in order
to support higher-order skills: learning knowledge and structuring it are essential for
meaningful understanding.
• Higher-order thinking skills, like critical thinking and creativity, are attained only on the basis
of a solid body of knowledge in a specific domain. There is no benefit in teaching critical
thinking or creativity as a general ‘skill’, as explained here in detail. Rather, we should build the
relevant body of knowledge and then deliberately practise the way of thinking we want to
students to develop.
Applications in the classroom
When students appear to be struggling to grasp new concepts, it may be because they lack either
sufficient relevant background knowledge or the ability to connect it meaningfully to new material.
Students who do not appear to demonstrate an understanding of concepts like multiplication or
photosynthesis may actually have understood them at a low level, which is sufficient to perform
only a narrow range of tasks, rather than having understood nothing at all. In order for a concept to
be retained in long-term memory, it is necessary to consolidate its meaning through ongoing
practice and reinforcement.

It is crucial for our students to attain higher-level understanding so that the knowledge they learn
at school will be accessible and useful to them in the future. To promote deep, higher-level
understanding in the classroom, it is important to focus on three basic components: new
knowledge, prior knowledge and meaningful connection:
1. New knowledge: the new concept needs to be explicit, distinct, and clear
Present the new concept before beginning the learning task to establish familiarity, if possible
even more than once. For example, you might write it on the board as a preview for the lesson, or
mention a concept in the context of future learning. It is also important to present the new concept
explicitly, clearly and distinctly to ensure processing. You can do this by:

• Explaining the concept explicitly and repeating it after a reasonable interval

• Giving a straightforward explanation, rather than letting students explore and discover (these
inquiry-based activities are more appropriate at later stages)
• Presenting only one new concept at a time, so as not to overload working memory resources
2. Prior knowledge: relevant prior knowledge needs to be available and active
Prior knowledge is the base of any learning pyramid, and is essential for future learning and
higher-order skills. It is important to teach a rigorous content-rich curriculum as facts are essential
bricks for future pyramids. There is ample evidence to support this. If prior knowledge is not
available, there is no other way but to teach it: time is better spent on teaching the basics than
trying to teach new content without it.

Relevant information also needs to be active at the time of learning. It is tempting to assume that
students intuitively relate new concepts to their background knowledge, but this is not always the
case, especially when they are novices. Having teachers review relevant material may also create
the illusion of active prior knowledge. Rather, retrieval practice in the form of a short questionnaire
on the required knowledge can be used as effective preparation for the learning, as well as a
source of formative assessment for the teacher to understand whether students have retained
relevant information.

3. Meaningful connections: create explicit and meaningful connections between prior knowledge
and new concepts
The connections between the new concepts and existing knowledge should be explicit. After you
have introduced and explained a new concept, you can establish these meaningful connections by
using the elaborative interrogation method, which prompts students to explicitly and specifically
explain the learned facts using questions like ‘why’ and ‘how’.

As connections are understood on the basis of already familiar connections, it is helpful to use
familiar and well-grounded concrete examples that represent the type of connections being
taught. The pyramid illustrations above are a concrete example of the relations between abstract
concepts knowledge and understanding. Other concrete examples that teachers can use include:

• Real objects (such as fingers) as examples for number concepts

• Matrices of real objects as examples for the multiplication concept
• Visual or physical models to help explain scientific concepts like DNA, forces, or currents
In order to ensure that students are able to make meaningful connections between concepts by
deeply understanding the concepts, it is important to use multiple concrete examples and make
explicit links between them, explaining the features they have in common.

Implications for students with different backgrounds

It is clear that the background knowledge each student has acquired is the basis of their individual
learning pyramids. This factor greatly influences how easily and how deeply they will engage in
new learning. If students’ prior knowledge is well established, it will be easier for them to utilise,
even without help from the teacher. However, when the background knowledge is shallow and not
practised, it is unlikely that students will utilise it effectively and independently. This means that
different students can be characterised as ‘quick learners’, ‘smart’ and even ‘creative’ just because
they have gained more knowledge and it is better established in their minds. As students learn
more, their ability to assimilate new knowledge grows – just like with pyramids, the wider the base,
the higher you can reach.

As teachers we can take steps to support students’ learning by focusing on allocating their
cognitive resources effectively. It is important to make sure that students gain new knowledge,
understand it, and then practise it to reach mastery. While talk about 21st century skills tends to
dominate current discourse about teaching and learning, research evidence makes it clear that
knowledge, understanding and deliberate practice are still the basis for all knowledge and skill
development. A teacher’s work is essential to making sure each student’s knowledge base is as
solid as possible so that they can freely explore opportunities that we cannot even imagine.

Recommended further reading

Willingham, D. T. (2009). Why don’t students like school?: A cognitive scientist answers questions
about how the mind works and what it means for the classroom. John Wiley & Sons.

It is based on research and written especially for teachers, includes clear explanation, compelling
examples and demonstrations (some of which can be shared with students as well), and
classroom applications. Specifically relevant are the following chapters:

Chapter 2: ‘Factual knowledge must precede skill’ on the importance of knowledge as building
blocks.

Chapter 4: ‘We understand new things in the context of things we already know, and most of what we
know is concrete’ on the importance of familiar concrete examples, deep knowledge and transfer.

References

Hirsch, E. D. (2003). Reading comprehension requires knowledge—of words and the

world. American Educator, 27(1), 10-
13. https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/periodicals/Hirsch.pdf

The Learning Scientists. (2018, January). Concrete examples. Retrieved from

https://www.learningscientists.org/learning-scientists-podcast/2018/1/3/episode-10-concrete-
examples?rq=concrete%20examples

Willingham, D. T. (2007). Critical thinking. American Educator, 31(3), 8-

19. https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/periodicals/Crit_Thinking.pdf

Willingham, D. T. (2006). How knowledge helps: It speeds and strengthens reading

comprehension, learning-and thinking. American Educator, 30(1), 30.

https://www.aft.org/periodical/american-educator/spring-2006/how-knowledge-helps
By Dr Efrat Furst

An introduction to cognitive load

theory
HomeSchool resourcesScience of learning

March 3, 2021

Without an understanding of human cognitive architecture, instruction is blind.[i]

Cognitive load theory helps us to understand how people generally learn and store new
information, and the types of instructional practices that best support learning. It draws on the
characteristics of working memory and long-term memory and the relationship between them to
explain how people learn. Cognitive load theory emerged in the late 1980s from the work of John
Sweller and his colleagues. The theory is based on our knowledge of the structure and processes
of the human mind, known as human cognitive architecture. Human cognitive architecture helps
us understand how we learn, think, and solve problems. It is considered to be a natural information
processing system that generates various procedures designed to reduce cognitive load and
facilitate the acquisition of biologically secondary knowledge held in long-term memory.

The distinction between biologically primary and biologically secondary

knowledge
There are two basic categories of knowledge, biologically primary and biologically secondary[ii].
Biologically primary knowledge is information humans have evolved to acquire over thousands of
generations. It is acquired unconsciously without instruction because it is necessary for the
survival of humans and their societies. Biologically primary knowledge includes general problem-
solving and thinking skills such as learning to speak and listen in a native language at a young age,
generalising, transferring, and performing simple social skills like recognising faces. Because we
have evolved to acquire such information automatically, it does not need to be taught and, since
we can learn biologically primary information easily, it does not impose a heavy cognitive load.

In contrast, biologically secondary knowledge relates to information that needs to be explicitly

taught and not left for students to discover. It requires conscious effort, and most subjects taught
in formal education belong in this category of information. Reading, writing, mathematics, history,
science, and other subjects traditionally taught in schools and universities are examples of
biologically secondary knowledge. Since the acquisition of biologically secondary information
requires conscious effort because it does not happen easily and automatically in the same way as
listening and speaking, it requires mental effort. In other words, it imposes a cognitive load.

Generic-cognitive skills and domain-specific skills

According to Sweller, most biologically primary knowledge results in generic-cognitive skills.
These are basic skills that can be applied across a variety of domains. On the other hand, most of
what is taught in educational institutions consists of domain-specific skills. Even though generic-
cognitive skills are far more important than domain-specific skills because they contribute to an
individual’s overall ability to adapt, learn and think independently, domain-specific skills are what
need to be taught because they are not acquired easily and unconsciously. Biologically secondary,
domain-specific skills need explicit instruction[iii] because, without it, most students will have to
use a trial-and-error strategy to find the solution to a problem, and that kind of strategy imposes a
heavy cognitive load.

Take as an example the specific problem-solving skills required to effectively solve the algebraic
equation: 2x – 40 = 60. One way to solve this equation would be to follow two solution steps.
Firstly, to add 40 to both sides of the equation to arrive at the simplified equation: 2x = 100; and
secondly, to divide both sides of the simplified equation by 2 to arrive at the answer: x = 50.
However, if a student attempts to solve the problem by using a trial-and-error strategy – for
example, by substituting multiple values for x to eventually reach a solution – this is likely to
impose a heavier burden on the working memory (or cognitive load), than if they are provided with
the solution steps. This biologically secondary, domain-specific skill – in this case, the
mathematical method for solving the equation – should be explicitly taught.

The relationship between working memory and long-term memory

Cognitive load theory explains the way that new knowledge is constructed in working memory, and
the way that permanent knowledge is built up and held in long-term memory – it explains how we
learn. Figure 1 below represents the aspects of the human memory system used to describe the
separate processes associated with working memory and long-term memory.

The general memory structure in Figure 1 shows that the memory system is not a unitary entity. In
other words, it is not just one system but rather two memory components that do not function
separately. These two components have links between them that represent separate processes.

Working memory is the conscious component of our memory where novel information is
temporarily stored and actively manipulated for reasoning, learning and comprehension. For
learning to occur, information must be processed in working memory for meaning before it is
passed into long-term memory. Long-term memory is the unconscious component of our
memory. If we have truly learnt something, it means we have stored it indefinitely in knowledge
structures known as schemas in our long-term memory. Schemas are activated when learners
deal with familiar information. When this trigger occurs, schemas are transferred from long-term
memory to be consciously processed in working memory for a specific purpose. This happens
automatically and easily because it is a biologically primary skill. A more knowledgeable learner in
a domain can effortlessly transfer large amounts of organised schematic information from long-
term memory to working memory to assist with carrying out complex problem-solving tasks
because their schemas are more sophisticated in magnitude, complexity and refinement than
those of a less knowledgeable learner.

Working memory has a limited capacity and can only remember roughly five to nine items or
chunks of novel information at any one time[iv]. In addition, only two to four chunks of novel
information can be simultaneously worked on or thought about in our working memory[v], which
means that we can work on only a very limited number of items when a task requires working
memory resources to process a new task. Furthermore, we can only hold this limited amount of
information in working memory for about 20 seconds without needing to prompt our memory[vi].
The limitations of our working memory result in cognitive load whenever we are presented with
new information.

Unlike working memory, long-term memory has no known limits. Furthermore, when familiar
information is transferred from long-term memory back to working memory to be used for
reasoning or problem solving, working memory has no limits on its capacity or duration. Working
memory only has limits when dealing with novel information, not familiar information from long-
term memory. Accordingly, when information is stored in long-term memory, the contents of our
mind change – this is the process of learning.

Why is it so important for teachers to know about cognitive load theory?

Cognitive load theory is vital for teachers to know about and understand because it helps them
reduce unnecessary cognitive load on students’ working memory in order to promote and optimise
learning. A student’s competence in a specific domain is dependent on what is stored in their long-
term memory. However, when a student does not have the prior knowledge to complete a task,
and information about how to complete the task has not been provided, this creates the need for
problem solving where novel information must be constructed. The newly generated information
must be tested for its effectiveness, with ineffective information being removed and effective
information kept, making the process of generating new information in working memory slow and
difficult. This is not a very effective way of learning, but it is the only procedure available when
solution paths such as information from teachers are unavailable.

This means that engaging in inquiry-based learning is usually an ineffective process for novice or
less experienced learners because it imposes a considerable cognitive load on their working
memory. Learners are forced to resort to weak, unguided methods such as problem solving, as in
the example above where a novice algebra student attempts to solve 2x – 40 = 60 by randomly
guessing the value of x. By contrast, when a less experienced learner in a specific domain studies
the solution steps contained in a worked example prior to attempting a similar problem-solving
task, this diminishes cognitive load and therefore efficiently assists the student to transfer
knowledge of the method for solving the problem to long-term memory. A student who already
holds domain-specific knowledge in long-term memory can use that knowledge to accurately
categorise the problem and its solution. This is why problem solving (or inquiry-based learning) is
better suited for more experienced learners, because they can perform the entire solution in a
single mental step that imposes a minimal working memory load.
Cognitive overload occurs when the working memory resources needed to process a task are
greater than available working memory resources. When working memory is overloaded, content
is hard to understand, learning becomes slow or ineffective, and transferring knowledge into long-
term memory becomes difficult. Students might experience cognitive overload when:

• they are exposed to complex learning material without being provided with sufficient guidance
from teachers or educational materials (see the worked example effect below)
• they are required to split their attention among multiple sources of interrelated information
(see the split-attention effect below)
• they are forced to process unnecessary information because it is integrated with essential
information (see the redundancy effect below)
• the level of instructional guidance has not been adjusted to take into account their prior
knowledge (see the expertise reversal effect below)
• they are exposed to a highly variable task, but they do not have a sufficient level of expertise
to enable them to process the task (see the variability effectbelow)
What is the state of the evidence regarding cognitive load theory?
Over the last three decades, instructional techniques (known as cognitive load effects) have been
developed within the framework of cognitive load theory to help people learn effectively. Each
effect is based on multiple, replicated, randomised, controlled trials. Most of the early research on
cognitive load effects was conducted in mathematics and science-based domains, although
increasing amounts of research have been conducted more recently in non-scientific content
domains such as music, literature, and foreign language acquisition. Consequently, cognitive load
theory is well grounded in robust empirical evidence based on hundreds of randomised, controlled
trials carried out by many researchers from around the world. This evidence suggests that
cognitive load effects can be directly transferred to most learning environments. By taking a
scientific approach to the way learning materials are designed, cognitive load theory and its
associated effects help to alleviate cognitive overload and maximise learning.

Useful cognitive load effects to help you design and implement effective
teaching strategies
As teachers, you can help overcome your students’ working memory limitations and foster
effective learning by factoring in some of the following cognitive load effects.

The worked example effect

The worked example effect demonstrates that it is not effective to have novice learners (less
experienced learners in a specific domain) attempt to solve problems without any instructional
guidance. In the absence of substantial prior knowledge, novice learners will randomly generate
their own solutions and test the effectiveness of them. This approach is likely to overload working
memory capacity, cause a high cognitive load, and inhibit learning. Teachers can reduce
unnecessary cognitive load and make learning more efficient by providing worked examples.
Novice learners who are exposed to worked examples during the initial stages of cognitive skill
acquisition learn more easily and more rapidly than they would when trying to solve the problem
by randomly generating solutions: this is the worked example effect. It has been replicated on
many occasions in technical domains such as mathematics, science, engineering, and computer
programming, and to some extent in non-technical domains such as English literature, foreign
language acquisition, athletics, music instruction, history, and social sciences.
Worked examples in technical domains essentially consist of a problem statement followed by a
well-structured representation of solution steps that clearly specify how to solve a particular
problem or perform a particular task. The most efficient way to present learning material for skill
acquisition and application is to link the worked example to a similar target practice problem
(known as a near transfer problem), rather than presenting an entire set of different worked
examples followed by a set of varied practice problems. Alternating worked examples and
problem solving enables the student to derive the full benefit of using appropriate prior
information from the example to build rules for the similar problem to be solved. Solving a
problem immediately after studying a similar worked example is also likely to generate more
incentive for the student to study the original example.

Worked examples in non-technical domains are similar to the classical worked examples in
technical domains. In the domain of English literature, for example, a worked example may consist
of an essay question (which is analogous to the problem statement found in a mathematics
problem) and a model answer to the essay question (analogous to the solution steps that specify
how to solve a mathematics problem). The model essay can therefore be used as a general guide
to help answer a similar type of essay question (analogous to studying a mathematics worked
example and attempting to solve a near transfer problem).

The split-attention effect

Split attention occurs when multiple sources of information cannot be understood at the same
time because the items of information are in a split-source format – in other words, disparate
sources of information are not integrated to form one intelligible task. An example is shown in
Figure 2 below, where a student is asked to solve an unknown angle in a geometric diagram and
the explanatory written text is not placed next to the unknown angle nor is there an arrow pointing
to the unknown angle. To make sense of the instructional material, the student will have to work
out the relevant relationships by searching and matching between the written text and the
corresponding parts of the diagram. This kind of cognitive activity will impose an unnecessary
cognitive load because the written text must be mentally integrated with the diagram by reading it
and then storing it in working memory temporarily before searching for the correct reference in the
diagram. This unnecessary activity can overburden working memory and interfere with learning
because of the intensive search-and-match process that is required for mental integration. In other
words, the student’s working memory is fully occupied by integrating the visual and written
information provided in the question and is unable to attend to solving the mathematical problem.
The heavy split-attention situation in Figure 2 can be reduced if the corresponding textual
explanations are physically embedded into the components of the diagram as shown in Figure 3
below. When multiple representations of interdependent sources of information are integrated into
a unified source of information, the student is not required to unnecessarily search for and match
different sources of information to complete a task: this benefit is the split-attention effect. It
applies not only to diagrams and texts but equally to any two interdependent sources of
information such as text and tables, tables and diagrams, and so on.

The redundancy effect

When teachers provide additional information to students to help reduce their mental effort and
alleviate unnecessary cognitive load, they may unwittingly include redundant information that has
already been presented or is unnecessary for learning. The redundancy effectshows that providing
students with redundant information can have a negative effect on learning because students are
forced to process multiple lots of information together to make sense of it when they do not need
to. Redundant information could include identical words in written and auditory form. For example,
when a teacher reads out the exact words that appear on PowerPoint slides, this forces students
to unnecessarily alternate between the written and spoken text, resulting in the text being read out
of phase with the teacher’s speech. Removing some of the written text on PowerPoint slides and
keeping the spoken text increases the likelihood of more information being absorbed.

Another case of redundancy occurs when teachers attempt to elaborate by providing additional
information that is lengthy and unhelpful, such as integrating explanatory written text in a diagram
when the diagram is intelligible on its own. Unlike the split-attention effect, where different
sources of information that are unintelligible on their own should be integrated, teachers should
avoid replicating necessary information into instructional materials. For example, any information
that repeats what is being presented, such as simultaneous spoken and written text or written text
that merely describes a diagram, should be eliminated. Similarly, any unnecessary information
such as cartoons or music should be eliminated because, while this material may be interesting or
engaging for students, it is unlikely to lead to learning and may in fact detract from the learning.
Redundant information should be eliminated so that scarce working memory resources are not
wasted on processing it.

The expertise reversal effect (prior knowledge effect)

There is a plethora of strong evidence to suggest that the effectiveness of many cognitive load
effects depends on the level of learner expertise in a specific domain. For example, using worked
examples is most effective for novice learners because they have not yet stored in their long-term
memory the appropriate problem-solving knowledge structures relevant to the area being studied.
However, worked examples lose their effectiveness when studied by more experienced learners in
a domain, and may even hinder learning due to redundancy. The expertise-reversal effect shows
that teaching strategies should be matched to an individual student’s level of expertise in order to
promote knowledge acquisition – novice learners learn best from clear, explicit instructions (such
as worked examples) and, as expertise increases, more experienced learners learn best from
inquiry-based learning (such as unguided problem solving).

The variability effect

Studying multiple worked examples with the same solution structure can help students solve
novel and difficult problems if they are able to draw an analogy between the examples. This is
because learning can be enhanced if the tasks differ in their surface features (for example: 2y =
20; 2x = 20; 3x = 30; 4x = 40; 0.4x = 1) and not their structural features (for example: 2x = 20; 2x +
60 = 4x – 40; (2x)2 = 100.

When worked examples differ only in their surface features (in other words, they have a common
solution structure), they enable students to recognise and reinforce the same solution steps.

Practising the same procedure with different variants of the task leads to the making of
generalisations about the task. Generalising helps with the construction of (or the further
development of previously constructed) schemas. These schemas enable learners to recognise
the same task in future problems, despite any superficial elements that may vary the problem
from those previously practised.
Consider a primary school mathematics problem: ‘Chloe has two marbles and Peter has three
marbles. How many marbles do they have together?’ A low-variability problem would be: ‘Soula
has two hats and Steve has three hats. How many hats do they have together?’ A high-variability
problem would be: ‘A box has five small blue balls, four large green balls, six large red balls, and
two small yellow balls. How many large balls are there altogether?’ In this example, the low-
variability mathematical task varies only by way of the object (the marbles are replaced by hats),
while the addition calculation of the numbers remains the same; and the high-variability
mathematical task varies by way of the objects and the numbers. This enhances learning because
students are able to create a generalised rule that can be transferred to a wider class of tasks that
contain different surface features. Exposure to high-variability example-based instruction,
compared to low-variability homogeneous examples, enables learners to engage in deeper
processing which enhances the ability to transfer knowledge.

Research has confirmed that it is important to adapt instructional procedures to a student’s

existing schematic knowledge base in their long-term memory (according to the expertise reversal
effect discussed above). Accordingly, students should be initially presented with low-variability
problems (to avoid cognitive overload), with variability increased as their levels of knowledge
advance – in other words, more experienced learners should be presented with high-variability
learning tasks .
[vii]

Consider a science lesson, where students are taught that energy in the form of food is
transferred from one organism to another, and that scientists represent this transfer by using an
arrow. Given that a fox is the predator and its prey is a rabbit, students could be given the
example: carrots→rabbit→ fox. It is more effective to give a less experienced learner a low-
variability problem such as: ‘Which animal is the predator and which is the prey in the food chain
grains→mice→owl?’ On the other hand, a more experienced learner could be asked to study the
diagram in Figure 4 and be given a high-variability problem such as: ‘Many food chains can be
joined together to make a food web. Which animal is the prey AND the predator in this food web?’
The example provided for the low-variability problem allows the novice learner to learn which is
the prey (rabbit) and which is the predator (fox). Once the novice learner can understand the food
chain (which is just one single line), the teacher can move onto the food web diagram in Figure 4,
which is much more challenging because of the many interconnected food chains that require the
student to work out that the bird is a predator (grasses→grasshopper→bird) but is also the prey
(grains→bird→fox).
References and further reading

Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental

storage capacity. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87-114.

Garnett, S. (2020). Cognitive load theory: A handbook for teachers. Crown House Publishing.

Geary, D. C. (2008). An evolutionary informed science. Educational Psychologist, 43(4), 179-195.

Likourezos, V., Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2019). The variability effect: When instructional variability
is advantageous. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 479-497.
Lovell, O. (2020). Sweller’s cognitive load theory in action. John Catt Educational.

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for
processing information. The Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.

Peterson, L. R., & Peterson, M. J. (1959). Short-term retention of individual verbal items. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 58(3), 193-198.

Endnotes

[i] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOLPfi9Ls-w&t=1s (Emeritus Professor John Sweller –

UNSW, Sydney)

[ii] Geary, 2008.

[iii] Explicit instruction is the teaching of skills and concepts that uses direct, structured instruction
which is designed and delivered to novices to help them develop specific knowledge about a topic.

[iv] Miller, 1956.

[v] Cowan, 2001.

[vi] Peterson & Peterson, 1959.

[vii] Likourezos, Kalyuga & Sweller, 2019.

[viii] Retrieved from https://desertoasisgarden.wordpress.com/2015/05/13/understanding-our-

garden-better-with-a-food-
web/#:~:text=A%20food%20web%20is%20a,5%20major%20levels%20of%20organisms.&text=Pri
mary%20Consumers%3A%20Organisms%20that%20feed,autotrophs%2C%20also%20known%20a
s%20herbivores.

By Dr Vicki Likourezos
Retrieval practice and its benefits for
long-term learning
HomeSchool resourcesScience of learning

March 2, 2021

Retrieval practice is a strategy used for rehearsing already learned information by trying to
retrieve it from memory. It is based on what is known as the ‘testing effect’, which found that
future long-term memory performance is enhanced when content is practised by testing. While
tests are often negatively associated with assessment and performance measurement, in
retrieval practice tests are used as a tool for learning and practice rather than as a means to
formally assess progress.

The evidence that it works

Retrieval practice tops a list of the most effective evidence-based learning strategies[i] and it has
been shown to be effective for students of all ages and subjects. Retrieval practice is often
compared to strategies like re-reading or re-studying. Re-reading is a very common method of
studying used students, and it is often recommended by teachers as well. Re-reading the book or
the notes seems perfectly reasonable, as it involves re-exposing ourselves to previously learned
material in order to secure it in our minds. Indeed, we can actually feel the benefit as we are
practising this method of rehearsal. However, this method has been found to be ineffective. More
accurately, re-reading may be effective in the very short term (defined loosely between minutes
and a few days), but is almost entirely ineffective for longer-term recall. The major difference
between re-reading and retrieval practice is that, when you re-read, the information is presented to
the learner in its entirety from an external source, while with retrieval the learners search for the
information in their own minds, following just a cue.

An influential study[ii] clearly demonstrates this point: Karpicke and Roediger had college students
learn 40 words in Swahili and their translation to English. The experiment included study phases in
which each word appeared next to its translation on a computer screen, and retrieval phases in
which the Swahili words appeared and participants were requested to type the English translation
if they could recall it. These phases repeated alternately four times each, and all the participants
were tested on their memory one week later. The goal of the study was to find out which of the
phases, re-study or retrieval, contributed more to long-term performance. To test that, they
changed the number of words in each phase for different groups: one group faced twice as many
retrieval repetitions than re-study repetitions, and another group experienced it the other way
around.
Here is their memory performance after one week: the group that had two-thirds of their study
trials in the form of test averaged 8o% of the words, while the group that had two-thirds of their
study trials in the form of re-study averaged 36% of the words. Additional experimental groups
showed that extra study repetitions did not improve the final recall performance, and were
therefore a waste of learning time. This study showed that retrieval or testing is a very effective
learning strategy. Many other studies demonstrate the benefits of retrieval practice with more
complex stimuli, such as passages of text, different types of materials and within educational
settings.
Why does retrieval work?
When we re-study by reviewing or reading over course material or notes, we focus on the
information and practically ignore the pathway leading to it in our long-term memory. By contrast,
when we try to retrieve memories, we focus on reconstructing the pathway to the stored
information and we go over the sequence of neural activities that is required in order to bring a
piece of information to mind. When we use retrieval practice, we rehearse the entire pathway, not
just the end goal. Much like navigation, knowing the way is as important as knowing the
destination.

Retrieval practice is obviously a more effortful task, but the effort is the reason it works. Most
students appreciate the importance of practice in acquiring mastery, and, because reviewing the
learned information is straightforward and easy, it is often the intuitive choice. But if the end goal
is to be able to retrieve the information and use it whenever required, it becomes clear that we
need to rehearse just that: retrieving information and using it. Retrieval practice is more
challenging than re-studying, but it is the more effective way to practise

How to make retrieval effective

One of the most important considerations in using retrieval practice isto make retrieval
effortful. Our mind should work hard, reconstructing partially deconstructed pathways. If retrieval
is too easy, it means that nothing was reconstructed and nothing was added. In addition, retrieval
is not effortful when it is a concept that we have already mastered, or when it is too soon after the
last learning or practice session. The straightforward way to make retrieval practice effective is
to space the study repetitions over time.

Another crucial element of retrieval practice is the provision of feedback, as receiving feedback
after the retrieval attempt improves learning. Effective feedback should always do two things: it
should correct misconceptions and misunderstanding, and reinforce correct responses. It is also
important to provide the right level of support. Retrieval practice has been shown to work even
with young children, but it may require more structure and support. Students of different ages and
those who are at different stages of learning (novices or advanced) in a particular subject or
learning area benefit from different types of retrieval activity, such as fill in the blank exercises,
multiple choice questions or open questions. One thing to keep in mind is that retrieval practice as
a form of practice should come after learning rather than at the time of learning.

How to make it work in the classroom

It is useful to frame retrieval practice as a learning activity, and it can be useful to explicitly explain
why retrieval practice is effective. The successful application of retrieval practice relies on:

• the type of activity (for example, a low-stakes quiz)

• how it is framed (for example, is it a surprise quiz or regular morning review routine?)
• how much room we leave for making mistakes and correcting them or providing feedback
It is highly recommended that retrieval practice activities are built into the learning routine in the
classroom rather than students using it at home by themselves, as most students will tend to
revert to easier strategies such as re-reading. While it may be challenging to make time for a
questionnaire or review during the lessons, it is highly likely to be worthwhile. Another reason to
use retrieval practice as opposed to an approach like cold-calling or whole-class questioning in the
classroom is that it makes the benefits available to all learners. For example, when a teacher asks
the whole class a question, generally only a few students volunteer to answer, and it is only the
student who actually answers that receives the benefits of retrieval practice. However, when
retrieval practice is used during class time as a learning activity in which all students participate
individually, it promotes the learning of all students and their ability to learn effectively in the
future.

There are a number of technological solutions that can be used for retrieval practice and have the
added value of storing the information for formative purposes, such
as kahoot!, socrative and plickers.

Recommended further reading

Agarwal, P.K., Roediger, H. L., McDaniel, M. A., & McDermott, K.B. (2020). How to use retrieval
practice to improve learning. http://pdf.retrievalpractice.org/RetrievalPracticeGuide.pdf

Brown, P. C., Roediger, H. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2014). Make it stick. Harvard University Press.

Harvard, B. (2017, September). Color coding recall attempts to assess learning. The Effortful
Educator. https://theeffortfuleducator.com/2017/09/14/color-coding-recall-attempts-to-assess-
learning/

Newmark. B. (2017, November). Nothing new, it’s a review – on why I killed my

starters. https://bennewmark.wordpress.com/2017/11/13/nothing-new-its-a-review-on-why-i-
killed-my-starters/

Sumeracki, M. (nd). How to create retrieval practice activities for elementary students. The
Learning Scientists. http://www.learningscientists.org/blog/2017/4/6-1
Endnotes

[i] Dunlosky, J. (2013). Strengthening the student toolbox: Study strategies to boost
learning. American Educator, 37(3), 12-
21. https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/periodicals/dunlosky.pdf

[ii] Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for
learning. science, 319(5865), 966-968.

http://learninglab.psych.purdue.edu/downloads/2008_Karpicke_Roediger_Science.pdf

By Dr. Efrat Furst

Spaced practice and its role in

supporting learning and retention
HomeSchool resourcesScience of learning

March 2, 2021

Most people agree that to master a skill we need to practise. However, there are many ways to
practise, some of which are more effective than others. Spaced practice or distributed practice is
the idea that practising a particular skill or retrieving particular information is more effective
when spread over time, rather than repeated several times in a single day or session.

The origins of spaced practice

In the late 1890s, the German experimental psychologist Herman Ebbinghaus reported the
‘spacing effect’. He was the first person to describe the forgetting curve, which shows how quickly
memories fade after learning. Note the red graph: about 50% is lost after one day.
Image from Wikipedia

Practising or rehearsing over time with intervals in between slows down the forgetting process,
making spaced practice much more effective than practice that is massed, or done all at once.
Each green line on the graph represents a rehearsal or instance of spaced practice, where the
memory goes back to 100% and then decays again: importantly, the memory decays in a more
gradual manner after each spaced repetition.

Why does spacing work?

When memory is encoded and stored in the brain, connections between neurons are formed.
Memories are represented by networks of interconnected neurons and, when we learn something
new, a new network is formed. This process of biological consolidation of memories requires
time. Research shows that resting (and, better yet, sleeping) after learning enhances our ability to
remember the information. Spacing out the repetitions may allow the brain machinery to work
without interference between the two events.

Another reason why spacing is effective is that, over time, memories decay and becomes less and
less accessible. By attempting to relearn something after a period of time we are actually
reconstructing the information itself, and, even more importantly, we are reconstructing the
pathways that lead to it so that it will be more accessible next time. The reason spacing is
effective is that it triggers active effortful reconstruction of the retrieval pathways: in other words,
spacing induces more effective retrieval practice.

Another advantage for spaced learning is that the passage of time also changes the context of
learning. If time has passed since our last practice, we will most likely approach the information in
a different way, and use different cues or triggers. It is like learning several different routes to a
house from different initial locations, which ultimately will allow us to get there easily, no matter
where we start from. By practising in varied contexts, we are making sure the information will be
much more accessible, in different situations and with different cues.

The bottom line is that practice should be effortful to be effective. We should concentrate on
reconstructing pathways, not just revisiting the information. By spacing the repetitions we are
making it harder on ourselves, but the effortful reconstruction process is what makes practice
beneficial since we are building stronger pathways to the memory. Rest is also crucial to memory.
Following the effort of reconstruction, it is better to rest in order to allow the pathways to
consolidate. A second immediate repetition is not challenging enough and consequently not so
effective. In addition, it may interfere with the consolidation processes of the previous attempt. To
apply effective spaced practice we should work hard and then take a break.

How long should you wait between rehearsals?

The answer to this question depends on several factors, including the level of difficulty of the
material, how familiar it is for the learner, and how much it has already been practised. It is most
advantageous to rehearse when it has decayed significantly but not completely. We want
reconstruction to be effortful but also effective. Take a look at the forgetting curve again below,
the first rehearsal after one day should reconstruct about 50% of the learned information. After a
few repetitions, the decay is slower, and hence larger spaces can be used.

Researchers have found a clear relationship between the spaces between revisiting the material
and the time it will take to reach optimal performance[i].Short spacing times (seconds and
minutes) produce short-term optimal performance, while longer spaces produce long-term optimal
performance: in other words, the longer the spaces, the longer the learning is retained.
Researchers have concluded that at least one day is required between repetitions to maximise
long term retention (weeks and months), and that longer spaces (such as a month) can produce
even longer-term effects.

Putting this information together, the conclusions are:

• Repeatedly rehearsing the material in the same study session will not have long-term effects
and may even impair learning (cramming is not effective for the long term)
• Repeat the same material on subsequent days produces long-term results
• The more we practise, the more stable and accessible the information becomes, which means
that it will ‘survive’ longer gaps, and subsequent repetitions will take less effort
How does it work in the classroom?
Everything that we learn should be practised effectively or it becomes unusable. Practice is
obviously an important part of the teaching process, and to maximise its effect we should
consider implementing a programme of strategically spaced retrieval. Once the information is
acquired it should be revisited in increasing spaces, starting with days and weeks, and then
spreading out to months and years. One barrier for learners is that frequent repetitions are easy to
do, while repeating older material is much harder, and may feel extremely vague and even
impossible to reconstruct. Understanding the benefits of spaced learning, teachers should take
these challenges into consideration when planning teaching routines.

It is illuminating to compare spaced practice in the classroom to practice routines that are
common in other fields. For example, when we practise music or sports, we often return to pieces
of music we have mastered, or repeat older and more basic exercises on a routine basis. Even at
the highest levels, musicians and athletes still practise basic skills. We should adopt the same
thinking in regard to learning academic subjects at school.

How to incorporate spaced practice

Start bybuilding systematic reviews of previously learned information into your planning. Be
specific about content and schedule some form of review in each lesson. Build spaced practice
into classroom routines, and bear in mind that, while it may seem challenging at first, it becomes
considerably quicker and easier in subsequent attempts. It is worthwhile to explicitly explain to
students why they are doing it. In this blog post, a secondary school psychology teacher shares
the simple method he devised to prove to his students that the method is working.

There are simple ways teachers can support the review process by adjusting it to where each
student is in their learning. One practical example is to use the Leitner system for effective use of
flash cards, explained in this 8-minute video about spaced practice. This method allows every
student to focus each study session on the cards that need the most attention.

It is also important to differentiate the practice phase from the initial learning process. Initial
learning is when a concept is presented, defined, explained and demonstrated. It is the building
phase and it requires working memory resources to build the new information on the basis of prior
knowledge. At this stage, it is helpful to reduce cognitive load by repeating the same points
several times in the same lesson. The practice phase occurs after the new concept (or skill) is
established, and is necessary to maintain what was built as well as to create and strengthen
pathways to it. More challenging and effortful methods than are used during initial learning are
appropriate during the practice phase.
The value of interleaved practice
Interleaving is another way to make the practice distributed, effortful and varied. It is an approach
that involves mixing up the order of tasks rather than repeating the same kind of task over and
over again. The benefits of interleaving are related to the those of both spaced and retrieval
practice: mixing up the order of learning creates spaces and distractions between two repetitions
of the same material, which forces students to re-engage with the material and invest effort in
reconstructing the information. For example, rather than having students complete a set of
addition problems followed by a set of subtraction problems and so on, it is more effective to
interleave different kinds of arithmetic problems. This approach strengthens learning because it
requires students to consciously select the most appropriate strategy for solving the problem
rather than automatically using the same strategy they used for the previous problem in the group.
You can read more about this in this short review with examples.

Recommended further reading

Brown, P. C., Roediger, H. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2014). Make it stick. Harvard University Press.

Dunlosky, J. (2013). Strengthening the student toolbox: Study strategies to boost

learning. American Educator, 37(3), 12-
21. https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/periodicals/dunlosky.pdf

Rohrer, D., Dedrick, R. F., Agarwal, P. K. (2017). Interleaved mathematics practice: Giving students a
chance to learn what they need to know. http://pdf.retrievalpractice.org/InterleavingGuide.pdf

Team Tom Education (nd). Spiral, massed and spaced math

practice. https://teamtomeducation.com/spiral-and-massed-math-practice/

The Learning Scientists (nd). Spaced practice. https://www.learningscientists.org/spaced-practice

The Learning Scientists (nd). Interleaving. https://www.learningscientists.org/interleaving

Endnotes

[i] Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal
recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354.

By Dr Efrat Furst