There are numerous reasons why students with disabilities struggle in school. A key reason is professionals in the field may not pay enough attention to students’ overwhelmed cognitive capacity. Cognitive load theory explains that all humans have limited capacity at any given time to use their auditory, visual, and tactile inputs (independently or collectively) to acquire new information and store it in long-term memory. When available cognition is overwhelmed – which can be caused by any number of reasons – learning cannot occur. In this article, we introduce the key aspects of cognitive load theory and give specific examples of how special educators can use this information to shape their instruction to support students’ unique needs.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllowayT. P.GathercoleS. E.KirkwoodH.ElliottJ. (2009). The cognitive and behavioral characteristics of children with low working memory. Child Development, 80(2), 606–621. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01282.x
BaddeleyA. (2003). Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 829–839.
5.
BarrouilletP.BernardinS.CamosV. (2004). Time constraints and resource sharing in adults’ working memory spans. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(1), 83–100. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.1.83
6.
ChenO.Castro-AlonsoJ. C.PaasF.SwellerJ. (2018). Extending cognitive load theory to incorporate working memory resource depletion: Evidence from the spacing effect. Educational Psychology Review, 30, 483–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9426-2
7.
CowanN. (2008). Chapter 20: What are the differences between long-term, short-term, and working memory?Progress in Brain Research, 169, 323–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6123(07)00020-9
8.
DeLeeuwK. E.MayerR. E. (2008). A comparison of three measures of cognitive load: Evidence for separable measures of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 223–234. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.223
9.
DeshlerD.ShumakerJ. (2005). Teaching adolescents to be strategic learners. Corwin Press.
10.
FeldonD. F. (2007). Cognitive load and classroom teaching: The double-edged sword of automaticity. Educational Psychologist, 42, 123–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701416173
KalyugaS. (2011). Cognitive load theory: How many types of load does it really need?Educational Psychology Review, 23(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9150-7
13.
KennedyM. J.RodgersW. J.RomigJ. E.MathewsH. M.PeeplesK. (2018). Introducing the content acquisition podcast professional development (CAP-PD) process: Supporting vocabulary instruction for inclusive middle school science teachers. Teacher Education & Special Education, 41(2), 140–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406417745655
14.
KirschnerP.SwellerJ.ClarkR. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
15.
LemonsC. J.VaughnS.WexlerJ.KeansD. M.SinclairA. C. (2018). Envisioning an improved continuum of special education services for students with learning disabilities: Considering intervention intensity. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 33, 131–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12173
16.
MayerR. E. (2020). Multimedia learning (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
RiccominiP. J.MoranoS. (2019). Guided practice for complex, multistep procedures in algebra: Scaffolding through worked solutions. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 51, 445–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059919848737
19.
RiccominiP. J.MoranoS.HughesC. A. (2017). Big ideas in special education: Specially designed instruction, high-leverage practices, explicit instruction, and intensive instruction. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 50, 20–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059917724412
20.
RogersM.HodgeJ.CountsJ. (2020). Self-regulated strategy development in reading, writing, and mathematics for students with specific learning disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 53, 104–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059920946780
21.
SmithJ. L. M.SáezL.DoablerC. T. (2016). Using explicit and systematic instruction to support working memory. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 48(6), 275–281. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059916650633
22.
StevensE. A.VaughnS. (2020). Using paraphrasing and text structure instruction to support main idea generation. TEACHING Exceptional Children. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059920958738
23.
SwansonE.VaughnS.WexlerJ. (2017). Enhancing adolescents’ comprehension of text by building vocabulary knowledge. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 50, 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059917720777
24.
SwansonH. L. (2015). Intelligence, working memory, and learning disabilities. In PapadopoulosT. C.ParrilaR. K.KirbyJ. R. (Eds.), Cognition, intelligence, and achievement: A tribute to J. P. Das (pp. 175–196). Elsevier Academic. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-410388-7.00010-5
25.
SwansonH. L.KehlerP.JermanO. (2010). Working memory, strategy knowledge, and strategy instruction in children with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 24–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409338743
26.
SwansonH. L.LussierC. M.OroscoM. J. (2015). Cognitive strategies, working memory, and growth in word problem solving in children with math difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48, 339–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413498771
27.
SwansonH. L.ZhengX.JermanO. (2009). Working memory, short-term memory, and reading disabilities: A selective meta-analysis of the literature. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 260–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409331958
28.
SwellerJ. (2020). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09701-3
