Load reduction instruction (LRI)

Martin, Andrew J.; Evans, Paul

doi:10.4324/9780429283895-2

Cited by 23 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We propose that one avenue for resolving this debate is through LRI (Pressley et al, 2003), which serves as the conceptual framework for the present study. Instead of privileging one approach over another, educational psychologists frame LRI as a continuum that responds to the cognitive demands of learning by encompassing both direct and constructivist approaches to instruction (Kirschner et al, 2006; Martin, 2016; Mayer, 2003; Mercer et al, 1996). Cognitive load theory suggests that, to decrease cognitive load, instruction for students with LD should be direct and explicit.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This includes using a set of sequentially ordered teaching skills, routines, and strategies to structure learning, aid in recall and retention, and make the implicit explicit (Archer & Hughes, 2011; Rosenshine, 1997; Watkins & Slocum, 2003). By providing direct and explicit instruction, teachers reduce cognitive load, avoid overburdening the working memory, and facilitate productive interactions between long-term memory and working memory (Barrouillet et al, 2004; Martin, 2016; Mayer, 2003; Sweller, 2012). This type of direct, explicit instruction enables knowledge to be encoded in long-term memory where it can then be applied, transferred, and generalized to more complex problems (Martin, 2016).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Descriptions of LRI necessitate attending to two aspects of instruction: (a) how teachers orchestrate learning opportunities—including interactions between students, teachers, and content (Cohen et al, 2003)—and (b) the practices that teachers use to lessen cognitive load (Martin, 2016).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When using LRI, teachers’ primary role is to orchestrate learning opportunities such that they lessen students’ cognitive load and incrementally move students from novice to expert status (Martin, 2016). In LRI, teachers’ instructional decisions are shaped by the content to be taught, the goals of instruction, and students’ present knowledge and skills (Connor et al, 2011, 2013, 2018).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is significant debate regarding the instructional approaches and practices that are most effective. However, research in cognitive science suggests that these should vary based on the needs of certain groups of students (Martin, 2016; Pressley et al, 2003). This is particularly evident with regard to students with learning disabilities (LDs), who have difficulty with the “basic psychological processes involved in understanding or using language, spoken or written” (IDEA, 2004, 34 CFR 300.8).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Danielson’s Framework for Teaching: Convergence and Divergence With Conceptions of Effectiveness in Special Education

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Danielson’s Framework for Teaching (FFT) is currently used in more than 20 states to inform teacher evaluation and professional learning. To investigate whether FFT promotes instruction that appropriately responds to the needs of students with learning disabilities, we conduct a systematic content analysis of the instructional approach emphasized in the FFT’s Instructional Domain (Domain 3) of Danielson’s FFT. We frame our study using cognitive load theory and research regarding effective instruction for students with disabilities. We end by discussing implications regarding the evaluation and development of effective teaching for students with learning disabilities.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Danielson’s Framework for Teaching: Convergence and Divergence With Conceptions of Effectiveness in Special Education

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The effects of load reduction instruction on educational outcomes: An intervention study on hands‐on inquiry‐based learning in science

Kadir

Yeung

Caleon

et al. 2023

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Load reduction instruction (LRI) is an instructional approach designed to manage the cognitive load on students as they learn complex learning materials. According to Cognitive Load Theory, complex learning is associated with high cognitive load and when not effectively managed, could impede learning. Inquiry-based learning with hands-on component, where students conduct experiments to find solutions to problems, are known to incur high cognitive load. In this study, we examined the effects on students' educational outcomes when the five key principles of the LRI framework were implemented to reduce the cognitive load of inquiry-based learning with handson involvement. Multiple regression analysis was used to compare the educational outcomes of the intervention and control groups. The control group also experienced hands-on inquiry-based learning, but without LRI. Results showed that students in the intervention group had better outcomes, indicating the effectiveness of LRI in managing the high cognitive load of complex instruction.

show abstract

Connected learning: An approach for teaching nature of science aspects and argumentation components

Khishfe

2023

J Res Sci Teach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study investigated the influence of a connected learning approach for explicit nature of science (NOS) instruction and explicit argumentation instruction, in comparison with a non‐connected approach, on students' NOS conceptions and argumentation skills. Participants comprised 42 students enrolled in two sections of grade 10 that were randomly assigned (flip of a coin) into two groups: Connected (22 students) and non‐connected (20 students). Participants in both groups were taught by the same teacher. The duration for the treatment was 2 months and one unit about plants was addressed. Participants in one group received explicit NOS and explicit argumentation instruction and learned about NOS and argumentation components as connected and at the same time, while participants in the other group received explicit NOS instruction and explicit argumentation instruction as non‐connected and learned about them as separate. An open‐ended questionnaire, together with individual semi‐structured interviews, were administered at the beginning and conclusion of the study to assess participants' NOS conceptions and argumentation components in socioscientific contexts. The results showed that the connected group outperformed the non‐connected group in generating arguments and counterarguments. As for NOS, the results revealed that both the connected and non‐connected approaches showed a general enhancement of the conceptions of the NOS aspects. These results are interpreted in terms of the reflective judgment model, argumentation as a framework, an explicit approach, cognitive load theory, and curriculum coherence.

show abstract

Load reduction instruction (LRI)

Cited by 23 publications

References 0 publications

Danielson’s Framework for Teaching: Convergence and Divergence With Conceptions of Effectiveness in Special Education

Danielson’s Framework for Teaching: Convergence and Divergence With Conceptions of Effectiveness in Special Education

The effects of load reduction instruction on educational outcomes: An intervention study on hands‐on inquiry‐based learning in science

Connected learning: An approach for teaching nature of science aspects and argumentation components

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About