Schema Based Instruction
This is a response written to a reading and critique presented in the 6411 Cognition and Learning week 3.
Schema-based instruction and cognitive load – some considerations
The research conducted by Bissett, Goldsmith, and Sibbald (2015) presents some interesting insights into how pre-chunked information, distributed through lecture and PowerPoint presentation, has the potential to improve memory recall of facts for speedy medical diagnosis. What struck me, as an experienced educator, was the question of instructional design that was not factored into this study. While the two controlled teaching events set up to determine if schema-based instruction was an effective means of information dissemination, it leaves out the bigger question – is a lecture based, information delivery system the best way to engage medical students in building networked schema where facts and diagnoses require quick responses from memory?
What I looked for in this study was a clearer picture of how these ‘lecture events’ were created. Bissett, Goldsmith and Sibbald appear to assume that the lectures will measure the impact of schema-based instruction, when they state the presentations “contained the same number of slides (81 slides) with the same number of words per slide (21 words)”. Theories of cognitive load in multimedia learning (Mayer & Moreno, 2003) would suggest that there may be other factors impinging on the development of schema as suggested. Without examining or analyzing the slide deck presentations, or viewing a lecture capture recording of the class, it is challenging to determine if those slides for the control group were significantly different in design, thus impacting the cognitive load of the students, and potentially impacting the results. Mayer & Moreno (2003) suggest nine ways to minimize the cognitive processing required during learning events that include multimedia presentations. They examine the essential processing (selecting, organizing and integrating words and images), incidental processing (attending to background music or animations), and representational holding (e.g. remembering what the lecturer says while viewing an illustration) impact the overall cognitive load, depending on the presentation design (Mayer & Moreno, 2003). It may not be the schema-based instruction that improves diagnostic performance, but the variations in how audio, verbal lecture, slide design, or multimedia inclusions, in combination with teaching differences between the two lecturers, that resulted in the differences found in the data.
Another question revolves around whether lecture and PowerPoint presentations is the best form of schema-based instruction. Would problem-based, inquiry learning provide stronger schema development? Chunking information into logical groupings when providing instruction is not new in K-12 classroom, but this idea has different terminology and vocabulary to describe it. My conception of schema-based instruction, from a K-12 background, is linked to ‘scaffolding’ of instruction, and interdisciplinary teaching – units of study based around a topic. The topic drives the learning for every subject or field of study, and a problem or inquiry question focuses the learning. Would a Dr. House M.D. (television series) style, problem based, inquiry learning experience, where diagnostic information is chunked as it would be in the field, provide a more lasting memory, than the schema-based information organized on a slide deck presentation in a lecture hall?
Scaffolded instruction, or schema-based instruction, comes from a spiralling view of curriculum development where prior knowledge and skills are built into the teaching plan. Lupo, Strong, Lewis, Walpole, and McKenna (2017) describe such a structured approach to scaffold schema development using text sets. Lupo et al. (2017) strategically selected quad sets of texts for adolescent readers, in order to build background knowledge, by scaffolding the reading materials students used, in order to gain the expected learning outcomes. This is a variation of schema-based instruction in that it is pre-structured, released as a chunk of information, and is anchored to build prior knowledge. There are other ways to achieve schema development within the medical profession that may reap benefits beyond that described by Blissett et al. (2015).
References
Blissett, S., Goldszmidt, M., & Sibbald, M. (2015). Do research findings on schema-based instruction translate to the classroom? Perspectives on Medical Education, 4(6), 334–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-015-0225-5
House M.D. (n.d.) [website]. Retrieved September 28, 2018 from https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0412142/
Lupo, S., Strong, J., Lewis, W., Walpole, S., & McKenna, M. (2017). Building background knowledge through reading: Rethinking text sets. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 61(4), 433-444
Mayer, R. & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
