Empowering students’ minds through a cognitive load theory-based lecture model: A metacognitive approach

References

• Ainsworth, S., & Burcham, S. (2007). The impact of text coherence on learning by self-explanation. Learning and Instruction, 17, 286–303. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.02.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Modhefer, A. K., & Roe, S. (2009). Nursing students’ attitudes to biomedical science lectures. Nursing Standard, 24, 42–48. doi:10.7748/ns2009.12.24.14.42.c7435
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Atkinson, R. K., Merril, M. M., & Renkl, A. (2003). Transitioning from studying examples to solving problems: Effects of self-explanation prompts and fading worked-out steps. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 774–783.10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.774
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 829–839.10.1038/nrn1201
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bligh, D. A. (1998). What’s the use of lecture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Bonwell, C. C. (1996). Enhancing the lecture: Revitalizing a traditional format. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1996, 31–44. doi:10.1002/tl.37219966706
   Google Scholar
• Brooks, D., & Shell, D. (2006). Working memory, motivation, and teacher-initiated learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15, 17–30. doi:10.1007/s10956-006-0353-0
   Google Scholar
• Brown, G., & Manogue, M. (2001). AMEE medical education guide No. 22: Refreshing lecturing: A guide for lecturers. Medical Teacher, 23, 231–244.10.1080/01421590120043000
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, S., & Race, P. (2002). Lecturing: A practical guide. London: Kogan Page.
   Google Scholar
• Cashin, W. E. (1985). Improving lecture. Manhattan: Kansas State University.
   Google Scholar
• Charlton, B. G. (2006). Lectures are such an effective teaching method because they exploit evolved human psychology to improve learning. Medical Hypotheses, 67, 1261–1265.10.1016/j.mehy.2006.08.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, R., Nguyen, F., & Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in learning: Evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load. San Francisco: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Cowan, N. (2010). The magical mystery four: How is working memory capacity limited, and why? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 51–57. doi:10.1177/0963721409359277
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 428–434.10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.428
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Florax, M., & Ploetzner, R. (2010). What contributes to the split-attention effect? The role of text segmentation, picture labelling, and spatial proximity. Learning and Instruction, 20, 216–224. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbs, G. (1982). Twenty terrible reasons for lecturing. Occasional Paper No. 8. Birmingham: SCED.
   Google Scholar
• Ginns, P. (2005). Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction, 15, 313–331. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory: How many types of load does it really need? Educational Psychology Review, 23, 1–19. doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9150-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1998). Levels of expertise and instructional design. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 40, 1–17. doi:10.1518/001872098779480587
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational psychologist, 38, 23–31. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41, 212–218. doi:10.1207/s1543042tip4104_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar, S. (2003). An innovative method to enhance interaction during lecture sessions. AJP: Advances in Physiology Education, 27, 20–25. doi:10.1152/advan.00043.2001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2005). Interactions among the imagination, expertise reversal and element interactivity effects. Journal of experimental psychology: Applied, 11, 266–276.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leppink, J., Paas, F., van Gog, T., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2014). Effects of pairs of problems and examples on task performance and different types of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 30, 32–42. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markett, C., Sánchez, I. A., Weber, S., & Tangney, B. (2006). Using short message service to encourage interactivity in the classroom. Computers & Education, 46, 280–293. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaughlin, K., & Mandin, H. (2001). A schematic approach to diagnosing and resolving lecturalgia. Medical Education, 35, 1135–1142. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2923.2001.01090.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81.10.1037/h0043158
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Millsom, H. (2005). Using IT effectively: A guide to technology in the social sciences. University College London, London: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2009). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358–368.
   Google Scholar
• Nasmith, L., & Steinert, Y. (2001). The evaluation of a workshop to promote interactive lecturing. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 13, 43–48.10.1207/S15328015TLM1301_8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen, N., Nelson, A. J., & Wilson, T. D. (2012). Computer visualizations: Factors that influence spatial anatomy comprehension. Anatomical Sciences Education, 5, 98–108. doi:10.1002/ase.1258
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38, 1–4.10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., van Merriënboer, J. J., & Darabi, A. A. (2005). A motivational perspective on the relation between mental effort and performance: Optimizing learner involvement in instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53, 25–34.10.1007/BF02504795
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paas, F., & van Gog, T. (2006). Optimising worked example instruction: Different ways to increase germane cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 16, 87–91. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.02.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penson, P. E. (2012). Lecturing: A lost art. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 4, 72–76. doi:10.1016/j.cptl.2011.10.010
   Google Scholar
• Race, P., & Brown, S. (1998). Lectures in the digital age. The lecturer’s toolkit: A practical guide to assessment, learning and teaching (4th ed.). London: Kogan Page.
   Google Scholar
• Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Rumelhart, D. E. (1978). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition: Center for human information processing. San Diego, CA: University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Sandhu, S., Afifi, T., & Amara, F. (2012). Theories and practical steps for delivering effective lectures. Journal of Community Medicine & Health Education, 2, 1–5. doi:10.4172/2161-0711.1000158
   Google Scholar
• Sloman, J., & Mitchell, C. (2003). Lectures. In P. Davies (Ed.), The handbook for economics lecturers (pp. 2–26). Bristol. University of Bristol.
   Google Scholar
• Steinert, Y., & Snell, S. S. (1999). Interactive lecturing: Strategies for increasing participation in large group presentations. Medical Teacher, 21, 37–42.10.1080/01421599980011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sorden, S. D. (2012). The cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Handbook of educational theories. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295–312.10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5
   Google Scholar
• Sweller, J. (2010a). Cognitive load theory: Recent theoretical advances. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. BrÜken (Eds.). Cognitive load theory (Vol. 1, pp. 29–30). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sweller, J. (2010b). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 123–138. doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12, 185–233.10.1207/s1532690xci1203_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Merriënboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory in health professional education: Design principles and strategies. Medical Education, 44, 85–93.10.1111/med.2009.44.issue-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, M. S., Robinson, S., & Alberts, P. (2009). Students pay attention!: Combating the vigilance decrement to improve learning during lectures. Active Learning in Higher Education, 10, 41–55. doi:10.1177/1469787408100194
   Google Scholar