Cognitive Overload

According to Mayer and Moreno(2003) in "Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning," cognitive overload is a potential problematic situation in which the the processing demands evoked by the learning task exceeds the processing capacity of the cognitive system in the learner (p.45). A few ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning are segmenting, aligning words and pictures, and synchronizing. Segmenting the presentation allows the learner time to process and synthesize. The learner works at his or her own pace by clicking a button on the screen to continue to the next segment. Aligning words and pictures near each other reduces unnecessary eye-movement while increasing the learner's capacity to better process the presented information. Synchronizing visual and audio components relieve the overuse of storing memory.

These solutions influence the design of my final project in that presentation is very important. My approach is to keep in mind how the user learns. Although I want to keep the learner informed, I also don't want to overwhelm them. For example, if I decide to use narration, audio and visual material will be synchronized. Finally, reducing cognitive load enables the learner to retain and integrate the presented information making a more positive experience.

ADDIE & Living Systems Model for KM Instructional Design Models

The ADDIE and living systems model for knowledge management system (KM) models of instructional design for computer-based instruction feature similar design elements such as analysis, design and development, implementation, and evaluation. However, the two models are different in approach and delivery. The more traditional mechanistic ADDIE requires the designer to systematically identify, define and determine needs and goals, design, demonstrate, develop and deliver at each of the five phases in the knowledge-building cycle. Essential elements (such as learners, outcomes, assessments, activities, and evaluation) spiral through each phase for synthesis. Furthermore, the ADDIE model promotes a collaborative effort with the client and other expertise to improve the design into an effective end product.

In contrast, the living systems model for KM functions similarly to that of the brain. The digital nervous system projects a building system that adjusts to its environment. The continuously changing environment shapes and changes the structure and culture. The system allows users to contribute feedback and information to enrich learning. In order to balance the system, the KM model incorporates a cycle of phases (Analyze end-user requirements, design instructional information architecture, develop instructional interaction design, develop instructional information design, implement system design, and conduct developmental evaluation) to accommodate and support its evolution. An end product does not exist for the KM model. On the contrary, data collection and ongoing assessment modifies the system.

As a novice to instructional design of my Web site, the mechanistic and traditional design ADDIE, while keeping in mind the components and functions of the living systems model would benefit my revision. ADDIE’s step-by-step linear design elements of focus on the learners and outcomes would assist the development and delivery. Feedback from focus groups and assessment would allow me to synthesize any possible obstacles. When the Web site is actually functioning, then user input would be important to the longevity.