Skip to content
SALIHUYAHAYA

Sense-making note

We May Think We Understand Cognitive Load Theory, Until We Dig Deeper

How much more nuanced Cognitive Load Theory becomes beneath the simplified version many instructional designers first encounter.

  1. Home
  2. Learning in public
  3. Sense-making notes
  4. Taking A Walk In Matt's Mind
  5. We May Think We Understand Cognitive Load Theory, Until We Dig Deeper
9 Surprising Facts About Cognitive Load Theory

We may think we understand Cognitive Load Theory, Till we start digging deeper. And suddenly, some of the things we confidently believed about cognitive load starts falling apart.

Because apparently…

Working memory isn't the destination, chunking isn't simply about grouping things. Element interactivity isn't just counting elements, Intrinsic load isn't something we should simply eliminate.


And the “three types of load” model I knew? It has been revised. And those are just the surface-level surprises.

The elaboration behind the last few genuinely changed how I think about learning design. So here are 9 things I learnt about Cognitive Load Theory while studying Matthew Richter's introduction to the topic.

And fair warning:

#7, #8 and #9 are where things really started getting interesting. And the deeper I go, the more interested I become in learning science. There is clearly so much more to learn. Which is exactly why I'm looking forward to learning more through the Learning Development Accelerator’s Learning Science Conference brought together by Clark Quinn eta'l



I'm still very much on the journey. And honestly?, I don't want to rush it. That being said, i hope you find this resource helpful,

1.Working memory isn't the destination.

Slide 1, "Working memory isn't the destination." Text: "I used to think about working memory mainly as the place where learning happens. Matt's explanation made me think differently: working memory is more like a channel. The real destination is long-term memory, because that's where durable changes in knowledge can occur. So the question isn't simply 'How much can I fit into working memory?' It's 'What do I need the learner to build in long-term memory?'" Illustration: colourful shapes stream through a narrow channel in a head and into an organised golden castle.

2.Prior knowledge changes cognitive load.

Slide 2, "Prior knowledge changes cognitive load." Text: "The same material can create very different cognitive demands depending on what the learner already has in long-term memory. A learning experience that may seem a great fit for a novice employee may only irritate an expert, because the expert has pre-existing schemas related to the same content. Knowing who our learners are and what they already know is an important question to ask ahead of the design architecture." Illustration: a frustrated novice with scattered pieces, low energy and a tangled thought, beside a calm expert holding an assembled cube, full energy and an organised thought.


3.Schemas change how we experience complexity.

Slide 3, "Schemas change how we experience complexity." Text: "What looks like many separate elements to a novice can become one meaningful unit for an expert. If working memory is limited, why can an expert handle something that overwhelms a novice? Because the expert has schemas in long-term memory that allow multiple elements to function as one meaningful unit. The novice sees A + B + C + D + E; the expert may see [ABCDE]. So instructional support depends on the learner: what helps a novice can become redundant, or even interfere with learning, for an expert who already has the schema." Illustration: a confused novice with scattered lettered puzzle pieces beside an expert whose pieces fit together into one block

4.Element interactivity isn't simply counting elements.

Slide 4, "Element interactivity isn't simply counting elements." Text: "What matters is how many necessary elements the learner must coordinate in relation to one another. Element interactivity is the degree to which the necessary elements of a task must be considered in relation to one another for the learner to understand or perform it. The same content that has high element interactivity for a novice, demanding more of working memory's budget, may be low interactivity for an expert who has coordinated it into one meaningful unit." Illustration: a thinking novice with a tangled cloud of shapes, then an expert with the shapes organised around a single hexagon.

5.Intrinsic load isn't something we should simply eliminate.

Slide 5, "Intrinsic load isn't something we should simply eliminate." Text: "If the complexity is necessary for the task, our job is to manage it, not remove the learning. Cognitive load is essentially mental work, and we need to give learners enough room to focus on the right mental work that results in learning. It doesn't have to be easy; it has to leave enough room for the mental work of dealing with the intrinsic load of the task. Definition: intrinsic load is the cognitive demand created by the necessary elements and their interactions in a learning task, relative to what the learner already knows." Illustration: a person adjusting a control dial as a tangled network becomes an organised cube.

6.The “three types of load” model I knew has been revised.

Slide 6, "The 'three types of load' model I knew has been revised." Text: "The 2019 revision reframed germane load rather than treating it as a separate third type of load. It is better understood as working-memory resources devoted to dealing with intrinsic load and building or modifying schemas. This brings us back to the classic two: intrinsic and extraneous load." Illustration: three coloured load icons feeding into a brain, then an arrow to just two icons feeding a clearer brain, with a person adjusting sliders.

7.Extraneous load is cognitive work created by our design.

Slide 7, "Extraneous load is cognitive work created by our design." Text: "Unnecessary animations, distracting UI, disintegrated diagrams and labels, unnecessary searching quests, and hiding the map of the learning experience can have learners spending their limited capacity on things that don't contribute to learning. This is why Matt recommended cutting them out entirely, so learners can spend that capacity on understanding and coordinating the necessary elements and relationships. Definition: extraneous load is the mental work caused by the way we design or present the learning that doesn't contribute to understanding and coordinating the necessary elements and relationships that result in learning (building the desired schema)." Illustration: a thinking person facing a cluttered mass of windows and pop-ups, with an arrow leading to a clean, simple flow.

8.Learning isn't the same thing as making everything easy.

Slide 8, "Learning isn't the same thing as making everything easy." Text: "If we remove every bit of complexity from a learning task, we may also remove the very thing the learner needs to think about and coordinate in order to learn. The goal isn't to eliminate mental work. The goal is to make room for the right mental work." Illustration: on one side, a grey, passive figure pushing a shopping cart under a dim brain; on the other, a figure in colour actively fitting puzzle pieces into a cube under a glowing brain.

9.Engagement isn't learning.

Slide 9, "Engagement isn't learning." Text: "Imagine a course with beautiful animations, background music, decorative graphics, narration and an elaborate simulation. Learners finish and say 'That was really engaging!' Then three weeks later, they can't perform the task. My interpretation from Matt's framework: the course may have optimised for what happened during the learning experience rather than what needed to remain in long-term memory afterward. So the question isn't simply 'Was this engaging?' but 'What cognitive work did the learner spend their limited capacity on, and did that work contribute to what we needed them to retain and use?'" Illustration: a learner enjoying a vivid, colourful course, beside a grey scene weeks later of a learner struggling, with missing puzzle pieces and a calendar.


Huge credit to Matthew Richter for giving me the raw sauce to wrestle with.


#InstructionalDesign#InstructionalDesigner#LearningAndDevelopment#LearningDesign#LearningExperienceDesign#LXD#Elearning#ELearningDesign#CurriculumDesign#CurriculumDeveloper#LearningJourney#Day1#Day2#LearningInPublic#BuildInPublic#SenseMakingNotes#MentalModels#TAWIMM

In case you missed the Quinn Seed Series 👇

Quinn Seed #1- CLICK ME

Quinn Seed #2- CLICK ME

Quinn Seed #3- CLICK ME

Quinn Seed #4- CLICK ME

Where this comes from

  1. Check out the Motivation Talks! Meet-Up #8 | August 24, 2026 for more benefits — In this session, we talked about how self-determination theory supports deliberate practice. Below you can find a video where Matt goes in more detail about this topic.
  2. Check out "Learning Science" by Clark Quinn — If you design learning, teach, or train people, you need to understand what is actually happening when someone learns. Learning happens at the neural level, but we design for it at the cognitive level. There’s a lot more in Clark Quinn’s book that I can’t share because of **intellectual property**. Get the book and experience the learning yourself. 📚You Would Love It!
  3. Check out "40 L&D Stakeholder Challenges: Of L&D Leaders, Practitioners, Clients, and Learners" by Guy W. Wallace — This book shares the answers I got from my EPPI-PACT Guidance Bot. The free EPPI-PACT Guidance Bot is a digital, interactive knowledge-transfer resource designed to help Learning and Development (L&D) practitioners, performance consultants, and business leaders master and apply Guy W. Wallace’s Performance Improvement and Performance Based L&D methodologies.
  4. To Learn More Join the "Learning Development Accelerator" — Click the link to join the Amazing Learning Development Accelerator Group Where practice meets evidence

Download "9 Things I Learnt About Cognitive Load Theory " Pdf

8 Things I Learnt About Cognitive Load Theory (1).pdf · 11.7 MB

Download