{"title":"Differences in Learning Effectiveness Across Management Learning Environments: A Cognitive Load Theory Perspective","authors":"Fabian Alexander Müller, Torsten Wulf","doi":"10.1177/10525629231200206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The extant literature indicates that blended learning leads to better outcomes compared to traditional lectures in management education. However, the working memory, which processes all incoming information, can be assumed to already work at capacity in traditional lectures. As blended environments cannot extend this capacity, they can only improve learning effectiveness if they can influence the mechanics underlying the working memory. Drawing on cognitive load theory from educational psychology, we posit that blended learning, by using technology as a differentiator, provides instructional designers with additional options and tools. When utilized effectively, these choices can reduce learners’ cognitive load related to the design and increase cognitive load related to learning. Our assumptions are based on a case study with two different learning formats, including a blended environment that actively integrates technologies into the curriculum. Empirical evidence supports our hypotheses. We contribute to educational technology research in management education by explicitly considering the mechanics of the cognitive system and the effects of instructional design, curriculum choice, and related technology use. Our results suggest that blended environments can improve learning effectiveness if technologies are well integrated into curricula. Educational technologies, thus, provide entirely new opportunities for management educators but also require faculty development.","PeriodicalId":47308,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10525629231200206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The extant literature indicates that blended learning leads to better outcomes compared to traditional lectures in management education. However, the working memory, which processes all incoming information, can be assumed to already work at capacity in traditional lectures. As blended environments cannot extend this capacity, they can only improve learning effectiveness if they can influence the mechanics underlying the working memory. Drawing on cognitive load theory from educational psychology, we posit that blended learning, by using technology as a differentiator, provides instructional designers with additional options and tools. When utilized effectively, these choices can reduce learners’ cognitive load related to the design and increase cognitive load related to learning. Our assumptions are based on a case study with two different learning formats, including a blended environment that actively integrates technologies into the curriculum. Empirical evidence supports our hypotheses. We contribute to educational technology research in management education by explicitly considering the mechanics of the cognitive system and the effects of instructional design, curriculum choice, and related technology use. Our results suggest that blended environments can improve learning effectiveness if technologies are well integrated into curricula. Educational technologies, thus, provide entirely new opportunities for management educators but also require faculty development.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Management Education (JME) encourages contributions that respond to important issues in management education. The overriding question that guides the journal’s double-blind peer review process is: Will this contribution have a significant impact on thinking and/or practice in management education? Contributions may be either conceptual or empirical in nature, and are welcomed from any topic area and any country so long as their primary focus is on learning and/or teaching issues in management or organization studies. Although our core areas of interest are organizational behavior and management, we are also interested in teaching and learning developments in related domains such as human resource management & labor relations, social issues in management, critical management studies, diversity, ethics, organizational development, production and operations, sustainability, etc. We are open to all approaches to scholarly inquiry that form the basis for high quality knowledge creation and dissemination within management teaching and learning.