How High the Moon?
What’s the maximum length of an e‑learning module?”
It’s a question that reveals more about how we think than how we design. Generally, it either stems from budget discussions (where what to leave on the cutting room floor is intended to shave dollars) or from a client’s sense that learners are more likely to complete one long module as opposed to several shorter ones. (A la Yogi Berra – “You better cut the pizza in four pieces because I'm not hungry enough to eat six.”) It’s a good question; although, our take on module length has less to do with screen counts and more to do with cognitive load.
When it comes to dealing with new information, our brain has a limited capacity to hold that information in working memory – this is the basis of cognitive load theory. Research on cognitive load began in the 1950s when George Miller [1] proposed that we could hold between 5 and 9 pieces of information (7 plus or minus 2) in working memory. His research was critical to cognitive science and our understanding of working memory. After that? Cognitive overload.
Building on Miller’s foundation, later researchers explored how multimedia presentation affects cognitive load. Specifically, in the context of multimedia learning, Mayer[2] identifies three assumptions about how the mind works in processing information and lays out solutions to reduce cognitive overload – clearly a risk given that multiple channels (auditory and visual) are being exercised.
Much of what was presented in his research is modeled in e-learning today, whether we recognize the origins or not. For example, Mayer looked at proximal placement of text (such as a caption and a visual) and found that separating these two elements placed added stress on cognitive load. Today, most instructional designers would intuitively group these elements together without overtly thinking about Mayers’ research – we just know from our own experience, as well as observation, what works for learners.
Formal research on module length seems oddly sparse. But, according to research done by Pomales-Garcia and Liu[3], learner perceptions about length of an e-learning program appear to influence its efficacy or at least a learner’s attitude about completing a program. They examined the impact of length and the format of e-learning modules on information recall and discovered that as module length increased, study participants were (not surprisingly) less inclined to complete the modules. I think its safe to say that as interest dwindles and cognitive load increases, we can expect diminishing returns on learning.
Frankly, the programs we’ve produced have varied greatly in size, scope, and length. We rely on intuition, along with experience and research to guide us as we make decisions on crafting a meaningful learning experience – thoughtfully accounting for cognitive load and working memory. Once you do this, the issue of screen counts is vastly less important as results become the more useful metric of an e-learning program.
Understanding cognitive load helps designers create learning experiences that feel effortless — not overwhelming.
References
Miller, G. A. (1956). "The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information". Psychological Review 63 (2): 81–97. doi:10.1037/h0043158. PMID 13310704.
Mayer. R.E. and Moreno, R. (2003). “Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning”. Educational Psychologist, 38 (1). 43-52.
Pomales-Garcia, C. and Liu, Y. “Web-Based Distance Learning Technology: The Impacts of Web Module Length and Format”. The American Journal of Distance Education, 2006, 20(3), 163-179.
