phenomenon · claim-type · cross-domain-transfer · mechanism · claim-relation · replication-status · limitation — grounded in the full text| phenomenon | cognitive load in STEM instructional materials— “This preliminary evaluation seeks to explore the effectiveness of implementing artificial intelligence (AI) and cognitive load optimization (CLO) in STEM education.” | |
| claim-type | method— “CLO, a new SoL theory, is fundamentally different because it is based on quantitatively modeling relational knowledge (and extended abstract knowledge) as a coherent, contiguous whole that is pedagogically scalable across different educational sectors.” | |
| method — evidence | — “The author further stated that new data presented in this paper stems from an analysis of printed materials only.” | |
| transfer | from mathematical/combinatorial optimization: the design of instructional material is recast as a combinatorial optimization problem — identifying, ranking and sequentially ordering interdependent elements to minimise a measured cost function (cognitive load)— “Optimization is essential because creating coherent and contiguous relational knowledge is a complex combinatorial problem involving the identification, ranking, and sequential ordering of many interdependent elements and associated relationships.” | transfers[0] |
| mechanism | short-term (working) memory has limited capacity, so high-intrinsic-load material overloads it and blocks schema construction in long-term memory— “However, STM (aka working memory) has only limited capacity and retention time and hence can easily be overloaded by curriculum materials with a high ICL.” | mechanisms[0] |
| mechanism | cognitive gaps in the material raise cognitive load, students fill the gaps with their own incorrect conclusions, and the resulting misconceptions then handicap further learning— “This problem is compounded by cognitive gaps in the materials, which exacerbate the cognitive load and may result in students coming to their own incorrect conclusions called misconceptions, which may handicap further learning.” | mechanisms[1] |
| mechanism | because existing learning theories are qualitative and open to interpretation, material quality tracks the individual educator's skill, which produces wide variation in pedagogical quality and pass rates— “Current learning theories and methods are easy to use and well established but are based on qualitative soft science principles, with subjective guidelines that are open to interpretation and hence dependent on the skill and experience of the educator.” | mechanisms[2] |
| extends | Cognitive Load Theory (CLT); de Jong, 2010— “However, CLT lacks a reliable quantitative metric for measuring ICL (de Jong, 2010).” | claim_relations[0] |
| extends | Cognitive Load Theory (CLT), de Jong 2010— “However, CLT lacks a reliable quantitative metric for measuring ICL (de Jong, 2010).” | claim_relations[1] |
| contradicts | Constructivist learning theory— “In effect students are guided to construct their own knowledge–which may be inefficient and error prone.” | claim_relations[2] |
| builds-on | SOLO taxonomy (Biggs & Collis, 1982, 1989)— “Learning outcomes can be evaluated by a learning taxonomy such as the Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO) taxonomy (Biggs & Collis, 1982, 1989).” | claim_relations[3] |
| sense | cognitive load optimization - claimed as a QUANTITATIVE science-of-learning theory, defined by modelling relational knowledge as schemas optimised for the lowest cognitive load— “CLO is a new science of learning (SoL) theory that quantitatively models relational knowledge as coherent, contiguous, pedagogically scalable schemas optimized for the lowest cognitive load.” | senses[0] |
| sense | learning theory - the paper draws a line ChatGPT is placed on the far side of: a useful pedagogical tool, but not a learning theory— “Arguable it is a useful pedagogical tool but not a learning theory.” | senses[1] |
| sense | existing learning theories - characterised as qualitative soft-science principles with subjective guidelines open to interpretation, which is the stated ground for a quantitative replacement— “The current learning theories in use today are based on qualitative soft-science principles, with subjective guidelines that are open to interpretation, which can lead to wide variations in the quality of instructional materials and learning outcomes.” | senses[2] |
| edge | cognitive load optimization —is-a→ science of learning— “CLO is a new science of learning (SoL) theory that quantitatively models relational knowledge as coherent, contiguous, pedagogically scalable schemas optimized for the lowest cognitive load.” | concept_edges[0] |
| for which use | limitation — the practicality claim: HOWEVER, CLO IS TIME CONSUMING TO IMPLEMENT— “However, CLO is time consuming to implement.” | limitations[1] |
| for which use | limitation — any learning-outcome claim: FURTHER WORK IS NEEDED TO DETERMINE AI CHATGPT'S IMPACT ON LEARNING OUTCOMES— “Further work is needed to determine AI ChatGPT’s impact on learning outcomes.” | limitations[2] |
| for which use | limitation — the evidential basis of the paper: NEW DATA PRESENTED IN THIS PAPER STEMS FROM AN ANALYSIS OF PRINTED MATERIALS ONLY - no new controlled study— “The author further stated that new data presented in this paper stems from an analysis of printed materials only.” | limitations[3] |
| duplicate of | limitation — limitations[1]— “However, CLO is time consuming to implement.” | limitations[4] |
| for which use | limitation — the same scope as limitations[1] - implementation cost— “However, CLO is time consuming to implement.” | limitations[4] |
| for which use | limitation — the adoption claim specifically: CLO IS A NEW LEARNING THEORY WITH A DETAILED METHODOLOGY (PROCEDURES, METRICS ETC.) THAT IS TIME CONSUMING TO USE— “However, CLO is a new learning theory with a detailed methodology (procedures, metrics etc.) that is time consuming to use.” | limitations[5] |
| duplicate of | limitation — limitations[2]— “Further work is needed to determine AI ChatGPT’s impact on learning outcomes.” | limitations[6] |
| for which use | limitation — any learning-outcome claim: FURTHER WORK IS NEEDED TO DETERMINE AI CHATGPT'S IMPACT ON LEARNING OUTCOMES— “Further work is needed to determine AI ChatGPT’s impact on learning outcomes.” | limitations[6] |
| for which use | limitation — the modality covered: THIS PAPER IS RESTRICTED TO TEXT-BASED CHATGPT— “This paper is restricted to text-based ChatGPT.” | limitations[7] |
| for which use | limitation — the claim that this methodology addresses a global STEM educational crisis: the reported experiment is one cohort of 33 non-native-English-speaking students given three lectures in remote online mode— “In this experiment, a cohort of 33 students whose first language was not English were given three lectures in remote online mode on computer technology, network technology and cybersecurity using CLO based materials and the relative advantages of CLO versus traditional teaching evaluated.” | limitations[8] |
| for which use | limitation — the artificial-intelligence component of this proposal: the paper states ChatGPT output is not necessarily coherent and contiguous and that further work is needed on its role in instructional design and assessment— “AI ChatGPT is applicable to school, college, and university educational sectors, but is not necessarily coherent and contiguous. Further work is needed. the output 10. Instructional design: CLO schemas serve as the basis of curriculum design, teaching, and assessment. Further work is needed regarding the role of AI ChatGPT in instructional… | limitations[9] |
| for which use | limitation — any expectation that adding ChatGPT improves learning outcomes here: the paper states further work is needed to determine its impact on them | limitations[10] |
| for which use | limitation — the contrast between this quantitative theory and existing ones: the existing theories are characterised as qualitative, subjective and dependent on the educator's skill, rather than compared on a measured outcome | limitations[11] |
| for which use | limitation — the claim that CLO schema diagrams are internalised into long-term memory: the paper reports only 'some evidence' for it and hedges the downstream scaffolding with 'may' | limitations[12] |
| replication | untested | |
| limitation | CLO is time consuming to implement, which the author offers economies of scale to offset. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[1] |
| limitation | The effect of ChatGPT on learning outcomes was not determined by this study. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[2] |
| limitation | The new data in the paper come only from analysis of printed materials, not from a new controlled study. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[3] |
| limitation | CLO is a detailed methodology that is time consuming to implement Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[4] |
| limitation | CLO is new and its detailed procedures and metrics must be learned before use, which costs time Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[5] |
| limitation | The effect of ChatGPT on learning outcomes is not established by this study Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[6] |
| limitation | Only text-based ChatGPT is considered Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[7] |
| limitation | The evidence offered for the method is one cohort given three lectures, and the cohort is described as students whose first language was not English. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[8] |
| limitation | The AI half of the proposal is repeatedly marked as not yet established, in the same table that presents the framework. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[9] |
| limitation | Its effect on the outcome the paper cares about is explicitly still open. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[10] |
| limitation | The comparison class is characterised rather than measured: existing theories are described as qualitative and subjective, and the description is the ground for replacing them. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[11] |
| limitation | The internalisation mechanism the framework depends on is supported only as 'some evidence', with further work stated as needed. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[12] |
finding · quantity · variable · definition · key-term — grounded in the full text| finding | ChatGPT 3.5's output on hubs versus switches imposed a high cognitive load with cognitive gaps, risking student misconceptions. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[0] |
| finding | ChatGPT's explanation of the two sine equations used degrees in one and radians in the other, a potential source of confusion. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[1] |
| finding | Every STEM curriculum item examined across school, college and university level was non-sequential and contained cognitive gaps, i.e. carried a high cognitive load. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[2] |
| finding | 64 business students who had passed three STEM IT units all scored zero on ten simple relational-knowledge questions. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[3] |
| finding | CLO consistently achieved high pass and retention rates (typically 100%) together with very positive student satisfaction. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[4] |
| finding | Cognitive Load Theory lacks a reliable quantitative metric for intrinsic cognitive load. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[5] |
| finding | Ninety-nine percent of the students in the comparison preferred CLO-based learning over the standard method. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[6] |
| finding | ChatGPT works across STEM disciplines and levels but is an educational technology rather than a learning theory, and gives no assurance of pedagogical quality. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[7] |
| quantity | 99% — share of students preferring CLO-based learning to the standard method Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[0] |
| quantity | 64 ... zero — business students tested on ten relational-knowledge questions after passing three STEM IT units, and their score Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[1] |
| quantity | 100% — pass and retention rates for engineering mathematics taught by the CLO method in remote access mode Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[2] |
| quantity | mean of 4.09 with a standard deviation of 0.739 — rating of the Relative Benefit factor by the Chinese graduate-student cohort taught with CLO Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[3] |
| quantity | 210 — business studies graduate students whose behavioural intention to adopt CLO was evaluated with TAM and UTAUT Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[4] |
| quantity | 29% ... 34% — respondents in a national online-learning report complaining of lack of engagement, and of inadequate academic interaction Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[5] |
| quantity | one million — additional STEM graduates called for by the US President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[6] |
| quantity | 33 — non-native-English students taught three remote lectures with CLO materials in the reported experiment Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[7] |
| variable | pass and retention rates (dependent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[2] |
| definition | Cognitive Load Optimization (CLO) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[0] |
| definition | Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[1] |
| definition | intrinsic cognitive load (ICL) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[2] |
| definition | schema Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[3] |
| definition | relational knowledge Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[4] |
| definition | misconceptions Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[5] |
| definition | SOLO taxonomy Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[7] |
| concept | cognitive load optimization Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[0] |
| concept | science of learning Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[1] |
| concept | SOLO taxonomy Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[2] |
| descriptive statistics | as written: evaluated using descriptive statistics Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[0] |
| mean | as written: a mean of 4.09 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[1] |
| standard deviation | as written: a standard deviation of 0.739 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[2] |
When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.
Tag layer © the Meta-Tagging Project, CC BY 4.0. The paper text is © its authors/publisher
and is linked, not reproduced. Excerpts shown are short quotations for identification and verification.
· back to index
· concepts · authors
· עברית
© 2026 Shir Sivroni · ORCID 0009-0000-2597-2824