Documents

Case Study

Summary

It is known that one of the most powerful strategies for reducing student cognitive load during problem solving instruction is the use of examples of how experts solve similar problems.  Most of the studies of worked examples have been conducted in STEM courses; this study tested the effectiveness of worked examples in teaching logical reasoning and particularly for the complex problems used in the Law School Admissions Test (LSAT). The researchers found that 9 minutes of studying worked examples resulted in better test performance than conventional study for 90 minutes.

This strong evidence of the efficacy of worked examples has both theoretical and practical implications. From a theoretical perspective, the fact that worked examples are effective in a new field, logical reasoning, indicates that improvements in logical reasoning are due to the same factors attendant on improvements in other areas. Learners need to learn to recognize problem types and their associated solutions rather than more generalized problem solution strategies. Worked examples provide those problem types and their solutions. Attempts to teach generalized strategies seem to be ineffective. From a practical perspective, logical reasoning is an important and difficult to teach component of the LSAT. The current results suggest that such reasoning can be very effectively taught using appropriately structured worked examples.

Conclusions and Lessons Learned

• The use of worked examples can be a highly effective approach to reducing cognitive load and improve test results, as shown in this example of students learning logical reasoning in preparation for the LSAT.

Cited References

• Larry Rudman (Kaplan Test Prep); John Sweller (University of New South Wales); and  David Niemi (Kaplan Inc.).  “Using Cognitive Load Theory for Improving Logical Reasoning for the LSAT.”  Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference, April 2013.