Learning out Loud: A Framework for Learning in an Era of Information Abundance

Abstract

Learning out loud (LOL) is an approach to learning and teaching in an era of information abundance and the changing state - and role - of formal education (K-12 and higher education, training and development programs). LOL frames a learning experience that extends beyond the traditional, centuries-old emphasis on encoding, or taking in information in formal settings, by expanding the storage, or sense-making process, stretching and sustaining retrieval, or application of content, and adding “bookends” of emphasis on motivation in the early stages and sustainability and flexible transfer toward the latter stages. In this way, a learning experience framed by LOL extends beyond the formal setting through authentic, emotional, and applied learning journeys. Based on theory and extensive empirical research from cognitive science and the science of learning, LOL addresses two pressing challenges for learners, the role and relevance of formal learning and the mismatch between how we feel we learn best and how we actually learn best. Learning out loud maps a learning journey to harness information abundance, seize the opportunities of the changing state and role of formal education, and scaffold individualized and collaborative sense-making.

1. Introduction

Learning out loud (LOL) is a cognitive science-based framework that harnesses digital media to engage educators and learners in a structured, individual and collaborative goal-directed learning journey. I define successful learning as being able to remember, retrieve, and flexibly apply content, be it knowledge, skills, and/or attitudes (KSA). In other words, learning is made up of memory and transfer.

The process of learning “out loud” is goal-directed, starting internally with motivation and attention on “to-be-learned” content. Internally, learning out loud is akin to consciously pausing and pondering, or thinking. Thinking = attention = focus. Cognitive scientist Daniel Willingham’s powerful truism, “memory is the residue of thought” [1], suggests that the more you focus on and think about something, the greater the likelihood you will remember it. Through a learning out loud approach, learners then express the thought “out loud” through speaking, drawing, gesturing, and writing. The sense-making process is both individual and collaborative – illustrating and expressing understanding in observable (audible, visible) ways with tangible outputs, or products of learning.

Outputs reflect learners’ understanding, achieved through the LOL process, and enable the learner to extend their understanding to authentic contexts and applications beyond the formal learning environment, such as online and in the workplace.

The learning out loud process, then, begins with attention and progressively involves observable behavior and tangible products that demonstrate learning – being able to remember and flexibly apply the content – followed by extension and maintenance, ideally through reciprocal interaction with others. Moving from conscious, focused, but passive intake of content through active processing and comprehension leads to inferences and construction of knowledge through connection-building with long term memory, including schema (mental models), and extends through interaction with others to co-construct and deepen understanding and therefore, learning. The passive, active, constructive, interactive continuum draws from Chi’s ICAP theory of learning [2], while the learning experiences embedded in the iterative cycle reflect strategies from the science of learning.

This chapter describes how, in formal learning environments, the LOL framework implements cognitive science, embeds universal design for learning (UDL), and harnesses digital media to facilitate learning, achieve learning goals, and solve performance challenges for diverse learners in the digital era of information abundance.

Given that approaches such as ICAP, the science of learning, and UDL exist, and infinite information and affordances from online spaces and digital media abound, why am I introducing learning out loud, yet another approach? LOL offers a port in the often chaotic storm of teaching and learning in an era of information abundance and evolving notions of formal learning. It collates and structures theory, research, and practice into a tangible, clear, and evidence-informed framework to address two pressing challenges in formal learning environments (e.g., higher education). This chapter begins by outlining the challenges and highlights the primary features of learning out loud and how it begins to address the challenges.

2. The problem: Two challenges in formal education

We face two challenges in formal education:

• its role and relevance are in flux, and

• common perceptions of how learning happens are outdated and lack empirical support.

2.1 What is the “why” of formal education?

The role and relevance of formal education is best understood through the current “epidemic of disengagement” [3] not only in K-12 and higher education, but also in the workplace. In the K-12 environment, research led by Julie Evans, CEO of U.S. education non-profit Project Tomorrow, has amplified the voices of students, parents, teachers, and school leaders since 2003. Findings prior to and during the pandemic suggest that only half of students in grades 6–12, for example, feel engaged in their learning when they are in school [4]. In higher education institutions, not only are enrollments continuing to decline, college students are increasingly disengaged [3, 5, 6]. At the same time, employee disengagement has reached its highest level since 2015 [7].

Two silos, formal education and the workplace, face challenges attracting, recruiting, and retaining engaged students and employees. Further disconnecting the two silos is the growing trend of job seekers no longer requiring qualifications from higher education institutions (HEIs) or other formal credential-granting environments [8, 9]. Higher education, the oldest, most traditional example of formal education is a natural context to explore these challenges and ask, “What is the role of university or college learning today when increasingly, job seekers no longer require degrees”?

Higher education institutions face disruptions in their role and relevance to students, employers, and society in a post-COVID era of information abundance, expanded training and development opportunities, and the epidemic of disengagement [3, 5, 6]. One answer lies in the “reach” of HEI. As higher education scholars Levine and Van Pelt note, “In times of rapid change, higher education has done well to maintain its foothold in the library but has lost its hold on the street” [10]. HEIs, they explain, are most successful when they fulfill their role in bridging the “library” and the “street”, figuratively having one foot in “humanity’s accumulated knowledge” and another in the real world, where the pace and scale of change happens in real time [10]. HEI classrooms and their ecosystems such as student services are strategically positioned to bridge or connect the library and street through evidence-informed instructional practices and connection-building. In other words, deep, meaningful learning experiences with application to authentic contexts.

However the institution itself requires a significant shift in practice.

The shift in practice is, however, slowed by the second challenge for HEIs, outdated and misinformed notions of how learning happens.

2.2 The mismatch between feelings and evidence of learning

There is a mismatch between how we feel we learn best and how we actually learn best. The mismatch is best understood through nature and nurture. Starting with nature, we tend to resist the types of learning experiences that lead to deep learning, and instead, favor those that involve greater ease of processing. This is due, in part, to our brain’s natural instinct to conserve energy. Active engagement in the learning process, especially the cognitive effort of processing of something new, draws on precious brain energy (metabolism). Our brains take up 20% of our resting metabolism despite representing only about 2% of our body weight [11]. And learning something new is one of the most expensive, energy-intensive activities for our brains to engage in [12, 13].

We have evolved, in part, by carefully conserving energy, so actively learning something new can be unpleasant and uncomfortable. When cognitive effort is increased during active learning, for example actively solving novel problems in a university classroom environment, we tend to associate the energy expenditure as an indicator of less effective learning. Paradoxically, we view less active learning experiences more favourably. To illustrate, research with science students at Harvard University suggests that when learners are more passively engaged in learning with greater ease of processing, for example by listening to a skilled lecturer, they associate their comprehension and comfort levels as more effective [14]. This passive engagement coupled with comprehension is termed the illusion of fluency (or knowing) and it affects learners’ perception of how easy it will be to remember the information, due in large part to the ease of explanation by the instructor and ease of retrieving the information from short-term memory, for example during the same class [15]. Research findings consistently indicate, however, that more active, effortful engagement leads to stronger memory, increased performance, and transfer of learning [14, 15].

Nature, then, presents a mismatch between how we feel we learn best and how we actually learn best. Nurture, in this case our academic or learning culture, has also contributed to the mismatch in our understanding of how we learn best.

The academic culture in HEIs across millennia have been based on transmission of scarce information. Over a thousand years ago, the holder of knowledge – typically an elite member of the community – “held” important information and was often one of the few literate members of the community. Over time, literacy rates increased, information became more readily available through the formation of universities and later, the advent of technologies such as the Gutenberg Press, radio, television, and now, the internet. Nonetheless, the dye had long been cast for formal learning, with universities such as Oxford University “masters” (lecturers) “transmitting” knowledge through lectures centuries before mass copying of books became a reality. This 1000-plus years tradition of “learning by lecture and memorization” [16] means that content knowledge is “delivered” or transmitted verbally and through textbooks. It is driven by scarcity as a core element, with knowledge and expertise representing the commodity and learning, the demand [17]. Each subject area has relatively small numbers of experts in an HEI so when “access” to experts is in person through a traditional lecture, the supply and demand model requires learners to receive content from (listen to) the knowledge holder, or “expert”.

As a result, a ‘pedagogy of scarcity’ developed, which is based around a one-to-many model to make the best use of the scarce resource (the expert). This is embodied in the lecture, which despite its detractors is still a very efficient means of conveying certain types of learning content. [17].

The pedagogy of scarcity has not been overwhelmingly disrupted by the digital era and new media, nor has a pedagogy of abundance become dominant. Disruption in higher education and beyond is afoot, however not at a large scale. Indeed, most higher education instructors, especially in large-enrolment classes, rely on traditional, one-to-many “delivery” methods [14]. In an information abundance (and access) paradigm shift, teaching and learning is primed for seismic shifts.

This new media environment can be enormously disruptive to our current teaching methods and philosophies. As we increasingly move toward an environment of instant and infinite information, it becomes less important for students to know, memorize, or recall information, and more important for them to be able to find, sort, analyze, share, discuss, critique, and create information. They need to move from being simply knowledgeable to being knowledge-able [18].

In higher education, bridging the library and the street requires instructional practices and structured learning processes that engage learners in this “border crossing” from knowledgeable to knowledge able [18]. Being knowledge able requires competencies to navigate the abundant “instant and infinite information” in both the library and the street and make meaningful connections and contributions, whether personal, community, or career related.

The good news is that cognitive science and more broadly, education research, offer myriad evidence and theory-informed strategies and approaches to guide learners (e.g., science of learning [19]) and educators (e.g., heutagogy, rhizomatic learning [20]). However, the not-so-good news is that there remains no single, unifying framework that flexibly integrates these resources for adult learners and their educators. Learning out loud is a first step in integrating research, seizing the era of change in formal learning environments such as HEIs, and empowering learners and educators alike.

3. Learning out loud: A learning journey

Learning out loud (LOL) is an iterative, non-linear flexible learning journey. Learners can apply the approach independently, and a growing number already do in networked, participatory learning communities.

Of particular relevance to educators is the growing number of learners engaging in self-directed learning experiences independently and collaboratively, based on personal or academic interest. Research by the non-profit organization Project Tomorrow (www.tomorrow.org) and its Speak Up project draws on survey and interview data gathered since 2003 from over 6.2 million K-12 education stakeholders [21]. CEO and lead researcher Julie Evans calls this emerging form of independent, informal exploration “free agent” learning [4]. Findings suggest that, outside of formal learning environments, motivated and self-driven learners are shaking off the constraints of the scarcity pedagogy they experience in school, and actively navigating the information abundance landscape quite successfully:

The increasingly ubiquitous availability and access of digital tools and resources such as social media, mobile devices, online communities, and digital games is the fuel that is propelling this new learning paradigm of Free Agent Learning. Students' learning potential is no longer restrained by the knowledge of their teacher, the resources within their classroom, or their ability to visit a local library or museum. A world of knowledge and learning experiences can now be accessed with a few clicks or swipes on their personal smartphone. Empowered with access to technology and a passionate motivation for highly contextualized learning experiences, students are now “Free Agents” in the sense that they can drive their own educational destiny just as professional athletes with free agency have the capacity to direct their own career fate. Most importantly, the experiences that students are having outside of school, driving their own learning experiences, using a wide range of digital tools and resources, and using those experiences to prepare for their future success, are influencing their expectations for in-school learning as well [4].

These expectations in K-12 are not new, and HEI educators like Michael Wesch [18] are at the forefront in seizing the “new media environment” (p. 69) in formal, “in-school” learning to scaffold leaners’ journey from being knowledgeable to knowledge able. A learning out loud framework facilitates this journey. To introduce the key features of learning out loud, I address the educator primarily, rather than the independent learner. Below, the descriptions and examples relate to asynchronous online learning environments, however the activities and principles apply to all modalities.

In many ways, learning out loud reflects the iterative processes of free agent learning, beginning with personalized motivation for learning and culminating in collaborative engagement via learning networks that can (and should) occur beyond the classroom. Table 1 provides an overview of the learning out loud stages and forms of cognitive engagement. More detailed explanations follow, with concrete examples, and finally, more in depth explanation of the two main cognitive science theories and approaches that inform LOL and provide extensive empirical support (Table 1).

Learning out loud stage	Engagement
1. Motivation, purpose and focus (curiosity, interest)	attention
2. Exploration of to-be-learned content (reading, listening, watching)	passive
3. Comprehension and retention (memory building)	active
4. Consolidation through connection- and meaning-making	constructive
5. Extension through collaboration and co-construction	interactive

Table 1.

Stages and forms of cognitive engagement of learning out loud.

3.1 LOL stage 1: Attention through motivation

Much like the “passionate motivation” of the K-12 free agent learner phenomenon identified by Evans ([4], p. xix), adult learner motivation involves both cognitive and affective processes and can account for 30 to 40% of learning and application [22]. For this reason, learning out loud begins with motivation via explicit orientation to the topic, the to-be-learned content and prompts to pique personal connections (curiosity, interest). Orientation is not only to motivating the learner and capturing their attention, or focus, but also to establish the big picture, or overview of the topic. Schema (mental models) of concepts and their relationships are ideal to orient the learner. Our brains seek meaning before detail [23] so an emphasis on the essential, motivating and, in terms of schema, features of the to-be-learned content, by default, minimizes and eliminates extraneous content that may negatively affect cognitive load [24]. Orienting learners to no more than three to five focus areas of the to-be-learned content also supports management of cognitive load and sets them up for success, namely optimal sense-making processes [24].

To illustrate this phase, I share an example of learning and authentic assessment.

LOL-based orientation:

• provides a learner-centred overview of the topic or schema of the central concepts,

• prompts the learner to make connections to their own lived experiences, learning goals, or future applications,

• introduces the learning material (e.g., online article, podcast, video, research paper, etc.),

• foregrounds the learning activities to follow, and

• explicitly directs the learner to focus their attention on specific content (limited to 3 to 5 elements).

The last component of an LOL orientation is essential. Guiding the learner orient their attention to key concepts (and often, specific passages or excerpts) enables them to maintain focus and sets them up to achieve the learning goals with sufficient working memory, as explained by cognitive load theory [24].

An authentic assessment related to motivation begins with purpose. For example, a multi-phase e-portfolio development project begins with learners articulating their purpose and creating a communication strategy (illustrated in an example below). The e-portfolio project is process- and product-based and learning activities are woven into the assessment when learners draft digital artifacts such as blogs and infographics as a response (personal, academic, or career-related connection) to the topic. Thus, part of the orientation stage motivates learners by linking to the e-portfolio project and its authentic application (e.g., job-seeking, lifelong learning).

3.2 LOL stages 2 and 3: Passive and active exploratory learning … with focus

In the next two phases, learners explore the content either independently or through social annotation using digital tools such as Hypothesis, Kami or Perusall [25, 26, 27]. Learners apply the focus areas provided during the attention-building stage to read, listen to, or view the learning materials for general comprehension. Concept and comprehension checks are valuable scaffolds for this foundation-building stage.

3.3 LOL stage 4: Constructive engagement to consolidate understanding

The greatest gains in learning and performance take place between the active and constructive modes of the ICAP continuum [28, 29]. This transition happens in stage 4 of learning out loud, once learners have explored the content with the focus areas in mind and established comprehension. Constructive engagement moves learners beyond what is provided in the materials to construct meaning and identify or extend connections, either with prior knowledge, personal relevance, or simply inferences gleaned from deeper exploration. Prompts to identify and explain emerging connections, or patterns, are particularly effective for consolidating understanding as well as meaning making. For example, learners may be prompted to compare and contrast elements of the to-be-learned content, or to extract cause and effect relationships.

Learning activities at this stage typically culminate in learners explaining, giving evidence for, and illustrating their consolidated understanding through digital artifacts of their own choosing, including narrative text, word-diagrams (e.g., table, Venn diagram), screen casts, or other means. Providing learners with options to express their newly constructed, emerging knowledge enables them to go beyond the original resource (learning material) and bridge the content to an authentic purpose such as in their draft e-portfolio. Equally important is the iterative process of communicating their understanding in its emerging, unfinished “draft” form and remaining curious and open to refinement and extension of their understanding through interactions at the next stage.

Scaffolds and structure at this stage are essential to facilitating a “progress over perfection” emphasis and acknowledgement of the messiness and uncertainty of the learning process itself. As an example, scaffolds might include sample digital artifacts in draft form, grading mechanisms that reward risk, and a “guide on the side” instructional role, offering support only where needed.

3.4 LOL stage 5: Extending learning with others

The final and most effective stage of learning out loud engages the learners in meaningful, reciprocal learning interactions with others both within the learning environment (e.g., classroom) and beyond. Well-designed and scaffolded learning at this stage connects learners in collaborative work that builds on their consolidated knowledge through problem solving and other applications of the to-be-learned content.

An example is learners’ collaborative design and development of training materials to teach others about the content. Each learner brings their own understanding and previously drafted products (e.g., blog with flow chart and screen cast) to the collaboration and together, the team identifies an authentic audience that would benefit from or a context in which the content is applicable. They then design and develop training experiences for the agreed upon audience and context, drawing on each of their knowledge and materials.

Again, the product(s) they co-create will be ideal artifacts to include in each individual’s e-portfolio, the authentic assessment. Further, sharing their work more widely, for example via social networking environments such as Twitter and LinkedIn bridges learners more directly from the library (more structured and controlled classroom) to the street (unpredictable, socially driven personal networks).

4. Learning out loud: Two students’ learning journeys

Examples from two fictitious but representative students will illustrate the LOL approach and set the stage for a discussion of the theoretical and empirical support for learning out loud.

Kayla and Salman are students in the same online asynchronous graduate class, Adult Learning and Development, a 15-week semester-long course. Kayla is a grade 6 teacher and Salman, a future physical therapist. As part of both learning and assessment, Kayla and Salman are independently designing and developing their own digital, interactive e-portfolio to synthesize their learning and showcase their competencies. Early in the course, they submit e-portfolio plans, the first assignment, in which they articulate their purpose for the e-portfolio (e.g., job-seeking, lifelong learning, professional development) as well as their communication strategy by answering six questions from Hobbs’ [16] Create to Learn:

1. Who am I?

2. Who is the target audience?

3. How will they encounter this message?

4. What do I want them to know?

5. What do I want them to feel?

6. What do I want them to do?

Kayla and Salman’s purposes and communication strategy responses are summarized below in Table 2.

	Kayla	Salman
Purpose	(1) job seeking; (2) professional development (PD)	(1) lifelong learning; (2) working with physical therapy (PT) clients, potentially
Who am I (Identity)	(1) educator; (2) emerging teacher trainer	(1) curious lifelong learner, (2) emerging physical therapist
Target audience	(1) potential employers; (2) colleagues	(1) self, possibly PT clients
Encounter message	(1) LinkedIn profile, hyperlinked in resume, cover letters, and email signature block; (2) incorporated in PD sessions	(1) private site; (2) potentially in future through training form, email signature block
Know	(1), (2) that I am knowledgeable about how humans learn and develop, and am a credible, competent communicator who can use digital media effectively	(1) that there are evidence-based frameworks about how humans learn and develop; (2) that I am trained not only in PT but also in adult learning
Feel	(1) impressed with my knowledge and competencies; (2) confident in my PD design and delivery	(1) informed; (2) trusting in my training, guidance, and overall support
Do	(1) hire me! (2) learn with me!	(1) refresh my memory and apply the content; (2) follow my training guidance

Table 2.

E-portfolio purpose and communication strategies, Kayla and Salman.

Together, the purpose and communication strategy will shape Kayla and Salman’s learning activities in the learning out loud processes throughout the course. In other words, the students will make choices in the learning process that align with their purpose for creating the e-portfolio, as well as their strategy for the design, development, and use (including sharing) of the end product, of the e-portfolio typically a website or e-booklet. With each week’s learning activities in the online course, learners have options for how to engage with the content including curating meaningful content, drafting and refining digital artifacts, and applying course concepts to solve problems such as a common workplace challenge (e.g., case study or scenario).

Kayla, for example, often chooses the learning activity option to draft and refine blog posts that incorporate infographics she’s created on her own or with others. Kayla makes direct, concrete connections in her blog posts to her professional context, teaching in the K-12 sector and makes evidence informed points with her target audience in mind (potential employers and colleagues). She has the option to select course concepts, such as transformative learning, to explore in relation to teacher professional development and to illustrate key concepts of transformative learning through word-diagrams. These steps align with her communication strategy for her audience to feel confident in her design and delivery of professional development.

At the beginning of the course, Salman opted to be more private with his e-portfolio, serving his lifelong learning purpose. By designing and developing a website for his curated content (e-portfolio), Salman is able to provide limited access to his instructor and peers in the class, but keep the site itself private. The flexibility of the website builder, Google Sites, enables Salman to keep the door open to adapt and use his materials, based on course content (adult learning) in his future profession, physical therapy. Salman is new to the field of education and has a healthy skepticism of its theories and approaches, so his communication strategy is to emphasize the extensive research base underpinning the content he’s exploring in class. In this way, his choices each week in the learning activities tend to lean toward generalizations and broad applications. As the course progresses, he is noticing more and more connections to future applications such as working with PT clients so his iterative revisions and collaborations in the class with educators like Kayla enable him to go deeper with certain topics. To illustrate, Salman opted to create an infographic of a research paper from the course and share it with the authors via social media. This learning process occurred over a six week period and the product itself took on multiple versions until Salman felt it was ready for an authentic audience, and also to be included in his e-portfolio.

As part of their weekly learning experiences, both Kayla and Salman re-ignite their motivation by being prompted to think about their purposes for learning in stage 1 of LOL. Each learner has quite unique prior knowledge and the “focus” prompts enable them to direct their attention to the important content. Stages 2 through 5 are not easy as neither learner was accustomed to this level of autonomy and applied engagement with the course content and each other. Nonetheless, by the end of the 15-week course, both learners become accustomed to the novel approach in which they share incomplete “drafts” of their understanding, demonstrating vulnerability and risk-taking, and along the way develop confidence in their iteratively deepening knowledge and competencies as well as their abilities to explain and illustrate their “take” on course content with credibility and through multiple modalities.

By the end of the course, each student have constructed and co-constructed both understanding and products of learning that were unique to their identities and purpose for learning. These connections are not easy to form in any learning context, nor is it to engage in effortful expenditure of precious brain energy or exploit the abundance of information and its delivery through digital media. These features of learning out loud bridge both unique learners between the library (course content) and the street (personal purpose for learning).

Features of learning out loud are less traditional but not new. They are based on extensive theoretical and empirical support.

5. Theoretical and research basis: learning plus out loud

Learning Out Loud brings together two established cognitive science frameworks, Chi’s ICAP theory of learning [2, 29, 30] and the science of learning [19]. The LOL approach is comprised of two concepts, learning and out loud, and the term is inspired by John Stepper’s social learning application to the work world, working out loud [31, 32]. After defining the two concepts, I go into greater depth in connecting them to ICAP theory of learning and two powerful science of learning approaches, Fiorella and Mayer’s generative learning [33, 34] and dual coding.

Recall my earlier cognitive science-based definition of learning as memory plus transfer. To learn is to construct memories, often in the form of schema schema and to be able to flexibly transfer, or apply, both. Learning experiences that happen out loud lead to deeper, lasting learning. Out loud learning is conscious and requires focused attention, and LOL involves alternating between expressing both emerging and established ideas and understanding out loud internally and externally, (i.e., in visible or audible modalities).

As a framework for learning, LOL emphasizes observable behavior and artifacts, indexing not only what learners do but also products they create. The LOL process is informed by Chi’s ICAP theory of learning and is therefore iterative, moving from passive intake of content to interactive co-construction of understanding and schema-building. Similarly, LOL incorporates generative learning and dual coding strategies from the science of learning to zoom in on learners’ specific engagement activities.

5.1 Chi’s ICAP theory of learning

The ICAP theory of learning outlines four modes of physical and cognitive engagement in descending order, interactive, constructive, active, passive [28]. Physical engagement as part of learning is observable, for example note-taking, pointing, underlining, etc. Cognitive engagement is invisible and reflects thinking processes while learning. To define the four modes of engagement, both types are indexed.

Table 3 outlines key learner behaviors and products (artifacts) in each mode of the ICAP continuum.

Mode	Passive	Active	Constructive	Interactive
Learner behavior	paying attention, focusing (e.g., reading, listening, watching)	physically manipulating learning materials (e.g., underlining, pausing and rewinding, copying)	physically generating novel ideas or inferences observable (e.g., comparing, reflecting, drawing)	collaboration with others via reciprocal, co-generative behavior (e.g., discussion, critique,
Learner artifacts	no physical output	output already existed	output new in relation to learning materials	output new (goes beyond) learning materials and each individual’s contribution
Cognitive process(es)	attention, focus, on to-be-learned content	re-focus, re-activate relevant information	produce new knowledge, infer new connections, revise existing knowledge	combine understanding and knowledge to co-construct and collaboratively new understandings
Learner and/or Instructor roles and example behavior	Establish motivation, pique curiosity, avoid cognitive overload by limiting number of elements	Annotate and interact via social annotation, share takeaways and connections, answer concept and comprehension questions	Identify connections, infer relationships (e.g., with earlier content, prior knowledge), describe patterns and/or models (schema)	Mutual contributions, reciprocal knowledge building and application of content

Table 3.

ICAP theory of learning modes.

The learning out loud approach adds to ICAP with its intentional and transparent emphasis on motivation for learning, i.e., by orienting learners toward their purpose, sparking curiosity, etc. Strategies focused on motivation and learning seem to result in similar levels of effect (30 to 40%) on both efficacy and transfer (application), which suggests a strong rationale for emphasizing motivation in learning design.

The four levels of learning with the ICAP continuum are, not surprisingly, greatest at the interactive level and least at the passive level. That is, learners engaged in interactive (co-generative and reciprocal) activities experience more and deeper learning outcomes than in constructive modes, which are more effective than active and passive. In other words, the hypothesis of ICAP theory predicts the ordering Passive < Active < Constructive < Interactive [2, 28, 29]. Learning out loud adheres to this order and adds value with specific learning strategies at each level. ICAP cannot make accurate predictions for activities within the same mode however research findings suggest that the “sweet spot” where the greatest improvement in learning happens is between active and constructive modes [28]. In HEI classrooms, this space offers numerous opportunities for application of generative learning strategies, based on the science of learning.

5.2 Generative learning and dual coding

Generative learning engages the learner through the ICAP steps and is particularly relevant in building and strengthening the connective tissue between active and constructive levels. Progressing from passive to interactive co-construction modes of learning is a messy, iterative process. It is also difficult for learners and involves a series of learning experiences that spend precious brain energy while selectively and purposefully exploiting the abundance of information. Dual coding is a generative learning strategy based on the science of learning that incorporates observable behaviors and results in tangible products of learning.

Dual coding is a form of self-explaining (elaboration) that harnesses visual and verbal (words) content to convey understanding. Examples of dual coding products are word-diagrams such as notes taken with both words and imagery (e.g., sketch notes), graphic organizers, Venn diagrams, tables, flow charts, maps, cartoon strips, timelines, and infographics.

As both an instructional and learning strategy, dual coding aligns with principles of universal design for learning (UDL), namely ensuring that alternative forms of verbal (words), auditory, and visual information are incorporated in both representation (displaying content) and action and expression (communication) [35].

Dual coding as part of learning out loud can engage learners in externalizing their emerging thoughts through drawing. Drawing as an encoding technique is particularly efficacious as it uses multiple constituent processes to make and convey meaning by exploiting tools such as external memory fields. When we externalize our understanding through symbols (images, words),

we have an external memory field, in the form of an immediate display of selected artifacts, that often serves as our real working memory. The thinker holds the displayed item in the external field, and plays with that item in iterative loops, improving or extending the memory representation in the external memory field [36].

Dual coding, then, builds strong multimodal memory traces, and supports working memory and comprehension, incorporating elaborative, motoric, and pictorial processes. Table 4 summarizes key learning behaviors and effects of dual coding (from [37, 39] unless otherwise indicated).

Elaborative	Motoric	Pictorial
Generative (constructive) processes to imagine and envision representations that capture visual and semantic features of the target concept Deep levels of processing of (imagining, enacting) and visual imagery Concept becomes more concrete (less abstract)	Manual translation of image (external or internal) from the mind to the page (external memory field) Similar memory-enhancement as enactment effect with motor action in response to a word Motor actions in response to words enhances retention	Visual processing and analysis for inspection purposes (quality, accuracy, etc.) [37] Picture-superiority effect through two routes, visual and verbal (an image’s “label”) [38] Dual coding of pictorial information strengthens encoding through accessing the “semantic store” [38]

Table 4.

Dual coding components and features.

6. Final thoughts: a novel, evidence-based solution to today’s learning challenges

Learning out loud starts with learners and their goals at the centre. With evidence-based practice and authentic application of learning, LOL bridges learners (and educators) and to-be-learned content iteratively between the “library” and “the street”. The library mindset that learners develop empowers them to filter the abundance of information through step-by-step meaning-making that emerges from a “pause and ponder” internal memory-initiating process along a continuum of comprehension, connection-building with prior knowledge and experience, construction and illustration of understanding, and ideally, collaborative, reciprocal meaning-making. Connections to real-world contexts and applications also emerge, to add relevance – bridge-building – related to learners’ goals. Consistent LOL experiences have the potential to build self-directed learning out loud habits of thinking and learning. The role and relevance of formal education, then, is to bridge learners from motivation to flexible transfer of learning in real life settings.

Notably, by teasing out the notion of “active” learning which many learners’ brains resist due to its energy expenditure, learning out loud scaffolds learning into step-by-step sense-making experiences. Designing learning experiences not only with learner motivation in mind but also learners’ cognitive load capacity lays the foundation for cognitive energy expenditure that is both meaningful to the learner and manageable for their working memory and the “storage” stage of traditional learning.

From an instructional perspective, LOL begins with learner motivation, incorporates student choice, universal design for learning (multiple means of engagement, representation, and action and expression) [35], and authentic assessment. From a learner’s perspective, LOL provides a coherent and energy-efficient structure and manages expectations for the non-linear, occasionally challenging pursuit of learning. With a foundation of theory and evidence from cognitive science drawing from Chi’s ICAP Theory of Learning and, among others, instructional and learning strategies from the science of learning, (for example, generative learning and dual coding) learning out loud represents a flexible learner-centred approach.

Learning out loud frames both the learning process, or journey, and tangible actions to learn deeply and achieve performance goals. In higher education classrooms and for independent adult learners, the structure of ICAP provides a heuristic for designing learning journeys, while strategies from the science of learning provide concrete, evidence-based guidance for action.

In this early, nascent stage, emerging research findings of the learning out loud approach and related features suggest promising opportunities for bridging the formal education library with the street and empower learners of all ages to harness the abundance of information in and out of the classroom and to become truly knowledge able.