Have you ever wondered what makes a course highly effective? If you had to focus on one, two, or three essential factors, what would they be? Would you emphasize a supportive learning environment, cognitive and affective learning, pedagogical design, essential content, creating assessments, providing feedback, integrating technology, or something different? Reflecting on my years in academia, I find myself increasingly drawn to the challenge of designing the optimal class—one that not only engages students but also maximizes student learning. Why do some classes leave an indelible mark on students, while others quickly fade from memory? As you think about this task, I hope this exercise offers a stimulating intellectual endeavor: a chance to reflect and improve one’s teaching.
Perhaps I am taking the easy way out by emphasizing pedagogical design, as it could be argued that a well-designed course naturally incorporates all of the above factors. That said, what is it about an optimally designed class that resonates so deeply with my inner teacher? Simply, it is the way it combines cognitive and educational psychology—how people learn—with the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), which focuses on how educators’ study and improve their teaching to increase student learning (McKinney, 2007). This convergence of theory and teaching practice offers one perspective for creating an optimal learning experience.
An Anticipatory Set
For me, a well-designed class begins with an anticipatory set and a review of prior learning. These activities work together to engage students, activate their prior knowledge, and prepare them for new content. An anticipatory set, for example, might ask students to brainstorm times when they applied knowledge in real-world settings. This approach not only sparks curiosity but also helps students connect the material to their personal experiences, facilitating affective learning. Following this, a review of prior learning solidifies what students have already learned and creates a transition to new material. By linking new content to existing knowledge, students move from learning in isolation to building meaningful connections. Together, these strategies reduce cognitive load (Sweller, Van Merrienboer, & Pass, 2019), allowing students to focus their mental energy on deeper understanding and application.
The Delivery
Next comes the delivery of new learning, which can be achieved through various methods such as assigned readings, live or pre-recorded lectures, class discussions, flipped classroom activities, or small group work. The key to presenting new material effectively is managing cognitive load—ensuring students are not overwhelmed by overly long or complex presentations. For instance, lecturing for extended periods without breaks, poorly structured group work, or using technology without a clear purpose can increase cognitive load and hinder learning. When students are required to concentrate for long periods or expend unnecessary mental energy, their ability to process and retain information decreases.
Present and Practice
After presenting new content, it is crucial to provide students with opportunities to practice what they have learned. This could take the form of a no-point or low-stakes quiz, a case study, group work, or even a reflective activity. These practice opportunities not only reinforce learning but also allow instructors to offer immediate feedback and guidance, helping students refine their understanding of the material.
Summary Statement
Finally, an effective class concludes with a strategy to summarize key points. This might involve asking students to write a summary statement, connect course concepts to learning outcomes, or collaborate to create mock exam questions. These activities encourage students to make meaningful connections between new and prior learning, solidifying their understanding and preparing them for future learning.
Approaching your course with an eye for cognitive load allows you to scaffold learning in ways that are both efficient and grounded in effective learning research. By carefully managing how new material is presented, providing opportunities for practice, and encouraging students to connect new knowledge to prior learning, you create a classroom environment where students can thrive. Moreover, adopting a SoTL mindset empowers educators to continually reflect on their teaching practices, identify what works, and make meaningful improvements—all with the goal of student learning.
Reflection
As you reflect on your own teaching, consider this: What small change could you make in your next class to better manage cognitive load or foster deeper connections between new and prior learning? Perhaps it is rethinking how you introduce new material, designing a low-stakes practice activity, or incorporating a summarization strategy at the end of a class. Whatever it may be, remember that teaching is an iterative process, and even small adjustments can have a positive impact on students. By embracing these principles and committing yourself to ongoing reflection and improvement, you not only enhance your teaching but also model for your students how to become lifelong learners.
Michael Kiener is a professor at Maryville University of St. Louis in their Clinical Mental Health Counseling program. For the past 10 years he has coordinated their Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Program, where faculty participate in a yearlong program with a goal of improved student learning. In 2012 and 2024 he received the Outstanding Faculty Award for faculty who best demonstrate excellence in the integration of teaching, scholarship and/or service. He has over thirty publications including a co-authored book on strength-based counseling and journal articles on career decision making, action research, counseling pedagogy, and active and dynamic learning strategies.
References
McKinney, K. 2007. Enhancing learning through the scholarship of teaching and learning: The challenges and joys of juggling. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sweller, J., Van Merriënboer, J. and Paas, F. 2019. Cognitive architecture and Instructional Design: 20 Years Later. Educational Psychology Review 31, (2): 261-292.
