Why learners might be zoning out and what to do about it: A practical guide to cognitive load, learning science, and designing courses that support learning success.

(Buckle up. This is a longer article on purpose. We’re covering a lot, but it’s the kind of “a lot” that changes how you build courses.)

Ever catch yourself wondering, “Why did they stop after page 3?”

You built a thoughtful, trauma-informed course.
The content is solid.
The visuals are clean.
The prompts are clear.

And yet…

Page 3: ✓
Page 4: …
Page 5: [crickets]

This isn’t a motivation problem.
It’s not about effort.
It’s not that learners “don’t care.”

It’s a cognitive load spike. In a closed, self-paced system like Edovo, those spikes can quietly derail learning before anyone realizes what happened.

Let’s unpack what’s going on and, more importantly, how to design around it.

What you’ll walk away with

By the end of this article, you’ll be able to:

• What cognitive load actually is and why it might be the quiet reason learners disappear halfway through a lesson

• How cognitive spikes happen, especially in self-paced courses for incarcerated adults

• The difference between productive challenge and “my brain just hit a wall” overload

• Practical, research-backed design strategies you can use to smooth out those spikes and keep learning moving

• How to redesign tough lessons so they work with the brain instead of asking it to perform mental gymnastics on page two

The jargon you actually need to know

Cognitive Load

What it is

Cognitive load is the amount of mental effort required to learn something. Working memory is limited. When we exceed its capacity, especially under stress, learning slows, stalls, or shuts down entirely.

Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1988) identifies three types of load. Understanding the difference matters, because each one calls for a different design response.

Let’s take a closer look at each type.

1. Intrinsic Load: how hard the material is

This is the inherent difficulty of the content itself.

Subtracting integers? Low intrinsic load.
Budgeting on a fixed income with compound interest and inflation? High intrinsic load.

You don’t create intrinsic load. The content does.

Design rule: You can’t eliminate intrinsic load, but you can pace and structure it.

What this means in practice  

When intrinsic load is high, your job is to control how much of the hard thinking happens at once. That means:

• Break complex ideas into clear, sequential steps (I see you bullet points, number lists and infographics)

• Introduce one new concept at a time before layering in another
  
  

• Use worked examples before asking learners to solve problems on their own
  
  

• Slow the pace when ideas build on each other, instead of compressing them onto one screen
  
  

Think of intrinsic load like weight on a barbell. The issue isn’t that it’s heavy, it’s whether you’re asking the learner to lift all of it at once.

Edovo example: Managing intrinsic load when teaching opioid overdose response

Recognizing and responding to an opioid overdose is inherently hard.

It requires noticing subtle physical signs, understanding what they mean, and knowing how to respond, often under stress. That’s high intrinsic load. You can’t make it simple, and you shouldn’t try.

What you can do is control how much of that complexity the learner has to hold at once. That’s what this lesson does, screen by screen.

Step 1: Reduce intrinsic load by narrowing the task

What’s hard here:
Learners are often expected to recognize an overdose and know what to do about it at the same time.

Design move: Focus first on recognition only.

What this looks like (Screen 1):
The opening screen orients learners to the topic, opioid overdose, without asking for action or decision-making.

Why this supports intrinsic load:
By narrowing the task to “What am I learning about?” the lesson limits how many elements the learner must process at once. This keeps intrinsic load manageable before adding complexity.

Step 2: Break a complex concept into observable pieces

What’s hard here:
“Recognizing an overdose” is not one skill, it’s a bundle of smaller ones.

Design move:
Split the concept into concrete, observable signs.

What this looks like (Screen 2 - feel free to scroll back up to see the image):
Each overdose sign appears as its own item, paired with an icon and plain-language label: breathing, skin color, pupils, responsiveness.

Why this supports intrinsic load:
Instead of treating overdose recognition as a single, abstract task, the lesson breaks it into smaller units the brain can process and store one at a time.

Step 3: Keep the structure stable so the brain can focus on meaning

What’s hard here:
High-stakes information already taxes working memory.

Design move:
Use a consistent pattern for every sign.

What this looks like (Screen 2 continued):
Numbered list. Same layout. Same visual rhythm for each symptom.

Why this supports intrinsic load:
Stable structure reduces the number of new elements learners must track. That frees up mental capacity to understand the concept itself.

Step 4: Reinforce understanding before adding judgment

What’s hard here:
Deciding what’s true, false, or urgent requires holding multiple signs in mind at once.

Design move:
Check recognition before requiring interpretation.

What this looks like (Screen 3):
A multiple-choice question asks learners to identify accurate statements based on what they just learned. Feedback guides their reflection and helps reinforce the material if they got it wrong.

Why this supports intrinsic load:
This reinforces individual elements before combining them into more complex reasoning, preventing overload.

Step 5: Add complexity by repeating the same sequencing pattern

What’s hard here:
Responding to an overdose requires multiple actions in the correct order, often under pressure.

Design move:
Apply the same breakdown strategy used for recognition to the response itself.

What this looks like across the rest of the lesson:
Once learners can reliably identify an overdose, the lesson introduces response the same way:

• First, using previously gained knowledge, practice recognizing signs of an overdose

• Next, what the response is (e.g., calling for help, staying with the person)
  
  

• Then, the steps involved, one at a time
  
  

• Only later, how those steps work together in a real situation

Response isn’t treated as a single task, it’s broken into observable, manageable actions, just like the signs were.

Why this supports intrinsic load:
By building response skills from already-stored recognition knowledge and breaking actions into clear steps, the lesson adds complexity without overwhelming working memory. The brain isn’t learning something entirely new, it’s extending a structure that already exists.

The intrinsic load takeaway

This lesson doesn’t lower the bar. It respects the weight of the content.

By controlling how much complexity appears at each moment, the design prevents overload while preserving the seriousness and accuracy of the material.

You can’t remove intrinsic load from hard content. But you can design so it doesn’t crush the learner.

If you want, next we can explicitly contrast this with extraneous load mistakes using the same example—or turn this into a short callout box you can reuse across articles.

2. Extraneous Load: the stuff that gets in the way

This is the bad kind of load: mental effort spent decoding the presentation instead of understanding the idea. In other words, it’s the mental effort caused by how information is presented, not by how hard the content actually is.

Poor layout.
Dense text walls.
Unclear instructions.
Decorative visuals that don’t actually explain anything (yes, even the piggy bank with sunglasses).

Extraneous load is entirely a design problem, and that’s good news, because it’s the easiest kind to fix.

Design rule: If learners have to work to figure out what matters, extraneous load is too high.

• You don’t need extraneous load.

• Learners don’t benefit from it.

• And unlike intrinsic load, it’s 100% optional. 

So let’s put it on the chopping block and get ‘er outta here!

What this means in practice

When extraneous load creeps in, the brain spends its energy decoding layout, language, or instructions instead of learning. To reduce it:

• Remove anything that doesn’t directly support the learning goal
  
  

• Make visual structure obvious at a glance
  
  

• Use consistent layouts so learners don’t have to re-orient on every screen
  
  

• Pair visuals with meaning, not decoration
  
  

• Keep language plain, concrete, and predictable
  
  

Extraneous load is like static on a radio. The message is still there, but it’s harder to hear, and eventually, people tune out.

Recognizing and responding to an opioid overdose is already high intrinsic load.
The last thing learners need is design friction on top of that.

This lesson intentionally strips away anything that would compete for attention so learners can safely focus on the content itself.

Step 1: Reduce extraneous load by clearly orienting the learner

What gets in the way: Unclear purpose or vague introductions force learners to guess what they’re about to learn.

Design move: Make the topic and goal immediately obvious.

What this looks like (Screen 1):
The opening screen clearly names the topic: Opioid Overdose. No metaphors. No abstract framing. No extra visuals competing for attention. 

Why this reduces extraneous load:
When learners know exactly what they’re looking at, they don’t waste mental energy trying to orient themselves. All attention goes to the content, not the setup.

Step 2: Use visuals to clarify, not decorate

What gets in the way: Text-only descriptions of physical symptoms require heavy mental translation.

Design move:
Pair each concept with a clear, concrete visual.

What this looks like (Screen 2):
Each overdose sign is paired with a simple icon and short label: breathing, pupils, skin color, responsiveness.

Why this reduces extraneous load:
The visuals do instructional work. Learners don’t have to imagine what “pinpoint pupils” or “slow breathing” looks like, the image does that work for them.

Step 3: Keep the visual and linguistic structure predictable

What gets in the way:
Changing layouts, formats, or phrasing forces the brain to constantly re-adjust.

Design move:
Repeat the same structure for every item.

What this looks like (Screen 2 continued):
Numbered list. Same icon size. Same text style. Same spacing for every sign.

Why this reduces extraneous load:
The brain quickly learns the pattern and stops spending energy on navigation. That mental space gets redirected to understanding and remembering the signs.

(Aaah, now do you see why we used the same image in both sections here? That was intentional. Reusing the same visual reduces extraneous load because your brain doesn’t have to re-orient to something new. You already know what you’re looking at so you can focus on the ideas, not on decoding a new image every time. You’re welcome.)

Step 4: Make instructions obvious and low-friction

What gets in the way:
Unclear or wordy prompts increase anxiety and hesitation.

Design move:
Ask one clear thing at a time.

What this looks like (Screen 3):
The multiple-choice question is straightforward, factual, and grounded in what learners just saw. Feedback clearly explains why an answer is correct or incorrect.

Why this reduces extraneous load:
Learners don’t have to guess what’s being asked or how they’ll be evaluated. That clarity keeps attention on the content, not the interface.

The extraneous load takeaway

This lesson doesn’t feel “easy.” It feels clear.

By removing visual noise, vague language, and unnecessary complexity, the design lets learners spend their limited mental energy on what actually matters: recognizing danger and knowing how to respond.

Intrinsic load is unavoidable.
Extraneous load is optional.
Good design removes it on purpose.

3. Germane Load: the thinking that builds understanding

Germane load is the productive mental effort learners use to make sense of new information, connect it to what they already know, and apply it in meaningful ways.

This is where learning sticks.

Germane load is not “easy,” but it is purposeful.

Design rule: Create space for thinking by supporting it step by step.

Unlike extraneous load, germane load is good.
Unlike intrinsic load, it’s effort we want to protect, not reduce.

What this means in practice

Germane load shows up when learners are asked to reflect, compare, decide, or apply. To support it:

• Make sure learners understand the content before asking them to think about it

• Scaffold reflection and application instead of jumping straight to open-ended prompts

• Start with recognition or choice before explanation or justification

• Keep prompts focused so learners aren’t juggling too many ideas at once

Germane load is like a solid workout. You need a warm-up first. Then comes the good kind of hard; the kind where a little shake means it’s actually working.

Edovo example: Supporting germane load in an opioid overdose lesson

Recognizing overdose signs and learning response steps lays the foundation.
Germane load is where learners begin to use that knowledge.

This lesson supports germane load by asking learners to think, but never before they’re ready.

Step 1: Reinforce understanding before asking for reasoning

What’s challenging here: Thinking about consequences or decisions requires holding multiple ideas in memory.

Design move:
Start with low-stakes checks that reinforce what learners already saw.

What this looks like (Screen 3):
A multiple-choice question asks learners to identify accurate information about overdose signs, with clear feedback explaining why.

Why this supports germane load:
Recognition-based questions strengthen memory without overwhelming working memory, preparing learners for deeper thinking.

Step 2: Ask learners to apply knowledge in small, supported ways

What’s challenging here: Application often requires synthesis, which can overload learners if it comes too early.

Design move:
Constrain the task before opening it up.

What this looks like:
Learners are asked to choose the best response option before being asked to explain or reflect.

Why this supports germane load:
Structured choices allow learners to practice applying knowledge without having to generate language or reasoning from scratch.

Step 3: Build toward reflection once the structure is stable

What’s challenging here:
Open-ended reflection demands recall, reasoning, and expression all at once.

Design move:
Delay open reflection until learners have practiced recognition and application.

What this looks like later in the lesson:
After learners have repeatedly worked with the material, they’re invited to reflect on how they might respond in a real situation.

Why this supports germane load:
By the time reflection appears, learners aren’t inventing understanding, they’re articulating it.

The germane load takeaway

This lesson doesn’t avoid thinking.
It sets thinking up for success.

By sequencing reflection and application after understanding, and scaffolding each step, the design makes space for real learning to happen.

Germane load is where growth lives.
Good design makes sure learners can actually reach it.

Got it. But what about the spike part?

Cognitive load on its own isn’t the enemy. Some effort is necessary, it’s what activates learning.

Spikes are different.
A cognitive load spike is a sudden surge in mental demand that overwhelms working memory. Instead of supporting learning, it interrupts it.

Spikes usually happen when:

• Intrinsic load is high (the material is genuinely hard),
  
  

• Extraneous load adds friction (unclear design, dense screens),
  
  

• And there’s no space left for germane load—the thinking that actually builds understanding.

The brain gets overloaded before it can do the useful work. That’s when learners start to think:

“I was following… and now I’m not.”

• Ongoing environmental stress
  
  

• Past educational experiences shaped by shame or disruption
  
  

• Trauma that already consumes mental bandwidth
  
  

This isn’t about ability. It’s about capacity in the moment. When working memory is already taxed, even small design hurdles can tip the system into overload.

Cognitive overload doesn’t announce itself. It shows up quietly as:

• Skimming or skipping
  
  

• Logging off early
  
  

• Incomplete or off-topic responses
  
  

• Avoiding reflection or writing
  
  

• Choosing the path of least resistance—short videos, multiple choice, anything easier
  
  

What looks like disengagement is often self-protection. The brain is preserving energy because it has nowhere to put new information.

Once you understand how cognitive load turns into cognitive spikes, the next question is simple: Where might this be happening in your own lessons?

Is your lesson spiking too soon? A designer’s checklist

Use this all-in-one table to spot and fix overload triggers before your content ever reaches a learner. Each row helps you rethink structure, visuals, pacing, and tone so your lessons build confidence, not confusion.

TL;DR: Design for the brain you’re teaching, not the content you love

• Cognitive load is the mental effort learning requires—and working memory is limited
  
  

• Intrinsic load comes from the material itself; you can’t remove it, but you can pace it
  
  

• Extraneous load comes from design choices; it’s optional and should be removed on purpose
  
  

• Germane load is the good work—the thinking that builds understanding—and it needs space to happen
  
  

• Cognitive spikes occur when hard content, messy design, and premature reflection collide
  
  

• Incarcerated learners often start with less available mental bandwidth due to stress and past educational harm
  
  

• What looks like disengagement is often self-protection, not lack of motivation
  
  

• Clear sequencing, consistent visuals, scaffolding, and pacing don’t lower the bar—they make learning possible
  
  

If learners are dropping off, don’t ask what’s wrong with them.
Ask where the design might be asking their brain to do too much, too fast.

References

(Because good design is backed by good science—and yes, we show our work.)

Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2011). Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. Psychology and the Real World: Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society, 56–64.

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (8th ed.). Routledge.

Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

SAMHSA. (2014). SAMHSA’s concept of trauma and guidance for a trauma-informed approach. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285.

Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296.