Solid State UX

A diagram of a someone's possible schema for the concept of "egg." Source: P.Davis 1991

Schema theory is a foundational element in almost all cognitivist descriptions of learning, and this one will likely make immediate sense to user experience practitioners because it is tightly entwined with the familiar concept of mental models.  The theory emphasizes the role of prior knowledge and provides a robust explanatory framework for how expert performance is attained.  Ok, so what’s a schema?  Piaget defined the term in 1926 as a mental representation of an associated set of perceptions, ideas, and/or actions.   Think of a schema as a network of connected facts and concepts into which any newly-formed structures can be fitted.  Then think of your brain as a bigger network of overlapping schema and sub-schema.  The schema themselves are a markup language for the brain, cognitive XML if you will.  Schema theory explains why we remember things so subjectively (In Bartlett’s 1932 research on people’s memory of stories such as the “The War of the Ghosts,” he found that in reconstructing a story they added elements of their own culture.  This is famously considered evidence of schema theory’s existence.)   More interestingly to designers, the theory can be exploited to provide more effective instructional materials.

Learners generally want to read for “gist” and “theme.”  Why? So they can incorporate the new knowledge within their existing schema framework. When learners lack specific schema-based prior knowledge, they tend to apply general problem solving strategies in inefficient, even unsuccessful, ways. (see Driscoll’s 1994 book on this topic)  Worse, a lack of a proper conceptual model can transform learning into the ‘rote’ memorization of a seemingly arbitrary series of steps.  While this is an effective method in learning to tie one’s shoes or to master the alphabet, it leads to problems when things get more complex – as in, say, learning how to use a modern software application.  Donald Norman (1998) has called this disconnect between what we can conceptualize and what we are being asked to learn the “bane of modern existence.” hmm… to make a new layer in Photoshop, just press CONTOL-ALT-SHIFT-N.

Of course, the rub is that it is difficult to determine what schema a potential user already possesses and to develop an instructional method that guides them towards the task at hand.  According to Driscoll, users arrive at most learning opportunities with an “imprecise, partial, and idiosyncratic” set of mental models.  This is where schema theory dovetails nicely with situated learning theory – the more grounded the instruction is in authentic contexts and shared cultural references, the more likely it is to activate prior-knowledge and allow for the acquisition of new schema.   If you strip situated learning theory from it’s socio-cultural agenda of “authentic thoughts in authentic contexts” (I don’t believe that “situated” learning is the opposite of “symbolic-computational” learning, as some do), the two theories can work nicely together.  Pull the conceptual world into your designs by providing context.  Context can include both the “atmosphere” of the learning environment and the “background events.”  To make a design better at activating prior knowledge in learners:

• Understand and ’segment’ your audience
• Draw upon information that is likely to be familiar to learners
• Contextualize material with analogies and background events (for “gist” and “theme”)
• Develop a sense of “situational intent” (focus on benefits, outcomes, applications, examples)


Photoshop Unsharp Mask Tutorial – Typical Example. Layers Magazine provides beautiful tutorials of how to use the software but nothing about the concepts behind the tool.




Photoshop Unsharp Mask Tutorial – Schema Building Example. Cambridge in Colour takes what could be a description of an arbitrary software feature and embeds it with conceptual meaning and background information.