Cognitive navigation: A phenomenological study of prospective elementary school teachers’ experiences in managing cognitive overload in blended learning

Faridt Musyadad; Kassymova Gulzhaina Kuralbayevna; Atika Dwi Evitasari; Garib Firman Buaga

doi:10.26740/eds.v10n1.p149-158

Authors

Faridt Musyadad Faculty of Education, IKIP PGRI Wates, Yogyakarta
Kassymova Gulzhaina Kuralbayevna Institute of Metallurgy and Ore Beneficiation JSC, Satbayev University
Atika Dwi Evitasari Faculty of Education, IKIP PGRI Wates, Yogyakarta
Garib Firman Buaga Faculty of Education, IKIP PGRI Wates, Yogyakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26740/eds.v10n1.p149-158

Keywords:

Blended Learning , Cognitive Overload , Metacognitive Resilience , Elementary School Education , Self-Regulated Learning

Abstract

The digital transformation in higher education has established blended learning as a permanent pedagogical paradigm, yet it has created a paradox in which instructional flexibility often leads to increased cognitive complexity for students. This study aims to explore the lived experiences of Elementary School Teacher Education students in navigating cognitive overload and to identify adaptive strategies employed to maintain learning effectiveness in a blended learning environment. Using a qualitative-phenomenological design, this study involved active students at IKIP PGRI Wates who had completed at least one semester of blended learning. Data were collected through semi-structured in-depth interviews and reflective learning journals, which were then analyzed using an inductive thematic approach. The findings reveal that cognitive overload is primarily triggered by fragmented instructional design, technical friction between platforms, and unmanaged dual task demands. These factors led to a degradation in the quality of cognitive processing, shifting students’ orientation from deep conceptual understanding toward a pragmatic, administrative focus. However, these findings also highlight the crucial role of Self-Regulated Learning as a metacognitive resilience mechanism that mitigates the impacts of mental fatigue and academic stress. This study concludes that cognitive overload in blended learning is a multidimensional phenomenon that requires coherent instructional synchronization and systematic support for students’ self-regulation. The practical implications of this study emphasize the need for platform standardization and the integration of metacognitive training as crucial navigational tools for prospective elementary school teachers to ensure their cognitive resilience in implementing learning technologies in the future.

References

Anthonysamy, L. (2021). The use of metacognitive strategies for undisrupted online learning : Preparing university students in the age of pandemic. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 6881–6899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10518-y

Banihashem, S. K., Bond, M., Bergdahl, N., Khosravi, H., & Noroozi, O. (2025). A systematic mapping review at the intersection of artificial intelligence and self ‑ regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22(50), 22=50. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00548-8

Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., & Terry, G. (2019). Thematic Analysis. Springer.

Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, Quantitatuve, and Mixed Methods (5ed). Sage Publications, Inc.

Dignath, C., & Veenman, M. V. J. (2021). The Role of Direct Strategy Instruction and Indirect Activation of Self-Regulated Learning — Evidence from Classroom Observation Studies Content courtesy of Springer Nature , terms of use apply . Rights reserved . Content courtesy of Springer Nature , ter. Jurnal Psikologi Pendidikan, 32(33), 489–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09534-0

Evans, P., Vansteenkiste, M., Parker, P., Kingsford, A., & Sijing, S. (2024). Cognitive Load Theory and Its Relationships with Motivation : a Self ‑ Determination Theory Perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 36(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09841-2

Guzm, J., & R, J. Z. (2024). education sciences Effects of Split-Attention and Task Complexity on Individual and Collaborative Learning. Education Sciences, 14(9). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14091035

Ha, S., Roehrig, A. D., & Zhang, Q. (2023). Self-regulated learning strategies and academic achievement in South Korean 6th- graders : A two-level hierarchical linear modeling analysis. Plus One, 18(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284385

Hill, J., & Smith, K. (2023). Visions of blended learning: identifying the challenges and opportunities in shaping institutional approaches to blended learning in higher education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 32(3), 289–303. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2023.2176916

Iuga, I. A., & David, O. A. (2024). Emotion Regulation and Academic Burnout Among Youth : a Quantitative Meta ‑ analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 36(4), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09930-w

Labadze, L., Grigolia, M., & Machaidze, L. (2023). Role of AI chatbots in education: systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00426-1

Liu, Z., Xie, Y., Sun, Z., Liu, D., Yin, H., & Shi, L. (2023). Factors associated with academic burnout and its prevalence among university students : a cross ‑ sectional study. BMC Medical Education, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04316-y

Martin, F., Bolliger, D. U., & Flowers, C. (2021). Design Matters : Development and Validation of the Online Course Design Elements ( OCDE ) Instrument. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(2). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i2.5187

Mukul, E., & Buyukozkan, G. (2023). Digital transformation in education: A systematic review of education 4.0. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 194(122664). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122664

Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic Analysis : Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

Oliveira, K. K. D. S., & Souza, R. A. C. De. (2022). Digital Transformation towards Education 4.0. Informatics in Education, 21(2), 283–309. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2022.13

Peltzer, N. R., Kuhn, J., Stadler, M., Cera, R., Hoyer, C., Flegr, S., Fischer, M. R., & Richters, C. (2026). The Interplay of Self-regulation , Cognitive Load and Learner Resources : Implications for Learning Outcomes in Virtual Reality. Computers & Education, 249(January), 105612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2026.105612

Review, C., Communication, S., & Principles, G. (2015). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki/

Sari, R. C., Solikhatun, I., Pranesti, A., & Nurbaiti, N. (2023). Cognitive overload in immersive virtual reality in education: More presence but less learnt? Education and Information Technologies, 29(10). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12379-z

Skulmowski, A. (2023). Realistic details impact learners independently of split ‑ attention effects. Cognitive Processing, 24(2), 187–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-022-01123-z

Skulmowski, A., & Xu, K. M. (2022). Understanding Cognitive Load in Digital and Online Learning : a New Perspective on Extraneous Cognitive Load. Educational Psychology Review, 34, 171–196. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09624-7

Surbakti, R., & Umboh, S. E. (2024). Cognitive Load Theory : Implications for Instructional Design in Digital Classrooms. International Journal of Educational Narratives, 2(6), 483–493. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.70177/ijen.v2i6.1659

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4

Xu, N., Wang, F., Zhou, B., Li, B., Xiao, C., & Chen, M. (2024). Cognitive Overload : Jailbreaking Large Language Models with Overloaded Logical Thinking. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 3526–3548. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.findings-naacl.224

Zidi, C., Jalaludin, N. A., & Rasul, M. S. (2025). Does cognitive load moderate students ’ learning engagement mechanism in blended learning ? Jurnal Internasional Evaluasi Dan Penelitian Dalam Pendidikan (IJERE), 14(5), 3904–3916. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v14i5.34333

Zou, L., Zhang, Z., Mavilidi, M., Chen, Y., Herold, F., Ouwehand, K., & Paas, F. (2025). The synergy of embodied cognition and cognitive load theory for optimized learning. Nature Human Behaviour, 9, 877–885. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02152-2