Show Your Work: Reference Deck 2

How to Evaluate a Task
Before You Assign It

A practical framework for checking cognitive load before a task reaches students, drawn from research on working memory, executive function, and instructional design.

showyourwork.education  |  Based on published research  |  About this project
01: Why evaluate before assigning

Most task problems are visible
before students see the task

By the time a student shuts down, asks the same question three times, or submits work that clearly missed the point, the task has already done its damage. The confusion was built in.

Evaluating a task before assigning it takes two to five minutes. It doesn't require special training or tools. It requires asking a small set of specific questions about what the task demands from working memory, attention, and executive function.

The goal is not to make every task easier. The goal is to remove barriers that exist not because the content is challenging but because the task design adds unnecessary cognitive load on top of the content itself.

Cognitive load theory, developed by John Sweller, distinguishes between load that comes from the inherent complexity of the material and load that comes from how the task is designed and presented. The second kind is avoidable.

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

02: The evaluation framework

Three questions to ask
before every task.

Each question targets a different source of avoidable cognitive load. A task that triggers all three is worth redesigning before students see it. A task that triggers none is probably fine as written.

02
Question 1 of 3

Does this task require students
to do two things at once?

This is the split-attention check. Split attention occurs when students must process two or more sources of information simultaneously, and those sources cannot be understood independently of each other.

Chandler and Sweller's research on this effect shows that tasks requiring learners to mentally integrate multiple information sources on their own produce significantly higher cognitive load than tasks where that integration is built into the design. The student's cognitive resources go toward managing the split rather than learning the content.

A

Listening while writing

A student taking notes during a lecture must process incoming audio, decide what matters, hold it in working memory, and convert it to writing, all at the same time.

B

Reading while answering

A student reading a passage and simultaneously answering questions must track their place in the text, hold the question in mind, and search for the answer at the same time.

C

Watching while recording

A student observing a demonstration and recording observations must track what they see and convert it to written language in real time.

The fix: Separate the demands where possible. Read first, then answer. Watch first, then record. Provide notes before a lecture, not during.

Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1992). The split-attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62(2), 233-246.

Question 2 of 3

How much must students
hold in mind while working?

This is the working memory load check. Working memory is limited in both capacity and duration. Research suggests most people can hold two to four chunks of information in working memory at one time when those chunks require active processing.

For students with ADHD, that capacity is more constrained and more easily disrupted by distraction, task-switching, and time pressure.

High working memory demand

Multi-step directions given verbally with no written reference

Tasks that require recalling prior content while producing new work

Open-ended assignments with no visible structure or starting point

Directions embedded in a paragraph of context rather than listed as steps

Reduced working memory demand

Written steps the student can see while working

One instruction per step, each starting with an action verb

A visible model or example of the finished product

A checklist that externalizes the sequence rather than requiring the student to track it internally

Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J.J.G. (2020). Cognitive-load theory: Methods to manage working memory load in the learning of complex tasks. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(4), 394-398. | Barkley, R.A. (1997). Psychological Bulletin, 121(1), 65-94.

Question 3 of 3

Is there a clear entry point,
or does the student have to figure that out too?

Task initiation is a distinct executive function skill. For students with ADHD, it is one of the most consistently impaired. Barkley's research identifies behavioral inhibition and working memory as the primary deficits underlying ADHD, both of which directly affect the ability to begin a task independently.

A task without a clear starting point requires the student to decide where to begin before they can do the work. That decision-making draws on the same limited working memory and executive capacity the task itself requires.

Example: high initiation demand

"Write a paragraph about what you learned from today's lesson. Use evidence and complete sentences."

Example: low initiation demand

"Start here: Write one sentence: what was the most important thing from today's lesson? Then add one detail that supports it."

The content requirement is the same. The initiation barrier in the second version is removed.

Barkley, R.A. (2012). Executive Functions: What They Are, How They Work, and Why They Evolved. Guilford Press.

03: Calibrating by grade level

Grade level changes
what the task can reasonably ask for

Executive function develops over time. Barkley's research indicates that children with ADHD show executive function development approximately 30 percent behind same-age peers. Even in typically developing students, the capacity to manage multi-step tasks, sustain independent effort, and self-monitor is significantly more limited in younger grades.

K-2
High support needed

One step at a time. Visual cues required. Starting point must be stated explicitly. Independent initiation is unreliable even for typically developing students.

3-5
Moderate support

Can follow short sequences with a written reference. Vulnerable to dense instructions and tasks without visible structure. Benefits from worked examples and checkpoints.

6-8
Less support, but still needed

Higher independence expected but not guaranteed. Still vulnerable when tasks require multi-source processing, planning, or holding multiple requirements in mind simultaneously.

Barkley, R.A. (2012). Executive Functions: What They Are, How They Work, and Why They Evolved. Guilford Press.

04: Estimating load before assigning

A rough scoring approach
for any classroom task

This is the logic behind the Attention Load Checker tool. Before assigning a task, run through these factors and count how many apply. More factors present means higher load.

+

Number of steps

More steps mean more to track. Each step held in working memory without external support adds load.

+

Split attention present

Any simultaneous demand, such as listening and writing or reading and answering, increases load significantly.

+

No visible starting point

If the student must decide where to begin, that decision is an additional cognitive task on top of the assignment itself.

+

Real-time processing required

Content delivered at pace, such as a lecture, video, or discussion, that does not allow time to consolidate before more arrives.

+

Directions delivered verbally only

No written reference means students must hold all instructions in working memory throughout the task.

+

Long sustained effort required

The longer a task requires uninterrupted focus, the more working memory is taxed by self-monitoring and task maintenance.

04 continued: Reading the results

Low, moderate, and high load:
what each means in practice

After counting the load factors, use this as a rough guide to what the task is likely to demand from students with attention and executive function challenges.

Low load (1 to 3 factors)

  • Task is likely manageable for most students
  • Students with ADHD may still need a clear starting point
  • Minor adjustments may improve flow but aren't urgent
  • Assign with standard supports in place

Moderate load (4 to 6 factors)

  • Some students will struggle without additional structure
  • Worth reducing one or two factors before assigning
  • Written directions and a clear first step will help most
  • Check for understanding before releasing to independent work

High load (7 or more factors)

  • Task is likely to produce confusion, shutdown, or off-task behavior in students with attention challenges
  • Reduce split-attention demands before assigning
  • Break into smaller segments with checkpoints
  • Provide written directions that stay visible throughout the task
  • Identify the first step explicitly in writing
05: What adjustment looks like

The same content.
A different cognitive demand.

These examples show how task adjustments change cognitive load without changing what students are learning or being asked to demonstrate.

Higher load version

"Listen to the lecture and take notes. You'll need your notes to answer the questions at the end."

Reduced load version

"Here are partial notes with blanks. Fill in the missing information as we go. After the lecture, use your notes to answer the questions."

Higher load version

"Read chapter 4 and write a paragraph explaining the main idea. Use evidence from the text and complete sentences."

Reduced load version

"Start here: Read pages 42 to 45 only. Write one sentence: what is the main idea? Then find one detail from the text that supports it and add it to your sentence."

Higher load version

"Work with your group to complete the lab and fill out the worksheet. You have 20 minutes."

Reduced load version

"Step 1: Read the procedure together as a group. Step 2: Decide who does each part. Step 3: Run the experiment. Step 4: Each person fills in their own worksheet. You have 20 minutes."

06: Making this practical

A two-minute check
before any task goes to students

This framework can be run mentally before any assignment. It does not require technology, extra preparation time, or a formal process.

1

Ask: does this task require doing two things at once?

If yes, consider separating the demands. Listening before writing, reading before responding.

2

Ask: are the directions written and visible throughout the task?

If not, write them. Put them on the board, on the handout, or on the student's desk. Visible directions reduce working memory load by externalizing what would otherwise need to be held in mind.

3

Ask: what is the first thing a student should do?

State it explicitly in writing. One action verb. One sentence. Students who struggle with initiation need this to be unambiguous.

4

Ask: can I reduce the number of simultaneous demands by one?

Not zero. Just one. Even removing one split-attention demand meaningfully reduces the load on students with limited working memory capacity.

5

Check for understanding before releasing to independent work

Ask a student to tell you the first step. Ask another what they do when they finish step one. This surfaces confusion before it becomes failure.

Show Your Work

Try the Attention Load Checker

The Attention Load Checker runs this framework on any task you describe. Enter what you're assigning, select a grade level, and get a load score, risk level, and specific fixes in under 20 seconds.

Free. No account required.

Research references: Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285. | Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1992). British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62(2), 233-246. | Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J.J.G. (2020). Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(4), 394-398. | Barkley, R.A. (1997). Psychological Bulletin, 121(1), 65-94. | Barkley, R.A. (2012). Executive Functions. Guilford Press.

Also in this series
Deck 01
Why Tasks Fail Students with ADHD
Barkley's executive function model, working memory under classroom conditions, and why the task is usually the variable worth fixing.
Deck 03
What Behavior Is Telling You
Four categories, six common patterns, and what to try before escalating.