The Asymmetry Hypothesis suggests that complex knowledge benefits from both complex and straightforward learning methods. But simple knowledge only benefits from simple methods.
Consider two possible relationships between knowledge and teaching:
- The Alignment Hypothesis suggests instructional complexity should match knowledge complexity. Simple knowledge needs simple instruction. Complex knowledge needs complex instruction.
- The Asymmetry Hypothesis suggests a different pattern. Simple instructions remain effective even for complex knowledge. But complex instruction only works for complex knowledge.
The KLI framework proposes that the Asymmetry Hypothesis is the correct relationship.
Spaced practice is simple. It works for facts (memorizing vocabulary) and principles (retaining understanding of evolution). Even complex knowledge must be remembered. (like using memory technique to learn quantum computing)
Argumentation is complex. It works for principles (discussing why evolution happens) but not facts (arguing why "H" represents hydrogen is pointless—there's no rationale).
Complex knowledge benefits from both complex and straightforward methods. Simple knowledge only benefits from simple methods.
This explains patterns in research. Worked examples help novices learn algebra, but don't help memorize facts. They show "expertise reversal": beneficial early, but later, straight practice works better.