Thank you Kisi. I think we all know that learning is a very individual process. However, mass education is still the norm, so we have to deal in what works for the masses.
I discussed this with a local guy, a PhD in Cognitive Training. He said that some people dispute the idea of a 3 idea maximum and push for 5-7. However in his research, the number of people who could handle even 4-5 ideas in their heads at one time was extremely small, so small as to be outliers. 6-7 would be an Einstein, or in moderns terms, Jeff Bezos. Leading with one main idea, and three supporting ideas per ~15 minute presentation (as a max parameter) seems to be the sweetspot.
Even more ideally, a pre-presentation research activity precedes the presentation to create a mind ready for further insight or discussion. At the end of that ~15 minutes, there should be a mental break, maybe a short quiz, activity, or lab, that reinforces the main idea. Once it 'sticks' to the neurons, the another 15 minute presentation can be added to further reinforce previous learning, perhaps one of the orginal three supporting ideas. That way, the 'rabbit trails' lead to an intentional outcome of the 'main idea'.
Change happens in a student's struggle for freedom from ignorance. We facilitate that by 'how' we teach. I have heard that if 'learning' is only academic and does not 'change' us in some way, maybe it does not qualify to be called learning. Bloom's taxonomy largely reinforces that idea.
