This leads to further predictions that have not yet been properly tested e.g. that learners will report these internalised activities when interviewed, and that study skill training would equip learners to perform such activities internally without further support. Nevertheless, I find this model to have real predictive power. That is, rather than studying the effects of media or of interactive modes on learning, I vote for studying these mathemagenic activities as primary factors determining learning. Inspired by how revealing a simulation is to them, some teachers implement one and hand it to students by itself. So then the teacher provides a worksheet, as for many labs.
Students go through the worksheet, but learn rather little, again as in labs.
It would not be technically difficult to deliver worksheets and pre-labs in software as well, but the point here is that this model suggests that learning outcomes depend on all these aspects being delivered, whatever the delivery medium of each. I am also finding that this model illuminates why some bits of courseware are merely OK while others are big successes. In contrast the big successes seem to be when the designer identified a defect in the previous non-CAL delivery corresponding to one of the Laurillard activities, and then thinks of a way of exploiting technology to fill the gap. Everyone nowadays thinks that the way to learn a second language is through conversation practice, but it is too expensive to provide each student with many hours of a Portugese speaker. This has produced a dramatic improvement in student learning.