Chapter 10: Cognitive Pysch and Technology

Not surprisingly, this chapter was particularly important to me! Since I'm in the Instructional Design and Learning Technologies program, I wanted an anchor to base how I approach this course: and this chapter provides that for me! Since technology is integrated thoroughly in my life, I take much of it for granted: even the design. On the one hand, technology augments my already considerable skills (ok, I'm exaggerating!), but on the other, sometimes I use technology for technology's sake! I'm a gadget freak (some of my friends have used a more derogatory term that begins with a "wh" but that's not here nor there!) One can say that I have a instinctual technology design and use philosophy. And, this chapter really reinforced what I felt and hadn't articulated! I was a member of the choir being preached to! Amen!

Briefly, the "Selected Uses of Technology" section had no surprises, but one thing that I take for granted is my normalcy in terms of my abilities (personality is another issue!). It is always a good reminder that technology opens worlds to people who, through no agency of their own, do not have the abilities to communicate or engage material in a normal fashion. Technology really does make many people, "handi-abled!" I'm glad the authors made a point to include that in this chapter!

There were two real revelations in this chapter that stood out: an articulated list of cognitive skills a student must learn/possess in order to use tech effectively and the cognitive load theory.

I hadn't really thought about the cognitive skills I possess or must be able to purvey to students to use tech in a learning environment. The list, on pages 217 and 218, creates a checklist to measure or shape a learning module's (I think that's the right word) effectiveness/goals. Bottom line: putting students in front of a computer won't necessarily teach them these skills. I assume this is an example of scaffolding (don't know the educational lingo just yet), but, you don't need an internet connected computer, or a computer at all, to teach a student how to contextualize knowledge: i.e. looking at bits of information and deciding the validity/accuracy it.

The cognitive load theory revealed a cool root design philosophy for interactive instruction: this was a true revelation to me! I think I had instinctively known this, but I'm not going to go quite that far and claim prescient knowledge. ;) It did make perfect sense to me. We have two channels: auditory and visual. Information can be either: simple or complex. Combine these two root premises and you get cognitive load theory. Our brains can handle only so much in one channel, but has a great capacity to process both in our working memory. In a multimedia presentation (and I did like the 4C/ID model), presenting a complex piece of information with simple visuals and reinforcing the information with narration is more effective than using complex visuals and narration. For example, using an animation with words/diagrams with narration can overload the visual channel which taxes the working memory because it is already processing complex information. On the other hand, a simple piece of information can be accompanied by animations, bells, and whistles to hold the students attention.

This was all very fascinating stuff! My next post will center around the class's discussion of the chapter: here's a preview, yes, I was picked on a lot! ;)