Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The cognitive approach to training development: A practitioner's assessment

  • Development
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article begins this special issue of ETR&D-Development by discussing what the cognitive approach to instructional design (ID) is and how ID practitioners can design training differently using the approach. Following some introductory comments about purpose, scope and perspective, the article is in two parts. The first part describes why the cognitive approach to ID is important and how the current approach to instructional design and training development is different from the cognitive approach. It then explains how learning occurs according to the cognitive point of view, and the different categories of learning according to one type of cognitive psychology. The second part describes a model that synthesizes and summarizes the components of a well-designed lesson, and describes what is different about this model from the current approach to ID. This model relates what learners have to do to learn to what instructional designers have to do to help them do so. It presents and briefly explains and exemplifies a general framework for instructional design based on cognitive psychology. Finally, it presents a table that can be used as a job aid to design training.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, J.R. (1995a).Cognitive psychology and its implications (2nd, 3rd, 4th & 5th eds.). New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J.R. (1995b).Learning and memory. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel, D. (1968).Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Best, J. (1989).Cognitive psychology (2nd ed.). St. Paul: West Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P.A., & Newby, T.J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective.Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, M., & Bednar, A. (1993). Concept-learning principles. In M. Fleming & H. Levie,Instructional message design (2nd ed.).Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foshay, W.R. (1991). Sharpen up your schemata.Data Training, May, 18–25.

  • Foshay, W.R., Silber, K.H., & Stelnicki, M.B. (1998).Training that works: A handbook for trainers. A cognitive approach to the analysis, design and development of training. Amherst, MA: HRD Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R.M., Briggs, L.J., & Wager W.W. (1992).Principles of instructional design (4th ed.).New York:Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M., & Hooper, S. (1993). Learning principles. In M. Fleming & H. Levie (Eds.).Instructional message design (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, J.H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes.Educational Technology Research & Development, 45(1), 65–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J. (1987). The systematic process of motivational design.Performance & Instruction, 26(8), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klatzky, R. (1980).Human memory: Structure and processes (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. (1993). Problem-solving principles. In M. Fleming & H. Levie, Instructional message design (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell, A., & Simon, S.A. (1972).Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paivio, A. (1983). The empirical case for dual coding. In J. Yuille (Ed.),Imagery, memory and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tosti, D. (1990).Feedback Revisited. Session presented at the 1990 National Conference of the National Society for Performance and Instruction, Toronto, ON.

  • West, C., Farmer, J, & Wolff, P. (1991).Instructional design: Implications from cognitive science. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Silber Performance Consulting in Chicago, USA

    Kenneth H. Silber Ph.D. (nationally recognized author and professional leader, and is President)

Authors
  1. Kenneth H. Silber Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Silber, K.H. The cognitive approach to training development: A practitioner's assessment. ETR&D 46, 58–72 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299674

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299674

Keywords

Search

Navigation