Unit 3: Cognitivism
Cognitivism is a learning theory centered on the learner’s internal thought process; this process involves connecting the learner's existing information and experiences to new knowledge. It is almost the complete opposite of behaviorism, as behaviorism is all about the output and evidence-based, observable, and measurable actions. Whereas cognitivism is all about internal processes.
Cognitivism emerged in the late 1920s and early 1930s, when researchers such as Edward Tolman, Ivan Krechevsky, and Wolfgang Kohler proposed that insight and purpose were related to learning.
Later, in the 1950s, it began to have more traction and attention, and eventually Jean Piaget, the “Grandfather” of cognitivism, defined different schemas within cognitivism.
Implications for Learning Design
The primary implication for Instructional Designers (IDs) is to create engaging and creative learning experiences that help learners acquire knowledge and sometimes improve performance. Because of this, IDs can utilize cognitivism to help shift the focus from only external behaviors (i.e., what we want learners to achieve) to the internal processing of the mind (i.e., how we can help learners learn).
​
Unlike behaviorism that focuses on learners as measurable outcomes and passive recipients, cognitivism focuses on treating learners like active information processors. Because of this, instructional designers are able to build more intuitive and effective learning experiences that manage cognitive load; meaning, effectively designing courses can help with the brain’s processing limits while maximizing retention.
​
While behaviorist strategies can be effective for foundational tasks, cognitivist theories are essential for mastering complex knowledge. The goal of cognitivist design is to facilitate the transfer and integration of information. By understanding a learner’s prior knowledge, designers can create strategies that allow for efficient encoding. An example of this is advanced organization, such as syllabi, learning objectives, and concept mapping. These tools better prepare learners to mentally process frameworks and prepare them to bridge gaps between new information and existing real-world experiences and knowledge.
Strengths & Limitations
In the context of higher education, students are frequently tasked with synthesizing multifaceted and abstract concepts. Cognitivism offers a great framework for these students to succeed in certain areas and has such a "computer-like" approach that it does present specific challenges.
Strengths
-
Deep Retention: Cognitivism focuses on encoding information into long-term memory, ensuring students don’t memorize information but actually master it and apply it.
-
Strategic Problem-Solving: Cognitivism places a heavy emphasis on mental restructuring, or realistic perspectives, which can help students tap into their unique insights and previous experiences to analyze and evaluate new knowledge or obstacles to effectively problem-solve.
-
Enhanced Perception: By connecting new information to existing knowledge, students can absorb and categorize information more quickly.
Limitations
-
Lack of Diversity: Cognitivism excludes large demographics of learners because it does not account for the global population and those from diverse cultures or neurodivergent learners who cognitively process information differently.
-
Information Usage: Cognitivism does not account for how the information is used, only how it can be presented to connect new knowledge back to previous teachings.
-
No Social Context: As someone who studied socio-cultural anthropology, I believe an important callout is that cognitivism treats the mind like a computer processor, which in turn makes me believe cognitivism aligns with the mind working one way; but it doesn’t account for the learner’s specific environment, culture, and/or emotional state.
Reviewing Instructional Material
I am currently required to learn Power Automate for my job, so I have been viewing numerous tutorials on how to properly make the tool work.
​
The instructional video I chose is titled “Save Outlook Emails & Attachments to SharePoint using PowerAutomate” by Deepak Shrivastava. In the video, Deepak provides a step-by-step walkthrough for automating a task through a Microsoft tool called Power Automate. The tutorial demonstrates how to create a “flow” (steps required for my desired outcome), based on specific actions, that will auto-trigger the cloud version of this tool to run the “flow”.
​
​
The instructor successfully utilizes some segmenting by dividing the technical processes into chronological steps, but the material struggles to address the intrinsic load and germane processing needed for beginner users.
​
-
Failure of Pre-training Principle: A significant hurdle I encountered while watching this tutorial was the lack of pre-training. As a new learner to Power Automate, I was immediately met with high intrinsic load because of the specialized jargon and technical logic used. The tutorial assumed that a level of pre-existing knowledge was present, but I had not yet processed it. To improve this, I would implement an introductory “Key Terms” segment at the beginning of the video. Providing this mental schema early on would allow all levels of learners to focus on the logic of the flow, rather than struggling to decode the steps and fields.
-
Segmenting Principle: Because the tutorial skipped foundational context, my germane load (or generative processing) – the mental effort required to actually link this new information to my work tasks – was exhausting, frustrating, and involved many instances of trial-and-error. The instructor focused heavily on the how, but neglected the why. I would fix this by utilizing the segmenting principle. Instead of the instructor chunking together a large part of the necessary steps, I would have defined each chapter with unique names and broken down each action and what each field in that action meant. For instance, the tutorial instructor did a decent job of breaking down the chapters in the video (i.e., Welcome, Create Flow, Export Email, etc.) but I believe what would have been more beneficial would be chapters like “Objective”, “Key Terms”, “Actions Needed”, “Building Your Flow”, “Testing Your Export”, and “How to Trigger Your Flow”. Breaking the material into even smaller concepts would reduce the extraneous load caused by confusion and would allow me to build a mental model and apply it back to my unique flow.
References
Bates, A. W. (2022). Teaching in a Digital Age : Guidelines for Teaching and Learning (Third). [Tony Bates Associates Ltd].
​
​McLeod, S. (2024). Jerome Bruner’s theory of learning and cognitive development. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/bruner.html
McLeod, S. (2025a). Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of cognitive development. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html
​
Michela, E. (2022). Cognitivism. In Education Research: Across Multiple Paradigms (pp. 129-137). https://open.byu.edu/education_research/cognitivismj