Introduction
Meaning
Components display theory (CDT) addresses the issues of learner control and the separation of instructional strategy from instructional content. Component Display Theory (CDT) classifies learning along two dimensions: content (facts, concepts, procedures, and principles) and performance (remembering, using, and generalities).
The theory specifies four primary presentation forms: rules (expository presentation of a generality), examples (expository presentation of instances), recall (inquisitory generality) and practice (inquisitory instance). Secondary presentation forms include: prerequisites, objectives, helps, mnemonics, and feedback.
The theory specifies that instruction is more effective to the extent that it contains all necessary primary and secondary forms. Thus, a complete lesson would consist of objective followed by some combination of rules, examples, recall, practice, feedback, helps and mnemonics appropriate to the subject matter and learning task. Indeed, the theory suggests that for a given objective and learner, there is a unique combination of presentation forms that results in the most effective learning experience. 
A significant aspect of the CDT framework is learner control, i.e., the idea that learners can select their own instructional strategies in terms of content and presentation components. In this sense, instruction designed according to CDT provides a high degree of individualization since students can adapt learning to meet their own preferences and styles.
History
This instructional design model was developed through the Time-shared Interactive Computer Controlled Information Television (TICCIT) project in the seventies. CDT had strong influence on other instructional theories, such as Reigeluth's elaboration theory and Merrill’slater Instructional transaction theory (ITT)
Reigeluth's elaboration
Elaboration theory helps users select and sequence content in a way that will optimize the attainment of learning goals. Reigeluth (1999) quoted by Wiley (2000).
Task
The model
According to Wilson and Cole (1992), Elaboration Theory's basic strategies can be summarized as follows
- Organizing structure: conceptual, procedural, or theoretical
- Simple-to-complex sequence of lessons
- Within-lesson squencing:
- For conceptually organized instruction "present the easiest, most familiar organizing concepts first"
- For procedures, "present the steps in order of their performance"
- For theoretically organized instruction, move from the simple to the complex.
- Summarizers: Content reviews at both lesson and unit levels
- Synthesizers, e.g. diagrams that help the learner integrate contents elements into a meaninful whole.
- Analogies: relate the content to learner's prior knowledge.
- Cognitive strategy activators: cues that can trigger cognitive strategies for appropriate processing of materials.
- Learner control: allow learners to exercise informed control over both content and instructional strategy.
The simplifying conditions method (SCM) is an associated design model and method of elaboration theory. It integrates initial critiques concerning previous content-structure-based sequencing methods. SCM is based on two principles: (1) finding the simplest version of the task to teach and that is still representative of the entire task (epitomizing) and (2) teaching increasingly complex version of the task (elaborating). Elaborated versions are always slightly more complex, equally or more authentic and equally or slightly less representative of the whole task.
According to Wiley (2000:38) and based on Reigluth (1999a), SCM can be summarized in the following nine steps:
- Prepare for the content analysis and instructional design.
- Identify the simplest version of the task to be taught, paying careful attention to the simplifying conditions (i.e., the conditions which make this version of the task simpler than others).
- Analyze the organizing content for this task. (This is called "organizing content" because different organizational strategies are presented for procedural, heuristic, and tasks containing a combination of the two).
- Analyze the supporting or prerequisite content.
- Decide the size of the individual instructional episodes. "Too big is bad ... Too small is bad" (p. 447). Appropriate size is situational, and varies depending on delivery constraints (such as time, learner ability, content difficulty, etc.) Episodes need not be of equal size.
- Determine within-episode sequencing of the content.
- Identify the next version (first elaboration) of the task.
- Analyze organizing content, supporting content, and determine size and within-episode sequencing of content (steps three - five) for the next version of the task.
- Cycle back to step seven to identify the remaining versions of the task and design the instruction for each.
Instructional transaction theory
Merril's Instructional transaction theory aims to develop instructional algorithms
The model
The instructional transaction
Merrill et al. propose an activity-based model of instruction that is based on two important concepts: The instructional transaction and a delivery tool, the transaction shell. See also the more recent IMS Learning Design educational modeling language.
Instructional transactions are instructional algoriyhms, patterns of learner interactions, usually far more complex than a single display and a single response, which have been designed to enable the lerner to acquire a certain kind of knowledge or skills. Different kinds of knowledge and skills would require different kinds of transactions. The necessary set instructional transactions are designed and programmed once like other computer application such are sprad sheets. They can then be used with different content topics as long as these topics are of a familiar kind of knowledge or skills. (Merrill, Li and Jones 1991)
An instructional transaction is mutual dynamic, real time give and take between an instructional system and a student in which there is an exchange of information. It is the complete sequence of presentations and reactions necessary for the students to acquire specific types of instructional goal. It requires active mental effort by the students. Its effectiveness is determined by the match between the nature of the student’s interaction and resulting mental processing with the type of task and subject matter content to be l
Process
How can the theory be effected in the classroom by integrating it with ICT
According to Component display theory (David Merrill) it be effected in classroom by integrating it with ICT due to the following facts
- Performance can be perceived as using, remembering or finding a particular concept. In the case of “remembering”, learners are encouraged to remember a specific piece of data that they have committed to memory. With “using”, the learners are asked to apply the information they've collected from their memory to a particular scenario or problem. “Finding” involves that learners are actually using the information to arrive at a new concept, idea or principle
Remembering Due to ICT the learner is able to search and recall from memory a particular item of information,
Using - integrating class with ICT the learner is directly apply the information to a specific case.
Finding - the learner uses the information to derive a new abstraction (concepts, principles
- It sets forth a set of presentation forms that are effective in instructing virtually any learning type. The matrix may serve as a blueprint that allows instructional designers to follow specific steps for maximizing the effectiveness of their eLearning courses.
- Provides learners with full control of their own instruction, by letting them adapt content, instructional strategy, as well as the number of practice items they will receive. In other words, an eLearning design
Evaluation
PRINCIPLES OF THIS THEORY BY DAVID MERRILL
- Instruction will be more effective if all three primary performance forms (remember, use, generality) are present.
- Primary forms can be presented by either an explanatory or inquisitor learning strategy.
- The sequence of primary forms is not critical provided they are all present.
Conclusion
THE IMPORANCES OF COMPONENT DISPLAY
- Components Display Theory specifies how to design instruction for any cognitive domain
- Components Display Theory provided the basis for the lesson design in the (Time-shared Interactive Computer Controlled Information Television) TICCIT computer based learning system.
- Components Display Theory It also the basis for the Instructional Quality Profile, a quality control tool for instructional materials in education
Also,There are a number of different applications of the Component Display Theory in an educational setting. It sets forth a set of presentation forms that are effective in instructing virtually any learning type. The matrix may serve as a blueprint that allows instructional designers to follow specific steps for maximizing the effectiveness of their eLearning courses.
In addition, another key aspect of the Component Display Theory is that it suggests that it is possible for instructional designers to provide learners with full control of their own instruction, by letting them adapt content, instructional strategy, as well as the number of practice items they will receive. In other words, an eLearning design based on the Component Display Theory could possibly allow instructional designers to create eLearning experiences that would enable learners to individualize their lesson and custom tailor the instructional design to meet their personal needs and preferences. This is a great step towards a really adaptive eLearning course.
Last but not least, I highly encourage you to view the following brief introduction to Dr. Merrill's thoughts about instructional design.