COGx Approach to Cognitive Enhancement
This video highlights the unique three-pronged approach that COGx programs rely on to ensure meaningful real-life outcomes that are sustainable.
It also explains how this compares to other programs in the industry that cannot emulate the outcomes through technology or standardized programs.
This short video highlights some important differentiators between our clinical and customized approach to enhancing cognition without technology to how competitors who attempt to achieve the same objectives operate -and why that core difference separates COGx from the rest.
Integrity in Our Process
When a program is customized to the individual it serves it can afford to hold itself accountable to a much higher standard: the learner’s unique goals.
Most programs that target cognition do not hold themselves accountable to the learner’s goals, which inevitably include the ability for the programs gains to transfer to real life.
This video highlights COGx’s unique process for ensuring successful program design and outcomes.
COGx Quality Assurance
COGx partners with qualified professionals and organizations that are committed to replicating programs with fidelity.
The careful selection process for COGx partners is complemented with ongoing Quality Assurance support.
This video showcases how we support our partners to ensure the quality of every COGx program delivered anywhere in the world.
“I didn’t even need to see the results to know how well Sam did with his COGx program; the results were evident in the grades. Sam especially has made big improvements in math and accuracy.”Parent of COGx Student
COGx is a research and development firm in applied cognitive science. We design clinical programs that incorporate the latest scientific research on human learning to improve how people learn.
Why Standardized Programs Fail
Playing a game (or repeating an exercise) doesn’t automatically transfer into a real-life skill. Measuring gains with a battery of tests designed by the company offering the program is self-serving and discrediting.
Few people persist at independently working on a skill that is weak. We are wired to respond positively to what we can do (or learn to do). We avoid or desist tasks we can’t do, particularly when repetition is not the solution.
Standardized programs offer the same recipe to a wide range of needs and abilities. Therefore, investing in irrelevance is almost guaranteed. Also, the likelihood of engaging and motivating the student by developing a path that connects their starting ability to their desired goals is greatly diminished.
A science-based methodology coupled with a clinical approach knows its own limitations, which prevents it from setting false expectations. On the other hand, commercial programs (standardized approaches) are more constrained in their ability to deliver meaningful results. Ironically, they are often more inclined to tout universal effectiveness and rely on emotion to convince their target audience. Universal claims and emotional appeal should be a warning sign, particularly if these programs have a one-size fits all approach as franchisors tend to have.