The CCSI is NOT about using CogSci to develop instructional techniques. It is about developing instructional techniques for teaching CogSci.  However, I do keep an eye on coverage of the first topic, even if just as an exercise in tracking whackery. The NY Times had a 'blog debate' on why school tests have shown so little improvement since the 1970s. Bloggers include Howard Gardner, Sandra Tsing Loh, amoung others.

Bill Evers, argues that:

What We Learn From School Tests - Room for Debate Blog - NYTimes.com
Teachers should adopt instructional practices that have the support of rigorous cognitive science.

Amoung other things. The problem here is not that Evers has made this claim. The problem is the TOTAL LACK of detail or data backing or supporting his claim. It demonstrates my central concern with this field: it seems that anything that can be called 'cognitive science'--no matter how far that can be stretched--will be suitable for educational theory.