ABSTRACT

“Learning engineering” has gained popularity as a term connected to the work of learning sciences. However, the nature of that connection is not entirely clear. For some, learning engineering represents distinct, industry-inspired practices enabled by data abundance and digital platformization of learning technologies. That view is presented as one where learning engineers apply learning research that has resided in experimental studies. For others, learning engineering should refer to the use of the full breadth of knowledge developed within the learning sciences research community. This second view is more inclusive of the fundamentally situated, design-oriented, and real-world commitments that are the backbone of the learning sciences, as reflected in this journal. The two views differ even as far as whether the academic field is labeled “learning science” or “learning sciences”. This article examines and articulates these differences. It also argues that without course correction, many who identify with learning engineering will conduct technology-supported learning improvement work that, at its own risk, will neglect the full and necessary scope of what has already been and continues to be discovered in the learning sciences. Moreover, it behooves all to consider recently elevated, but deeply fundamental questions being asked in the learning sciences about what is important to learn and toward what ends. With some more clarity around what is actually encompassed by the learning sciences and how all interested in design and educational improvement can build upon that knowledge, we can make greater collective progress to understanding and supporting human learning.

摘要

“学习工程”作为与学习科学工作相关的术语而广受欢迎。然而，这种联系的本质并不完全清楚。对于某些人来说，学习工程代表了独特的、受行业启发的实践，这些实践是由数据丰富和学习技术的数字平台化实现的。这种观点是学习工程师应用实验研究中的学习研究的观点。对于其他人来说，学习工程应该指的是对学习科学研究界开发的全部知识的使用。第二种观点更包容了基本定位、以设计为导向和现实世界的承诺，这些承诺是学习科学的支柱，正如本杂志所反映的那样。甚至就学术领域是否被贴上“学习科学”或“学习科学”的标签而言，两种观点也有所不同。本文研究并阐明了这些差异。它还认为，如果不进行路线修正，许多认同学习工程的人将进行技术支持的学习改进工作，而这种工作自担风险，将忽视学习科学中已经存在和继续发现的全部和必要的范围。此外，所有人都应该考虑最近在学习科学中提出的一些升高但又深刻的基本问题，即学习什么是重要的以及学习的目的是什么。更清楚地了解学习科学实际包含的内容以及所有对设计和教育改进感兴趣的人如何以这些知识为基础，