Learning engineering: What it is, why I’m involved, and why I think more of you should be

In the article I am responding to (Lee, 2023, this issue and volume), Victor Lee makes the claim that because learning sciences is already an applied science, we do not need another field called Learning Engineering. And because there are currently so many disconnected communities of people writing about learning engineering and calling themselves learning engineers, and many of those people have been advocating for a far less expansive view of what learning entails than the learning sciences community proposes, he wonders whether connecting the learning sciences and learning engineering will diminish the learning sciences. These concerns, I believe, are unfounded; instead, I believe, as I’ve been preaching for the past decade (Kolodner, ISLS keynote, 2012), that we should be more worried that what we are learning in our research is not better appreciated and known by others outside of the learning sciences community. What we have learned about how to support learning and the work we’ve done toward showing what’s possible to implement in schools, should be, but is still little present, in the imagination of policy makers, teachers, parents, administrators, and the designers of curriculum and learning technologies. One reason for that is that too many in the education, academic, and policy “establishments” value lab-based and large-scale experimental research over what we do. Another reason is that we aren’t involved enough in participating in activities that would challenge establishment views. Yet another is that we (the learning sciences community) are not preparing and encouraging our students to take positions in organizations that are designing the newest learning technologies and curriculum products, or in organizations that are helping educators and educational organizations refine their pedagogical approaches, cultures, and social practices.