Two learning engineerings?

So, I’ve written before about ‘learning engineering’. And, separately, it’s become an issue just what the term means. It appears there are two ‘learning engineerings’, and the issue is how to resolve them. So, let’s look at the contenders.

First, there’s the notion of engineering as applied science. We refer to chemical engineering as applied chemistry, electrical engineering as applied physics, etc. There’s not a one-to-one correspondence between label and theoretical field, but there is a relationship of theory and application.

Thus, learning engineering could be the application of learning science to the design of instruction. Which is ‘instructional design’. And, to be clear, there’s a contingent that suggests this is what learning engineering could and should be. I, for one, think we should be looking to a focus on applied learning science instead of thinking of designing instruction, simply because the entrenched practices have devolved to content and a quiz. Which isn’t true ID, but…

Read the full story by

Tags:

RELATED READS
Trial by video conference? Not yet, but coronavirus forces Bay Area courts to embrace more virtual proceedings [Egelko] Learning from home: Lessons from Speexx
We are updating our Privacy Policy, so please make sure you take a minute to review it. As of May 25, 2018 your continued use of our services will be subject to this new Privacy Policy.
Review Privacy Policy OK