What happened to the interdisciplinary study of learning in humans and machines

Bibliographic Data

ID21633071
AuthorsShayan Doroudi (0000-0002-0602-1406, School of Education, University of California, corresponding author)
Year2023
Volume32
Issue4-5
Pages663-681
Publication date2023-10-20
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of the Learning Sciences (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1050-8406 • E-ISSN: 1532-7809
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/10508406.2023.2260159
OpenAlexW4387570757
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited45

When the Learning Sciences emerged in 1991, there was an ethos of studying learning in humans and machines in conjunction with one another. This ethos reflected three decades of prior work on the interdisciplinary study of learning; however, in the three decades since the emergence of the Learning Sciences, it seems to have largely disappeared. I begin by describing the ethos that was prevalent in 1991 using quotations from the inaugural editorial of the Journal of the Learning Sciences. I then describe how this ethos was prevalent decades before the Learning Sciences in four distinct approaches to cognitive science research, which I call the “Four C’s”—cognitivism, constructivism, cybernetics, and connectionism. I suggest three reasons why the Learning Sciences moved away from the use of artificial intelligence as a central tool for thinking about learning, noting that these reasons do not suggest a fundamental incompatibility between the two. I end by discussing how Learning Scientists might once again embrace artificial intelligence and computational modeling and use them as tools for gaining insight into the constructivist, situated, and socio-cultural nature of learning

Data science · Engineering ethics · AI-based Problem Solving and Planning · Computability, Logic, AI Algorithms · Computer Science · Engineering · Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

Tools

Open DOI