LEBOK Wiki
Prototype — not authoritative. A learning-engineering product under development, cloned from the lebok.wiki of record. Much content is AI-drafted and pending expert review.About & pedagogy →
📖

Authored from the Learning Engineering Toolkit — pending expert review

This page was authored on 2026-07-16 directly from the source text of the Learning Engineering Toolkit (Jim Goodell & Janet Kolodner (Eds.), 2023). Every factual claim carries an inline <cite> citation to the specific chapter it draws on; the full references are listed at the foot of the page. The prose is grounded in the primary source but has not yet been validated by a subject-matter expert. Use the Edit button to validate, correct, or expand.

Chapters: LET-01 (Chapter 1)

1.3.10 Project and Program Management

This subtopic covers Project and Program Management which are critical disciplines within learning engineering, responsible for guiding the design, development, implementation, and evaluation of learning solutions from inception to completion. Effective management ensures that learning engineering projects and programs are executed efficiently, resources are allocated appropriately, risks are mitigated, and learning outcomes are achieved. See Knowledge Area 10 in this LEBOK operations and management topics.

Research Context

Project and program management in learning engineering must bridge the iterative, evidence-driven cycles of learning science research and the fixed-scope, fixed-timeline demands of institutional delivery [LE-LS-GL-003]. The High-Leverage Opportunities report identified the absence of shared R&D project infrastructure — common protocols for A/B testing, shared data pipelines, reusable evaluation frameworks — as a key constraint on the field's ability to scale evidence-based practice, because each team reinventing these protocols wastes resources and prevents cross-project learning [LE-LS-GL-003]. The Learning Engineering Virtual Institute (LEVI) has modeled one approach to this challenge: multi-year cohort funding that allows teams to build, test, and refine tools across multiple iteration cycles rather than delivering a finished product on a traditional project timeline [LE-LS-CO-001]. Kenneth Koedinger's work at CMU demonstrates the long arc that effective LE project management must accommodate: the Cognitive Tutor development process spanned decades of iterative refinement before producing the tools deployed in thousands of schools [LE-LS-PP-005].



From the Learning Engineering Toolkit

The Learning Engineering Toolkit does not treat "project and program management" as a named discipline, but Chapter 1 supplies the closest grounding by distinguishing a repeatable process from a single project. It defines a process as "a series of actions or steps taken in order to achieve a particular end," with inputs, process steps, and outputs, and uses baking as an analogy: the recipe is the repeatable process, while baking one batch is "a project" [LET-01]. Learning engineering, the book says, is likewise "a repeatable process intended to iteratively design, test, adjust, and improve conditions for learning" [LET-01].

Managing this work means accommodating iteration rather than a single linear pass. The book stresses that the learning engineering process "always involves multiple iterations" and that its exact order and steps "will vary based on the nature and scale of the challenge" and other factors [LET-01]. It also notes that processes used by a large team may differ from those used by a small team, which is a program-level consideration in how work is organized [LET-01].

Chapter 1 further describes the coordination challenges that management must handle. Implementation across multiple settings grows "more complex in each iteration as venues and teachers or facilitators are added," sometimes becoming a separate challenge in its own right [LET-01]. And because a "single challenge" is usually "connected with or nested within dozens of other challenges," the book calls for "engineering mindsets, systems thinking, and modular design" to keep nested, iterative work coherent [LET-01]. It contrasts sequential handoffs — designer to developer to implementer to data scientist — with a more integrated "Lean-Agile or concurrent" approach, pointing to its dedicated tools chapter for managing such development [LET-01].

Sources from the Learning Engineering Toolkit

  1. [LET-01]Aaron Kessler, Scotty D. Craig, Jim Goodell, Dina Kurzweil & Scott W. Greenwald (2023). Chapter 1: Learning Engineering is a Process. In Jim Goodell & Janet Kolodner, Learning Engineering Toolkit (pp. 29–46). Routledge / Taylor & Francis. Open Access

Further Reading

Source: wrgr/lecommons — curated by the learning engineering community. Confidence: medium — lecommons-curated; not yet independently expert-validated in this context. To validate or challenge any item: use the Edit button on this page. Upgrading confidence from mediumhigh requires expert sign-off.

Landmark Academic Papers

  • Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning — John Sweller (1988). Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4 · ~4,000 citations · tier: foundational

    The founding paper of Cognitive Load Theory. Established that working memory limitations impose hard constraints on instruction design. CLT-derived principles (worked examples, split-attention, redundancy) are among the most widely replicated findings in educational psychology and are standard design rules in learning engineering. Source: lecommons/landscape/data/papers.json · ID: LE-LS-AP-008 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

Policy, Reports & Grey Literature

  • The Job of a College President — Herbert A. Simon (1967). Educational Record (American Council on Education) · link

    The founding document of learning engineering. Simon coined the term 'learning engineer' and made the case that teaching effectiveness is a distinct, learnable expertise grounded in cognitive science — not a byproduct of subject-matter expertise. The philosophical foundation for everything that followed. Source: lecommons/landscape/data/grey_literature.json · ID: LE-LS-GL-001 · confidence: low · expert-validated: false

  • Online Education: A Catalyst for Higher Education Reforms — Karen Willcox, Sanjay Sarma, Philip Lippel (2016). MIT Online Education Policy Initiative (MIT OEPI) · link

    Re-injected 'learning engineer' into higher education discourse at the moment MOOCs reached 58M+ global students. Recommended universities create dedicated learning engineering roles. Catalyzed institutional adoption of LE language and practices across US higher education. Widely cited as the document that triggered the modern LE movement. Source: lecommons/landscape/data/grey_literature.json · ID: LE-LS-GL-002 · confidence: low · expert-validated: false

  • High-Leverage Opportunities for Learning Engineering — Ryan S. Baker, Ulrich Boser, Allison Shelley (2021). University of Pennsylvania Center for Learning Analytics · link

    Synthesized a 2020 convening of 100+ academics, policymakers, and practitioners to define ten strategic priorities for the field in three domains: Better LE Infrastructure (shared R&D architectures, A/B testing at scale, reusable algorithmic components), Supporting Human Processes (teacher dashboards, predictive advising), and Better Learning Technologies (algorithmic equity, complex-skills measurement). The field's most comprehensive contemporary roadmap. Source: lecommons/landscape/data/grey_literature.json · ID: LE-LS-GL-003 · confidence: low · expert-validated: false

  • EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: Teaching and Learning Edition — EDUCAUSE (2017). EDUCAUSE · link

    The annual predictive literature for edtech adoption across global higher education. Tracks short-, mid-, and long-term adoption horizons. Documents the gradual mainstreaming of LE concepts (analytics, adaptive systems, AI tutors) from forecast to widespread adoption across the 2017–2024 arc. Source: lecommons/landscape/data/grey_literature.json · ID: LE-LS-GL-005 · confidence: low · expert-validated: false

  • NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition — Samantha Adams Becker, Malcolm Cummins, Annie Davis et al. (2017). The New Media Consortium / EDUCAUSE · link

    Identified adaptive learning technologies and data-driven personalization as short-term adoption trends in higher education. Forecast the long-term restructuring of degrees around competency measurement. Part of the annual Horizon series that documented the field's gradual integration into mainstream institutional practice. Source: lecommons/landscape/data/grey_literature.json · ID: LE-LS-GL-006 · confidence: low · expert-validated: false

Key People

  • Herbert A. Simon (profile), Carnegie Mellon University (1916–2001) — Originator of the 'learning engineer' concept; Nobel laureate

    Coined the term 'learning engineer' in the 1967 Educational Record essay 'The Job of a College President' Source: lecommons/landscape/data/people.json · ID: LE-LS-PP-001 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

  • John R. Anderson (profile), Carnegie Mellon University, HCII (1947–present) — Cognitive architect; creator of ACT-R; pioneer of Cognitive Tutors

    Developed ACT-R (Adaptive Control of Thought–Rational), the dominant cognitive architecture for modeling skill learning Source: lecommons/landscape/data/people.json · ID: LE-LS-PP-002 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

  • John Sweller (profile), University of New South Wales (1946–present) — Developer of Cognitive Load Theory

    Formalized Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) distinguishing intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load Source: lecommons/landscape/data/people.json · ID: LE-LS-PP-004 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

  • Kenneth R. Koedinger (profile), Carnegie Mellon University, HCII (active 1988–present) — Co-originator of learning engineering as a named field; Cognitive Tutor pioneer; DataShop founder

    Led development of Cognitive Tutors deployed in thousands of schools; co-founded Carnegie Learning Inc. Source: lecommons/landscape/data/people.json · ID: LE-LS-PP-005 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

  • Bror Saxberg (profile), Formerly Chan Zuckerberg Initiative / Kaplan; founder of LearningForge (active 2000s–present) — Learning science practitioner; LE thought leader; industry-academic bridge

    Led learning science at Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, framing LE as 'precision education' analogous to precision medicine Source: lecommons/landscape/data/people.json · ID: LE-LS-PP-009 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

Organizations, Conferences & Journals

  • IEEE ICICLE — Industry Consortium on Learning Engineering (consortium) · link

    Source: lecommons/landscape/data/organizations.json · ID: LE-LS-CO-001 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
  • The Simon Initiative — Carnegie Mellon University (research_center) · link

    Source: lecommons/landscape/data/organizations.json · ID: LE-LS-CO-002 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
  • Journal of Learning Engineering (journal) · link

    Source: lecommons/landscape/data/organizations.json · ID: LE-LS-JO-006 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
  • IEEE 1484.20.2: Recommended Practice for Defining Competencies (standard) · link

    Source: lecommons/landscape/data/organizations.json · ID: LE-LS-SG-004 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
  • IEEE 1484.12.1-2002 & P2881: Learning Object Metadata (standard) · link

    Source: lecommons/landscape/data/organizations.json · ID: LE-LS-SG-005 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
  • Open Context Exchange (OCX) (standard) · link

    Source: lecommons/landscape/data/organizations.json · ID: LE-LS-SG-006 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

Programs & Initiatives

  • Learning Engineering Virtual Institute (LEVI) (PC) · link

    Funds multi-year cohorts building AI-driven, research-backed tools to improve outcomes in math (LEVI Math) and early literacy (LEVI Literacy), with rapid experimentation and rigorous evaluation. Not affiliated with the earlier iNACOL/Aurora convening sometimes also called LEVI. Source: lecommons/site/src/data/programs_people_registry.json · ID: LE-PP-003 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

  • IEEE ICICLE Annual Meeting (CE) · link

    Annual community gathering for the IEEE learning engineering community. Standards, BoK, and credentialing discussions. Source: lecommons/site/src/data/programs_people_registry.json · ID: LE-PP-024 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

  • IEEE ICICLE (CO) · link

    International Community for IEEE Learning Engineering. Primary professional home for LE. Developing BoK, standards, credentialing. Resources page is a primary seed source for this corpus. Source: lecommons/site/src/data/programs_people_registry.json · ID: LE-PP-040 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

  • The Simon Initiative — Carnegie Mellon University (CO) · link

    Cross-disciplinary learning engineering ecosystem at CMU named for Herbert Simon. Encompasses LearnLab (in-vivo research lab), OLI (courseware platform), DataShop/LearnSphere (world's largest educational log data), METALS master's program, and the OpenSimon Toolkit. Hundreds of faculty; the most integrated LE research-to-practice ecosystem globally. Produces both the theoretical advances and the open infrastructure that defines modern learning engineering. Source: lecommons/site/src/data/programs_people_registry.json · ID: LE-PP-107 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

  • Journal of Learning Engineering (CO) · link

    The only journal specifically dedicated to learning engineering as a named field. Diamond Open Access — no fees for authors or readers. Community-driven by ICICLE; provides the 'Learning Engineering Primer' to align complex multidisciplinary terminology among authors. Because the field is young and sparsely indexed, JoLE papers often do not appear in citation-network-based discovery — venue search is required. Added as a venue query in icicle_adjacent_conference_queries.json. Source: lecommons/site/src/data/programs_people_registry.json · ID: LE-PP-114 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

  • Credential Engine / Credential Transparency Description Language (CTDL) (CO) · link

    Open-source data standard and registry for describing credentials, competencies, and learning pathways. CTDL encodes 1,200+ properties for representing what people know and can do. The emerging national infrastructure for credential-level knowledge representation. Source: lecommons/site/src/data/programs_people_registry.json · ID: LE-PP-138 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false

Lecommons enrichment applied 2026-04-17. All items pending expert validation. See wrgr/lecommons for source data and curation methodology.