Maybe we could add to the definition some “time” reference, since the previous definition can apply to almost any learning intervention, no matter how long it takes.

How small must it be to be “micro” or “mini” or some other diminutive for learning?

What do you think?

Rachel, I think your little course on active/passive could be micro learning if it is indeed on the order of a few minutes (one criteria: can the amount of practice you provide in a few minutes sufficient to lead to retention?). I think the other courses would also each be a micro learning instance if they stand alone, but they’d aggregate into a curriculum.

Or perhaps was the active/passive voice training ever microlearning to begin with?

Quite frankly, as you mention, it doesn’t matter – but I’m mostly curious so I know what people are talking about when they’re talking about microlearning.

We decided that the only rationale for eLearning courses was providing a billing mechanism for vendors.

So now courses are in their death throes. Latest evidence pegs human attention span at 10 – 18 minutes. I cringe when I see that a YouTube recording is ten minutes long. That’s forever.

What do we call these learning experiences that occur in minutes? What’s our unit of measurement?

I’ve been called them snippets but frankly appropriating the term microlearning might be a better idea,

As an individual, I need or want to learn to do something. If that’s a complex task, it might be broken down into components, and those may be further broken down into yet smaller pieces that I need to learn. Looking at the definition of microlearning, I note it’s based on behaviorism and has micro, meso, and macro aspects. I’m no expert, but it made sense to think of an example such as drawing an illustration. Some of the micro aspects of learning to illustrate might include choosing appropriate media – paper, pencils, etc. – or how to hold the pencil. Perhaps becoming skilled at drawing straight lines or circles might also be micro aspects. Meso aspects might include things such as erasing properly or learning how to form other shapes based on more basic shapes. Macro aspects might include even higher level things such as perspective or shading. It’s imperfect, but helps me put things in context.

Where I think things get complicated is when we create something for someone else to learn from, and we decide that will be in short interactions, and therefore label it microlearning. All points you make then make sense. But as Will Thalheimer said, like it or not, microlearning is coming to a CEO near you. If we think it’s confusing to address the term in L&D circles, how will we fare dealing with the expectations of business leaders?

In #chat2lrn, Adam Weisblatt wrote that he sees microlearning as a philosophy. From the L&D perspective, so do I. If we maintain the integrity of programs we create but overlay a philosophy of developing in manageable, quickly released, easily consumed components, that might be worthwhile. Whether that’s called microlearning or not really doesn’t matter in the end.