1
INCITE – A MICRO-LEARNING FRAMEWORK
By Kamalika Bhattacharya and Arijit Lahiri, Founders, QuoDeck
INCITE is a framework proposed for planning and
implementing micro-learning in the real world,
primarily in organizational contexts.
WHAT IS MICRO-LEARNING
Micro-learning deals with relatively small learning
units and short-term-focused activities (Hug, 2005).
In the e-learning context, it refers to a learner's short
interaction with learning matter broken down to very
small bits of content.
Practically, the micro-perspective on learning is on
much more than just the content, and goes beyond
to taking a small-scale approach to the factors that
influence learning, such as:
 Cognitive load: Learners are routinely
overburdened by unfocused, information-heavy
content. Micro-learning reduces cognitive load,
making it easier for learners to process.
 Space: Since micro-learning takes up less digital
space, you can avoid digital real estate issues
that come with storing and displaying media
files – especially on mobile devices.
 Scope: Micro-learning is more focused in scope,
making it easier for a learner to tie what they
learn directly to specific on-the-job actions.
 Cost: Short content is cheaper and faster to
produce and update, so you can continually test
and experiment, even on the tightest budgets.
 Perspective: Micro-learning forces us to
consider the small learning moments and
opportunities that happen continuously
throughout an employee’s day.
While the broad characterization helps in getting a
general idea of the concept, what is lacking right now
is a practitioner’s framework to implement micro-
learning in the real world. The INCITE framework has
been developed through the author’s work with over
40 large companies and helping them create micro-
learning. The Framework leans heavily towards a
practitioners point of view, having been refined
through these live implementations.
THE MILLENNIAL GENER ATION
As per the 2015 Millennial Majority Workforce study
(elance-Odesk, 2015), Millennials are the largest
generation in the US workforce in 2015. The US
Bureau of Labor statistics estimate this to already
exceed 50% of the total employee pool with an
estimate crossing 75% by 2030. From an
organizational learning perspective, this is perhaps
the most critical demographic shift to account for
while planning learning systems.
The Millennial generation is the most computer
literate generation to enter the workforce till date.
Also known as the Net Generation, those born from
1981- 2001 have been raised in an era of instant
access. The concept of anywhere, anytime learning
fits right into the mindset of millennials, who
discharge most of their social, personal and
professional obligations through their mobile device.
Their learning and communication style is through
multi-media and their most common method of
contact is over their mobile devices (Nicholas, 2008).
Their style is high-tech and highly networked, and
Millennials “will want to be able to work quickly and
creatively, and they want to do it their way” (Zemke,
1999). Their creativity and investigation with media,
free expressions, strong views and the need for
independence are noted facets of their generation.
“Many young people today are accustomed to
watching TV, talking on the phone, doing homework,
eating, and interacting with their parents all at the
same time” (Frand, 2000). Such routine multitasking
behavior may have shortened their attention span
2
and caused them to lack critical thinking skills and
introspection (J.P.Murray, 1997). Although there
may be concern for Millennials’ analysis of material,
there is high confidence in their usage of media to an
extent that it can be used as a tool for learning.
It is to effectively tap this aptitude, that the INCITE
framework has been devised.
THE INCITE FRAMEWORK
Content
Navigation
Implementation
INCITE
The INCITE Framework is used to systematically plan
out how micro-learning should be designed for an
organization’s learning needs. A practitioner
following the INCITE Framework step-by-step should
expect to end up with a fully designed micro-learning
management system and process. Practitioner notes
have been included in the white paper to suggest
tools that can be used to better use the Framework.
 Implementation – The first pillar of this
Framework is to discover the ask from the micro-
learning management system and establish the
constraints around organizational processes,
technology and learner psychology.
 Navigation – Depending on the objective, the
flow of the learning has to be established next.
An established concept in Formal Learning
design, creating a learning flow is akin to
establishing curriculum and lesson plans for a
course.
 Content – Micro-learning content is very distinct
from regular e-learning content. It is driven by
criticality of information, which in turn drives
size and form of the content.
Interactivity
Testing
Effectiveness
 Interactivity – A learning system targeted
towards the Millennial learner has to engage first
and explain quickly. This makes it essential to
embrace a participative pedagogy delivered
through interactivity.
 Testing – The Millennial learner has typically
grown up in a very connected social context,
with high doses of competition and a healthy
dose of skepticism towards authority. Modern
testing methodologies have to account for these
attitudes.
 Effectiveness – Of all organizational processes,
learning is perhaps the least measurable
currently, reducing the focus and importance of
this function in spite of its criticality for the
organization. Measurement of learning
3
 effectiveness is critical to the success of any
learning system.
The remainder of this paper will focus on expanding
on each of the six precepts of INCITE and try and
provide guides & tools on how to understand and
plan each of them better.
ORGANIZATION CONTEXT ON LMS
SYSTEMS
A virtual learning system is intended to automate the
management and tracking of organizational learning.
It serves as a platform for housing content, recording
training progress and administering assessments. To
put it into a structure, virtual learning systems are
typically designed to achieve three objectives:
transmission, interaction and evaluation (Brandon,
2010). However, usage patterns and self-reporting by
educators indicates that learning systems end up
facilitating only the transmission of learning content,
without achieving either of the other two objectives.
Organizational LMS
HRMS
Sales Micro-LMS Operations Micro-LMS
In the organizational learning context, this becomes
particularly relevant given the geographical
dispersion of the employee base in most large
organizations. With the advent of millennials,
learning systems today are being expected to allow
learners to engage with the learning content at any
point of time and ideally from any location.
A micro-learning based learning system progresses
the concept of an old-world learning management
system by leveraging on the advancements in
modern technology. Moving away from the
commercially-enforced “course-based” model of
LMS use entirely, micro-learning management
systems allow for creation of smaller units of LMS
access. This approach decentralizes the structuring
and administration of the learning to the functional
team level.
Certain other problems manifest themselves in the
organizational context. Firstly, each functional team
requires a completely different approach to
managing content and evaluation. For example, the
content, learning flow and access requirements of a
sales team will be vastly different from those of an
operations manager. Add to this the fact that the
team members themselves are subject-matter
experts (SMEs) in the domains that they want their
teams trained in, but currently have no suitable
authoring system to create SCORM packages for the
LMS. This results in long creation cycles for new
content with the entire responsibility devolving on
the nodal learning manager and external SMEs.
...
Due to these constraints, most central learning
teams make rather sub-optimal trade-offs and
compromises to ensure that ‘one size fits all’ in terms
of features, overall LMS structure and content
creation.
The lack of suitable authoring capabilities in current
learning systems have made PowerPoint a tool of-
choice for internal transmission of learning in teams.
This also hampers adoption of any LMS in an
organization. This usage of PowerPoint for learning,
while scoring on the transmission aspect, lacks the
4
elements of interaction and evaluation required for
effective learning management.
With a micro-learning approach, the responsibility
for configuring and populating the content resides
with the central team. The content population and
updating in the micro-learning module can easily be
done by the team itself. Further, interaction and
evaluation aspects of the module are completely
customizable to the requirements of the team,
making the learning more contextual. To ensure that
organizational requirements are met, the
assessment scores can be cascaded to a central data
repository, which is then the only system that the
nodal learning manager has to manage. Interestingly,
existing organizational learning management
systems are an excellent choice for the central data
repository.
IMPLEMENTATION – KNOWING WHAT YOU
WANT
The Implementation stage for a micro-learning
system essentially focuses on defining the
parameters of the system as per the organizational
requirements (IT Policy, HR Policy, Training Needs &
Analysis, etc.). Detailed Constraint Analysis is
recommended to ensure that the implementation
specifications are comprehensive:
 Device Constraints – These constraints pertain
to whether the micro-learning is being built for
the mobile or the desktop or both. Based on the
answer to this question, constraints with respect
to operating systems, screen orientation and
sizing, app vs. web, etc. need to be further
analyzed.
 Security Constraints – These constraints
pertain to the data and access security concerns
of the organization. These can range from basic
questions like whether the learning is to be
accessible only inside the office to more complex
issues like remote wiping of learning data on
exits, etc.
 Bandwidth Constraints – These constraints
pertain to the network bandwidth available for
the learning system. These constraints are
typically derived from surrogate analysis of
geographical dispersion and network
capabilities of the devices on which the learning
is to be deployed.
 Org Structure Constraints – These pertain to
the team structures within the company and
non-hierarchical structures (like Leadership
Group, Committees, etc.) that might be present.
The main aspect to analyze is the likelihood and
extent of overlap between multiple micro-
learning systems for a learner who might belong
to multiple cohorts.
 Engagement Level Constraints – A lot of
organizations seek to tread cautiously on the
extent of engagement they would like to
implement. The interaction level of the micro-
learning has to be kept on the fine line which
creates motivation without creating obsession
which hampers work.
 Learner Psychology Constraints – Depending
on the organizational DNA and employee
profiles, it is critical to understand the needs and
attitudes of the learner groups and design the
system accordingly. In this section, it is also
critical to assess how learners might try to “game
the system”.
 Learning Objective Constraints – Ultimately, it
all comes down to the learning objectives that
you want to drive through the system.
Depending on the objectives you want to
achieve, you will need to make trade-offs on
engagement, length, seriousness, etc.
These are just a quick sample of the components of
Constraint Analysis. More details can be found in our
forthcoming paper on Constraint Analysis for Micro-
Learning Implementation.
NAVIGATION – LET IT FLOW
Learning is a process, not an event, which makes the
planning of the journey through the process, a critical
part of learning design. The navigation of learning
flows is fundamental to the success of any micro-
learning implementation.
5
A Learning Flow is a continuous steady stream of
social micro-learning activities – accessible from the
web and mobile devices. (Hart, 2014)
Let’s look at each of the elements of that sentence,
that describe a Learning Flow
 continuous – that are ongoing (i.e. no end date)
 steady – that are daily (or probably more likely,
weekly)
 micro-learning – that are short – i.e. taking no
longer than 15-20 minutes to undertake
 activities – that involve reading (watching or
listening to) something and doing something
 social – that invite and encourage active
participation and contribution
 stream – that are organized and structured in
the Flow in weekly themes
 accessible from web and mobile devices – that
ensure that learning takes place anywhere and at
anytime
For the learners, being present in a Learning Flow
means:
 having some help to navigate the turbulent
waters of a fast-flowing stream of (new)
knowledge
 retaining control over how and when they get
involved, and how they fit it into their daily
workload – autonomy is a key element of
participation.
At a macro-level, micro-learning systems can be
structured with four types of navigation systems -
Course, Reference, Social and Game. Let us look at
each of these in a little more detail:
Course Navigation
This is the traditional flow of learning systems. The
material is broken down into modules that are
typically accessed sequentially. The content
escalates progressively in complexity or depth of the
knowledge being disseminated. Modules are
generally released over a period of time and a break
in the sequence would make the learning difficult to
understand.
A course-based format of navigation is typically used
when depth of learning in a subject is required. The
main disadvantage of this form of navigation is that
it is designed for an academic pedagogy and doesn’t
relate well to modern adult learning principles. As an
example, for a micro-learning system that is being
designed to train a sales team with both absolute
rookies and sales veterans, the content has to start
with the basics of sales to cater to the rookies. The
sales veterans would find this initial content
redundant and repetitive and their interest might
wane for the rest of the course, before they’ve even
reached the part relevant to them. In the course-
based format, they have no option but to plod
through the initial content to get to the material that
is truly relevant to them. A lot of interest loss in e-
learning content happens due to this.
Reference Navigation
This is a library-style approach to learning navigation.
In this format, the learning happens because the
learner is looking to learn. When the learner wants an
answer to a specific question or explanation of a
concept, in this form of navigation, the material is
organized as a collection of information nuggets with
a well-structured searching system.
This format of navigation is best used when the
learning system is structured with a knowledge
management approach. It is particularly applicable
when there are frequent updates to the learning
content. For example, if the organization is in an
industry which is highly regulated, like banking or
aviation, such a navigation style is good to have for
any ready reference/reckoner content.
The main disadvantage of the reference navigation
approach is that learners have to know what they
needs to learn before they can search for it. A lot of
critical learning might fall through the cracks as a
result. As an example, assume the learning system
deals with compliance training in a bank, and a new
regulation prohibiting opening of a certain type of
6
account is released. An employee who does not know
about the birthing of this regulation will not become
aware of it, simply because he/she does not know to
search for it. Reference Navigation based systems
require strong notification mechanisms to handle
this disadvantage.
Social Navigation
This is a navigation style based on Social Learning
Theory (Bandura, 1971). According to this theory,
learning is a cognitive process that takes place in a
social context and can occur purely through
observation or direct instruction, even in the absence
of motor reproduction or direct reinforcement. In
addition to the observation of behavior, learning also
occurs through the observation of rewards and
punishments, a process known as vicarious
reinforcement.
This is a knowledge management approach to
learning design. The learners themselves participate
alongside teachers in creating and growing the
learning material. A classic case of this approach is a
forum where questions are debated and answered by
the participants. The now omnipresent mechanics of
likes, comments and shares have created an
environment where this has emerged as a powerful
learning navigation method. Wikipedia, Quora and
Stack Overflow are prime examples of effective
social learning on a grand scale.
The main disadvantage of this approach comes from
its over-reliance on participation for content creation.
In an organizational setting, driving users to
participate in the learning system is a difficult
problem. Gamification mechanics of points, badges
and rewards can be used to help the cause, but
designing such a gamification system requires
experts, who can be expensive and difficult to find.
Game Navigation
This navigation style is unique to the micro-learning
approach. In this style of navigation, the learner
engages with the system with the intention to play a
game and any learning that happens is through the
game and incidental. The learning structure in the
game can span the spectrum of complexity, ranging
from simple constructs like in-game quizzes and
exercises to more complex formats like story-telling
and learning through the game-play itself.
The best example of this style, in our opinion, is the
Sid Meier’s Civilization series of games. All titles in
the series share similar gameplay, centered on
building a civilization on a macro-scale from
prehistory up to the near future. As of February 2016,
the series has reached 33 million total units shipped.
While the game is designed for entertainment, it
provides strong insights into history, economics,
political science and ecology, teaching players at a
conceptual level what these evolved concepts truly
signify for a society.
This method of micro-learning falls within the space
of Serious Games. Serious games are simulations of
real-world events or processes designed for the
purpose of solving a problem. Serious Games can be
entertaining, however their main purpose is to train
or educate users. Serious Games may also be used for
other purposes, such as marketing or advertisement.
In fact, often a Serious game will deliberately
sacrifice fun and entertainment in order to achieve a
desired progress by the player.
The main disadvantage of game-based navigation
for learning content is in its very name. Games are
often seen as non-serious, and therefore, meet with
resistance from organizational decision makers. Also,
complexity of Serious Games need to be kept at a
very careful balance of challenge and simplicity for
them to be effective. Creating effective micro-
learning games, therefore, does requires game
designers, apart from having the technology, which
can prove to be fairly expensive.
Creating an effective Navigation system for micro-
learning cannot be done with a single navigation
form, and will most likely require a combination of
the above four techniques, depending on the learner
set and implementation considerations. A detailed
exploration into how to choose and combine
navigation techniques will be discussed in our
7
forthcoming paper on Navigation Design for Micro-
Learning.
CONTENT – KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID
“We are moving from a world where computing
power was scarce to a place where it now is almost
limitless, and where the true scarce commodity is
increasingly human attention” - Satya Nadella.
A recent study conducted by Microsoft Corporation
(Microsoft Canada, 2015) found that the average
human now has a shorter attention span than a
goldfish. A goldfish can focus for nine seconds;
people are down to a mere eight seconds. The core
precept of micro-learning is to cater to this reality
and plan out content to be delivered in the most
effective method possible. A four-step approach
called Criticality Analysis is proposed to prepare
content for a micro-learning topic: Collation,
Curation, Chunking, Composition.
Collation
As a first step to designing micro-learning content,
the learning material needs to be collated from
across various sources. Given the plentiful resources
found on the internet and other sources, one could
end up collating an incredibly large amount of
information. In today’s day and age, information is
also available in a wide variety of mediums. The trick
to collection is knowing what to pick. Micro-learning
is about bite-sized content, and that is where the
collation focus should be. Here’s a quick set of
guidelines to collating content for micro-learning
effectively.
 Wiki Content – Deconstruct the wiki article into
points, with no more than a single line per point.
You should also travel down the wiki-links in the
heading block of the wiki and extract
information from them. These are additional
content nuggets that make the information
more interesting.
 White Papers and PDFs – These potentially can
contain raw material for an entire learning
module. Look for lists, graphs and infographics
in these and snip them out. Deconstruct each
section of the white paper for different content
blocks.
 Presentations – Good presentations are
typically already summarized to bullet-pointed
content. However, most presentation language
is cryptic, which would need to be expanded into
meaningful content nuggets. Incidentally, retain
the slide titles during collation, as these really
help while creating micro-learning content.
 Videos – Videos are very effective micro-
learning tools. As a rule of thumb, micro-learning
videos should be in the range of 45-90 secs,
keeping it in the range of the optimum
suggestion for tutorials and marketing videos
(Hornung, 2014).
 Tidbits – The point of micro-learning is to make
things more interesting. During the collection
process on a topic, do a search for the following
and store them separately: Examples, Quotes,
Infographics, News, Quiz and Trivia.
Curation
Once all the content has been collated, as a logical
next step, remove all duplicate or near-duplicate
information. Post this step, classify the content
nuggets into one of 5 categories (Clark, 2004):
 Facts - Specific and unique data or instance.
 Concepts - A class of items, words, or ideas that
are known by a common name, includes
multiple specific examples, shares common
features. There are two types of concepts:
concrete and abstract.
 Processes - A flow of events or activities that
describe how things work rather than how to do
things. There are normally two types: business
processes that describe work flows and
technical processes that describe how things
work in equipment or nature. They may be
thought of as the big picture, of how something
works.
 Procedures - A series of step-by-step actions
and decisions that result in the achievement of
8
 a task. There are two types of actions: linear
and branched.
 Principles - Guidelines, rules, and parameters
that govern. It includes not only what should be
done, but also what should not be done.
Principles allow one to make predictions and
draw implications. Given an effect, one can infer
the cause of a phenomena. Principles are the
basic building blocks of causal or theoretical
models.
 Metacognitive - Knowledge of cognition in
general, as well as awareness and knowledge of
one’s own cognition. This is basically about
creating a realization in the learner about what
he knows and what he needs to learn.
Chunking
Chunking involves reducing information that can be
difficult to remember down into shorter and more
manageable chunks.
The typical rule of thumb for the length of a micro-
learning topic is approximately 15 minutes. In our
experience, this is enough time to cover 30-40 points
at a maximum for a topic.
Tidbits and interesting information relating to a point
can be clubbed into sub-points during the curation
exercise. For example, if the point is on how to
extract data from presentations for micro-learning,
the point on retaining slide titles can be a sub-point.
During this process, remember that a picture is often
worth a thousand words. If you can find suitable
pictures or infographics to highlight the point, it can
make your job a lot easier.
Another simple, but effective way of chunking the
content is to use a question or an exercise to
communicate a complex sub-point. These can be as
simple as a Multiple Choice Question or be as
complex as a Simulation.
Composition
The next step is to organize the chunked content into
a logical flow. Subsequent to that, each point is to be
deconstructed into its critical import and additional
information. The critical information has to be front
and center in the micro-learning flow, while the
additional information should be made discretionary
in terms of access for the learner. This output should
ideally be first organized into an instructional design
storyboard.
Finally, a suitable authoring tool has to be selected
for composition of the storyboard into consumable
learning. The choice of the authoring tool will largely
be dictated by the micro-learning technology that
has been planned in the implementation stage. Each
authoring tool comes with its own advantages and
disadvantages and will impact your composition
ability. That being said, the most critical thing while
evaluating authoring tools for micro-learning is the
extent to which the output is suitable for mobile
learning. Since more and more learning is being
consumed on the mobile, having multi-device
capability is a must for an effective authoring tool.
This aspect cannot be compromised upon.
Content creation for micro-learning is an extensive
subject of discussion and one which we plan to detail
out further in our forthcoming paper on Criticality
Analysis for Micro-Learning.
INTERACTIVITY – I DO AND I UNDERSTAND
As E-learning professionals, our goal is to engage
and inspire learners, in order to enhance learning
outcomes. E-learning interactivity has been proven
to activate long-term memory and to improve
attention, both of which are essential parts of all
learning mechanisms.
9
A well-tested method of planning interactivity in
learning is Bloom’s Taxonomy. Bloom's Taxonomy
was created in 1956 under the leadership of
educational psychologist Dr. Benjamin Bloom, in
order to promote higher forms of thinking in
Once the form of the interactivity has been
established for each content nugget, the interactivity
level can be selected as appropriate:
 Flat Content
In this form of content, Learners are not required

Content Type Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create

Facts List paraphrase classify outline rank categorize
Concepts Recall explains show contrast criticize modify
Processes outline estimate produce diagram defend design
Procedures reproduce example relate identify critique plan
Principles state convert solve separate conclude revise
Metacognitive proper use interpret discover infer predict actualize

education, such as analyzing and evaluating
concepts, processes, procedures, and principles,
rather than just remembering facts (rote learning).
Lorin Anderson, a former student of Bloom’s, and
David Krathwohl revisited the taxonomy in the mid-
90s and made some changes. The revised version of
the taxonomy outlines six major categories of
cognitive processes:
 Remembering – Recall or retrieve previously
learned information
 Understanding – Comprehending the meaning,
translation, interpolation, and interpretation of
instructions and problems
 Applying – Use a concept in a new situation or
unprompted use of an abstraction
 Analyzing – Separate material or concepts into
component parts so that its organizational
structure may be understood. Distinguish
between facts and inferences
 Evaluating – Make judgments about the value
of ideas or materials
 Creating - Builds a structure or pattern from
diverse elements. Put parts together to form a
whole, with emphasis on creating a new
meaning or structure
Based on the learning content, the ideal form of
interactivity to be used for each nugget can be
determined through the above knowledge matrix.
to interact with E-learning resources and the E-
learning process is strictly linear. This level may
include: text content, simple images and
graphics, simple video and audio, etc.
 Clickable Content
With clickable content, learners may have some
control over their E-Learning experience, as they
are required to make simple interactions with
the E-Learning material. This level may include:
animations, clickable menus, etc.
 Exercise Content
At this level, learners learn through introspection
and application, as they are required to make
simple decisions to progress the learning. This
level may include: quizzes, surveys, polls, simple
games, etc.
 Simulation Content
With this type of content, learners have great
control over their E-Learning experience, as they
are required to fully interact with the E-Learning
content and give feedback. This level may
include: interactive games, simulated job
performance exercises, stories and branching
scenarios, etc.
Any E-Learning content has to balance costs vs.
engagement. Given this consideration, flat content
naturally forms the bulk of the material, as it rightly
should. Interactivity is all about giving an opportunity
to the learner to participate, and that implies a choice
that must be respected. If the learner chooses not to
interact, he should be able to skip the section without

10
significantly compromising on the learning
objectives.
Simulation Content, while it seems great, ends up
being very expensive in terms of cost and time and is
rarely used at a content nugget level. In micro-
learning, the game navigation approach is
recommended whenever extremely high
interactivity is required to explain a concept.
The main problem when it comes to creating
interactive content is the learning curve associated
with implementing it using the authoring tool. Rapid
authoring of interactions is a bit of a holy grail, and
one which learning technologists are actively trying
to develop.
We will be exploring simple methods of creating
interactive content and tools which can be used for
the same in our forthcoming paper on How to create
interactivity in Micro-Learning.
TESTING – DID YOU GET IT
Micro-learning can create a much richer, more varied
active learning experience than would normally occur
via a passive didactic teaching mode. Consequently,
it also offers the potential to provide new and
innovative assessment modes and systems.
Testing in micro-learning can be implemented
through a combination of these assessment
techniques (Karran, 2009):
 Self-Assessment
Through this form of assessment, the learner is
able to give instant online feedback through
questionnaires, multiple-choice questions and
even through publication of FAQs. Allow
learners to gather the information they need to
focus their study in areas that need
improvement
 Online Exams
Though online exams, the learning creator can
moderate and control online exams with start
and stop times, or with login passwords and
timeouts.
 Online Quizzes
Regular online quizzes can be used as as one of
the components of final assessment. Quizzes
can be also used as formative in-line assessment
during the course, ensuring sufficient skills and
knowledge have been attained before the
learner attempts the final assessment. Fun
quizzes can be used as an introduction to the
online assessment environment.
 Online Discussion Forums
While not a traditional form of assessment,
discussion or participation online in chat rooms,
forums and threaded discussion can be used to
gauge how much a learner has understood the
learning content. Social learning networks can
usually measure these indicators and use them
as effective proxies for understanding. This form
of assessment can be made more effective by
setting each learner a discrete area of work to
review and explore. Getting learners to review,
assess and critique the work, adding complexity
and depth to the original piece of work can also
help.
 Bulletin Boards
One of the most effective peer assessment
methods is bulletin boards, where topics are
placed as the starting point for online
collaborative assignments. Once completed,
this collaborative work can be re-posted (with
prior consent from the learner) for peer
assessment, review and comment.
 Portfolios
In this form of assessment, the learner is
typically required to submit a portfolio of work,
which can be reviewed by the learning creator.
Some examples are training someone on taking
appropriate photographs, or ad creatives.
Portfolios can be developed using a variety of
online tools. Facilitators can assess learner
products and performances, and, if desired,
peers can also access these portfolios to provide
feedback and reviews.
 Role Play
While not suitable everywhere, a role-laying
assessment can help learners get into and
demonstrate their understanding of the
character of the people they are studying.
11
 Learners can take on a role which they can
research, develop and act out. Branching
conversation simulations are perfect for creating
micro-learning role plays.
 Simulations
Where there is an aspect of safety involved,
running a simulation may be a very good form of
assessment. Students learning to fly large jets,
learning to implement large networked
accounting systems, or learning to repair and
service lifts and escalators might all benefit from
a simulation. However, they are expensive tools
to design and develop.
Broadly, the choice of testing framework tends to be
closely associated with the navigation mechanism
being used:
 Testing in Course Navigation
This approach follows standard methodologies
that have been applied across academics and
conventional organizational learning.
Typically, course-based testing starts with a pre-
assessment test, which generally involves
multiple-choice questions, matching exercises,
etc. A similar test is conducted at the end of each
content module, and a large scale test is
conducted at the end from a methodology that can be used to track the progress
completion/certification point of view.
 Testing in Reference Navigation
This form of navigation is essentially pull-based
and the frequency of access by the learner is an
essential part of the assessment structure. Of
course, periodic assessments can be mandated,
but in-line exercises form the core of the
assessment in this format of navigation.
 Testing in Social Navigation
Social navigation allows us to bring in peer
review-based assessment to the micro-learning
environment. Social metrics such as the number
of likes and shares of the content created by the
learner can give a view of his/her grasp of the
topic. As a qualitative assessment, comments
can give a more granular understanding of the
peer review. As in the case of Reference
Navigation, the frequency of access and the
extent of activity on the network forms a key
part of the assessment of the learner.
 Testing in Game Navigation
Game-based navigation offers a wide variety of
techniques to implement testing. Because
games typically get played and replayed,
assessment gets captured as data streams. For
example, if a learner is faced with a question
repeatedly over the course of the game, it is
possible to capture how many attempts he took
to get it right and how much he retained over
subsequent attempts.
Games also allow for complex assessment
structures to assess behavior where application
and decision making can be assessed through
gameplay paths taken by the learner. Choices
made in the games provide deep insights into
learner behavior and can be used beyond
assessment, and for learner profiling.
In all these methods, a key aspect of testing in the
micro-learning approach has to be remembered. In
micro-learning, the learning content has to double up
as assessment. At its simplest, the learning material
can be laced with in-line exercises to conduct
ongoing assessments as the learner consumes the
content. This facilitates a continuous testing
of a learner over the course of the learning. This
provides both validation and causality of the learning
outcomes and gives in-depth data to plan reactive
and corrective measures on the part of the learning
creator.
While the conventional modes of assessments have
been extensively discussed, game-based assessment
is still a nascent space and one that we would be
discussing in our forthcoming paper on Game-based
assessments for Micro-Learning.
EFFECTIVENESS- MEASUREMENT IS
EVERYTHING
A business in the real world is always under
tremendous pressure to achieve specific business
objectives by leveraging scarce financial and human
resources. Decisions are based on how well each
12
initiative utilizes available resources to achieve these
objectives.
With this context, business leaders generally view
training in one of three ways (Freifeld, 2013):
 A necessary requirement. For the majority of
training, leaders treat it as an expense and don’t
usually measure its effectiveness (e.g.,
onboarding).
 As part of a major effort. In this instance,
leaders view training as a component of a major
business initiative (e.g., a new product launch).
 As a tangible capital investment. When there is
a significant tangible learning investment for the
long-term return it presents (e.g., a learning
management system or E-learning technology).
Keeping this is mind, any learning system should
incorporate MIS features to provide insights into the
‘Return on Investment’ it is generating. Micro-
learning systems are no exception to this rule.
Broadly speaking, micro-learning systems need to
consider 4 stakeholders as clients for its internal
reporting system:
 The Learner
The learner has to be aware of the path he is
travelling in his learning journey. Having clear
baselines, milestones and goals are critical to
motivating the learner to complete his/her
journey. Typical data that the learner is
interested in are scores, improvement metrics,
areas of improvement, completion statistics,
remaining distance, etc. In today’s hyper-
competitive world, it might also make sense to
provide data on how the learner’s peers have
fared on the same learning path and where
he/she stands with respect to statistical averages.
 The Content Creator
Effective content creation is an iterative process.
The content creator in micro-learning has a
significant challenge given the constraints
he/she has to work with. Typical data that can
help a content creator improve the content are
completion metrics like drop-off and time spent,
comprehension metrics like correlation between
test scores and simulation scores, and
engagement metrics like survey results and
extent of interaction.
 The Learning Manager
The learning manager’s key role in micro-
learning is to ensure the health of the system and
its constituents. He/she has to evaluate the
performance of both the learner and the content
creator, and therefore, requires aggregated data
that correlates performance of the learners with
a given creator’s content. The analysis of this
correlation can be based on the Kirkpatrick
Model of measuring Reaction, Learning,
Behavior and Results (Kirkpatrick, 1954).
 The Business Manager
The Business Manager is the one paying for the
learning system. While it can loosely be said that
he/she is only interested in learning results, there
are usually other imperatives at play as well.
There are key points that he/she wants
emphasized such as social media metrics that
need to be tracked. The Business Manager is
often also interested in understanding the team
being trained, and profiling metrics correlated
with strengths and gaps in performance areas.
Having this information can make the system
more valuable for him. For example, a micro-
learning system for negotiations training that
provides a learner profile broken down by their
negotiation styles.
We are planning to provide detailed schematics and
tools for measuring learning effectiveness in our
forthcoming paper on Analytics in Micro-Learning.
CLOSING NOTES
The INCITE Framework has been applied extensively
across industries in the past 6 years. It has been used
to devise systems for sales training, process training,
imparting knowledge and product training across
industries such as FMCG, Banking and Insurance, E-
Commerce, Media among others.
The framework also forms the basis of QuoDeck, a
system designed to create micro-learning platforms.
With an intention to popularize and democratize the
13
creation of micro-learning, QuoDeck is currently
being offered free to use. We would be very keen to
hear your inputs on micro-learning and QuoDeck.
Please feel free to contact us at info@quodeck.com.
About the founders
Kamalika and Arijit co-founded Ptotem Technologies,
a pioneer of Serious Games in India in 2010. Both have
led senior roles in finance sector with expertise in
corporate finance, business analytics, wealth
management and investment banking. A love for
games prompted them to leave their successful
banking careers and take it up as a full-time occupation.
Linkedin:
Kamalika Bhattacharya
(https://www.linkedin.com/in/kamalika-
bhattacharya-aa75079)
Arijit Lahiri
(https://in.linkedin.com/in/arijit-lahiri-30b53a18)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bandura, A. (1971). Social Learning Theory. General
Learning Press.
Brandon, W. (2010). Strategic Directives for
Learning Management System Planning.
ECAR Research Bulletin, 2-4.
Clark, R. C. (2004). Graphics for learning: Proven
guidelines for planning, designing and
evaluating visuals in training materials.
elance-Odesk. (2015). The 2015 Millennial Majority
Workforce. Millennial Branding.
Frand, J. (2000). The information-age mindset:
changes in students and implications for
higher education. EDUCAUSE Review.
Freifeld, L. (2013). Last word: Measuring Learning
Effectiveness. Retrieved from
Trainingmag.com:
https://trainingmag.com/content/last-
word-measuring-learning-effectiveness
Hart, J. (2014, February 19). Learning in the Modern
Social Workplace. Retrieved from
http://c4lpt.co.uk/blog:
http://www.c4lpt.co.uk/blog/2014/02/19/th
e-learning-flow/
Hornung, Y. (2014). Optimal length for video
marketing content. Retrieved from
http://thenextweb.com/socialmedia/2014/0
5/02/optimal-length-video-marketing-
content-short-possible/#gref
Hug, T. (2005). Micro learning and Narration. Paper
presented at fourth Media in Transition
conference, 1.
J.P.Murray. (1997). Nursing: The Next Generation.
Nursing Education Perspectives.
Karran, T. (2009). On-Line Assessment for E-
Learning: Options and Opportunities. In J.
P. T. Latomaa, eReflections - Ten years of
Educational Technology Studies at the
University of Oulu (pp. 127-152). Lincoln:
Oulu University Press.
Microsoft Canada. (2015). Attention Spans.
Consumer Insights, Microsoft Canda, 3-5.
Nicholas, A. (2008). Preferred Learning Methods of
the Millennial Generation. Digital
Commons, Salve Regina University, 2.
Zemke, R. a. (1999). Generations at Work. In R. a.
Zemke, Generations at Work: Managing the
Clash of Veterans, Boomers, Xers, Nexters in
Your Workplace (p. 143).
14