How to Measure the Efficiency of Microlearning

Higher Level Learning – a learning company in Manchester

Evaluating Microlearning

The field of evaluation is well established and as a result, there are a number of different approaches and theories, but evaluate microlearning as you would any other learning. In order to develop a practical, non-labour intensive and therefore cost-effective tool for evaluating microlearning, opt for a goal-based approach (see 2. below) whilst making certain assumptions regarding environmental variables.

Evaluation Theories

Robinson (2002) lists the five main approaches developed by different evaluation theorists, below. ‘While the different approaches are all attempting to answer similar questions (about the worth of programmes and elements of them), the emphasis on various aspects (purpose, focus and evaluator’s role) varies, as does the underpinning theory. However, all

share at least one feature: a concern for rigor in the conduct of the evaluation and a concern for reliable and systematic evidence to support any conclusions.’

Approach Emphasis Focusing issues Evaluator’s role Specific information needs
1. Experimental Research design What effects
result from
programme
activities and
can they be
generalized?
Expert/ scientist Outcome measures.
Learner characteristics.
Variation in treatment.
Other influences on learners.
Availability of a control group.
2. Goal oriented Goals and
objectives
What are the
programme’s
goals and
objectives, and
how can they be measured?
Measurement
specialist
Specific programme
objectives.
Criterion-referenced
outcome measures.
3. Decision focused
[CIPP]
Decision
making
Which decisions
need to be
made and what
information will
be relevant?
Decision
support person,
provider of
information.
Stage of programme
development.
Cycle of decision making.
Data gathering and reporting.
4. User-oriented Information
users or clients
Who are the
intended
information
users and what
information will
be most useful?
Collaborator Personal and
organizational
dynamics.
Group information
needs.
Programme history.
Intended uses of information.
5. Responsive Personal
understanding
Which people
have a stake in
the programme
and what are
their points of
view?
Counsellor/
facilitator/
collaborator
Variation in individual and group perspectives.
Stakeholder concerns and participation in
determining and framing the data.
Programme history.
Variation in measures and sites.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *