# data[].attributes.body
This video was extremely helpful for me in understanding connectivism. The video provides a brief overview of behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism before describing why connectivism was needed for to for the digital age. The video is also based off of the George Seimens article on connectivism.

# data[].attributes.headline
Theories Explained & Relatable Examples Provided

# data[].attributes.subject
Theories Explained & Relatable Examples Provided

# data[].attributes.body
Loved this video! The images and explanations of each learning theory were explained and examples of applications of the theory were presented. This helped me understand the concepts in a relatable way. The video also dove a little deeper into each theory.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Learning Sciences Theories - Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism

# data[].attributes.body
This article provides an explanation of microlearning and breaks down different "efficiencies" of microlearning. My favorite is the learner control strategy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Microlearning And Modern Learners

According to Bersin by Deloitte (n.d.), modern learners are overwhelmed, distracted, and impatient. Learners are untethered, with a tendency to be constantly on the move and in different forms of employment, to access information on-demand to solve issues, and are heavily time-strapped (having only about 1% of a typical workweek to spend on training and development). With rapid changes in work demands, many skills are decreasing in relevance in less than five years. Organizations are hard-pressed to upskill their employees consistently and efficiently. In contrast, employees are increasingly digitally literate and social. They are empowered learners who look for work support via interactions with their personal and professional networks.

Organizations can capitalize on these characteristics by training their employees in an entertaining and engaging manner with the aim of improving their performance. This article explains what microlearning is and 4 key efficiencies provided by microlearning Instructional Design (ID), as compared to that of mesolearning, from the perspective of Instructional Designers.

Instructional Design For Microlearning

Hug (2007) identified three levels of instruction: macro (program level), meso (curriculum level), and micro (bite-sized within a module). We are familiar with the differences in macro and mesolearning. Similarly, there are distinct differences in the Instructional Design for mesolearning and microlearning. Khan's (2019) framework for microlearning highlighted some of these differences. He mentioned that microlearning needs to be interactive and engaging, with a usable interface design, delivered in short durations either as stand-alone micromodules or part of a whole as just-in-time support to boost retention, via device-independent technologies. Furthermore, the evaluation of learning must be outcomes-focused and the implementation cost-effective to the institution.

Microlearning is often used in corporate training to support training prework, post-instruction follow-up, just-in-time learning at the point of need, and performance support (Torgerson & Iannone, 2020). My department has developed micromodules targeted mostly at training prework, post-instruction follow-up, and performance support for our learners over a period of five years.

Recently, we developed a micromodule on critical reflection for our undergraduates. Our team consisted of members with varied experience in writing for microlearning, and contrasting disciplinary backgrounds. This diversity formed the motivation to share our inputs on the efficiency gains between Instructional Design for mesolearning and microlearning. We hope that others embarking on developing microlearning content could benefit from these examples and have a deeper understanding of what efficiencies microlearning affords.

Key Efficiencies: Mesolearning ID Vs. Microlearning ID

1. Compact

The first efficiency in moving to microlearning relates to the compactness of the medium compared to conventional pedagogy. This term refers to the necessity to script precisely all presentational language relating to the context, form, and function of the various critical thinking skills. Conveyed via a voice-over, this language is characterized by a rapid delivery speed, variegated intonation, and a complete absence of natural features such as fillers, hesitations, and other redundancies. Instructional language is similarly marked, although this at least resembles its conventional counterpart as seen in regular task design and orthodox classroom materials.

2. Streamlined

The second distinguishing ID feature relates to the regular, discrete nature of the topic design. Each unit is subdivided into three components of comparable duration (discovery, development, and reinforcement) which efficiently enables an author's efforts to be directed toward a specific end product. This streamlining also helps provide students with a sense of consistent structure and progression as they move through the learning materials.

When combined, efficient ID through microlearning is clearly apparent. Compact, repeatable units provide a relatively intense stream of information with no wastage. Predictable, structured topics allow authors to efficiently focus their attention on writing specific types of feasible input.

3. Focused Bite-Sized Engagement

As educators and trainers, we constantly try to engage our learners to facilitate learning. Effective teachers in the classroom depend on cues such as learners' body language and facial expression to interpret their level of understanding as the teaching takes place, making teaching an interactive bidirectional experience in a fluid manner. A classroom teacher may choose to ask questions to stimulate thinking, answer questions to clarify concepts or insert an activity on the spot to emphasize an idea.

In contrast, the online microlearning delivery does not allow one to obtain cues about a learner's understanding. Furthermore, due to the static nature of the content, no adaptation is possible to adjust to the learners' level of understanding. As such, in the design of the micromodule, we undertook the following considerations:

Keep the microlearning units small and digestible to prevent learner fatigue

Provide reference across units to reinforce concepts learned in earlier/subsequent units

Present visuals that are easy on the eyes while being interesting and visually appealing

Use voice-over talents who are expressive and able to engage the learner through effective handling of vocal strategies such as pitch and loudness inflections

Insert interactive activities at strategic locations through the units to maintain engagement. Activities need to be fun but age-appropriate

4. Learner Control

The types of activities to facilitate feedback and assessment are limited in microlearning since in such a delivery mode, learner response often needs to be binary for learners to receive immediate and automated feedback on their performance. Thus, we would like to reiterate that microlearning is better suited for training prework, post-instruction follow-up, just-in-time learning at the point of need, and performance support purposes, and not for complex tasks like training in problem-solving.

In going through the micromodule, learners often need to self-assess to decide if they have fully understood the learning content before making the decision to move forward to the next unit or to review the content in the current unit. Because of this, each microlearning unit should provide numerous opportunities for students to return to an earlier section to review the contents as they deem necessary. Learners should also be allowed to reattempt quizzes to improve their scores. Overall, the learner retains their autonomy to their learning in the units.

The examples above illustrate that there are distinct efficiencies provided by the Instructional Design for microlearning as compared to mesolearning. We hope that this article provides food for thought for educators and trainers embarking on microlearning.

References:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Key Efficiencies In Microlearning Instructional Design

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
According to Bersin by Deloitte (n.d.), modern learners are overwhelmed, distracted, and impatient. Learners are untethered, with a tendency to be constantly on the move and in different forms of employment, to access information on-demand to solve issues, and are heavily time-strapped (having only about 1% of a typical workweek to spend on training and development).

# data[].attributes.headline
How to use Behaviorism in Instructional Design

# data[].attributes.subject
How to use Behaviorism in Instructional Design

# data[].attributes.body
This article was useful for me to start to think about how to apply behaviorism in instructional design for eLearning. One of the examples provided is the use of gamification.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What eLearning Professionals Should Know About Behaviorism In Instructional Design For eLearning

Although we may declare ourselves supporters of cognitivism or constructivism, we are all behaviorists by nature. Even if we may not realize it, as eLearning professionals, we all use behavioristic principles extensively in our Instructional Design for eLearning. This happens because behaviorism, no matter how much out-of-date it sounds, without any doubt, is deeply rooted in the human subconscious. Instinctively, it's part of our actions and reactions. From an educational point of view, who doesn't want to examine the learners' observable and measurable behavior and guide them accordingly to optimize their learning? What are tests and assessments in general, other than an effort to estimate the learners' performance and adapt the instruction accordingly to the learning needs of the audience? These principles also apply to eLearning.

No. In this article, I won't talk about Pavlov's dogs, Skinner's rats and pigeons, nor about Thorndike's law of effect. There is extensive bibliography about all these. Instead, I will give you examples of elements we all use today in Instructional Design for eLearning, without even realizing that they are based on behavioristic principles. I will also explain for what type of learning objectives a behavioristic approach may yield better results.

Applying Behaviorism In Instructional Design For eLearning

Right-wrong, on-off, 0-1, etc. In fact, the connection between behaviorism and eLearning was clear from the very beginning. If we take a look back in the 1950s and 60s, when Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI) first appeared, the computer seemed to be the ideal tool to measure learning outcomes, on the condition of course, that there was a single correct answer learners were expected to give. Soon this evolved to an attempt for programmed instruction, with the computer programmed to give predetermined paths to follow, allowing learners to proceed only when the correct answer was given. Today, programmed instruction can be perceived as a forerunner of interactive branching scenarios and adaptive hypermedia systems applied to online education with behavioristic elements, the resemblance of which with programmed instruction is very difficult to be ignored, despite the fact that we tend to "cover" them in modern "constructivistic" packages claiming that we give learners "freedom of choice." The truth is that the only freedom learners are allowed is the order in which they choose to follow the predefined learning paths, so carefully tracked and programmed in the Instructional Design of really good eLearning courses.

Back to behaviorism. As the name implies, a behavioristic approach focuses on guiding learners to reach pre-established learning outcomes. Learning is considered to take place when learners manage to reach these expected outcomes, designed to meet the learning objectives of the eLearning course. Therefore, the aim of a behavioristic-oriented Instructional Design strategy for eLearning must be to provide learners with the appropriate stimuli, that is with opportunities that help them demonstrate that they are able to express desired behaviors that prove that learning has actually taken place.

Instructional Design for eLearning based on the behavioristic approach starts from the basic assumption of behaviorism that knowledge is objective, meaning that there is only one correct answer to give or a specific approach to follow. Although this may sound rigid-and perhaps it is-this is where to start in order for eLearning professionals to become aware of the type of activities that a behavioristic approach could be appropriate for. It also shows that behaviorism may not be the appropriate approach for eLearning activities that require the user to develop higher-order skills, such as decision-making or problem-solving through analysis, synthesis or evaluation of the information presented.

Objectivism is the key to remember in order to decide whether a behavioristic approach is appropriate for your eLearning activities or not. Is there a single correct answer, or multiple approaches may be acceptable? Is knowledge objective? Don't rush to answer no. Facts and standardized procedures actually are examples of "objective" knowledge. They do not change. Take advantage of this and check the learning objectives of the eLearning course. This is where you need to start.

Techniques To Be Used For The Instructional Design Of Behavioristic eLearning Activities

Once determined that a behavioristic approach is suitable to meet the particular learning objectives of your eLearning course, you need to design the respective eLearning activities accordingly. The techniques you may use are the following:

1. Discrimination

Use discrimination whenever the learning objective requires learners to identify whether a concept belongs to a specific category or not. In order to do so, learners should be able to identify key characteristics and qualities of the category and judge whether the new information shares the same qualities so as to belong to the group or not. Drag-and-drop exercises to classify concepts into different categories may serve as examples of developing discrimination activities in terms of eLearning course design.

2. Generalization

Generalization is suitable whenever the learning objectives are such that learners, after identifying the attributes of an item belonging to one category, are expected to assign the same attributes to all items within the category. Teaching through examples is based on an inductive approach of presenting eLearning content, during which learners after observing a series of independent online examples should be able to identify their common characteristic(s) and generalize by formulating the rule. Under this perspective, generalization is very close to what today we perceive as active learning, with an obvious direct connection to constructivism.

3. Association

Although in strictly behavioristic terms, association is the typical example of conditioning-which is linking a specific stimulus to a specific response-there is a tendency in today's eLearning to create eLearning interactions based on association whenever the learning objectives require the new information presented to be linked to specific practical applications of it. Presenting information within context can help learners create associations. This means that whenever learners encounter the same or similar information, they already know what it's related to, as they have already built a basic frame of reference to associate this piece of information with. Although a behavioristic approach perceives this association as an automated drill task and not as a cognitive process applied in Instructional Design for eLearning, matching exercises are examples of eLearning activities that could be designed to facilitate the learners' process of making associations.

4. Chaining

Chaining is referring to learners' automatic performance on specific procedures with predetermined steps to be followed. Like a chain, one step leads learners to the next. Performing drill tasks is an example of eLearning objectives that can be mastered through chaining. Creating drill tasks in eLearning involves presenting the theoretical model first and then asking learners to repeat the procedure by actually repeating the steps involved in the same order these were presented. Through repetition and online practice, learners at the end are able to reach the desired outcome by following the steps exactly as presented in the model. Sequence ordering exercises through drag-and-drop are very frequently used in the quiz-making templates most eLearning authoring tools provide. Such exercises may serve as typical examples of drill tasks applied in eLearning course design. In such activities, there is always a predefined and unique correct sequence that learners must form in order to show that they have mastered the learning objective under consideration. It's very common for learners to reach the desired outcome through trial and error, another behavioristic technique quite applicable in eLearning, depending on the number of attempts allowed by the Instructional Designer. It sounds like Thorndike's law of effect, doesn't it? Learners do not stop pressing different levers, exploring alternative answers until they find the rewarding one!

Keep in mind that for all of the above techniques, there is just a single correct answer. All quiz creation eLearning authoring tools take advantage of these behavioristic-based alternative exercise formats in order for the program to give an automated response and test learner performance through their test scores (measurable outcomes). There should be a unique correct response for each question.

Reinforcing Desired And Weakening Undesired Behavior

What is the instructor's role in this process then? Instructional Design for eLearning based on a behavioristic approach sets the type of reactions to be received by learners after interacting with the online training material. These reactions come from an online instructor or corporate trainer in synchronous eLearning settings, or from the eLearning course itself in the case of asynchronous eLearning. Depending on the type of the reaction received, the learners' expressed behavior may be reinforced or weakened. This highlights the importance of feedback throughout the entire learning process, not only at the end of the eLearning course but each time a learner interacts with the system. In behavioristic terms, although nobody wants to call it like this today, feedback is the simplest form of conditioning. Correct attempts are most frequently being reinforced by positive comments written on automated programmed responses. Although negative reinforcement, that is punishment and negative criticism, is not quite acceptable today, and certainly not appropriate for adult learning, such behavioristic traces can still be found in some cases that negative scores are used.

Instructional Design for eLearning based on the behavioristic approach would, therefore, imply that learning takes place when unwanted behavior is extinguished and learners reach the point of giving only the desired, uniquely correct responses that express the expected learning outcomes that guarantee that the learning objectives of the eLearning course have been mastered.

Application Of Behavioristic Principles In Gamification And Game-Based eLearning

Last, but not least, nowadays, behavioristic principles are also still applicable in gamification, which is presenting the learning material by employing game design elements in an entertaining way in order to motivate and engage the audience throughout the learning process. In gamification, as well as in other types of eLearning activities, the reinforcement of a certain desired behavior can occur in two ways: either by eliciting from learners' particular learning outcomes and rewarding these outcomes by assigning points, grades, budges, a higher position in leaderboards, etc., or by removing from learners specific benefits, for example, points, lives, etc., in order to make them try to avoid undesired consequences of their behaviors.

Concluding Remarks

It is true that behaviorism has received too much critique during the last decades, mainly due to the fact that it does not take into account other aspects of learning such as the mental processes involved or the environment in which learning takes place. The aim of this article was not to show any favoritism toward behaviorism, but rather to show that, in certain cases, it's still a valuable approach to today's eLearning. Of course, we cannot ignore cognitivism and constructivism as alternative approaches. Today, we know that a behavioristic perspective of certain activities in Instructional Design does not mean that other approaches may not be used simultaneously for the same online course for different types of eLearning activities. Rather than following a single approach for the entire eLearning course, we should, therefore, select the most appropriate for each one to cover the learning objectives.

Although the focus of behaviorism may not be to examine what is going on in learners' minds during the learning process, this does not necessarily mean that it denies cognition. It simply does not examine it. Humans are social beings; we learn from the environment, we learn from each other. We evolve all the time. We are rational beings. We are clever. If we are given the right incentives, we are able to construct knowledge in learning that meets our personal interests and needs.

As Instructional Designers, all the emphasis should be placed on the learning objectives, as each one of them may require eLearning activities that follow a different approach. Overall, the result in most cases is a mixed approach that combines the best of behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism, which meet the needs of each learning objective in order for it to be mastered and offers the audience the best possible eLearning experience.

Want to learn more about adult learning? The article 9 Tips To Apply Adult Learning Theory To eLearning features 5 adult learning theory assumptions to integrate into your eLearning course design in order to achieve maximum engagement and motivation for your audience.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Behaviorism In Instructional Design For eLearning: When And How To Use It

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Although we may declare ourselves supporters of cognitivism or constructivism, we are all behaviorists by nature. Even if we may not realize it, as eLearning professionals, we all use behavioristic principles extensively in our Instructional Design for eLearning. This happens because behaviorism, no matter how much out-of-date it sounds, without any doubt, is deeply rooted in the human subconscious.

# data[].attributes.headline
5 Educational Learning Theories and How to Apply Them

# data[].attributes.subject
5 Educational Learning Theories and How to Apply Them

# data[].attributes.body
I chose this article because of how it explained learning theories and why they are used. The chart in this article was very useful in showcasing each theories explanation and application.

# data[].attributes.body
I like how this diagram explains each theory and includes methods of teaching. It is also helpful to see more teacher focused methods vs. student focused methods.