How do you align microlearning objectives with Merrill's performance levels?

Merrill's Two-Dimensional Matrix is a framework is an integral part of CDT (Component Display Theory) that extends Gagne's Conditions of Learning. It helps people learn in different ways by showing how information can be presented and practiced. The first dimension is about how information is presented, either sequentially or holistically. The second dimension is about how to practice, either abstractly or concretely. By aligning learning objectives with Merrill's performance levels, instructional designers can measure the effectiveness of their microlearning methods and ensure that each objective is specific and measurable.

I love these principles for use when designing competency-based education courses, badges, or professional development for industry roles. They are simple and strategic, yet they provide depth to learning.

How is this different from what has been the state of the art since at the publication of the 1989 NCTM standards? I read a lot of jargon but no specifics.

Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction (FPI) can help the designer focus on task-based and authentic experiences for the microlearning. Like any design, there’s risk of an info-dump, and microlearning is not immune. To tap into Merrill’s FPI, microlearning must give an engaging context for the learning and give opportunity for relevant practice with specific feedback. And I think the feedback portion has to be really intentional with microlearning and go beyond “That’s correct!”

Another way to use microlearning that aligns with FPI is to create the instruction for the component skills (i.e., the steps and conditions your learners need to master to solve the Whole Shebang problem you identified in the design phase). For example, you may build a complex task/problem-centered design for Excel training. Still, you realize that not everyone will have the skill to enter data and formulas into the cells. Since this is a component skill that most of your learners will have, you can make a microlearning for just that skill that learners can access at will. This solves two things, the instruction covers that component skill, and learners can pull the information if they need it instead of it being pushed on everyone.

Using Merrill's First Principles of Instruction (FPI) is an outstanding way to quickly teach a skill while simultaneously fostering healthy, feedback-driven exchanges between learners and their coaches. It's especially useful when training software workflows in test environments, as unaddressed knowledge gaps can prevent a learner from moving forward and prompts swift remediation by the facilitator, peer, or coach.

Using Merrill's First Principles for microlearning also helps instructional designers and learners know what they're trying to accomplish. It's like playing a game with rules. When everyone knows the rules, they can play the game better and have more fun. By using Merrill's First Principles for microlearning, everyone knows what they're supposed to be learning, and it's easier to measure how well they're doing. That way, everyone can have fun and learn at the same time.

Best example is my own learning Photoshop. Google. “Photoshop Marquee Tool,” and look for videos or text that go straight to the point. If the video is longer that 3 minutes then it probably has too much extraneous information. If I need to scroll past the first sentence then probably too much extraneous information. Find the right resource and I can immediately apply the lesson.