Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies

Background: Microlearning organises instruction into short, focused learning units that can be accessed flexibly. Its rapid adoption across school, university, professional and patient-education settings has outpaced consensus about its comparative effectiveness, the conditions under which it works, and the durability of learning.

Objective: To systematically review empirical evidence on microlearning for teaching and learning, with emphasis on knowledge, performance, retention, motivation, engagement, self-efficacy, behaviour and acceptability.

Methods: Publicly accessible scholarly sources were searched from inception to 23 July 2026 for eligible reports published from 1 January 2000 to 30 June 2026. Primary empirical studies were eligible when a deliberately brief, focused and usually digitally delivered learning intervention was evaluated in learners or recipients of education. One reviewer performed searching, deduplication, screening, extraction, risk-of-bias assessment and verification; all decisions were retained in an auditable ledger. Owing to pronounced heterogeneity in populations, interventions, comparators, outcome measures and designs, findings were synthesised by outcome domain without statistical pooling.

Results: Forty-eight records were captured, 10 duplicates were removed, 38 records were screened, 22 reports were sought, 20 full texts were assessed and 17 studies were included. Samples ranged from 19 to 213 participants and covered secondary education, higher education, professional development, health-professions education and adult education. Most comparative studies reported favourable immediate knowledge or performance, but long-term retention was assessed infrequently and one study found that an immediate advantage was not sustained. Motivation, engagement, efficiency and acceptability were commonly favourable, whereas self-efficacy results were mixed. Confidence was limited by small samples, non-randomised allocation, multicomponent interventions, self-reported outcomes, short follow-up and inconsistent reporting.

Conclusions: Microlearning is a promising instructional format for focused objectives and flexible delivery, particularly when it reduces extraneous burden, provides practice and feedback, and is integrated with broader pedagogy. The evidence does not support treating brevity alone as an effective mechanism or assuming durable learning across contexts. Larger preregistered comparative studies with common outcomes, active comparators and delayed assessments are required.