Beyond guesstimating: Calculating student workload in fully online micro-credentials

Abstract

Estimating the volume of student learning in courses is more of an art than a science. Yet, mismatches between advertised workload and actual student effort can lead to high student dropout rates. To investigate the factors affecting student workload and whether they can be quantified, we undertook a mixed methods study aimed at refining and testing a student workload calculator specifically tailored for online micro-credentials. Utilising a case study methodology, we blended a literature review with our experiential knowledge as learning designers to refine existing workload calculators into a cohesive reflective tool to interrogate assumptions about learner effort and time on task. We then employed quantitative methods to test the calculator against advertised workloads in a sample of online micro-credentials from one platform. Findings suggest a potential discrepancy between provider-advertised workloads and calculator-based workload estimates, indicating that commonly used advertising practices may rely on materially different assumptions about student effort than those of conservative, research-informed modelling approaches. While this study did not measure actual student time on task, the consistency and magnitude of this discrepancy warrant closer scrutiny of how workloads are estimated and communicated to learners, as misalignment could contribute to student disengagement, lower completion rates and reduced trust in online learning.

Implications for practice:

• Course designers should take extra care when estimating workloads for online micro-credentials.
• Education providers could balance transparency and appeal by offering both typical and maximum workload estimates.
• Activity time estimates should be framed as flexible guides to support student planning.
• Educators should use workload calculators as reflective tools rather than fixed measures.