User:Umelsa/Microlearning/Rchristo21 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Umelsa


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Umelsa/Microlearning?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Microlearning

Evaluate the drafted changes
The lead concisely summarizes and introduces what is to come in the body of the article. I appreciate that the revised lead is written more concisely than the lead of the original article while still maintaining the important content in the article. Will the lead include anything from the original article? The reason I ask is because the first sentence discusses the etymology of the word microlearning, but I think it is important in the first sentence to briefly introduce the concept of microlearning itself. The etymology sentence may work better as the second sentence in the lead.

Two of the sections--"framework" and "action plan" in the body are currently written as lists/bullet points. I think that these sections would be better in paragraph form in order to expand on each of the bullet points and to maintain the form of a typical Wikipedia article. It may be that the editor hasn't finished those sections yet and is just keeping notes, so I apologize if that is the case. The tone in the first section of the body is neutral and informative, and the writing style is concise. It is very well done.

I see two references on the bottom of the sandbox draft, but I don't see those citations in the body of the article. I think it would be important to go back and cite each of the new sentences and pieces of information in the article itself.