This paper investigates the relationships between the concepts Micro Credentials and Micro Learning within the field of Continuous Professional Development and STEM-development.

The specific relevance to distinguishing these two concepts is primarily related to the observed ambiguity in practice.

The term Micro Credentials is often used when describing short-term courses. In practice, however, the result-based perspective is dominating dealing with badges and certification levels as proof of learning. This current practice has been suppressing the emergent discussion about what really constitutes learning including its productive learning process and learning effects, which are worth recognizing with a Micro Credential.

This paper draws the conceptual line between the two interrelated concepts named Micro Learning and Micro Credentials.

Moreover, this paper starts to initially outline the dichotomy, which shapes the tight conceptual connection about a better understanding what Micro Learning and Micro Credentials is about.

The analysis is based on information stemming from a scoping review of the existing literature to depart from. Additionally, empirical insights stemming from both an implementation project at one Danish Institution of Higher Education and an international entrepreneurship project provides a more nuanced practical perspective uncovering the differences of both Micro Learning and Micro Credentials.

With help of juxtaposition the gap evident in literature is being outlined in conjunction with the practical use of these to contradicting concepts.

The applied triangulation approach analyses the theoretical perspectives and the distinctive practical implementation perspectives chosen within the Danish Institution of Higher Education and an international entrepreneurship development project.

A thematic analysis provides the starting point for the discussion of the findings. In result to this investigation, this paper is going to explain the dichotomous relationship of both concepts, Micro Credentials and Micro Learning as well as three newly emerging themes. These themes are:
1) conceptual ambiguity,
2) learning outcome evaluation practices,
3) didactical practices.

The analysis results presented in conjunction with this study contribute to the field of research as the important topic named Learning Design has been identified among other factors to be an important part for the process to successfully create short-term learning effects with the resulting learning outcome which is worthwhile being recognized by the awarding mechanism named Micro Credentials.

The underlying reasoning for the discussion within this paper is to rethink short-term and online learning formats. Therefore, this paper also offers a critical standpoint in relation to the notion of Micro Credentials coined by the European Union. The purpose of this paper is also to start a discussion among scholars and educational professionals about how to properly build skills and competencies needed in our future society. Hereby, this paper also advocates for an understanding related to potential, boundaries and barriers related to the observed and divergent practice, which yet do not distinguish between the concepts related to both Micro Learning and Micro Credentials.

Finally, this paper proposes action steps on how to start the development of sustainable practices used to design short-term learning courses in educational institutions.

Keywords: Life-Long Learning, Micro Learning, Micro Credentials, Learning Design, Continuous Professional Development, STEM Development.