## 5 Discussion and Conclusions
The reasons for this can be as follows:  
* microlearning was applied in combination with the automatically evaluated assignments and its addition was minimised or overlapped,
* many of the different sources and the obligation to develop microlearning lessons caused overload for weaker students and caused them to resign. The results of the questionnaire survey presented below support the first claim. The histogram shown in Figure 7p presents the group division into students with excellent and students with weak (resp. zero) results, while the number of students with average results was minimised. The reasons for and real effects of microlearning on the obtained level of knowledge or the dropout rate of the students should be the subject of further research. **Hypothesis 4 (H4). **_The use of microlearning principles improves students' results in object-oriented programming._  
The hypothesis cannot be again accepted. The use of microlearning in the advanced chapters of introductory programming course does not cause significant differences in students' outcomes. The reasons are similar to the reasons mentioned in a discussion about the hypothesis H2. The dependencies between the achieved VPL score and the final test score, as well as the dependencies between the microlearning activities and the final score, were identified in a section focused on the verification of the dependencies between the success of students in the inspected activities and the results in the course. The dependencies are identified from the moderate to strong level and place these LMS activities into the position of a tool with the assumptions to identify the risk of dropout. The 2019 group responded to the questionnaire survey conducted after the end of the semester, and the results collected also correspond to the research findings. Thereby, students evaluated the subjective contribution of the monitored activities to their learning. The main facts are summarised in Table 15. The students expressed their opinions using a seven-point Likert scale questionnaire. The questionnaire shows that both types of activities are received positively by more than 70% of users. Activities are identified as resources that play a significant role in building skills and knowledge. Activities with automated code evaluation are accepted more positively. The students identified the main benefits as immediate control and feedback on the submitted program, learning from one's own mistakes, practical learning, and possibility to repeat solutions in the case of error. The benefits of microlearning activities were most often mentioned: a better understanding of the content, preparation for the following lessons, quick acquisition of information, brief content of the lesson, possibility of practice. Moreover, students would expect similar use of both types of objects in other programming courses. The research result aimed at verifying the effectiveness of interactive activities for successful completion of the course is the confirmation of a significant benefit of the implementation of automatically evaluated programs into the introductory programming courses. At the same time, it was found that this benefit is not significant in advanced programming topics. The advantage of the educational content transformation into the microlearning form did not bring a significant improvement in the students' results despite the positive perception of this activity by the students. Even though the significant contribution of interactive elements was confirmed only in the case of automatically evaluated programs in the first half of the course, the dependence between the overall results of students and the results in the activities was proven. Further research will focus on the identification of students at risk of a dropout based on their behaviour during the solving of the mentioned activities. Conceptualisation, J.S. and M.D. ; methodology, J.S. and M.D. ; investigation, J.S. and M.D. ; resources, J.S. and M.D. ; data curation, J.S. and M.D. ; writing--original draft preparation, J.S.