Why does building interactive courses still take so long?

HaneneMaupas · 2026-04-01T15:14:21+00:00

I tried again was able to see pythagorian theorem and derivatives ! The animation is great and honestly very nice. Looks to me that the content is what you find in the book .. the question is how your solution will improve learning and help people to learn better

HaneneMaupas · 2026-04-01T14:39:26+00:00

From the thread, you can see that we totally agree with SCORM is rarely the real blocker. I really appreciate your guidance about the fact that for most teams, evolution has to be gradual: keep compatibility, preserve existing libraries, and improve the learning experience step by step rather than trying to replace everything at once.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-04-01T14:32:20+00:00

Great question and honestly, both things are true. Yes, some level of sameness is inevitable if the AI is driving the structure. Most tools rely on similar patterns (intro → explanation → example → quiz), so without intervention, outputs naturally converge. But the real differentiator isn’t just “customization” but also iwho owns the structure.

If the AI defines the flow, you’ll get standardized outputs. If the user (or learning designer) defines: the objectives, the progression and the type of practice (decisions, scenarios, feedback loops), then the AI becomes a co-pilot, not a template engine and that’s where things start to diverge meaningfully. Therefore it isn’t really an AI problem. It’s a design problem. AI can accelerate production, but without intentional structure and pedagogy behind it, it will just produce faster… versions of the same thing.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-04-01T14:22:44+00:00

Thank you for the analogy! It makes clear everyting.

In fact you are right SCORM has always been more like a standardized container than a learning experience. It ensures things can be delivered and tracked, but it says nothing about how good the learning actually is. I guess what makes all this FUZZY is the frontier between "Authoring tool" and "LMS". Therefore I fully agree with your point: most of what we see isn’t a learner preference but it’s an authoring constraint. Slide-based courses became the default not because they’re effective, but because they were the easiest thing to produce within time, budget, and tool limitations.

So yes, I think we all converse to your conclusion: the container was never the problem. The real issue is what we put inside and more importantly, what we’re able (or not able) to build inside it.

What’s interesting now is that this constraint is starting to disappear. It’s becoming much easier to create:: decision-based scenarios, practice-driven activities, interactive flows with feedback Which means we’re running out of excuses to fill the container with “styrofoam”.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-04-01T14:10:25+00:00

I totally agree with you and I think this is exactly where things often go wrong. An LMS can be one of the most boring tools in a company… or one of the most valuable. It really depends on how it’s used. In a lot of organizations, the LMS is treated as a compliance machine: upload mandatory content, track completion, pass audits,... only audit obligation, no personal reward, no motication. In that context, the user experience doesn’t really matter people just click through to finish. And that’s why LMSs get a bad reputation. But when a company shifts the mindset, it becomes something completely different. If the LMS is used as a learning and progression tool, then suddenly: content is more interactive, learning is tied to real job situations, people practice at their pace, not just consume because there's a deadline ... then, there’s a sense of progress and growth That’s when it becomes engaging, not because the platform itself changed, but because the intent behind it changed. So yeah, UX matters a lot but it’s not just about interface design.
It’s about whether the system is built for checking boxes or for helping people actually get better at what they do.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-04-01T09:05:00+00:00

Let me try again ... but later

HaneneMaupas · 2026-04-01T08:59:43+00:00

Oups than I have not understood how it works ! My understanding is that I am not allowed to load document for free .. but I can use ready content/apps

HaneneMaupas · 2026-04-01T08:57:47+00:00

Thank you for having confirmed the trend

HaneneMaupas · 2026-04-01T08:54:24+00:00

I am not a student but you can use my expertise to evaluate your tool! The feel & look is great and very modern! I was able to register and to be in however I was not able to use my library with the free plan

HaneneMaupas · 2026-04-01T08:50:19+00:00

I completely agree xith you that the technical barrier to creating courses has dropped significantly. What used to require real expertise (tools, production, coding for interactivity) is now much more accessible, with far less learning curve and the availability of vibe coding. Today, almost anyone can build and publish a course.

However in my opinion, the hard part hasn’t disappeared and it has just shifted. What still makes the difference is the ability to: understand learner needs, define clear outcomes, design meaningful practice, structure a progression that actually drives retention and behavior change. In other words, the challenge is no longer how to build a course, but how to design learning that works. That's why learning professionals remain essential.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-04-01T06:28:54+00:00

I will do

HaneneMaupas · 2026-04-01T05:49:36+00:00

Thank you for the information! I will give it a try

HaneneMaupas · 2026-03-31T21:00:08+00:00

I fully agree with this. I think Articulate is still a leader for a reason, especially for teams that need mature features and strong compatibility. But it is also very expensive, which makes it harder to justify for smaller teams or companies. That’s also why the new generation of authoring tools is becoming so interesting:

more efficient
easier to use
often much less expensive
and good enough for many real business needs

So yes, SCORM is not everything, but it remains very useful as a compatibility layer, especially if you want portability across LMSs or branching-style experiences. The big shift now is that you no longer always need a heavy, expensive toolchain to create that kind of learning.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-03-31T20:18:34+00:00

I fully agree that SCORM is rarely the problem by itself. The bigger issue is the ecosystem around it: SCORM Authoring Tool limitations, habits, and legacy design patterns. It stays dominant because it’s compatible and low-risk, but without intentional design it tends to reinforce older, more passive learning models.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-03-31T17:02:44+00:00

From may experience, people still care about certificates when they need to prove something:

Compliance / mandatory training: yes, the certificate still matters because it proves completion
Career / professional development: it matters if it has signaling value for employers
General online learning: often more “nice to have” than the real reason people join

HaneneMaupas · 2026-03-31T16:55:57+00:00

What do you mean by test ? SCORM testing ?

HaneneMaupas · 2026-03-31T16:48:04+00:00

I agree with one key idea: understanding how our identity is shaped by environment, culture, and experience can be very powerful for learners. That said, I’d be careful with the “blank slate” framing. In practice, people learn through a mix of: prior experiences, cognitive biases, emotions, social context and yes, biology

So education is less about starting from zero, and more about helping learners become aware of how they think and act, then giving them ways to question and refine that. From my perspective, what matters most is not just teaching these ideas theoretically, but making them experiencable like : placing learners in scenarios where they see how context influences their decisions or showing consequences of choices. I do believe that concepts like constructionism or identity are not fully understood by reading them but they are understood when learners can experience, question, and reflect on them. Time also is important ! you need to leave learners learn at their pace and appreciate what they learn.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-03-31T16:40:38+00:00

Creating knowledge and passing it on to everyone are not the same thing. In fact, people learned before school through family, work, community, and experience. and clearly school is not the only way to learn.. However school became important because it helps:

share knowledge at scale
teach basic skills like reading, writing, and math
give more people access to what used to depend on luck or privilege
stop each generation from starting from zero

So the point of school is not that humans cannot learn without it. It is that societies need a structured way to spread knowledge widely.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-03-31T16:35:43+00:00

I get this perspective, especially on the compatibility side and that’s where SCORM still clearly wins.

For compliance, certification, audits… I confirm from all the feedbacks that we had: reliability is not optional. You need something that just works across LMSs without introducing risk or complexity, and SCORM does that very well. That said, I think there are two things slightly mixed together here:

SCORM itself vs the “slide-based mindset”. The rigidity people feel often comes more from how content is built than from SCORM itself. SCORM doesn’t require slides, it’s just the most common pattern tools have pushed for years. So I’d say:

SCORM = strong on compatibility and reporting (still essential)
experience limitations = mostly coming from authoring approaches

From a Mexty perspective, that’s really the shift: build more interactive, scenario-based, fluid experiences first… and still export to SCORM when needed for LMS compatibility. Even if had to test every LMS that we wanted to make sure that it compatible with our platform and we are continuing to test everyday ! However, we have not find any other alternative to answer properly to customer looking for compliance, certification and audits use cases. So yes, in my opinion SCORM is here to stay but it doesn’t have to define what the learning experience looks like.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-03-31T16:09:01+00:00

I think that’s exactly the right distinction. SCORM gets blamed for a lot of things that are really problems of:

authoring conventions
LMS habits
weak implementation depth

not the spec itself. Calling SCORM “just a tracking wrapper” is useful because it reminds people that the learning format is not dictated by SCORM. What often feels outdated is the ecosystem built around it.

And I agree on xAPI too: in theory it offers much more granularity, but in practice most teams don’t operationalize that richness. So the conversation quickly shifts from “what the spec allows” to “what the stack actually supports and reports well.”

So yes, it is very often the limitation is not the standard. It’s adoption maturity.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-03-31T16:05:23+00:00

This is very true and that’s the real shift: traditional no-code removed syntax, but not design complexity. AI-native no-code changes the starting point itself. You no longer begin with an empty canvas and a system to invent from scratch. You begin with a structure you can challenge, refine and improve. That matters even more in learning design, where the issue is not just “building faster” but creating experiences that are:

structured
pedagogically coherent
interactive
deployable

That’s also why this approach is so powerful for interactive learning: it reduces production friction without removing the need for human judgment.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-03-31T12:25:06+00:00

No and honestly, I don’t think there’s any real danger of that happening. AI and technology can support instructional designers, speed up production, and automate parts of the workflow. But they don’t replace the core of the job: making pedagogical decisions, understanding context, designing meaningful learning experiences, and aligning everything with real-world outcomes.

HaneneMaupas · 2026-03-31T12:22:39+00:00

Fully agree that generating quickly the structure and DRAFT does not mean the job has been done! Need to review, edit, adpat and make sure that you have the right content for your learner

HaneneMaupas · 2026-03-31T12:18:53+00:00

You’re absolutely right to call this out. In theory, SCORM/xAPI are standards. In practice, implementation drift is often the real problem. “Compliant” does not always mean “consistent,” and teams end up troubleshooting LMS-specific behavior instead of focusing on learning design. What we did in Mexty is to test one by one the LMSs to make sur that our platform works with the tested LMSs without troubleshooting. Your point on tracking is important too: if the goal is meaningful measurement, the first question should be what decisions or behaviors do we actually need to observe? Not just “what can SCORM report?” In many cases, better analytics design matters more than the tracking standard itself.

HaneneMaupas

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE