@ainsley.burnett Hi, Ainsley … I don’t believe there is anything in the LMS that you can monitor. It’s likely going to be done in the SCORM file.

I’d look to make sure that any page with a seek bar is set so that the seek bar cannot be moved by the user (or at least not until the page has been fully viewed the first time).

You might also have someone test your course to see how long it takes for someone using a screen reader to complete. It may be that hearing the course goes faster … though I wouldn’t expect it to be quite as dramatic as what you’ve reported.

Also, what is the inactivity timer set for? We’ve run into situations where the inactivity timer (when set really long) was impacting our completion times because someone would just walk away. I don’t think that this could be part of this situation, but …

Each video is set to require completion of the prior video before a learner can move forward. When I go into learner view, I am unable to replicate any method of speeding up the videos. I might be in a bit over my head, as I am newish to the admin side of Docebo. Could it be something off with the reported time? One user is averaging one minute per video on the report, and that’s just not possible, as far as I know.

@ainsley.burnett I’d get with the person who created the course, and just review the findings with them. They may have some ideas.

The other approach could be to reach out to the Help Desk.

Is there any way to block Chrome extensions that can speed up course videos?

Not from Docebo, no. If the users are internal, you can ask your IT team to block specific Chrome extensions on company devices. However, if they are external users, there’s not much you can do.

What we have found effective in this case, and also for for learning retention, is introducing multiple “Knowledge Checks” that require users to pause and complete mini quizzes. They don’t have to pass it necessarily but they have to slow down to read them and maybe also remember that they are supposed to actually take the course lol

Hi @ainsley.burnett - you are bringing up a really “good pain point” that sneaks up on training teams and @KMallette was describing one way that used to be one of the key ways to help limit it…but there are caveats left and right with it today. Let me explain...

“How do you really know if a person has consumed that video” has been a problem statement that L&D types of software developers have been trying to solve for years with technology. They have “created layers of interaction” - some have gone as far as developing special players to encourage ways to pause until a user interacts with the player itself - and even ask questions inline that can react by bringing a person to a said point in the timeline based on the response.

We do this to encourage “gating” - a much colder way to say that a person needs to pause until you show us you get it. But there is always a loose point that gets lost. The media itself may seem like it is being transformed into an onscreen experience, but the media - at its core - must behave the same way to be interpreted in a browser into a playable format and once your browser is doing its thing, you are going to find that browser plugins/media players ultimately have the control.

Where Docebo can monitor a video file for a calculated completion level of said video/media and listen to a scrub bar and progression through a video, nothing guarantees that a person has actually consumed that video/media and going further - at an expected timing.

And then you introduce the fact that we now have our browsers helping with an issue - accelerating video and audio - where a browser and even mobile device media player gets a chance to play the media and introduce its own plugin to enhance an experience, and you find out that you are SOL.

Years ago at another workplace, we bought into camtasia interactive videos that ultimately were breaking because the most common browser at our org was not compatible with the player. Horrible and expensive way to learn that we probably should not have gone down the rabbit hole when it was initially recommended to us. We had hours of tutorials that people were burning through in minutes. When we told the lead about the finding - it was already too late...and effectively the videos became only part of a knowledge base that was later abandoned.

I am going to say a bold statement, I believe video needs to be referential only at this point and to use approaches like @francesca.vaccarino is one of the keyways to understand a person's “knowledge synthesis” by pulsing knowledge checks. If you put a timer/criteria on those gates? You will be able to show off your metric more of how long it takes for people to get to a base level of synthesis. Just be careful - too many gates can sneak up on you as well. Also be careful, note - I am not saying a person necessarily learns from the approach either.

In the end - you can always run a metric with all of your learners to understand how many are burning your content out. My point - you dont have to have the few impact the numbers of the many if you consider folks consuming below a threshold as outliars. If there are way too many doing it? Then yes - shift your delivery strategy.

Sorry about the rant/rave. Had a little too much coffee and a carb breakfast to start my day off.