The problem you will run into with one ILT course with two sessions is that once they complete the first session the course will be marked complete and they will be able to move on and have a hard time signing up for the second.

You could technically do 2 events per session and require they go to both, but then they are kind of locking themselves into the two dates which sounds restrictive to me, I guess you could put all the dates into the session and make them complete at least 2, but I guess my question is are the sessions the same? Or do you want the returning users to be grouped and the first timers to be grouped?

From the high level it sounds more appropriate to me to make 3 courses, one first time ,ILT, one elearning, and one second timer iLT. The learning plan to organize and control order of entry makes sense to me as well.

@Bfarkas is right on track with the 3-course solution. The additional materials could be served up as part of the learning plan, and users would have to click on the materials to complete the learning plan. You may want to add quizzes or surveys to get some feedback and data from participants. 

Hi @Iryna , we use Learning Plans in cases where we have to specifically sequence eLearning modules and ILT events as one (as the uses would term it) ‘course’. Whilst eLearning materials can be added to an ILT course I believe I’m right in saying you can’t dictate the order of completion or set pre-requisites and I don’t think it’s particularly clear there are materials that have be completed in the way that course screen is designed, unlike an LP, shown below. There are some basic features of LPs we don’t like, (e.g. can’t easily remove groups of users, the LP card in channels doesn’t show if LP is completed or not), but the good outweighs the bad.

hope that helps.

Stephen

Thank you so much, everyone, for sharing your experience!

This is extremely helpful!! :)