Interesting, I have just gotten into archiving enrollments, and I did not know this was the case. Have you tested how an equivalency would work in that situation?

Hi! 

We do plan on using equivalencies for the course itself so they can either take the scorm package or the test out. 

However, I see what you’re saying. My concern is that we only want to assign the test-out version to folks who completed the previous year’s training. There likely is archived data from users who did not complete the training last year. If we added the equivalency, would it pull everyone assigned, or everyone who completed last year with the archived data? Additionally, would it allow us to use an additional equivalency for this year’s test-out? 

To clarify, I believe the way we’re planning on building the course this year is to make two separate courses: One with the SCORM package, one with the test (built in Docebo).  We’d planned on using an equivalency to mark anyone complete who passed the test so they don’t have to take the entire course, too.

Now that I think about it, if you do not have enrollment status in course A there is likely no way to pass that to course B.

How many courses? Do the exact completion dates matter?

I would address that with pulling a report of completed users, and then using the CSV to enroll the users into the new course. The select all and complete. That will give them all a completion date for that day.

Then adjust my process to only archive the in-progress and enrolled users when the previous course is archived. That will allow you to go back to your automatic groups.

@Renee.Robinson Hi, Renee.  Have you considered using an additional field for those you’ve migrated into the platform that notes their prior certification? You can create the automated group based on this additional field.

I like this idea, too! I’ll see if this could potentially be a fix. Thank you!

We use user additional fields to set a job role that can then drive automatic enrollments. They can be a very useful solution. We did find out the hard way that using the drop-down solution has a limit of 500 entries (we were using for the external company names). 

But a drop-down solution where you decide what is used in that entry would work well for this solution. 

Great idea @KMallette 

Adding on archiving...when a record is archived there are many things that cannot be retrieved at it functions today.

Any course with a survey, exam will have those results unretrievable in reports. There is no edit, delete option and once the record is archived, it’s locked away. As you mentioned, groups no longer recognize those archived records as they seem to tucked away in a part of the database not connoted to the rest of the Docebo Learn world..Also note that when reporting on archived records, no information from the user additional fields are displayed in the reports; another big gap .it’s unfortunate that this was launched in this state so we are hoping to see some major improvements coming soon...sadly we have no idea when we’ll see any updates on this function. 

We are only using is very limited capacity at the moment due to these gaps

This is good to know for future reference. Thank you! I’ll pass this along to our compliance team as well. 

@Renee.Robinson here are a bunch of ideas I posted you can vote on if you like...we need to push Docebo to put some resources towards fixing this tool