@Daniel - Here is my two cents…

Is SCORM a suitable format?

I wouldn’t think of SCORM as a format per se. We simply need it to be SCORM compliant so that our LMS can do some tracking. I could publish all my projects as HTML5 and they would do the exact same thing but if I want to upload and track scores in Docebo, I need to publish as SCORM. But in essence - yes - totally suitable.

In what ways can it be use to make the learning more interactive?

Simulations of a device interface. 

Example to share?

Sure - take a look at these.

Firmware Update - You’re gonna need to turn on the tips. Part of an actual training program.

Using a Voltmeter - This was more of a fun - one off - project. Short interactive screens with a meter.

Is Rise enough or do I need a more sophisticated tool?

Hmm… in my opinion, the end product I have seen in Rise doesn’t live up to my standards of interactivity but I don’t develop with it and so I honestly don’t know what it is capable of but as a student of Rise courses, I have not been impressed by anything I have seen yet from an interactive standpoint.

I think you’ll want something with a bit more power.

Would I recommend in-house or third party?

Well, that depends on who you have on your team and what they are capable of. I like to make things in-house whenever I can but that is my personal preference.

Mediums other than SCORM?

SCORM isn’t really a medium in the same way I think you are thinking. If you want some increased interactivity, though, you’ll want an authoring tool that you can create those interactions with that will publish as SCORM objects. As far as I am concerned Captivate and Articulate are the two big dogs on campus. My examples were done in Captivate.

Hope that is useful.

@gstager Thank you so much for the detailed response and examples. Our designers already use software simulators to test our machine interfaces, so I’m wondering if it might be possible to convert them into a SCORM or HTML file so we don’t have to recreate them from scratch. Thank you also for the clarification of SCORM. I was using it as a term to describe interactive training in general (as opposed to passive videos) but I now understand that it’s just one of the formats that can be output from an authoring tool. I also loved the Voltmeter example. We would like to create an electrical troubleshooting course for our service engineers, so it’s great to know that something like this can be handled in Captivate or Articulate. I know the answer to this will vary depending on the person, but how long do you think it would take someone to become reasonably proficient in Captivate or Articulate?

Hi @Daniel 

My team have been constantly rethinking & improving the way we can use the Storyline authoring tool to create interactions to create simulations for different technology and products. You can go a long way with this tool (I’d imagine the Adobe equivalent - Captivate? - is equally useful here, but I can’t speak to it directly) but it is very time-consuming, and some interactions are a lot easier than others.

If I want to create an interaction which simulates using, say, Excel, it’s pretty simple, especially if I were to create it in such a way as to only allow users to click where/when they’re supposed to. But I’ve made some which allow a user free reign within a simulation of an app on a smartphone, & that can be extremely time-consuming & iterative, & it requires a fair deal of comprehension of both the authoring software & the technology you’re trying to mimic.

I could talk about using Storyline ad nauseum so I won’t go into much detail here, but it’s an extremely robust tool which can make some pretty impressive interaction, but it does take a lot of effort. I find it more useful in demonstrating a software over a video, but you have to consider your time constraints.

I hope this helps!

There will still be a fair amount of work in your authoring tool to create the interactivity.

In my case, I actually developed that mockup using PowerPoint for all the graphics but it would be nice if your marketing department has some blank overlay designs of the equipment or if the developers of the simulators have some graphics they can share. The more you can borrow the better.

I would call what I have created an advanced use of the Captivate authoring tool and there is a great deal of logic behind the scenes. Captivate is - I think - known for having a steep learning curve but it is an extremely capable piece of software. Someone who is well versed in authoring tools such as these may very well pick it up and be decent within a year - say someone switching from Articulate. In a similar way, I feel like I could probably learn Articulate faster than the average Joe because of my background with Captivate but they are different.

For someone without any eLearning authoring tool experience - give it a few years - I guess, depending on what you mean by reasonably proficient. Faster if you’re extremely dedicated and in the tool daily, following forums, and asking questions of other users.

@NateC - agreed that full control vs sweet path only are two completely different monsters.

Full simulators require an enormous effort and level of dedication to pull off.

Hi @gstager 

I think you’re absolutely correct, it really takes time to become proficient in the more robust eLearning authoring tools. I haven’t used Captivate much, just a trial version for a few days w/ come very pointed instruction, but I’d already been using Articulate Storyline for years by that point, so I could understand it more or less immediately. 

Storyline is easy enough to pick up the basics within a few hours for anyone who has a history of using a variety of software competently - it harnesses a lot of the same UX as the Microsoft Suite - but to build complex & impressive interactions such as the ones you’ve linked in your first response takes several months of experience, at the very least. A lot of trial & error, a lot of research & a lot of sharing of ideas with other developers.

Very powerful tools capable of pretty impressive & helpful outputs, but they are definitely a significant investment in time.

:) 100% what Greg said.

One thing to remember is you can bring storyline blocks into Rise, so if you want to use rise for the quick nice looking aspects of adding simple content, and then have a complex block from storyline, that is one route to go.

@Daniel  You already have a lot of answers here but let me add my 2 cents worth.

Is SCORM a suitable format for teaching technical procedures? 

You can absolutely use the benefits of SCORM to assist in teaching technical material. SCORM is not an elearning platform but more a way of recording what learners do and how they perform in a course. I publish a lot of material to SCORM 2004 v3. This allows me to track things like raw score, max score, min score, scaled score, how many attempts they make in a course, etc.

In what ways could SCORM be used to make learning technical procedures more interactive? Are there any specific examples you could share?

SCORM really doesn’t make material more interactive - the platform (Captivate / Storyline / Articulate) does. How you leverage those platforms and what you do with that data once it gets to your LMS is where the benefits are. Publishing an object to SCORM 2004 v3 allows you track what a learner did in the course. I think the answer you really want in in the next statement below.

Would a simple tool like Articulate Rise be enough or would we need a more sophisticated tool like Storyline?

Think of  the differences between Articulate Rise and Storyline like the difference between a Toyota Rav 4 and a Chevy Suburban. The Rav 4 can carry a decent load and you get places quickly and rather inexpensively but it can’t do any of the heavy lifting of the Suburban. I have built literally a ton of technically based courses. I have used Captivate, Storyline, Lectora, Camtasia and even Rise. It depends on how much heavy lifting I need to do. Personally I prefer Captivate. I am also very proficient with Adobe CC products like After effects, Premiere, Photoshop, etc. I create things like scenario generators that are multi leveled and complex to build, Simulations that can take on a great deal of complexity, games that can also be hard to build. When building in Captivate you can assign point values to learner clicks and actually grade a learner on what buttons they do/don’t click on. ( For example: if you have a software simulator you add a point when they click on  a correct area and sequence but then subtract one when they do something wrong.) SCORM will track this and if your LMS is set up correctly you can get a report that lays it all out for review. That data can then be used to improve/change your course. Captivate has a much steeper learning curve than Articulate. If your course only requires multi level branching and maybe some tabbed interactions (like the voltmeter example above) Storyline will work fine. You can build as a SL block and import into Rise. If your building a simulator SL nor Rise will cut it. The bottom line… what do you really want your limitations to be??

Would you recommend creating SCORM courses in-house or out-sourcing them to a professional?

If you do them in house be prepared to shop around. You need a really good developer with a wide skill set. Be prepared for it to take some time for them to do their magic. It takes a while for them to really think through how to approach such issues. You also need to be prepared to pay them well. If you decide to outsource you will pay top dollar for their services. These guys are always booked solid. Believe me, I am very familiar with the process. 

Are there any other mediums other than SCORM that we should be considering?

SCORM is only the tip of the iceberg. Here’s what I consider the “grail”  list that I would put forward to a potential employer… All of Adobe CC, Captivate, Adobe Acrobat DC, Articulate 360, Camtasia, SnagIt. 

@LDusa Many thanks for the detailed response - it’s very helpful! 

We’re going to be getting a couple of licenses for Adobe Creative Cloud pretty soon. Could you explain which apps you find most useful for creating training material?

Looks like a lot of folks have helped you already. I would echo a lot of what has been said here. You’ll need some form of an authoring tool to make modules that are more interactive - could range from simulations, games, videos/knowledge checks, and much more. I work for a company called GuyKat, who is a Docebo partner. We predominantly develop in the Articulate suite of products - mainly in Articulate Storyline as it’s much more powerful than Rise however Rise is preferred if you have a heavy mobile use case. To the point made earlier, Rise does have some limitations over Storyline.

@Daniel Let me preface my answer to your question above with some history first.  I have a very deep electronics background.  I also have a very solid understanding of adult learning; I have done standup instruction, blended, straight virtual and elearning. I am not a computer programmer but I do have better than working knowledge of programming functionality. I have also developed many multi-national/cultural courses for delivery outside of CONUS. At this point in my career I do ID development because its fun… I enjoy it. I very proudly tell people that I have turned down management positions simply because I like doing the job too much and would rather do the job than go to meetings all day and let someone else tell me how they did the job.  Because of my electronics background I am not the typical instructional designer you will run into. I do a lot of out-of-the-box specialized ID development. I state this because many will read this and wonder if I’m for real - I tend to sound more like a manager than a working ID. With that said; I will give you the “Rolls Royce” of what I use and why.

The two most useful elearning development aps I use are Captivate and Articulate 360.  My preference is Captivate simply because it is much more robust than Articulate. I especially like the idea that I can create a shared action in captivate and use it over and over again -  big time saver. I build everything from scratch so that even something as simple as a tabbed interactive I customize allowing me to track if a learner actually clicks the button. I build a lot of simulation exercises where the learner sees what is happening, then gets to do it with assistance (help button available) then they are asked to do it themselves (practical). In many cases I assign point values and grades dependent upon what/where the learner clicks. I find it way easier to do this with Captivate. I know similar activities can be done in Articulate SL; I just think Captivate is more intuitive. Leveraging Captivate takes a whole different learning set than Articulate.  Articulate 360 comes with three basic levels… Rise is the easiest and takes the least amount of time to learn. It’s like building a web page. You get preset blocks and you drag your text/images on to create a web-style type course. The cost of simplicity is the complex interactivity. You are teaching robotics - outside of basic knowledge, I don’t think Rise will cut it for you. Next, would be the Presenter package Presenter/Engage/Quizmaker. This adds some complexity to your courses. It’s like PPT on steroids; your course content is built in presenter( basically PPT with a presenter ribbon across the top), a pre-built  selection of interactions are available in engage to add in, and your quiz can be manufactured in quizmaker. None of these aps require an exceptional amount of skill so a new ID could easy master them and because of the underlying PPT look, most people are familiar with it. If you understand HTML you can even get into the published files and tweek them to meet special needs. I would use presenter if I need something really fast, don’t have a skilled tech to do it but still need a level of complexity. The disadvantage is that presenter projects tend to look “old” or more like a PPT presentation. Storyline is what everyone uses. Everything you can do with Presenter and Rise you can do in Storyline. Storyline allows you to create triggers, write variables and control what happens on the page much like captivate. - It takes more skill to do it than the rest of 360. Storyline is easier to learn than captivate and can be a fast way to build something but the flip side is that it is not as robust. If a client sees something they like and wants you to amplify or build out further, you may find yourself up against a wall. I do like Storylines menu feature. If you leverage correctly I think its better than Captivate.

Now for the ancillary stuff.

Adobe  After Effects makes great animations that I import elsewhere. You can include audio here too. Very useful.

Adobe Audition: This is an audio app. I manipulate all audio with it although I will tell you Audacity works just as well . (audacity is a free download.)

Adobe Dreamweaver: This is a programming app but I use it to troubleshoot problems with. I have imported the .CPM file from captivate or java files to do more complex troubleshooting. This is really useful when things go really bad.

Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop: I use to make all customized graphics.

Adober Indesign: I use this to format all learner textbooks

Adobe Media Encoder: I use this to format and prep all my After Effects products.

Adobe Premiere: This is a video manipulation app. This can do a lot but it’s a steep learning curve

SnagIt: I use this for screen grabs. You really don’t want to use the snip It tool.

Sorry for being so long winded.  Not my intention. If you have any more questions; I’ll be glad to assist.

@LDusa Wow, thanks for taking the time to explain everything in such detail! I've been involved in training for quite some time now, but most of that time has been spent writing manuals and teaching face-to-face. Only in the last two years has my organization ventured into the world of e-learning and we obviously have a lot to learn. We’re a very small team and have tried to do everything ourselves so far, but I’m beginning to think that it would be smarter to outsource some of the work, or even better, bring an experienced instructional designer onto our team. The biggest hurdle, as always, will be convincing management that it's worth the investment!