Comments on: "Which part of SCORM should I implement in my LMS?" http://scorm.com/blog/2008/12/which-part-of-scorm-should-i-implement-in-my-lms/ We make SCORM easy Tue, 22 May 2012 11:50:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: SCORM » Drupal, SCORM, and why The Partridge Family was wrong http://scorm.com/blog/2008/12/which-part-of-scorm-should-i-implement-in-my-lms/comment-page-1/#comment-351 SCORM » Drupal, SCORM, and why The Partridge Family was wrong Wed, 02 Sep 2009 19:13:12 +0000 http://beta.scorm.com/blog/2008/12/which-part-of-scorm-should-i-implement-in-my-lms/#comment-351 [...] but SCORM really suffers from inconsistent implementations. If you’re going to implement part of SCORM, please do the industry as a whole a favor… finish [...] [...] but SCORM really suffers from inconsistent implementations. If you’re going to implement part of SCORM, please do the industry as a whole a favor… finish [...]

]]> By: Tim Martin http://scorm.com/blog/2008/12/which-part-of-scorm-should-i-implement-in-my-lms/comment-page-1/#comment-350 Tim Martin Mon, 22 Dec 2008 18:21:00 +0000 http://beta.scorm.com/blog/2008/12/which-part-of-scorm-should-i-implement-in-my-lms/#comment-350 Right on, Dave. I couldn't agree more. For someone who will have control over both the content and the LMS (as you do in Articulate Online), SCORM is more hassle than help. You guys are able to do things in reporting data that SCORM simply doesn't allow for. (Detailed interaction reporting is a great example of this, and, something I <a HREF="http://www.scorm.com/scormblog/2008/12/joe-smith-answered-question-1-with-b.aspx" REL="nofollow" rel="nofollow">posted</a> on a few weeks ago.<br/><br/>The benefit of SCORM comes when you deliver content to another LMS provider and need to know that certain aspects of LMS functionality are globally available. (Obviously, at Articulate, you're well informed in that regard, given your broad success in delivering content in so many LMS's.)<br/><br/>Thanks for the comment. Right on, Dave. I couldn’t agree more. For someone who will have control over both the content and the LMS (as you do in Articulate Online), SCORM is more hassle than help. You guys are able to do things in reporting data that SCORM simply doesn’t allow for. (Detailed interaction reporting is a great example of this, and, something I posted on a few weeks ago.

The benefit of SCORM comes when you deliver content to another LMS provider and need to know that certain aspects of LMS functionality are globally available. (Obviously, at Articulate, you’re well informed in that regard, given your broad success in delivering content in so many LMS’s.)

Thanks for the comment.

]]> By: Dave http://scorm.com/blog/2008/12/which-part-of-scorm-should-i-implement-in-my-lms/comment-page-1/#comment-349 Dave Fri, 19 Dec 2008 23:16:00 +0000 http://beta.scorm.com/blog/2008/12/which-part-of-scorm-should-i-implement-in-my-lms/#comment-349 Interesting post.<br/><br/>When we originally built Articulate Online we built it only for our products and to support only our products, but we still used SCORM 1.2 for reporting thinking it wouldn't be that bad. We ran into a host of problems with some of the limitations of SCORM, like the limit on the number of characters for Essay questions, characters that aren't supported, which made things difficult because with Articulate Online we had a goal of having really rich reports, which was difficult to support using SCORM as our communication mechanism.<br/><br/>We eventually switched our new products to use our own new proprietary communication method that wasn't bound by the limitations of SCORM. As a QA person I hated the idea of changing our communication mechanism in our new products because hey, we spent so much time getting the SCORM approach to work, but after all was said and done, our own proprietary communication method caused way less headaches, and had way less bugs.<br/><br/>Don't get me wrong, SCORM is great, but it would have worked better for us to just begin with our own communication method.<br/><br/>But I have to totally agree with this:<br/>"Your content vendors will hate you!"<br/><br/>I can't count how many times I have heard from people that content created with our software doesn't work in their "in house" developed LMS and the problem ends up being some half assed implementation. Interesting post.

When we originally built Articulate Online we built it only for our products and to support only our products, but we still used SCORM 1.2 for reporting thinking it wouldn’t be that bad. We ran into a host of problems with some of the limitations of SCORM, like the limit on the number of characters for Essay questions, characters that aren’t supported, which made things difficult because with Articulate Online we had a goal of having really rich reports, which was difficult to support using SCORM as our communication mechanism.

We eventually switched our new products to use our own new proprietary communication method that wasn’t bound by the limitations of SCORM. As a QA person I hated the idea of changing our communication mechanism in our new products because hey, we spent so much time getting the SCORM approach to work, but after all was said and done, our own proprietary communication method caused way less headaches, and had way less bugs.

Don’t get me wrong, SCORM is great, but it would have worked better for us to just begin with our own communication method.

But I have to totally agree with this:
“Your content vendors will hate you!”

I can’t count how many times I have heard from people that content created with our software doesn’t work in their “in house” developed LMS and the problem ends up being some half assed implementation.

]]>