r/elearning

Hi all — I've been developing Verbalu (verbalu.com), a browser-based platform of interactive tools built specifically for trainers, HR professionals, and L&D teams.

For basic usage it is free.

The idea: instead of juggling five different apps for icebreakers, simulations, quizzes, and whiteboarding during a session, you get one place with everything ready to go — Kanban boards, a wiki for documentation, a whiteboard for group work, training games (like a project-management simulation and an AI transformation simulator), and AI features built in.

It's still evolving so any ideas of new tools are welcome. I need to add that current tools and games were ideated by my friends - professional business trainers.

Would love feedback from people who actually run sessions for a living: what tools do you reach for most during a live training, and what's still missing from platforms like this?

I teach knowledge-based training, and most of my lessons already exist as documents, slides or written tutorials.

I'm looking for an actual end-to-end AIGC tool where I can upload the material and generate a complete tutorial video in one place. Script, narration, visuals, captions and editing.

A lot of the workflows I've found still involve moving between several platforms. One tool for the script, another for voice, another for visuals, then a video editor to put everything together. That's exactly what I'm trying to avoid.

I don't mind reviewing the result or making corrections inside the same tool, but I want the first full draft generated in one go. It also needs to stay faithful to my source material instead of making up extra information.

Has anyone found a platform that genuinely does this well? What still needs to be fixed manually?

I'm an instructional designer making product training and some professional development training with PowerPoint narrated by Elevenlabs. When I'm in project season, I'm completing 3-5 training courses per week which is usually 3-5, 30 - 120 slide decks.

Anyone else producing this much with Elevenlabs?

Hi everyone,

I’ve been building Scaffold, a free and open-source authoring tool for creating interactive learning content for the LMSs organisations already use.

The aim is to make authoring feel less like configuring software and more like writing in a modern editor.
Scaffold can be used to create scrolling lessons or slides with structured content, media, interactive activities and assessments. You can add and configure blocks directly in the editor and quickly switch to the learner view.
It currently supports Moodle and Open edX, and the core is open source.

It’s still pre-alpha, so there are bugs and rough edges, but it’s ready for people to explore and I’d genuinely value feedback from anyone working in e-learning or course authoring.

I’d be especially interested to hear:
Does the authoring experience make sense?
Which activity or assessment types are missing?
What would stop you from using something like this?
Which LMS integrations would be most useful?

You can try it here:
https://scaffold.ac

Happy to answer any questions about how it works.

Been trying to figure out what's actually shipping under the "agentic AI" label versus what's just a pitch right now. Here's what I found:

Microsoft is putting Copilot straight into LMS platforms starting this spring.

Absorb has a thing they're calling a readiness gate. Instead of just checking if you finished a course, it checks whether you can actually do the thing before it lets you move on. So instead of a manager finding out three weeks later that training didn't stick, the system catches it right there.

The pattern I keep running into is systems that just act without anyone telling them to. A manager used to have to notice someone struggling and go assign training manually. Now some platforms are supposed to catch that dip themselves and push a quick module out, sometimes even loop in a coaching bot before anyone's even flagged a problem.

"Agentic" is turning into a buzzword the same way "AI-powered" did a couple of years back. Might be worth checking whether something's actually taking action on its own or just responding a bit quicker than before.

Anyone actually seen this working for real, or still mostly hearing about it in demos?

We all know the drill, AI can now generate a full training course in a few minutes. In a few years, it will probably even manage complex branching scenarios well.

But it begs the question, are we're tracking the wrong thing? Yes, a course exists now, or a quiz got completed. That feels like progress, and it's structured and efficient enough that it's easy to mistake for real progress. Except watching an AI-generated module, or passing its auto-graded quiz, doesn't actually prove anyone can do the job better under pressure. All we really did was swap a content metric for a capability metric and called it done.

The worrying part is how this compounds. If a company leans on AI to generate junior-level work and also leans on AI to generate the training that used to build junior people into senior ones, you can lose the pipeline without anyone deciding to. Three years later you're short on the people who were supposed to grow into the harder problems.

This is a conversation we've been having internally. Has anyone actually measured this at their org? Not "did people complete the AI-generated course" but whether people who went through AI-generated training perform differently on the job than people who didn't?

We're a small consulting firm (around 20 people, contractor-based) looking to trial an LMS. Learning is voluntary rather than mandated — the goal is to let people upskill to meet client needs as they come up.

We've got a mix of seniority, but the main focus is on our juniors: building up their consulting skills and technical skills.

A few things that matter to us:

• Right-sized for a small team. Enterprise platforms like Absorb feel like overkill for our size and structure, so we're after something leaner.
• Affordable, without a heavy per-seat model that punishes a small headcount.
• A real sales conversation + free trial before we commit — we want to actually talk to someone and test-drive it first.
• AI features that genuinely work rather than tacked-on gimmicks.
• Integrates with an internal knowledge base, so learning and our own materials live in the same place.

Anyone running something similar at this scale? Would love to hear what's worked (and what to avoid).
Thanks!

#chrpindia corporate elearning solutions

Hi everyone,
I’m volunteering with a nonprofit that’s building a tuition-free online university, and I’ve been tasked with evaluating Learning Management Systems (LMSs) and this is time bound. Appreciate responses asap.
Our enrolment will likely be 500 - 1000 users .

We’re currently speaking with vendors. I recently had a demo with Absorb LMS. While it looked like a solid platform, it felt much more geared toward corporate learning and employee training than a traditional academic environment with faculties, degree programs, instructors and students.

My benchmark is D2L Brightspace, as I completed my MBA using it at a Canadian University and thought it was an excellent higher education platform. However, I realize from other reddit posts, it may be outside our budget, so we’re trying to understand all of our options.

Specifically, I’m looking for:
- Contacts (sales, partnerships or higher education teams) at D2L Brightspace, Canvas (Instructure) or Moodle.
- Anyone who’s worked with these vendors on a new institution or nonprofit implementation.
- Advice on nonprofit or startup pricing (if available).
- Recommendations for other LMSs that provide a true higher education experience rather than a corporate training platform.

Some of the capabilities we’re looking for include:
Degree and certificate programs
Download options of materials and uploads by students
Assignments, quizzes, exams and gradebook
Discussion forums
Student and faculty portals
White-label branding
Reporting and analytics
Zoom/Microsoft Teams integrations
Digital certificates/transcripts
Scalability from a few hundred students to thousands

From my research so far, Brightspace, Canvas and Moodle seem to be the strongest higher education options, while many other LMSs appear to focus primarily on corporate learning.

If you have a contact you’d be willing to share (either publicly or via DM), or any lessons learned from selecting an LMS for a university or college, I’d really appreciate it.

Thank you!

One of the things we really like about our current learning platform is that it doubles as a knowledge base. Anything we load into courses is easily searchable as an asset.

We could replicate this as a sharepoint but there are reasons that hasn't been ideal in the past. It would be best if we could add content to a knowledge base and then use that content in courses as well.

It would be even better if this knowledge base could store URLs in addition to uploaded files, as we have a lot of content in our current platform that is just that.

So far I have determined that Absorb, Docebo, Cornerstone, and EducateMe all appear to support this in some way, but I would like to get confirmation/opinions on that from people actually using these tools before I start talking to any salesperson.

If you have used any of these LMS for this purpose, would love to hear your thoughts!

Hi all — I've been developing Verbalu (verbalu.com), a browser-based platform of interactive tools built specifically for trainers, HR professionals, and L&D teams.

For basic usage it is free.

The idea: instead of juggling five different apps for icebreakers, simulations, quizzes, and whiteboarding during a session, you get one place with everything ready to go — Kanban boards, a wiki for documentation, a whiteboard for group work, training games (like a project-management simulation and an AI transformation simulator), and AI features built in.

It's still evolving so any ideas of new tools are welcome. I need to add that current tools and games were ideated by my friends - professional business trainers.

Would love feedback from people who actually run sessions for a living: what tools do you reach for most during a live training, and what's still missing from platforms like this?

Hi everyone,

I’m hoping someone here can help me with a frustrating issue I’ve been dealing with in H5P (Course Presentation).

I create my slide designs in PowerPoint and then export them as images to use as background slides in H5P. I’ve already set my PowerPoint slide size to match H5P’s 16:9 format (20 cm × 11.25 cm, which equals 1920×1080 px). I export the slides in high quality (PNG or JPEG), and they look perfectly sharp on my computer.

But the moment I upload them into H5P as background images and save the presentation, the quality drops noticeably. The images look soft, slightly blurry, and nowhere near as crisp as the originals.

I’ve tried:

• PNG high fidelity export
• JPEG export
• Exporting as PDF and converting via Adobe Acrobat Pro
• Even inserting the image as a regular “Image” element instead of a background

No matter what I do, H5P seems to compress or downscale the background images.

I’m using H5P Course Presentation for educational content, so clarity is really important, especially for text-heavy slides.

Has anyone found a reliable workflow that keeps background images sharp in H5P?
Is there a specific export setting, file format, DPI, or H5P trick that actually works?

Any help or insights would be hugely appreciated!

(Note: English is not my native language. This post was translated and refined with the help of Copilot to make sure everything is clear.)

Hi everyone,

I'm looking for an LMS that works well for practical, hands-on classes where student submissions are mainly photos or videos, and instructors need to give detailed feedback on each submission.

Most LMS platforms seem to be designed around curriculum progress tracking — quizzes, assignments, grades. That's fine for theory, but not ideal for classes like dental clinical training where:

• Students take photos/videos of their work (e.g. cavity prep on a typodont)

• Instructors need to review each image closely

• Feedback needs to be specific — pointing out details in the image

I'm exploring this for dental education in Korea. Would really appreciate any recommendations — whether it's a general LMS that handles this well, or something more specialized.

Thanks in advance!

Hi all, I’ve recently joined an L&D team in a telecommunications company and I’m trying to sense check our current training approach. Something feels off, and I’d really value perspectives from others in this space.

Right now, our training is heavily self-led and delivered through Articulate Rise modules that run for a few hours each. Each module starts with a 45 minute research activity where agents are asked to find answers using our website and internal knowledgebase. The issue is that our knowledgebase is mostly system and process focused, with very little foundational knowledge or soft skills content. So learners are essentially being asked to teach themselves from incomplete material. There is very little actual instruction or guided learning in the modules themselves.

We also have a call listening library that includes a mix of AI-generated calls and some poor-quality recordings of agent demonstrations. These calls intentionally exclude product names, pricing, etc, because the business says things change too often to keep content up to date. I suggested using real customer calls, but this was rejected due to privacy concerns.

On top of that, our reporting is extremely limited. We only track module completion. We don’t capture responses to activities or any meaningful engagement data, so someone could scroll through everything without participating and we wouldn’t know.

Other components of the training include:

• 45 minutes of roleplay scenarios
• 45 minutes of live call listening

One thing I’m questioning is whether live call listening makes the call library redundant, or if both serve different purposes. We also don’t have any kind of simulator or practice environment, so there’s very little opportunity for hands-on or kinesthetic learning.

Overall, this setup goes against a lot of what I’ve learned about effective L&D. Feedback from agents has been consistently negative. They say the training doesn’t cater to different learning styles, they feel unprepared and lack confidence going into live calls, and both learners and feedback from facilitators is that agents are experiencing burnout and disengagement. It also doesn't help that we have almost no soft-skill training such as objection handling, complaint management, conversational guides, or tone of voice.

I’m trying to understand if this approach is as ineffective as it seems, or if I’m missing something. Has anyone worked with a similar model? What would you recommend changing or prioritising if you were redesigning this from scratch?

Hey everyone,
I work in a highly regulated industry with a ton of mandatory compliance training. Right now, we buy all our courses off-the-shelf from training providers specialized in our sector.
To be honest, I feel like this creates a massive vendor lock-in: we don’t own the SCORM packages, and we can’t update any content to fit our specific internal processes without going back to them and paying up. On top of that, we are currently planning a migration to a new LMS, and not having full control over our course deliverables is making me nervous about the transition.
Crucial detail: we don't have any in-house Instructional Designers. My idea would be to partner with an e-learning agency to co-create custom modules so we can have full ownership of the source files and SCORM packages (which would also make our future LMS migration much smoother).
Has anyone been in a similar situation? How would you handle this to make sure we don't mess up our deliverables before switching LMSs?

A lot of corporate e-learning still follows the same pattern: content, video, quiz, completion.

At the same time, instructional designers are being asked to add scenarios, gamification, AI, storytelling, accessibility, localization, analytics… sometimes all in the same project.

So I’m curious: where do you draw the line between “better learning design” and overcomplicating a course?

Is the future of e-learning more interactive, more personalized and more AI-assisted, or simply shorter, clearer and closer to the real work people need to do?

I’m curious if anyone else has run into this problem.

We use TalentLMS, and while importing questions is straightforward, the answer feedback still has to be entered manually.

Articulate Rise 360 has a similar limitation.
Has anyone found a better workflow for this?

I’m considering building a small tool that takes a question bank (including explanations/feedback) and generates a SCORM package automatically, so feedback can be imported in the same environment?

Would this be a worthwhile pursuit or is there already a better solution I’m missing?

I see a lot of "most advanced LMS" threads, and most of them just list whoever has the flashiest AI page. If you run a training business, "advanced" only matters where it saves you real time. So here's how I'd break it down, by what each thing actually does for you.

•  AI course authoring. The part that turns a rough outline or a PDF into a real course draft. This is where the newer AI-first platforms pull ahead of the old guard. Blend-ed is built around it, and Docebo has one of the deepest AI stacks out there, though you pay enterprise money for it.
• In-course learner support. An AI tutor that answers a learner's question inside the lesson, instead of them giving up or emailing you. Not many platforms do this well yet. It's genuinely useful when your learners are self-serve.
• Automation. Cohorts, certification, and expiry and renewal triggers running on their own. Absorb is strong on the compliance and certification side. If you're in regulated training, this matters more than any AI feature.
• Multi-tenancy. Every client on their own branded portal with clean, separate reporting. LearnUpon and TalentLMS both handle this, LearnUpon more cleanly once you're at mid-market scale.
• Ready-made content. Sometimes "advanced" just means you don't want to build anything. Litmos ships a big course library for exactly that.

Honest take: most training providers don't need the most advanced anything. They need the two or three of these that match how they actually deliver. If authoring volume is your bottleneck, the AI-first tools earn their keep. If you're mostly reselling stable content, they don't.

Full disclosure: I work at Blend-ed, one of the platforms above, so weigh my take on the AI parts accordingly. I tried to give the others their due.

Curious what people here consider "advanced" that actually changed how they work, versus what just demos well.

We use pdfs for some learning materials, but passwords only control access to the file they don’t stop screenshots. I recently tested MaiPdf and its screenshot blocking feature got me wondering what everyone else uses to protect training content.