Hi all:
So excited to get such great answers from my last post, I thought I'd run another one by you all. Can anyone give me an overview of the pros and cons for Scorm 2004 vs, Scorm 1.2? Using Captivate 9.
We chose Scorm 1.2 because it was more stable with our LMS. However we'd like to access the analytics that Scorm 2004 allows. Can anyone share any insight into one format over the other?
Thanks in advance, I appreciate the collaboration.
Best,
W
SCORM 1.2 had some limitations regarding the way it recorded completion status that were overcome in SCORM 2004 by separating out the variables that tracked completion from the ones that tracked pass/fail, and there were new features added such as the ability to enforce sequencing of modules so that learners had to do them in a certain order, or had to pass one before doing the next etc.
Take a look at these links:
SCORM - Technical SCORM » SCORM -
SCORM 1.2 vs SCORM 2004 - Which is Better? ‹eLearning Experts
Advantages and Disadvantages of SCORM 1.2 vs 2004 | eLearning Chef
However, all of this becomes a moot point if your LMS doesn't support SCORM 2004. Many organisations are perfectly satisfied with the basic functionality offered with SCORM 1.2 so many LMS vendors don't see the need to deliver anything more. You need to check with your LMS vendor to find out where they sit on the scale here.
Already have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
AdChoices