Trainings are not static entities
Hi,
Trainings are not static entities, nor are the programs that comprise them.
Organizing courses in alphabetical or chronological order is not suitable for structuring learning paths. The administrator must be able to freely change the position of courses. For example, a newly created course may need to be inserted between two older ones. Furthermore, end users should not have the ability to modify this order.
Please take this into consideration.
David
I fully agree with the idea that courses should not be treated as static entities. Learning is a dynamic process, and the structure of a learning path should reflect that.
Alphabetical or chronological ordering may seem convenient, but it does not serve the purpose of guiding learners through content in a meaningful and strategic way. In practice, the sequence of courses often needs to be adjusted to reflect changes in learning objectives, updated content, or the introduction of new material that builds on existing knowledge.
Granting administrators the flexibility to change the position of courses ensures that the learning journey remains coherent and effective.
In short, maintaining control over course order while allowing for flexibility in its organization is essential for delivering high-quality, goal-oriented training programs.
I would so love to be able to group them.
J V Grouping would be ideal and am sure the ninja's will do this eventually. BuddyBoss does this and it's a great feature.
