Microsoft 365 Copilot connector
I would like to request a Microsoft 365 Copilot connector for Articulate tools, starting with Review 360 and potentially extending to Rise and Storyline. The goal is to enable a single Copilot-powered “Peer Review Assistant” that can access course content and support structured, consistent review workflows aligned to defined quality standards. The connector would enable a Copilot Agent to: Review course content and provide structured feedback Access courses within Review 360 Analyse on-screen content, structure, and interactions Interpret course flow, scenarios, and learner decision points Evaluate content against: Instructional design quality Accessibility standards Storytelling and scenario-based learning principles Action-oriented and decision-based learning design Generate actionable feedback linked directly to specific on-screen content Reference examples from the course to support review comments Distinguish between confirmed issues and areas requiring human validation Integrate with style and governance sources Connect to a Style Guide hosted in Rise 360 or Sharepoint Validate tone of voice, terminology, and consistency Flag deviations from writing, accessibility, or branding standards Identify opportunities for designer development Map identified issues to underlying skills, for example accessibility, scenario design, and assessment design Explain why the issue matters from a learning design perspective Provide practical guidance on how to improve Encourage reflective improvement rather than only corrective feedback Value Reduces manual effort in peer review and QA processes Improves consistency across reviewers and courses Embeds accessibility, instructional design, and style standards into the workflow Enables scalable, repeatable review practices across teams Supports more effective learning experiences by focusing on outcomes, not just content Supports ongoing capability development for learning designers, not just course quality assurance I’m also keen to hear from anyone else in the community who would benefit from this idea. Thanks!Ability to Copy/Move Microlearnings to Courses
In Articulate 360, it’s possible to copy or move a lesson from one course to another, but there’s no equivalent capability for microlearning content. 🙄 Instead, users are forced to rebuild microlearning content as block templates every time they need to reuse it in a course, which is both inefficient and unnecessarily time-consuming. 🤬 This gap creates avoidable friction in what should be a straightforward workflow. Enabling the ability to copy or move microlearning content into courses would be a simple but high-impact improvement that would remove a lot of frustration and redundancy. Rather than focusing heavily on AI features, it would be great to see attention given to strengthening these core content management capabilities that directly affect day-to-day productivity. I am sure I am not the first person to share this feedback. Thanks for your time and consideration! 🙂Review 360: can we transfer comments from one link to another?
Greetings, For a single Storyline project, I use Review 360 for the following groups... a link for our dev team a link for a group of clients a link for a different group of client I essentially have 3 Review links for the same SL file, all accessible with the comment pane. Can we transfer comments from the client group #2's link to our dev team's link, as they are for the same project? While I can access them with the comment pane in Storyline, our main issue is that we need to filter each comment and avoid responding to those, since the clients will be notified. Is there a way for me to "export comments from one link" and "import those comments in another link", hoping that each comment will be placed according to their respective slides? Thanks in advance :) P.S. I say Storyline, but I'm sure Rise could benefit from this.Allow publishing access for more than one owner
My team works in a very collaborative environment and the "owner" of the course in Rise360 may not be the only owner or the only person that needs access to publish the course to our LMS. We previously all had access to publish the course as long as we were listed as collaborators (manager or editor). As of today, this access is gone and only the owner has the option to publish the course. I saw in Articulate Community that this question has been asked previously in the context of an employee leaving the organization and it was recommended to just share the link. This does not allow us to publish the course in our LMS to track completion for compliance. I'm not sure what changed for us to previously have access to the publish feature regardless of ownership or why we no longer have the access to do so, but there should at the very least be an option to assign collaborators as "co-owners" so we can have equal publishing/modification rights on team projects. Thank you!Allow "Owned by Anyone" to be Selected by Default
As a leader in L&D, I need to be able to review my team member's courses at any time easily. An inconvenience to this is that in Rise 360, one filter always defaults to only seeing courses "Owned by Me", rather than "Owned by Anyone". If you switch it, it only stays that way for the current session and must be switched again for all future sessions. We should be able to change the default selection to this filter to the option of our choosing in Settings! This way, people can keep it to "Owned by Me" if they want, but leaders like me can switch it to "Owned by Anyone". A simple setting could save a lot of inconvenience in my opinion!Give triggers names to help remember what they are for
Hi, Ever wondered what a trigger was for? I have a few in a project that are JS triggers and I can never remember which is which if I want to copy and paste to another slide. We need the ability to add a name or a description to a trigger. The name can be added in the Triggers panel when creating it. Perhaps the name/description can be hidden in an icon in the triggers side panel so to not take up room, but if you roll over it the name/description appears? I created a quick example to help get my idea across. Thanks for your consideration! RussEnhancing Review 360 Feedback Management with Categorization Tags
Currently, in Review 360, feedback and comments provided during reviews are captured in a generic format without any structured categorization. This often leads to ambiguity when interpreting feedback, as reviewers and developers must manually infer whether a comment refers to an error, an enhancement suggestion, or a query. The lack of classification makes prioritization and resolution time-consuming, especially when handling large volumes of feedback across multiple stakeholders. Post-implementation of the proposed feature—a dropdown selection allowing users to tag feedback as Error, Enhancement, Query or Not applicable—the process becomes significantly more streamlined. Categorization at the point of entry ensures clarity, enabling teams to filter and sort feedback based on type, prioritize critical issues, and allocate resources effectively. This structured approach not only improves communication between reviewers and developers but also accelerates decision-making and enhances overall productivity by reducing misinterpretation and manual effort. This categorization should also be reflected in the generated reports.Search functionality for unassigned trigger.
At present, we are required to manually inspect each page and layer for any unassigned triggers, which is a labor-intensive process and prone to oversight. This method is not only time-consuming but also increases the likelihood that some unassigned triggers may go unnoticed. There are instances when triggers remain unassigned due to various reasons, such as moving or reusing slides, or other operational factors. This can lead to significant functionality errors, which could impact the overall performance. To streamline this process and reduce the risk of errors, it would be highly advantageous to implement a search functionality specifically designed to identify and highlight unassigned triggers.Enhancement in shape angle option.
Currently, an angle option is available to set the corner radius of certain shapes. However, this option should be extended to all shapes that feature a yellow adjustment dot used for modifying angle elevation. For example, in the case of a parallelogram, we currently adjust the slant manually using the yellow dot. If we had the ability to set a specific angle for such shapes, it would greatly improve consistency across the course design. This enhancement would ensure uniformity in angle settings and reduce manual adjustments.
