Bullet points in quiz feedback not left aligning
Hi there, despite left-aligning the bullet point sections in the feedback areas of the quiz, the text remains centre-aligned - how do I fix this? For context, when you populate the feedback sections, the text is not centre-aligned: In preview mode: In edit mode:Community Insights: What You Can Learn from David Tait’s Career Pivot
One of the best things about creative careers is how flexible they are—you can take them in so many directions. For DavidTait, that flexibility led from graphic design to learning design, and eventually to co-founding 4pt, a learning design studio. 4pt has been creating meaningful learning experiences for more than 16 years. In this Member Spotlight, you'll discover how adaptability, curiosity, and community shaped David's journey, and how to apply these lessons to your own career path. From Design to Learning “Before starting my career in e-learning, I was a student focused on design,” David says. “I spent four years studying design. Two in graphic design and two in newspaper, magazine, and infographic design. That background gave me a strong foundation in visual communication, which has been incredibly useful in my learning and development (L&D) work.” While still in college, he took on a freelance project as a graphical user interface designer for the Northern College Network. “It was my first real step into the world of digital learning design,” he recalls. “It helped me see how I could apply my design skills in a completely different context.” Soon after, a former lecturer offered him a role at an e-learning startup creating online CPD courses for healthcare professionals. “Working in a startup meant wearing many hats,” David says. “That experience really shaped my path and helped me see how my design skills could grow into a career in learning.” 💡Tip: Apply your existing creative skills to a small digital learning project (freelance, volunteer, or self-initiated). Hands-on experience helps bridge design and instructional work faster than theory alone. Turning Change into Opportunity A few years later, the company was acquired, and layoffs followed. “Rather than seeing it as a setback, my studio manager and I took it as an opportunity,” David says. “When we started 4pt, all of those responsibilities suddenly became our job. Being able to adapt to new challenges was essential, and it’s a big reason why we’ve been able to thrive.” 💡Tip: When your path shifts unexpectedly, use it to test new skills or partnerships. Career detours often reveal strengths you wouldn’t discover in a stable role. Finding Flexibility with Storyline “One project in 2013 really shaped our company,” David says. “A client asked us to build a course in Storyline 1. We’d never used it before, but rather than turn the work away, we invested in licenses and learned as we went.” “Before long, Storyline became the tool most of our clients wanted to use,” he explains. “Storyline gave us the ability to solve problems ourselves, experiment more freely, and move much faster. That agility has stayed with us ever since—it’s a core part of how we approach learning design.” 💡Tip: Don’t wait to feel like an expert. Pick a project, open the tool, and build. Use the community forums and shared files when you hit roadblocks. The Power of Community “I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve hit a dead end in Storyline and found the solution on the forums,” David says. “That support has saved me countless hours and kept projects moving. The community around Articulate is unlike anything else.” Over time, helping others became just as rewarding. “Being part of E-Learning Heroes isn’t just about getting help,” he adds. “It’s about giving back. I try to pay it forward when I can, and that sense of community has been such a valuable part of my journey.” 💡Tip: When you find an answer in ELH, take a minute to thank the poster—or add your own version of the solution. Small interactions build visibility and confidence. Lessons from the Journey “Figure out where your limitations are, and then build a trusted network of professionals who can help you overcome them,” David says. “Continuous learning is important, but you don’t have to master everything yourself.” He also believes in stepping outside your comfort zone: “Sometimes doing that sooner opens doors you didn’t even realize were there.” “I try to focus on projects where I can see real value and impact—and to work with people I genuinely like and respect. That combination has made the journey far more meaningful.” 💡Tip: Find one collaborator who complements your skills—a developer, writer, or media pro—and trade knowledge. Collaboration accelerates growth and keeps learning fun. Looking Ahead These days, David is focused on advancing localization in his projects and exploring how AI fits into e-learning. “We’re evaluating Storyline’s new localization features ahead of a major project,” David says. “I’m excited to see how these tools evolve and how we can integrate them to deliver even better multilingual learning experiences.” He’s also reading Co-Intelligence: Living and Working with AI by Ethan Mollick. “It’s not written specifically for L&D, but it’s helped me think more critically about how AI can be used thoughtfully and effectively.” 💡Tip: Keep one “outside-the-industry” book on your reading list. Fresh perspectives often spark the most creative ideas. 💬 Your Turn David’s story is a reminder that creativity, curiosity, and community can take your career in directions you never planned, but might love most. What’s one skill—or moment—that’s shaped your own learning design journey? Share it in the comments below!AI‑powered, real‑time role‑play platforms
Hello Heroes! Has anyone cracked this yet? I’m exploring AI‑powered, real‑time role‑play platforms that can be embedded directly into an Articulate Rise Multimedia Embed block and run within the Rise frame—without sending learners outside the course or requiring a separate login. I’ve tested a few options, including Yoodli, but that experience redirects learners out of Rise. Other platforms I’ve reviewed are either cost‑prohibitive or not transparent with pricing. Has anyone successfully integrated a truly seamless, experiential role‑play experience into Rise? I’d love to hear what you’ve tried, what’s come close, or where you hit barriers. Thank you!AI Voices Skipping Words?
Hi Heroes! I've got an issue and I'm wondering if anyone else is having this same challenge with the AI voices lately. I have been using the AI voices in Articulate Storyline for about 8 months now and it's been great. But, in the last few days, I've had an issue with my AI voice skipping the first few words on a slide. I uploaded a review of one project and shared with a colleague. I use Storyline and Rise. Rise is my book and Storyline is the individual chapter. As my colleague was going through the project, she noticed that the voice would start on the third or fourth word. It wasn't happening on every slide but it was an issue on many of them. If she went back and played the slide over, the entire sentence would be heard. Is anyone else having this issue? I'm using the Jessica voice but I've been told by other co-workers that they are having the same issue and they are using different voices.An Agent for creating course intros to use with Articulate
I’ve been testing an AI Agent called StoryTool for creating short intro videos and other visual explainers that could work well alongside Articulate projects. It seems useful for cases like course intros, topic openers, or short illustrated sections where plain text feels a bit dry. This is one example from StoryTool: The Wood Wide Web They’re currently opening free testing on the website at storytool.io. I’m testing it myself and plan to come back with a more honest review next week. If anyone else is curious, feel free to try it too and share what you think.Parity Between AI and Manual Translation Workflows, and AI Translation Quality Concerns
I want to start by saying that the new Articulate Localization tool is genuinely impressive. The ability to manage multiple language versions as a single course package is exactly the kind of workflow improvement our team has needed, and the in-context validation via Review is a great touch. That said, I'm running into significant gaps that are creating real problems for a current project, and I want to raise three interconnected issues. 1. Poor AI quality forces a manual workflow that breaks the multi-language learner experience We're building a course that requires both Hindi and Bengali for our client's learners, with the requirement that learners can select their preferred language within the course itself — a single item in the LMS, not two separate courses. Both languages are available through AI translation. However, following a formal Language Quality Assessment of the Hindi AI output (detailed in point 2), the quality is not at a standard we can publish. As a result, we'll be using our internal globalisation team to provide human translations for both Hindi and Bengali — at significantly higher cost to our client. Here's where it becomes a compounding problem: the manual XLIFF process produces standalone duplicate courses. It doesn't slot into the multi-language course stack the way AI translations do. That means we cannot offer learners a language toggle within a single course — we would have to publish two entirely separate courses in the LMS and ask learners to self-select the right one. That is a worse learner experience, harder to manage, and not what our client asked for. To be clear: this situation was directly caused by the AI translation quality not being fit for purpose. We started this project intending to use Articulate Localization end-to-end. The tool's own output has pushed us onto a manual workflow that the tool doesn't fully support — and our client is the one bearing the cost of that, both financially and in terms of experience. The fix we need: allow manually translated XLIFF files to be imported into the multi-language course stack, not just as standalone duplicates. If we're providing validated human translations, we should be able to manage them within the same course package and give learners the language-selection experience the tool is designed to deliver. 2. AI translation quality for Hindi (hi-IN) is below acceptable thresholds We had the Hindi AI output formally assessed by our globalisation team using a Language Quality Assessment (LQA) framework against the WalkMe + Training profile (≥1,000–4,000 words), applied to a 2,860-word electrical safety course (en-US → hi-IN). The overall verdict: the translation is not suitable for customer-facing content. Error summary by category Category Minor Major Notes Fluency 14 (+ 2 repeated) 0 Largest volume; affects naturalness throughout Omission 2 1 (+ 1 repeated) Most severe — content is dropped Inconsistency 2 (+ 2 repeated) 0 Systemic terminology variance Inconsistent with termbase 3 (+ 1 repeated) 0 Termbase not followed Punctuation 1 (+ 3 repeated) 0 Devanagari punctuation misused Mistranslation 2 0 Grammar 1 0 What this means in practice Our localisation team reviewed the output qualitatively alongside the LQA scorecard and identified five compounding issues: Clarity and readability Much of the content is technically understandable but does not read like natural, professional Hindi. Sentences are awkward or overly literal, which makes the training hard to follow. The LQA flagged 16 fluency errors across the sampled content — including several that required substantial rewrites in the corrected version, not for accuracy but for basic readability. Missing critical information In multiple places, important safety instructions are partially or fully absent. The clearest example: the navigational instruction "Please ensure you have flipped all cards, watched the video, and opened the transcript before moving on" was rendered as "Please ensure you have flipped all the cards before moving on" — the video and transcript steps dropped entirely. This segment appeared twice in the course, and the omission occurred both times. This is not a cosmetic issue. Learners following the Hindi version could skip key actions or misunderstand safety procedures as a direct result. Meaning changes Some phrases are mistranslated, particularly around risk and mitigation. The LQA flagged two mistranslation errors in the sampled content alone. Even small wording changes in this context can weaken or alter safety messages — which is unacceptable in high-risk, electrical-safety training. Inconsistent use of key terms Key concepts — equipment names, safety gear, risk terminology — are not used consistently. "High Voltage" alone appears both as हाई वोल्टेज (transliterated) and उच्च वोल्टेज (translated) across different parts of the same course, with no consistent rule applied and the provided termbase not followed. The same idea appearing in different forms across a course is genuinely confusing for learners. Overall brand and safety risk The combined effect is a course that does not meet the standard of a polished, trustworthy training product. For a safety-critical topic, this introduces reputational risk for the content owner and potential compliance and safety risk if learners misunderstand or fail to fully absorb the guidance. We would not be comfortable publishing this output without significant human rework. Our recommendation We recognise that the in-context validation feature in Review is Articulate's human-in-the-loop step, and we appreciate that it exists. The problem is that it can only be effective if the base AI output is of a standard that a reviewer can reasonably work with. What we received was not that. When a translation has major omissions, meaning changes, and systematic terminology failures throughout, the Review step stops being a validation pass and becomes a full retranslation effort — one being carried out by people who may not be professional translators, without the tooling or context that a language service provider would have. That's not a sustainable or safe quality control mechanism for safety-critical content. Our globalisation team's recommendation is that Articulate either improve the AI output quality to a standard where Review can function as intended, or explicitly position the output as a machine translation post-editing (MTPE) starting point — and set user expectations accordingly. Right now, the workflow implies a level of AI quality that our experience suggests isn't there, at least for Hindi. 3. "Bangla" should be labelled as "Bengali" (or both) A small but important usability point: the language is listed in the tool as "Bangla" rather than "Bengali." While Bangla is the correct native name for the language, Bengali is the standard English name used across the L&D industry, by language service providers, in ISO language codes (bn), and in most professional translation contexts. In practice, this caused real confusion on our project — we initially concluded that Bengali wasn't supported at all and were prepared to raise it as a missing language. We only discovered it was available by chance. If that happened to us, it will happen to others, and some won't catch the error before making decisions based on it. A simple fix would be to list it as "Bengali (Bangla)" or add "Bengali" as a searchable alias. This is a discoverability issue, not a technical one — but it has real consequences for users trying to plan multilingual projects. Allow manually translated XLIFF imports to be added to the multi-language course stack (not just as standalone duplicates) Investigate and address Hindi (hi-IN) AI translation quality — particularly around omission, fluency, and termbase compliance Consider clearer guidance or workflow support for MTPE as an intermediate option between raw AI output and full human translation Relabel "Bangla" as "Bengali (Bangla)" or add Bengali as a searchable alias — the current labelling causes users to incorrectly conclude the language isn't supported We're genuinely invested in making Articulate Localization work for our projects. These issues are the main barriers right now. Thanks for the tool and for taking this feedback seriously.Combine Separate Projects into One Project Keeping Triggers and Quiz Results
We developed eight separate projects with final assessments and quiz results slides that need to be combined into one large project. We are having issues with the quiz results slides working after the projects are combined. Also, the project is large, with videos and lots of interactivity. Making changes and saving them is taking a very long time, making it very frustrating to edit. Sometimes the changes made are not reflected in the preview, and the project has to be saved, closed and reopened to continue with edits. Being relatively new to Storyline, I am looking for best practice to combine these projects with the least amount of trigger breakage and quiz results slides issues. The modules will be put into Canvas for delivery to learners. Any sage advice would be greatly appreciated, because of course I am on a deadline. P.S. All the projects worked when they were separate projects, and much easier to edit.
