The eLearning Audit & Redesign Methodology

Every L&D function inherits courses it didn’t build. Some are good. Some are bad. Most are in the middle, and the question “should we keep it or scrap it” is rarely answered with rigour. This framework is the rubric I use to answer it.

Seven dimensions

Score each dimension 1–5. The total is less informative than the shape.

1. Objective alignment. Do the stated learning objectives reflect the real performance need? Are they Mager-format and assessable?
2. Content accuracy. Is the content technically correct? Up to date? Sourced?
3. Instructional design. Is the strategy fit for the content type? Does the structure support transfer to the job?
4. Assessment integrity. Do the assessments actually measure the objectives, or are they comprehension proxies?
5. Interactivity quality. Is the interaction meaningful, or is it “click next” with extra steps?
6. Accessibility. WCAG level, captions, keyboard nav, screen reader compatibility, all measurable.
7. Production polish. Visual design, audio quality, navigation clarity, responsiveness on the devices learners actually use.

The maturity levels

The audit produces a maturity rating:

• Level 1, Compliance shell. Exists. Tracks completion. Doesn’t change behaviour.
• Level 2, Information transfer. Teaches content. Doesn’t practise application.
• Level 3, Performance support. Teaches and practises in realistic scenarios.
• Level 4, Behaviour change. Practises, reinforces, and integrates with the job context (manager involvement, on-the-job tasks, follow-up).
• Level 5, Cultural shift. Behaviour change at scale, measured at Kirkpatrick Level 4, embedded in the operating rhythm.

Most legacy courses sit between Levels 1 and 2. The cost of moving them to Level 3 is usually less than building from scratch. The cost of moving from Level 3 to Level 4 is usually larger than the original build, because it requires the surrounding system, not just the course.

The priority matrix

Plot the audit score against the strategic importance of the topic. Two quadrants matter:

• High importance, low score → rebuild
• High importance, high score → protect and reinforce

The other two quadrants don’t deserve much investment. That sounds obvious. It is. It is also routinely violated.

The redesign playbook

If the verdict is rebuild, the playbook runs in six steps: re-anchor in the performance gap, rewrite the objectives, restructure modules, redesign the practice, rebuild the assessments, then, only then, rebuild the surface. Most rebuilds skip straight to the surface. That’s why most rebuilds fail.