No Miles, it will showup as different items in the TOC of LMS.

Thanks,
Vish

Miles,
Why would you want this to be in a single SCO? Besides not being SCORM-centric design, it makes courseware in general more difficult to support from both a development standpoint and from an LMS administration standpoint. For example, If a student is having difficulties getting through one SCO, in a proper multi-SCO course an administrator can provide them credit for the one SCO allowing them to further progress through the rest of the course, with a large single SCO multi-lesson course we could not do that. Besides the fact that these weighting and pre-test/post-test rollup behaviors are only supported using the SCORM 2004 standard, I assume that if SCORM 1.2 was chosen, you would still be able to create a multi-SCO course, you would be very limited in the things you would be able to do/specify.

Well, I believed this to be a scorm limitation, and expected the sequence response, honestly… still, whenever I design a course, I always seem to get the question about scoring each enabling objective separately. We all know that this is simply a matter of position along the chain of “objective” fractals… each SCO is cosidered an ELO that, when all completed to satisfaction, equals the accomplishment of the unstated TLO. However, I do see validity in their argument about having several ELO level quizzes within a single continguous Lesson as a Terminal Object, that allows for complex branching and scoring that separate SCO’s linked by a sequence simply does not, in many LMS’s.

Short ananswer: SCO’s don’t talk, and I only get one TLO quiz output.