Two institutions, two Moodle projects, two ways of using them. On one side H3 Campus, which trains between 3,000 and 4,000 learners a year and is preparing a new learning experience for the 2026 intake. On the other the chamber of commerce and industry network — CCI Hauts-de-France and CCI de Grenoble — which hosts two very different audiences on one platform: professionals on short courses, and students from their apprenticeship training centre.
Both go through Moodle and through LTI 1.3. Both made the same underlying choice: conversational practice belongs inside the LMS, not beside it. But what each gets out of it is not the same. The first case is about scale and the range of professions involved. The second is about placement in the pathway — at what point you have people practise.
This article sets the two configurations side by side, without headline figures we do not yet have, and stops on what they teach anyone considering the same thing. The shared technical framework is described in the guide to integrating Face Up with your LMS.
H3 Campus trains between 3,000 and 4,000 learners each year. At that scale, the questions change in nature. It is no longer "is the scenario any good" but "will the route in hold up". An invitation to email, a password to recover, support to provide: multiplied by several thousand, those small actions become the main subject of the project.
That is the real reason for going through LTI rather than a separate tool. The learner signs in to Moodle as they already do, opens their course, clicks an activity. Nothing new to learn, nothing new to administer. The scheme does not add another front door, it sits behind the one that already exists.
H3 Campus learners are students on work-study contracts. They split their week between the employer and the training centre. That has a direct consequence for the format: training time is tight, and relational practice is precisely what gets dropped first when the programme is crowded.
Practice that launches in one click from the course, lasts a few minutes and can be replayed as often as wanted slips into those gaps. It is a format that works with the time pressure of work-study rather than against it.
H3 Campus covers a wide spread: management, sales, human resources, property. Four families of professions, four vocabularies, four kinds of working situation. That is where the case becomes interesting.
One and the same practice scheme has to serve very different jobs. A future manager rehearses pulling a team member up on their work; a salesperson handles an objection; an HR professional runs a difficult conversation; an estate agent delivers bad news to a seller. The situations have nothing in common. What does repeat is the mechanism: facing someone who reacts, saying the thing, getting a debrief, going again.
The practical consequence is a question of catalogue organisation, not technology. Each stream needs its own scenarios, and each trainer has to be able to pick the right one without going through an administrator. That is exactly what Deep Linking settles, letting the trainer choose the scenario from the LMS.
The new version of the H3 Campus Moodle was built by the integrator eLearning Touch'. Face Up plugs into that Moodle. This organisational detail matters more than it looks: in many institutions the LMS is not administered in-house but by a specialist supplier.
It means that declaring the external tool, which happens at site level rather than course level, goes through a third party. That is not an obstacle, it is a planning step to identify at the right moment. Projects that drag almost never drag on the technology; they drag on the availability of whoever holds administrator rights.
When an integrator is in the loop, the right instinct is to treat them as a participant in the pedagogical project, not as a technical contractor. They know the platform's constraints, the institution's configuration habits, the settings that have caused trouble before. The parameters to exchange and the order of operations are set out in the tutorial for integrating Face Up with Moodle.
The aim at H3 Campus is to offer a new learning experience to all their learners from the 2026 intake. A start-of-year deadline imposes its own discipline: anything not ready beforehand cannot be caught up once the cohorts are running. That argues for handling the technical part early, so the remaining time goes to the part that genuinely needs it — deciding where the scenarios sit within each stream.
At CCI Hauts-de-France and CCI de Grenoble, the first population is professionals on short courses. They come for a limited time, usually with a specific objective, then go back to their company. Available time is the limiting factor, and the gap between what is covered in the room and what is applied on return is the main risk.
The second population comes through the CFA, the apprenticeship training centre. These are apprentices, on a long rhythm, with assessments and pedagogical follow-up over time. Their needs do not overlap with the professionals': they have time to progress, but they lack the field experience to draw on.
These two audiences share the same platform. That works because what separates them is not the tool but how it is used: the same scenarios, placed at different moments and with different expectations. Administration stays single; the teaching differentiates through the pathway.
A simulation played ahead of a session changes the nature of the day that follows. The learner arrives having already tried, and therefore knowing what they cannot yet do. The trainer no longer starts by explaining the context but by working on real difficulties the group has just hit. On a short course, that shift is worth several hours of programme.
During the session, the scenario works as an application exercise. Everyone practises at once, without waiting their turn and without the group watching — which lifts the inhibition that blocks a share of participants in a conventional role play. The trainer then picks up collectively on what went wrong, with concrete material to work from.
This is the most often neglected moment and the most decisive one. Three weeks after the session, most of what was covered has faded if it has not been played again. Reopening the same scenario remotely, inside the LMS, puts the reflex back into circulation just as it was starting to disappear. That is exactly what an LMS is good at — scheduling, reminding, reopening — and what the module-and-quiz format never exploits for relational skill, as we explain in why an LMS alone is not enough for soft skills.
Both go through Moodle and LTI 1.3. Face Up is declared once as an external tool at site level, the two platforms exchange their credentials, and every launch after that is signed. All the trainer has to do is add the activity to their course.
In both cases, the scenario opens in an iframe inside the course page. No second password, no second tool to find again. That is the condition for practice to remain one activity among others rather than becoming a separate undertaking.
The score out of 100 and the completion status come back into the course gradebook through the AGS service. The programme manager reads results where they already read the others. Several grade lines can be sent back to separate what the learner is improving on, a point we develop in AGS and sending soft skills results back to the LMS.
The chambers of commerce case makes the point: the question that decides success is not technical. It is "at what point in the pathway does the learner practise". Before, during, after, or all three. That decision is taken up front, with the trainers, and it shapes everything else.
The H3 Campus case makes the other point: you do not need one tool per stream. What changes from one profession to the next is the content of the scenarios, not the learning mechanism. Planning a catalogue by family of professions and letting each trainer draw from it is an arrangement that holds at a scale of several thousand learners.
In both configurations the path is the same: one pilot course, one scenario, one cohort. You check that the launch works, that the column appears, that the microphone stops nobody. Only then do you open up the catalogue. The logic of scaling is developed in deploying soft skills training at scale.
These two deployments do not prove the same thing. H3 Campus shows that a conversational practice scheme can serve a broad catalogue without fragmenting, provided access runs through the platform learners already open. The chambers of commerce show that the value does not come from the tool but from when you use it: before to prepare, during to practise, afterwards to make it stick.
If you are preparing an equivalent project, those are the two questions to settle first — who gets access, and when they practise. The LTI configuration itself is sorted in a single working session.
