SAMPLE
Sample audit. Anonymized data from a real course type — this is what CourseLint output looks like for your own courses.
Audit your own course
courselint.app/report/standard
CLCourseLint

Marketing in Practice

sample audit #A-2287 · medium course · anonymized
STANDARD
↑ Quality score — higher is better (0–100)
67/ 10025 findings · 8 planes
assessed deterministically and by AI
Critical
5
To improve
9
OK
10
Needs review
1
id · plane · checkpoint · severity · description · recommendation · location · source · confidence
Severity
Critical — blocks quality
Medium — should be improved
OK
Needs review — uncertain finding
N/A — not evaluated (deeper audit / API)
Finding source
det rule engine
AI language model
vision image analysis
hybrid rules + AI
Confidence
Deterministic findings have a confidence of 1.0. AI findings go through two-phase verification. The confidence threshold rises with depth.
Traffic light by plane
critical medium OK needs review not evaluated (N/A)
Click a plane — it shows what it checks.
Evaluated 7 of 8 planes fully. Not evaluated: 7 (Student Engagement (requires API connection))Not evaluated in this audit.
What we checked
Course content by section6 sections · 22 activities · 95 quiz questions
1 · Introduction to Marketing4 items
Course goals (page)
What is marketing (text)
Introductory video
Discussion forum
2 · Segmentation and Targeting4 items
Segmentation theory
Study materials
Entry quiz
Exercise – persona
3 · Marketing Mix (4P)3 items
The 4P explained
Examples.pdf
Quiz: marketing mix
4 · Digital Marketing4 items
Case studies
Video: viral campaign
SEO basics (text)
Quiz: digital
5 · Campaigns and Budget3 items
Topic goals
Assignment: campaign budget
Plan template.pdf
6 · Measurement and Analytics2 items
Measurement and analytics
Final test
The finding number is colored by severity (🔴 critical · 🟡 medium · 🔵 needs review). Clicking filters the list down to that one finding — clear it via ✕ or “All”.
Prioritized findings
2.1CriticaldetPlane 2 · Content integrity
A case study link returns a 404 error
The “Case study: rebranding” link points to a page that no longer exists — students cannot reach the material.
Recommendation: Fix the target URL or replace the link with a current source.
Location: Section 4 › Case studiesConfidence: 1.0
2.3CriticaldetPlane 2 · Content integrity
The embedded ad campaign video is unavailable
The embedded video was removed at the source; the player shows an error instead of content.
Recommendation: Replace the video with a working source or a local copy.
Location: Section 4 › Video: viral campaignConfidence: 1.0
6.1CriticaldetPlane 6 · Grading
Weights in the “Ongoing assignments” category sum to 80%, not 100%
Item weights in the category do not add up to 100%, so the final grade is skewed.
Recommendation: Adjust the weights so they sum to exactly 100%.
Location: Gradebook › Ongoing assignmentsConfidence: 1.0
6.5CriticaldetPlane 6 · Grading
The final test allows unlimited attempts
Without an attempt limit the test loses discriminating value — students can retry to full marks.
Recommendation: Set a sensible attempt limit (e.g. 1–2).
Location: Section 6 › Final testConfidence: 1.0
1.2MediumAIPlane 1 · Pedagogy
The goal “build a marketing plan” has no verification in assessment
The declared goal is not covered by any assignment or quiz — there is no way to verify students achieved it.
Recommendation: Add an assignment or quiz item targeting this outcome directly.
Location: Section 5 › Topic goalsConfidence: 0.80
3.4MediumdetPlane 3 · Configuration
The assignment due date is in the past
The “Campaign budget” assignment is due before the course run starts — students cannot submit.
Recommendation: Move the due date into the current run.
Location: Section 5 › Assignment: campaign budgetConfidence: 1.0
5.2MediumAIPlane 5 · UX/UI
Section labels are generic (“Topic 1” to “Topic 6”)
Section names do not describe the content, making the course harder to navigate.
Recommendation: Name sections after their content, e.g. “Digital Marketing” instead of “Topic 4”.
Location: Course outlineConfidence: 0.77
4.5MediumhybridPlane 4 · Content & language
Inconsistent formatting in the study materials
The page mixes heading levels and contains copy-paste artefacts (inline styles).
Recommendation: Unify heading styles and remove inline formatting.
Location: Section 2 › Study materialsConfidence: 0.63
6.4Mediumdet+AIPlane 6 · Grading
The final test has no answer feedback
Questions lack explanatory feedback — students don't learn from their mistakes.
Recommendation: Add feedback at least to the key questions.
Location: Section 6 › Final testConfidence: 0.78
5.6MediumAIPlane 5 · UX/UI
Long text with no visual structure
The “Marketing Mix (4P)” explanation is a solid block of 10+ paragraphs without headings or bullets — hard to read.
Recommendation: Break the text up with subheadings and bullets, highlight key terms.
Location: Section 3 › Marketing Mix (4P)Confidence: 0.69
4.3Needs reviewAIPlane 4 · Content & language
Possibly outdated market statistics (year 2020)
The text cites 2020 market shares — currency cannot be verified automatically. Requires human review.
Recommendation: Verify the data is current and add a newer source if needed.
Location: Section 6 › Measurement and analyticsConfidence: 0.54
Deepen to Detail. An action plan with priorities, ready-made fix wording, the student journey, an impact×effort matrix and a re-audit. You only pay the price difference.
+3 000 Kč · pricing
AI-generated, indicative. Fixes are not part of the audit. Every finding lists its source and confidence level; AI findings went through two-phase verification.