The usual order for building a course is: gather the content, organise it into modules, then write some questions at the end. It produces training that covers a lot of material and certifies very little.
Try the other order. Before any content exists, write the assessment — the thing the learner has to be able to do at the end, and how you would know whether they can.
Why it is uncomfortable
Because you often cannot. Sitting down to write the test exposes that "understands the safety requirements" is not an objective anyone can assess, and that half the material in the existing course does not map to anything a learner needs to do. That discovery is painful in week one and much more painful in month six.
What it gives you
- Objectives that are real, because you had to test them.
- A defensible certification, if certification is involved — the assessment demonstrably measures the stated objectives.
- A content scope with an edge on it. Anything that does not serve an objective is reference material, not course material, and can be moved out of the four hours you have.
- An honest conversation with the subject-matter expert about what actually matters, early, while it is still cheap to change.
It also settles most arguments about course length. If the assessment is right, the course is as long as it needs to be to pass it, and no longer.