Solutions Consulting & Implementation
Former educator helping education technology companies understand school workflows, drive adoption, and translate real classroom needs into product solutions.
I help education technology companies turn complex platforms into smooth experiences for schools. Nine years inside classrooms and school leadership taught me where systems break. I now bring that rigour to discovery, onboarding, and enablement in educational technology.
THE GAP I BRIDGE
Nine years inside classrooms and school leadership. The past year building products, reviewing platforms, and consulting for EdTech startups. I sit between a product team and a school and translate in both directions.
What I Do
Experienced across school operational systems including assessment, reporting, curriculum mapping, and parent communication platforms.
Portfolio
Conducted a strategic review of an EdTech startup's PRD and AI tutor dashboards, identified where the signal hierarchy prioritised tracking over instructional insight, and delivered annotated Figma mockups enabling teacher decisions in under 30 seconds.
An early-stage EdTech startup needed their AI tutor dashboards to work for real teachers in real classrooms.
LearnPF is an early-stage EdTech startup built on Productive Failure, a pedagogy where students work through problems before being taught the solution. Their AI tutor captures student thinking during pre-work, and the teacher dashboard is meant to translate that into classroom-ready insight.
The problem was that the dashboard wasn't doing what the pedagogy needed it to do. It prioritised completion tracking and status labels like "At Risk" and "Inactive" over the instructional signals teachers actually need. A teacher preparing for a consolidation lesson needs to know what students are misunderstanding and why. Instead, they were getting compliance metrics.
For a product built on a differentiated pedagogical model, this mismatch put adoption at risk before the tool ever reached a classroom.
The original dashboard centred completion status and risk labels. It told teachers who was behind, but not what students were misunderstanding or what to teach next.
I reviewed the product requirements document, the current dashboard screens, the product roadmap, and the student-facing Productive Failure flow. A consistent pattern emerged: the product vision was strong, but the dashboard didn't yet reflect it.
Four key issues surfaced:
The class view listed students by activity status and generic categories. These labels create urgency without providing instructional direction.
I delivered two things: a strategic review and annotated Figma mockups.
The strategic review challenged a core assumption in the product direction. I recommended that LearnPF consider an in-class model, where students complete the Productive Failure cycle live, rather than relying on pre-work completion at home.
The mockups restructured the dashboard around misconception clusters, consolidation focus, and suggested student groupings rather than completion status. The design ensured a teacher could open the dashboard, understand the most significant patterns, and walk into the room knowing where to start, all within the 30-second benchmark set in the PRD.
The restructured view leads with the highest-impact misconception, a suggested consolidation focus, and student groupings. A teacher can open this and know where to start within 30 seconds.
LearnPF received a clear framework for aligning their dashboard logic to the pedagogical model that differentiates their product, along with mockups that demonstrated what a teacher-first signal hierarchy looks like in practice.
Designed to meet the PRD benchmark: teachers understand the dashboard in under 30 seconds.
Client Testimonial
"I liked the clarity of thought and how Justine reviewed our ideas before delivering a dashboard that translated business needs into clear, actionable designs. Justine brought a strong understanding of education workflows and how teachers actually use tools in practice."
Teachers spend 60+ minutes per student on compliance reporting because existing tools digitise the paperwork without reducing it. Éirico automates evidence mapping to regulatory requirements while preserving professional judgement, built from Figma prototype through to a functional Next.js application.
An AI-assisted assessment and reporting workflow that reduces compliance reporting time while preserving teacher judgement.
Type
Self-directed product
Status
Figma prototype, partial Next.js build
Stack
Figma, Claude Code, Next.js, Supabase, Anthropic API
Australian primary school teachers spend upwards of 60 minutes per student, per subject, compiling compliance-grade assessment reports each semester. Existing tools digitise the paperwork but do not reduce the cognitive or mechanical load of cross-referencing evidence against curriculum standards.
The downstream impact is measurable: assessment administration is consistently cited as a leading contributor to unsustainable workload and reduced teacher wellbeing.
The problem is not a lack of tools. It is a misalignment between what assessment tools do and what teachers actually need in the moment.
Through nine years of teaching across Australia, Qatar, and the UK, I saw the same pattern everywhere. Teachers are not struggling with understanding curriculum standards. They are struggling with the manual labour of mapping evidence to those standards under extreme time constraints.
The opportunity is to automate the mechanical layer while keeping the teacher in control of the judgement layer. AI can map a photo of student work to curriculum codes. The teacher reviews, adjusts, and confirms. The report drafts itself.
Teacher workflow UI flow diagram mapping the core assessment path and state handling across each stage.
Éirico guides teachers through a simple workflow. Take a photo of student work. The AI maps it to curriculum outcome codes, identifies learning gaps, and suggests next steps. The teacher reviews the mapping, exercises professional judgement, and saves the analysis. A structured report drafts itself.
This case study models AI as enforced decision support, not autonomous automation. Mechanical work is reduced while professional judgement remains structurally required.
~83%
Estimated time reduction
From ~60 mins to ~10 mins per student.
100%
Human review required
Workflow enforces teacher confirmation for every output.
Reduces reporting time from 60 minutes to 10 minutes per student while enforcing professional judgement at every step.
41% of medical referrals never convert because the handoff between GP, specialist, and patient is fragmented. Built a working coordination system using a Chrome extension, Cursor, Zapier, Twilio, and Google Sheets that connects all three stakeholders in a single workflow.
A coordination system that connects GPs, specialists, and patients in a single referral workflow, reducing the 41% drop-off rate in medical referrals.
41% of medical referrals never convert because the handoff between GP, specialist, and patient is fragmented across disconnected systems. Patients fall through the cracks between referral and appointment, leading to delayed care, wasted specialist capacity, and frustrated practitioners.
The referral process involves three stakeholders who each operate in different systems with no shared visibility. GPs send referrals and lose track. Specialists receive referrals but can't efficiently communicate availability. Patients receive no proactive coordination.
Built a working coordination system using a Chrome extension, Cursor, Zapier, Twilio, and Google Sheets that connects all three stakeholders in a single workflow. The system captures referral data at the point of creation, automates patient outreach via SMS, and provides real-time visibility to all parties.
Rather than replacing existing clinical systems, Relay layers on top of them — meeting each stakeholder where they already work.
Built a working prototype that connects three disconnected stakeholders in a single referral coordination workflow.
A literacy tracking system designed for classroom use, enabling teachers to monitor student progress against structured phonics milestones and identify at-risk readers early.
A structured literacy tracking system that replaces manual paper-based monitoring with a focused digital workflow aligned to phonics milestones.
Foundation and early primary teachers tracking structured literacy programs face a manual, paper-heavy monitoring process. Progress against phonics milestones — letter recognition, blending, segmenting — is recorded on printed grids, updated by hand, and stored in folders.
This works until you have 25 students across multiple phonics phases, each progressing at different rates. The result is delayed identification of students falling behind, inconsistent records, and significant preparation time spent on administrative tracking rather than instructional planning.
The manual paper-based process: printed tracking grids, hand-updated records, and physical folders that make pattern recognition across a class nearly impossible in real time.
Letters & Sounds digitises the phonics tracking workflow without overcomplicating it. The interface is designed around how early-years teachers actually work: quick check-ins during small group rotations, progress updates between sessions, and weekly overviews before planning meetings.
The system is structured around phonics phases with gated progression — students advance when mastery criteria are met, not by calendar. Teachers see at a glance which students are on track, which need intervention, and where the class clusters are forming.
Week overview showing student progress with mastery-based gating. Teachers can identify intervention needs at a glance.
Interactive scaffolding interface with audio support for phonics practice sessions.
Focus sounds interface with colour-coded flow for structured literacy practice.
Approach
Every system I've worked in, from classrooms to startups, has the same failure pattern: tools get built for how things should work, not how they actually work. My approach starts with understanding the gap between the two.
Listen before solving.
I start by understanding the environment, not just the brief. Who uses the system? What pressures are they under? What workarounds have they already built? The workarounds tell you more than the requirements document.
Diagnose the real problem.
The stated problem is rarely the actual problem. A dashboard that "needs better UX" might actually have a signal hierarchy issue. A tool with low adoption might not have a training problem but a trust problem. I look for the root cause before recommending anything.
Design for the person with the least time.
Nine years in education taught me that if a tool doesn't work for the busiest, most time-pressured person in the room, it doesn't work. I design solutions around real constraints, not ideal conditions.
Recommend options, not ultimatums.
I present multiple paths forward with clear trade-offs so the team can make an informed decision. My job is to make the decision easier, not to make it for them.
Writing
EdTech · Product Strategy
A look at why education technology fails when it meets real school environments, and what it takes to build tools teachers will actually choose to use.
Read articleA playbook for product teams building tools that survive
This is written for designers, product managers, and EdTech founders building products for schools.
Most educational software fails within 30 seconds.
Not because it lacks features. Not because teachers "resist change."
It fails because it is designed for a version of work that does not exist.
Uninterrupted focus.
Predictable schedules.
Spare time to learn new systems.
That is not the environment your product is entering.
When a tool fails on first contact, the damage isn't loud.
There are no formal complaints. No dramatic rejection.
Instead, it quietly kills adoption, retention, renewals, and word of mouth.
By the time analytics report "one-week abandonment," the decision has already been made.
Across nearly a decade teaching in schools in Australia and overseas, I saw the same pattern repeat.
Teachers decide whether a tool fits their day almost instantly.
Not after onboarding. Not after a pilot. Not after training.
The decision happens in the flow of a real day: mid-lesson, mid-incident, mid-interruption.
This is the moment your product must survive.
This pattern shows up anywhere people work under pressure. Classrooms are an extreme case.
Sustained cognitive overload. If a tool isn't immediately obvious, it disappears into the noise of the day.
"Just another thing" is a fast filter. New platforms usually mean extra admin layered onto an already impossible workload. If a product smells like more work, it starts from a position of distrust.
Attention exists in fragments. Time arrives in one- and two-minute windows. Bells ring. Students interrupt. Behaviour incidents happen.
If it takes more than a couple of clicks to reach the screen a teacher needs, the tool will not survive a real timetable.
This isn't laziness. It's triage.
Most tools are mandated, not chosen. Compliance can look like adoption until it doesn't. Real adoption is when teachers would miss the tool if it disappeared.
Before you ship anything teacher-facing, run this test.
Fail several of these and the product will be rejected, usually in seconds.
This is not a usability checklist. It is a kill-switch.
Designing for teacher time is not kindness. It is strategy.
Tools that feel lighter spread faster. Renewals are easier when teachers would genuinely miss the product. Support costs drop when workflows make sense. Word of mouth happens when teachers feel respected and understood.
Most school software is tolerated, not relied on.
The tools that survive are the ones teachers depend on under pressure.
The fastest-growing EdTech products do not demand attention. They earn it.
Teachers do not need more platforms. They need systems that close loops, reduce cognitive load, and survive real school days.
I design education products by treating time, attention, and duty of care as the hardest constraints in the room.
When those constraints are central, products survive first contact. When they are ignored, even the most polished roadmap struggles.
If you are building for schools and want your product to survive contact with reality, this is the work.
Get in Touch
If you're hiring for solutions consulting, implementation, or school-facing advisory roles, I'd welcome a conversation.