A training platform nobody could actually edit
Every small change became a queue, and every queue became a delay.
Revature is a technology talent accelerator: it trains early career engineers and builds talent pipelines for enterprise partners. Its curriculum ran on a legacy system that was rigid by design. Trainers and content developers could see schedules, but they couldn't touch them.
When a curriculum needed rescheduling, they raised a request and waited for a product engineer to make the edit in the backend.
The brief: hand that work back to the people doing it. A centralised platform where trainers and content developers could view schedules and create, update and organise curricula themselves. It was also the first move in something bigger: the foundation for modernising the entire training system, and eventually a customer facing tool for the sales team to walk clients through curriculum structures.
Partners include: Accenture · PEGA · Workday · Salesforce · Infosys · UiPath
Sole designer on a new product
I owned the UI/UX end to end: mapping the existing workflows, shaping the structure, designing every flow and interaction, right through to the final shipped screens. A UI Lead held design direction across the wider platform family. On this build the design was mine, start to finish, working day to day with a cross functional team.
I started by listening
Before designing anything, I spoke with the two groups who would live in this product every day. The same frustration came up from both sides: too much of their work was manual, and things that should have taken a moment took a detour through someone else.
That gave me a north star for the whole build. The platform had to get out of their way. Every minute a trainer spent wrestling with scheduling was a minute not spent teaching.
Trainers
See schedules clearly, reschedule curriculum timings without help, and walk into sessions properly prepared.
Content developers
Create and edit competencies, build units, and manage content without depending on anyone else.
Around them sat training managers, overseeing progress and trainer workload, and further out the sales team, who would eventually present curricula to clients. But the two groups in the middle were the ones the old system blocked, so they were the ones I designed for first.
Ship something real, then make it beautiful
A strict timeline shaped every decision. We prioritised a functional MVP: a deliberately minimal palette and simple, repeatable UI patterns so the team could move fast, with visual polish planned for after the MVP proved itself in production. That restraint was a design decision in its own right: clarity and speed ahead of decoration.
Understanding existing workflows
How trainers and content developers actually used the old system, friction included.
Identifying gaps in the legacy system
Where the rigidity genuinely hurt, not just where it looked dated.
Mapping the curriculum model
Curriculum → competency → unit, the backbone the whole interface hangs from.
Wireframing and prototyping
Testing structure before surface.
Validating flows with real users
Checking the model held up against real work.
Finalising core interactions for the MVP
Locking the handful of flows that had to be right at launch.
From a spreadsheet you couldn't touch, to a system you could run
The old curriculum view was a dense, colour coded table. The redesign turned it into a structured week by week, day by day grid that a trainer can scan in seconds, and edit without leaving the page.
Four shifts that made the difference
Not a recap of the screens above. The decisions that shaped them.
A week by week, day by day grid replaces a cramped colour coded table. A 10 week programme is now scannable at a glance.
Topic, Module and Activity views let each role see the curriculum at the depth they need.
Editing lives in the interface, not the backend. Rescheduling no longer needs an engineer.
Navigation built around three core concepts: Curriculum, Competency, Units.
The messy middle
Before the calm grid, there was the sprawl: hundreds of frames and prototype links, the part of a 0 to 1 build nobody screenshots.
What shipped
A curated look at the core of the product: the flows that tell the story, not every screen.
That's what I can show. The rest is under NDA.
Ask to see moreWhat made it hard, and what it taught me
Designing with tight timelines
Shipping the MVP fast meant core functionality first and minimal UI patterns, with polish deferred.
Multiple user groups, different needs
Trainers, content developers and managers all used the system differently. Aligning their workflows and prioritising features was genuinely complex.
Improving a legacy system while building a new one
Translating old constraints into a modern, scalable structure meant mapping the curriculum → competency → unit relationships from the ground up.
Designing for clarity in complex systems
Taking layered concepts and shaping them into something people could navigate without a manual. If one thread ties this project together, it's this.
Working cross functionally
Constant contact with trainers, PMs and engineers sharpened how I gather insight, test assumptions and refine workflows.
Balancing speed with quality
A fast MVP taught me to prioritise the essential and plan the polish for later, without pretending the two are the same thing.
What changed
Trainers and content developers gained control of their own work
They could finally create, edit and manage curriculum components directly, instead of raising a request and waiting on a backend engineer.
Curriculum became clearer to navigate
Clear navigation and real visibility into competencies, units and schedules, replacing a view people had learned to tolerate rather than use.
It became the foundation for what came next
The MVP set the baseline for modernising Revature's training platforms, and gave the sales team a concrete tool for presenting curricula to prospective clients. The work outlived the MVP.