Teach'a'Topic : 'Learning by Teaching' with AI

Teach'a'Topic | Case Study

Teach'a'Topic: Frictionless
'Learning by Teaching,' with AI

TeachaTopic is a concept app that helps students learn by teaching, developed as part of my master’s project investigating why this method is rarely used.

Role: UI/UX Designer 4 months Master's project Me, Mentors Figma
Teach-a-Topic hero preview

Challenge: Teaching others is one of the highly effective learning method, yet it is rarely practiced. In a survey of 48 students, 88% recognized its value, but only 8% have tried it, mainly due to logistical barriers such as scheduling and coordination.

Outcome

Outcome: 85% of tested users said they would use the AI‑assisted teaching tool, indicating reduced friction and higher intent to teach.

My Role

What I Owned End to End

Mostly solo execution, with mentor coaching and regular review meetings.

What I personally did

Research, synthesis, concepts, prototyping, testing, and final UI design.

What decisions I drove

Initial idea and the pivot to AI, set success criteria, and shaped the final flow.

Mentor guidance

Independent execution, with mentor critique and regular review meetings.

The Problem

Students Knew Teaching Helps Them Learn, But Rarely Used It

Teaching someone is one of the most effective ways to learn, yet in a survey of 48 learners, 88% acknowledged its value while only 8% had actually practised it. The main barriers were logistical, especially scheduling and coordination.

Survey signal

48 learners

Aware that teaching improves learning

88%

Used it at some point

8%

OPPORTUNITY

How might we enable learners to benefit from teaching without these frictions?

First Direction

Human Matching Solved Logistics, But Not Social Hesitation

To reduce the above friction, I designed a simple connect → teach → feedback → repeat flow that lets learners practice through teaching, then validated it through user testing.

CONCEPT FLOW

human-matching-flowchart.png

USER TEST: I walked 5 participants through this wireframe to understand whether the concept would make them feel comfortable starting a teaching session.

HYPOTHESIS

If this flow reduced the logistical friction, users would focus more on teaching.

SIGNAL

Four participants said they would hesitate to start a teaching session using this flow.

Why participants hesitated

Fear of judgment
Feedback quality concerns
Coordination frictions

Explore the wireframe here ->

PIVOT

Because of hesitation to start with a human partner, I pivoted the concept to an AI listener.

The Pivot

I Replaced Human Matching with an AI Listener

To eliminate scheduling and judgment barriers, I swapped the peer partner for an AI listener that lets learners start immediately, receive automated feedback, and repeat sessions at their own pace.

AI TEACHING-LEARNING LOOP

A simple refined loop with AI feedback

Success criteria were simple:

Start friction

Will users start teaching without hesitation?

Repeat intent

Is the feedback actionable enough to make them want to come back?

NEXT

Next, I tested whether the AI listener actually reduced start friction and increased repeat intent.

Validation

Testing Whether the 'AI' Reduced Hesitation and Increased Return Intent

I created low-fidelity prototypes across two rounds and iteratively refined them through user testing.

Round 1 (n=5):

Insights

Start signal

80% started without hesitation

Repeat signal

Only 40% said they would return

LEARNING

AI feedback was seen as interesting, but not actionable enough to show what to do next.

What I improved?

Changes

Feedback now focused on one gap instead of all at once. Clear next step made it easier to act on. Thread UI added continuity between sessions.

Round 1 vs Round 2

Updates made after first round of testing

Round 2 (n=7):

Results

Return likelihood

85% demonstrated likelihood to return.

Start behavior

85% started without notable hesitation.

LEARNING

Reducing friction gets the first use. Actionable feedback drives repeat behavior.

From Concept to Product

Shaping the Final Experience Through Hi-Fi Testing and UI Refinement

After defining the flow and tone, I built and tested a hi‑fi prototype, addressed issues like distracting teaching screens and thin feedback, and iterated to reach the final design.

1. FOUNDATION BEFORE HI-FI

Flow chart

What informed the first hi-fi pass

Flow chart to validate the journey logic

2. HI-FI PROTOTYPE AND VALIDATION

Hi-Fi prototype and Testing

8 participants tested the prototype

Testing the high-fidelity version revealed three issues that had to be resolved before finalizing the experience:

1. Teaching screens had distractions.

2. Text-only feedback felt too thin.

3. Repeating the loop risked becoming boring.

3. SO I CHANGED THE UI

Recording focus

Response to the main focus issue

A more focused recording view reduced distraction

4. THE RESULTING EXPERIENCE

Setting up

One of the final polished screens

The final flow makes it easy to begin quickly, stay focused while teaching, and receive clearer feedback afterward.

These refinements led to the final high-fidelity prototype:

Final Prototype

Takeaways

What This Project Proved and What Comes Next

The project closes with what the work proves now and what should happen next to make it stronger.

CLOSING REFLECTION

This project shows a strong product-design loop: find the real barrier, test alternative directions, refine the interface, and define the right next step.

WHAT THIS DEMONSTRATES

4 strengths

I identify and validate behavioural problems with evidence.

I iterate rapidly based on user feedback and am willing to pivot direction.

I design for long-term behaviour change, not one-off interactions.

I turn insights into testable product loops and polished designs.

FUTURE WORK

3 next steps

Building an MVP

To test learning outcomes, not just usability.

Collaborating with educators

To develop credible feedback criteria.

Exploring ethics and bias

To understand the implications of AI-generated feedback.