Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths of this program:
1. Foundational Knowledge, great for learning introductory principles of UI/UX.
2. Actual hands-on extensive experience with UX research, and design projects.
3. Lessons are easy and simple to digest
4. Nolan's strengths are technical understanding of Figma, and explaining UI/UX general principles. He’s easygoing, understanding, and has a friendly demeanor. Most people would be very happy to have him as an instructor.
5. Supportive classmates that you will remain friends with.
6. If you have experience with design principles and design software, you will do well.
Where the program could improve:
1. Communication responsiveness could be improved. Some students reported multiple cancellations of scheduled 1:1 meetings. Because students often made logistical arrangements in advance (such as childcare or time off work), these consistent cancellations had a negative impact on students.
2. How student questions are addressed. Occasionally, responses such as “of course not” to student’s questions felt discouraging, and a softer delivery might foster a more psychologically safe learning environment.
3. Internship: A key reason many students joined the program was the promised paid internship, described as being awarded within the first month after graduation. However, the internship process extended roughly 3–4 months beyond that timeframe, without any initiation of contact from the institute. During this period, updates were sporadic, and expectations were unclear. This had a negative impact on students outlook towards the program.
4. Accessibility to Non-Tech Saavy and Non Design Familiar people: The program appears to assume a baseline level of comfort with design software. Students without prior experience in tools such as Figma may find tasks challenging. While the theoretical foundations of UI/UX are covered, some participants may need to supplement the course with additional resources to strengthen their practical prototyping skills.
5. The expectations around constructive criticism and design critique were not clearly outlined prior to feedback sessions. As a result, peer feedback tended to be primarily positive, and additional guidance on how to deliver structured, constructive critique may have strengthened the learning experience.








