AI is part of how I work. Here’s what that means for this portfolio specifically.
The HTML, CSS, and JavaScript in this portfolio were written with the help of Claude Code, Anthropic’s coding tool. I provided the design direction, made every layout and content decision, wrote the copy, and reviewed and approved every change. Claude Code did the implementation work.
I’m not a frontend developer by trade. I learned HTML, CSS, and a little JavaScript in college, so I can read the code and understand what it’s doing, but my focus is on design. Using Claude Code let me build something I couldn’t have built as efficiently on my own, while keeping full control over what it looks like and what it says. That’s the version of AI collaboration I find most useful: I set the direction, it handles the mechanics.
The UX work in my case studies, the research, design decisions, wireframes, prototypes, and outcomes, is mine. I did it at T-Mobile (via WongDoody) and Missouri S&T. AI was not involved in any of that work unless I’ve explicitly said so.
The case study text was written by me first. I then gave it to both ChatGPT and Claude to read through and suggest edits. The thinking, the reasoning, and the decisions described are mine.
Lineara is a side project where I directed the design and used AI tools to build it. The design decisions were mine; the implementation was handled primarily with AI. That’s a different situation than my professional case studies, which were done inside real teams with real constraints.
I use AI tools, mostly Claude and ChatGPT, daily. I use them to prototype, sort through information and data to help make decisions, write and edit copy, fix code, explore directions, and generally move faster. I still make the decisions.
That’s a meaningful distinction to me. AI makes me more capable, not less involved. I’m not using it to replace judgment; I’m using it so I can spend more of my time on the parts where judgment actually matters.