Andamio platform enhancement requests
Enhancement requests for the Andamio platform itself, raised by the cohort in the live sessions and the cohort channels. No learner is named. Changes we made on our own side are in platform adjustments. This list goes to the Andamio team as one document.
1. A visible review status for a submitted assignment
What was asked. When a learner submits an assignment, nothing on the dashboard tells them what happens next. They asked for a visible status that moves through states - submitted, under review, reviewed - so they are not refreshing the page wondering whether anyone has looked.
Why. The chain confirms the submission, but tutor review is a human step with no signal attached, and a pseudonymous system has no email to fall back on.
Suggested shape. A flag on the submission that updates when the tutor opens it to read, and again when the tutor decides. Optionally a countdown ("reviewed within 48 hours") or a queue position ("N submissions ahead of yours") to set expectations. A countdown cannot be guaranteed without the tutor actually returning in time, so the status flag matters more than the clock.
2. Notifications for both learner and tutor
What was asked. A way for the tutor to be told a submission is waiting to be reviewed, and for the learner to be told when theirs has been reviewed.
Why. With no email address there is no notification channel, so reviews depend on the tutor happening to check and submissions can sit unseen then arrive at once.
Suggested shape. Notification without PII, ideally in-wallet, on-chain messaging tied to the registered wallet rather than an email address. ryp.io (Reach Your People) was noted as an existing on-chain connector that links projects and wallets for this kind of alert. A native publish/subscribe protocol, discussed in the wider Cardano community, would be the longer-term route.
3. Smoother first mint: collateral and the signing step
What was asked. Reduce the friction at the point a first-time learner mints their access token, which is where people get stuck and drop off.
Why. Minting needs collateral set and a wallet signature. Lace handles collateral automatically; a new Eternl wallet needs it switched on by hand. The access token gates everything, so this step decides whether a learner starts at all.
Suggested shape. In-platform guidance through the collateral and signing step, or platform handling that does not assume collateral is already configured, so the experience does not depend on which wallet a learner happened to install.
4. Make the per-action cost model clear in the platform
What was asked. Show learners what each on-chain action costs and what comes back, so the fees are not a surprise.
Why. Learners were caught out that submitting an assignment and claiming a credential each cost ADA. The model is reasonable, roughly 20 ADA across the eight modules with much of it a returnable deposit, but it is not surfaced, so it reads as unexplained charges.
Suggested shape. A clear, in-context note of the cost and the returnable deposit at each step that spends ADA.
5. An optional custodial, web2-login onboarding path
What was asked. A way for learners who are not crypto-native to take the course without first installing a wallet, securing a seed phrase and holding ADA - the barrier that stops people before they start.
Why. Items 3 and 4 are one problem: the web3 setup is the hardest part of the course and it comes first. Andamio already runs this differently for its FC Barcelona partner project, where a custodial wallet sits behind a normal web2 login and the transactions are hidden.
Suggested shape. Offer that custodial, web2-login path as an option for cohorts whose learners are new to Cardano, keeping the self-custody route for those who want it. It would remove the single biggest drop-off in one move.
6. Save a part-written assignment
What was asked. Let a learner leave an assignment half-finished and come back to it.
Why. The answer is lost if they stop, so the assignment has to be done in one sitting. A learner working around a job will not always have that sitting.
Suggested shape. Draft persistence on the submission form, local to the learner's browser if that keeps it off the chain, with an explicit save and a visible "draft saved" state.
7. Make the submission entry point discoverable
What was asked. A clear, obvious place to submit a completed assignment.
Why. One learner could not find where to submit until they were shown on a call. Anyone who cannot ask is simply stuck, having done the work.
Suggested shape. A submit action on the module page itself, next to the assignment, rather than a separate place a learner has to know about.
8. Mobile rendering defects
What was asked. Fix the platform on a phone: some images are cut off rather than scaled, and a video transcript would not load.
Why. Part of this cohort works mostly from a phone, and the material is unreadable where it is cropped.
Suggested shape. Responsive image handling on lesson content, and a transcript that loads on mobile. Worth a pass over lesson pages at phone width.
Status
Items 1 to 5 were raised in the live sessions, items 6 to 8 in the written feedback form after the 26 October deadline. Complete as of 28 October 2026 and ready to go to the Andamio team.