Most systems don’t fit the people who have to use them. I find out why, build a better way through, and then explain it.

I build the thing that was missing. Usually because I needed it first.

I’m an educator and technical training specialist working on learning systems, responsible AI implementation, and the kind of workflow design that tends to happen after everyone agrees a process is fine and then quietly works around it.

The same habit shows up off the clock. There’s a math channel, a few small apps I built because I needed them and they didn’t exist, narration work, and two invented worlds that both began the same way — I designed a system, then had to build somewhere it could exist.

Newest build

A more precise dishwasher magnet

It is the first time I ever tried to make a product to fill a need. The only dishwasher magnets I could find said Clean and Dirty. I wanted one that also said Empty and Washing.

I made it from scratch, learning Fusion 360 as I went, and it took nine versions. The arrow alone went through three designs: pushing it out the front made the front box too thin, so I went with an arrow that is contained by the box but also runs over the top. In Fusion it is three pieces — the arrow, the end cap, and the body, which is eleven sections of its own.

As a birthday present to myself, I had it 3D printed through Cloudcraft (this is not an advertisement): the two small pieces in white PLA from one vendor, the body in multicolor PLA from another. Something went wrong in the conversion to 3MF, and domes came out where three of the pieces should have been. It took a lot of back and forth and a lot of versions of the files to sort out, so it arrived a week later than I wanted. But it came in.

The first product idea I ever actually designed is now on my dishwasher. That’s pretty cool.

Recent

Latest on LinkedIn

Short pieces on AI implementation and how work actually gets done.

  • A successful AI pilot isn't necessarily one that produced impressive results. It's one you understand well enough to repeat. When an AI pilot goes well, it's tempting to treat the results as evidence that the organization is ready for a broader rollout. But there's a question…

    Read the whole post

  • A recent AI preprint brought back a frustration from my years as a teacher: the class average could improve while individual students fell further behind. The paper examines how changes to an AI agent’s instructions can improve its average performance while breaking things it…

    Read the whole post

  • An AI search tool sitting on top of outdated documents can give you a faster way to retrieve the wrong answer. You probably know the source problem already. There are three versions of a procedure, and the old one still appears first in search. A shared drive makes sense to the…

    Read the whole post

  • Six years ago, I made a lesson because I couldn't find anyone teaching one Common Core geometry standard the way I thought students needed it taught. This week I went back and found that people are still finding it! The video has never gone viral. It has just kept getting slow…

    Read the whole post

  • When an AI tells you how it arrived at an answer, how do you check that account? That’s the part of the GPT-6.1 Astra news I find worth examining. OpenAI withheld the model after it fell short on staying within authorized scope and communicating what work it had done, according…

    Read the whole post

More posts on the Social page

Two channels

Same person, different rooms. One is after school; the other is the professional practice.

I’m building these because they were missing

Small, live, and each one solving a problem I am actually having.

Still in the workshop

Not published yet, so there is nothing to click. This is what they look like so far.

Speaking next

Trust the Output: Four Principles for a Responsible AI Workflow in L&D

ATD Sacramento · 2026 Annual Conference · 10:00 AM–4:00 PM PT

For Learning and Development professionals using generative AI to create content, this session will use a practical L&D example and guided discussion to help participants explore four principles for responsible AI workflows: human-owned, source-grounded, verifiable, and traceable. Participants will apply them to their own workflow and leave able to evaluate an AI-assisted workflow, identify gaps in source quality, oversight, verification, and documentation, and propose practical changes that support responsible AI implementation.

Registration and details$175 for ATD Sacramento and California chapter members; $200 for non-ATD members.