Complete 100-Day UI Challenge

Proof required

Submit links to your first 10 publicly posted designs with their publication dates visible (Dribbble shots, Behance project updates, tweets/posts, or a GitHub repository with dated commits showing 10 daily entries). Each post must show the design itself and the prompt or design brief it responds to. Include a one-sentence reflection on day 10 about what was hardest in the first 10 days.

What gets checked

• 10 publicly accessible posts with visible timestamps covering 10 consecutive days — not 10 designs posted on the same day or spread across several weeks
• Each design is responsive to a specific prompt or brief — 'I designed a login screen' without a stated brief is less informative than 'Daily UI #001 — Sign Up (brief: design a sign up screen)'
• Designs use a real design tool that produces screen-ready output — Figma (free), Penpot (free open source), or coded UI in HTML/CSS/CodePen; rough paper sketches without any digital component are not accepted for this SKILLS outcome

Common mistakes

• Setting up a private folder of designs rather than a public record — the public posting habit is part of the skill being built; private practice without an audience removes the accountability and sharability that makes the challenge valuable
• Using design tools without learning keyboard shortcuts and component reuse — the 100-day challenge is an opportunity to build production-speed design skills; if each design takes longer than 30–60 minutes by day 10, the workflow needs optimisation

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Ask the submitter to show day 1 and day 10 side by side — tests whether there is visible skill development within the first 10 days.
• Ask about the prompt for day 10 and what constraints they imposed on themselves — tests that the design process is deliberate, not just mechanical output.
• Ask what tool shortcut or workflow they learned in the first 10 days — tests active skill-building, not just production of images.

Proof required

Submit links to your public posts for days 11–60 (50 posts, same timestamp evidence standard as M1) and a 300-word progress statement that: names the skill you focused on for this period, shows three specific designs from days 11–60 that demonstrate that skill's development, and identifies one design decision from this period that you made differently from how you would have made it in the first 10 days.

What gets checked

• 50 public posts covering 50 consecutive days — the same daily continuity standard as M1; any gap restarts the consecutive count from the last continuous day
• Progress statement identifies a specific named skill — not 'I got better at design' but 'I focused on building consistent spacing systems across designs using an 8px grid' or 'I focused on improving the information hierarchy of complex data displays'
• Three designs cited in the progress statement are identifiably better at the focus skill than designs from days 1–10 — the improvement must be visible to the reviewer, not just asserted

Common mistakes

• Treating each design as independent rather than building on the previous — the 100-day challenge produces the most value when there is a thread of deliberate skill-building; 50 unconnected one-off designs produce less growth than 50 designs that progressively refine one skill
• Posting at minimum standards to preserve the streak — a design that took 5 minutes and shows no creative engagement does not advance the skill; the daily design should require genuine thought

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Ask the submitter to show day 11 and day 60 from the same design type (e.g., two forms, two dashboards) and describe what changed — comparing like-for-like designs is the most direct test of progression.
• Ask about a design from this period where they tried something and it did not work — tests genuine experimentation rather than safe repetition.
• Ask what design convention or principle they disagree with — tests that the deliberate practice has built an independent point of view, not just technical competence.

Proof required

Submit links to public posts for days 61–100 (40 posts with timestamp evidence) and your portfolio retrospective. The retrospective must include: a side-by-side comparison of your day-1 design and a redesign of the same brief from day 100 (both publicly accessible), a curated gallery of your five best designs from across the full 100 days with a one-sentence explanation of why each was selected, and a 500-word written reflection on what the daily practice produced that would not have emerged from a portfolio of five long projects.

What gets checked

• Before/after comparison uses the same brief — the day-100 redesign of day 1's prompt is the most direct evidence of skill growth; the comparison must be honest about which decisions in the new version are genuinely better, not just different
• Five curated designs are significantly better than the median work from days 1–20 — the curation demonstrates that the submitter can evaluate their own work, which is an essential design skill
• The 500-word reflection makes a specific claim about what daily practice uniquely builds — not 'I improved a lot' but 'daily constraints forced me to solve the same layout problem 30 different ways, which gave me a vocabulary of layout patterns I would not have developed from five long projects'

Common mistakes

• A before/after comparison where the day-100 version is more complex or detailed but not more effective — complexity is not skill; the comparison must evaluate communication quality, not design decoration
• A retrospective that does not make a claim about why the volume of practice (100 daily designs) produces something that fewer, longer projects do not — this claim is the central argument for the challenge's value and must be specific

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Ask the submitter to critique their own day-1 design — tests that genuine growth has built self-critical capability.
• Ask which of the 100 days was the most valuable learning experience and why — tests reflection on process, not just output.
• Ask what design decision they made consistently across the 100 days that they would now make differently — tests a specific evolved perspective, not a generic 'I improved'.