シャドーイング練習: Can AI Replace UX Designers? Claude Ultracode Wins! - 動画で英語スピーキングを学ぶ

練習モードを選ぶ

各モードは全画面の練習ルームで開きます。

151 文

文が短すぎたり長すぎる場合は、Editをタップして調整してください。

So let's say you have a working app that solves a real problem, but users are struggling with it.

What do you do?

You either hire a UX designer or you try to fix it yourself with AI.

So you decide to give it a shot with AI.

Now where do you start?

You can't just tell AI to fix the UX and let it figure everything out, right?

Well, I just realized that with Claude, you can actually do that.

Just last week, I made a video where I shared my simplified professional UX process into prompts

that will get your AI to follow the correct methods to identify UX problems and to fix them.

And I specifically said that you can't just tell AI to fix your UX

and expect it to create a coherent user -friendly product.

Well, I was wrong.

The problem with my assumption is that I only tested it with Codex, and I assumed that Codex and Claude were somewhat at the same level,

since that's what the benchmarks are saying.

But that's not the case.

Claude just reached a level where I honestly didn't think would be possible this soon.

And after this video, I'm not going to be using Codex for coding and UI UX anymore.

My name is Jad.

I've been UI UX designer for over 10 years, but now everything is changing

if you want to stay updated on how ai is changing my work make sure

you turn on the notification bell and

if you need any help with ui ux

or coding you can submit your project on ai tooltip .com the example

i'm going to show you is a marketing platform

that i built in a recent video it's for my wife to manage her own marketing clients

and she's been adding features to it based on her usage requirements

so of course now it has a lot of usability issues and it's my turn to improve the UX.

I made two copies of the same platform.

I put one through my own AI UX workflow with the prompts

that I shared in my last video and I gave the other to Claude to fix all on its own.

Then I'll show you how Claude compares to Codex just for fun.

I think you know where this is going, but keep watching till the end because it all comes together.

And I'm going to tell you how I'm going to be approaching UX projects from now on.

Now, for my workflow, I gave AI multiple consecutive prompts to identify UX issues.

And it found 26 problems.

And then I fixed them by priority.

Now, this is not manual UX work.

I'm still using AI to identify the problems and to fix them.

But I'm guiding the AI based on my own process to identify user context issues,

to make sure the user journey is optimized and to fix consistency issues

and states issues and to make sure everything is considered.

Now for the other copy of the platform, I simply gave it to Claude and I said, you are a UX expert,

analyze and optimize the whole platform.

I put it on Opus 5 .5 in UltraCode, which is the maximum effort on the latest model.

It worked for a while on its own.

It ran multiple agent tests and many, many commands.

It found 40 problems and it fixed everything just with that one prompt.

Now I went through the two improved platforms and I compared them.

There's noticeable differences and I'm gonna say it up front.

I liked what Claude did on its own more than what my own workflow produced and that's why I'm making this video.

Now that doesn't mean we don't need you ex -designers anymore.

I'm just comparing AI with AI here.

Whether we need to know how to prompt it or if anyone can just say fix the UX.

Let me show you the results side by side and then I'll show you an analysis of how the two results compare.

On the left side is the result of my own workflow

and on the right side is what Claude did all on its own.

The first thing I noticed here is how Claude moved the client selector to the top bar

and made that bar sticky so it doesn't move when I scroll.

That means I always know which client I am working on.

This is a very good improvement that my workflow did not identify.

Here when you select a client and scroll you won't be able to identify which client you are working on.

But here it adds clarity.

Very much needed.

Claude also consolidated all the text in the top section of the page to have less debt space.

That's also very important because this is a high priority real estate.

What you see on your screen before scrolling should be the high priority stuff.

So more space for content is always better.

Another thing I immediately noticed here is how the navigation is organized.

Originally I had no groups but now both results are improving on that.

They grouped the menu items in different ways and based on my wife's usage she prefers what Claude did.

It makes more sense in terms of usability and user journey.

It's also visually easier to scan because it's more compact.

Even here at the bottom Claude reduced the amount of text and made the whole thing clickable.

As opposed to here where you have just a small target to click, it makes sense.

Another great improvement from Claude.

Now the dashboard itself also got improved in both cases, but Claude is more optimized towards what the user actually needs.

Here on the left side, there's a lot of wasted space just to display the status of the client,

then a long list of to -do items, then you get to the progress tracking.

But what Claude did here on the right side is impressive from my UX perspective.

This to -do list is smaller, more compact, and it grouped the important tasks at the top.

Here on the left, you have to look all the way down to see a task due today.

But Claude surfaced it to the top here.

And even the language is much more helpful.

Needs attention is better than tasks and this see all button is much better than all reminders.

All reminders does not tell me what action I am taking if I click it.

It's a little bit confusing because I don't know

if these are all my reminders or if I click it I see all my reminders.

Cloud also introduced something different here where you can see more items without leaving the page.

That way it can make the list smaller.

Small things like that improve the usability a lot.

Overall much better visibility and interaction in Claude's UX design.

And if you want a copy of this improved marketing platform let me know in a comment

and I'll be happy to share it.

All right let's go deeper and complete a user task.

Let's assess this content performance.

On the left side I'll click write assessment and here this is a new improvement it's telling me what I'm assessing.

It's actually showing me the result here, which is very important info.

It does not show me what I'm assessing here.

And it does not show me the previous result, which is important info to have.

100

So this one is better in my workflow, because I explicitly told it to analyze user intent and context and goals.

101

So for this feature, I get the win.

102

There's also a lot of improvements

103

that Claude did on its own in the campaign strategies page

104

it decided to move my strategies to the top instead of scrolling down to find them here

105

i can see my strategies then how they are doing my wife also preferred claude here

106

now i won't waste your time too much here analyzing

107

but let me know in the comments

108

if you want a more in -depth analysis for ux for complex platforms like this one i would be happy to share.

109

Here's how the two results compare.

110

This is based on my test result and the report that came out of each AI.

111

Now in terms of UI change, Claude did better by considering these areas that I showed you in my review.

112

But on a deeper level, my workflow actually improved things that Claude did not really catch,

113

like helping the user with relevant context for certain actions and failed save recovery.

114

These are things to avoid user frustration and improve user satisfaction.

115

So if you want max optimization, ask Claude to do its thing, and then follow up by using the prompts from my previous video.

116

And just for fun, let me show you what ChatGPT did with Codex on the latest and strongest model.

117

Here I have sold 6 .1 on UltraEffert, and I gave it the same prompt, and the result is not even close to what Claude did.

118

When I used Codex on the strongest model, I thought it would be close to Claude, but the result here is just not good at all.

119

Here, it did not consider any of the usability changes that Claude did.

120

It kept mostly everything the same as it was.

121

Nothing really changed with the main user flow and the context of the user.

122

Claude is much better.

123

So this tells me that we still need to guide the AI to find deeper usability issues,

124

but AI is only getting more powerful from this point.

125

Who knows, maybe with the next update things can become easy for AI to spot.

126

But what surprised me is that Claude didn't just clean up the interface, it made decisions about what the user needs to see,

127

what needs attention first, and where actions belong.

128

And in many of the flows that I showed you, I preferred Claude's version, And so did my wife, who is actually using the platform.

129

My workflow still helped in specific areas.

130

But what Claude did is real independent UX work from just one prompt.

131

And that changes how I would approach UX next time.

132

I would let Claude do the first pass, then test the important journey with real users who are actually using the product.

133

Where do they hesitate?

134

What information is missing?

135

Real user testing will never be eliminated by AI.

136

A week ago I said you couldn't just ask AI to fix your UX

137

and expect it to do the work we do as designers.

138

This experiment proved me wrong.

139

So I'm changing my opinion.

140

AI can now make good UX improvements without expert guidance.

141

It can still miss some things, but I think it produces good enough UX to launch a product.

142

And considering the rate at which AI is improving, I'm sorry to say this, but soon UI UX jobs won't be needed anymore.

143

We would still need UX research and strategy, yes.

144

We would also need to conduct real user testing and analysis.

145

That still takes human experience.

146

So the most important thing I want to leave you with is that everyone should be using AI.

147

Let me know what you think.

148

Do you agree?

149

Do you disagree?

150

I always answer everything down in the comments.

151

Cheers.

アプリをダウンロード

流暢に話すために必要なすべて

AI発音採点文ごとに採点

IPA練習すべての音をマスター

単語学習自分の単語帳を作る

単語ゲーム遊びながら覚える

QRをスキャン

Download on theApp Store Get it onGoogle Play

同じチャンネル

10 Years Of UX/UI Experience In One Claude Skill

Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults

The Simplest UI/UX Workflow With AI

Daily ConversationWorking Adults

FOR YOU

このレッスンの語彙とスピーキングのポイント

このスピーキングレッスンは、動画「Can AI Replace UX Designers? Claude Ultracode Wins!」を教材にしています。繰り返し出てくる語は次のとおりです：claude, user, result, fix, workflow。この動画には、シャドーイング用の文が151文、単語が1903語あります。音声の長さは10:46です。話す速さは1分あたり約177語で、日常会話に近い自然なペースです。単語の83%は英語の頻出3,000語に含まれます。残りは練習の前に確認しておきましょう。

この動画の重要語彙

動画に出てくる覚えておきたい単語15語を、発音と意味つきで紹介します。

単語	発音	意味
compare 動詞	/kəmˈpɛɚ/	比べる, 比較する
designer 名詞	/dɪˈzaɪnɚ/	デザイナー, 設計士
reminder 名詞	/ɹɪˈmaɪndə(ɹ)/	備忘, 念押し
scroll 名詞	/skɹoʊl/	巻物, スクロール
priority 名詞	/pɹaɪˈɒɹɪti/	優先, 優先権
analyze 動詞	/ˈæn.əˌlaɪz/	分析する
usage 名詞	/ˈjuːsɪd͡ʒ/	使い方
impressive 形容詞	/ɪmˈpɹɛsɪv/	印象的な
assessment 名詞	/əˈsɛsmənt/	評価
cloud 名詞	/ˈklaʊ̯d/	雲, 雲霞
select 動詞	/sɪˈlɛkt/	選ぶ
helpful 形容詞	/ˈhɛlp.fl̩/	役に立つ, 有用
solve 動詞	/sɒlv/	解決する
hire 動詞	/ˈhaɪɹ/	借りる
belong 動詞	/bɪˈlɒŋ/	所属する, 属する

動画に出てくる句動詞

単語	意味
clean up 動詞	掃除する

この動画の文法

話し手がよく使っている文型を、動画の実際の表現とともに紹介します。

文型	動画での表現
受動態 be + 過去分詞 — 誰がするかより、何が起きるかに焦点を当てる	is optimized · is considered · is organized
関係詞節 who / which + 節 — 人や物について情報を加える	UltraCode, which is · here, which is · result, which is
現在完了形 have/has + 過去分詞 — 過去の出来事が今も関係している	I've been · have sold

注意したい発音

話し手はI'm, I'll, won'tなど、短縮形や弱形を31回使っています。聞こえたとおりの短い形で発音しましょう。

「sh」と「zh」の音: interaction /ˌɪn.təˈɹæk.ʃən/, satisfaction /sætɪsˈfækʃən/, assumption /əˈsʌm(p).ʃ(ə)n/, navigation /nævɪˈɡeɪʃən/, frustration /fɹʌsˈtɹeɪ.ʃən/
長い単語（アクセントの位置に注意）: priority /pɹaɪˈɒɹɪti/, experiment /ɪkˈspɛɹ.ə.mənt/, interaction /ˌɪn.təˈɹæk.ʃən/, consecutive /kənˈsɛkjʊtɪv/, satisfaction /sætɪsˈfækʃən/

日本語話者が苦手な音：

/r/ と /l/ の区別 — /l/ は舌先を歯茎につけ、/r/ はどこにもつけない: scroll /skɹoʊl/, clarity /ˈklæɹ.ɪ.ti/, selector /sɪˈlɛktə(ɹ)/
/v/ — /b/ にならないように、上の歯を下唇に当てる: impressive /ɪmˈpɹɛsɪv/, solve /sɒlv/, consecutive /kənˈsɛkjʊtɪv/, navigation /nævɪˈɡeɪʃən/, visibility /ˌvɪz.əˈbɪl.ɪ.ti/
/f/ — 「フ」ではなく、上の歯と下唇で出す: helpful /ˈhɛlp.fl̩/, satisfaction /sætɪsˈfækʃən/, interface /ˈɪn(t)ɚˌfeɪs/, frustration /fɹʌsˈtɹeɪ.ʃən/, notification /ˌnoʊtɪfɪˈkeɪʃn̩/

この動画での練習方法

まず声を出さずに動画を最後まで聞き、知らない単語をメモします。
まず0.75倍速で一文ずつシャドーイングし、慣れてきたら通常の速度に戻します。
自分の声を録音して元の音声と比べます。compare, designer, reminderなどの単語に特に注意しましょう。

シャドーイングとは？英語上達に効果的な理由

シャドーイング（Shadowing）は、もともとプロの通訳者養成プログラムで開発された言語学習法で、多言語習得者として知られるDr. Alexander Arguelles によって広く普及されました。方法はシンプルですが非常に効果的：ネイティブスピーカーの英語を聞きながら、1〜2秒の遅延で声に出してすぐに繰り返す——まるで「影（shadow）」のように話者を追いかけます。文法ドリルや受動的なリスニングと異なり、シャドーイングは脳と口の筋肉が同時にリアルタイムで英語を処理・再現することを強制します。研究により、発音精度、抑揚、リズム、連音、リスニング力、そして会話の流暢さが大幅に向上することが確認されています。IELTSスピーキング対策や自然な英語コミュニケーションを目指す方に特におすすめです。

シャドーイングのやり方: ステップ別の完全ガイドを読む →

シャドーイング練習: Can AI Replace UX Designers? Claude Ultracode Wins! - 動画で英語スピーキングを学ぶ

練習モードを選ぶ

アプリをダウンロード

同じチャンネル

10 Years Of UX/UI Experience In One Claude Skill

The Simplest UI/UX Workflow With AI

おすすめ動画

AI Destroyed My Profession

Is AI Killing Human Fashion Design? Who Will Shape the Future of Design? Fashion Tea #6

How to Build an AI Agent for Every Part of Your Life

How Anthropic uses Claude in Product Management

How AI Empowers Tech Leaders Siwei Shen

The UX Psychology Behind Apps People Can’t Stop Using

How to Edit VIRAL Talking Head Videos Using ONLY Claude! (New Minimal Style)

We Let $200 GPT-Pro Think for 7 Days on Unsolved Math

I Tested The Viral Reverse Engineering Repo

9 Insane Claude Mods I Already Can't live Without

Jack Dorsey’s New Dessa AI Voice Sounds Scary Human