How we built Odriken
Livia Engström
Started teaching in 2012 and spent years frustrated by the limitations of traditional classroom formats. Developed the core teaching methodology that became Odriken's foundation, focusing on adaptive learning paths that actually work for different student types. Handles curriculum development and instructor training.
Darija Kovačević
Built her first learning management system in 2015 because nothing on the market supported the kind of flexible session structure she needed. Designed the technical architecture that allows seamless switching between group sessions and individual instruction. Oversees platform development and student experience design.
Why we created this
We met at an education technology conference in 2017, both complaining about the same thing: existing platforms forced you to choose between group classes or private tutoring, but students needed both. Some concepts click better in group discussion. Other skills require focused one-on-one practice. Real learning doesn't fit into rigid categories.
So we started building what we actually wanted to use. First version launched in 2018 with three instructors and forty students. The core idea was simple: let students move fluidly between collaborative learning and personalized instruction based on what they need right now, not what some administrator decided months ago.
It took two years of iteration to get the session switching mechanism working smoothly. Another year to figure out pricing that made sense for both students and instructors. We still adjust things constantly based on actual usage patterns, not abstract theories about how education should work.
What we learned building this
The hardest part wasn't the technology. It was figuring out how to structure sessions so students could actually use the flexibility we were offering. We tested eight different scheduling systems before finding one that didn't require a manual to understand. Turns out, people don't want infinite options. They want clear paths with obvious flexibility points.
We also discovered that instructors needed different skills for group sessions versus individual work. Good classroom teachers aren't automatically good at one-on-one coaching, and vice versa. Now we train specifically for both contexts and match instructors to the formats where they're strongest. Better for everyone involved.
The platform serves students primarily from Warsaw and surrounding areas, which shaped how we think about accessibility. Not everyone has consistent high-speed internet or dedicated study space. We optimized for variable connection quality and designed sessions that work even if you're joining from a coffee shop or during a commute.
Group sessions
Scheduled collaborative learning with multiple students. Works well for discussion-based topics, peer feedback, and building understanding through different perspectives. Limited to 12 students maximum to keep interaction meaningful.
Individual sessions
One-on-one focused work with an instructor. Used for skill practice, specific problem solving, and topics that need personalized pacing. Students book these as needed rather than committing to rigid weekly schedules.
Adaptive paths
Learning sequences that adjust based on actual progress, not estimated completion times. System tracks which concepts students grasp quickly versus which need more practice, then suggests appropriate next steps.
Live interaction
Real-time teaching with actual instructors, not pre-recorded content. All sessions include live video, screen sharing, and collaborative tools. Recordings available afterward but designed for synchronous participation.
