I shipped my first iOS app. It’s called SPEEM, and it helps middle and high school students build study habits. But this post isn’t about the app itself. It’s about a design decision that goes against everything the app industry stands for.
SPEEM limits how much you can use it.
Not because of a paywall. Not because of server costs. Because using it more would make it worse.
The Attention Economy Is a Terrible Teacher
Every app on your phone is fighting for the same thing: your time. More sessions. Longer sessions. Daily active users. Monthly active users. Engagement. Retention. These are the metrics that matter. These are the metrics that get funded.
But here’s the problem: attention is not learning.
A student who spends four hours in a study app isn’t necessarily learning four times more than one who spends one hour. In fact, research consistently shows the opposite. Cramming doesn’t work. Cognitive overload kills retention. The brain needs space between study sessions to consolidate knowledge.
The most effective study pattern isn’t “more.” It’s “less, but consistently.”
So I had a choice. Build an app that maximizes engagement, or build one that maximizes learning. They’re not the same thing.
The Limits
Here’s what SPEEM won’t let you do:
- No more than 2 active missions at a time. You can’t juggle five subjects at once. Your brain can’t either.
- No more than 1 new mission per week. Spaced repetition works. Cramming doesn’t.
- Quests have minimum time requirements. You can’t speed-run your way to “done.”
- You must complete or close a mission before starting a new one. Finish what you start.
These aren’t artificial constraints to create scarcity. They’re based on decades of learning science: Locke & Latham’s goal-setting theory, Sweller’s cognitive load research, Ebbinghaus’s spaced repetition findings, Lally’s habit formation studies.
The science is clear: students with fewer, focused goals outperform those juggling many. Working memory handles 3-5 items, not 15. Distributed practice beats massed practice every time.
Most apps ignore this research because it’s bad for engagement metrics. I decided to build around it.
The Uncomfortable Business Reality
Let me be honest about what this means for the business.
Lower engagement means fewer opportunities to show value. Fewer sessions means less data to optimize. Limiting usage means some users might think the app is “too simple” or “not doing enough.”
In a pitch deck, these limits would be weaknesses. Investors want hockey stick growth curves, not principled constraints.
But I’m not building for investors. I’m building for students who actually want to learn. And for their parents, who are tired of apps that are designed to be addictive rather than effective.
The parents I talk to don’t want another app competing for their teenager’s attention. They want something that works and then gets out of the way. That’s what I’m trying to build.
The “Am I Ready?” Question
There’s another thing study apps get wrong: they measure activity, not learning.
Complete 100 flashcards? Great, here’s a badge. Streak of 30 days? Amazing, you’re on fire. But can you actually pass your exam? Who knows. The app can’t tell you because it never checked.
SPEEM’s core feature isn’t the streaks or the gamification (though those help with habit formation). It’s answering the question every student actually cares about: Am I ready for this exam?
The app tracks comprehension across topics, runs subtle assessments after each quest, and shows you a readiness dashboard. Not “you studied for 47 hours”, but “here’s where you’re strong, here’s where you’re weak, and here’s what you should focus on next.”
This is harder to build than an activity tracker. It requires actual AI that understands the material, not just a timer that counts minutes. But it’s the only thing that matters to a student the night before a test.
Why I’m Writing This
I’ve been a software engineer for 15 years. Last year, I burned out and stepped away from client work. I wrote about it here. The short version: I was building things I didn’t choose, using technologies I didn’t like, for goals I didn’t care about.
SPEEM is the opposite. I chose the problem (my kids struggle with study habits). I chose the technology (Swift, SwiftUI, Claude API). I chose the principles (science-backed, privacy-first, limits by design).
It’s also terrifying. There’s no client paying invoices. No guaranteed revenue. Just an app in the App Store and a belief that there are enough people who want something different.
I could be wrong about all of this. The market might not want a study app that limits usage. Parents might not pay for something that does less. The “anti-attention” positioning might be too weird to explain in an App Store screenshot.
But I’d rather build something I believe in and fail than build another attention trap and succeed.
Try It
If you have a middle or high school student who struggles with study habits, SPEEM is on the App Store. There’s a 14-day free trial. No credit card required.
And if the limits frustrate you, if you want to do more missions, more quests, more everything, that’s fine. SPEEM isn’t for everyone.
It’s for students who want to learn better, not just study more.