The Assignment: Modernizing a Growing Platform
When I joined this project, the challenge was clear: transform a unified Next.js e-learning platform into two specialized applications—one for students and one for administrators—without duplicating code or compromising performance.
The existing platform served both roles from a single codebase. While this “all-in-one” model had served the team well during the early stages, it began to show serious limitations as the platform scaled.
My mission: architect and implement a separation that would enhance security, boost performance, and make the codebase more maintainable for the long run.
The Challenge: When One Size No Longer Fits All
The original architecture followed a typical startup strategy:
“Build fast, ship faster.”
A single Next.js app powered everything—from course browsing to system administration. However, rapid growth exposed several architectural cracks:
- 📦 Bundle Bloat: The admin dashboard inflated the bundle size for student-facing pages.
- 🔐 Security Concerns: Admin features coexisted with public student routes—raising exposure risks.
- 🛠 Development Friction: Student features and admin tools tangled in the same codebase.
- 🐌 Performance Hits: Shared concerns affected load times and UX.
Clearly, the unified setup was becoming a bottleneck. It was time for a strategic evolution.
The Solution: Separation for Specialization
After thoroughly analyzing the codebase and business needs, I proposed a split:
- ** Student Portal**: A lean, focused app for learning and discovery.
- ** Admin Dashboard**: A dedicated app for platform management.
But this wasn’t just about splitting code. It meant building a smart shared component architecture that prevented duplication while giving each app freedom to evolve independently.
The Architecture: Smart Separation with Shared Resources
The new structure followed a modular, maintainable pattern:
platform/
├── student/ # Student-focused Next.js app
├── admin/ # Admin-focused Next.js app
└── shared/ # Common components & utilities
├── components/ # Reusable UI components
├── hooks/ # Custom React hooks
├── lib/ # API clients & utilities
├── providers/ # React context providers
├── store/ # Zustand state management
└── types/ # TypeScript definitions
The shared/ directory became the single source of truth for components, state, and utilities.
Implementation Challenges and Solutions
🧩 Challenge 1: Component Dependencies
Problem: Existing components were mixed—some tightly coupled to student logic, others to admin workflows.
Solution: I introduced a component classification system:
-
shared/components/→ Universal UI components -
student/src/components/→ Student-specific -
admin/src/components/→ Admin-specific
🧠 Challenge 2: State Management
Problem: Zustand stores contained both student and admin logic.
Solution: I separated stores by domain:
-
auth-store.ts→ Authentication (shared) -
course-store.ts→ Course data (shared) -
progress-store.ts→ Student tracking -
certificate-store.ts→ Certificate issuance
🔁 Challenge 3: Routing and Auth Logic
Problem: A single routing middleware managed both student and admin paths—hard to debug and scale.
Solution:
- Student App: Public pages + protected dashboard
- Admin App: Fully protected with role-based access control
- Shared Layer: JWT logic + session management
The Results: Measurable Improvements
🔒 Enhanced Security
- Reduced Attack Surface: No more admin code in the student app.
- Complete Isolation: Admin tools live in their own sandbox.
- Improved Access Control: Granular permissions per app.
⚡ Performance Gains
-
Bundle Size:
- Student: ↓ 33%
- Admin: ↓ 14%
Load Times: ↓ 34%
Build Time: ↓ 38%
💻 Developer Experience
- Clearer codebase → Faster onboarding
- Focused teams → Fewer conflicts
- Isolated bugs → Easier debugging
🚀 Operational Benefits
- Independent Deployments
- Flexible Hosting
- App-Specific Monitoring & Analytics
Impact Metrics: Before vs After
| Metric | Before | After | Improvement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Student Bundle Size | 2.1MB | 1.4MB | 33% smaller |
| Admin Bundle Size | 2.1MB | 1.8MB | 14% smaller |
| First Load Time | 3.2s | 2.1s | 34% faster |
| Dev Build Time | 45s | 28s | 38% faster |
| Security Risk | Mixed | Isolated | Significantly safer |
Key Lessons from the Migration
1. 🧱 Architect the Shared Layer First
Upfront investment in a shared library ensured reusability without tight coupling.
2. 📦 Keep Imports Consistent
Relative imports like ../../../shared/components/button enforced clarity and consistency.
3. 👥 Design for Team Autonomy
Each team focused on one domain, boosting domain expertise and velocity.
4. 🧪 Test Thoroughly During Migration
Comprehensive test suites protected against regressions.
Technology Stack That Enabled Success
- Next.js 15 + App Router
- TypeScript 5
- Tailwind CSS + Radix UI
- Zustand + TanStack Query
- React Hook Form + Zod
Long-Term Benefits (6 Months Later)
- 🚀 Faster Feature Development
- 🔐 Stronger Security Posture
- 🧑💻 Higher Team Velocity
- 👋 Simplified Onboarding
When Should You Consider Platform Separation?
✅ You serve multiple user types
✅ You're seeing bundle bloat
✅ Your security surface is growing
✅ Teams are clashing over shared logic
✅ You need faster deployments and better monitoring
Conclusion: Thoughtful Separation, Strategic Evolution
This was more than a refactor—it was a strategic re-architecture that:
- Strengthened platform security
- Improved performance
- Enhanced developer experience
- Future-proofed the product
By separating concerns without sacrificing cohesion, we created a scalable foundation that supports long-term growth and team autonomy.
Sometimes, the smartest way forward is to break things apart intentionally.
Technical Implementation Note:
This was implemented using modern modular patterns in React and Next.js. The shared library ensures consistent UI and logic while enabling each app to evolve independently.
Project Outcome:
This architecture unlocked faster development, stronger security, and higher code quality across the board.
Top comments (0)