STUDENT SEARCH

Product Design, UX Design, UI Design, Visual Design,
Accessibility, User Testing, User Surveys, AI,
Cross-Function Collaboration


College Board

Designing a complex student segmentation and data purchasing system that enables institutions to identify, refine, and act on prospective student audiences.

Student Search allows colleges to define and purchase student datasets based on academic, demographic, and behavioral attributes.

These datasets power recruitment — emails, mailers, and outreach students receive.

I worked across the system to improve clarity, feedback, and decision-making in a highly complex filtering environment.

Role: Senior Product Designer, end-to-end ownership.

Partnered with: Engineering, QA, Content, Accessibility

Led: UX strategy, workflow redesign, specs

Scope: End-to-end product design, UX strategy, workflow restructuring, specs, prototyping, research synthesis

Timeline: 1 Year

Tools: Figma, Zeplin, High + Low Fidelity Prototyping

The System

This is not a single feature — it is an ecosystem.

Student Search spans:

  • search creation

  • filtering logic

  • saved searches & orders

  • subscription constraints

  • data uploads & segmentation

  • account + criteria management

Each part contributes to a single outcome: defining the right audience to purchase.

The Problem

The existing experience had grown into a powerful but fragmented system over time.

While feature-rich, it created friction across nearly every stage of the workflow.

Key issues

1. Lack of clarity in filtering logic
Users could select filters, but struggled to understand:

  • how filters combined

  • what impact they had on results

  • whether their audience was accurate

2. No real-time feedback

  • Audience size was unclear until late in the process

  • Users couldn’t confidently iterate

  • Filtering felt like trial-and-error

3. Fragmented workflows
Search creation, saved searches, orders, and uploads existed as:

  • separate tools

  • inconsistent interfaces

  • disconnected mental models

4. High cognitive load

  • Dense tables

  • Nested dropdowns

  • Overwhelming inputs

Users were forced to translate system logic instead of focusing on strategy

Legacy State

The legacy system reflected years of incremental feature additions:

  • inconsistent UI patterns

  • minimal hierarchy

  • poor visibility into system state

Users frequently lacked confidence in: “Did I actually build the right audience?”

Transform a complex, opaque system into one that:

  • provides continuous feedback

  • supports confident decision-making

  • scales across expanding datasets and features

  • connects the full workflow from search → purchase

Goal

Instead of simplifying the system (which wasn’t possible due to business complexity),
I focused on making the system legible.

This meant:

  • exposing system behavior

  • structuring complexity

  • reinforcing cause-and-effect relationships

Insert: Students Included bar

As users apply filters:

  • audience size updates instantly

  • changes are visible and trackable

  • users can iterate with confidence

Why this matters

Previously:

  • users operated blindly

Now:

  • every action produces immediate feedback

This transforms filtering into:a feedback-driven decision system

  1. Structuring Complex Filters

The system includes dozens of filters across:

  • academics

  • geography

  • testing

  • demographics

  • behavioral data

    Insert: Accordion filters

To reduce cognitive overload:

  • filters were grouped logically

  • sections were collapsible

  • users could focus on one dimension at a time

Impact

  • reduced overwhelm

  • improved scanability

  • increased task completion efficiency

  1. Clarifying Filter Logic

One of the most confusing areas was how filters combined.

Insert: AP / SAT logic UI

Users struggled with:

  • OR vs AND logic

  • inclusion vs exclusion

  • overlapping conditions

Design decisions

  • made logic more explicit

  • surfaced relationships between filters

  • clarified outcomes through UI structure

Result

Users could understand not just what they selected — but what it meant

Instead of simplifying the system (which wasn’t possible due to business complexity),
I focused on making the system legible.

This meant:

  • exposing system behavior

  • structuring complexity

  • reinforcing cause-and-effect relationships

4. Persistent Context & Actionability

Users frequently needed to:

  • monitor dataset size

  • save progress

  • submit orders

Key actions were made persistent:

  • visible at all times

  • accessible without context switching

Impact

  • reduced friction

  • improved flow continuity

  • supported long, multi-step workflows

5. Expanding the Data Model

New capabilities were introduced to support more nuanced targeting.

Landscape Context

This included:

  • environmental and neighborhood data

  • expanded segmentation options

  • contextual scoring systems

Challenge

Adding complexity without increasing confusion

Solution

  • integrated into existing patterns

  • maintained consistency across filters

  • introduced progressively

6. Connecting the Ecosystem

Student Search does not exist in isolation.

It connects to:

  • saved searches

  • orders & downloads

  • subscription plans

  • uploaded datasets

My Searches / Orders page

Design focus

  • unify interaction patterns

  • maintain consistency across pages

  • reduce re-learning

7. Supporting Custom Data Input

Users can upload their own data for segmentation.

Upload + Segment Analysis

This required:

  • new workflows for file handling

  • tagging and clustering systems

  • integration with search filters

Impact

Expanded system from:
static data → dynamic, user-driven segmentation

8. Designing Within Business Constraints

Access to features is tied to subscription tiers.

This introduces constraints on:

  • dataset size

  • feature access

  • filtering capabilities

Design challenge

Balance:

  • transparency

  • usability

  • monetization

Approach

  • clearly communicate limits

  • avoid blocking user workflows abruptly

  • guide users toward valid actions

Approach

Research evidence

  • Affinity mapping revealed recurring confusion around upload states and requirements

  • User quotes highlighted anxiety around “what happens after upload”

  • Survey data confirmed lack of confidence in media correctness

  • Key learning slide

  • Media upload quotes slide

  • Accessibility findings

  • Research method / approach

  • Key research questions slides

What the research made impossible to ignore

  • Cropping and size restrictions were a major pain point

  • Users wanted confidence that uploaded images would look correct after approval

  • Format, dimension, and accessibility guidance needed to be more explicit

  • Users needed preview states and better feedback loops

  • Approval and publication states needed stronger communication

Research Evidence

User Flow

How The New Flow Works

01

Entry Point

User lands on the BFPM homepage and sees profile completion status and next actions.

02

Profile Complete

Returns to a homepage that reflects progress.

03

Upload Assets

Uploads logo and banner assets.

04

Enters profile information

Enter Information

05

Review

Reviews image choices and guidance.

Outcome

The redesigned system shifted Student Search from a static filtering tool into a feedback-driven decision system.

  • Users can now iterate on audience selection in real-time, rather than relying on trial-and-error

  • Increased confidence in filter selection and dataset accuracy

  • Reduced reliance on external support for complex search creation

  • Improved ability to understand how filters affect outcomes before purchase

Product & System Impact

  • Established a scalable filtering framework across search and segmentation workflows

  • Introduced real-time feedback patterns that improved visibility into system behavior

  • Unified fragmented experiences into a cohesive, end-to-end workflow

  • Created a foundation for expanding data inputs, segmentation models, and new features

Business Impact

  • Enabled more precise audience targeting, improving the quality of purchased datasets

  • Reduced risk of incorrect or inefficient data purchases

  • Supported clearer alignment between product capabilities and subscription models

  • Strengthened the system’s role as a core driver of institutional recruitment strategies


Outcome / Impact

Reflection

Designing this system required balancing:

  • user needs

  • data complexity

  • business constraints

The biggest shift was moving from interface designdecision system design

Every interaction shapes:

  • who institutions reach

  • how students are targeted

  • and ultimately, access to opportunity

Reflection

Transform a complex, opaque system into one that:

  • provides continuous feedback

  • supports confident decision-making

  • scales across expanding datasets and features

  • connects the full workflow from search → purchase

Approach

Previous
Previous

PayPal Paris Sweepstakes Campaign Email

Next
Next

PayPal Campaign Email