Michelle Blomberg

Student Journey Barriers Study

AI Strategy · Adoption · Case study

This is a formative study, not a summative one. It runs in rounds, and each round is analyzed before the next is designed. The findings themselves stay unpublished until the domain confirms them.

Where the study stands

58
Logged runs, rounds 1a and 1b
22
Of the 50 personas used so far
10
Colleges touched
34
Candidate barriers registered

The register holds thirty-four candidate barriers. Every severity is tester-assigned and pending human rating. Nothing here is a confirmed district finding, and the barriers themselves stay unpublished until the domain has reviewed them.

Round log

What the first two rounds established

A single mechanism accounts for most of what both rounds found, and it is more useful than any individual barrier: retrieval matches vocabulary, not need. A page ranks on a student’s query when it contains the student’s word, and does not when it contains only the service’s name. The services exist. The language of need exists. They sit in different documents.

The open question shaping the next round

Both rounds so far tested one channel: the public college website. The study assumes a student with a problem goes to the website. That is likely true for some students and it is certainly not true for all of them. A student who needs help could reasonably start at any of these, and the corpus covers exactly one:

It does not invalidate the findings. It bounds them: they are findings about the public web, on the public web.

The study at full scope

The numbers below are the designed extent of the study, not what has run.

50
Synthetic students
46
Journey tasks
10
Colleges
52
Services mapped
520
Service access points to test (52 × 10)
80
In-person walk-ins, planned