We’ve been testing a lot of higher ed experiences lately, and a few weeks back we did a fun side experiment around the college football playoff contenders. The idea was simple: if these schools are competing on the biggest stage athletically, what do their digital experiences feel like when students are trying to make real decisions?
One of the pages that stuck with us was Indiana University’s degree search experience.
In testing, the mechanics mostly worked. People could find programs, filters behaved as expected, and nothing was outright broken. But sentiment was the weak spot. Even when users succeeded, they didn’t feel great doing it. A lot of “this works, but it’s tiring” energy.
That got us asking a different question: what would actually improve how this page feels without blowing up the whole system?
Our strongest recommendation was surprisingly simple. Move away from individual program cards and present degrees and majors as a clean, scannable list.
Why lists instead of cards:
-
Cards repeat the same metadata over and over, which makes long pages feel heavier than they need to be
-
Lists let your eyes move vertically and horizontally much faster, especially when you’re comparing similar programs
-
Columns create natural groupings, so people can make sense of scale without reading every item
-
It feels more like browsing options and less like wading through tiles
We mocked up a version where programs are displayed in a list with clear columns for delivery mode, degree type, and credits. Same information, less visual noise:
This isn’t about making the page flashy. It’s about reducing fatigue at a moment where people are already doing a lot of mental work. If students leave the page feeling oriented instead of overwhelmed, sentiment tends to follow. Check out the full case study here.
Curious how others are handling large program inventories. Are you seeing better results with lists, cards, hybrids, or something else entirely?