Minder

Role: UX Designer — research, wireframes, prototyping, usability testing
Timeline: September 2024 – March 2025
Team: Sehrish Daud, Jack Strickland, Siheng Li
Context: HCDE 302 & 303 · Figma

The Problem

"I don't want to walk all the way to Odegaard library just to find out no one else showed up."
UW mechanical engineering student

UW STEM classes are full of people who could study together — but large lectures, intimidating social dynamics, and scattered tools like Slack and GroupMe make connection feel risky. Students weren't avoiding collaboration. They were avoiding the uncertainty of showing up alone.

Minder

A mobile app that helps students find study partners by course, set a clear session goal, and commit only when the plan feels worth the trip.

Hi-fi prototype walkthrough — from sign-in to joining a study group.

Minder onboarding and home screens — Canvas-linked courses and study group discovery — Home pulls in Canvas courses; one tap leads to groups for that class.

What it does

Match by class, not cold outreach

Browse small groups tied to your actual courses — filtered by availability and study environment — instead of messaging strangers on Slack or approaching people after lecture.

Minder group details, member profiles, and calendar view — Profile, home, and calendar — the three core surfaces.

Know the goal before you go

Every session states its purpose — homework help, exam prep, concept review — and shows who is coming. The calendar marks meeting times so accountability is visible, not assumed.

Minder session screen with study goal, time, and confirmed attendees — Session details before anyone leaves their dorm.

The Gap

Students wanted connection. The tools weren't built for it.

Discord and GroupMe handle chat. Canvas holds coursework. Neither helps a student find two peers, agree on a goal, and show up at Odegaard on Tuesday. After competitive analysis, our focus narrowed: match people by shared context, then remove every reason to bail.

How might we help STEM undergraduates form study groups that feel small, purposeful, and worth showing up for?

Research

Three interviews with UW STEM undergraduates — focused on where they study, how groups form today, and why past attempts failed.

Small groups work

2–4 peers, not large circles. Accountability drops when groups feel like another lecture.
Environment varies

Silent libraries, cafés, dorm rooms — one default setting fails half of students.
Goals must be explicit

Groups without a defined purpose — homework vs. exam prep — fall apart quickly.
Schedules rarely align

Classes, work, and clubs make overlap the hardest part — not finding willing partners.

We didn't really have a goal. We just said we'd meet up and then nobody knew what to work on.
Biology major, UW

Low-fidelity paper sketches of the study group journey — Lo-fi sketches — mapping where students drop off between "I need help" and "we're meeting."

Iteration

Twenty weeks: competitive analysis → lo-fi → mid-fi → hi-fi, with two rounds of usability testing between each jump.

Round 1 · Mid-fi

Test the flow, fix the confusion

Users liked structured matching over random outreach — but the home screen lost them. They couldn't find the path from courses to groups.

Clearer home layout and labels — course → find groups
Filters for study style, experience level, and availability
Onboarding guidance so first-time users know where to start

Mid-fidelity Figma screens — revised home flow and group discovery — Mid-fi — home, find groups, and calendar flows after round one.

Round 2 · Hi-fi

Polish what testing confirmed

Ease-of-use scores were strong and users said they'd return — but match confidence still needed work. We refined onboarding copy, standardized navigation, and added personalization so groups felt intentional, not random.

Step-by-step onboarding with plain-language instructions
Consistent button placement and visual hierarchy
More match fields so schedules and preferences actually align

Hi-fidelity Minder screens — final group calendar and session views — Hi-fi — the final screens tested in round two.

Use-case scenario — how Minder fits into a student's week.

Reflection

What I learned

Students needed confidence, not features. The hardest design problem was reducing the social risk of showing up — not building another calendar.
Testing caught what interviews couldn't — users said the app was easy, then got lost on the home screen. Watching beats asking.
Industry feedback at our showcase pushed us beyond UI polish. Connecting students by course and schedule raises real privacy and safety questions — something we hadn't fully designed for.

What I'd do next

Rework onboarding so study-style preference is central — less choose-your-own-adventure, more guided path into matching.
Design for trust and safety: reporting, visibility controls, and clear boundaries within groups.
Plan for when matching fails — students with no overlapping schedules need a fallback, or the app stops being useful to them.
Expand research across departments, and design for what happens after a session ends — return visits, not just first joins.

Minder shifted how I frame product problems — from "build a study app" to "design for the moment someone almost reaches out, and doesn't."

HCDE 302 & 303 · Team: Jack Strickland, Siheng Li