**Calculate the Satisfaction Score:**
Use the responses from the column **"[Column with satisfaction ratings]"** in the attached CSV to calculate the Satisfaction score using the following formula:
Satisfaction Score = ((% of “Very Satisfied” participants + % of “Somewhat Satisfied” participants) ÷ (number of responses)) × 100
After calculating the Satisfaction score, report where it lands on the following scale:
- **Very Good** = above 90%
- **Good** = 70–89%
- **Average** = 50–69%
- **Poor** = 30–49%
- **Very Poor** = 0–29%
Next, analyze the responses in the column **"[Column with qualitative explanations]"** in the CSV to identify common themes and provide clear, actionable suggestions for how the Satisfaction score could be improved.
📊 Calculation (Section 2 Choices)
Distinct options detected: Very satisfied, Somewhat satisfied, Neutral, Somewhat dissatisfied, Very dissatisfied (N=100)
Counts:
Very satisfied: 31
Somewhat satisfied: 40
Neutral: 25
Somewhat dissatisfied: 1
Very dissatisfied: 3
Satisfaction Score
Very satisfied
+
Somewhat satisfied
𝑁
×
100
=
31
+
40
100
×
100
=
71.0
%
N
Very satisfied+Somewhat satisfied
×100=
100
31+40
×100=71.0%
Scale placement: Good (70–89%)
💬 What participants said (Section 2 Explanation — common themes)
Top recurring ideas/terms:
Choice coverage & options — “options,” “all degrees,” “programs,” “array” → users like seeing breadth/coverage.
Clarity & simplicity — “simple,” “easy,” “organized,” “well designed” → layout aids understanding.
Information depth needs — mentions like “need more information/help,” “doesn’t look…” signal gaps for some users.
Illustrative snippets:
“It is simple and easy to understand.”
“They are well organized and easy to see.”
“Need more information and help for people.”
“It is more detailed, clear and helpful.”
🔧 How to improve Satisfaction
Surface essential details without leaving the page
Add expandable accordions or hover reveals for key facts (requirements, duration, cost, outcomes).
Show a concise “at-a-glance” spec line for each option (e.g., length, format, next start date).
Strengthen information scent from the list to detail views
Make headings & labels more descriptive (“BS in ___ — 4 years, online/on-campus”).
Use subhead text to clarify who each option is for.
Boost scanning & comparison
Provide a “compare” toggle for 2–3 options with a consistent table of features/outcomes.
Ensure visual hierarchy (typography/spacing) highlights what matters most.
Address help-seeking moments
Inline help links (“Talk to an advisor,” “Email us,” “FAQs”) near ambiguous fields; add a short “What to expect next” box.
Close the loop with microcopy
Replace vague CTAs (“Learn more”) with precise ones (“See curriculum & costs”).
Add reassurance lines where commitment is implied (e.g., “No application required to explore”).
With these changes, you should be able to move more “Neutral” respondents into “Somewhat/Very satisfied,” nudging the score further into the mid-to-high 70s.