Advance HE's pre-arrival questionnaire shows where student feedback expectations start

Updated Sep 07, 2026

Advance HE’s 16 April 2026 announcement described initial results from the Pre-arrival Academic Questionnaire (PAQ) pilot, covering incoming undergraduates at 15 institutions in England. It highlighted variation in expectations, confidence and concerns before study. Advance HE announcement.

Findings and scope

Advance HE reported lower entry confidence among disabled students, carers, commuters and mature entrants, alongside expectations of structured contact and accessible feedback. It also highlighted financial and wellbeing concerns. Its researcher described participating institutions using responses to signpost services and discuss expectations.

These are findings as described in the public announcement. They should not be treated as estimates for every English entrant, evidence about every institution, or proof that signposting improved continuation. The underlying results report was unavailable through the reviewed link, so this article does not add subgroup effect sizes or claims about causal impact.

The participation guidance places wave 1 in autumn 2025 and plans wave 2 for September–November 2026, within an OfS-funded project running until June 2027. It describes institutional surveys through Jisc Online Surveys and later benchmark analysis. The wider project includes undergraduate and taught-postgraduate questionnaires; the April announcement’s headline findings concern undergraduates. Wave 2 guidance, pages 5–10.

Use entry questions to plan a response

Our practical suggestion is to decide before collection which concerns can inform induction, which require service-level review and how students will hear the response. Describe available support accurately rather than promising that a questionnaire will resolve the difficulty it identifies.

A later survey could explore whether anticipated concerns occurred. Keep its purpose and population clear: a difference between two surveys does not, by itself, show that an intervention worked. Questions, participation and the students included may also differ.

Invite students to review the wording and response options before launch. The staff–student evaluation redesign summary and comment-analysis governance checklist offer related planning questions.

Review note, 7 September 2026: checked the public findings and participation guidance, clarified the undergraduate versus wider pilot scope, and removed claims that comment comparisons can establish intervention effects. This is a briefing on accessible official evidence, not a full analysis of the unavailable results report.