UCL’s postgraduate Annual Programme Survey covers modules and wider programme experience

Updated Sep 07, 2026

UCL’s 24 April 2026 announcement invited taught postgraduates to complete its Annual Programme Survey (APS), covering modules, dissertations and placements where applicable. It described a five-minute survey with a closing date of 26 June 2026, and an automatic prize draw with a top prize of £1,000. That survey window has now passed. Postgraduate announcement.

What the public notices establish

The postgraduate notice presents APS as a way to inform changes for future students. It does not show that all respondents had completed their dissertation or placement, or demonstrate improved outcomes from this cycle.

A separate UCL briefing, published on 23 February 2026, describes the continuing-undergraduate wave. It covers teaching, support, assessment, programme structure and module comments. That briefing says anonymised comments and numerical results go to departments and services and contribute to Faculty and Department Education Plans. Its confidentiality statement is UCL’s description of the process, not an independent audit of anonymity. Undergraduate briefing.

The two notices concern different cohorts and windows. They do not establish identical questionnaires or direct comparability between undergraduate and postgraduate responses.

Planning a programme survey

Our practical suggestion is to identify which experiences students can meaningfully evaluate at the time of collection. For a dissertation or placement, distinguish those who have completed it from those whose experience is still developing. Provide a suitable later route where needed.

Separate module-specific comments from issues about the programme as a whole. Record the relevant context rather than forcing every concern into one undifferentiated theme. Assign responsibility for interpreting results and deciding what should be communicated back.

Keep data access and confidentiality clear, particularly where small cohorts or detailed comments may identify someone. Confirm the process before sharing extracts beyond the teams entitled to receive them.

The student comment analysis governance checklist offers questions for this planning. A shared survey name is not evidence of a complete cross-cohort dataset, and analysis alone cannot establish whether an action improved the student experience.

Review note, 7 September 2026: verified both dated notices, preserved their distinct cohorts, and limited claims about confidentiality, comparability and follow-through to the public evidence. Removed the unsupported assertion about APS’s relationship to PTES.