> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.peridot.works/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Build a design master's portfolio that explains your decisions
- URL: https://www.peridot.works/design-masters-portfolio-process/
- Published: 2026-10-10T05:23:38.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-10T05:23:38.000Z
- Description: Use a project evidence worksheet to select and present your own research, design decisions and contribution for a master’s portfolio application.
- Author: Santosh Srinivas

For a design master's application, begin with the exact course instructions, then select projects that let a reviewer follow your own contribution and development. A finished image shows an outcome. The evidence behind it helps explain what you investigated, chose and changed. Page limits, requested tasks and selection criteria belong to the actual course, so establish them before designing a presentation.

This guide offers an original project-selection worksheet. University of the Arts London provides scoped examples of portfolio and postgraduate application guidance; these examples do not establish requirements for every design master's or predict admission.

## Make a requirements card before making pages

Record the university, exact course, intended application cycle, requested material, submission route, limits and deadline. Put a current official source beside each requirement. Add your individual submission invitation when it arrives. A department's general advice and an applicant's specific instruction should not be treated as interchangeable.

UAL's [portfolio advice](https://www.arts.ac.uk/study-at-ual/apply/portfolio-advice?ref=peridot.works), checked on 10 October 2026, directs applicants to their course's requirements. It describes portfolios as evidence of creative development, including research and process, and asks applicants to explain their role in group work. Parts of that general page address undergraduate applications; do not turn every suggestion into a master's requirement.

The [UAL postgraduate application guidance](https://www.arts.ac.uk/study-at-ual/apply/postgraduate?ref=peridot.works) says applicants may be asked for a portfolio or video task after the initial application, submitted through PebblePad by the assigned deadline. The page's displayed 2025/2026 round deadlines do not establish the next cycle's dates. Verify the course and cycle you intend to apply for.

## Inventory evidence before choosing your strongest-looking project

For each real project, write a short entry under these original worksheet fields:

- Context: the problem, audience or question you actually worked on.
- Evidence: observations, research or source material you genuinely used.
- Alternatives: approaches you considered and why you selected one.
- Development: what changed after feedback or further work.
- Outcome: the work you completed and any limitations you can explain.
- Contribution: what you did personally and what teammates did.
- Permission: what you can show publicly or submit, including any client restrictions.

Use the inventory to find a project with an explainable sequence. It is not a scoring formula. A project with a striking final visual but little accessible process evidence might serve a different purpose from a less polished project with substantial development. Decide using the requested criteria rather than a universal rule about which one is better.

If something is missing, identify it honestly. You can say that you did not test an idea, or that a constraint prevented further development. Do not add invented interviews, user counts, impact figures or feedback to create a more impressive story.

## Build a project narrative that can be checked

Here is a hypothetical planning example, not an applicant's story or a prescribed university assignment. A student made a prototype for a campus information interface. Their records contain an initial sketch, two navigation alternatives and a revised screen. They can explain the question behind the alternatives, their reason for choosing one and what the revised screen still fails to resolve.

If they actually collected user feedback, they can describe its limited scope accurately. If they did not, they should explain their own design reasoning without inventing a research exercise. The distinction affects what the project demonstrates.

Choose material that supports each part of the narrative. A short annotation should connect an image to the decision it illustrates. Avoid making the reviewer search across disconnected screenshots to understand what changed. Our [statement-of-purpose evidence map](https://www.peridot.works/statement-purpose-evidence-map/) provides related preparation for written motivation; the portfolio needs its own visual evidence and task-specific instructions.

## Keep authorship visible in collaborative work

Give the project context, then identify your contribution at the relevant point. If another person created a component, do not let layout imply that it was yours. Check whether you have permission to include client material, unpublished work or identifiable people. Access to a team folder does not itself answer those permission questions.

UAL's general advice also favours a legible layout without crowded pages or decorative backgrounds. Apply the broader reading principle to your own draft: can someone understand the sequence and annotations on an ordinary screen? Preserve the requested format instead of substituting a visually attractive format the application cannot accept.

## Treat a video task as a separate instruction

If a video is requested, record its actual prompt, length and submission requirements. UAL's postgraduate guidance states that AI tools, including voice alteration, are not allowed during its video tasks. That is a task-specific institutional rule; it does not answer every question about another university's portfolio. Read the applicable policy before using assistance, with the [application AI-policy guide](https://www.peridot.works/masters-application-ai-policy-check/) as a preparation aid.

## Review evidence, then presentation

First check whether you can substantiate the captions, describe your own contribution and explain the work without invented results. Then check page order, readable annotations, file opening and any required links. Test the actual submission instructions early enough to resolve a technical issue through the institution's specified route.

Your next useful action is to complete the requirements card and inventory one project. Select the evidence that explains your decisions before spending time on decorative layout. That produces a clearer preparation task while leaving the admissions decision with the institution.

Sources checked 10 October 2026\. The project worksheet and hypothetical example are original editorial aids. Exact course and application-cycle instructions govern what you submit.