| Date Created | Date 1st Review Due | Date Reviewed | Version | Next Review Due |
| October 2025 | October 2026 | |||
Key Staff Involved
| ROLE | NAME(S) |
| Head of Centre | Abby Stonell |
| Exams Officer | Amar Panesar |
| SENDCo | Nicki Foster |
| Senior Leader(s) | All of the above |
Contents
Key staff involved in the procedure: …………………………………………………………………….2
Purpose of the procedure……………………………………………………………………………………4 Appeals relating to internal assessment decisions (centre assessed marks)……………….5 Appeals against decisions to reject a candidate’s work on the grounds of malpractice..8 Appeals relating to centre decisions not to support an application for a clerical
re-check, a review of marking, a review of moderation or an appeal……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 9
Appeals regarding centre decisions relating to access arrangements and special consideration ……………………………………………………………………………………………………11 Appeals regarding centre decisions relating to other administrative issues ………………13 Further guidance to inform and implement appeals ………………………………………………16
Purpose of the procedure
This procedure confirms Egham Park School’s compliance with JCQ’s General Regulations for Approved Centres (5.3z, 5.8) that the centre will:
• Have in place for inspection that must be reviewed and updated annually, a written appeals procedure which must cover at least appeals regarding internal assessment decisions, access to post-result services and appeals, and centre decisions relating to access arrangements and special consideration
• Draw to the attention of candidates and their parents/carers their written internal appeals procedures
This procedure covers appeals relating to:
• Internal assessment decisions (centre assessed marks)
• Centre decisions not to support an application for a clerical re-check, a review of marking, a review of moderation or an appeal
• Centre decisions relating to access arrangements and special consideration
• Centre decisions relating to other administrative issues
Appeals relating to internal assessment decisions (centre assessed marks)
Certain qualifications contain components/units of non-examination assessment, controlled assessment and/or coursework which are internally assessed (marked) by centres and internally standardised. The marks awarded (the internal assessment decisions) which contribute to the final grade of the qualification are then submitted by the deadline set by the awarding body for external moderation.
The qualifications delivered at Egham Park School contain internally assessed components/units are:
ASDAN Qualifications
This procedure confirms Egham Park School’s compliance with JCQ’s General Regulations for Approved Centres (5.7) that the centre will:
• Have in place for inspection that must be reviewed and updated annually, a written appeals procedure relating to internal assessment decisions and to ensure that details of this procedure are communicated, made widely available and accessible to all candidates
• before submitting marks to the awarding body inform candidates of their centre assessed marks and allow a candidate to request a review of the centre’s marking
Egham Park School is committed to ensuring that whenever its staff mark candidates’ work this is done fairly, consistently and in accordance with the awarding body’s specification and subject-specific associated documents.
Egham Park School ensures that all centre staff follow a robust policy regarding the management of nonexamination assessments including controlled assessments and coursework. This policy details all procedures relating to all qualifications, including the marking and quality assurance/internal standardisation processes which relevant teaching staff are required to follow.
Candidates’ work will be marked by staff who have appropriate knowledge, understanding and skill, who have been trained in this activity and do not have any potential conflicts of interest. If AI tools have been used to assist in the marking of candidates’ work, they will not be the sole marker. Egham Park School is committed to ensuring that work produced by candidates is authenticated in line with the requirements of the awarding body. Where more than one subject teacher is involved in marking candidates’ work, internal moderation and standardisation will ensure consistency of marking.
On being informed of their centre assessed marks, if a candidate believes that the above procedures were not followed in relation to the marking of their work, or that the assessor has not properly applied the marking standards to the marking, then the candidate may make use of the appeals procedure below to consider whether to request a review of the centre’s marking.
Egham Park School will:
1. Ensure that candidates are informed of their centre assessed marks so that they may request a review of the centre’s marking before marks are submitted to the awarding body.
2. Inform candidates that they will need to explain on what grounds they wish to request a review of an internally assessed mark as a review will only focus on the quality of their work submitted.
3. Inform candidates that they may request copies of materials (for example, a copy of the marked work and the mark scheme or assessment criteria plus other associated subject-specific documents) to assist them in considering whether to request a review of the centre’s marking of the assessment.
4. Having received a request for copies of materials, promptly make them available to the candidate within 3 calendar days. (This will either be the originals viewed under supervised conditions or copies).
5. Inform candidates they will not be allowed access to original assessment material, including artefacts, unless supervised.
6. Provide candidates with sufficient time, normally at least five working days, to allow them to review copies of materials and reach a decision.
7. Provide a clear deadline for candidates to submit a request for a review of the centre’s marking. Requests will not be accepted after this deadline. Requests must be made in writing within 3 calendar days of receiving copies of the requested materials by completing the internal appeals form and candidates must explain on what grounds they wish to request a review.
8. Allow 7 calendar days for the review to be carried out, to make any necessary changes to marks and to inform the candidate of the outcome, all before the awarding body’s deadline for the submission of marks.
9. Ensure that the review of marking is conducted by an assessor who has appropriate competence, has had no previous involvement in the assessment of that candidate for the component in question and has no personal interest in the outcome of the review.
10. Instruct the reviewer to ensure that the candidate’s mark is consistent with the standard set by the centre.
11. Inform the candidate in writing of the outcome of the review of the centre’s marking.
The outcome of the review of the centre’s marking will be made known to the Head of Centre who has the final decision if there is any disagreement on the mark to be submitted to the awarding body. A written record of the review will be kept and made available to the awarding body upon request.
The awarding body will be informed if the review of marking brings any irregularities to light.
After the candidate’s work has been internally assessed, it is moderated by the awarding body to ensure consistency in marking between centres. The moderation process may result in a mark change, either upwards or downwards, even after an internal review. This process is outside the control of Egham Park School and is not covered by this procedure.
Appeals against decisions to reject a candidate’s work on the grounds of malpractice
The JCQ Information for candidates documents (Coursework, Non-examination assessments, Social media) which are distributed to all candidates prior to relevant assessments taking place, inform candidates of the things they must and must not do when they are completing their work.
Egham Park School ensures that those members of teaching staff involved in the direct supervision of candidates producing work for assessments are aware of the potential for malpractice.
Malpractice by a candidate discovered in a controlled assessment, coursework or nonexamination assessment component prior to the candidate signing the declaration of authentication does not need to be reported to the awarding body but will be dealt with in accordance with the centre’s internal procedures. The only exception to this is where the awarding body’s confidential assessment material has potentially been breached. The breach will be reported to the awarding body immediately.
If there are doubts about the authenticity of the work of a candidate or irregularities are identified in a candidate’s work before the candidate has signed the declaration of authentication/authentication statement (where required) and malpractice is suspected, Egham Park School will:
• Follow the authentication procedures and/or malpractice instructions in the relevant JCQ document (Instructions for conducting non-examination assessments/Instructions for conducting coursework) and any supplementary guidance that may be provided by the awarding body. Where this may lead to the decision to not accept the candidate’s work for assessment or to reject a candidate’s coursework on the grounds of malpractice, the affected candidate will be informed of the decision.
If a candidate who is the subject of the decision disagrees with the decision:
• A written request, setting out as clearly and concisely as possible the grounds for the appeal including any further evidence relevant to supporting the appeal, should be submitted
• An internal appeals form should be completed and submitted within 3 calendar/working days of the decision being made know to the appellant
The appellant will be informed of the outcome of the appeal within 7 calendar/working days of the appeal being received and logged by the centre.
___________________________________________________________________________
This procedure is informed by the JCQ documents Instructions for conducting non-examination assessments (4.6, 6.1, 9), Instructions for conducting coursework (6, 7, 13.5), Review of marking (centre assessed marks) suggested template for centres, Notice to Centres – Informing candidates of their centre assessed marks and Suspected Malpractice: Policies and Procedures (4.5)
Appeals relating to centre decisions not to support an application for a clerical re-check, a review of marking, a review of moderation or an appeal
This procedure confirms Egham Park School compliance with JCQ’s General Regulations for Approved Centres (5.13) that the centre will:
• Have available for inspection purposes and draw to the attention of candidates and their parents/carers, a written internal appeals procedure to manage disputes when a candidate disagrees with a centre decision not to support an application for a clerical re-check, a review of marking, a review of moderation or an appeal.
Following the issue of results, awarding bodies make post-results services available. Full details of these services, internal deadlines for requesting a service and fees charged are provided by the Exams Officer.
Candidates are also made aware by email of the arrangements for post-results services prior to the issue of results and of the periods during which senior members of centre staff will be available/accessible immediately after the publication of results.
If the centre or a candidate (or their parent/carer) has a concern and believes a result may not be accurate, post-results services may be considered.
The JCQ post-results services currently available are detailed below.
Reviews of Results (RoRs):
• Service 1 (Clerical re-check)
• Service 2 (Review of marking)
• Service 3 (Review of moderation)
This service is not available to an individual candidate
Access to Scripts (ATS):
• Copies of scripts to support reviews of marking
• Copies of scripts to support teaching and learning
Where a concern is expressed that a particular result may not be accurate, the centre will look at the marks awarded for each component part of the qualification alongside any mark schemes, relevant result reports, grade boundary information etc. when made available by the awarding body to determine if the centre supports any concerns.
Written candidate consent (informed consent via candidate email is acceptable) is required in all cases before a request for a RoR service 1 or 2 (including priority service 2) is submitted to the awarding body.
Consent is required to confirm the candidate understands that the final subject grade and/or mark awarded following a clerical re-check or a review of marking, and any subsequent appeal, may be lower than, higher than, or the same as the result which was originally awarded. Candidate consent must only be collected after the publication of results.
Centre actions in the event of a disagreement (dispute)
If the candidate (or their parent/carer) believes there are grounds to appeal against the centre’s decision not to support a review of results, an internal appeal can be submitted to the centre by completing the internal appeals form at least 10 calendar days prior to the internal deadline for submitting a request for a review of results.
The appellant will be informed of the outcome of their appeal before the internal deadline for submitting a RoR.
Following the RoR outcome, an external appeals process is available if the head of centre remains dissatisfied with the outcome and believes there are grounds for appeal. The JCQ publications Post-Results Services and JCQ Appeals Booklet will be consulted to determine the acceptable grounds for a preliminary appeal.
Where the Head of Centre is satisfied after receiving the RoR outcome, but the candidate (or their parent/carer) believes there are grounds for a preliminary appeal to the awarding body, a further internal appeal may be made to the head of centre.
Following this, the head of centre’s decision as to whether to proceed with a preliminary appeal will be based upon the acceptable grounds as detailed in the JCQ Appeals Booklet. Candidates or parents/carers are not permitted to make direct representations to an awarding body.
An internal appeals form should be completed and submitted to the centre within 7 calendar days of the notification of the outcome of the RoR.
Subject to the Head of Centre’s decision, this will allow the centre to process the preliminary appeal and submit to the awarding body within the required 30 calendar days of the awarding body issuing the outcome of the review of results process.
Awarding body fees which may be charged for the preliminary appeal must be paid to the centre by the appellant before the preliminary appeal is submitted to the awarding body (fees are available from the exams manager). If the appeal is upheld by the awarding body, this fee will be refunded by the awarding body and repaid to the appellant by the centre.
Appeals regarding centre decisions relating to access arrangements and special consideration
This procedure confirms Egham Park School’s compliance with JCQ’s General Regulations for Approved Centres (5.3z) that the centre will:
• Have in place for inspection that must be reviewed and updated annually, a written appeals procedure which must cover at least appeals regarding centre decisions relating to access arrangements and special consideration
Egham Park School will:
• Comply with the principles and regulations governing access arrangements and special consideration as set out in the JCQ publications Access Arrangements and Reasonable Adjustments and A guide to the special consideration process
• Ensure that all staff who manage and implement access arrangements and special consideration are aware of the requirements and are appropriately supported and resourced
Access arrangements and reasonable adjustments
In accordance with the regulations, Egham Park School:
• Recognises its duty to explore and provide access to suitable courses, through the access arrangements process submit applications for reasonable adjustments and make reasonable adjustments to the service the centre provides to disabled candidates.
• Complies with its responsibilities in identifying, determining and implementing appropriate access arrangements and reasonable adjustments
Failure to comply with the regulations have the potential to constitute malpractice which may impact on a candidate’s result(s).
Examples of failure to comply include:
• Putting in place access arrangements/adjustments that are not approved
• Failing to consider putting in place access arrangements (which may be a failure to comply with the duty to make reasonable adjustments)
• Permitting access arrangements/adjustments within the centre which are not supported by appropriate evidence
• Charging a fee for providing reasonable adjustments to disabled candidates
Special consideration
Where Egham Park School has appropriate evidence signed by a member of the Senior Leadership Team to support an application, it will apply for special consideration at the time of the assessment for a candidate who is affected by adverse circumstances beyond their control when the issue or event has had, or is reasonably likely to have had, a material effect on the candidate’s ability to take an assessment or demonstrate their normal level of attainment in an assessment.
Centre decisions relating to access arrangements, reasonable adjustments and special consideration
This may include Egham Park School’s decision not to make/apply for a specific reasonable adjustment or to apply for special consideration, in circumstances where a candidate does not meet the criteria for, or there is no evidence/insufficient evidence to support the implementation of an access arrangement/reasonable adjustment or the application of special consideration.
Where Egham Park School makes a decision in relation to the access arrangement(s), reasonable adjustment(s) or special consideration that apply for a candidate or candidates:
• If a candidate who is the subject of the relevant decision (or the candidate’s parent/carer) disagrees with the decision made and reasonably believes that the centre has not complied with its responsibilities or followed due procedures, a written request setting out the grounds for appeal should be submitted
• An appeals form should be completed and submitted to the centre within 7 calendar days of the notification of the decision being made known to the appellant.
To determine the outcome of the appeal, the head of centre will consult the respective JCQ publication to confirm the centre has complied with the principles and regulations governing access arrangements and/or special consideration and followed due procedures.
The appellant will be informed of the outcome of the appeal within 10 working days of the appeal being received and logged by the centre.
If the appeal is upheld, Egham Park School will proceed to implement the necessary arrangements/submit the necessary application.
___________________________________________________________________________
This procedure is informed by the JCQ documents A guide to the awarding bodies’ appeals processes (chapter 3), Suspected Malpractice: Policies and Procedures (section 3.3), General Regulations for Approved Centres (section 5.4), Access Arrangements and Reasonable Adjustments (Importance of these regulations) and A guide to the special consideration process (sections 1, 2, 6)
Appeals regarding centre decisions relating to other administrative issues
Circumstances may arise that cause Egham Park School to make decisions on administrative issues that may affect a candidate’s examinations/assessments.
Where Egham Park School may make a decision that affects a candidate or candidates:
• If a candidate who is the subject of the relevant decision (or the candidate’s parent/carer) disagrees with the decision made and reasonably believes that the centre has not complied the regulations or followed due process, a written request setting out the grounds for appeal should be submitted
• An appeals form should be completed and submitted within 7 calendar days of the decision being made known to the appellant.
The appellant will be informed of the outcome of the appeal within 10 working days of the appeal being received and logged by the centre].
___________________________________________________________________________
This procedure is informed by the JCQ document A guide to the awarding bodies’ appeals processes (chapter 7)
Appeals Form
Please tick box to indicate the nature of your appeal and complete all white boxes* on the form below
Appeal against an internal assessment decision and/or request for a review of marking
Appeal against a decision to reject a candidate’s work on the grounds of malpractice
Appeal against the centre’s decision not to support a clerical re-check, a review of
marking, a review of moderation or an appeal
Appeal against the centre’s decision relating to access arrangements or special
consideration
Appeal against the centre’s decision relating to an administrative issue
*Where the nature of the appeal does not relate directly to an awarding body’s specific qualification, indicate N/A in awarding body specific detail boxes
| Name of appellant | Candidate name if different to appellant | ||
| Awarding body | Exam paper code | ||
| Qualification type/ Subject | Exam paper title | ||
| Please can you explain where you feel that you have achieved the assessment objectives but have not been awarded for doing so: (If applicable, tick below) Where my appeal is against an internal assessment decision, I wish to request a review of the centre’s marking If necessary, continue on an additional page if this form is being completed electronically or overleaf if hard copy being completed | |||
| Appellant signature: Date of signature: | |||
This form must be signed, dated and returned to the exams manager on behalf of the head of centre to the timescale indicated in the relevant appeals procedure
Appeals log
On receipt, all complaints/appeals are assigned a reference number and logged. Outcome and outcome date is also recorded.
The outcome of any review of the centre’s marking will be made known to the head of centre. A written record of the review will be kept and logged as an appeal, so information can be easily made available to an awarding body upon request. The awarding body will be informed if the centre’s review of marking brings any irregularities in procedures to light
| Re No: | Date Received | Complaint or Appeal | Outcome | Outcome Date |
Further guidance to inform and implement appeals
JCQ publications
• General Regulations for Approved Centres https://www.jcq.org.uk/exams-office/general-regulations
• Post-Results Services https://www.jcq.org.uk/exams-office/post-results-services
• JCQ Appeals Booklet (A guide to the awarding bodies’ appeals processes) https://www.jcq.org.uk/exams-office/appeals
• Notice to Centres – Informing candidates of their centre assessed marks https://www.jcq.org.uk/exams-office/non-examination-assessments
• Suspected Malpractice: Policies and Procedures
• Access Arrangements and Reasonable Adjustments https://www.jcq.org.uk/exams-office/access-arrangements-and-specialconsideration/regulations-and-guidance/
• A guide to the special consideration process https://www.jcq.org.uk/examsoffice/access-arrangements-and-special-consideration/regulations-andguidance/