Appealing calculated grades

You can appeal from 13 August when results are issued.

We encourage you to appeal as soon as possible where a candidate needs to know if their grade will change because a progression opportunity depends on this.

All appeals must be submitted by 17 September 2020.

You can apply to proceed to the independent review stage of the appeals process after that date, but all initial review applications must be made by that date.

We've developed a new system for appeals, which can be accessed via Edexcel Online (EOL).

Only those Edexcel Online users with a post-results access profile will be able to submit an appeal.

You may have been given access to allow you to provide centre assessment grade data, but this will not automatically give you the required access to submit an appeal.

If you need to change your access permissions, you can do this within your centre via an appropriate user who has the access required to update permissions.

Appeals can be submitted by the centre on behalf of one or more candidates. All appeals must be authorised by the Head of Centre before they are submitted.

Candidates/parents/carers cannot appeal directly to the awarding body. This includes private candidates for general qualifications including GCSE, A level, AS, EPQ and AEA qualifications.

Only private candidates for vocational and technical qualifications can appeal directly to the awarding organisation via edexcelappeals@pearson.com

An appeal may be submitted if:

1. the Head of Centre considers that:
   • the awarding body did not apply procedures consistently, or procedures were not followed properly and fairly; or
   • the awarding body used the wrong data in calculating results (​including where the centre made an error in the centre assessment grade or rank order data provided to the awarding body); or
   • the result generated was incorrectly issued by the awarding body to one or more candidates
2. the centre establishes exceptional circumstances in which using a default data set to calculate results might be shown through an appeal to amount to using the wrong data because of some exceptional factor which undermines the assumption that the default data set is the most appropriate basis to calculate results. This would require a centre to establish that its previous cohorts of learners are not sufficiently representative of the 2020 cohort reliably to inform the calculation of results.

Following an initial review appeal, for any of the reasons above, a centre may apply for an independent review which is the next stage of our appeal process.

Wrong data can include:

1. where the centre provided the awarding body with incorrect data (centre error); or
2. an incorrect data set, which includes the transposition of data sets from two or more centres (awarding body error); or
3. where the awarding body introduced errors into a specified data set (awarding body error).

Where a centre believes there may have been an error in the results for one or more of their candidates, the first thing to do is to check the information that was submitted to us in order to make sure it was correct.

The information will have been signed off by your Head of Centre as being accurate so in most cases it should be correct. However, if you find there has been an error, the centre can make a ‘centre error’ appeal application. You will need to provide evidence to show how the error occurred and explain why it was not identified prior to the Head of Centre sign-off.

We'll consider this evidence and decide whether we can make the changes you request.

Where the centre checks on the data submitted to us show that no error was made, it may still be appropriate to appeal if there's reason to believe we've made an error; either in our process, the data we've used or in how we issued the results.

You'll need to explain the basis for your appeal, why you think an error has been made and where you think it's been made, i.e. either in the process or in a particular data set such as the centre historical data we used.

We will contact your centre, in writing, with the outcome of the appeal.

The decision made, following the Ofqual consultation on the Exceptional Arrangements for Summer 2020, was that there should not be an opportunity for candidates to challenge their centre assessment grade or their position in the centre’s rank order through an appeal.

This is in line with the Secretary of State’s direction to Ofqual in which he said that the appeals process should focus on whether the right data was used and correctly applied, rather than on teachers’ professional judgement.

Where your learners feel there may have been an error in the submission of the data, they should discuss this with the centre. The centre can support them by checking that the information submitted was correct, i.e. the grade and rank order you intended to submit was submitted accurately.

If you find that an error has occurred, you can submit an appeal application (a centre error appeal) and we'll consider the evidence you provide and correct the error, where appropriate.

Candidates may ask their centre to check whether an error was made when the centre assessment grade and rank order information was submitted to the awarding organisation.

Your centre should provide clarification to candidates about how to submit such requests and the timescales you require for undertaking these checks on the accuracy of the data submitted.

If you find an error in the data you submitted, you can submit a ‘centre error’ appeal with supporting evidence.

Candidates are able to raise a complaint with their centre if they believe their grade has been affected by bias or discrimination.

All centres should review the evidence presented and decide consistently and fairly whether the evidence supports the candidate’s complaint.

If a candidate has evidence of bias or discrimination, they may provide this to the awarding organisation. This will be treated as an allegation of malpractice and will be considered for further investigation.

Our malpractice investigations team can be contacted via PQSMalpractice@pearson.com

Once the data you submitted has been used as the basis for calculating grades, there's no opportunity to amend it, other than where you can provide clear evidence of an error and submit an appeal on that basis. It's not permitted to change it on the basis that you have now reconsidered matters or changed your mind.

Additionally, all data submitted by centres required the Head of Centre to confirm its accuracy and is, therefore, not subject to change except in instances where a clear error has been made in submitting the data.  

We expect that the data you submitted for centre assessment grades and rank ordering to have been thoroughly checked and agreed before it was submitted to us.

Additionally, your Head of Centre will have provided a declaration to confirm the accuracy of the data. We would therefore expect errors to be rare.

However, we appreciate that errors can occur where people are working with a new system and process for the first time and under unusual circumstances.

Where you find a genuine error that you can support with clear evidence, it's important that you let us know so that we can ensure any candidates affected receive the right grades.

This issue can be raised with us through our appeals process on the grounds that a centre made an error in the data it submitted to the exam board.

We can only accept such errors for correction where you can provide us with clear evidence that an error had been made by the centre. In the absence of such evidence we will not be able to amend the data previously supplied.

The appeals process for Summer 2020 qualifications can be found in the JCQ Appeals Booklet 2020.

It's a two-stage appeal process with an initial review and also an independent review, if required.

After the completion of the process, a centre may access the Exams Procedure Review Service (EPRS) of the relevant regulator. Information on that service will be provided on the relevant regulator’s website.

The process outlined in the JCQ Appeals Booklet 2020 will apply. Centres may submit an appeal on the grounds provided in the Booklet for initial review and independent review, where appropriate. The regulators’ EPRS service will not apply, but centres may complain to the relevant regulator if they wish to.

In addition to that appeal process, we've added an additional service for situations where grades for internally assessed units, which were internally verified but not standards verified, were submitted to us by 10 June 2020.

We'll provide an opportunity for any adjustments we've made to the grades provided by the centre to be reviewed by one of our Standards Verifiers as part of the appeals process.

The Standards Verifier will be able to either confirm the centre’s grades were appropriate, confirm that the adjustment made by us was appropriate, or confirm that a further adjustment is required. This is an additional feature in the appeals process for these units only.

If a centre identifies errors in the unit grade submissions for internal assessments, they should follow the existing SA16 grade amendment process. They will not need to submit these errors as an appeal as the existing process can be used to quickly resolve these issues.

Where an error has been made in the Rank Order information submitted, this will need to be submitted as an appeal (centre error).  

Please consider carefully if you have grounds for appeal - you may find it useful to refer to this decision map in making your decision. If you'd like to make an appeal, fees will be applicable for certain appeal types. Please see below for further details.

No fee is charged before an appeals process is completed. Fees are as follows

• Access to historical data to support you in considering your decision to appeal: free of charge
• For an initial appeal:
  • Where this relates to a centre error, this will be free of charge
  • Where this relates to an error by Pearson, this will be free of charge in cases where the appeal is upheld. In cases where the appeal is not upheld, this will be £20 per student, with a cap of £120 per subject
  • £120 for an initial appeal based on exceptional circumstances
    
• For an independent appeal conducted by external partners: £150 (this can only take place after an initial appeal has concluded).

Within the initial appeal for exceptional circumstances, the charge will apply to each appeal. So, for example, if you appeal the grades for one subject for the whole cohort for the same reason, it will be treated as one appeal. If you appeal the grades of one learner in two separate subjects, it will be charged as two appeals.

Once an appeal has been submitted, and is in process, it's not possible to add another learner to the appeal. You'll need to submit a separate appeal and will be charged for another appeal.

For the independent appeal, this charge will apply for each appeal case you wish to have reviewed by one of our independent reviewers.

The fee makes a contribution towards some of the associated costs of running the appeals process and invoices are charged to the centre.

Further information about the fees for appeals can be found in the visual guide below.

Summer 2020 appeals overview 96.7 KB pdf /content/dam/pdf/Support/Post-results services/A2204a_Appeals_A4_infographic_6 FINAL.pdf false

{{ doc.title }} ({{doc.extension | uppercase}} | {{doc.size}})

{{doc.description}}

{{ doc.title }} ({{doc.extension | uppercase}} | {{doc.size}})

{{doc.description}}

Show more

{{ gatDoctitle }}

Pearson would like to keep you updated with information on our range of products and services.

If you don't want to receive this information, please tick this box.

Your personal data will be processed by Pearson in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and our Privacy Notice.

Name

{{invalidUserName}}

Email

{{invalidUserMail}}

Download

{{errorMessage}}

No, the process has been developed to provide a quick resolution wherever possible.

We hope that the majority of appeals can be completed in the initial review stage and, if you're happy with the outcome of the initial review, there's no need to go any further.

The independent review stage has been included in the overall appeals process to ensure that, where you continue to have concerns, you have the opportunity to request that these are considered by an independent person, who is not employed by us.

We'll process initial review appeals as quickly as we can and within 42 calendar days. We'll send you the outcome of each appeal in writing.

Where a candidate requires the outcome of an appeal more quickly, e.g. in relation to an offer of a university place, it's possible to flag this up in the appeal application. We will aim to process these appeals as quickly as possible.

Following an initial review appeal, a centre will have 14 days from the date of our communication of the outcome of the initial review to apply for an independent review appeal.

We'll process independent review appeals, within 42 calendar days. We'll communicate the outcome of the independent review appeals to you in writing.

If, for any reason, we're not able to respond to you within these timescales, we'll contact you to make you aware and to provide a date by which we'll be able to respond in full.

When you make your application for an appeal, you'll be able to indicate to us if one or more of the candidates, on whose behalf you are making the appeal, needs the outcome because they're waiting to confirm a university place or other progression opportunity.

We'll try our best to prioritise these appeals but we do encourage you to make them as early as possible in the appeal window.

Our aim is that the information we send you at the end of your initial review appeal provides sufficient information to help you to understand why we have reached our decision.

However, if you're not satisfied with the outcome of an initial review, you can apply for an independent review. You must do this within 14 days of the date on which we send you the outcome of your initial review appeal. We'll not be able to accept late applications.

Completion of the independent review is the end of the appeals process with us.

If, after an independent review appeal, you remain unhappy with the outcome, you may apply to the relevant regulator’s Exam Procedures Review Service, where this is applicable to the qualification you are appealing. Details of this service can be found on the relevant regulators’ websites.

Prior to results being issued, candidates cannot access this information and any centre that provides this information prior to results being issued will be investigated for malpractice.

Once results have been issued, you may find that learners request this information or seek to access it through a Subject Access Request (SAR).

Candidates have the right to access their data (but not the information associated with other candidates).

You may decide that, rather than process these requests through SARs, your centre wants to offer a quicker and easier route to requesting and accessing this information.

Private candidates who worked with your centre to access grades should contact you to make an appeals application through the centre in the same way as any other candidate.

The only exceptions to this are private candidates for vocational and technical qualifications.

All centres are required to have a procedure in place which allows candidate to request that a review is conducted of the centre’s decision not to appeal to an exam board.

An exceptional factors appeal is provided as a route to appeal for cases where the centre has evidence that the wrong data was used to calculate grades.

For example, this may be where there are some exceptional circumstances in which using a default data set to calculate results might be shown through an appeal to amount to using the wrong data because of some exceptional factor that undermines the assumption that the default data set is the most appropriate basis to calculate results for the centre’s learners. This would require a centre to establish that its previous cohorts of learners are not sufficiently representative of the 2020 cohort reliably to inform the calculation of results.

The Ofqual Extraordinary regulatory framework: General Qualifications, COVID-19 Guidance (PDF) states that a substantive difference will not be established through subjective evidence or evidence which is relevant only to the potential performance of the 2020 cohort had exams taken place.

Ofqual has made it clear that it does not expect appeals to be brought on the basis of inspection reports, curriculum choices or changes to teaching staff, the outcome of standardised tests, mock exams or other evidence the centre has about the potential performance of this year‘s learners relative to previous cohorts at the centre.