Post-results services

Appeals should be lodged on either of the following two bases:

• That the awarding body used procedures that were consistent with the regulatory requirements (see links below), and applied its procedures properly and fairly in arriving at judgments,

           Or

• that there had been a marking or moderation error that has not been corrected at the review stage.

The appeals office may refuse to accept an appeal application if valid grounds are not presented. That is if no specific marking or moderation error is identified or if no procedural grounds are cited.

JCQ rules and guidance

JCQ Appeals Booklet
Access Arrangements, Reasonable Adjustments and Special Consideration guidance
Suspected Malpractice in Examinations and Assessments

Ofqual Regulations

Ofqual guidance on reviews and appeals
Changes to regulations for enquiries and appeals
General Conditions of Recognition
Pre-reform GCE Qualification Level Conditions and Requirements
GCE Qualification Level Conditions and Requirements
GCSE (9 to 1) Qualification Level Conditions and Requirements

In considering whether or not to appeal on the grounds of a marking or moderation error it is important to note Ofqual’s ‘Guidance on considering marking errors on a review or appeal’, which states that:

‘Following a review or an appeal, a reasonable mark should not be replaced with another such mark, simply because those carrying out the review or the appeal would have given a different mark if they were the original Assessor. We do not consider that one such mark should be replaced with another (often higher) mark, as then Learners who request a review or appeal would be unfairly advantaged over those who do not. A review or appeal should not be an opportunity for a Learner to have a second go at getting a better mark. Such a review or appeal should only interfere with a mark where there has been a Marking Error.’

Ofqual has defined a marking error as:

‘The awarding of a mark or the arrival at an outcome of Moderation which could not reasonably have been given or arrived at given the evidence generated by the Learner(s) (and for Moderation, the centre’s marking of that evidence), the criteria against which Learners’ performance is differentiated and any procedures of the awarding organisation in relation to Moderation or marking, including in particular where the awarding of a mark or outcome of moderation is based on: an Administrative Error, a failure to apply such criteria and procedures to the evidence generated by the Learner(s) where that failure did not involve the exercise of academic judgment, or an unreasonable exercise of academic judgment’.

For additional information on the appeals process, please refer to the Joint Council for Qualifications document ‘A Guide to the Awarding Bodies Appeals Processes’

Further Guidance

If you are unsure if you have grounds to appeal, are unsure how to present your grounds for appeal, or would like further guidance on the appeals process, the Appeals Office can be contacted at edexcelappeals@pearson.com and we would be happy to arrange a time to discuss matters with you.

When an appeal is lodged on procedural grounds, we will carry out a preliminary appeals investigation. This will take the form of a fresh examination of all the available evidence and may involve research officers, subject-related assessment staff and senior examining personnel. We will inspect the review of marking or moderation (RoMM) files and other relevant records for accuracy.

For GCSE, AS, A level and Project qualifications only, we will also refer, where it has been identified by the appellant, the details of the alleged marking or moderation error to a senior examiner or moderator for further review and response. That senior examiner or moderator will not have had any involvement in the original marking or moderation of the component.

We will acknowledge each letter of appeal within two working days of receipt, at which point, we will provide further written guidance on the Pearson appeals process. We will send a letter, summarising the results of the initial appeals investigation, normally within 6 calendar weeks of receipt of the letter of appeal. In the event that the appeals office is unable to complete its enquiries within 6 calendar weeks, we will advise the centre of the likely extent of any delay.

If, following the initial investigation, a centre remains dissatisfied with our response, the head of centre may request the opportunity to present the case in person to an appeals panel which is made up of people who are wholly independent of Pearson.

If, following an appeal hearing, the centre remains dissatisfied, it may submit an appeal to:
Ofqual's Examinations Procedures Review Service (EPRS)
Reform of the Exam Procedures Review Service

We will normally expect centres to contribute towards the costs of appeal investigations and hearings. The maximum amounts that we will charge are £120 per examination component for the initial appeal investigation, and £150 for any subsequent appeal hearing. There is no requirement for any fee to be submitted with the initial letter of appeal. We will not charge centres for special consideration appeals, nor for other appeals if an appeal is upheld.