Post-Results Services (PRS): Appeals

For more information please select from the following options:

• General guidance

• Grounds for appeal

• Contact for further guidance

• The appeals process

• Fees

General guidance

Grounds for appeal

1. the awarding body didn't apply its procedures consistently, properly or fairly
2. there's been a specific marking or moderation error that has not been corrected at the review stage. Details of the exact error must be provided as the appeals process is not an opportunity to have an assessment generally re-checked in its entirety. 

• no valid grounds are presented 
• no specific marking or moderation error is identified  
• no procedural grounds are cited.

Appeals relating to access arrangements, reasonable adjustments and special consideration will be handled in line with the approach specified in the JCQ Guide to Awarding Bodies’ Appeals Processes, June 2024. Please see page 9, paragraph 45 for further information surrounding this type of appeal.

The following JCQ documents may be of use:  

• JCQ Appeals Booklet  

The following Ofqual regulations and guidance may also be of use: 

• Ofqual guidance on reviews and appeals
• Examinations Procedures Review Service (EPRS) Information
• GCSE 9-1 qualification level guidance (Page 20 - Guidance on considering Marking Errors on a review or appeal) 

In considering whether or not to appeal on the grounds of a marking or moderation error, it's important to note Ofqual’s ‘GCSE 9-1 qualification level guidance’, page 21, 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’.

Contact for further guidance

The appeals process

Fees

We'll normally expect centres to contribute towards the costs of appeals and panel hearings. The maximum amounts that we will charge are £150 per examination component for the preliminary appeal, and £200 for any subsequent appeal panel hearing.

There is no requirement for centres to submit any fee with the initial appeal application. We will not charge centres for special consideration appeals or for any appeal that is upheld. We will invoice the centre following the completion of the appeal.

Refunds
Where an appeal is upheld at any stage the fees for the original Review of Marking and Moderation (RoMM) service will be refunded. 
Please note: this does not include the fee for requesting a copy of the reviewed exam paper via the Access To Scripts (ATS) service placed at the same time as submitting the RoMM request.

Please see Post Results: T Level Appeals including applicable fees.

Back to Results, Post-Results & Appeals index page.

Back to Exams Officers & Administrators main index page.