Official Statistics

Background information for appeals for GCSE, AS, A level: Summer 2020

Published 17 December 2020

Applies to England

© Crown copyright 2020

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.

Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/appeals-for-gcse-as-and-a-level-summer-2020/background-information-for-appeals-for-gcse-as-a-level-summer-2020

1. Purpose

In this release, Ofqual presents data on all initial reviews and independent reviews (collectively referred to as ‘appeals’) requested for all GCSE and GCE (AS and A level) qualifications during summer 2020. Geographical coverage

The accompanying report presents data on the number of appeals in England. Four exam boards offer GCSE, GCE qualifications in England:

  • AQA Education (AQA)
  • Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations (OCR)
  • Pearson Education Ltd. (Pearson)
  • WJEC-CBAC Ltd. (WJEC/Eduqas)

2. Appeals in summer 2020

Exams were cancelled in summer 2020 following the closure of schools and colleges to most students, as part of the response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. As part of the exceptional arrangements for exam grading and assessment in 2020, students ultimately received the higher of a centre assessed grade or calculated grade for GCSE, AS and A level.

For summer 2020 results, the standard post-results services were not available. Following consultation, we published the grounds on which a school or college could submit an appeal to an exam board in summer 2020. A school or centre could appeal to an exam board if they had evidence of an administrative error, such as where the exam board did not apply its procedures properly and fairly or where the data used by the exam board to calculate results contained an error. Examples of the sorts of errors that the data could contain include the:

  • head of centre had evidence that the school or college made a mistake when submitting the centre assessment grades to the exam board
  • head of centre had evidence that the exam board introduced an error into the centre assessment grade data submitted to it or when it communicated a grade
  • exam board used the wrong data when statistically standardising some students’ results

A student could not appeal because they disagreed with their school’s or college’s professional judgement of the grade the student would most likely have achieved if exams had taken place. However, if a student thought their grade might have been affected by wrongdoing or a lack of care taken by their school or college (malpractice or maladministration), or had evidence of bias or discrimination, that student could ask the awarding organisation to investigate. Guidance on the kinds of evidence that would have been considered for this purpose is available in our student guide to appeals, malpractice & maladministration complaints: summer 2020.

If a school or college had evidence that it made a mistake when it submitted information to the exam board about its judgement of a student’s likely grade, it could take that evidence to the exam board. The exam board would need to understand how the school or college made a mistake that resulted in the head of centre making an incorrect declaration.

If the exam board was satisfied that the evidence showed the school or college made a mistake and that the school or college should therefore have submitted a different judgement, it could change the grade awarded.

The exam boards put in place a two-stage appeals process:

  1. An initial review, in which a suitable member of an exam board’s staff checked the relevant data, procedure or process depending on the nature of appeal.
  2. An independent review. If a centre was not satisfied with the outcome of the initial review, they had 14 calendar days from the outcome to request an independent review. The independent review was carried out by an independent decision maker (i.e. someone who has not been directly employed by the awarding body, was not an examiner or moderator working for the awarding body and was not connected to the awarding body in any other way).

The exam boards had 5 calendar weeks to complete an initial review and an independent review within 5 calendar weeks from the receipt of the request for an independent review. In some cases, appeals are not resolved in the target timescale. Sometimes, this occurs to allow a fair appeal hearing with appropriate evidence, or for individuals to be present from both the school or college and the exam board.

Due to the exceptional nature of the appeals process in summer 2020, direct comparisons of appeals in summer 2020 and previous years are not valid and need to be treated with caution.

3. The Examination Procedures Review Service

If a school or college is still dissatisfied with the outcome following an appeal, it can apply to the Examination Procedures Review Service (EPRS) within 21 days of receiving the appeal outcome from the exam board. The EPRS is provided by Ofqual.

Ofqual reviews each application and arranges a review hearing if appropriate. Ofqual looks at whether the exam board has followed the appropriate procedures and used them properly and fairly. If the exam board has not followed its own procedures or has not secured the outcomes required by Ofqual’s regulations, the application to EPRS may be upheld. Exam boards must give due regard to the outcome of EPRS hearings, both in respect of results issued to the candidate making the application and, where appropriate, other potentially affected results.

4. Data source

AQA, OCR, Pearson and WJEC/Eduqas provide data on appeals requested for all GCSE and GCE (AS and A level) assessments taken during the summer series in England on an annual basis.

5. Limitations

Ofqual cannot guarantee that the data sent are correct, although it expects exam boards to send correct data. Summary data is sent to exam boards for checking and confirmation. The figures reported in this release reflect the status of appeals at the data cut-off date of the 17 November 2020.

6. Revisions

Once published, data are not usually subject to revision, although subsequent releases may be revised to insert late data or to correct an error.

7. Confidentiality and rounding

The number of appeals and grade changes have been rounded to the nearest 5 to preserve confidentially. The figures between 1 and 4 have been denoted as 0~ and 0 represents zero value. Total values of rows or columns are calculated using unrounded figures; the sum of rounded figures may differ from the total reported. All percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number.

8. Quality assurance

Quality assurance procedures are carried out as explained in the Quality Assurance Framework for Statistical Publications published by Ofqual to ensure the accuracy of the data and to challenge or question it, where necessary. Publication may be deferred if the statistics are not considered fit for purpose.

9. Status

These statistics are classified as Official Statistics.

The following statistical releases and publications relate to this one:

12. Feedback

We welcome your feedback on our publications. Should you have any comments on this statistical release and how to improve it to meet your needs, please contact us at data.analytics@ofqual.gov.uk.

Back to top