Operated by: Nudge Education Ltd · Version: v08.26 · Owner: Director NEO & Head of School
NEO BY NUDGE EDUCATION
Appeals Procedure Nudge Education Online
| Policy Owner | Director, Nudge Education Online & Head of School |
|---|---|
| Approved | August 2026 |
| Review Date | August 2027 |
| Version | 08.26 |
| Operating Company | Nudge Education Ltd (Company Number 10192753) |
| Proprietor | Diego Melo |
| Accreditation Route | Online Education Accreditation Scheme (OEAS) — accreditation in progress |
1. Purpose and Scope
This procedure sits alongside the Complaints Policy and together they form the school’s written appeals and complaints framework. The Complaints Policy covers concerns and complaints about the school’s provision generally; this Appeals Procedure covers appeals relating specifically to examinations and assessment, namely:
- internal appeals against marks awarded by NEO for internally assessed work (for example coursework or non-examination assessment) before submission to the awarding organisation;
- appeals about decisions on examination entries or tiers;
- appeals about access arrangements decisions;
- post-results services: reviews of marking or moderation and access to scripts; and
- onward appeals to the awarding organisation and the regulator.
It applies to all candidates entered for public examinations by NEO, their parents and carers, and, where a place is commissioned, the commissioning authority acting with the family’s agreement.
2. Principles
- Every candidate has the right to a fair, transparent and timely assessment process.
- Appeals are handled by someone with no personal interest in the decision under appeal, wherever practicable.
- No candidate will be treated less favourably for having made an appeal in good faith.
- Deadlines published by the awarding organisation and JCQ are absolute; NEO’s internal deadlines are set to protect them.
- Records of every appeal, its handling and its outcome are retained by the Exams Officer.
3. Internal Appeals — Internally Assessed Work
Where a qualification includes work marked by NEO staff and submitted to the awarding organisation, candidates are told their centre-assessed marks before submission and given the opportunity to request a review. The process is:
- Notification. The candidate (or parent/carer) requests a review in writing to the Exams Officer within five working days of being informed of the mark, stating the grounds.
- Review. A second member of teaching staff who did not carry out the original marking, appointed by the Director NEO & Head of School, reviews whether the marking applied the awarding organisation’s criteria consistently and fairly. The review considers process and application of criteria, not academic judgement alone.
- Outcome. The reviewer’s decision, with reasons, is communicated in writing within ten working days of the request and before the submission deadline. The mark may be confirmed, raised or lowered; the final centre mark is the one submitted.
- Escalation. If the candidate believes the review process itself was not followed, the matter may be raised under the Complaints Policy.
4. Entries, Tiers and Access Arrangements
Decisions about whether and when to enter a candidate, at which tier, and what access arrangements to apply for are made by the Director NEO & Head of School and Exams Officer with the SENCo, in consultation with the learner and family. Where a family disagrees with such a decision, they may appeal in writing to the Director NEO & Head of School within ten working days of the decision; a written response with reasons follows within ten working days. Where the disagreement concerns an access arrangements decision made under JCQ regulations, the response will set out the evidence considered and the JCQ criteria applied.
5. Post-Results Services
After results are issued, the following JCQ/awarding organisation services are available, co-ordinated by the Exams Officer through the host examination centre at which the candidate sat the examination:
- clerical re-check and review of marking (with the candidate’s written consent, since marks may go down as well as up);
- access to scripts; and
- priority review of marking where a university place depends on the outcome.
Requests must reach the Exams Officer promptly after results day — the Exams Officer publishes the internal deadline for each series, set ahead of the awarding organisation’s published deadline. Fees charged by the awarding organisation or host centre for post-results services are payable by the family or commissioner and are refunded by the awarding organisation where a grade changes, in line with its published policy.
6. Appeals to the Awarding Organisation and Regulator
If, after a review of marking or moderation, the candidate believes the outcome is still wrong on procedural grounds or grounds of unreasonable exercise of academic judgement, NEO will, at the family’s request, submit a preliminary appeal and, if necessary, a full appeal to the awarding organisation within its published deadlines. Should the awarding organisation’s appeal process conclude and concerns about procedure remain, the final avenue is the regulator’s Exam Procedures Review Service (Ofqual). The Exams Officer will advise families honestly at each stage on the grounds available and the realistic prospects, so that costs are only incurred with informed consent.
7. Malpractice
Allegations of malpractice in examinations or assessment — whether concerning a candidate, a member of staff or the centre — are not handled under this procedure. They are reported and investigated in accordance with the JCQ publication Suspected Malpractice in Examinations and Assessments, with the Head of Centre responsible for notifying the awarding organisation.
8. Roles and Responsibilities
| Role | Responsibility |
|---|---|
| Head of Centre (Proprietor) | Overall accountability; awarding organisation notifications for malpractice; final internal point of reference. |
| Director NEO & Head of School | Decides internal appeals on entries, tiers and access arrangements; appoints reviewers for internal assessment appeals. |
| Exams Officer | First point of contact for all appeals; deadlines, records and candidate consent; co-ordination of post-results services and awarding organisation appeals through the host centre. |
| SENCo | Evidence and advice for access arrangements appeals. |
| Teaching staff | Marking to awarding organisation criteria; participation in reviews where appointed. |
9. Related Policies and Documents
- Complaints Policy — the companion document to this procedure
- NEO — Examination Venues Policy
- NEO — Examination Contingency Plan
- SEND Policy
- JCQ General Regulations for Approved Centres; JCQ Post-Results Services; JCQ A guide to the awarding bodies’ appeals processes; JCQ Suspected Malpractice in Examinations and Assessments (current editions)
10. Review
This procedure is reviewed annually by the Director NEO & Head of School, alongside the Complaints Policy, and whenever JCQ or awarding organisation arrangements change.