Bailiff’s Ukraine Appeal
Please help the students of JCG raise money for the people of Ukraine
Read MorePlease help the students of JCG raise money for the people of Ukraine
Read More
Author : |
Peter Marett, Jade Richard |
Reviewed By : |
N/A |
Date : |
November 2022 |
Next Review : |
October 2023 |
At Jersey College for Girls, we aim to provide all students with the opportunity to achieve their full potential in all areas, including external exams. In order for all students to excel in their exams we strive to have an exams system which is efficiently run and which is transparent so that all parties: staff, students and parents, understand their roles within it. We aim to ensure that all parties understand and adhere to the regulations regarding exams, non-examined assessments and coursework and that they are aware of the services available to them prior to, during and following exams and the release of results.
Aims of this Policy
The centre is committed to ensuring that the exams management and administration process is run effectively and efficiently and in compliance with the published JCQ (Joint Council for Qualifications) and Cambridge International regulations and awarding body requirements.
This exam policy will ensure that:
This policy is reviewed annually to ensure ways of working in the centre are accurately reflected and that exams and assessments are conducted to current JCQ and Cambridge International (and awarding body) regulations, instructions and guidance.
This policy will be communicated to all relevant centre staff and students. It will be reviewed annually and published on our website
Head of Centre (Principal) responsibilities
Assistant Headteacher with responsibility for exams
Examinations Officer
Heads of Department/Subject
The ENCO
Has responsibility for:
Teachers
Invigilators
Office staff
Site staff
Candidates
Recruitment, selection and training of staff
Jersey College for Girls...
Internal governance arrangements
Delivery of qualifications
Public liability
Security of assessment materials
Malpractice
Policies/procedures
Data Protection Policy (Exams)
Conflicts of interest
National Centre Number Register
Centre inspections
The exam cycle
The exams management and administration process that needs to be undertaken for each exam series is often referred to as the exam cycle and relevant tasks required within this grouped into the following stages:
This policy identifies roles and responsibilities of centre staff within this cycle.
Head of Centre (Principal)
Examinations Officer
Examinations Officer
Heads of Department/Subject
Head of Centre (Principal)
ENCO
Heads of Department/Subject Teachers
Head of Centre (Principal)
Controlled assessments, coursework and non-examination assessments
Heads of Subject/Department
Teachers
Examinations Officer
Head of Centre (Principal)
Examinations Officer
Examinations Officer
Heads of Department/Subject
Examinations Officer
Heads of Department/Subject
Please refer to Appendix 15 for information relating to entry fees.
Examinations Officer
Heads of Department/Subject
Examinations Officer
Teachers
Candidates
ENCO
Examinations Officer
Examinations Officer
Heads of Department/Subject
Examinations Officer
Head of Centre (Principal)
ENCO
Teachers
Heads of Department/Subject
Examinations Officer
Candidates
Examinations Officer
ENCO
Invigilators
Examinations Officer or Senior leader
ENCO or relevant Senior leader (in the absence of the ENCO)
Examinations Officer
Invigilators
Examinations Officer
Office staff
Teachers
Examinations Officer
ENCO
Site staff
Examinations Officer
Examinations Officer
Heads of Department/Subject
Examinations Officer
Examinations Officer
ENCO
Teachers
Examinations Officer
Please adhere to the following procedure in the case of a student failing to attend an exam:
Invigilators
Candidates
Examinations Officer
Head of Centre (Principal)
Examinations Officer
Examinations Officer
Examinations Officer
Head of Centre (Principal)
Food and Drink (Exams)
Leaving the Examination Room
Examinations Officer
Site staff
Invigilators
Candidates
Head of Centre (Principal)
Managing Behaviour (Exams)
Jersey College for Girls expects students to conduct themselves well at all times, including when in exams. This section of the policy should be seen in conjunction with the College’s Improving Behaviour Policy.
In the unlikely situation of a student’s behaviour causing a concern when in an exam, the invigilator should firstly remove the student from the exam room, try to resolve the situation, return the student to the exam room and keep a note of the incident. They should then inform the examinations officer.
If the issue cannot be resolved by the invigilator, the examinations officer should be called. They should speak with the student and try to resolve the situation. If necessary, this might require the student to take the exam in another room.
If further escalation is required, the Assistant Headteacher with responsibility for exams should be called (or another member of the senior leadership team).
In all cases, any incident should be noted by the examinations officer and recorded as appropriate.
Malpractice
Heads of Department/Subject
Examinations Officer
Invigilators
Heads of Department/Faculty/School/SLT
Examinations Officer
Candidates
Invigilators
Examinations Officer
Invigilators
Heads of Department/Subject
The Head of Centre (Principal)
Examinations Officer
Site staff
Head of Centre (Principal)
Examinations Officer
Review of marking (ROM) and access to scripts (ATS)
Results - Students will collect their results from College on results day. All results are emailed to students during that day. Results cannot be collected by a third party. Arrangements for the school to be open on results days are made by the Head of Centre.
The provision of staff on results days is the responsibility of the Head of Centre.
Review of marking - ROMs may be requested by centre staff or students, in consultation with their subject teacher, if there are reasonable grounds for believing there has been an error in marking. Students usually pay for ROMs themselves.
Access to Scripts (ATS) - After the release of results, students may ask subject staff to request the return of papers or may request themselves within the allotted time. Centre staff may also request scripts for investigation or for teaching purposes. For the latter, the consent of students must be obtained. If it is used with other students, the script must be anonymised. Review of marking cannot be applied for once a script has been returned.
Head of Centre (Principal)
Examinations Officer
Teachers
Candidates
Data Analyst
Certificates are provided to centres by awarding bodies after results have been confirmed. These will usually be posted to candidates.
Examinations Officer
To confirm the main duties and responsibilities to be escalated should the head of centre, or a member of the senior leadership team with oversight of examination administration, be absent.
In the event of the absence of the head of centre or the member of senior leadership with oversight of examination administration, responsibility for implementing JCQ regulations and requirements relating to activity prior to examinations will be escalated to another Assistant Headteacher.
To support understanding of the regulations and requirements, the following JCQ/Cambridge International publications will be referenced:
In the event of the absence of the head of centre or the member of senior leadership with oversight of examination administration, responsibility for implementing JCQ regulations and requirements relating to entries and exam preparation will be escalated to another Assistant Headteacher.
To support understanding of the regulations and requirements, sections of relevant JCQ/Cambridge International publications will be specifically referenced including:
In the event of the absence of the head of centre or the member of senior leadership with oversight of examination administration, responsibility for implementing JCQ regulations and requirements relating to during exam time will be escalated to another Assistant Headteacher.
To support understanding of the regulations and requirements, sections of relevant JCQ/Cambridge International publications will be specifically referenced including:
In the event of the absence of the head of centre or the member of senior leadership with oversight of examination administration, responsibility for implementing JCQ regulations and requirements relating to after examinations will be escalated to another Assistant Headteacher.
To support understanding of the regulations and requirements, sections of relevant JCQ/Cambridge International publications will be specifically referenced including:
Role | Name(s) |
Head of Centre | Carl Howarth |
Examinations officer line manager (Assistant Headteacher) | Peter Marett |
Examinations officer | Jade Richard |
ENCO | Caroline David |
Vice-Principal | Toni Rollo |
Assistant Headteachers | Ruth Lea, Simon Milner, Emma Silvestri-Fox |
Bursar | Julie Forsyth |
Business Manager | Mel Gouzinis |
Site Manager | Gary Briggs |
This plan examines potential risks and issues that could cause disruption to the exams process at Jersey College for Girls. By outlining actions/procedures to be invoked in case of disruption it is intended to mitigate the impact these disruptions have on our exam process. A
longside internal processes, this plan is informed by the Ofqual/JCQ/Cambridge and CYPES arrangements.
This plan also confirms the College’s compliance with JCQ’s General Regulations for Approved Centres (section 5.3) that the centre has in place:
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Key tasks required in the management and administration of the exam cycle not undertaken including:
Planning
Entries
Pre-exams
Exam time
Results and post-results
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Key tasks required in the management and administration of the access arrangements process within the exam cycle not undertaken including:
Planning
Pre-exams
Exam time
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Key tasks not undertaken including:
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
Alternative venue details:
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
The invigilator must take the following action in an emergency such as a fire alarm or a bomb alert.
When it is safe for the candidates, return to the room and continue their exam
When dealing with emergencies you must be aware of any instructions from relevant local or national agencies.
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
JCG does wish to run such external exams where possible for the benefit of students providing that no student or member of staff’s health and safety is put at risk. As health and safety is our first priority, the following procedure will apply only when it is deemed appropriate to do so:
The final decision as to whether students attend external exams having been informed the school is open, rests with the parent. In taking this decision, they should ensure that they can make provision for the safe travel of the student to and from school. If the student is unable to attend her exam, she will be entered in the next exam season (now in the following year).
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Alternative venue details:
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
Criteria for implementation of the plan
Centre actions to mitigate the impact of the disruption
This procedure confirms the arrangements that Jersey College For Girls will undertake when dealing with a lockdown when an examination is taking place.
A lockdown may be required but not limited to the following situations.
It should be noted that the likelihood of such an event is unlikely in our setting.
Where a lockdown is required when conducting examinations the main focuses will be:
Where a lockdown is required, the following procedures will be employed by Jersey College For Girls.
As candidates are entering/waiting to enter the examination room:
When candidates are in the examination room:
As candidates are leaving the examination room :
The role of the head of centre (Principal)
The role of the Assistant Headteacher with responsibility for exams
The role of the examinations officer
The role of the invigilator
This policy details how Jersey College for Girls deals with an emergency evacuation of the exam room(s) by defining staff roles and responsibilities and confirming the emergency evacuation procedure. This policy should be seen in conjunction with the College’s overall emergency evacuation procedure.
An emergency evacuation is required where it is unsafe for candidates to remain in the exam room. This might include a fire in the exam room, the fire alarm sounding to warn of fire, bomb alert or other serious threat.
In exceptional situations, where candidates might be severely disadvantaged or distressed by remaining in the exam room, the emergency evacuation procedure may also need to be followed. This might include situations where there is severe disruption in the exam room, serious illness of a candidate or invigilator or similarly serious incidents.
As each incident may be different, advice will be sought from the relevant awarding body as soon as it is safe to do so, particularly where the centre is concerned about the security of the examination(s).
Where candidates are unable to return to the building to complete the examination, the relevant awarding body will be contacted immediately for advice. The awarding bodies have procedures in place to ensure that candidates are not disadvantaged where they are unable to complete the examination due to circumstances beyond their control.
Head of centre (Principal)
Senior leadership team
ENCO
Examinations officer
Invigilators
All staff
As soon as practically possible and safe to do so, details should be recorded. Details must include:
Further details could include:
Invigilators are trained in this procedure and understand the actions they must take in the event of a fire alarm or other emergency that leads to an evacuation of the exam room.
The invigilator must take the following action in an emergency such as a fire alarm or a bomb alert.
When it is safe for the candidates, return to the room and continue their exam
When dealing with emergencies you must be aware of any instructions from relevant local or national agencies.
This procedure confirms Jersey College for Girls’ compliance with JCQ and Cambridge International’s requirement for centres to have in place and available for inspection a written internal appeals procedure which must cover at least appeals regarding internal assessment decisions, post-result services and appeals, and centre decisions relating to access arrangements and special consideration
This procedure covers appeals relating to:
Certain GCSE, GCE and other qualifications contain components of non-examination assessment (or units of coursework) which are internally assessed (marked) by Jersey College for Girls and internally standardised. The marks awarded (the internal assessment decisions) which contribute to the final grade of the qualification are then submitted by the deadline set by the awarding body for external moderation.
This procedure confirms that the centre will:
Jersey College for Girls is committed to ensuring that whenever its staff mark candidates’ work this is done fairly, consistently and in accordance with the awarding body’s specification and subject-specific associated documents.
The College ensures that all centre staff follow a robust Non-examination Assessment Policy (for the management of GCE and GCSE non-examination assessments). This policy details all procedures relating to non-examination assessments, including the marking and quality assurance/internal standardisation processes which relevant teaching staff are required to follow.
Candidates’ work will be marked by staff who have appropriate knowledge, understanding and skill, and who have been trained in this activity. The College is committed to ensuring that work produced by candidates is authenticated in line with the requirements of the awarding body. Where more than one subject teacher/tutor is involved in marking candidates’ work, internal moderation and standardisation will ensure consistency of marking.
On being informed of their centre assessed marks, if a candidate believes that the above procedures were not followed in relation to the marking of his/her work, or that the assessor has not properly applied the marking standards to his/her marking, then he/she may make use of the appeals procedure below to consider whether to request a review of the centre’s marking.
Jersey College for Girls will:
The outcome of the review of the centre’s marking will be made known to the head of centre who will have the final decision if there is any disagreement on the mark to be submitted to the awarding body. A written record of the review will be kept and made available to the awarding body upon request.
The awarding body will be informed if the centre does not accept the outcome of a review.
The moderation process carried out by the awarding bodies may result in a mark change, either upwards or downwards, even after an internal review. The internal review process is in place to ensure consistency of marking within the centre, whereas moderation by the awarding body ensures that centre marking is in line with national standards. The mark submitted to the awarding body is subject to change and should therefore be considered provisional.
This procedure confirms that Jersey College for Girls will:
Following the issue of results, awarding bodies make post-results services available. At Jersey College for Girls, the examinations officer oversees this procedure. Full details of how to request any of these services will be provided in advance of the issue of exam results. This involves completing an online form and paying a fee.
Senior members of College staff are available immediately after the publication of results so that results may be discussed, and decisions made on the submission of reviews of marking.
If the centre or a candidate (or their parent/carer) has a concern and believes a result may not be accurate, post-results services may be considered.
The post-results services currently available are detailed below.
Reviews of Results (RoRs):
Access to Scripts (ATS):
Where a concern is expressed that a particular result may not be accurate, the centre will look at the marks awarded for each component part of the qualification alongside any mark schemes, relevant result reports, grade boundary information etc. when made available by the awarding body to determine if the centre supports any concerns.
For written components that contributed to the final result, JCG will …
Online consent, using the form accessed via the link shared, is required in all cases before a request for a RoR service 1 or 2 (including priority service 2) is submitted to the awarding body. Consent is required to confirm the candidate understands that the final subject grade and/or mark awarded following a clerical re-check or a review of marking, and any subsequent appeal, may be lower than, higher than, or the same as the result which was originally awarded. Candidate consent must only be collected after the publication of results.
For any moderated components that contributed to the final result, the College will:
Where a candidate disagrees with a centre decision not to support a clerical re-check, a review of marking or a review of moderation, Jersey College for Girls will:
If the candidate (or his/her parent/carer) believes there are grounds to appeal against the centre’s decision not to support a review of results, an internal appeal can be submitted to the centre by completing the internal appeals form at least 5 working days prior to the internal deadline for submitting a request for a review of results. The appellant will be informed of the outcome of their appeal before the internal deadline for submitting a RoR.
Following the RoR outcome, an external appeals process is available if the head of centre remains dissatisfied with the outcome and believes there are grounds for appeal. The JCQ publications Post-Results Services, JCQ Appeals Booklet (A guide to the awarding bodies’ appeals processes) or the relevant Cambridge International guidance will be consulted to determine the acceptable grounds for a preliminary appeal.
Where the head of centre is satisfied after receiving the RoR outcome, but the candidate (or his/her parent/carer) believes there are grounds for a preliminary appeal to the awarding body, a further internal appeal may be made to the head of centre. Following this, the head of centre’s decision as to whether to proceed with a preliminary appeal will be based upon the acceptable grounds. Candidates or parents/carers are not permitted to make direct representations to an awarding body.
Jersey College for Girls’ internal appeals form should be completed and submitted within 5 working days of the notification of the outcome of the RoR. Subject to the head of centre’s decision, this will allow the centre to process the preliminary appeal and submit to the awarding body within the required 30 calendar days of the awarding body issuing the outcome of the review of results process. Awarding body fees which may be charged for the preliminary appeal must be paid to the centre by the appellant before the preliminary appeal is submitted to the awarding body. If the appeal is upheld by the awarding body, this fee will be refunded by the awarding body and repaid to the appellant by the centre.
Jersey College for Girls will:
In accordance with the regulations, the College:
Failure to comply with the regulations has the potential to constitute malpractice which may impact on a candidate’s result(s).
Examples of failure to comply include:
Where Jersey College for Girls can provide signed evidence to support an application, it will apply for special consideration at the time of the assessment for a candidate who has temporarily experienced illness, injury or some other event outside of their control when the issue or event has had, or is reasonably likely to have had, a material effect on the candidate’s ability to take an assessment or demonstrate his or her normal level of attainment in an assessment.
This may include the College’s decision not to make/apply for a specific reasonable adjustment or to apply for special consideration, in circumstances where a candidate does not meet the criteria for, or there is no evidence/insufficient evidence to support the implementation of an access arrangement/reasonable adjustment or the application of special consideration.
Where Jersey College for Girls makes a decision in relation to the access arrangement(s), reasonable adjustment(s) or special consideration that apply for a candidate or candidates:
To determine the outcome of the appeal, the head of centre will consult the respective JCQ/Cambridge International publication to confirm the centre has complied with the principles and regulations governing access arrangements and/or special consideration and followed due procedures.
The appellant will be informed of the outcome of the appeal within 5 working days of the appeal being received and logged by the centre.
If the appeal is upheld, the College will proceed to implement the necessary arrangements/submit the necessary application.
Circumstances may arise that cause Jersey College for Girls to make decisions on administrative issues that may affect a candidate’s examinations/assessments.
Where the College may make a decision that affects a candidate or candidates:
The appellant will be informed of the outcome of the appeal within 5working days of the appeal being received and logged by the centre.
This document is provided as an exams-specific supplement to the centre-wide Diversity Equity an Inclusion Policy. We recognise our duties towards disabled candidates, ensuring compliance with all aspects of equality legislation in Jersey. This must include a duty to explore and provide access to suitable courses, through the access arrangements process submit applications for reasonable adjustments and make reasonable adjustments to the service the centre provides to disabled candidates. Where the centre is under a duty to make a reasonable adjustment, the centre must not charge a disabled candidate any additional fee in relation to the adjustment or aid.
This policy details how the centre facilitates access to exams and assessments for disabled candidates by outlining staff roles and responsibilities in relation to:
Head of centre (Principal)
Assistant Headteacher with responsibility for exams
ENCO and any assessors of candidates with learning difficulties
Teaching staff
Teaching assistants
ENCO
Examinations officer
Assistant Headteacher Student Progress and Welfare
External assessments
These are assessments which are normally set and marked/examined by an awarding body which must be conducted according to awarding body instructions and/or the JCQ/Cambridge International instructions.
Head of centre (Principal)
ENCO
Examinations officer
Invigilators
Internal assessments
These are non-examination assessments (NEA) which are normally set by a centre/awarding body, marked and internally moderated/standardised by the centre and externally moderated by the awarding body.
ENCO
Teaching staff
Internal exams
These are exams or tests which are set and marked within the centre; normally a pre-cursor to external assessments.
ENCO
Teaching staff
Examinations Officer or Heads of School
The following information confirms the centre’s good practice in relation to equality legislation and the conduct of examinations.
On a candidate by candidate basis, consideration is given to:
The table provides example arrangements, adjustments and adaptations that are considered to meet the need(s) of a candidate and the actions considered/taken by the centre for the purposes of facilitating access.
Example of candidate need(s) | Arrangements explored | Centre actions |
A medical condition which prevents the candidate from taking exams in the centre | Alternative site for the conduct of examinations
Supervised rest breaks |
ENCO gathers evidence to support the need for the candidate to take exams at home Relevant member of staff (Head of School) provides written statement for file to confirm the need
Approval confirmed by ENCO; AAO approval for both arrangements not required ENCO discussion with candidate to confirm the arrangements should be put in place Examinations Officer submits ‘Alternative site form’ for timetabled written exams to awarding body/bodies online using CAP An on-line submission must only be made for timetabled written examinations in the following qualifications… Examinations Officer provides candidate with exam timetable and JCQ information for candidates ENCO confirms with candidate the information is understood ENCO agrees with candidate that prior to each exam will call to confirm fitness to take exam Examinations Officer allocates invigilator(s) to candidate’s timetable; confirms time of collection of exam papers and materials Invigilator monitors candidate’s condition for each exam and records any issues on incident log Invigilator records rest breaks (time and duration) on incident log and confirms set time given for exam Invigilator briefs Examinations Officer after each exam on how candidate’s performance in exam may have been affected by his/her condition Examinations Officer discusses with ENCO or Head of School if candidate is eligible for special consideration (candidate present but disadvantaged) Examinations Officer processes request(s) for special consideration where applicable; incident log(s) provides supporting evidence Examinations Officer informs candidate that special consideration has been requested |
Persistent and significant difficulties in accessing written text | Reader/computer reader 25% Extra time
Separate invigilation within the centre |
Confirms candidate is disabled within the meaning of equality legislation
Papers checked for those testing reading Computer reader/examination reading pen sourced for use in papers (or sections of papers) testing reading OR up to 50% extra time awarded A short concise file note produced on centre headed paper, signed and dated kept on file, confirming the nature of the candidate’s impairment and that the use of a computer reader and/or a reader reflects his/her normal and current way of working within the centre (25% Extra time - Form 8 completed as appropriate) Supporting evidence, AAO approval and signed candidate personal data consent form kept on file |
Significant difficulty in concentrating | Prompter Separate invigilation within the centre | Gathers evidence to support substantial and long term adverse impairment
Confirms with candidate how and when they will be prompted Briefs invigilator to monitor candidate and the method of prompting (call out his name to bring his attention back to the paper - confirms requirement for separate room) |
A wheelchair user | Desk
Rooms Facilities Seating arrangements Practical assistant |
Applies for practical assistant to help candidate set up wheelchair and other equipment in a practical assessment; approval automatically fails so awarding body referral lists the tasks that will be performed
Provides height adjustable desk in exam room Allocates exam room on ground floor near adapted bathroom facilities Spaces desks to allow wheelchair access Seats candidate near exam room door Confirms arrangements in place to assist the candidate in case of emergency evacuation of the exam room Practical assistant cover sheet printed from AAO; to be completed by facilitator and inserted inside the candidate’s work where this may be applicable to the assessment |
This procedure confirms that Jersey College for Girls will draw to the attention of candidates and their parents/carers their written complaints and appeals procedure which will cover general complaints regarding the centre’s delivery or administration of a qualification. This procedure should be viewed in conjunction with the College’s Complaints Policy.
A candidate (or his/her/parent/carer) may make a complaint on the grounds below (this is not an exhaustive list).
If a candidate (or his/her parent/carer) has a general concern or complaint about the centre’s delivery or administration of a qualification he/she is following, Jersey College for Girls encourages them to try to resolve this informally in person, via a telephone call or via email with the appropriate member of staff in the first instance. If a complaint fails to be resolved informally, the candidate (or his/her parent/carer) is then at liberty to make a formal complaint.
Following the outcome, if the complainant remains dissatisfied and believes there are clear grounds, an appeal can be submitted.
In the event of the candidate and their parent not being happy with the written response received, they may request a personal hearing. They must make this request within 5 working days of receiving the findings and conclusion.
The personal hearing will be before a panel consisting of a member of the senior leadership team who has not previously been involved in the particular case and a governor. The candidate and their parent should be given a least seven days’ notice of the date of the hearing. At the same time as they are sent notification of the hearing, they should be given copies of all relevant documentation e.g. marks awarded, assessments made, assessment criteria, exemplar material, assessment guidelines, Centre report etc. Candidates may present their own case or may ask a single parent or friend to do so on their behalf. If they choose to present their own case, they may be accompanied by a single parent or friend in the role of supporter.
The teacher(s) and candidate should have an opportunity to hear each other’s submission. Once the submissions have been heard, the panel will withdraw to consider its verdict.
The candidate and her parent will be given a written copy of the outcome of the appeal within 5 working days of the hearing. The outcome will include an explanation of the reasons for the decision. In the event of a decision being made to change an internally assessed mark, the examinations officer will immediately inform the examination board involved. A copy of the appeal and the outcome will remain in the school records maintained by the examinations officer.
Whistleblowing at Jersey College for Girls is encouraged, not penalised, and staff are made aware that they have a duty to report any concerns they have about the conduct of examinations.
The head of centre and governing board at the College aim to create and maintain an approach to examinations that reflects an ethical culture, and encourages staff and students to be aware of and report practices that could compromise the integrity and security of examinations.
Jersey College for Girls will
A whistleblower is defined as a person who reports an actual or potential wrongdoing. They are protected providing they are acting in the public interest. If the person raising the issue is a worker, this will be considered as whistleblowing. This includes agency staff and contractors.
If a member of centre staff involved in the management, administration and/or conducting of examinations (such as examinations officer or invigilator), a student or a member of the public (such as a parent/carer) has a concern or reason to believe that malpractice has or will occur in an examination or assessment, concerns should normally be raised initially with the Assistant Headteacher with responsibility for exams. However, there may be times when it may be more appropriate to refer the issue direct to the Head of Centre (Principal) (if the allegation is against the assistant headteacher) or the governing board (if the allegation is against the head of centre).
In addition to the centre wide Whistleblowing Policy, this exams-specific policy, includes reference to exams-related breaches including, but not limited to, the following:
If the individual does not feel safe raising the issue/reporting malpractice within the centre, or they have done so and are concerned that no action has been taken, that individual could consider making their disclosure to a malpractice expert at the awarding body for the qualification where malpractice is suspected.
In order to investigate concerns effectively, the awarding body should be provided with as much information as possible/is relevant, which may include:
In some circumstances, the whistleblower might find it difficult to raise concerns with the Assistant Headteacher with responsibility for exams. If a concern is raised anonymously, the issue may not be able to be taken further if insufficient information has been provided. In such instances, and if appropriate, the allegation may be disclosed to a union representative, who could then be required to report the concern without disclosing its source. Alternatively, whistleblowers or others with concerns about potential malpractice can report the matter direct to Ofqual, who is identified as a ‘prescribed body’. Awarding organisations are not prescribed bodies under whistleblowing legislation; however, awarding organisation investigation teams do give those reporting concerns the opportunity for anonymity.
A whistleblower can give their name but may also request confidentiality; the person receiving the information should make every effort to protect the identity of the whistleblower.
Students at Jersey College for Girls are made to feel comfortable discussing/reporting malpractice issues of which they are aware. The regulations surrounding their assessments, and wider academic integrity, will be reiterated to students who are undertaking, or who are about to undertake, their courses of study.
This policy should be read in conjunction with our College Individual Student Needs Policy.
Access arrangements are agreed before an assessment. They allow candidates with specific needs, such as special educational needs, disabilities or temporary injuries to access the assessment and show what they know and can do without changing the demands of the assessment. The intention behind an access arrangement is to meet the needs of an individual candidate without affecting the integrity of the assessment. Access arrangements are the principal way in which awarding bodies comply with the duty under equalities legislation to make ‘reasonable adjustments’.
The UK Equality Act 2010* requires an awarding body to make reasonable adjustments where a candidate, who is disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010, would be at a substantial disadvantage in comparison to someone who is not disabled. The awarding body is required to take reasonable steps to overcome that disadvantage. An example would be a Braille paper which would be a reasonable adjustment for a vision impaired candidate who could read Braille. A reasonable adjustment may be unique to that individual and may not be included in the list of available access arrangements. Whether an adjustment will be considered reasonable will depend on several factors which will include, but are not limited to:
An adjustment will not be approved if it:
This is because the adjustment is not ‘reasonable’.
The purpose of this policy is to confirm that Jersey College for Girls has a written record which clearly shows the centre is leading on the access arrangements process and is complying with its obligation to identify the need for, request and implement access arrangements.
The ENCO holds individual files/e-folders of each access arrangements candidate. Each file/e-folder contains detailed records of all the essential information that is required to be held according to the regulations.
Where the ENCO is storing documentation electronically they must create an e-folder for each individual candidate. The candidate’s e-folder must hold each of the required documents for inspection.
The purpose of an access arrangement/reasonable adjustment is to ensure, where possible, that barriers to assessment are removed for a disabled candidate preventing them from being placed at a substantial disadvantage due to persistent and significant difficulties. The integrity of the assessment is maintained, whilst at the same time providing access to assessments for disabled candidate.
The ENCO must ensure that the proposed access arrangement/reasonable adjustment does not unfairly disadvantage or advantage the candidate.
Access arrangements/reasonable adjustments should be processed at the start of the course.
Arrangements must always be approved before an examination or assessment.
The arrangement(s) put in place must reflect the support given to the candidate in the centre.
The candidate must have had appropriate opportunities to practise using the access arrangement(s)/reasonable adjustment(s) before his/her first examination.
A large part of the access arrangements/reasonable adjustments process is covered in the Equalities Policy (Exams) which covers staff roles and responsibilities in identifying the need for, requesting and implementing access arrangements and the conduct of exams.
The Access Arrangements Policy further covers the assessment process and related issues in more detail.
Assessments are carried out by the ENCO or assessors appointed by the head of centre. The assessors are appropriately qualified as required by JCQ/Cambridge International regulations.
Most assessments are carried out by appropriately qualified Jersey College for Girls’ staff. If they are carried out by another qualified professional, the ENCO will always consider the assessment to see whether the process of gathering a picture of need, demonstrating normal way of working within the centre and ultimately assessing the candidate themselves should be instigated.
The ENCO will oversee the collating of information from all subject areas to paint a ‘holistic picture of need’ and gather evidence to demonstrate normal way of working. The evidence gathered will give background information to assist any assessment.
Access arrangements online (AAO) is a tool provided by JCQ member awarding bodies for centres to apply for required access arrangement approval for the qualifications covered by the tool. This tool also provides the facility to order modified papers for those qualifications included. Similarly access arrangement approval needs to be sought for Cambridge International Exams.
AAO is accessed within the JCQ Centre Admin Portal (CAP) by logging in to one of the awarding body secure extranet sites. A single application for approval is required for each candidate for all JCQ awarding bodies.
The processing of applications are made by the ENCO in liaison with the examinations officer.
The ENCO must liaise with the examinations officer to ensure that candidates have complete a personal data consent form prior to processing the online application. The consent form must be retained for 26 months from the date of the online application being approved.
The ENCO must keep detailed records of all the essential information on file. This includes a copy of the candidate’s approved application, appropriate evidence of need and a signed candidate personal data consent form. This should be available for inspection.
An exam candidate may be approved the use of a word processor where this is appropriate to the candidate’s needs and not simply because the candidate now wants to type rather than write in exams or can work faster on a keyboard, or because they use a laptop at home. The use of a word processor must reflect the candidate’s normal way of working within the centre.
A decision where an exam candidate may be approved separate invigilation within the centre will be made by the ENCO.
The decision will be based on:
It is the responsibility of the head of centre (Principal) to ensure that Jersey College For Girls
The purpose of this policy is to confirm how Jersey College for Girls manages conflicts of interest under normal delivery arrangements in accordance with the regulations.
A process is in place to collect any declaration of interests and place the hard copies in a secure location as well as sending an electric copy to the awarding bodies.
A hard/electronic copy of the declaration of interests form is sent to exam office staff.
The role of the head of centre (Principal)
The role of the examinations officer
This procedure confirms Jersey College for Girls’ compliance with JCQ and Cambridge International’s requirement for centres to have in place and available for inspection a written internal appeals procedure which must cover at least appeals regarding internal assessment decisions, post-result services and appeals, and centre decisions relating to access arrangements and special consideration.
This procedure covers appeals relating to:
The use of a word processor in exams and assessments is an available access arrangements/reasonable adjustment.
The purpose of this policy is to confirm how Jersey College for Girls ensures that where possible the barriers to assessments are removed for a disabled candidate preventing them from being placed at a substantial disadvantage as a consequence of persistent and significant difficulties.
Separate invigilation within the centre is an available access arrangements when a candidate may be eligible to take an examination accommodated outside the main examination room, for example in a room for a smaller group of candidates.
At Jersey College for Girls, decisions on the awarding of the arrangements are made by the ENCO.
Decisions are based on:
Separate invigilation will be considered where the arrangement would prevent a candidate from being placed at a substantial disadvantage and where the following conditions are met
This policy affects the delivery of subjects of GCE and GCSE qualifications which contain a component(s) of non-examination assessment/Coursework.
The regulators’ definition of an examination is very narrow. In effect, any type of assessment that is not:
Remember the mantra: ‘There should be no surprises!’
Coursework (or NEAs) are an essential component of many GCSE and A level subjects. The exact details and requirements vary from board to board and subject to subject, but essentially the work must be the student’s own work, verified by the school and submitted for marking by a specified date. The need for a systematic approach to coursework is essential if students are to maximise their success in this component of their examination and if all candidates are to be treated fairly. The College will provide support, advice and a structured process for the management of coursework.
All coursework is to be completed by all students by the given date in mid March (published on the College’s calendar). It is expected that the minimum grade coursework will be a grade 4 (or equivalent) at GCSE and grade C at A level.
This coursework deadline date will allow lesson time afterwards to be devoted to exam revision. This should also make the administration of coursework and the associated form filling easier to manage.
The Head of Department in liaison with the Head of Faculty is responsible for
Assistant Headteacher Exams is responsible for
Head of centre (Principal)
Head of Faculty/Department/Subject
Subject teacher
Examinations officer
Subject teacher
Subject teacher
Supervision
Subject teacher
Advice and feedback
Subject teacher
Resources
Subject teacher
Word and time limits
Subject teacher
Collaboration and group work
Subject teacher
Authentication procedures
Subject teacher
Presentation of work
Subject teacher
Keeping materials secure
Subject teacher
Technical ICT Manager
Intervention if deadlines are not met
When a student does not meet an interim deadline or the work is substandard the following will apply:
If the newly agreed deadline is not met then
If the work remains outstanding then
Conduct of externally assessed work
Subject teacher
Examinations officer
Submission of work
Subject teacher
Examinations officer
Marking and annotation
Head of centre
Head of Faculty/Department/Subject
Subject teacher
Internal standardisation
Quality assurance (QA) lead/Lead internal verifier
Subject teacher
Consortium arrangements
Head of Faculty/Department/Subject
Subject teacher
Examinations officer
Submission of marks and work for moderation
Subject teacher
Examinations officer
Storage and retention of work after submission of marks
Subject teacher
Examinations officer
Subject teacher
Head of Faculty/Department/Subject
Examinations officer
Subject teacher
ENCO
Subject teacher
Examinations officer
Head of Centre (Principal)
Subject teacher
Examinations officer
Head of centre/Principal
Head of Faculty/Department/Subject
Subject teacher
Examinations officer
Head of centre/Principal
Head of Faculty/Department/Subject
Subject teacher
Examinations officer
Issue/Risk | Centre actions to manage issue/mitigate risk |
Centre staff malpractice | Records confirm that relevant centre staff are familiar with and follow:
|
Candidate malpractice | Records confirm that candidates are informed and understand they must not:
Records confirm that candidates have been made aware of the JCQ/Cambridge International documents Information for candidates - non-examination assessments and Information for candidates – Social Media - and understand they must not post their work on social media |
Awarding body set task: IT failure/corruption of task details where set task details accessed from the awarding body online | Awarding body key date for accessing/downloading set task noted prior to start of course
IT systems checked prior to key date Alternative IT system used to gain access. Back up. Awarding body contacted to request direct email of task details |
Centre set task: Subject teacher fails to meet the assessment criteria as detailed in the specification | Ensures that subject teachers access awarding body training information, practice materials etc.
Records confirmation that subject teachers understand the task setting arrangements as defined in the awarding body’s specification Samples assessment criteria in the centre set task |
Candidates do not understand the marking criteria and what they need to do to gain credit | A simplified version of the awarding body’s marking criteria described in the specification that is not specific to the work of an individual candidate or group of candidates is produced for candidates
Records confirm all candidates understand the marking criteria Candidates confirm/record they understand the marking criteria |
Subject teacher long term absence during the task setting stage | See centre’s Exam Contingency Plan |
Awarding body set task not issued to candidates on time | Awarding body key date for accessing set task as detailed in the specification noted prior to start of course
Course information issued to candidates contains details when set task will be issued and needs to be completed by Set task accessed well in advance to allow time for planning, resourcing and teaching |
The wrong task is given to candidates | Ensures course planning and information taken from the awarding body’s specification confirms the correct task will be issued to candidates
Awarding body guidance sought where this issue remains unresolved |
Subject teacher long term absence during the issuing of tasks stage | See centre’s Exam Contingency Plan |
A candidate (or parent/carer) expresses concern about safeguarding, confidentiality, or faith in undertaking a task such as a presentation that may be recorded | Ensures the candidate’s presentation does not form part of the sample which will be recorded
Contacts the awarding body at the earliest opportunity where unable to record the required number of candidates for the monitoring sample |
Planned assessments clash with other centre or candidate activities | Assessment plan identified for the start of the course
Assessment dates/periods included in centre wide calendar |
Rooms or facilities inadequate for candidates to take tasks under appropriate supervision | Timetabling organised to allocate appropriate rooms and IT facilities for the start of the course
Staggered sessions arranged where IT facilities insufficient for number of candidates Whole cohort to undertake written task in large exam venue at the same time (exam conditions do not apply) |
Insufficient supervision of candidates to enable work to be authenticated | Confirm subject teachers are aware of and follow Instructions for conducting non-examination assessments and any other specific instructions detailed in the awarding body’s specification in relation to the supervision of candidates
Confirm subject teachers understand their role and responsibilities as detailed in the centre’s non-examination assessment policy |
A candidate is suspected of malpractice prior to submitting their work for assessment | Instructions and processes in the current Instructions for conducting non-examination assessments are followed
An internal investigation and where appropriate internal disciplinary procedures are followed |
Access arrangements were not put in place for an assessment where a candidate is approved for arrangements | Relevant staff are signposted to the guide to the special consideration process, to determine the process to be followed to apply for special consideration for the candidate |
Candidate claims appropriate advice and feedback not given by subject teacher prior to starting on their work | Ensures a centre-wide process is in place for subject teachers to record all information provided to candidates before work begins as part of the centre’s quality assurance procedures
Regular monitoring of subject teacher completed records and sign-off to confirm monitoring activity Full records kept detailing all information and advice given to candidates prior to starting on their work as appropriate to the subject and component Candidate confirms/records advice and feedback given prior to starting on their work |
Candidate claims no advice and feedback given by subject teacher during the task-taking stage | Ensures a centre-wide process is in place for subject teachers to record all advice and feedback provided to candidates during the task-taking stage as part of the centre’s quality assurance procedures Regular monitoring of subject teacher completed records and sign-off to confirm monitoring activity Full records kept detailing all advice and feedback given to candidates during the task-taking stage as appropriate to the subject and component Candidate confirms/records advice and feedback given during the task-taking stage |
A third party claims that assistance was given to candidates by the subject teacher over and above that allowed in the regulations and specification | An investigation is conducted; candidates and subject teacher are interviewed and statements recorded where relevant
Records as detailed above are provided to confirm all assistance given Where appropriate, a suspected malpractice report is submitted to the awarding body |
Candidate does not reference information from published source | Candidate is advised at a general level to reference information before work is submitted for formal assessment
Candidate is again referred to Information for candidates: non-examination assessments Candidate’s detailed record of his/her own research, planning, resources etc. is regularly checked to ensure continued completion |
Candidate does not set out references as required | Candidate is advised at a general level to review and re-draft the set out of references before work is submitted for formal assessment
Candidate is again referred to Information for candidates: non-examination assessments Candidate’s detailed record of his/her own research, planning, resources etc. is regularly checked to ensure continued completion |
Candidate joins the course late after formally supervised task taking has started | A separate supervised session(s) is arranged for the candidate to catch up |
Candidate moves to another centre during the course | Awarding body guidance is sought to determine what can be done depending on the stage at which the move takes place |
An excluded pupil wants to complete a non-examination assessment(s) | The awarding body specification is checked to determine if the specification is available to a candidate outside mainstream education
If so, arrangements for supervision, authentication and marking are made separately for the candidate |
A candidate augments notes and resources between formally supervised sessions | Preparatory notes and the work to be assessed are collected in and kept secure between formally supervised sessions
Where memory sticks are used by candidates, these are collected in and kept secure between formally supervised sessions Where work is stored on the centre’s network, access for candidates is restricted between formally supervised sessions |
A candidate fails to acknowledge sources on work that is submitted for assessment | Candidate’s detailed record of his/her own research, planning, resources etc. is checked to confirm all the sources used, including books, websites and audio/visual resources
Awarding body guidance is sought on whether the work of the candidate should be marked where candidate’s detailed records acknowledges sources appropriately Where confirmation is unavailable from candidate’s records, awarding body guidance is sought and/or a mark of zero is submitted to the awarding body for the candidate |
A candidate is penalised by the awarding body for exceeding word or time limits | Records confirm the awarding body specification has been checked to determine if word or time limits are mandatory
Where limits are for guidance only, candidates are discouraged from exceeding them Candidates confirm/record any information provided to them on word or time limits is known and understood |
Candidates have worked in groups where the awarding body specification states this is not permitted | Records confirm the awarding body specification has been checked to determine if group work is permitted
Awarding body guidance sought where this issue remains unresolved |
A teacher has doubts about the authenticity of the work submitted by a candidate for internal assessment
Candidate plagiarises other material |
Records confirm subject staff have been made aware of the JCQ document Notice to Centres - Sharing NEA material and candidates' work/Cambridge International guidelines
Records confirm that candidates have been issued with the current Information for candidates: non-examination assessments Candidates confirm/record that they understand what they need to do to comply with the regulations for non-examination assessments as outlined in the Information for candidates: non-examination assessments The candidate’s work is not accepted for assessment A mark of zero is recorded and submitted to the awarding body |
Candidate does not sign their authentication statement/declaration | Records confirm that candidates have been issued with the Information for candidates: non-examination assessments
Candidates confirm/record they understand what they need to do to comply with the regulations as outlined in the JCQ document Information for candidates: non-examination assessments/ Cambridge International guidelines Declaration is checked for signature before accepting the work of a candidate for formal assessment |
Subject teacher not available to sign authentication forms | Ensures a centre-wide process is in place for subject teachers to sign authentication forms at the point of marking candidates work as part of the centre’s quality assurance procedures |
Candidate does not fully complete the awarding body’s cover sheet that is attached to their worked submitted for formal assessment | Cover sheet is checked to ensure it is fully completed before accepting the work of a candidate for formal assessment |
Candidates work between formal supervised sessions is not securely stored | Records confirm subject teachers are aware of and follow current Instructions for conducting non-examination assessments
Regular monitoring/internal audit ensures subject teacher use of appropriate secure storage |
Candidates work produced electronically is not securely stored | Records confirm subject teachers are aware of and follow current publication Instructions for conducting non-examination assessments
Internal processes and regular monitoring/internal audit by IT Manager ensures:
|
A candidate is absent on the day of the examiner visit for an acceptable reason
|
Awarding body guidance is sought to determine if alternative assessment arrangements can be made for the candidate
If not, eligibility for special consideration is explored and a request submitted to the awarding body where appropriate |
A candidate is absent on the day of the examiner visit for an unacceptable reason
|
The candidate is marked absent on the attendance register
|
A candidate submits little or no work
|
Where a candidate submits no work, the candidate is recorded as absent when marks are submitted to the awarding body Where a candidate submits little work, the work produced is assessed against the assessment criteria and a mark allocated appropriately; where the work does not meet any of the assessment criteria a mark of zero is submitted to the awarding body |
A candidate is unable to finish their work for unforeseen reasons
|
Relevant staff are signposted to the JCQ publication A guide to the special consideration process (section 5)/Cambridge International, to determine eligibility and the process to be followed for shortfall in work
|
The work of a candidate is lost or damaged
|
Relevant staff are signposted to the JCQ publication Instructions for conducting non-examination assessments (section 8)/Cambridge International, to determine eligibility and the process to be followed for lost or damaged work
|
A teacher assesses the work of a candidate with whom they have a close personal relationship e.g. members of their family (which includes step-family, foster family and similar close relationships) or close friends and their immediate family (e.g. son/daughter)
|
A possible conflict of interest is declared by informing the awarding body before the published deadline for entries for each examination series Marked work of said candidate is submitted for moderation whether part of the sample requested or not
|
An extension to the deadline for submission of marks is required for a legitimate reason
|
Awarding body is contacted to determine if an extension can be granted. Determine eligibility and the process to be followed for non-examination assessment extension
|
After submission of marks, it is discovered that the wrong task was given to candidates
|
Awarding body is contacted for guidance. Determine eligibility and the process to be followed to apply for special consideration for candidates
|
A candidate wishes to appeal/request a review of the marks awarded for their work by their teacher
|
Candidates are informed of the marks they have been awarded for their work prior to the marks being submitted to the awarding body
Records confirm candidates have been informed of their marks Candidates are informed that these marks are subject to change through the awarding body’s moderation process Candidates are informed of their marks to the timescale identified in the centre’s internal appeals procedure and prior to the internal deadline set by the examinations officer for the submission of marks |
Deadline for submitting marks and samples of candidates work ignored by subject teacher
|
Internal/external deadlines are published at the start of each academic year
Reminders are issued as deadlines approach Records confirm deadlines known and understood by subject teachers Where appropriate, internal disciplinary procedures are followed |
Subject teacher long term absence during the marking period
|
See centre’s Exam Contingency Plan
|
GCSE initial registration and entry exam fees are paid by the Centre.
A level initial registration and entry exam fees are paid by the Centre. Late entry or amendment fees are paid by the departments. If the late entry is caused by the student then they will be responsible for paying the late fees themselves. Students or departments will not be charged for changes of tier, withdrawals made by the proper procedures or alterations arising from administrative processes, provided these are made within the time allowed by the awarding bodies.
Reimbursement will be sought from students who fail to sit an exam or meet the necessary coursework requirements.
Re-sit fees for first and any subsequent re-sits are paid by the students.
Candidates taking exams for subjects which are not taught as part of the JCG curriculum or candidates who are no longer attending College may be entered for external exams at the discretion of the Head of Centre. They will be charged fees and should be made aware (see below)
Students taking an external exam for a subject not taught as part of the JCG curriculum or candidates who no longer attend lessons at JCG will pay the following fees:
Sample costs (2020) (subject to annual increases)
Spanish GCSE
Exam Entrance Fee – £36.70
Admin Fee - £50
Total - £86.70
French A level
Exam Entrance Fee - £189.60
Admin Fee - £50
Total - £239.60
Students must be made aware of these fees and pay them prior to their entry being made.
Suggested wording for communication
External Examination Agreement:
Thank you for enquiring about entering the …. examination through JCG.
I confirm that the total cost of the examination will be £… This fee includes the examination entry fee, invigilation and administration fee.
If you would like to proceed with the entry, please complete and return the slip below to the examinations officer.
Student Name:
I would like to enter the following external examination:
Subject:
Level:
Exam Board:
Module Codes and Names:
I have paid the costs through Touch Top Up.
Signed:
Date:
This purpose of this policy is to confirm that Jersey College for Girls follows the correct procedures when considering the arrangements for a candidate entered for multiple examinations timetabled for the same day.
The College reserves the right to exercise discretion when deciding to allow a candidate to take an examination the following morning and must have appropriate arrangements in place to maintain the security and integrity of the examination(s).
Overnight supervision arrangements:
When candidates are entered for multiple examinations (three or more examinations) timetabled for the same day and the total duration for those papers is:
Candidates may, at the centre’s discretion, be allowed to take an examination the following morning.
These arrangements do not apply where a
Overnight supervision arrangements should only be applied as a last resort and once all other options have been exhausted.
The head of centre (Principal) must be satisfied with any arrangement for overnight supervision of a candidate where necessary and must accept full responsibility for the security of the examination throughout.
Candidates are not allowed to take examinations on an earlier day than that scheduled on the timetable.
The role of the head of centre (Principal)
The role of the examinations officer
The role of the head of centre (Principal)
The role of the examinations officer
The role of an affected candidate (or parent/carer)
At Jersey College for Girls, where a candidate is eligible, special consideration will be applied for at the time of the assessment in accordance with the regulations as detailed in the JCQ and Cambridge International publications on the special consideration process.
For candidates who are present for the assessment but disadvantaged, Jersey College for girls must be satisfied that there has been a material detrimental effect on candidate examination performance or in the production of coursework or non-examination assessment
Examples where a candidate/candidates may be eligible for special consideration include:
Where a candidate may be affected by a minor disturbance in the exam room caused by another candidate (momentary bad behaviour, mobile phone ringing etc.), special consideration cannot be applied for.
Candidates who are absent from a timetabled component/unit for acceptable reasons
If a candidate is absent for acceptable reasons, and Jersey College for Girls can support this, special consideration will be applied for if the examination missed is in the terminal series and the minimum requirements for enhanced grading in cases of acceptable absence can be met.
For unitised examinations taken in an examination series prior to certification, candidates must be re-entered for any missed units at the next assessment opportunity. Unless there are difficulties arising, e.g. group performances which cannot be repeated, special consideration will not be awarded.
The role of the head of centre (Principal)
The role of the examinations officer
At Jersey College for Girls, where a candidate or group of candidates is/are eligible for special consideration, applications will be submitted to the relevant awarding body following the published processes.
In cases of online applications for special consideration, the candidate/candidates will be informed when an application for special consideration is submitted to the awarding body Evidence to support all applications will be kept on file until after the publication of results.