What are valid grounds for an appeal?
AIRS-J/1 sets out nine grounds on which a candidate may appeal. This FAQ gives each ground in the Standard's words with a short plain explanation. It also sets out what the review looks at and what is not a ground.
Who is this for?
It is for a candidate who thinks a result is wrong. An employer whose applicant has appealed can read the list to see what the review may find.
What may a candidate appeal?
A candidate may appeal within 30 days. The appeal may concern a certification-status decision, any employment-grade result released to an employer, an accommodation decision that affects access to assessment, or a suspension (Section 18.5).
What is an employment-grade result?
An employment-grade result comes from an approved instrument at Moderate or High confidence (Section 12.8).
What are the nine grounds?
The grounds in Section 18.6 apply to every appeal. An anchor is the published description of what the transcript shows at each level, 0 to 4.
- Misapplication of an anchor. The published anchor applied does not match what the transcript shows the candidate did (Sections 7 and 7.5).
- An observation not supported by transcript evidence. The report cites an act that the transcript does not hold (Section 12.5).
- A procedural failure under Sections 4, 8, 9, 10, 11 or 15. A required procedure in one of these sections was not followed.
- Denial or material misapplication of an access support. A support the candidate asked for before assessment was refused, or an approved one was applied wrongly in a way that mattered (Section 8.9).
- An undisclosed assessor conflict. A human assessor who scored or confirmed an observation had an undisclosed conflict of interest (Section 4.6).
- A material technical failure. The appeal identifies the technical failure and explains why it was material to the decision being appealed.
- A localisation or translation defect capable of changing the construct-relevant demand. A translated or local version of a scenario asked for something different from the original, in a way that could change what is assessed (Section 8.5).
- The near-cut rule in Section 12.8.1 not applied. Before release for hiring or promotion, AIR APAC checks one thing. It checks whether a change of one level in any single observation would change the outcome between Certified and Not Certified. If so, the candidate is offered one further held-back mission at no charge. The ground is that this was not done (Section 12.8.1).
- The sitting mode required by Section 9.1 not met. Identity is verified at the start of each certifying session, with a live check for a remote session. An Assessment for a hiring decision is sat in person under supervision. The exception is a remote sitting that the approved instrument records for its duration and that AIR APAC has announced. The ground is that one of these rules was not met (Section 9.1).
Is re-running the scoring rule the review?
No. Rule-based scoring is deterministic, so the same transcript under the same rule gives the same result. Re-running the rule is not the review (Section 18.5).
What does the review look at?
The review looks for a wrongly applied rule or anchor, evidence the instrument extracted wrongly, a technical failure, or a procedural failure. It considers the transcript, the published anchors, any access-support record and the procedures that apply.
Who carries out the review?
An appeals reviewer not involved in the original decision or delivery carries it out.
What should a candidate do before an appeal?
A candidate first reads the report, which cites the evidence for each observation and the anchors applied (Section 12.5). A candidate may also obtain their own transcript and result (Section 14.5). With the transcript, the first two grounds can be checked. The appeal names the decision and the ground in Section 18.6 that applies.
Is disagreement with an anchor itself a ground?
No. This is a comment on the Standard, and it goes to the review board (Section 18.6).
Can a development reading be appealed?
No. Practice, a training session, a public demonstration, and a Provisional or Insufficient result are development readings (Section 12.8). They decide nothing and are not appealable. A comment on one is a complaint (Sections 18.5 and 18.7).
Where do concerns about service, conduct or a delivery partner go?
These go to the complaints procedure. A complaint does not change certification status by itself (Section 18.7).
How is an appeal lodged, and is it free?
An appeal is lodged through the contact page within 30 days. Appeal is free for the first instance (Section 18.5).
What this does not claim
An appeal does not score a result again against a different standard. This page gives no guidance on how to raise a band. The review applies the published anchors, never new ones.