SiteTicket SiteTicket
ST-POL-22 · Article 22 statement SiteTicket Ltd · GQA 00454 · v0.1 Draft

No assessment outcome is decided solely by a machine

A qualified human assessor, invigilator, or Head of Centre makes every decision that awards, refuses, or withdraws a result. Artificial intelligence prepares, structures, and flags. It does not pass. It does not fail. It does not certify.

UK GDPR Article 22. GQA AOP-013 (misuse of AI is malpractice). This page is the human-in-the-loop map. Public summary: siteticket.co.uk/privacy/automated-decisions

Human-in-the-loop map

Process Machine Human decision
Practice, mocks, drills Scores the item bank None. No qualification effect
Official GQA module tests and CSCS HS&E Applies GQA’s published mark scheme Live invigilator authenticates the sitting. Malpractice and appeals are human. GQA awards
Identity verification (AOP-042) Vendor check status (provider-agnostic) Staff review inconclusive or disputed checks. A vendor score never awards a qualification
English video interview (GQAGN 27) Transcript and name-match score Centre judges the GQA English standard. Corroboration only
NVQ / competence evidence Claude pre-mark and AI-use screen, stored as proposed (ai_runs, append-only) Named assessor decides. IQA samples and cannot sample their own work
Invigilation integrity flags Event timeline, malpractice checkbox Invigilator reports. Escalation to GQA is manual. No auto-notify
Support assistant / course matcher Drafts a reply or a pathway Not an assessment decision. Results escalate to a person
Certification request May submit the centre’s already-taken decision to GQA Centre decided first. GQA awards

We will not

Challenge

If you believe a machine decided your result: stefana@siteticket.co.uk and the published appeals policy. We will name the human who took the decision and the evidence they used.

Role Name Date Signature
Head of Centre Stefana Strimbei 14 August 2026 Signed
Director