How we write, source and correct what we publish.

Articles are written by Ucademy tutors, admissions consultants and examiners who teach the curriculum they are writing about, and by the Ucademy editorial team working from their input.

Where an article names an individual author, that person is accountable for its accuracy and their role is published on our team page. Where an article is bylined “Ucademy Team”, accountability sits with Ucademy as an organisation rather than with a named individual — and the structured data on that page says exactly that, rather than presenting a company byline as if it were a person.

Moving the archive from corporate bylines to named, credentialed authors is work in progress. Until an article carries a person’s name, read it as the company’s position, not an individual expert’s.

Anything a reader could act on — a grade boundary, an entry requirement, a deadline, a pass rate — is sourced to the body that sets it. In practice that means Ofqual, JCQ, the DfE, UCAS and the exam boards themselves (AQA, Edexcel, OCR, WJEC/Eduqas), and for research claims the published paper rather than a summary of it.

Figures are dated, because most of them move. A grade boundary is true of one exam series, not of the qualification, and an article that states one without the year is wrong the following August.

Where the evidence is genuinely contested — and in education a good deal of it is — the article says so rather than picking the more convenient reading.

Articles covering examined content are reviewed by a subject tutor before publication, and re-checked when the specification, the grading system or the admissions process they describe changes.

Every article shows the date it was published. Where it also shows a Last updated date, that date reflects a real edit to the article — a correction, a new figure, a rewritten section. It is not moved by anything else. Articles that have not been revised since publication show no update date at all, which is the honest answer rather than a fresher-looking one.

Ucademy sells tutoring, and the articles are published by a company that stands to gain if you enquire. That interest is disclosed here rather than hidden, and it is bounded by three rules.

We do not rank ourselves against named competitors. Ucademy does not publish “best online tutor” listicles placing itself at the top. Several companies in this market do; under CAP/ASA rules and CMA guidance on misleading rankings it is a real exposure, and it is not needed to compete.

We do not buy links or placements. No paid guest posts, no link packages, no reciprocal link schemes.

We do not publish structured data a reader cannot see. Every FAQ marked up in this site’s schema is rendered on the page it belongs to. There are no hidden questions, and there is no site-wide star rating in our markup — see below.

The testimonials on our homepage are real, attributed, and marked up verbatim — the words in the structured data are the words on the page.

We publish no aggregate star rating in our structured data. Doing so requires a rating value and a review count that can both be checked against a public profile on the day they are published, and we would rather show nothing than round a number upwards. Our independent reviews are on Trustpilot, where you can read them without us as the intermediary.

The results published on our about page are first-party figures from our own records. They have not been independently audited, and we do not present them as though they had.

The headline figure — 100% A/A* — applies to students who complete a Full Course, which is a selected group: students who finish everything recommended are, by construction, the more diligent ones, and no control group separates our teaching from their diligence. The 78% figure across everyone enrolled is the less flattering and more representative number, which is why we publish it alongside.

If something on this site is wrong, tell us and we will fix it. Email [email protected] with the page and what is inaccurate.

Substantive corrections — a changed fact, figure or recommendation, as opposed to a typo — are made to the article and move its Last updated date, so the change is visible rather than silent.