Proposed amendments to pupil database

[TE44]

I find this very worrying.

7 Proposed Changes

7.1 The Regulations would be amended to allow data to be shared with

persons:

 conducting research,

 or providing information, advice and guidance,

 or data based products and services

for the purpose of promoting the education or well-being of children in

England and who require individual pupil information for that purpose.'

For the purpose of regulation ?well-being' means the well-being of children, so

far as relating to the matters mentioned in section 507B of the Education Act

1996, namely their:

 physical and mental health and emotional well-being;

 protection from harm and neglect;

 education, training and recreation;

 the contribution made by them to society;

 social and economic well-being.

The proposed amendments would allow the Department for Education to

share extracts of data for a wider range of purposes than currently possible.

This will enable researchers, educators, professional bodies, the voluntary

sector, consultants, education publishers and developers, the media, and

other commercial or non-profit organisations to go further in producing

research, publications, advice or applications useful to families, education,

business and the wider public and help stimulate the market for services

underpinned by the data.

As under current arrangements, selected data would only be released subject

to a robust approval process and with strict terms and conditions on data

security, handling and use.

http://www.education.gov.uk/aboutdfe/departmentalinformation/consultations/a00216528/prescribed-persons

click on consultation document on right side, above quote copied from document.

Especially after this

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/9485004/Childrens-private-records-leaked-on-internet-from-independent-school-applications.html

[TE44]

Has anyone any idea why the media should have access to pupil data. I find it difficult to find information about education, it seems some parents are paying for information. I genuinely feel education is becoming more about business. I'd like to hear any views.

[Bouncy]

The Telegraph story is unrelated to proposals for revised usage of the National Pupil Database (NPD). It's about a private company losing personal information (including individual identifiers) which was aparently provided by the parents.

Information provided from the NPD is anonymised, so it's highly unlikely that a situation could arise where information linked to individual pupils could become public, whoever it was provided to. (Though you never know how things are going to be further revised and to slip...)

There is a debate to be had around the proposed extension of access, however, I agree. Perhaps the idea underpinning the media having access is that more nuanced analysis could more easily be conducted for news stories? I'm more wary of the opening up to commercial companies...

[TE44]

Hi bouncy, I thought the company involved in the telegraph story, was a commercial company. I dont know much about school mailings and when I googled I was shocked at the amount of online companies, I understand businesses use these companies but couldnt understand why parents were having to pay for information that should be available to them.

[TE44]

prospect services, he company involved with Telegraph story,this is a company that is no longer inspected by Ofsted, gets millions of pounds from government contracts. sorry edited to say, see bottom link.

http://www.schoolmailings.com/

Prospects Services has the ?50m prime Work Programme contract for the south-west. In 1995 Prospects was basically the south London schools careers service.Thanks to privatisation it has been transformed into a massive company squeezing cash out of the government. By taking ov"er school inspections, careers services and "benefit-busting" schemes it has grown massively."

I have quoted this from link underneath. I do not use computer a lot as I have epilepsy, but I have tried to find out where this companys profits go, but got nowhere. I cannot see how these transactions are not commercial already.

Gove states in his consoltation paper, "Organisations granted access would need to comply with the Data Protection Act, and any reports, statistical tables, or other products published or released, would need to fully protect the identity of individuals... It could also help stimulate the market for innovative tools and services which present anonymised versions of the data." Does this mean the third party will anonymise.

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/content/view/full/119935

[Bouncy]

Hi TE44 - That is ambiguous, isn't it? Currently only anonymised data is provided outside of DfE...but that quote does imply that non-anonymised data may be provided...but maybe it's just a misphrasing if not in the proposals themselves?? Or not??

[TE44]

Hi bouncy, I find a lot of the proposals for these changes ambiguous. Thanks for pointing out to me the difference with the company in the telegraph paper. I thought it was a company like the one on 1st link above (sorry thought I put that above). The above quote came from michael gove, I can't check now but pretty sure it came from consultation papers. I also had a look at prospects website, and found nothing about the internal investigation into the queens jubilee re treatment of unemployed. I believe the sub contractors prospect hired were investigated independantly.