EDUCATION chiefs have rejected a Tynwald scrutiny committee’s criticisms of a centralised pupil database.
In a damning report, the Social Affairs policy review committee called for work on the database to be halted as there was a risk the Department of Education could be holding information to which it is not legally entitled.
The pupil database was trialled in two schools in December 2011 with the aim of assessing pupil achievements and needs and help ensure scarce resources are used where they are needed most. Set-up cost of the system was £267,000 with the annual running cost estimated at £44,000. But civil liberties campaigners expressed concern about the holding of sensitive personal information on a central database.
And giving evidence to the scrutiny committee, data protection supervisor Iain McDonald suggested that without changes to existing legislation, processing personal data in the attendance and admission registers may contravene the Data Protection Act. The committee described his findings as ‘alarming’.
Now in its response, to be laid before Tynwald next week, the Department of Education and Children, has branded that description as ‘inappropriate’. ‘The findings are only alarming if they are correct and based on the advice we have, they are not.’
The department said the legal advice it had obtained concluded that no further legislative powers were required.
But it said until this matter is resolved, the development of other forms of reporting have been halted.
At present only those who enter data because of their role can also access it. Attendance data, which has been gathered by the department manually for at least 20 years, is still gathered by education liaison officers.
‘This is a clear example of a saving as rather than driving around the island looking at registers, they now do this on screen and instead spend their time helping get children back into schools. In the meantime, we have a management information system which is not being used to potential,’ says the DEC’s report.
The department is looking at whether to produce a new set of regulations as part of an updated Education Bill.
In his evidence the committee, civil rights campaigner Tristram Llewellyn Jones pointed out that just because a database is ‘data protection compliant’ does not automatically mean that the underlying policy for the data collection is right or justified.
And the committee said Tynwald approval for new regulations could not be taken for granted, and it recommended the department consult thoroughly with members, parents, teachers and other interested parties before bringing forward updated legislation.
The committee said it was ‘extremely disappointed’ by the Attorney General chamber’s failing to provide a copy of its legal advice despite eight months of chasing. In its response, the department apologised for the delay.