Register to Comment
Page 16 of 22 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 211
Like Tree55Likes
  1. #151
    realist realist is offline

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,596

    Quote Originally Posted by GrainneDee View Post
    But everyone has a PPSN. It's not a state secret. Why would the Dept. of Education, part of the government which has issued the PPSN, want to sell it? If the government want to sell our PPSN's, they already can. What use would a child's ethnic origin or religion, or other such information, be to anyone?

    We're far too paranoid.
    If you had read the links, you would see that personal data is considered an asset to be traded i.e. bought and sold.

    While ethnic origin or religion may not be of much value, health history would be of great interest to health and life insurance companies, mortgage brokers etc. As has been proved by the IW PPSN fiasco, the government have either little knowledge of or no concern about safeguarding personal privacy rights.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #152
    GrainneDee GrainneDee is offline
    GrainneDee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    27,127

    Quote Originally Posted by realist View Post
    If you had read the links, you would see that personal data is considered an asset to be traded i.e. bought and sold.

    While ethnic origin or religion may not be of much value, health history would be of great interest to health and life insurance companies, mortgage brokers etc. As has been proved by the IW PPSN fiasco, the government have either little knowledge of or no concern about safeguarding personal privacy rights.
    I know that personal data CAN be bought and sold. That doesn't answer my questions - WHY would the government want to sell such information and what use would it be? Religion and ethnic origin, not health, are the data being recorded.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #153
    ant ant is offline
    ant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    592

    Quote Originally Posted by GrainneDee View Post
    ...

    People are getting far too paranoid!
    It is the level of willful ignorance that worries me.

    Daragh O' Brien of Castlebridge Associates makes some excellent points in his blog and identifies seven major data protection issues with the implementation of the Primary Online Database.[17th Jan]
    Data Protection Rake: WHACK!! | The DOBlog

    So, when the Minister comments on the retention of data about primary school children until they are 30 years old, and says that

    “I did say I would examine it but it looks to me that up to the 30th birthday is probably appropriate and it satisfies the Data Commissioner as well which is obviously very important,”

    it is really important to ask: What is the purpose for which this long a retention period is required?...
    ...In my opinion, the Minster’s statement means that the Department are mis-understanding the role of the Data Protection Commissioner and what it means for the DPC to give an opinion on the appropriateness of processing.

    ...It’s also not the role of the DPC to correct the homework of a Government Department, and the new Commissioner Helen Dixon has made that exceptionally clear to Public sector representatives in at least two forums since November. Her role is to enforce the legislation and support the protection of fundamental data privacy rights of individuals and to be independent of Government (that’s a Treaty obligation by the way since 2009… and towards the end of his term Billy Hawkes the former Commissioner exercised that independence by, for example, prosecuting the Minister for Justice).

    ...The stance adopted by the Minister is not good. In the face of valid criticism she has adopted an entrenched position, clutching to the DPC as a shield rather than a fig leaf. Given the narrative arc in the Irish Water debacle that is, as Sir Humphrey Appleby would say, “Courageous Minister, very courageous”. (Data relating to children, “all cleared by the DPC”, challenge in public by knowledgeable experts, public disquiet, “DPC said it was OK”, immediate reverse ferret after a reshuffle… [we are at stage 3 now].)

    Pausing. Assessing and defining an appropriate strategy for strategic use of data in education for statistical planning and centralisation of operational data, combined with an appropriate Privacy Impact Assessment that takes in to account recent rulings on necessity and proportionality by the CJEU would be advisable at this time.

    Anything else is simply courageous, Minister.

    'Minister says data watchdog ‘fully satisfied’ with pupil database plan.'

    When asked why it was necessary to hold the information for 30 years, Ms O’Sullivan replied:

    “I have gone back and asked for the reasons why it’s up to the 30th birthday and I am told it is in order to ensure that we have full maximum data that we need.”
    Minister says data watchdog


    Simon McGarr: [McGarr Solicitors]

    'Simon McGarr @Tupp_Ed · 2h 2 hours ago

    Minister explains why she will keep holding kids data till they’re 30: “it is in order to ensure that we have full maximum data”

    Reassuring'

    https://twitter.com/tupp_ed
    Last edited by ant; 18th January 2015 at 05:21 PM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #154
    vision vision is offline
    vision's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,093

    I think the objections to POD are an overreaction. In the school I worked at they have been collecting most of this data in paper form for 9 years plus. It centralises it all in one place and as for other Departments access. Schools are asked annually to provide a list of pupils pps numbers etc., to the HSE to cater for inoculation programmes, dentist apppointments etc. For a number of years now we have provided returns to the Educational Welfare Board on non attendance or "disappearing pupils". It will cut down on duplication by schools, ensure pupils are included in inoculation programmes when they move schools, enable better monitoring of where pupils are transferring to or not.

    Further the Social Welfare Officer in our area used to write each year asking for a list of pupils and there pps numbers who would be receiving communion or confirmation when the grant existed. This removed the need for individual parent's to come in and ask for a letter from the school so that they could claim same.

    As for ethnicity/religion - I think there is a question about language spoken too. So take my small rural school of 60 pupils, 8 of whom have Polish parent's, English is not the first language of 6 of them, that is 10% and maybe an indication of additional supports the school may need rather than pulling the English speaking pupils out to explain what is wrong with these younger pupils. I think the ethnicity/religion question also relates to changing demographics and at least an attempt by the Department to start acting smart.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #155
    ant ant is offline
    ant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    592

    Quote Originally Posted by vision View Post
    I think the objections to POD are an overreaction. In the school I worked at they have been collecting most of this data in paper form for 9 years plus. It centralises it all in one place and as for other Departments access. Schools are asked annually to provide a list of pupils pps numbers etc., to the HSE to cater for inoculation programmes, dentist apppointments etc. For a number of years now we have provided returns to the Educational Welfare Board on non attendance or "disappearing pupils". It will cut down on duplication by schools, ensure pupils are included in inoculation programmes when they move schools, enable better monitoring of where pupils are transferring to or not.

    Further the Social Welfare Officer in our area used to write each year asking for a list of pupils and there pps numbers who would be receiving communion or confirmation when the grant existed. This removed the need for individual parent's to come in and ask for a letter from the school so that they could claim same.

    As for ethnicity/religion - I think there is a question about language spoken too. So take my small rural school of 60 pupils, 8 of whom have Polish parent's, English is not the first language of 6 of them, that is 10% and maybe an indication of additional supports the school may need rather than pulling the English speaking pupils out to explain what is wrong with these younger pupils. I think the ethnicity/religion question also relates to changing demographics and at least an attempt by the Department to start acting smart.
    You think the objections to POD are an overreaction and then go on to describe instances of data breach but it's OK because these data protection breaching practices have existed for a very long time
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #156
    ant ant is offline
    ant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    592

    DES don't do legal questions, but if they did, they would be the best...

    http://www.tuppenceworth.ie/blog/201...e-of-children/
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #157
    lostexpectation lostexpectation is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    20,164

    another similar issue

    Poor response from schools to social context survey

    A third of post-primary schools have failed to return questionnaires designed to help allocate resources for special education needs from next September.

    The “social context” survey is part of a plan to create a more equitable system of allocating teaching supports.
    While school principals say the plan is well-motivated, they are complaining about the onus it puts on them to report on pupils’ family backgrounds.

    The questionnaire asks for details of medical card holders, the number of pupils living in social housing, those with an unemployed head of household, and other indicators of the school’s socio-economic make-up.

    While principals had no problem providing educational information, he said it was not the business of schools to know “whether a family has income supplement or is paying a mortgage. It damages the relationship of trust”.

    But, he said, “people have concerns about aspects of it and why information should come from the schools when it should be available from other agencies or departments.”
    Mr Byrne said principals had been asked to make “guesstimates” and were concerned their schools could be penalised if they left sections blank.
    committee discussion https://www.kildarestreet.com/commit...0-08a.101#g138

    so the schools have to go round asking parents all these intrusive questions

    Principals also expressed concern as to whether providing information on children’s backgrounds breached data protection laws, but the Department said in a statement: “Schools were not asked to return data in relation to the social circumstances of individual pupils.

    “The position was checked with the office of the Data Protection Commissioner and it was clarified that provided the information sought was not personal to any individual the provisions of the Data Protection Act did not apply.”
    To ask the Minister for Education and Skills the reason her Department is putting the onus on teachers to gather information regarding the economic circumstances of parents for the educational resource centre questionnaire which forms part of the basis for the allocation of special educational needs teachers next year https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/...14-10-07a.1154
    the data issue are for the school principals collecting the data, in terms of whether they should be forced to ask them

    RTÉ Radio Player news at one piece on it
    Last edited by lostexpectation; 24th January 2015 at 06:28 PM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #158
    lostexpectation lostexpectation is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    20,164

    Quote Originally Posted by vision View Post
    I think the objections to POD are an overreaction. In the school I worked at they have been collecting most of this data in paper form for 9 years plus. It centralises it all in one place and as for other Departments access. Schools are asked annually to provide a list of pupils pps numbers etc., to the HSE to cater for inoculation programmes, dentist apppointments etc. For a number of years now we have provided returns to the Educational Welfare Board on non attendance or "disappearing pupils". It will cut down on duplication by schools, ensure pupils are included in inoculation programmes when they move schools, enable better monitoring of where pupils are transferring to or not.

    Further the Social Welfare Officer in our area used to write each year asking for a list of pupils and there pps numbers who would be receiving communion or confirmation when the grant existed. This removed the need for individual parent's to come in and ask for a letter from the school so that they could claim same.

    As for ethnicity/religion - I think there is a question about language spoken too. So take my small rural school of 60 pupils, 8 of whom have Polish parent's, English is not the first language of 6 of them, that is 10% and maybe an indication of additional supports the school may need rather than pulling the English speaking pupils out to explain what is wrong with these younger pupils. I think the ethnicity/religion question also relates to changing demographics and at least an attempt by the Department to start acting smart.
    did you know they were planning on keeping the info till the pupils are 30
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #159
    ant ant is offline
    ant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    592

    Minister Jan O'Sullivan said the Data Protection Commissioner Helen Dixon is 'satisfied' with the Primary Online Database...

    NOT SO...

    In today's Irish Times

    Helen Dixon:

    “The Department of Education is of the view that it has a genuine and proportionate need for this data and yet it seems to be the case that there’s an inadequate explanation of why they need it and why they need to hold it for as long as they are holding it.

    “I think we need to get clarity from the Department of Education as to whether the data is being held from a certain point onwards in an anonymised form and only being used for statistical purposes. It is possible that is the case, but again there’s insufficient clarity on it.”
    Discussions ongoing over primary school database
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #160
    alloverbartheshouting alloverbartheshouting is offline
    alloverbartheshouting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    8,327

    Quote Originally Posted by lostexpectation View Post
    another similar issue

    Poor response from schools to social context survey



    committee discussion https://www.kildarestreet.com/commit...0-08a.101#g138

    so the schools have to go round asking parents all these intrusive questions



    To ask the Minister for Education and Skills the reason her Department is putting the onus on teachers to gather information regarding the economic circumstances of parents for the educational resource centre questionnaire which forms part of the basis for the allocation of special educational needs teachers next year https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/...14-10-07a.1154

    the data issue are for the school principals collecting the data, in terms of should they be forced to ask them

    RTÉ Radio Player news at one piece on it
    That one did cause huge problems as there was no permission sought from parents to provide such information. By this, I mean that while there was no individual information provided against PPSNs, principals were asked to estimate the number of children from families with full medical cards, GP-only medical cards, living in social housing, reliant upon social welfare, etc. This was all done based on the research and knowledge of the principal. Now, if schools chose to gather this data via questionnaires or interviews then they could do so.

    When asked for guidance about how to possibly determine the question about social housing, the really helpful response was to use Google Maps...

    We did send back the form but "not known" was written as the answer to most questions.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 16 of 22 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment