 |
 |
giving all candidates a list of all the ID numbers of their colleagues makes a bit of a nonsense about treating it as anonymised data: you might as well include the names. Including the known ID numbers therefore must be treated as publicly identifying the students and their results. They could therefore do you if they felt they'd been exposed to humiliation, damage, distress etc by this public declaration that they were pecuniary or academic sinners. If it had not been the case that all candidates knew each others numbers it would be very different. I don't think there'd be much of a case then. John [log in to unmask] wrote: > > A real life example I'd appreciate views on from a few days ago: > > A college posts the candidate numbers of those who have passed the course. > The statement is that if you are not on the list you have failed or you owe > money for fees or library fines. Every student has a list of all the > candidate numbers. > > A student's husband goes to look at the list on the Friday, she is not > listed. The Admin offices and Exam Offices are shut. Phone calls are made > and messages left on answerphones. There is no explanation forthcoming as to > whether the student has failed or owes money. > > Eventually, on the Tuesday night, 10pm, the professor phones the student at > home to admit that she'd had problems with the computer and had missed her > off the list as her surname was the last in the alphabetical list. > > Andrew Fogden > Global IT Security & Data Protection Officer > The British Council > London > > +44 (0) 20 7389 4148 > [log in to unmask] > -- ************************************************************** * From Dr John M Gledhill * personal email: [log in to unmask] * Academic Registrar, Coventry University, * Priory St. Coventry CV1 5FB, UK * phone 024 7688 8336, fax 024 7688 8311 * for general University email use: [log in to unmask] ************************************************************** %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%