Professional Skill Courses at the Graduate School

The request was partially successful.

Dear Imperial College London,

I have the following questions related to the Graduate School:

1. What are the results (i.e. list of all responses and summary of the results, if a summary is available) of the last two PhD Wellbeing Surveys?
2. What feedback has been given by students attending Graduate School courses through online feedback forms? Please send a list of all responses and summary, if a summary is available.
3. How does the Graduate School monitor how its teaching contributes towards the goals set out in its mission statement and strategy? Please send available data that demonstrates how the Graduate School's teaching contributes towards the goals set out in its mission statement and strategy, if such data is available.
4. Who servers on CQSD, PPDC, and CDT/DTP? Who of these are members (students, administrators, or academics) of the Imperial College Mathematics Department?
5. Who serves on the external advisory board?
6. Have Imperial College students delivered Graduate School courses in the past? If so, please send course information (course title, course date, course summary), course evaluations, and reports, including internal reports, mentioning any such course.

Thank you very much for the help.

Yours faithfully,
Mx Platt

IMPFOI, Imperial College London

Dear Mx Platt,

This is to acknowledge receipt of your request below, made under the Freedom of Information Act. The College aims to respond to your request within twenty working days of receipt of your request.

We will contact you again in due course.

Kind regards,

Freedom of Information Team
Imperial College London

show quoted sections

Dear IMPFOI,

I hope you are doing well. Can you give an estimate as to when you will send an answer to my request?

Yours sincerely,

Mx Platt

IMPFOI, Imperial College London

7 Attachments

Dear Mx Platt

 

Thank you for your recent Freedom of Information request.  Please find
below the College's response to your questions.

 

1. What are the results (i.e. list of all responses and summary of the
results, if a summary is available) of the last two PhD Wellbeing Surveys?

 

Please find attached the following documents:

 

o 2014 Wellbeing survey brief results (pdf)
o 2018 HEFCE Wellbeing Survey Imperial results (Excel)

 

Please note that the survey experience and methodology changed
significantly between the 2014 and 2018 surveys.

 

Please also see the following information regarding the two surveys:

 

[1]https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperia...

[2]https://re.ukri.org/documents/2018/menta...  

 

2. What feedback has been given by students attending Graduate School
courses through online feedback forms? Please send a list of all responses
and summary, if a summary is available

 

Please find attached the following Word documents:

o 2017-18 Report on evaluation of Doctoral programme courses
o 2017-18 Report on evaluation of Masters programme courses
o 2017-18 Report on evaluation of Retreats
o 2017-18 Report on evaluation of FUMO [Finish Up and Move On]

 

Please note that free-text comments made by course attendees have been
redacted where they were included in order to protect the identity of the
respondents.  The quantity of comments is noted in each case, and the
reports discuss the overall tone of the feedback.

 

Information is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information
Act, Section 40(2), if it is personal data and releasing the information
would breach one of the data protection principles contained in the Data
Protection Act 2018/General Data Protection Regulations. Free text
comments could identify the respondent and therefore amount to personal
data.

The first data protection principle requires us to be fair in the way we
handle a person’s information. It would not be regarded as fair to
disclose information that the individual would not reasonably expect to be
made public. It is important for the College and its students to be able
to trust the information that feedback surveys provide.  A key part of
this is the guarantee of anonymity.  It is not in the interest of the
College or its students to limit student participation in any feedback
surveys due to concern that their responses may at any time be published.

 

3. How does the Graduate School monitor how its teaching contributes
towards the goals set out in its mission statement and strategy? Please
send available data that demonstrates how the Graduate School's teaching
contributes towards the goals set out in its mission statement and
strategy, if such data is available

 

The Graduate School’s new strategy and mission statement was implemented
in 2017-18 and will be reviewed in five years' time.  However, each
strategic area has a framework by which its goals can be monitored.  These
are reviewed regularly by the relevant Graduate School committee.

 

Please see here for further information about the Graduate School’s
mission:
[3]https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...

 

Further information about the Committees is available here:
[4]https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...

 

4. Who servers on CQSD, PPDC, and CDT/DTP? Who of these are members
(students, administrators, or academics) of the Imperial College
Mathematics Department?

 

The membership of each of these committees can be viewed online:

 

PPDC:
[5]https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...

 

The Department of Mathematics is represented at PPDC by the Faculty of
Natural Science representative.

 

CQSD:
[6]https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...

 

This is an internal management committee so there are no representatives
at CQSD from the Department of Mathematics.

 

CDT DTP Governance Committee:
[7]https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...

 

The CDTs where the Department of Mathematics are involved will be
represented here.

 

5. Who serves on the external advisory board?

 

Please see information here regarding the External Advisory Board:
[8]https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...

 

6. Have Imperial College students delivered Graduate School courses in the
past? If so, please send course information (course title, course date,
course summary), course evaluations, and reports, including internal
reports, mentioning any such course

 

Please find attached Graduate Teaching Assistant courses (Word document). 
This details the courses provided by GTAs in the last year, including
Learning Outcomes and a description of the course.

 

Please note that the Graduate School has now appointed two new members of
staff to take forward the delivery of research computing skills workshops.

 

Evaluations and related material will be incorporated into the reports as
provided for question 2 above.

 

If you are unhappy with the way that we have handled your request, you can
ask us to conduct a review. Please make your representation in writing
within 40 days of the date you received this response. If you remain
dissatisfied with how Imperial College has handled your request you may
then approach the [9]Information Commissioner’s Office. 

 

Kind regards, 

 

Freedom of Information Team

[10]Imperial College London 

 

 

References

Visible links
1. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperia...
2. https://re.ukri.org/documents/2018/menta...
3. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...
4. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...
5. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...
6. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...
7. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...
8. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...
9. https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/off...
10. http://www.imperial.ac.uk/

Dear IMPFOI,

Thank you very much for the message.

The document "2017 18 Report on evaluation of Doctoral programme courses.docx" cannot be opened using Microsoft Office 365 Word or using LibreOffice Writer. Could you provide the document in a form that can be processed using common software such as Microsoft Office 365 Word, or LibreOffice Writer, or Adobe Reader?

And some of the links you provided contained additional characters at the end which made them dysfunctional. For future reference I note the correct links here:
PPDC: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...
CQSD: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...
CDT DTP Governance Committee: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/pg/grad...

Thank you very much for your help.

Yours sincerely,

Mx Platt

IMPFOI, Imperial College London

2 Attachments

Dear Mx Platt,

I am sorry you had problems opening the document. I have saved it using "compatibility mode" so it should now be compatible with the latest version of MS Word. Also as a pdf just in case you still have problems.

Yo

Anita Hunt
Access to Information Manager
Central Secretariat
Imperial College London  I South Kensington Campus I Faculty Building Level 4 I London SW7 2AZ
Tel: +44 (0)20 7594 5107

show quoted sections

Dear IMPFOI,

Thank you very much for your swift reply, I can now open the file without problems.

In my original request I asked: "2. What feedback has been given by students attending Graduate School courses through online feedback forms? Please send a list of all responses and summary, if a summary is available." You answered this question by sending four reports from 2017-18. You did not send a list of all responses.

Can you please send a list of all responses that have been given by students attending Graduate School courses through online feedback forms? I am particularly interested in responses from PhD students from 2017-18 and 2018-19, including free text comments.

Yours sincerely,

Mx Platt

IMPFOI, Imperial College London

Dear Mx Platt,

I am sorry that we did not make it clear in our response that we are unable to release the details of individual responses, especially free text comments, as it might be possible to identify the individual respondents from that information. If it is possible to identify an individual from the information (or the information combined with other information) then the information is personal information. Information is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, Section 40(2), if it is personal data and releasing the information would breach one of the data protection principles contained in the Data Protection Act 2018/General Data Protection Regulations. The first data protection principle requires us to be fair in the way we handle a person’s information. It would not be fair to disclose information that the individual would not reasonably expect to be made public. It is important for the College and its students to be able to trust the information that feedback surveys provide. A key part of this is the guarantee of anonymity. It is not in the interest of the College or its students to limit student participation in any feedback surveys due to concern that their responses may at any time be published.

Yours,

Freedom of Information Team
Imperial College London 

show quoted sections

Dear Imperial College London,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Imperial College London's handling of my FOI request 'Professional Skill Courses at the Graduate School'.

I believe that section 40(2) was applied incorrectly and the requested information is not exempt under section 40(2). Section 40(2) is about personal data. Student feedback texts only contain a small amount of personal data. I believe that Imperial College is still obligated to provide student feedback texts after redacting personal information.

Please review your decision to not disclose the requested information.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/p...

Yours faithfully,

Mx Platt

IMPFOI, Imperial College London

Dear Mx Platt,

This is to acknowledge receipt of your internal review request below, made under the Freedom of Information Act. The College will respond to your request by 3 December 2019.

Yours,

Freedom of Information Team
Imperial College London 

show quoted sections

IMPFOI, Imperial College London

Dear Mx Platt,

Thank you for your internal review request. You submitted a Freedom of
Information Act request on 18 August asking for various information
including:

What are the results (i.e. list of all responses and summary of the
results, if a summary is available) of the last two PhD Wellbeing Surveys?

The College provided various documents that summarised the outcomes of two
wellbeing surveys (conducted in 2014 and 2018). The College did not
provide a list of all responses; we explained in subsequent correspondence
that we could not release information about individual responses because
the details of individual responses, especially free text comments, might
enable the identification of the individual respondents.

 

In your internal review request, you stated:

 

I believe that section 40(2) was applied incorrectly and the requested
information is not exempt under section 40(2). Section 40(2) is about
personal data. Student feedback texts only contain a small amount of
personal data. I believe that Imperial College is still obligated to
provide student feedback texts after redacting personal information.

 

We have no further information available about the 2018 survey, we have
given you all of the information that we hold (the survey was conducted by
a third party on our behalf and we were not given the raw data). We have a
spreadsheet of the responses to the 2014 survey.

Our view, having reviewed the data in that spreadsheet, is that the risk
of a person being able to identify the respondents remains, even having
removed the names of those who responded. The questionnaire asked for
quite specific information about what stage in the programme the
respondents had reached. For example, options included “Approx 18 months
onwards (full-time equivalent) - you have completed the Late Stage
Review”. Our usual approach when looking at releasing statistical
information about students would be to supress numbers of 5 or fewer. As
the answers given are cross-referenced to the stage of the PhD the student
had reached and the low number of respondents, there are no situations
where more than 5 people selected a particular answer. It is our view that
someone who had some knowledge of the College’s PhD students might be able
to identify the individuals involved which would involve the College
disclosing sensitive information about the respondents.

Information amounts to personal information if it would be possible to
identify the individual from that information or from that information and
other information that may be available to the recipient of the
information. Where small numbers are involved, the possibility that the
receiver might be able to link the information to an individual is
increased.  

The first data protection principle requires us to be fair in the way we
handle a person’s information. It would not be regarded as fair to
disclose information that the individual would not reasonably expect to be
made public. Our students would not expect that the information that they
have given to us in response to a wellbeing survey, which was provided on
an understanding of confidentiality and provides quite sensitive
information about the students, would subsequently be released to the
public. When considering fairness, we need to look at the public interest
in disclosure of the information that you are seeking and compare that
with the public interest in protecting the confidentiality of our PhD
students’ responses to the surveys. I am aware of no public interest
grounds for making the actual response data available to you. You have
been provided with various summary documents which tell you the overall
results. That information is sufficient to satisfy any public interest in
this matter. The need to ensure the confidentiality of the responses means
that the balance of fairness in this case rests with withholding the
further detail you have asked for.

 

Having reviewed the College’s original response, your request for a
review, and relevant ICO guidance and decisions, I am satisfied that the
College was correct to claim that S.40(2) applied. If you are unhappy with
the outcome of my review of your request, you have the right to complain
to the [1]Information Commissioner’s Office.  

 

 

Yours,

 

Anita Hunt

Access to Information Manager

Central Secretariat

[2]Imperial College London  I South Kensington Campus I Faculty Building
Level 4 I London SW7 2AZ

Tel: +44 (0)20 7594 5107

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

show quoted sections

Dear IMPFOI,

Thank you very much for the explanation, I greatly appreciate the detailed response. There is one bit of it that I don't understand, and I am grateful if you can clarify it.

In my original request I requested: "What feedback has been given by students attending Graduate School courses through online feedback forms? Please send a list of all responses and summary, if a summary is available." You replied to this with: "Free text comments could identify the respondent and therefore amount to personal data" and did not provide a list of all responses. On 3 November I requested an internal review of this decision and suggested to possibility of "redacting personal information".

In your message from 3 December you wrote: "the risk of a person being able to identify the respondents remains, even having removed the names of those who responded." You did not comment on the possibility of redacting the remaining personal information. In the case of the 2014 wellbeing survey, this could be done by removing all fields from the spreadsheet except for the free text answers, and then removing personal information from the free text answers.

Could you explain why it is not possible to redact all personal information from the requested records, rather than just redacting the names of those who responded?

I am grateful for your help in this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Mx Platt

IMPFOI, Imperial College London

Dear Mx Platt,

Free text answers to a survey may not contain any redactable personal information in themselves. However, it could be possible for someone, especially someone who is or was at the College, to deduce who the person making the comment was from the comments made. The only way to ensure that the respondent could not be identified, is to withhold the comments. It is important that respondents feel confident that any replies they submit are treated as confidential, otherwise people may not be willing in future to give frank feedback. The people who completed this survey were not told that the responses would be published on the internet, we believe that to make them available to you (which in effect is publishing them online) could identify the individuals and would breach the requirement of the first principle of the Data Protection Act, which requires us to process personal data fairly and lawfully.

Yours,

Freedom of Information Team
Imperial College London 

show quoted sections