MML Statistics

Robert Y Chen made this Freedom of Information request to University of Cambridge

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was successful.

Dear University of Cambridge,

The Freedom of Information Act (herein 'the Act') gives members of the public the right to request data from public bodies and institutions. For the purposes of the Act, your institution - the University of Cambridge - is deemed to be a public institution. Accordingly, we request the following information regarding applicants in the 2018 cycle for "Modern and Medieval Languages (R800)" and "History (V100)"

(1) Please provide for each candidate, identified by name or, if your institution seeks to apply an exemption under s 40 of the act, a unique randomly generated number:--

i. GCSE results presented as a string (where GCSE results are absent, please provide an explanation, for example, "International"/"Not on Personal Statement", etc.
ii. Interview test score
iii. Pre-interview or at-interview test score
iv. The local authority of residence (defined as either the second tier where two-tiered local government exists or the single tier in a unitary area)
v. Achieved GCE grades or other (UMS desirable)
vi. Predicted A-level grades or other, as provided by each applicant, inclusion or exclusion of unaccepted GCEs, i.e. 'General Studies, is irrelevant for the purposes of this request and is left at your discretion.
vii. Aggregated candidate score, based on the university's metric

Please present your data tabulated in a manner which allows the cross-comparison of individual applicants's individual statistics.

Please reply within the statutory timeframe, public holidays considered. Any exemptions applied should be justified, providing us with relevant public interest tests.

If your institution wishes to pursue noncompliance with this request on the grounds provided by s 12 of the Act, please fulfill the request chronologically until the point where the exemption would apply.

Robert Y Chen

(By email)

FOI, University of Cambridge

This is to acknowledge receipt of your request for information. Your reference number is given in the subject line of this email. We will respond on or before 30 January 2018.

Regards,

Freedom of Information Office
University of Cambridge
Registrary's Office, The Old Schools
Trinity Lane, Cambridge, CB2 1TN
T: (01223 7)64142
F: (01223 3)32332
E: [email address]

show quoted sections

FOI, University of Cambridge

1 Attachment

Further to your request for information, please find attached the University’s response.

Regards,

Freedom of Information Office
University of Cambridge
Registrary's Office, The Old Schools
Trinity Lane, Cambridge, CB2 1TN
T: (01223 7)64142
F: (01223 3)32332
E: [email address]

show quoted sections

FOI, University of Cambridge

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Chen,

Some data protection concerns have been raised with the University with regard to the dataset we disclosed to you on 30 January 2018. Following consultation with the ICO and What Do They Know site administrators, we are accordingly issuing a revised response and revised dataset in reply to your request and this is attached. We have asked the What Do They Know site administrators to remove the original response from their site.

Regards,

Freedom of Information Office
University of Cambridge
Registrary’s Office, The Old Schools
Trinity Lane, Cambridge, CB2 1TN
T: (01223 7)64142
F: (01223 3)32332
E: [email address]

show quoted sections

Matt Knight left an annotation ()

We ceased publishing this thread between 25 September 2018 and 13 October 2018 following a request from the Information Commissioner asking us to substitute the data in the initial response with the replacement provided by the University. We did not understand the reasoning behind the Information Commissioner's request. We reviewed the situation and asked the Information Commissioner to reconsider their request, and to explain the basis of it." An officer from the Information Commissioner's office wrote to WhatDoTheyKnow on the 13th of November 2018 to say:

'...on balance I do not consider that any potential detriment to the data subjects outweighs the legitimate interests of WDTK and the wider public who might view the dataset.... It appears that WDTK has complied with its data protection obligations in the particular circumstances of this case'.

-Matt
WhatDoTheyKnow.com Volunteer