April 30, 2004
House Calendar 32, Report from the Finance Committee
SB 333-FN, establishing a unique pupil identification system. OUGHT TO PASS WITH AMENDMENT
Rep. Robert K. Dodge for Finance: The purpose of this bill is to establish a unique pupil
identification (UPI) number for each public school pupil. Although the prime impetus for
UPI is the reporting required by the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), there are other
useful reasons for this number:
1) better accounting for student transfers between schools;
2) help for administrators to perform gains-based analysis;
3) more accurate tracking of dropout information;
4) aggregating data at the department level by keeping inputs anonymous, which also saves
school districts time and labor;
5) and lastly, delivering more accurate and timely data to the people of New Hampshire.
After the bill came to Finance, changes were made at the instance of the Education Committee
to protect pupils’ privacy interests with respect to the UPI and personally identifiable data.
The amendment also makes it clear that only federal funds will be used to pay for the program
($400,000 in FY 05 and $100,000 each year thereafter) and that any contracts required will go
through the approval process of Governor and Council and Fiscal Committee. Vote 15-7.
May 5, 2004
The House accepted the Finance Committee's recommendation on a voice vote.
May 6, 2004
The Senate concurred with the House amendments, as moved by the bill's prime sponsor, Sen O'Hearn.
The bill now goes to the governor.
I believe that the new section of definitions addresses the concerns of home educators,
and limits the assignment of UPI numbers to public school students:
193-E:4 Definitions. In this subdivision:
IV. “Unique pupil identifier” means a randomly generated number assigned to a
public school pupil in order to gather pupil level data.
A quick perusal of the bill leads me to believe that a home educated student who takes the state assessment test would not be assigned a UPI number. I need to do further research to see if the definition of "public school pupil" includes home educated students who take courses at public schools.
The amended language also clarifies that the UPI number is only used until high school
graduation (previous language could have had it in use through college):
193-E:5 Unique Pupil Identification.
(c) The unique pupil identifier shall be requested and maintained by the local school
district. The unique pupil identifier shall remain in the pupil’s file throughout his or her
elementary and secondary academic career in New Hampshire.
There have been *major* changes to the bill that address privacy issues. According to the House Finance Committee secretary, both Rep. Kurk (Finance Committee Chair; came to testify before the House Education Committee about his concerns) and Rep Balboni (House Education Committee member; chaired the working subcommittee for this bill) did a lot of work on this bill while it was in the Finance Committee. The report says that the changes were made "at the instance [insistance?] of the [House] Education Committee". The question arises: since the Education Committee already had a shot at amending it, and its report of Ought To Pass with Amendment was sent to the House with a vote of 11-0, what happened between April 15 and April 28 to cause such concern among Education Committee members? Another question is whether the provisions protecting privacy are so restrictive that they conflict with a family's right to access a student's records under FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act).
An interesting note regarding financing of the measure:
193-E:5 Unique Pupil Identification.
I. The department of education shall, using federal funds only, implement and maintain
a unique pupil identification system...
As this legislation is written, if the DOE does not get a grant from the federal government,
the system will not be implemented.
If future federal funding for this dries up,
the system would have no funding, and would have to be mothballed.