IB Diploma Programme coordinators handle records that can affect results, university applications, access arrangements, and student welfare. IB student data privacy therefore requires a documented system for collecting necessary information, restricting access, checking accuracy, using approved transfer channels, applying retention rules, and responding quickly to incidents.
The IB defines responsibilities for schools, but privacy law varies by jurisdiction. This guide provides general data-handling guidance, not legal advice. Coordinators should apply it alongside current IB assessment procedures, school policy, and instructions from the school’s data protection officer or equivalent privacy lead.
What counts as an assessment record?
An assessment record includes any recorded information connected to a student’s participation in, performance on, or administration of assessment. It is not limited to final grades.
Examples include:
- Candidate names, numbers, registration details, and dates of birth
- Predicted grades, component marks, teacher comments, and moderation records
- Internal Assessments, Extended Essays, TOK essays, oral recordings, portfolios, and scripts held by the school
- Access arrangement applications and supporting medical evidence
- Academic integrity investigations and related correspondence
- Enquiry upon results requests, appeals, and result-release records
- Spreadsheets, emails, backups, printed lists, and handwritten notes containing assessment information
Some records create greater risks. Access arrangement evidence may reveal health or disability information, while academic integrity files can contain serious allegations. Such material needs stricter access controls and should not be placed in ordinary departmental folders merely because it relates to assessment.
What the IB requires and what local law adds
The current IB privacy policy explains that coordinators and school administrators may submit personal data for registration, assessment, accommodations, academic misconduct investigations, and results services. Staff submitting information must have authority to do so and comply with applicable privacy law.
The Rules for IB World Schools make schools responsible for accurate data transfers and secure assessment administration. The 2026 DP general regulations state that schools must securely store internally and externally assessed student work until the examination session closes, identified as 15 September for May sessions and 15 March for November sessions.
These dates do not require schools to delete every related record immediately. Local education, safeguarding, limitation, or records laws may require longer retention. Schools therefore need schedules distinguishing candidate work from registration data, grade records, access evidence, complaints, and incident files.
Under UK GDPR principles, schools must consider lawful processing, transparency, purpose limitation, data minimisation, accuracy, security, and storage limitation. In the United States, FERPA guidance explains protections and rights concerning education records at covered institutions. Other jurisdictions impose different requirements, so coordinators must identify the rules applying to their school.
A secure assessment-record lifecycle
Records are easier to protect when each follows a defined lifecycle rather than accumulating across personal drives, inboxes, and paper files.
| Stage | Coordinator’s control | Practical question |
|---|---|---|
| Collection | Collect information for a defined purpose | Is every requested field necessary? |
| Recording | Verify identity, subject, level, and session | Is this linked to the correct candidate? |
| Storage | Restrict access in approved systems | Who can view, download, or alter it? |
| Sharing | Confirm authority, recipient, and minimum content | Does the recipient need the whole file? |
| Retention | Apply the relevant IB and school rule | What event starts the retention period? |
| Disposal | Delete or destroy securely | Can the information be reconstructed? |
Create a data map listing each record category, storage location, owner, users, purpose, transfers, and deletion date. The UK government’s school data-protection guidance provides a useful model.
Access, storage, and accuracy controls
Access should reflect professional need, not seniority or convenience. A subject teacher may require marks and student work for their class but not another student’s medical evidence. Examinations officers may need scheduling information without unrestricted access to pastoral records.
Use role-based permissions and review them before registration, coursework submission, examinations, and results release. Remove access promptly when staff change roles or leave, and avoid shared accounts because they prevent reliable accountability.
Protect every copy, not only the main database. Exported spreadsheets, email attachments, downloads, printed mark sheets, and backups can expose information even when the official system is secure. Use school-approved storage, multi-factor authentication where available, encrypted devices, locked paper storage, and confidential disposal.
Accuracy is also a privacy responsibility. Use second-person checks for registration, subject or level changes, access arrangements, predicted-grade exports, coursework attribution, and result requests. Before uploading or disclosing a record, verify the student identifier, document version, recipient, and purpose.
Sharing records and evaluating platforms
Before disclosure, establish who is requesting the information, why it is needed, what authority permits sharing, and what minimum content will meet the purpose. Consent may sometimes be required, but it is not the only possible legal basis. The school’s privacy lead should determine which basis applies.
Use IBIS and other designated IB channels for their intended functions. Personal email, consumer file-sharing services, and informal messaging should not replace approved systems. Universities, tutors, parents, researchers, and outside agencies do not automatically receive assessment records simply because they request them.
Educational software also requires formal review. Schools should examine data categories, purposes, hosting locations, international transfers, encryption, authentication, subprocessors, retention, deletion, incident notification, and whether content is used for analytics or AI training. Staff should remove unnecessary names, candidate numbers, school identifiers, and comments before uploading work, even to an approved platform.
RevisionDojo’s guidance on coursework privacy settings and sharing IB assignments with AI tools outlines useful review questions. Schools considering the platform should also examine the current RevisionDojo privacy policy, student data and platform security overview, and coordinator guide.
Retention, disposal, and incident response
Create retention rules by record category, not one blanket period. Each rule should identify the purpose, trigger date, retention period, owner, disposal method, and any legal hold suspending deletion. Remove duplicate convenience copies when they are no longer needed, even if the authoritative record must remain.
Deletion should cover shared folders, downloads, collaboration spaces, and backups according to technical procedures. Cross-cut shred paper and securely erase or destroy storage media. Replacing names with codes is only pseudonymisation when re-identification remains possible.
A breach can include sending grades to the wrong parent, losing a laptop, exposing candidate numbers, or granting excessive dashboard access. If an incident occurs:
- Contain it: revoke links, disable access, or recover documents.
- Record facts: identify affected students, records, recipients, and timing.
- Escalate promptly: notify the privacy lead, IT team, safeguarding lead, and senior leadership.
- Assess obligations: determine whether affected people, regulators, or the IB require notification.
- Correct the cause: change permissions, processes, training, or technical controls.
Conclusion
Strong IB student data privacy depends on consistent routines: collect less, verify carefully, restrict access, use approved channels, retain records under documented rules, and report incidents immediately. Coordinators must connect IB requirements with local privacy law and school safeguarding, cybersecurity, and records-management procedures.
RevisionDojo resources can support discussions about secure digital assessment workflows, although each school remains responsible for approving tools and configuring access. Begin with the coordinator guide, privacy policy, and coursework privacy guidance when reviewing digital feedback platforms.
Sources and referenced URLs
- IB privacy policy
- IB Rules for IB World Schools
- IB 2026 Diploma Programme general regulations
- UK school data-protection guidance
- US Department of Education FERPA guidance
- RevisionDojo coordinator guide
- RevisionDojo coursework privacy settings
- RevisionDojo guidance on assignments and AI tools
- RevisionDojo student data and privacy overview
- RevisionDojo privacy policy