Senators Question School Surveillance Startups on Civil Rights
Online education during the pandemic led to unprecedented levels of digital surveillance of children, as schools rushed to find ways to keep track of students.
March 30, 2022 at 12:49 PM
4 minute read
School surveillance companies are not doing enough to determine whether their products unfairly target minority groups, according to a report released by U.S. Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey.
The Democratic senators sent questions to four of the most prominent companies that make education software monitoring students' online activity. The resulting report about their findings said that parents and schools are not fully informed about the extent and risks associated with the tracking software made by GoGuardian, Gaggle.Net Inc., Bark Technologies Inc. and Securly Inc. The report also said that because the products could increase students' contact with law enforcement, the software "may be exacerbating the school-to-prison pipeline."
Online education during the pandemic led to unprecedented levels of digital surveillance of children, as schools rushed to find ways to keep track of students, Bloomberg Businessweek reported in October. Private equity-backed GoGuardian, officially named Liminex Inc., is one of the most popular makers of education surveillance tools. Its software helps teachers and administrators track what students are doing on school-issued devices, and sometimes personal devices when kids are logged into school accounts.
The senators' report says none of the companies has assessed whether their algorithms are biased or track whether they over-target students of color or LGBTQ students. Each of the companies told the senators' offices that they do not study the effects of their products on specific populations due to privacy concerns. For example, GoGuardian does not collect demographic information in order "to maximize student privacy," the company said in a letter replying to the senators' inquiries.
The report authors pushed back on the idea that the companies were striving for minimal data collection. "These excuses for the companies' failure do not make sense," the senators say. The companies are already collecting sensitive and personally identifiable information about students, according to the report, "so they could easily pair that sensitive information with student demographics to better understand if their product is inflicting disproportionate harm."
The report raised concerns that students could be penalized for their activity when not in school. GoGuardian told senators that only about one-third of schools use a feature that disables monitoring outside of classroom hours and on weekends. The company also said it sees peak volume for alerts about student activity between 5 p.m. and 6 p.m., indicating the company is identifying students' activities after-hours.
In letters to the senators responding to their inquiries, the companies stressed that their products are meant to protect students from harmful content online. The software "is not intended to be used for discipline or punitive purposes," Gaggle wrote in its response to the senators. "The goal is to find any indication of a child in crisis, so that a tragedy can be prevented."
The companies' responses also reveal how popular tools to track students' online activity have become. GoGuardian said it has 6,700 schools or districts using Admin, its web filtering system, with 500 schools using Beacon, its automated alert system that assesses the risk level students may pose to themselves or others. Bark said its free product, Bark for Schools, which filters websites, is used by more than 2,900 schools or districts with more than 5.5 million students. And Gaggle said 1,500 school districts use its service.
The senators recommended in the report that the government craft guidelines on what schools should consider when implementing surveillance tools as part of the Children's Internet Protection Act. The Department of Education should also require that local agencies track the impact of monitoring services, they said. "Absent federal action, these surveillance products may continue to put students' civil rights, safety, and privacy at risk."
Priya Anand reports for Bloomberg News.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow Uncertainty in College Athletics Compensation Could Drive Lawsuits in 2025
St. Thomas University Settles With Fired Professor Who Had Alleged Academic Freedom Violations and Discrimination
9 minute readEx-St. Thomas Univ. Law Professor Sues School Over Firing, Alleging Defamation
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Administrative Court Finds Prevailing Wage Law Applies to Workers Who Cleaned NYC Subways During Pandemic
- 2Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 3Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 4'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 5Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250