Chariho
is among the five worst Rhode Island schools for spying on students
By Marcela Betancur,
Policy Associate, ACLU of Rhode Island
However, there is one
concerning matter that many of them are not aware they should be worried about: their
school spying on them while using their school-loaned laptop.
Most Rhode Island
school districts participate in “1-1” programs — in which third parties provide
free laptop devices to students for the school year.
While that should be a
good thing, the details are a bit more complicated. We recently found out that
most of the state’s participating schools give themselves the ability to
remotely spy on their students through these loaned devices.
We published our
findings early this month in a report titled “High School
Non-Confidential: How School-Loaned Computers May Be Peering Into Your Home.”
The report found that more than 60 percent of Rhode Island school districts today participate in the 1-1 program. It also discovered that a majority of those districts allow school officials or administrators to remotely access the device — while a student is at home, without their knowledge, and without any suspicion of misconduct.
We know from an outrageous
Pennsylvania case,
in which school administrators were found to have activated webcams to spy on
students in their homes, that this obvious privacy concern is not hypothetical.
Yet only six districts specifically stated in their policies that they would
not remotely access the webcams or microphones of devices distributed through
the programs.
Consider how creepy it
is for any school official to be able to remotely and secretly peer over your
shoulder while you’re in the safety of your home. And webcams aren’t the extent
of the threat.
Without proper
policies, schools can also access the keystroke and browsing histories of
students participating in the programs. George Orwell’s “1984” is standard
required reading in schools.
Administrators would do well to revisit it.
We also found that
many schools equate the blanket access to computers that their policies allow
to their right to inspect student lockers.
This is a problematic
analogy because lockers are actually in school at all times.
School-loaned devices
are designed for portability — and students are encouraged to use them at home.
In addition to the
obvious Fourth Amendment implications of such a search, there are First
Amendment concerns as well.
Unlike a locker, a
search of a computer can reveal tons of documents, files, messages, social
media activity, and other classic elements of “speech.”
We’ve also seen that
invasions of privacy chill free
speech and free
association — both critical to development and effective learning.
We’re not against
school-loaned devices, but the policies that govern these programs need some
work when it comes to civil liberties.
In denying students
their right to privacy, we are limiting their learning and teaching them that
they are all suspects in the eyes of authority.
Additionally, it
shouldn’t be the case that wealthier students who can afford to use their own
devices get to keep their privacy, while other students are forced to take the
device and surrender their privacy — or keep their privacy, turn down the
device, and hurt their education.
No one’s privacy
should be conditioned on their socioeconomic status.
There are ways to fix
this. The ACLU has written a model bill that any state can adapt to
protect its students. In Rhode Island, a bill that largely mirrors the model
bill has been introduced in the state legislature.
It would limit when an
administrator or third party can remotely access devices to instances where
there is reasonable belief that misconduct, as spelled out in school policies,
took place, or if a warrant is present.
No child should have
to trade away privacy in exchange for access to cutting-edge technology.
Schools should be taking the lead in protecting their students