Louisiana's out of inBloom

h/t to Diane Ravitch

You may have missed this with so much else going on, but on Friday, Louisiana state superintendent John White announced to his Board of Education that he was pulling all student data out of inBloom. His memo to his board, which you can read in full here, reads in part:

We have protected student information for decades and take security very seriously. Given the concerns expressed by our most important constituents -- students and families -- I'd like a chance to discuss our policies and procedures with you before we enter into new relationships with partners providing this service

So, students and families: keep the pressure on!  You're being heard!

Note that Worcester's items regarding inBloom are on this week's agenda:

gb #3-114 -  Ms. Novick/Mr. Monfredo                    (March 28, 2013) Forward to our Legislative Delegation and the State's Joint Committee on Education the New York Assembly Bill #A06059 regarding student privacy and urge that they submit and support a similar bill in the Massachusetts Great and General Court.
gb #3-115  - Ms. Novick/Mr. Monfredo                    (March 28, 2013) Request administration ensure that the Worcester Public Schools' is abiding by 201 CMR 17.00 Standards for the Protection of Personal Information of Residents of the Commonwealth and further request administration share student information only with those who can demonstrate that they comply with 201 CMR 17.00.
gb #3-116 - Ms. Novick/Mr. Monfredo/                   Ms. Colorio/Miss Biancheria                   (March 28, 2013) Request administration notify parents of any organization or agency with whom student or family information is shared and procedures for parents denying the sharing of their child's information.
gb #3-117 - Ms. Novick/Mr. O'Connell/                   Mr. Monfredo/Ms. Colorio/                   Miss Biancheria                   (March 28, 2013) Request administration report on the agencies and organizations with whom student information is shared, the circumstances under which it is shared and the measures taken to keep such information secure.

If you're concerned about this, people of Worcester: let us know!

So let's talk student privacy

I've been putting off posting a full rundown on this inBloom thing as there's so much to say, though I've posted about it here and here. At the state Board of Education meeting on Tuesday, however, they'll be taking the topic up, so it's time to be sure we're all clear.

inBloom is the "using data to improve instruction" bit on Tuesday's agenda, and you can see that the Commissioner largely is dismissing concerns raised by the state PTA, ACLU, Citizens for Public Schools, and the Campaign for a Commercial-free Childhood regarding how the information will be used, how it will be secured, and the amount of information given to parents regarding what is being done with information having to do with their children.
inBloom is a private entity which has signed an agreement with eight states to gather and hold data on the students in their states; it will be held "in the cloud" meaning (as most of us think about it) "on the internet." Note that these systems are notoriously vulnerable to security breaches; inBloom itself states "it “cannot guarantee the security of the information stored in inBloom or that the information will not be intercepted when it is being transmitted” to third party vendors."

Think for a moment about what information a school district has on its students: certainly, names, birthdates, addresses, family information, and grades. Test scores are in there. Legal guardianship information.
Discipline records.

Both the Commissioner and inBloom are careful to cite FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, as something with which they will have to comply. As has been discussed elsewhere, however, FERPA has been substantially weakened under this administration:

...will make it increasingly easier for administrators to put the students privacy rights secondary to the commercial interests of businesses and other third parties including foundations.

..which is why inBloom exists, of course: to work with corporations who then will attempt to sell districts stuff based on our students' information.

We don't send our kids to school to be data points for vendors.This isn't why the school system exists.

The state doesn't have my permission to use my children to create or market products.
Nor does the district or the state have my permission to put my children's information up online where it is very vulnerable to being hacked.

I'm still pulling together something for an agenda on this (I'm looking, for example, at this bill which has been filed in New York state, which would put definite restrictions on data sharing), but, in the meantime, I plan to go to the Board of Education meeting on Tuesday and testify against this contract.

And if you have concerns, I would send an email to Deputy Commissioner Wulfson, and I would cc both the School Committee and your legislative delegation.

About that data-sharing

This came in this week's Commissioner's update:

Update on Shared Learning Collaborative:
ESE is engaged in a number of projects to explore ways that educators can make better use of student data to improve instruction. One of these is the Shared Learning Initiative, involving nine states, several Massachusetts districts (including Everett), the Gates Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation, and a recently established non-profit organization named inBloom. Some of you may have seen recent correspondence from the ACLU of Massachusetts and several other advocacy organizations expressing their concerns over the security and privacy of student data that might ultimately be used as part of this initiative. We believe their concerns are unfounded.

In this project (which is still very much in the research and development stage), participating school districts retain full control over how their confidential student data are used and shared. All organizations involved in the project are committed to full compliance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and other applicable data privacy and security laws. Commissioner Chester will brief the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education on this project at its March 26 meeting. In the meantime, if you have any questions or concerns, please contact Deputy Commissioner Jeff Wulfson at jwfulson@doe.mass.edu.
Two things:
1. FERPA has been greatly undercut in this Presidential administration.
2. It would seem to me that if, in fact, "participating school districts retain full control over how their confidential student data are used and shared," then we have some policy work to do.

...not to mention, of course, that the central objection--that our students are not "consumers" whose data needs to be collected so the schools can be sold things--is nowhere mentioned here.