Slashdot Mirror
Students and Bodies Tracked Via RFID Tags
AT writes "The Brittan School District in Sutter County, California, is requiring students to carry RFID-tagged identity badges on them at all times. Readers are currently installed at the doors to all classrooms. Readers were removed from bathrooms when parents protested. The school district is meeting next week to consider parents objections to the system." Relatedly (but not), Leilah writes "The University of California is considering using RFID tags or bar codes to help track their collection of bodies and parts. They are attempting to reopen their body donation program which has been on hold since spring 2004 due to disappearing parts - they've previously had legal trouble over improper disposal as well."
I am getting the impression from reading rants on Slashdot that people think if you have an RFID badge that someone could be sitting at some screen watching a little dot represent a person as they move across a building. Watching the little dot move step-by-step down the building.
Yes, this is an invasion of privacy but this is not what RFID does. RFID is an inventory control method. Almost always, an [unpowered] RFID badge must be swiped within a foot a reader - and even then you sometimes have to swipe it once or twice to get a reading. RFID cannot and does not provide a method of tracking exact locations.
is what the school gets in return. This article points out that the school got some computer equipment donated to them. However, according to the version of this story at MSNBC:
"InCom has paid the school several thousand dollars for agreeing to the experiment, and has promised a royalty from each sale if the system takes off, said the company's co-founder, Michael Dobson, who works as a technology specialist in the town's high school. Brittan's technology aide also works part-time for InCom."
Seems more like this is less of a "it's for the safety of the kids" and more of a "let's make money by tagging our kids like cattle."
"1. Students have rights, even in school."
But they are not the same rights adults are accustomed to. Here's blurb with some of the key cases listed:
"All people in the United States are guaranteed this right by the Constitution. Students, however, do not have this right to the same extent as adults. This is because public schools are required to protect all students at the school. The major aspects of this right are speech and dress. Both the right to speech and dress are not absolute in public high schools. According to the American Civil Liberties Union: "You (students) have a right to express your opinions as long as you do so in a way that doesn't 'materially and substantially' dirsupt classes or other school activities. If you hold a protest on the school steps and block the entrance to the building, school officials can stop you. They can probably also stop you from using language they think is 'vulgar or indecent'("Ask Sybil Libert" ACLU 1998). Public schools can also restrict student dress. In 1987 in Harper v. Edgewood Board of Education the court upheld "a dress regulation that required students to 'dress in conformity wit hthe accepted standards of the community'"(Whalen 72). This means that schools can restrict clothing with vulgarities and such, but they cannot restrict religious clothing: "School officials must accomodate student's religious beliefs by permitting the wearing of religious clothing when such clothing must be worn during the school day as a part of the student's religious practice"(Whalen 78)."
Here's some other stuff:
"Veronia v. Acton 1995
In Veronia v. Acton the issue concerned the drug testing of athletes at an Oregon Public High School. In 1995, drug abuse was a major problem in Veronia, Oregon, and the school district reacted by implementing a policy of drug testing all student athletes. When a member of the Acton family had signed up for athletics in the school district, the parents did not sign the testing agreement. They believed this policy violated their son's privacy. The United States Supreme Court felt that this policy of drug testing was constitutional and that by voluntarily becoming an athlete the person gave up some privacy (Harrison and Gilbert 175). These cases helped all those involved with public high schools know exactly the rights of public school students."
I agree with 2 and 3, though.
"That's not even wrong..." -- Wolfgang Pauli
Ban the catalytic converter!
My cousins attend UMass at Amherst. They have little "laser gun type things" that they use to sign in. You just scan your ID with the scanner and it marks you as present. Some of their classes are in lecture halls with over 400 students. They just rotate who shows up to class based on day of the week.
They already have.
Actually, since public school districts receive federal funds, there _ARE_ rights to privacy, free speech, and such as guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights - it's the same clause that applies to the colleges that accept federal funds.
However, ignorant parents and students often sign these rights away when they receive student handbooks and "behavior contracts" at the beginning of the year. The behavior contract includes clauses about "disruptive behavior" and "classroom disruptions," though no one really defines what those are. Students are usually barred from participating in extracurricular activities until said contracts are signed and returned to the school's office. If the student ever gets in trouble, the contract is brought out to remind the student what a good little sheep they agreed to be.
The legality of the contract is binding, as the school requires both the parent(s) and the student to sign it, thus circumventing any age-releases if the student's a minor.
Most schools are even starting to do this at the primary level.
I'll wholeheartedly agree with your comment about parents not being strict enough. I taught after-school computer classes for the kids at the primary school where I work for a year, and one day, the four-year-old son of a fourth-grade teacher walked out of my class with the biggest grin on his face. He turned around and said, with thirty kids in the class, his mother standing RIGHT behind him, and me showing a kid how to use Firefox...
"I swear to God I'll kill you all next time!"
He walks off, and no apology was forthwith from either him or his mother, and NO disciple was had in front of me or later when I brought it up with his mother (he was removed from my class permanently for that; I don't take crap from kids, ESPECIALLY not when I'm teaching others).
And don't think that all private institutions are good. Several charter schools down here have been horrible, not just in financial terms, but in terms of the discipline; one I attended (West Houston Charter School) regularly had violence in it (kids making homemade flamethrowers and using them on other kids and computers, beatings, and of course the ever-popular swirlie), thefts, and teachers not giving a damn about the kids.
Disclaimer: I am a network administrator at a public elementary school in Texas. I have firsthand knowledge of this, as I work for the district I went to school in.
Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
FYI. There is no constitutional guarantee of driving priviledges. You are free to fight the horrible restriction of seat belts. Just don't drive. Insurance companies should not have to pay for injuries caused by someone not wearing a seat belt. You are free to risk your life, but don't expect the rest of society to pay for your mistakes.
Flame away!!
I also had a single mom, and while it could be argued that the software company I work for now isn't "good," it's an excellent job. I don't steal cars either, and again - no kids that I can't support.
I think the reason people are weirded out by this, but not by paper attendance lists and other traditional methods of getting kids to go to class, is that technology has a tendency to be regarded as absolute and infallible, and its records are used instead of human judgment. This creates the "well, the computer says so. the computer's never wrong" situation which popped up in old jokes about banks etc.
You can argue with the principal that you forgot to sign the attendence sheet but what if they rely on the sensors and you later find out your tag wasn't working, or was sitting inside your metal pencil case or something. Odds are they won't listen, because there'll be a "zero-tolerance policy" in effect which forces them to punish you. I had a rough time in high school but at least the admin didn't treat us like incarcerated criminals.
And yes, this sort of thing WILL create a generation of people who think technological intrusion is "normal". Maybe not desirable, but normal, the way we all hate to pay taxes but don't demand they be rescinded. And thus the ratchet tightens.
Freedom: "I won't!"