Students In UK Tracked With RFID Chips

An anonymous reader writes "Ten kids in a pilot program in the Hungerhill School in Edenthorpe, England will participate in a program that puts RFID chips in students' uniforms to keep track of their whereabouts. A group called 'Leave Them Kids Alone' is opposing the program. Bruce Schneier blogs: '...Now it's easy to cut class; just ask someone to carry your shirt around the building while you're elsewhere.'"

Comments

Well

[moogied]

I think this is a very responsible use of "human monitoring". Its voluntary, its in there CLOTHES, and its only useful at school. Something like this I can understand. Now I did not RTFA, but I hope this is only used at exits/entrances to the school grounds. Just as a way of telling if they are there or not. Could be very useful in fire drills, bomb threaths, and lock downs. To tell who is at the school still, or left.

Re:Well

[Iftekhar25]

I was involved with a start-up company in Singapore trying to sell RFID solutions to schools for tracking children.

The school we were pitching to were interested at first, but didn't make the jump once they discovered it was "experimental." In hindsight, it was a good thing, because the start-up I was working for lacked the expertise to pull it off.

But I agree with the parent; it's responsible so long as it's used within the school premises. Children aren't the same as adults, and otherwise draconian practices are part and parcel of raising kids.

This isn't a privacy issue, but on the contrary, an example of the application of technology to save many man-hours of tedious attendance-taking and embarrassingly mis-pronounced names.

Re:Well

[SteveAyre]

"The kids are supposed to learn how to be responsible, make their own decisions, and generally become members of the society. They cannot learn that while knowing they are under a constant surveillance with no way to escape."

Strange, with the amount of CCTV and data mining around lately that sounds like pretty good practice for when they become adult members of our current society.

Re:Well

[jamie(really)]

Alternatively, there is a fire and the RFID system says everyone was beeped out of the gate because little Johnny is carrying little Jimmy's shirt, while Jimmy burns to death alone and confused.

Or a firefighter dies rescuing a shirt, when its owner is outside having a smoke (maybe even caused the fire).

There are two fundamental problems with this system - forget the moral implications - just stick to the facts.

1. Automation breeds complacency.

2. Kids are not fucking stupid.

Complacency is fine if the system really is foolproof: it works and it does what each user expects. Unfortunately, this system is not.

I advocate a campaign of civil disobedience where everyone carries around RFID transmitters that give out incorrect information. While we're on the subject, I would also advocate putting everyone's finger prints online and offering a service to print copies of other peoples finger prints onto gel pads. If the government wants to store private details, the only way to stop them is by making them not-private.

Zeitgeist

[amplusquem]

It's happening:

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

No big deal

[BadAnalogyGuy]

1) Kids still need to have a physical presence. If they are not in attendance, but their shirt seems to be walking around the school, then it is clear that they have deliberately tried to circumvent the requirement to be in school during school hours.

2) RFID is only an identifier, not a tracker. For someone to actively track a kid, they'd still have to follow the tried and true method of skulking and bush-hiding and slow van driving.

I made the comment earlier that SecurityFocus and Bruce Schneier were causing more damage than good due to chicken-little-ism and this kind of reactionary idiocy. The "security experts" are fighting against Big Brother, but that's not where the security problems lie. Big Brother, at any time, can subpoena all your stuff and any security measures you've taken are for naught. It's the people who don't have the legal power to require you to open up that you need to be secure from. RFID does not make you any less secure because it doesn't increase your "securable surface area". It requires the same proximity that sight does, and if you're that close to danger already, then your risk quotient is too high to be affected by RFID.

UDel's "ThoughtReform" a better fit for YRO

[Anonymous Coward]

Many universities try to indoctrinate students, but the all-time champion in this category is surely the University of Delaware. With no guile at all the university has laid out a brutally specific program for "treatment" of incorrect attitudes of the 7,000 students in its residence halls. The program is close enough to North Korean brainwashing that students and professors have been making "made in North Korea" jokes about the plan. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has called for the program to be dismantled.

Residential assistants charged with imposing the "treatments" have undergone intensive training from the university. The training makes clear that white people are to be considered racists - at least those who have not yet undergone training and confessed their racism. The RAs have been taught that a "racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture, or sexuality."

FIRE reports that the university's views "are forced on students through a comprehensive manipulation of the residence hall environment, from mandatory training sessions to 'sustainability' door decorations." Residents are pressured to promise at least a 20 percent reduction in their ecological footprint and to promise to work for a "oppressed" group. Students are required to attend training sessions, floor meetings and one-on-one sessions where RAs ask personal questions such as "When did you discover your sexual identity?". Students are pressured or required to accept an array of the university's approved views. In one training session, students had to announce their opinions on gay marriage. Those who did not approve of gay marriage were isolated and heavily pressured to change their opinion.

The indoctrination program pushes students to accept the university's ideas on politics, race, sex, sociology, moral philosophy and environmentalism. The training is run by Kathleen Kerr, director of residential life, who reportedly considers it a "cutting-edge" program that can be exported to other universities around the country. Residential assistants usually provide services to residents and have light duties, such as settling squabbles among students. Kerr and her program are more ambitious. She has been quoted as saying that the job of RAs is to educate the whole human being with a "curricular approach to residential education." In this curricular approach, students are required to report their thoughts and opinions. One professor says: "You have to confess what you believe to the RA." The RAs write reports to their superiors on student progress in cooperating with the "treatment."

The basic question about the program is how did they think they could ever get away with this? Most campus indoctrination is more subtle, with some wiggle room for fudging and deniability. This program implies a frightening level of righteousness and lack of awareness. But the RAs have begun to back away a step or two. After telling the students the program is mandatory, the RAs sent an email saying the sessions are actually voluntary.

----------------
In one-on-one sessions with RAs (Resident Assistants), University of Delaware students were questioned: "When did you discover your sexual identity?" In dorm meetings, they were pressured to pledge their allegiance to university-approved views on race, sexuality and environmentalism. When FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) spotlighted the indoctrination, a university official defended the "free exchange of ideas." A few days later, the program was canceled.

How can academics talk about "critical thinking" while turning residence halls into reeducation camps? Well, they meant well. Everyone agrees they meant well. If only academics were capable of thinking critically about their own assumptions.

Thanks to FIRE's links to ResLife