Slashdot Mirror


$100 Million Student Database Worries Parents

asjk writes "The controversial database includes millions of children and documents their names, addresses, disabilities other statistics and demographics. Federal law allows for the files to be shared with private companies. From the article: 'In operation just three months, the database already holds files on millions of children identified by name, address and sometimes social security number. Learning disabilities are documented, test scores recorded, attendance noted. In some cases, the database tracks student hobbies, career goals, attitudes toward school - even homework completion. Local education officials retain legal control over their students' information. But federal law allows them to share files in their portion of the database with private companies selling educational products and services."

250 comments

  1. Don't flatter yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    There is no vast government conspiracy to expose how retarded your kid is. Besides, let's face it, everyone who has met him already knows.

    1. Re:Don't flatter yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The two parties need to know who and where the retarded are. They need to keep tabs on their voting bases.

    2. Re:Don't flatter yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      The same reason Democrats keep winning the Northeast. The base is retarded.

      By openly expressing your inability to count to two, you can be sure you are in the database.

    3. Re:Don't flatter yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are still missing the point. You must have multiple entries in the database.

    4. Re:Don't flatter yourself by zkiwi34 · · Score: 1

      California is a red state?

  2. Strongly Disagree by Redmancometh · · Score: 1

    Is this just CT babble, or a real thing? Seems a bit far.

    1. Re:Strongly Disagree by swb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Whatever the situation is, it sure seems like a huge moral hazard for local school administrators. They have an ethical obligation to protect children's data, but they have a self-interest in successful careers, which can be judged by how much money they bring into the district.

      My guess is that money and status trumps children's privacy, even among the people you'd presume "think of the children."

    2. Re:Strongly Disagree by will_die · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The summary is more scare mongering.
      The database is designed to be run by an non-profit and will give the school administrators a free service, may be pay in the future, where the administrators can enter the information of the their students. The original cost of this was done by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundatation.
      The database can then produce reports for the school and be used for tracking the status of the student.
      The thing about the federal law allowing it is fear mongering. Federal law does not prevent it provided the school officials allow it; if the school officials did not allow the use of the system then it would be illegal.
      Companies are allowed limited access to the data and only at a high level if they are providing services and teaching material. So a company could have a product that is aimed at students doing poor in math but high in science and they would be able to identify that a school has such students and tell the school about their product.

    3. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      For now at least, in the US, parents can still shield their children, keeping them out of the public indoctrination academies by sending their children to private schools or homeschooling them. I suspect though that if large numbers of people start doing this, self serving politicians lobbied by school administrators will make it illegal to homeschool children, like they have done in Germany and Sweden. Educating children at home is an economic sacrifice. It requires one of the parents to forgo income from a traditional job. Staying faithful to the marriage commitment is also a necessity.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    4. Re:Strongly Disagree by Kogun · · Score: 2

      You missed a key point regarding the word "abuse". It all sounds legit until you ponder the security issues and how easy it could be to gain access to the database--even legitimately. e.g., I'm writing an app to tutor math students. In fact, I just spent 10 minutes creating an introduction to Algebra, so I'm legit, now please provide access to the database.

      Real security has been a joke in my kids' school system. It is hardly fear-mongering to extrapolate what that means for the database described in the article.

    5. Re:Strongly Disagree by oh2 · · Score: 1

      Its not illegal to homeschool in Sweden. You just need a better reason than "I dont wanna" to do it.

      --

      Now the world has gone to bed, Darkness won't engulf my head, I can see by infra-red, How I hate the night.

    6. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because the Gates foundation has never had strings attached to any of their 'donations', right?

    7. Re:Strongly Disagree by Zemran · · Score: 1

      Next step is to tattoo barcodes on every child's forehead as they are born...

      --
      I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
    8. Re:Strongly Disagree by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Well, the dollar sign in front of the "100" kind of confused me. It still does.
      The title reads: "Hundred Million dollar Student Database Worries Parents". Makes little sense.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    9. Re:Strongly Disagree by moeinvt · · Score: 1

      That's absolutely absurd!

      They will be tattooed on the inner arm of course. At the same time they get their first dose of required immunizations.

    10. Re:Strongly Disagree by swb · · Score: 1

      Rare is the private school that doesn't somehow, somewhere get public money, which comes with all those lovely strings attached, including mandatory reporting.

      Further, while the school district has at least the hope of public policy exposing a data sell out, a private school has far less oversight and usually a lot greater financial pressure.

      Homeschooling is a great idea in principal, it's a tough idea to actually implement in practice and there's also no guarantee you won't want or need services from your public district which could cause you to get sucked into the database.

    11. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Staying faithful to the marriage commitment is not a necessity. There many kids of single parents who do well. Like Barack Obama. Or Alexander Hamilton, who practically had no parent. Nor is a marriage commitment a sufficient condition. I'm sure you know lots of loosers with loving parents in a great marriage.

      2. Never met a normal home-schooled kid, but I'm sure there must be one out there. In my experience home-school parents are generally terrified of their kids hearing a perspective aside from what ever crazy {$religious | political} views the family has.

      3. I'd wager that public school is less indoctrinating then 99.5% of homeschooling.

      -AC

    12. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Any time a person needs permission from the government for any activity, including homeschooling, and such permission is denied for whatever reason, it becomes effectively illegal to do that particular activity, including homeschooling. In Sweden and in other countries, permission is required from a government official. If this permission is denied, there is no appeal in many places. You can look at the article here:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooling_international_status_and_statistics

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    13. Re:Strongly Disagree by Edzilla2000 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because obviously most parents can teach all the subjects in school as well as specialized school teachers...

      Hint: how many teachers do you know that have taught more than 2 subjects?

    14. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It makes plenty of sense, certainly more sense than 100m students being in this database.

    15. Re:Strongly Disagree by halltk1983 · · Score: 2

      How many teachers do you know that have taught even a single subject well? Many of my math teachers in public school held history, english or other liberal arts degrees. I never once had a science teacher with a degree in that field. Your false assumptions or teacher's superiority is baseless. Considering that most teachers teach straight from the book, frequently just reading it aloud, parental teaching, at a one on one level could easily be far more productive than the current 30:1 rates, even if the primary tool is the same book, considering that a parent would have more time available to answer questions and ensure comprehension.

      --
      Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
    16. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Except the data shows that home schooled kids taught by poor parents with little education are in the top 20% of public schooled kids' standardized scores.

      Not much of a shocker, but having parents who care about your education is really the only indicator of how well you'll do in school, thus the tautological argument that home schooled kids generally do as well as the top public schooled kids.

    17. Re:Strongly Disagree by CimmerianX · · Score: 2

      Wrong. Arms can become amputated. The Forehead would be the logical choice.

    18. Re:Strongly Disagree by Sperbels · · Score: 1

      2. Never met a normal home-schooled kid, but I'm sure there must be one out there. In my experience home-school parents are generally terrified of their kids hearing a perspective aside from what ever crazy {$religious | political} views the family has.

      And how many have you met? My brother's kids were home schooled. It had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with disappointment with the public school system. These kids are totally normal. They're ahead of their peers in math. They are better read. They play musical instruments. They do Tawkwondo. One completed NaNoWriMo two years ago at the age of 14. I read it, not publishable, but still fairly impressive for a 14 year old.

      3. I'd wager that public school is less indoctrinating then 99.5% of homeschooling.

      That's because most people do it for extreme religious reasons. Not everyone though. You can't claim homeschooling somehow screws up kids when it's in fact the parents.

    19. Re:Strongly Disagree by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Moral hazard? You act as though they give on iota of a fuck about the children's data. If there was a nice piece of candy in it for them they would hand it over.

    20. Re:Strongly Disagree by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I disagree, you entire notion is just loony talk.

      Would you say driving is illegal? You need permission to do that and sometimes it is denied.

      Homeschooling is often done because people want to keep their children uneducated. That should be prevented, it is simply child abuse.

    21. Re:Strongly Disagree by Edzilla2000 · · Score: 1

      So, because most teachers don't have a degree in the subject they are teaching (do you have statistics on that highly precise number?), you think a parent, who most likely hasn't seen a classroom in the last 10 years (at the very least) and hasn't read anything on the subject taught in 20 could do better?

      I have had my share of bad teachers, but there were definitely a lot more good teachers than bad ones, and pretty much none that simply "read the textbooks" to me...

      I was pretty good in school, I have a history of very grades all through my education, most people would tell you I would make a very good teacher, but there's no way I could possibly teach all the subject in a child's program.

      How many homeschooled kids have actually become scientists, in the last 20 years, for instance?

    22. Re:Strongly Disagree by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      If these people educate the kids, which is generally the opposite of what home schooling is about. Most of these people want to indoctrinate their children into some crazy religion. Why should that kind of child abuse be legal? Why should a child be denied the ability to even operate in society later?

    23. Re:Strongly Disagree by h4rr4r · · Score: 1, Insightful

      When parents are the ones doing the homeschooling you can.

      Even you admit that most of these cases are religious nutters. I am not sure why they don't just test for some knowledge and terminate homeschooling for that family if the kids fail.

    24. Re:Strongly Disagree by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Unless you ask them about evolution or the age of the universe.

      Face it homeschooling falls into two camps people who deeply want their kids to get the best education and the religious nutters who want to keep their kids ignorant. One is something no one care about the other is just child abuse.

    25. Re:Strongly Disagree by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      In my high school there were only a few teachers that actually knew their subject matter and I could probably count them on a single hand. The rest basically were useless with a good number actually causing more harm than good with their incompetency. All of this was in the best school district in a state that at the time was one of the best states for education in the nation. The worst was the 9th grade science teacher who couldn't form a rational though and had some truly bizarre experiments that when properly analyzed didn't show the effect that she was trying to demonstrate. It was an earth sciences class and the worst was the baking soda volcano which is fine for 2nd graders but for high schoolers is a giant waste of time and only reinforces bad information. The good teachers were the auto/metal shop teacher, the wood shop teacher, the AP Comp Sci teacher, the AP euro/humanities teacher, and the calculus teacher.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    26. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's my beef - educational programs and materials can be produced without requiring personally identifying information. Statistics in the aggregate are sufficient; it's the school staff who know best which students need what kind of materials.

    27. Re:Strongly Disagree by worf_mo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If I had mod points you'd get one. Some parents prefer their children at work instead of at school. They want the quick buck now, and don't put much thought into their kids' future. Obligatory school attendance can help cut down on child labor.

    28. Re:Strongly Disagree by 7-Vodka · · Score: 1

      You don't need to present a reason to drive.

      --

      Liberty.

    29. Re:Strongly Disagree by Phteven · · Score: 1

      So calling the governmental restriction of some activity "illegal" is loony talk, but calling the under-education of children "child abuse" isn't? Your first sentence seemed like a call to reason. Why did you abandon that approach at the end of your post?

    30. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if your license is suspended, it is.

      If you don't buy insurance, it is
      If you don't renew your registration, it is.
      Need I continue?

    31. Re:Strongly Disagree by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      So what?

      That is one kind of restriction that does not apply to driving, but does to get a concealed carry permit in my state. Niether are illegal, both require permits/licenses.

    32. Re:Strongly Disagree by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      How did I abandon it?

      Purposefully under educating children is abuse. You are making sure they will be unsuited to operate in society and stealing their future. How is that not abuse?

      I think both are reasonable. Just because people (which is what the government is/represents) decide to restrict an activity does not mean that activity is illegal. Nor does it mean that it is not abuse to fail in the care of a child.

    33. Re:Strongly Disagree by penglust · · Score: 1

      These are the same people who think it is OK to fund the school system by installing vending machines in every corner of the school. Money trumps making sense.

    34. Re:Strongly Disagree by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      No since none of those things apply to the situation at hand.

      Driving is generally a legal activity, so is homeschooling as is concealed carry of a handgun. All three are regulated to some degree and society has decided you can lose the privilege of doing them under some circumstances.

    35. Re:Strongly Disagree by Kreplock · · Score: 1

      If these people educate the kids, which is generally the opposite of what home schooling is about. Most of these people want to indoctrinate their children into some crazy religion. Why should that kind of child abuse be legal? Why should a child be denied the ability to even operate in society later?

      Disagree due to perceived inaccuracy of your terms "generally" and "most of these people". There's been a lot of homeschooling activity in the US during the past decade, and of the many homeschoolers I know not one of the families even goes to church more than 5 or 6 times per year. The concerns I hear have all been related to quality of education. I'm going to guess a few crazy, in-bred homeschoolers get more attention than a quiet, well-adjusted home-school family - they certainly have your attention. Of course this is anecdotal - if you could post some statistics that support your assertions I am open to that.

    36. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well isn't it illegal until you get the permit? Just saying.

    37. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are, depending on the state. Have you even researched this, or does your disdain for homeschool come from kneejerk reactions and unwavering personal beliefs? Considering you dismissed evidence of homeschool success with 'who gives a fuck?', I'm going to assume so.

    38. Re:Strongly Disagree by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      http://www.indiana.edu/~homeeduc/FAQ.html

      Look at their question about religion.
      The biggest single reason people homeschool is that they are religious nutters. I have a friend who's wife quit working to homeschool, every time they bring it up they have to mention they are not religious nutters since that is the most common reason for that arrangement. The wife stays home only because her income was lower than his.

    39. Re:Strongly Disagree by Zemran · · Score: 1

      You also need one parent to be a actual teacher...

      --
      I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
    40. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you say driving is illegal? You need permission to do that and sometimes it is denied.

      Wrong. You only need permission to drive a motor vehicle on the public roads.

      Homeschooling is often done because people want to keep their children uneducated. That should be prevented, it is simply child abuse.

      Wrong again. Most people who homeschool their children do it because the public schools are not able to provide adequate education for their kids, and/or are not able to provide a safe learning environment. Most homeschooled children rank higher on standardized college entrance tests (ACP, SAT, etc.) than publicly schooled kids.
      And homeshooled kids are required to take an annual Standardized test.

      I disagree, you entire notion is just loony talk.

      It's not a matter of opinion, the parent is stating fact. Once an activity requires governmental approval, that activity is by definition illegal by default, and you must gain specific exemptions in order to do it legally.

    41. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you seen public schools and their standards lately? I tried to home school my children because I *don't* want them to be as dumb as what public schools are now churning out. I couldn't make it work economically so they are in public school now. Every time I compare their education to mine I cringe. I was doing things in kindergarden (pre-grade 1) that my son is doing in grade 2.

      I come home from work and continue their education so that they won't end up as part of a generation of future Wal-mart greeters.

      If you really believe that most people go through the economic sacrifice of loosing one income to teach their own children so that they can be dumber...well wow, where do you live man? I can't exclude the possibility of course but "often done"...not even close to what I've seen.

    42. Re:Strongly Disagree by Kreplock · · Score: 1

      That response stat is lumped in as a "religious and moral" education concern, and is *a* reason to homeschool, not *the* reason to homeschool (i.e. one of multiple reasons a given respondant gave). I think people who ticked that box because they didn't want their kids getting sex ed in elementary school are getting counted as religious nuts by you. Either way, later on that site indicates "homeschoolers generally fare quite well in college", which does not sound like "children being denied the ability to even operate in society".

    43. Re:Strongly Disagree by TheoMurpse · · Score: 0

      keeping them out of the public indoctrination academies by sending their children to private schools or homeschooling them

      Funny considering basically 100% of all private schooling and home schooling is done by Christians wishing to indoctrinate children into the faith.

    44. Re:Strongly Disagree by JazzLad · · Score: 1

      IME (yes, small sample size & all that), even a mediocre teacher that hasn't just checked out can do well teaching very small groups of kids that they can connect with. The main trouble with public school (any many private school) learning is that with large class sizes much time is wasted on discipline, etc. I do not homeschool, but I have (well educated) friends that do & can definitely see their perspective. One thing they do right is they do it as a small cooperative, about a dozen kids in several families where each 'teacher' teaches what they know best. Most if not all of them are college educated. Like I said, I chose public school for my kids, but I can see advantages and disadvantages of both.

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    45. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know this sucks, but you make a pretty bold statement there. Care to back it up with a link to anything?

    46. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My niece was home school from 3rd grade on and now holds a PhD in Chemistry (received at 26), making more money than you and I put together will ever make.

    47. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When parents are the ones doing the homeschooling you can.

      What kind of a stupid fucked up statement is that?

      Home Schooled = Parents Teaching. That's the definition.

      Church School = Private school. That's not home schooled.

      I suspect you are just being your usual asshole self.

    48. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have a point that's relevant to the conversation or are you just being a bigot?

      Raising a kid in an environment where the are exposed to gangs, drugs and the like is also abuse. So I guess we can call them Democrat nutters.

    49. Re:Strongly Disagree by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      I homeschool my kids because I want them to get a better education. They are two grades above public school level. And yes, they understand evolution.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    50. Re:Strongly Disagree by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Homeschoolers who would not go to college would never then be tested by your little metric.

      Yes, people who deny reproductive education to their kids are also religious nutters. To a lessor degree than those who think their god planted dinosaur bones as a test.

    51. Re:Strongly Disagree by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      That is a pretty nice pointless anecdote you have their.

      Judging from them Chemistry PhDs I know, I hope she does not get caught running her clandestine lab. The rest tend not to make that much money.

    52. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get that many people will homeschool their children for legitimate reasons, but on the other hand I've also heard of parents pulling their kids out of public schools because they don't want them to be taught evolution or the Big Bang.

    53. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to just shut the fuck up. You clearly know nothing of the Home Schooling process, associations and various support groups that provide pooled resources for advanced subjects and the like. You have no idea how well home schooled children do on standardized tests, you have no idea about their graduation rates, etc.

      In short, you are an ignorant, bigoted asshole acting in a manner you would accuse "religious nutters" of acting.

    54. Re:Strongly Disagree by HaZardman27 · · Score: 1

      They are better read.

      But are they better write?

      --
      Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
    55. Re:Strongly Disagree by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      It is now bigotry to point out people who are so lost in fairytales that they deprive their kids of education might be unfit parents?

      I don't imagine parents in those areas want to raise kids there. I am not sure what those things have to do with political affiliation.

    56. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bigot: : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

      Your irrational hatred of religion places you comfortably withing this definition. Your grouping of those who are members of a religion as religious nutters shows that you are ignorant of religion.

    57. Re:Strongly Disagree by war4peace · · Score: 1

      My bad. Thanks for pointing that out :)

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    58. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before you try to be a grammar Nazi, you should know WTF you are talking about.

    59. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read: adjective
      Having knowledge gained by reading (usually used in combination): a well-read person (or in this case, better read)

      Now shut the fuck up.

    60. Re:Strongly Disagree by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      I'll support homeschooling when the "teacher" completes 4 years of college at an accredited university, passes accreditation for each year and course they will teach within a 5 year period for the intended teaching stint, passes an inspection for the location that will serve as the "school" and has all materials on hand and validated. After that, they must also have regular tests in all subjects, taken at a testing center, perhaps 4 times during the "school year". They must also bear all costs for all aspects of these certifications.

      Oh my, why must I be so unfair? It's not. It's what we demand of our schools, should we demand any less of our "home schools"?

      Last point - I'm not against home-schooling. I think home-schooling is fine, and I engage in that activity every day after my kids come home... from school.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    61. Re:Strongly Disagree by Kreplock · · Score: 1

      Homeschoolers who would not go to college would never then be tested by your little metric.

      Yes, people who deny reproductive education to their kids are also religious nutters. To a lessor degree than those who think their god planted dinosaur bones as a test.

      You are wildly inaccurate. I supplied no metric, just a comparison of your reckless conjecture with a source you yourself supplied. If you have a problem with your own source's statement just admit you don't like your source. And people who wait until after elementary school to address reproduction issues on their own terms are not denying their children an education. So... thanks anyway.

    62. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First home schooling does not mean that your parent teaches you what ever they want they have to use an approved text book and take a state test just like everyone else. Further, most US states provide home schooling (including the teacher) for children that cannot attend regular classes due to disabilities, and these are probably the most common home schooled children.

    63. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know many home schooled children, they have a state paid teachers come to their house to teach from a curriculum, and they all have disabilities that would make attending public school difficult at best. I have never met a home schooled child taught by a parent. (but I used to work for the state in a program for disabled children)

    64. Re:Strongly Disagree by Yakasha · · Score: 1

      Bigot: : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

      Your irrational hatred of religion places you comfortably withing this definition. Your grouping of those who are members of a religion as religious nutters shows that you are ignorant of religion.

      Why do you claim it is ignorant or irrational? Does the Catholic Church then have a long history of tolerance, education, and enlightenment? Does commonly practiced Sharia law even allow women to attend school? Does the state of Tennessee teach creationism with evolution in science class because there is equal evidence for both?
      There is nothing ignorant or irrational with recognizing religion's long-standing goal of keeping everybody in its dominion ignorant of the world around them.

    65. Re:Strongly Disagree by Yakasha · · Score: 1

      http://www.indiana.edu/~homeeduc/FAQ.html

      Look at their question about religion. The biggest single reason people homeschool is that they are religious nutters. I have a friend who's wife quit working to homeschool, every time they bring it up they have to mention they are not religious nutters since that is the most common reason for that arrangement. The wife stays home only because her income was lower than his.

      From your link

      Q: What are the demographics of the typical homeschooler? As I explain in the third of my Three Key Points About Homeschooling, describing the "typical homeschooler" is about as difficult as defining the "typical public schooler"--the range of demographics, philosophies, and practices make such a generalization practically impossible.

      When offering evidence to support your description of a typical homeschooler, don't submit ones that include statements about how it is impossible to describe a "typical homeschooler". :)

    66. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is now bigotry to point out people who are so lost in fairytales that they deprive their kids of education might be unfit parents?

      Yes, because you are "obstinately convinced of the superiority or correctness of one's own opinions and prejudiced against those who hold different opinions." Hey, if you're going to wear the label, wear it proudly; even parade down the street proclaiming it to everyone, regardless whether they care or not!

    67. Re:Strongly Disagree by Spiridios · · Score: 1

      I homeschool my kids because I want them to get a better education. They are two grades above public school level. And yes, they understand evolution.

      I was homeschooled and I plan to homeschool my kids. I've interacted with quite a few homeschooled kids because of this. I can say that a lot of kids are homeschooled for religious reasons - the parents want a religious education but can't send them off to a religious school. There's also a decent share of chronic-troublemakers and a few that have health problems the schools are ill-equipped to handle. I'm sure there were more than a few parents that were in it because they wanted a better education, but they weren't very vocal about it....

    68. Re:Strongly Disagree by Spiridios · · Score: 1

      2. Never met a normal home-schooled kid, but I'm sure there must be one out there. In my experience home-school parents are generally terrified of their kids hearing a perspective aside from what ever crazy {$religious | political} views the family has.

      You're never going to meet one. By definition, to be "normal" means you do things "normal" people do, which includes going to public school. You're going to find the religious nut, the over-protective nut, the expelled kids, the kids that have health problems the school can't deal with, or the kids with the intelligent, geeky parents. None of those are "normal."

    69. Re:Strongly Disagree by Spiridios · · Score: 1

      And how many have you met? My brother's kids were home schooled. It had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with disappointment with the public school system. These kids are totally normal. They're ahead of their peers in math. They are better read. They play musical instruments. They do Tawkwondo. One completed NaNoWriMo two years ago at the age of 14. I read it, not publishable, but still fairly impressive for a 14 year old.

      I'd wager to say, you haven't met homeschooled kids who were "normal" either. Ahead of their peers, writing over 50k words in a month voluntarily, playing instruments... They're outliers, above, but outside, the range that is considered "normal."

    70. Re:Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      umm, driving without permission is illegal

    71. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      Islamists and other religions also indoctrinate their children. We have the freedom of religion in this country and that includes the freedom to indoctrinate, if you want to call it that, any parent's own children, but not other people's children like the public schools do.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    72. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      Anybody can be a teacher. What's so special about a teacher? Anybody who has any kind of skill, can teach it to somebody else. That makes him/her a teacher.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    73. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      Permission to drive is not taken away arbitrarily. There is also an appeals process that can override the decision of some bureaucrat. Usually permission to drive is taken away by due process in a court of law, not by some faceless, and unelected bureaucrat.

      If you would educate yourself about homeschooling, you would learn that homeschooled children do far better on average than the ones in public school. For many parents who send their kids to public school, that school is not much more than an inexpensive babysitting service. Homeschooling parents are much more likely to stay faithful and their marriage relationship, then others who send their kids to public school. Read about homeschooling statistics and educate yourself.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    74. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      There may be a few parents that keep their children out of public school, so the kids can work in the family business. This mainly works with older children and is not at all common, because there are not that many family businesses. Homeschoolers do far better in almost every respect than the equivalent age children schooled in public schools. Many graduate at age 16 and enter college. If you want to educate yourself, read this:

      http://homeschooling.about.com/od/gettingstarted/a/homeschoolrise_2.htm

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    75. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      How did I abandon it?

      Purposefully under educating children is abuse. You are making sure they will be unsuited to operate in society and stealing their future.....

      It turns out that homeschooled kids on average do far better than those in public school. If you want to educate yourself, read this:

      http://homeschooling.about.com/od/gettingstarted/a/homeschoolrise_2.htm

      Most public schools, especially in certain areas, only turn out illiterate juvenile delinquents. Do some research and find out how many homeschooled teenagers DON'T graduate from high school and go on to college. You will find it is a very small percentage of homeschooled students.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    76. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      I have a “pointless” anecdote to add here.

      I know of ONE homeschooled family with 6 children of which I know several personally. They all grew up on a farm not very far from here. They were raised and educated by their father because their mother died when the youngest child was still a baby. If you want to learn more about them, you can read part of their story here:

      http://www.robinsoncurriculum.com/view/rc/s31p54.htm

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    77. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      In this country we still have freedom of religion. This includes the freedom for people to teach their children their own values and traditions. We have always had religious private schools in this country. We also have religious homeschools in this country. You are wrong and bigoted by labeling religious education as child abuse. I think that failing to teach moral values in public schools is child abuse.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    78. Re:Strongly Disagree by worf_mo · · Score: 1

      I didn't mean to generally relate homeschooling to child labor. I should have written "Some of the parents that opt for homeschooling prefer ...".

      From Compulsory education and child labour: historical lessons, contemporary challenges and future directions:

      There is a growing recognition that child labour elimination and the achievement of universal basic education are interrelated challenges – that one cannot be achieved without the other.

      In a seminal study, Myron Weiner (1991) accords compulsory education the principal role in eliminating child labour, past and present.

    79. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      The big difference is that homeschooling parents indoctrinate (educate) their own children, but in public school the state educates (indoctrinates) other people's children. People who send their children to private schools, make sure that the teachers there and the administrators have a similar worldview to their own. This is called freedom of religion.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    80. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      I know of a homeschooled family with 6 children of which I know several personally. They all grew up on a farm not very far from here. They were raised and educated by their father because their mother died when the youngest child was still a baby. If you want to learn more about them, you can read part of their story here:

      http://www.robinsoncurriculum.com/view/rc/s31p54.htm

      Because their fathers is a scientist, they ALL followed in his footsteps.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    81. Re:Strongly Disagree by Edzilla2000 · · Score: 1

      I was not asking for anecdotal evidence, but for statistics, or at least the beginning of a credible number...

    82. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      How does believing in the fairytales of evolution or the Big Bang prepare children to hold a decent job when they grow up or become productive members of our society? Perhaps, if they are training to be a public school teacher, they must learn how to indoctrinate other people's children in the current politically correct socialistic and scientific mantras. Instead of learning that they are a special, precious creation of a supreme God who loves them, they must be told that they are nothing but a cosmic accident that crawled out of the primordial ooze and that there are no moral absolutes.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    83. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      How does the Catholic church or any church enter into this? Parents have an intrinsic right to pass their worldview onto THEIR OWN children. You do not have a right to indoctrinate and brainwash MY children with your worldview. This has been true for thousands of years, long before the invention of public education.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    84. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      Homeschooling is not simply schooling at home. It is an entirely different paradigm. Parents who homeschool are still forced to pay taxes to the public school system, so why should they not be entitled to some of the services? Over the years many excellent curricula have been made available, that are particularly suitable for parents who wish to homeschool their children. Educating children, whether in public schools or private home, depends on motivating children to want to learn. That is the main job of educators, whether those are parents or public school teachers. Parents know their children better than anyone in public school, who is essentially a stranger. Therefore they have a much better chance at motivating their own children, than any public school teacher.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    85. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      Do parents who teach their own values and worldview to THEIR kids screw children up anymore than public school teachers who indoctrinate OTHER people's children in whatever is politically correct at the moment?

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    86. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      When the overwhelming majority of homeschooled children are tested for real knowledge rather than current political correctness, they get higher scores than those from public schools. That is a fact! Educate yourself! Real knowledge of English, math, science, and history, is what gets these children into prestigious colleges. Brainwashing people into believing political and scientific fantasies, such as socialism and evolution does not give them a better life. Teaching a kid the philosophies of Karl Marx or Charles Darwin does not make them into better persons that will result in a better job. Teaching a child about Jesus Christ and the importance of honesty, truth and love, will help them in all areas of life, including a job. Most employers highly value a truthful and honest person of integrity. Teaching someone about how their ancestors crawled out of the primordial ooze, can only have a negative effect on their life.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    87. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      Your statement shows that you are largely ignorant about homeschooling. Most parents who homeschool are college educated themselves and have realized that most public schools are not preparing their children adequately for college. There are also curricula available to homeschoolers, which were developed by highly educated and skilled people, many of them certified teachers. Some states administer their standardized tests to homeschool students. Multiple studies have shown that homeschooled children score considerably better than the equivalent public school students.

      You are also under the misconception that homeschooling is not much different from schooling at home. Having one on one interaction with each child is much different than sitting 30 or more children in a classroom and lecturing them. The public education establishment has tried for years to shut down home schools. They have been unsuccessful so far, because every study without exception has shown that schooling kids at home by their parents is far superior on average than any public school.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    88. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      In case you have not learned yet how to Google, here are one of many statistics:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooling#Test_results

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    89. Re:Strongly Disagree by Yakasha · · Score: 1

      How does the Catholic church or any church enter into this?

      Same way any other church enters into the discussion: they represent the beliefs of their parishioners; those beliefs are based on religious doctrine that has no basis in science or rational thought; those beliefs are, to the believers, incontestable factual artifacts so important that they are willing to die (or home school their kids) to protect them; and are the single most commonly cited reason for home schooling.

      Parents have an intrinsic right to pass their worldview onto THEIR OWN children. You do not have a right to indoctrinate and brainwash MY children with your worldview.

      I love the subtlety behind chosen words. Your worldview is "passed on", my worldview is "indoctrination" and "brainwashing". Irrelevant as it is, I find it interesting. Well, with some districts "teaching" creationism next to evolution, I'd have to say its not the atheist science crowd that has a problem understanding this point.

      This has been true for thousands of years, long before the invention of public education.

      Great. Nobody disputed that here. But if your goal is to raise a productive, successful human being in today's world, teaching your child that AIDs is God's punishment for being gay, women should be uneducated and covered from head-to-toe at all times, the world is flat, evolution doesn't happen, or that the world is only 6000 years old only sets up both you and your child for absolute failure.

      Whatever the religion based belief, if its shared by 1,000,000 others and called "Catholicism", or only yourself and 200 others and called "Jonestown", is still a fairy tale. Basing a child's entire education on this is a sign of being an unfit parent, and this belief is not ignorant or irrational.

    90. Re: Strongly Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Driving without a liscense is illegal on public roads

    91. Re:Strongly Disagree by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Whatever the situation is, it sure seems like a huge moral hazard for local school administrators. They have an ethical obligation to protect children's data, but they have a self-interest in successful careers, which can be judged by how much money they bring into the district.

      My guess is that money and status trumps a child's privacy, even among the people you'd presume "think of the children."

      Does not a child that is registered in that database own his own public and confidential data? If corps want to make use of the data, they better get permission from each of the record owners they want to read.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    92. Re:Strongly Disagree by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Your statement shows that you are largely ignorant about homeschooling, its reasons for being, and its effects.

      I can tell you this because I'm closely involved with 3 groups of people, 2 that fall into the religious nutbag arena. 1 homeschools, and has a large group of associated homeschooled people that we know. Their children are largely unprepared for the world, and mostly go to bible colleges, if at all. Additionally, their emotional and social development is running anywhere from 2-5 years behind others their age that are not homeschooled. I have for comparison the other group, still religious nutjobs, but do not homeschooled. They are a good comparison because these two families are quite close, so close that they do bible studies together. The latter family's children have blossomed into real people with reasonable social skills and personalities over the past 8+ years (yes, this is not a short term exposure, and not a small group - both sets have associated groups that number more than 20 kids).

      I'm under no misconceptions. homeschooling as you describe it is unknown for any of the homeschooled families I'm aware of, throughout my life. In fact, they're all largely reminiscent of what you picture as a one room school house back in the 1800s, one person trying to teach 3+ children all at the same time. Sounds like a great plan to me.

      BTW, being college educated in no way shape or form makes you qualified for being a teacher. It's not even requirement to be honest but gives you a better perspective. I personally would suck at lower grade levels, or various topics, but excel at others. Yes, I have taught also, and have done post graduate work, some at the post-doctoral level in the technical world.

      The only reason home schooling hasn't been shut down completely is because.... George Bush. You know, the brainiac that came up with "No Child Left Behind" that resulted in all children being left behind the rest of the world, and the same that pushed school vouchers so schools could worry about "making money" instead of teaching children. BTW, that was started in a state where schools are run by localities, so the real reason behind vouchers wasn't to allow students to move to better public schools, but to fund these private indoctrination farms. (Yes, I'm probably showing far too much disdain here, but honestly, if you don't think those private religiously based schools are free from indoctrination, there's no reason to continue talking.)

      I'd need citations for homeschoolers being better off. Fair citations that aren't run by a religious entity or anyone else (mostly conservatives) that desire some form of private indoctrination for their children. They would also have to compare like children by test over significant periods, with further tests to compare them by as they progressed. We've all heard about the home-schooled spelling bee champ. There was also Einstein, one among many many many successful brilliant people that were not home-schooled. The list of accomplished home-schooled people is astonishingly short. I just provided it. You may add to it if you can.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    93. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      The fact remains that homeschooling, whether by Christians or not, results in better and productive adults. Many states have standardized tests, which are also mandatory for homeschoolers. In case you don't know how or are too lazy to look up facts, you can look here:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooling#Test_results

      Most homeschoolers are only interested in doing the job that public schools are no longer doing, namely educating the children. Someone believing the fairy tales of evolution and politically correct socialistic claptrap, does not for believing such nonsense get a better job. People who believe in personal integrity and honesty as taught in the Bible, as well as math and science will always have a much better chance at getting a decent job. Many employers would rather have someone working for them that has high integrity and honesty but average intelligence, rather than a super intelligent but dishonest crook.

      Exactly how does teaching children that their ancestors crawled out of the primordial ooze millions of years ago help them in life? Teaching children that they are special, valuable creations of a loving God as all of the other people are as well, will make them better behaved, productive citizens in the future. It is people who truly believe this who will want to treat their fellow residents on this planet with the respect and love that they deserve. How will teaching children that the earth is the product of a cosmic explosion instill in them the need to take care of the environment? The biblical view that this planet was made by and belongs to God, with us as caretakers, is a better reason for environmental concerns. Such beliefs are NOT ignorant or irrational.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    94. Re:Strongly Disagree by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      You are the one that is ignorant and wrong on many counts. Why don't you read the article in the link below, paying special attention to the section on test results.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooling

      The fact that you are calling Christians and other religious people nutbags, demonstrates how biased and prejudiced you are. Many of the ivy league colleges were originally founded by Christians. Some of the best ones are still being run by the Catholics. When these schools were founded, the Bible was a major part of their curriculum. I suggest you study your history of education.

      Both of my daughters were homeschooled. After the basic primary education at home, they both attended a public high school. One of them was salutatorian of her class and the younger one was valedictorian. One of them graduated from Pepperdine University on a scholarship and the other one has her master's degree from Duke University. She is still there finishing her thesis for her Ph.D.

      For thousands of years, homeschooling was the by far major means of passing knowledge and life skills from generation to generation. This only changed in the middle of the 19th century, when public schools were invented. For all those millennia, it was mostly the parents that educated their children. Part of that education has always been the instilling of moral values and the worldview of the parents in the children. For you and the secular education establishment, that seems to be the major reason why you and public education bureaucrats hate homeschooling.

      In public schools today, they teach fairytales such as evolution and the Big Bang. They misrepresent this secular belief system as “science”. Please explain to me how knowing about this sort of fiction gives any person a better job and an edge in life? How does knowing about socialism and self-esteem help a person in earning a living at a decent wage? Those “progressives” in government that want authoritarian control over people, want pliable, nonthinking sheep. The liberal, secular public education establishment churns those out by the millions.

      If you want to know about a successful homeschool story, explore this website:

      http://www.robinsoncurriculum.com/view/rc/s31p54.htm

      I know two of these children, now grown up, personally. They do not live very far from where I live. One of these is a veterinarian and the other one has a degree in engineering. They both have homeschooled children of their own, which are a delight to interact with, because they are very well behaved.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    95. Re:Strongly Disagree by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Because I don't believe wikipedia without backup on anything, nor should you.

      I call them nutbags because they are. So should you.

      For thousands of years, homeschooling largely failed. Just check the last 150 years to see what public education has done for society. Your kids not withstanding, and no proof offered. Anecdotes mean nothing.

      And then you reveal yourself to be a nutbag as well, which explains your desire to convince others of the "worthiness" of your cause, because otherwise, you'd be.... a nutbag.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  3. so....there really is a by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    permanent record. I thought it was a bluff!

  4. xkcd already has the solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I, for one, will be naming my future son Robert'); DROP TABLE Students;-- .

    1. Re:xkcd already has the solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    2. Re:xkcd already has the solution by sacrilicious · · Score: 3, Funny

      Little Bobby Tables, we'll call him.

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
    3. Re:xkcd already has the solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My SQL is way lacking, but judging by the syntax, the '); is obviously the end of an insert command. the drop table students is the command to delete the table named students. The following semicolon must signal the end of that command. But, what are the two hyphens and a space for?

    4. Re:xkcd already has the solution by Win0ver · · Score: 2

      Two hyphens mean the start of a comment. That way the rest of the SQL syntax is basically ignored, so your DROP TABLE Students; is actually applied without errors.

    5. Re:xkcd already has the solution by Kreplock · · Score: 1

      My SQL is way lacking, but judging by the syntax, the '); is obviously the end of an insert command. the drop table students is the command to delete the table named students. The following semicolon must signal the end of that command. But, what are the two hyphens and a space for?

      the hyphens comment our the rest of the (original) INSERT command, so that the truncated INSERT and the DROP TABLE commands get executed instead of erroring out due to syntax.

    6. Re:xkcd already has the solution by aceboomblain · · Score: 1

      It starts a comment so the rest of the line is ignored.

  5. Local officials will sell everybody out by realmolo · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Local school administrators are worthless pieces of shiat, that are looking to scam as much money as possible for themselves and their cronies.

    I expect that nearly EVERY district is already in talks with various marketing firms about how much this data is worth.

    1. Re:Local officials will sell everybody out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Federal law allows for the files to be shared with private companies

      Federal law - read as Congress person was bri...lobbied into making it legal for big corps to mine children's data.

      The people you should be pissed at are in DC. Punish them by voting them out of office.

    2. Re:Local officials will sell everybody out by jasnw · · Score: 2

      OK, this is like saying "everyone who posts on /. are worthless pieces of shiat" just because of the few boneheads like yourself who make wild sweeping assertions based on too little data. This database is clearly a serious problem that needs to be handled much more carefully than it probably is, but I know and have worked with a lot of these "local school administrators" you think so little of and most of them are underpaid, overworked, and care deeply about the children in their care. Often they care more than some of the parents involved. As someone else points out, the laws in this case come from the Bozoids in DC. That's where the real problem lies.

    3. Re:Local officials will sell everybody out by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Working in IT support in education, I think they're like this because schooling is horribly under-funded, and they have to be ruthless in order to get the money we need.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    4. Re:Local officials will sell everybody out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, when was it ever illegal for them to do so? Because federal law doesn't disallow something doesn't mean it specifically allows it.

    5. Re:Local officials will sell everybody out by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yet there is always money for inflatable covered sports fields, to acquire the newest gadget, golden parachutes for failed administrators, excessive numbers of administrators and other non teaching staff, all expenses paid trips to go to conferences in other states, and all sorts of fringe benefits for superintendents. The best teacher I had in high school used a slide projector and chalk boards and that was in the '90s. If someone could explain to me how smart boards, teachers having iPads, teachers having laptops, or any other silly gadgetry in the class helps students learn I am all ears. From what I have seen it may help initially because of enthusiasm but after a few years the results go back to where they were. Please explain why a school needs a Principal, 2 or 3 vice principals, a disciplinary administrator or 2, a staff of 5 to 10 emotional counselors/therapists, 5 to 10 career counselors, multiple secretaries for the administration to support the bureaucracy and on and on. Add in things like the competition for having the best sports equipment and fields and the need to acquire the shiniest new gadgetry and it becomes hard to say schools are under funded and not just poorly managed. Cut all that other crap and if the school is still short on money then come talk to me until then figure out how to manage my tax dollars properly.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    6. Re:Local officials will sell everybody out by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      Regarding sports fields, that stuff is funded through ticket sales and boosters. You have a problem with that, complain to the parents of nerds who don't donate money to the school for new computers for the science club.

    7. Re:Local officials will sell everybody out by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Not in the school district I live in. About a decade back they got levy approved for maintenance and building projects (never specified what was to be built beyond another elementary school which was needed) and shortly there after the inflatable structure over some sports fields appeared, and the track/football field was redone with nicer bleachers, a new high tech track surface, better lighting, new score boards, additional out building, etc. I don't have a problem with parents or students raising or spending their own money for their pet project I do have a problem with schools spending my tax dollars on some pet project that doesn't increase educational outcomes. It all started with the new high school was built and they had the nicest newest sports equipment so over the course of the next decade the other 3 high schools had their stuff upgraded to the newest stuff even if the old stuff still worked.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    8. Re:Local officials will sell everybody out by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 1

      Please explain why a school needs a Principal, 2 or 3 vice principals, a disciplinary administrator or 2, a staff of 5 to 10 emotional counselors/therapists, 5 to 10 career counselors, multiple secretaries for the administration to support the bureaucracy and on and on.

      I used to think like you to an extent, then I actually went looking for answers. Trust me, that is a skeleton crew. Between, public/community//state/federal standards/mandates/reporting I am continually shocked they get as much done as they do. Look at it this way. Take any company with as many workers as your local school has students (the parents and community are the customers), anything close to the same budget, and overall responsibility to thieir customers and see if they have as many managers. Chances are they have many many more. If you want a hand crafted product, it is going to take incredible attention to detail, that costs time, people and money.

      Add in things like the competition for having the best sports equipment and fields and the need to acquire the shiniest new gadgetry and it becomes hard to say schools are under funded and not just poorly managed. Cut all that other crap and if the school is still short on money then come talk to me until then figure out how to manage my tax dollars properly.

      Few people that participated in HS sports would tell you it was a bad investment years later. As for tech, if you want cake you are going to have to break some eggs. As for 'your' tax dollars, I guess more people decided that their tax dollars were well spent on these things. Welcome to democracy.

      --
      Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
  6. That's nothing . . . by jvarsoke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apparently none of these parents have heard of Facebook.

    1. Re:That's nothing . . . by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Apparently none of these parents have heard of Facebook.

      Except that users have some measure of control over what is on their Facebook page and participation is with their consent. Neither appear to be the case with this database.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    2. Re:That's nothing . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Apparently none of these parents have heard of Facebook.

      Most people don't publish their real DOB or their SSN and learning disabilities on their FB page.

      There's a big difference between those pieces of information and the typical mundane things I've seen on folks' FB page - like pictures of their dog in a hat.

    3. Re:That's nothing . . . by alen · · Score: 1

      really?

      so i'm wishing happy birthday to people on the wrong day?

    4. Re:That's nothing . . . by tapspace · · Score: 1

      There's no law against providing Facebook with false information...

    5. Re:That's nothing . . . by tapspace · · Score: 1

      Possibly. Are you wishing 'happy birthday' to people you never talk to? I used to get those errant happy birthdays from about 5-10 idiots once a year on my myspace and 5-10 more on my facebook on some other random date. (Now, I just don't use those sites.)

    6. Re:That's nothing . . . by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Yes, but Facebook parents have (an illusion of at least) control over. This database, well, you couldn't take your child off even if you tried.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    7. Re:That's nothing . . . by SJHillman · · Score: 2

      In many cases, they omit or falsify the year which is often the most valuable portion of the birthdate.

      Personally, I just leave mine off altogether. Might be why I've only had one person remember my birthday today, which is fine by me.

    8. Re:That's nothing . . . by RevDisk · · Score: 1

      Facebook is optional. This would not be.

    9. Re:That's nothing . . . by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Sure the parents have heard of Facebook by now. And the grandparents, too. That's why some teens are using other things now instead. Teens do not want their parents and grandparents to know what they are up to: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57572154-93/why-teens-are-tiring-of-facebook/

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    10. Re:That's nothing . . . by fustakrakich · · Score: 0

      Except that users have some measure of control over what is on their Facebook page and participation is with their consent.

      Not true, and you should know why.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    11. Re:That's nothing . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually that isn't clear. People have been criminally prosecuted for violating terms of service. The EFF is looking to get this clarified so that violating a TOS is limited to civil actions instead of abuse by prosecutors.

    12. Re:That's nothing . . . by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      In many cases, they omit or falsify the year which is often the most valuable portion of the birthdate.

      Which can be gleaned quite closely by looking at their HS graduation year. Or if they've not provided that, look at their friends. Find a big cluster in one particular year, bingo, that's probably it.

    13. Re:That's nothing . . . by CimmerianX · · Score: 1

      Happy Birthday.

    14. Re:That's nothing . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Happy birthday SJHilman!

    15. Re:That's nothing . . . by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Most people don't publish their real DOB or their SSN and learning disabilities on their FB page.

      Do you even use Facebook? Pretty much everyone under forty or so uses their real DOB. So far as disabilities go, people practically brag about them routinely - when they aren't blaming every failure in their lives on them. (OK, these are self-diagnosed disabilities...)
       
      You're right about the SSN though.

    16. Re:That's nothing . . . by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      Not true, and you should know why.

      To clarify, by participation I mean joining Facebook. Nobody is forced to have a Facebook page.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    17. Re:That's nothing . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have no idea of amount and variety of information stored in SLI err inBloom. Facebook profile is a child play compared to that.
      Think credit history on steroids. Think education industry LexisNexis.

    18. Re:That's nothing . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To clarify, by participation I mean joining Facebook. Nobody is forced to have a Facebook page.

      Yes, they are. Facebook has profiles on people that don't have accounts, just as they have profiles of people with accounts. Stuff you personally post to your own Facebook page is a small part of the data Facebook gathers. Facebook brokers your data regardless of whether you are a member.

    19. Re:That's nothing . . . by oursland · · Score: 1

      You don't need to directly measure the variable (person's state: connection graph, behaviors, interests, etc); you may estimate the state of the variable by the observable information (how other's react, discuss, etc). This is the basis of sensor theory.

      Facebook tracks information on persons with and without accounts based on information provided by other users. For those without accounts, Facebook creates "shadow profiles."

    20. Re:That's nothing . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Happy Birthday!

    21. Re:That's nothing . . . by Yakasha · · Score: 1

      There's no law against providing Facebook with false information...

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act

      Both may apply.

    22. Re:That's nothing . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're referring to one of my accounts with hundreds of "friends", almost certainly. I have a simple actual one family links to, but it hasn't been used in years.

      Even my mother has a fake account for playing those stupid Zynga games.

  7. No matter what it costs to build... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    ... don't build a database of ruin.

    So yes, those parents are right to be worried.

    1. Re:No matter what it costs to build... by afidel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed, putting PHI (which is what disabilities should be classified as) into a database open to corporate fishing is just asking for problems. It's not like this data is going to ever go away, so it's likely these children will have their disability brought up during an interview 20 years from now (or not, they'll likely just be dropped into the round file as not worth interviewing). I can't believe that the US doesn't have some type of data privacy law beyond HIPAA, I wonder what type of incident it will take before people will wake up and demand that this kind of idiocy is shut down?

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    2. Re:No matter what it costs to build... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      It would need to be something that affected large numbers of people in most states violently. Even that might not be enough. Some legislators would favor big companies (or even just companies) even if a majority of their voters had written in objecting. (I've got at least one Senator that I feel that describes.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:No matter what it costs to build... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US education has privacy laws like FERPA. The problem here is not so much as privacy as a creation of single point of collection and aggregation of huge amount of information in the hands of private for profit corporation. Even if they don't change anything until 2015 it doesn't change anything.

  8. i wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i wonder if they are researching how likely some of these children with low test scores will be to accept a carbon tax for riding bikes when they come of voting age.

    what the fuck is up with the news today? faith in humanity lost wtf

  9. Great idea, what could go wrong? by mikeiver1 · · Score: 1

    This is a fantastic way for the company to make money for the schools... Oh, wait, scratch that. I meant to say for the administrators and the company to make money for them selves at the risk of future generations. We all know how well these benign corporations have done at protecting the private, in this case very private and potentially damaging, information of people. The things these kids are going to have to deal with, identity theft being the prime one, when they grown older is going to be sad to see. The scum bags behind this sort of thing should be strung up for their greed and lack of forethought of the ramifications for their "business model" on this most vulnerable segment of our population.

  10. really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tell me again, guys, how your country isn't losing it's mind.

  11. What Could Possibly Go Wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems like a win all around, then!

  12. Time to put that in your permanent record. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Let me see, shows antisocial tendencies by thinking there is anything wrong with recording every bit of life and using it to judge.

  13. Not new. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.masonichip.org/

  14. Uhm, yea. by RevDisk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Unless they have an insanely awesome security team and very rigorous employee screening, this will not end well.

    The smarter way to handle it would be to replace personal information with UIDs. School districts alone can map UIDs to actual students. It'd be relatively trivial to implement, on either side. Sure, if someone crouched the numbers hard enough, they might be able to use analysis to collate the data to individuals. But that'd be enough to keep random stalkers, pedos, abusive parent with a restraining order against them, etc at bay.

    If I was the non-profit running the DB, I'd be strongly pushing for something like that to absolve me of the liability and risk. Less persistent threats if the data is only useful to the student, school and statistics folks. The data, especially anonymized, would be VERY useful for curriculum research and development.

    1. Re:Uhm, yea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sort of system can be abused as well using some data analytic. The database is not the only data input... Think using some random credit card db, a property tax sheet, to match up to someone else in the db.

  15. US needs privacy laws by bradley13 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What kind of country allows this kind of information to be tracked "en masse", much less sells it to private companies? It reminds me of the credit-rating agencies:P private companies that somehow are magically authorized to suck up all of your financial information and sell it. At least the US finally added the ability for you to "freeze" your credit data. That's the wrong way around - they ought to have to actively ask for permission, but it's better than nothing.

      Now your kids need to be able to "freeze" their school data. Worse, the US is continually trying to force its lack of privacy on the rest of the world, most recently with FATCA.

    It's a crying shame that the US Constitution forgot to list privacy as a basic right to be guaranteed by the government, right next to life and liberty. Failing that, you guys really need to get some privacy laws on the books!

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:US needs privacy laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's a crying shame that the US Constitution forgot to list privacy as a basic right to be guaranteed by the government, right next to life and liberty."

      It doesn't need to. That's what the ninth amendment is there for:

      "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

    2. Re:US needs privacy laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One thing that's amazing to me about this... and continues to amaze me is the discrepancy between what private corporations are allowed to get away with and what researchers at nonprofit universities and organizations have to put up with to get something much smaller and more innocuous done.

      For example, if this was a research project at a university, it would probably be dead in the water due to IRB ethical concerns about privacy, etc. In the very least, it would probably require opt-in from parents.

      However, when private for-profit institutions are involved, somehow it's a free-for-all and no ethical principles are required. I see this over and over and over again, not just in educational settings but in other settings as well. I've been involved with corporations in research, and it's mind-blowing how much easier it is to get things done (note that I'm not saying that easier is always bad--sometimes it's bad that it's so difficult for nonprofit researchers to conduct research that has essentially no risk)

      This is disturbing to me for all the same reasons that are being mentioned, but another layer of it to me--the icing on the cake--is that there's not even some sort of prioritization of who has access--it's like not only are privacy concerns thrown out the window, they're thrown out the window to the people who are most likely to abuse the privacy laws because of profit incentives.

    3. Re:US needs privacy laws by lightknight · · Score: 1

      You'll find that any right not enumerated in the Constitution is quietly trampled upon by anyone seeking authority. As such, that Amendment remains somewhat useless, as does the notion of a piece of paper being the source of our highest laws, without the use of force to back it up. Indeed, those laws are only backed up if those using force agree with the silly words written on those pieces of paper, and wish to enforce those laws as written. Prove me wrong.

      What it comes down to is, some people are tied to the status quo, some are tied to reason, some are tied to force. Guess which one seems to be winning these days?

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    4. Re:US needs privacy laws by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      It's a crying shame that the US Constitution forgot to list privacy as a basic right to be guaranteed by the government, right next to life and liberty.

      The Constitution doesn't say what government isn't allowed to do, it says what government is allowed to do. And I think anyone other than a lawyer would have a hard time finding authority in there for this kind of boondoggle.

      But over the last few decades people have been happy to ignore the Constitution when they're getting things they want, and then act surprised when they're getting unconstitutional things they don't want.

    5. Re:US needs privacy laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What we need is an agency that you can go to and say that a company's product is crap. Generate a score from all the comments and then have the Government be forced to consider the ratings when doing business with the companies.

      Oh...make the companies pay $35 to see a copy of it and make it near impossible to have bad reviews removed.

  16. Another win.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another win for homeschooling!

  17. Road to Hell Paving Material by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd suggest we look back on the track record of such databases.

    I won't go and track down the links (There's a link somewhere to the famous HBR "Database of Ruin" article, and that has a number of good links).

    However, when you have potential for profit and money, you have almost certain abuses.

    When you have people (humans), administering these types of databases, you have certain (100%) abuses. There are a number of documented cases of cops abusing DMV and arrest report DBs for purposes of harassment, stalking and revenge.

    There are "grey" private detectives that are called "skip tracers." If you want to find out more, check out this book, called "How to Disappear."

    This database WILL be misused. It may come back to haunt folks in thirty years.

    I was able to rack up a pretty significant juvenile record, way back in the "paper era." I'm real glad that was never tracked, although I'll bet it would bubble to the surface if I ever wanted to work for the NSA.

    1. Re:Road to Hell Paving Material by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I work at a private for-profit company in the USA that has similar information for 20mil+ students and years worth of data. We work with this kind of stuff all the time. Good security practices and regular 3rd-party voluntary security auditing. We don't have to do any auditing by law or any other rules, but we pay for it because we want to be secure. We actively refuse information that does not pertain to helping students, even though we have access to it. Address? We don't need that, so we don't store it. SSN, we highly discourage. etc etc

    2. Re:Road to Hell Paving Material by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the EC philosophy: Don't collect data that you don't need, and don't hang onto it for any longer than you need.

      However, American companies are working to weaken that.

      Kids are an incredibly lucrative market. Many vast fortunes have been made, based on selling to kids.

  18. Self-serving project by Dunkirk · · Score: 2

    The database is a joint project of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which provided most of the funding, the Carnegie Corporation of New York and school officials from several states.

    All it looks like to me is a $100M SQL Server project for Microsoft, secured by the former CEO for his friends back at the home office.

    --
    Acts 17:28, "For in Him we live, and move, and have our being."
    1. Re:Self-serving project by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      All it looks like to me is a $100M SQL Server project for Microsoft, secured by the former CEO for his friends back at the home office.

      Which is one of many reasons why the team-up between Gates and Buffet to create the largest charitable organization in the world (I believe it is an order of magnitude better funded than the second runner up) is a dangerous thing. Not just because it is a way to funnel money into Microsoft, but mainly because it puts so much control of so much charitable work into the hands of such a small group of people. Even if you like how Gates thinks, it still means that the blindspots of those people become blindspots that will dominate the field of charitable work.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    2. Re:Self-serving project by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually if you google around you can find references to how things are architectures. It looks like ip the database is mongodb.

    3. Re:Self-serving project by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except, it doesn't use SQL Server. Or any other propriety software.

      https://www.inbloom.org/sites/default/files/docs-developer-1.0.68-20130118/doc-2b03fc2a-19c2-4ebd-a0a0-b660a34b7384.html

  19. Re:A win.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally, a win for homeschooling!

    FTFY.

  20. How anti-freedom of you! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See that's un-American of you, because by taking away the freedom of corporations to buy and sell private information about you, you are interfering with their precious freedom.

    How dare you.

     

  21. Scary by Murdoch5 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    attitudes toward school - even homework completion

    I'm confused on what this point has to do with the student. I never liked school growing up, I didn't like my teachers and I didn't like doing homework, yet I just graduated with my SECOND engineering degree. I'm pointing this out because what is going to happen from this database is private company's will see that Billy doesn't like going to school and assume incorrectly that Billy wont be a good employee when he grows up.

    This database is effectively a big profiling system that is designed to trap kids who don't feel that achieving is the most important thing in the world. How a kid feels about school really doesn't place any bearing on how they do in life overall, a kid that hates school can become an engineer well kids that love school end up drug addicts ( The "school lovers" I knew ). This database will not help kids in the long run, it will be used as a tool to track, record and hinder kids into adult hood, all because this database will track what Billy thinks of school and his teachers.

    1. Re:Scary by fermion · · Score: 1
      If a high school graduate is being hired for his or her first job and did not work, then yes, the high school record may be checked. And yes, if the student has not worked, has not learned to get to school on time and complete tasks, then it is a reasonable assumption that this kid would be a worse employee that someone who did manage to wake up every morning, get to work, and do a reasonable amount of work.

      Some will say that such a student will magically learn these skills when they are paid to so do, but do you want to be the employer who trains a kid to get to work on time and not spend all day on the phone. These are the kind of skills that are not supposed to be on the job training. No one is going to look at this after a college degree is achieved or when a work record is established. If I were an employer I would be worried of the legal implications on knowing anything from this database.

      But it could significantly impact school. The Gates foundation is significantly involved in school reform, and this could be used in two diametrically opposed ways. The positive or negative impact is going to be students who go through school in this system.

      The first is is track students between schools, something that is difficult to do now. The advantages are many. It will a more accurate drop out rate. It may minimize the huge problem of schools not being aware of a student's past academics and accommodations, thus possibly accidentally placing them in a duplicate class or not providing maximum accommodations. Comprehensive schools can use it to track students who change schools often due to dangerous behavior

      The second is to filter students for charter schools, which the Gates foundation strongly supports, to the point of investing $25 million to encourage districts to promote charter schools, Bill Gates speaking at the Charter School Conference, and $22 million in direct investment in charter schools.

      There is nothing inherently wrong with charter schools, except the way they are funded. They are often funded based on the fact that they are cheaper than a comprehensive school. The problem with this is that often the best way to make something cheaper is not to educate. It is a simple fact that some kids are cheaper to educate than other, and this has little to do with race or how much money the family has. What often happens now is that the charter school will filter, either though a difficult application process or arbitrary rules for who gets to stay in the school, to minimize the cost per student. This does not save any money to the taxpayer because the average cost for student increases at the comprehensive schools, but will make politicians look better because they can claim to find innovative ways to educate students.

      What this database will allow is for schools to target the preferred students. So someone like Yes can use the database to provide incentives to certain students to leave their schools not because they are not being provided an excellent education, but because YES wants to minimize the cost per student.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    2. Re:Scary by Kjella · · Score: 1

      This database is effectively a big profiling system that is designed to trap kids who don't feel that achieving is the most important thing in the world. How a kid feels about school really doesn't place any bearing on how they do in life overall, a kid that hates school can become an engineer well kids that love school end up drug addicts ( The "school lovers" I knew ).

      And a lot of kids and teens have huge swings growing up because they spent so much time living up to someone else's expectations and aspirations, particularly their parents or peers. Grades, sports, career, partying, whatever and the longer it goes on the harder the pendulum swings. You're really a B pupil but your parents won't take less than an A pupil so you're forced to study, study, study until you burn out and drop to a D student. Or maybe more relevant to Slashdot, the other kids hate nerds and so you intentionally underachieve to fit it. Or maybe just want to party hard and not give a fuck and not be mommy's little angel anymore. Most people need some kind of rebellion where they make their own choices, just to test the "well what if I don't do like [mom/dad/teacher/friends/family] wants me to".

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:Scary by kermidge · · Score: 1

      I don't recall seeing "the need to meddle" in Maslow's hierarchy, but I've met too many people over the years who seem to have it; this DB and the tools who'll make the tools to manipulate (whoops, meant 'facilitate', right?) "the educational experience" will be for them a luxurious playground in which to mess people about.

      I understand the reasoning that one can't judge the effectiveness of a system, and cannot improve that effectiveness, without measurement. So, what is measured, how, by whom?

      Whatever the good intentions and noble pronunciamentos, this will be a way to find profit at the expense of privacy and freedom to choose.
           

  22. Disastrous! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just a disaster for young people for the rest of their lives! They will be branded, slotted, discriminated against forever just because they are on this list! This MUST be stopped, and IMMEDIATELY! If there was ever a more egregious example of privacy violation, I cannot think of it! These pinheads - what are they THINKING?

  23. Scary outcome by Grayhand · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's no longer such a thing as a childhood. Anything you do or say practically from birth will be recorded and used against you. Have a bad year in grade school and some one will bring it up in your thirties when you apply for a job. A childhood prank and suddenly you are seen as a risky hire. It's already happening with social media as others are pointing out but imagine your whole school record available to employers and credit agencies? Even your criminal record is sealed when you turn 18 for a reason. One childhood mistake shouldn't ruin a life but they seem to have found a way. Perfect people will succeed, the rich as well since money can hide many sins, but the rest of us need to start worrying.

    1. Re:Scary outcome by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of people moving out of the U.S. so their kids start in a different educational system.

      Of course, there is the old school defense of "this isn't me, somebody using my identity!"

      Therefore we need something like GMI that will allow you to put food on the table or fulfill your parental responsibilities WITHOUT worrying what other people think or kissing asses.

    2. Re:Scary outcome by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      There's no longer such a thing as a childhood. Anything you do or say practically from birth will be recorded and used against you.

      What planet did you grow up on? It's been like that for decades... if not forever. The only difference today is that it's recorded in a database rather than people's fallible memories.

    3. Re:Scary outcome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Childhood is a creation of the first world. The idea that one can screw up for 20 years and then magically end up as a responsible adult has little basis in fact. When most of us were living in small towns, there was one way to erase the record of your past. To move away. A scary thing to me growing up was knowing that I was surrounded by criminals who knew they could do anything and get away with it. I had enough sense to stay out of trouble, and get educated, so I could get out of the hood, but not everyone did. I knew I was not perfect, not rich, so I had learn to be responsible. My friends were the same. Which is why we were successful without having to hid behind rules.

    4. Re:Scary outcome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prior to the SSN, which in spite of assurances to the contrary has become a national citizen registry, people routinely could move to a new area and use a new name if they were a general laborer where prior credentials or references were needed. Anyone who looks at family histories finds those odd name changes since they can be significant snags in tracing lineage.
      People as recently as when Social Security was enacted didn't trust the government nearly as much as they do today. Germany proved the value of propaganda, and it's been in use incessantly ever since.

  24. Re:money and status trumps children's privacy by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    This sounds like a card game.

    "Money and status trump children's privacy, but Children trump adult privacy in legal filesharing". Or something.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  25. Isn't it neat.... by bickerdyke · · Score: 2

    Isn't it neat when other people get to decide if they want to share YOUR personal data?

    --
    bickerdyke
    1. Re:Isn't it neat.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why wouldn't the same people who choose how to spend your money also decide whether or not to sell your data

    2. Re:Isn't it neat.... by LeadSongDog · · Score: 1

      Isn't it neat when other people get to decide if they want to share YOUR personal data?

      They aren't just selling your personal data. They've been selling YOU for years, thirteenth amendment or no. Now that you're a commodity corporate asset, management has a fiduciary duty to maximize ROI for shareholders. That includes extending ownership to any offspring units you produce, and increasing the value of each unit by providing detailled characterization to buyers.
      Target and others profile your behavior in and out of stores: what labels do you read, what magazines are you reading, when did you stop buying pregnancy tests, when was your baby due, what size diapers do you choose, when did you start solid food, what language is her bedtime reading, it's all grist for the mill...
      Don't like it? Buy from street vendors or small consignment shops. Pay cash or barter. Share shopping errands with a friend.
      If this sounds somehow wrong to you, write (with a pen and paper) to your congress critter and demand you get your rights back. Let them know the price of their failure will be your active personal support of their opponent in the next race. That's what gets their attention.

      --
      Oh, I'm sorry sir, I thought you were referring to me, Mr. Wensleydale.
    3. Re:Isn't it neat.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they have it to share, then it's not really my personal data.

    4. Re:Isn't it neat.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PROTIP: There is no such thing as "intellectual property". It is physically impossible to "own" data. Simple as that.
      Of course that doesn't give them the right to rape your privacy. Because that is just being an asshole, and gets you expelled from the tribe. At least in a sane society.
      But if you don't want your secrets to be passed around behind your back, then don't give them to untrustworthy individuals.
      Yes, you can't hide everything you should have the possibility to hide if things were ideal. But again, in a sane society, there would be a concept of forgive and forget. Things would not be remembered forever, and not get passed on to everyone. Hell, even criminals are forgiven. That's what the act of releasing them and/or deleting their records is. And it's right that way.

      That's what's missing:
      - People don't have a society of trust anymore. Trust relationships is a foreign concept to them. Every dog eats every other dog whenever there's a chance, not thinking about the long-term disadvantages that ignoring the advantages of teamwork brings with it.
      - Things aren't forgotten or forgiven anymore. You have a Jew star sticking on your forever. Once peed in public (A morally absolutely unproblematic thing. It's just a penis / pussy. Stop being a Catholiban! Nudity doesn't harm anyone.), "sexual predator" forever.

    5. Re:Isn't it neat.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if you don't want your secrets to be passed around behind your back, then don't give them to untrustworthy individuals.

      I generally agree with your post, but I don't think the part quoted above is applicable in this situation. Many families don't have much choice as to which school educates their children.

  26. Re:A win.... by Deep+Esophagus · · Score: 2

    {shrug} depends on your definition of "win". For us, rampant drug use, chronic bullying, and overemphasis on sports at the expense of academics were all important reasons to homeschool our hatchlings. So from my point of view, this news is indeed *another* win.

  27. Re: disabilities in a database by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2

    Also that gets into Gattaca grade problems because data "wants to be abused!" (To abuse a phrase!) So what's stopping insurance companies from playing games with it as well as employers?

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  28. Tracking for education, fine. Commercial? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is NO way that this information should be available to private companies. There is no justification. ZERO. This puts school boards and whoever else is collecting and accessing this data into an unacceptable conflict of interest. They're right this data is worth money. But what they should be saying is: "No, you can't have it at ANY price, because we protect the privacy of the students we are entrusted to teach."

    The information would be very helpful to evaluate progress of students individually and overall, but tying it to them in easily identifiable ways is foolish. It's a disaster waiting to happen. Access to it should be very limited, and some information shouldn't be generally accessible to anyone. Federal laws should PROHIBIT sharing of this data with anyone but the school authorities.

    To demonstrate how bad this is, I have another suggestion. Why don't we build a similar database containing all the same information about educators nationwide (employment details, medical history, what they teach, the whole thing), and then sell it to marketers so we can make more money for the schools to run their operations? What's that? There are issues of privacy? Who'd have thunk?

  29. Any person getting a government education... by hsthompson69 · · Score: 0

    ...should have their school records available to the taxpayers who funded them. If teachers can't judge the progress of a student by their school records, how are taxpayers supposed to judge the efficiency of schools or teachers or students without those records?

    As far as I'm concerned, as soon as someone gets on the government dole, either because they're employed by the government, or are being supported by the government using taxpayer money, *every* taxpayer has a right to inspect the data. The person paying the bills has a right to know what they're paying for.

    1. Re:Any person getting a government education... by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      Children don't have a choice of where they go to school. The parents send them. If your parents insisted you go to government funded school, would you want a database like that tracking your every move and broadcasting it to anyone and everyone? What if you had learning disabilities? Still no problem?

    2. Re:Any person getting a government education... by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      Children are affected by parental decisions outside of their control all the time. Parents should know well ahead of time that the consequence of taking a government job, or taking government benefits or entitlements, means an accountability to the taxpayer. Learning disabilities or no, the public has a right to the data generated by its financial largess.

      Is it okay for government funded research to remain private? Is it okay for sex offenders to remain private?

      Government is an extension of the taxpayer - if I'm paying the bill, I deserve a look at the data. The only issue I'd have with this database is that it should be 100% publicly accessible.

    3. Re:Any person getting a government education... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...should have their school records available to the taxpayers who funded them. If teachers can't judge the progress of a student by their school records, how are taxpayers supposed to judge the efficiency of schools or teachers or students without those records?

      As far as I'm concerned, as soon as someone gets on the government dole, either because they're employed by the government, or are being supported by the government using taxpayer money, *every* taxpayer has a right to inspect the data. The person paying the bills has a right to know what they're paying for.

      Spoken like a true liberal. The only thing left is to institute a 100% tax, and EVERYTHING will be "funded by taxpayer money", and we'll wake up in an Orwellian "paradise".

    4. Re:Any person getting a government education... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the overall effectiveness of a district, or a school within a district, fine... things like 95% graduation rate, 1% truancy, 10% test too low on standardized tests, 80% go on to college.. that sort of thing is fine to compile and publicize... BUT you, nor i, nor anyone else outside of a student's parents, their school administrators, counselors, or the student's teachers has a right to, nor needs to, know anything relating to any particular student.

      and outsourcing this stuff, en masse, by entire states is just plain *stupid*. keep your data in-house, under lock-and-key and OFF THE FUCKING INTERNET.

    5. Re:Any person getting a government education... by MerlynDavis · · Score: 1

      As far as I'm concerned, as soon as someone gets on the government dole, either because they're employed by the government, or are being supported by the government using taxpayer money, *every* taxpayer has a right to inspect the data. The person paying the bills has a right to know what they're paying for.

      I want a copy of your criminal record, as well as your financial records...

      You get police protection in your city, yes? You also have money in a bank with FDIC insurance?

      That's all paid for by the government.

      Also, I want access to your travel records....you drive on public roads...also, you are protected by the US Military....

      Where do we stop?

      Studying individual student records, including hobbies, likes/dislikes, etc. won't help judge school progress...

      --
      -merlyn
    6. Re:Any person getting a government education... by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      Criminal records should be public data.

      Police reports should be public data.

      FDIC insured accounts should be public data (particularly with payouts).

      Government cameras and other traffic observations on public roads should be public data.

      Individual student records for students in government schools should be public data.

      Employment records of all government employees (including salaries, evaluations, etc), should be public data.

      If I'm paying for it as a taxpayer, I deserve the data.

    7. Re:Any person getting a government education... by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      No. I paid for it, I deserve the raw data. If you don't want your child's school records public, then don't send them to government school on my dime.

    8. Re:Any person getting a government education... by tibman · · Score: 1

      If you're driving on a government funded road, i want to know where you are. Just so that i know you aren't speeding or being dangerous on roads i helped pay for : )

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    9. Re:Any person getting a government education... by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between able-bodied people living in generational welfare and children going to government funded schools. Our country was set up such that the states had a duty to provide education to the nation's children. I agree with the broader point you're making, but not this specific instance. Regardless of whatever the parents are up to, there should be no interference or surrender of rights by having a child attend one school versus another. This database doesn't get you any accountability. Test scores, attendance and such are recorded by the same system you wish to monitor. It's not useful and comes at a significant sacrifice of privacy rights.

      Government funded research should be public, other than for research that would significantly affect our national security. Sex offenders should be private if they are no longer on parole/probation. If the system says they have completed their sentence, that's it. Personally, I'd rather see most of them executed, but that's not likely to happen. I don't agree with the courts letting them free if they're still a risk to society. This public registry thing they're doing does not protect the public. You can't escape them, nor should anyone feel obligated to.

      I see the moderator nazis nuked your first comment. Pity. This is a valid avenue of discussion related to the OP.
      -1 disagree!
      -1 disagree!

    10. Re:Any person getting a government education... by Common+Joe · · Score: 1

      I don't disagree with you, but taking what you say straight is a setup an us vs them kind of society. Those who are rich and can afford not to be tracked publicly will have an advantage over those who are helped by the public. Knowledge is power. One person who has knowledge while the other doesn't is a bad setup. Indeed, that is what we see today in a lot of ways. What you propose will further that widen the crack. I think we need to pull back more than what we have today or go further than what you propose.

    11. Re:Any person getting a government education... by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      Interesting point - arguably already a reality, since the rich already can pay for additional privacy today :)

      However, at the very least, this will make pause for the rich who would be political - that is to say, those rich who wish to be government employees, or take government largess, will have to give up their privacy. I'd even go so far as to assert that any private company that has a government contract must make the terms and performance of that contract public.

      As it stands right now, the grand disconnect between the taxpayers and information on the things they pay for seems like an evil enough to be remedied. Whether or not an upper class that can hide its children's test scores and school records provides any sort of problem to be addressed I think is an open question.

    12. Re:Any person getting a government education... by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      It's not a surrender of rights - it's a protection of rights. If taxpayer dollars are used for a function, the taxpayer has a right to the data thus derived.

      Now, one may argue that the arbitrary use of government funds to run schools is an improper one - and that would solve the moral conflict quite nicely.

      I suppose if you're arguing, as say the military might, that while the public funds the military, the exposure of say, secret special ops identities would breach national security and so should be protected, I'm not sure if I can see such a clear harm from the public consumption of government school data. Yes, I can imagine some far fetched scenario where a serial killer who hunts people who get B+ on every third test for a year might do some data mining that would end up targeting some unfortunate souls, but as a general rule, I think I'd prefer a 100% publicly accessible database rather than one shared only with private companies and those politically connected.

    13. Re:Any person getting a government education... by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      Yup, if the taxpayer funded the road, they should have access to the cameras installed on it. I should also be able to look up the driver history of any license plate, and see if the asshole in front of me has a drunk driving conviction, or a speeding conviction.

      Here's the thing - the government is already using this data, so imagining that it's "private" is an illusion - the only reasonable response is to make sure *everyone* has the information, so that they can be fully aware of what data is out there on themselves, and make decisions, say, to only drive on private roads if they are concerned with surveillance.

    14. Re:Any person getting a government education... by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      You can't see harm? If a student is tagged as learning disabled and it's published to that database, it could have irreparable harm to their future. What employer would choose that person as a new hire over one that hasn't been tagged? Even if it later turns out to be false, that's as permanent as a glitch on a person's credit report. Heck, we had people wanting President Obama's college transcripts. Well, they can't get that.. but they'd be able to get any public school records (assuming he went to a public school). It's pointless data, but parts of the public would run wild with it regardless.

      This data should not be accessible to the federal government at all. It should not be accessible to anyone other than the school system, the student, and the parents. It should also be destroyed by the student's request upon reaching the age of eighteen.

      There is no accountability to be had from this data. It's entered by the same people in the same system that you wish to hold accountable. That'd be like having a tax cheat perform their own audit. As for surrender of rights, this is an all-out assault on the right to privacy. Would you like to barcode the nation's children as well? It'd make it that much easier to pull up their data.

    15. Re:Any person getting a government education... by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      Isn't it better to know that a student was learning disabled? I mean, say you've got that student out of school, and they're looking for a job. Employer doesn't know anything about the kid, and during the interview, sees terribly poor performance because of dyslexia - but because he doesn't *know* he's looking at a dyslexic, he just figures the kid is stupid, lazy or being disrespectful, and *bam* - no job offer. While certainly there are some people who will take a look at some tag on some file and jump to an unfortunate conclusion, there seems little reason to hide information like that.

      As for being accessible to "the school system", that *is* the federal government. And knowing the school district employees that I do, that means it really isn't secure at all. Furthermore, if a student's performance isn't public to the taxpayer, how are they supposed to know their tax dollars are being spent well? Without the raw data, school systems (under the "sorry, it's just us, the student and parents") can make up any story they want.

      As for being "entered by the same people in the same system", make no mistake, I don't just want to hold the educators accountable, the *students* and even the *parents* should be held accountable, neither of whom actually enter in test scores or other entries into the school record.

      As for the right to privacy, just like a person walking on a public street has no right to prohibit people from photographing or listening to them, a student in a public school should have no right to prohibit the taxpayer from observing them.

      Now the bar codes - that's an interesting idea. Imagine, for example, if instead of a right to privacy, we asserted a right to *identity* - that is, you could arbitrarily change your identity at any time, to something unattached to your previous identities. Of course, this is morally suspect in say, cases of a fraud or criminal changing identity to avoid accountability for their crimes, but in essence, that's what a strong right to privacy would be - "sorry sir, but I have no past record for you to examine". I haven't thought through all the benefits and disadvantages such a "right to identity" would have, but I think that as a parallel to the "right to privacy", it can be somewhat informative.

      While I value my privacy, and certainly enjoy poisoning the well of data collectors to avoid targeting, I'm not sure if I'd embrace it as a civil right, since it requires the effective suppression of other people's speech. Back in the day where you lived your whole life in the same village, effectively, you had no privacy - the school marm and all the other socialites were certainly privy to who was bright in school, and who was a bit slow. Going to a village shopkeep looking for a job included dealing with whatever reputation you had garnered during your life, however fair or unfair it was earned. It might be that society is arguably better off when people know everything about everyone else, and it might be that society is arguably better off when we're all effectively strangers - I've yet to see any particularly convincing evidence either way.

    16. Re:Any person getting a government education... by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      Isn't it better to know that a student was learning disabled?

      That's not for us to decide on behalf of someone else. If they want to bring it up with the potential employer, that's their business.

      As for being accessible to "the school system", that *is* the federal government.

      No, that's typically the town with some state oversight. The feds are overstepping their boundaries by interfering with them.

      As for the right to privacy, just like a person walking on a public street has no right to prohibit people from photographing or listening to them, a student in a public school should have no right to prohibit the taxpayer from observing them.

      What? Are you going to stick cameras in the stalls of public restrooms too? I mean.. they're paid for by taxpayer money, right? How do we know what's going on there if there's no video record?

      Now the bar codes - that's an interesting idea.

      Is this your gimmick account?

      Imagine, for example, if instead of a right to privacy, we asserted a right to *identity* - that is, you could arbitrarily change your identity at any time, to something unattached to your previous identities.

      You already have a right to your identity.. ever hear of "identity theft"? You can also change your name if you like. Heck, you can even post as anonymous coward.. which might be advisable in your case.

      You're suggesting with your village parable that there can be only two types of information. Information that is public, and that which is private. Student records are in between. Those with an actual purpose get to see them. Parents, for example. They can also be shared by the student with colleges. The taxpayers of a town and state have a right to a statistical summary of certain data to gauge the school's performance, but they have no business accessing data of individual students, not if it can be matched to a particular student.

      What next? Do I have to post my performance reviews from work? I don't work for the government, but I do pay taxes. I might be slacking off or something. Off to the gulag! And no, that's not interesting and it's not something we should do. Good grief.

    17. Re:Any person getting a government education... by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      That's not for us to decide on behalf of someone else. If they want to bring it up with the potential employer, that's their business.

      It becomes our decision when we're paying for the education. Imagine that potential employer effectively paid for 100% of that student's education - don't they have a right to the data regarding that education?

      The feds are overstepping their boundaries by interfering with them.

      I firmly agree, and have personally observed the effects of "No Child Left Behind" as a federal lever to impose national will on state schools. If we actually had real state control, then maybe we could try out the effect of 100% public public school records in one state and observe the consequences compared to another.

      What? Are you going to stick cameras in the stalls of public restrooms too? I mean.. they're paid for by taxpayer money, right? How do we know what's going on there if there's no video record?

      That's actually a very good point - publicly funded restrooms (say, those at a park or rest stop), should certainly be open to public scrutiny. But I'd assert the data wouldn't have to include full-on video of people doing their business (though, lord knows, it's not like the consumer technology doesn't exist to setup your own pinhole camera). My real problem with government surveillance isn't that it exists in the first place, but that the data it brings isn't made public. If government wanted to install video systems that recorded every person entering and exiting a public restroom, the entire public should have access to that feed - as it is, the disparity of information between citizen and government is troublesome. I guess I'm arguing that expanding the information to the citizen is easier than restricting the capabilities of government.

      You already have a right to your identity.. ever hear of "identity theft"? You can also change your name if you like. Heck, you can even post as anonymous coward.. which might be advisable in your case.

      I mean something different - I mean, literally, the ability to change your name without anyone, including the government, being able to track that change. This isn't about anonymity, this is about having the right to effectively destroy your history and start from zero reputation. It was something one could do in older days, simply by walking far enough away from where people knew you...but was it a *right*? Was it a *good* thing on the whole?

      What next? Do I have to post my performance reviews from work? I don't work for the government, but I do pay taxes.

      As a taxpayer, you deserve access to the performance reviews of every single government employee.

      The taxpayers of a town and state have a right to a statistical summary of certain data to gauge the school's performance, but they have no business accessing data of individual students, not if it can be matched to a particular student.

      I disagree - taxpayers of a town and state deserve the raw data. If a student doesn't want to have their school performance public, they shouldn't go to a taxpayer funded school.

      For all the theoretical harm of knowing that Johnny is learning disabled (or hell, gifted), I simply don't see any overwhelming evidence that the harm would outweigh the benefit. I'd be open to actual experiments on it though :)

    18. Re:Any person getting a government education... by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      Interesting point - arguably already a reality, since the rich already can pay for additional privacy today :)

      Not really. Ever heard of "paparazzi"? This maybe true for non-celebrity rich people, if there is actually such a thing.

  30. Hackers, get your keyboards ready by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    Database will be stolen in 5...4...3...

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  31. How is this FERPA-compliant? by JDG1980 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    On its face, the proposal to share student data with private companies seems to clearly violate FERPA, the federal law covering privacy of educational data. According to the article linked, the schools are claiming that it's OK, because when FERPA says it's OK for student data to be accessed by "School officials with legitimate educational interest", that really also means third-party contractors working for the schools. Apparently, the Department of Education has signed off on this. WTF? How can this possibly fit the legislative intent? It says "school officials", not "school vendors" or "school contractors". And there's a reason for that: actual school officials are subject to some level of public control and accountability, while private contractors are not.

    This plan should be challenged in court as a violation of federal law.

    1. Re:How is this FERPA-compliant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh shut up.

      sharing is caring.

    2. Re:How is this FERPA-compliant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe a request for addresses of all 6-9 year old boys in a school's area on NAMBLA letterhead would catch some attention.
      Do they have letterhead? Maybe a Catholic Church instead.

  32. It strange what Americans will allow to be tracked by qzzpjs · · Score: 1

    So, apparently you're allowed to collect and share all this information about your children, but God forbid they collect a single detail about your guns! Or maybe you just need a private marketing company to do it since Congress made laws that prevents the government from doing it themselves.

    That said, we tried gun registration in Canada and it failed miserably due to the cost.

  33. And yet the CDC can't... by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 0

    Do research into gun violence and Doctors can't ask if you own a gun....wow....

  34. This is Microsoft's fault - no joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The database is a joint project of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which provided most of the funding"

    Leave it to Microsoft. And they gave Google crap about privacy?

  35. Correction: Not GMI by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 1

    It has to be unconditional except being a legal citizen or resident.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee

  36. Prospective employer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can see prospective employers faking their way into having access to this database.

  37. InBloom FERPA statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    For anyone wanting to read it.

    https://inbloom.org/sites/default/files/inBloom-and-ferpa.pdf

  38. Reminds me of... by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

    http://blogs.ajc.com/bob-barr-blog/2010/02/01/americans-say-%E2%80%9Cno%E2%80%9D-to-medical-database/

    Obama wants to do the same thing with medical records.

    I'm also a bit conflicted on the security aspect of the matter, what would any non-pedo's motive be for stealing / compromising this data? The only thing is it becomes a true permanent record in the sense that it can be easily retrieved 20 years down the line. But, another interesting aspect is, nobody that I know of that employees people actually looks up grades and kinda just take your word for it, could that change?

    And yet another interesting aspect is how we separate the privacy of 18. Could this erode that line?

    1. Re:Reminds me of... by tibman · · Score: 1

      Digital medical records are great. You can visit any clinic or hospital that is wired up and they'll be able to access all your x-rays, notes, and prescriptions. Paper is fine though for people who've never moved and have a family doctor or something. I wouldn't be a fan if they sent parts of my record anywhere without my consent though.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
  39. Disappointed by Indigo · · Score: 2

    From the linked Reuters article:
    > The database is a joint project of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which provided most of the
    > funding, the Carnegie Corporation of New York and school officials from several states. Amplify
    > Education, a division of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp, built the infrastructure over the past 18
    > months. When it was ready, the Gates Foundation turned the database over to a newly created
    > nonprofit, inBloom Inc, which will run it.

    I thought the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation was trying to *help* children, not *sell* them.

    1. Re:Disappointed by sam_handelman · · Score: 1
      --
      The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
  40. non-profit ! = non-evil by CaptainNerdCave · · Score: 1

    We can't assume a company will be good just because it's non-profit. If access is "limited", how much will it cost to become unlimited? If it's limited, someone is limiting it, and everyone has a price. Don't kid yourself.

    Governments are supposed to be non-profit, and look what has happened throughout world history.

    When it comes to governments, or any institution that has unrestricted access to all of the information about a population, no amount of suspicion is too much.

  41. Not the perfect, the boring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " Perfect people will succeed"

    No, the boring one, the one which don't make waves, the unremarkable, the one jsut following the flow will be advantaged in such system. The perfect little robot.

  42. Laugh by koan · · Score: 1

    Guess what jobs you kid won't be hired for once they look at his school records.

    Sharing this information is going to far, corporations should not know these things.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  43. Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HERF gun to the serves

  44. Sorry NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Government dole? Sigh.

    How about when you personally are in need of some sort of government assistance? Say psychological or medical because of a long term disability that drained your savings and forced you to apply for government disability or even go on medicaid? And then all of your neighbors and potential employers get to look up that maybe you are impotent or utilize long term counseling because of psychological trama you suffered as a child due to a molestation? Of course that won't prevent you from getting any jobs right? And I'm sure the neighbors will let you keep coaching the local soccer team and having you over for dinner?

    In aggregate you have every right to know how much is being spent and specifics on where. But you have no right to inspect someone's detailed private data just because government taxes paid for it.

    1. Re:Sorry NO by hsthompson69 · · Score: 1

      If you have a psychological or medical problem that is being paid for by the taxpayer, the taxpayer deserves the data. Period.

  45. Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, SERVERS. (Got to start spellchecking)

  46. Courtesy of Bill and Melinda by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 2

    FTFA: The database is a joint project of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation,

    They label it as "personalized learning" but it could just as easily be used for "personalized hiring". Typical M$ spin applies easily here.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
    1. Re:Courtesy of Bill and Melinda by helobugz · · Score: 1

      You meant to say, personalized NON-hiring, right? Employers only look to databases and credit history for reasons NOT to hire you.

  47. This isn't legal is it? by gr8_phk · · Score: 1

    How can this be legal? The schools are sharing student records with an outside organization. It's also not supposed to be legal to share SSNs in this way. WTF is wrong with people, they think they can just do whatever they feel like.

  48. Permanent Record by sudon't · · Score: 1

    I'm so glad my Permanent Record, a bundle of IBM cards and a rotting rubber-band, is packed away in a box somewhere, gathering dust. These kids nowadays, they'll never escape theirs.

    --
    -- sudon't

    Air-ride Equipped

    1. Re:Permanent Record by Kittenman · · Score: 1

      I'm so glad my Permanent Record, a bundle of IBM cards and a rotting rubber-band, is packed away in a box somewhere, gathering dust. These kids nowadays, they'll never escape theirs.

      Got your record here now ... we still have a hollerith reader sir. Oh..... my.... goodness.... Why yes, you wouldn't want THAT widely known now, would you?

      --
      "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
  49. HIPPA Violation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Subject says it all, this would be a clear violation of HIPPA, assuming the school nurse, shrink, guidence counsellor or other specialist is held to that standard as they should be in referance to medical issues of students...

  50. You thought a credit report was pushing it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait until potential employers start checking your 4th grade transcript...

  51. This is despicable! by NoSalt · · Score: 0

    I cannot believe how cavalier their attitude is towards the possible release of data of millions of children. Where will those attidudes be when a person turns 18 and has to pay thousands of dollars to have their credit score cleaned up because their SSN was hacked?

  52. Grooming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a tedious word, for ever used by British journalists in the ultimate '1984' newspeak fashion- "grooming". However, turning the word against its masters, these giant privacy invading databases that record everything the State can find out about our children are a clear act of 'grooming'. They prepare the coming generation to live in a "no place to hide" society that was commonly discussed as inevitable in the 1950s (although back then it was assumed that we would all end up effective 'slaves' of giant multi-national corporations).

    Sometimes 'grooming' of kids is 'good'. When I was at school, we were 'groomed' to accept decimal currency and the SI system of 'weights and measures' at a time when the adults of the nation loved their 'stones', 'ounces', 'inches' and 'shillings'. However, even this 'grooming' had a darker side, for it prepared the nation for entry into the EU (whether the citizens of Britain really wanted this or not).

    These child databases are being rolled out in every nation of the West. Of course, the sheeple are told that this is just a giant co-incidence, with each nation spontaneously thinking that this is a good thing to do, regardless of public opinion or concern.

    Teachers are being paid to act as spies, and not just in the classroom. Some teachers spend hours a day entering extra details about pupils and their families- actions protected by blanket immunity. You should recall that when the Soviet Union broke up, citizens in nations like Poland and East Germany were shocked to discover just how widespread spying had been by employees of the government, including teachers and doctors. Today, the UK and USA proudly boast how they encourage state employees to spy on us.

    The whole program is sold to the sheeple (Rupert Murdoch depicts the users of his world wide news agencies as 'sheep' in the official Fox/News International corporate Xmas cards each year- Google if you don't believe me) on the back of "if you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide". In UK Academy Schools, this 'philosophy' is backed up by hundreds of cameras that track each pupil, even in the toilets and changing rooms.

    There is no room for privacy in the world of '1984'. How does an army prepare to brutalise new recruits so they will murder on command? Simple- it strips them of all privacy.

    When modern policing was first introduced, the no.1 concern of all politicians was that the new police powers must NOT allow the privacy of ordinary citizens to be destroyed by the State. The police had to have damned good reason to exercise their powers, and then only with a continuous understanding of the rights of law-abiding citizens. Today, this policy has been turned on its head.

    Kids are 'groomed' into thinking "only deviants seek privacy- where they clearly intend to hide their undesirable behaviour". For many years now, children of a vulnerable age have been forced to participate in "CIRCLE TIME", where they are instructed to reveal their deepest secrets to fellow classmates and the teacher. I am old enough to recall when such behaviour was said to indicate the brainwashing techniques used by cults- a staple of TV movies from the 1970s.

    Society splits naturally into sections.
    -the psychopaths who rise to the supreme positions of power, and only pretend to hold religious or dogmatic beliefs.
    -the army of evil who willingly serve strong psychopathic leaders. These people do hold religious or dogmatic beliefs, and are stupid enough to think their leaders do to.
    -the army of useful idiots who believe that things are the way they are for a good reason, and must be put up with, no matter how much pain they feel
    -the collection of decent, moral, good people who despise armies and wars (especially those waged by their 'own' people), and love freedom, individuality and privacy. This group is often cowed by the violence and evil of the other two main groups, which means it frequently mistakes members of its own group for 'useful idiots', and this leads to underestimating th

  53. Oblig xkcd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exploits of a Mom:
    http://xkcd.com/327/

  54. Organizing links by sam_handelman · · Score: 1

    Sheila Kaplan has been on this since federal child provacy laws were relaxed to permit it in 2011. She launched Education New York's National Opt-out Campaign to alert parents to their rights under FERPA to restrict third-party access to their children's information and encourage them to review their school's annual FERPA notification at the beginning of the
    school year. Here's her website:
    http://www.educationnewyork.com/about.html

    and a parent information page
    http://educationnewyork.com/optoutnow

    --
    The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
  55. a fresh idea soured by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The initial idea of recording more real data about each student could improve each kid's education, as well as improving the technology of teaching in general. We all know that the coming century demands updated educational thinking. But the private investment wouldn't be there unless the plan from the beginning was to profit from it.
          I wish the Dept of Ed had done this on it's own with some basic protections like requiring by law that:
      UID information be used only for that person's education
      Data being used to track broad, nationwide statistics be stripped of UID
      Each person's whole record should be deleted upon graduation, apart from grade transcripts.