Texas school district, community at odds over student tracking badges

[Donjeta]

Jeeze, Louise, people! What's the big deal? If you think armed commandos of 2nd graders are going to defend our freedom by overthrowing the federal government, you are entirely divorced from reality.

Can you point me to the post that says that?

 

[raeann]

With all due respect, discussion is more fruitful if one responds to claims that have been made by the other posters. Of course it is absurd to suggest that he's excited by a blip on the computer screen more than seeing flesh and blood children. I think this is why no one is suggesting that here. It's not a source of sexual gratification, but it could be a tool for detecting children who are wandering alone in a vulnerable position and getting to them.

As for catching predators dragging kids into the boiler room, it would probably take them very little time to take the badge off the child before going into the boiler room.

JMO, they need to keep a strict log of everyone who accesses the data about the students whereabouts.

BBM

exactly, and not only a problem with a possible predator....


I haven't read this entire thread but unless these chips are going to be surgically IMPLANTED into the kids, rather than in some sort of a badge....its going to take about 3.5 seconds before the kids figure out how to outwit any type of scanner at the classroom door or wherever! Kids will carry and scan other kids badges for them. If the scanner can detect two badges "too close" together, the kids will enter with one badge on, exit the room for a few seconds without any badge and re-enter with someone else's badge on...etc. etc. It's a perfect exercise in kid ingenuity and much easier to fool than a teacher who can SEE who is there and who is not!

Physically taking roll takes literally seconds of time, and can easily be completed and entered into a computer while the students get out their books or turn in homework assignments. Not to mention this is often done by a student aid and not by the teacher at all, so it takes NONE of the teachers time.

jmo

 

[Nova]

Can you point me to the post that says that?

It was a reference to the invocation of "Big Brother" and George Orwell. In the book, the proles are monitored almost constantly to keep them from rising up and overthrowing the government. My point was that 8-year-olds are already monitored and not likely to foment revolution.

 

[Nova]

With all due respect, discussion is more fruitful if one responds to claims that have been made by the other posters. Of course it is absurd to suggest that he's excited by a blip on the computer screen more than seeing flesh and blood children. I think this is why no one is suggesting that here. It's not a source of sexual gratification, but it could be a tool for detecting children who are wandering alone in a vulnerable position and getting to them.

As for catching predators dragging kids into the boiler room, it would probably take them very little time to take the badge off the child before going into the boiler room.

JMO, they need to keep a strict log of everyone who accesses the data about the students whereabouts.

I have no problem with restricting access to student information. That should be done now (and it certainly was where I taught university students).

But for the life of me, I don't understand why you and Kimberly think a pedophile principal or janitor is going to spend his day watching a computer screen rather than being out among the children.

And, yes, discussion would be more fruitful if somebody would answer my question as to how this system will be misused, rather than telling me "it's obvious" and ranting about "Big Brother".

 

[Nova]

raeann, I don't doubt that some kids will learn ways to get around the computer. Hell, I learned to sign an English teacher's name and signed permissions slips for all three of her daughters throughout high school. (We didn't even do anything wrong (except for the forgery itself); it was just a matter of convenience.)

And teachers will still need to keep an eye on their students, particularly the young ones.

But none of that means we just surrender and stop tracking kids when they are under the care of the school.

 

[Nova]

I should think it's obvious. Provided that the predator has access to the information, he gets information about the whereabouts of a whole bunch of students all over the school at a glance, and doesn't have to prowl the corridors to get it.

His own two eyes can only be at one location at any one time.

Think Argus Filch and the Marauder's Map in Harry Potter.

I'm sorry, Donjeta, I overlooked this post earlier.

1. In the Potter books, Hogwarts is considerably larger than an American elementary or middle school.

2. Since when does a sexual predator depend on knowledge of large numbers of students rather then one, isolated and vulnerable victim?

3. If a predator depends on a computer read-out, he has no way of knowing whether a student is still in the place s/he was when the computer took its last reading. This is why the naked eye works better: it records info in real time and in close proximity.

I agreed with you in another post that the results of such a scan should be kept confidential. But I still don't see how such a system will become a convenient tool for sexual predation.

 

[ChasingMoxie]

I wear one of these at my office anytime I enter the building, and I have for the past ten years. It tracks my movement through the building, and grants or restricts access by area. I'm not alone in wearing this type of badge, so does virtually everybody who works at any large sensitive-data-housing corporation in the United States. I'm all for using technology to simplify and improve security and efficiency. Wearing a badge does that. There is no way that corporations would shell out for a system that didn't provide a measured return on investment. Count on it (hehe!). If there is some insidious threat by my wearing an electronic badge, I assume I would have heard about it by now. So far no mandatory TVs broadcasting propaganda in my bedroom all night long, but I do admit to being somewhat concerned about the growing porcine menace.

 

[Donjeta]

I'm sorry, Donjeta, I overlooked this post earlier.

1. In the Potter books, Hogwarts is considerably larger than an American elementary or middle school.

It doesn't matter, it could nevertheless be very convenient for a predatory school employee if they could figuratively prowl the corridors without leaving their desks and attracting undue attention.

2. Since when does a sexual predator depend on knowledge of large numbers of students rather then one, isolated and vulnerable victim?

If you're a lion you tend to have to scan the herd of zebras to find the one zebra that is vulnerable.

3. If a predator depends on a computer read-out, he has no way of knowing whether a student is still in the place s/he was when the computer took its last reading. This is why the naked eye works better: it records info in real time and in close proximity.

If the pervert wants to get into actual contact with the child he would presumably have all the benefits of the naked eye at his disposal while he's getting there. In the meantime, having a virtual eye in the corridors could be useful for detecting opportunities since his actual proximity might be mostly expected to be at his work station with no isolated kids close at hand and if he kept constantly walking in the corridors trying to detect them with his magical naked eye and totally ignoring his work, his co-workers might take notice.

It depends on what the employee's tasks are. A janitor might find have an excuse to linger in the corridors but if an administrative employee or a principal spent a lot of time ijust walking around the school someone would wonder.

I agreed with you in another post that the results of such a scan should be kept confidential. But I still don't see how such a system will become a convenient tool for sexual predation.

It's perfectly fine that you don't. Maybe you just don't have a criminal mind. Hopefully it will not be a huge problem, and I am not saying it will be very often misused. But it could be if someone had the desire to. They need to install proper safeguards that alert if someone unauthorized attempts to access the data or if someone who has the right to access the data seems to access it in a deviant pattern.

Hopefully they're for the most part successful in doing background checks and keeping the perverts out of the school systems either way because they have no place to be there, badges or no badges.

Mostly I just think that personal checks involving an actual person who knows the children and sees what the children are doing is absolutely necessary anyway so it makes no sense to me that it's presented as an advantage of the badges that the teachers don't have to spend their time on this any more.

Big Brother watching doesn't worry me, I totally hope and expect that my little ones are watched when they're at school anyway.

 

[raeann]

raeann, I don't doubt that some kids will learn ways to get around the computer. Hell, I learned to sign an English teacher's name and signed permissions slips for all three of her daughters throughout high school. (We didn't even do anything wrong (except for the forgery itself); it was just a matter of convenience.)

And teachers will still need to keep an eye on their students, particularly the young ones.

But none of that means we just surrender and stop tracking kids when they are under the care of the school.

My point exactly, if teachers do the tracking instead of or along with badges, then great.....my kids private schools already track the kids QUITE precisely without any kind of badges. The kids have an extremely low absentee rate and very close to a 100% graduation rate. Badges and computers are no substitute for a responsible and caring staff.

jmo

 

[Nova]

My point exactly, if teachers do the tracking instead of or along with badges, then great.....my kids private schools already track the kids QUITE precisely without any kind of badges. The kids have an extremely low absentee rate and very close to a 100% graduation rate. Badges and computers are no substitute for a responsible and caring staff.

jmo

I agree with you, raeann, and I agree with donjeta that controls should be instituted for any use of new technology.

A custodian checking the computer to locate students SHOULD be a red flag that the system is being misused. I can't think of a legitimate reason why the custodian would need that info. (This is not to dump on custodians. I mention them only because I don't see how their job includes tracking children.)

As ChasingMoxie points out above, lots of us have used similar systems when working with confidential data. Ideally, I presume, scanners in doorways would record the coming and going of badges. (Yes, a kid could give his badge to somebody else to take to class; but then the kid without a badge should trip the scanner as an "unauthorized" person in any room he enters. There are ways to get around misuse of the system.)