With two months left in the school year, we’re only 34 school shootings from last year’s tally, according to the “,” which tracks the number of cases where a gun is “brandished, fired, or a bullet hits school property for any reason, regardless of the number of victims, time, or day of the week.” Currently, the incidents in 2023 sit at 271, nearing 2022’s record-high 305.
Given this heightened sense of security, administrators are vetting edtech surveillance systems to keep their schools safe for students and staff. However, new research from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) suggests that these technologies do more harm than good, and the industry is taking advantage of fearful K12 districts.
Over the last two decades, the edtech surveillance industry has become a $3.1 billion-a-year “economic juggernaut,” according to the report. But it did so “by playing on school districts’ fears of school shootings, student self-harm and suicides, and bullyingmarketing them as common, ever-present threats,” the researchers declare.
As a result, school leaders have felt compelled to rely on things like communication monitoring and facial recognition technology all in the name of student safety. And while these added security measures help students to 韓艶艶鉛油safe, the report suggests that student surveillance may be largely ineffective and often harms students.
According to the researchers, surveillance technologies harm students in a number of ways, including:
- Teaching students the wrong lessons about issues like authenticity, risk-taking and the right to live free from surveillance.
- Invading students’ privacy.
- Stripping away students’ trust in their teachers, staff and administrators.
- Lessening the likelihood that students will engage in self-help in a serious event.
- Increasing student fear and criminalizing youth.
In terms of effectiveness, the authors note that security cameras were in place during eight out of 10 of the deadliest school shootings in the past 20 years. The report suggests this is problematic given that many companies assert their products are effective in “preventing school violence” and other threats.
“The methods the industry uses to make its efficacy claims are designed to mislead school districts into concluding their effectiveness as a student safety measure has been proven,” the report reads.
More from 91心頭: 3 ways social media threats are disrupting K12 school operations
Advice for leaders
Time and time again, experts tellDistrict 91心頭istrationthat the number one best practice for preventing dangerous threats is through safety training and education. However, certain technologies are necessary to ensure a secure school environment.
The authors of the report offer four best practices for district leaders wanting a better understanding of how they can vet surveillance technologies in the wake of increased school shootings and other threats:
- Define the problem your district wants to solve.
- Evaluate the surveillance technology’s benefits and its costs/harms in light of the problem.
- Seek community input.
- Conduct a final benefits-versus-costs/harms analysis.
