Stephanie Simon writes in politico.com about how parents organized, lobbied, agitated, and brought down inBloom.
Simon writes:
“You’ve heard of Big Oil and Big Tobacco. Now get ready for Big Parent.
“Moms and dads from across the political spectrum have mobilized into an unexpected political force in recent months to fight the data mining of their children. In a frenzy of activity, they’ve catapulted student privacy — an issue that was barely on anyone’s radar last spring — to prominence in statehouses from New York to Florida to Wyoming.”
Most shocking of all is that the Obama administration is prepared to spend $1 billion (half from the federal government, half from the states) to track the movements of every child:
“Now, parents are rallying against another perceived threat: huge state databases being built to track children for more than two decades, from as early as infancy through the start of their careers.
Promoted by the Obama administration, the databases are being built in nearly every state at a total cost of well over $1 billion. They are intended to store intimate details on tens of millions of children and young adults — identified by name, birth date, address and even, in some cases, Social Security number — to help officials pinpoint the education system’s strengths and weaknesses and craft public policy accordingly.
“The Education Department lists hundreds of questions that it urges states to answer about each child in the public school system: Did she make friends easily as a toddler? Was he disciplined for fighting as a teen? Did he take geometry? Does she suffer from mental illness? Did he go to college? Did he graduate? How much does he earn?
“Every parent I’ve talked to has been horrified,” said Leonie Haimson, a New York mother who is organizing a national Parent Coalition for Student Privacy. “We just don’t want our kids tracked from cradle to grave.”
Why does the Education Department want so much information about every child? What is the rationale for assembling Big Data about our children? Does Congress know about this? Is there any other government in the world that is data mining its children?
Will parents mobilize to stop the federal government from mining their children’s personal data?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Was there any genuine dissent within the ed reform movement on the collection of data on children? Did any of the hundreds of orgs and paid lobbyists and lawmakers do anything to protect student privacy until the parents organized? Not “suggestions” for private contractors, or “best practices” lists. Actual oversight and regulation.
If not, why not?
They knew they were collecting massive amounts of information, and they planned to collect still more. Was the plan to set up the private contractors and then attempt to regulate, you know, if the contractors didn’t comply voluntarily with the aspirational “best practices” the contractors might write, if we ask them nicely?
The motivation is obvious: these data systems create big fat juicy piles of data that can be mined without anyone’s knowledge or consent. Look at the precautions real researchers have to take with data:
http://bigeducationape.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-sociological-eye-on-education-whos.html
Now that’s what is required of individual researchers and that is AFTER study participants/guardians grant informed consent. The learning tools from these efforts may be potentially powerful, but the entire industry wants to avoid any form of public discussion or consent procedures.
I don’t really blame the contractors. They obviously believe in this approach and it’s not their job to regulate or police their own work as far as safeguards. I don’t know what they think about privacy, and the public shouldn’t have to rely on their good faith and good intentions anyway.
It’s a failure of policy-makers and lawmakers. They’re not on the same team as contractors. They’re supposed to be looking out for the broader public interest and putting protections in before they launch the product.
In a way they’re lucky the parents spoke up. If this had been a disaster as far as securing personal information, even accidentally, the people on the government side of this transaction wouldn’t be able to blame the contractor.
I’m surprised that they haven’t tried to microchip the children. All the easier to track them.
Just wait, that’s on the way, in the name of “security.”
Better yet, let’s implant a chip in their brains that just downloads Common Core-related “informational text” – you know, things like consumer product operating and poverty-wage job training manuals – as well as product placements, directly into their brains.
Look, Bill, No Teachers!
Murdoch’s inBloom business plan was about collecting child/family data and at the same time running around parents and legislators by working directly with certain easy state “reformers” like those positioned in NY and LA. The for-profit data mining plan focused on manipulating the free data in a “dashboard” to sell back to the school district and/or state at a per child fee with contracts signed by reformers such as John King who gave away the free data in the first place to Murdoch.
InBloom is like the the “Bridgegate” of the Ed Privatization movement. It’s an easy to understand abuse of power against everyday people. Closing schools, high stakes tests, and abolishing teacher’s due process are also terrible, but more complicated to understand. Tracking kids and their private information– legislators know that they can’t ok that and still keep their job.
Thanks Leonie, I called my legislators before the vote and was so gratified that it didn’t pass!
Simon asks “Does Congress know about this?”. I don’t know if “Congress” does but the Feds made it happen.
http://www.doleta.gov/performance/workforcedatagrant09.cfm
“WDQI supports the development of, or enhancements to, longitudinal administrative databases that will integrate workforce data and create linkages to education data.”
“The long-term WDQI and SLDS goal for States is to use their longitudinal data systems to follow individuals through school and into and through their work life.”
“Enable workforce data to be matched with education data to ultimately create longitudinal data systems with individual-level information beginning with pre-kindergarten through post-secondary schooling all the way through entry and sustained participation in the workforce and employment services system.”
And any state that that won RTTT money now has an education longitudinal database as required by one of the grant applications. And apparently the application specifically stated that there could be no state laws on the books to prevent the database from being implemented.