Apparently Congress doesn’t care about the privacy of student data and doesn’t think that parents need to know which vendors are getting their children’s confidential records.
The Parent Coalition for Student Privacy issued this statement:
OUR RESPONSE TO THE MARKEY/HATCH STUDENT PRIVACY BILL INTRODUCED 7.30.2014
JULY 30, 2014 ADMIN
For immediate release: July 30, 2012
Rachael Stickland, 303-204-1272; info@studentprivacymatters.org
Leonie Haimson: 917-435-9329; leonie@classsizematters.org
On the Markey/Hatch student privacy bill
Rachael Stickland, co-chair of the Parent Coalition for Student Privacy, said: “Though we appreciate the effort that Senators Markey and Hatch have undertaken on behalf of better privacy protections for students, their proposed legislative fix falls short of what’s needed; it sets no specific security standards for the storage or transmission of children’s personal information, allows unlimited disclosures and redisclosures to for-profit vendors and other third parties without parental consent as long as the data isn’t used for marketing purposes, and doesn’t even require that schools and districts inform parents as to what personal information is being shared with which particular vendors. Thus the clause that requires that parents be able to amend the information held by the vendor is nonsensical as its unclear how they would even know who to contact.”
Said Leonie Haimson, the other co-chair of the Parent Coalition, “Nothing in this bill would have stopped the outrageous data-grab of inBloom, or any of the other companies set to take its place. We need a far stronger bill to do the job that parents are demanding: protecting their children’s privacy and safety from breaches and unwarranted data-mining.”
###
Our response to the Markey/Hatch student privacy bill introduced 7.30.2014
Reblogged this on V-Series and commented:
That’s Great
Oh, speaking of the privacy bill, this is part of a post on the Democrats for Education Reform web site:
While many of us share concerns about the misuse of student data in education policy, there’s less consensus about everything else the American Principles Project stands for. On economic issues, the group advances a theory of the economy so retrograde you have to reach back to the nineteenth century to find mainstream thinkers who seriously considered such ideas. Papers like “The Gold Standard: The Foundation of Our Economy’s Greatness” provide a sense of their economic platform…
It says something about Diane Ravitch’s role in the education debate that this is the sort of group that she perceives as an ally. Just as the American Principles Project advances a fringe vision of the United States, so does Diane Ravitch promote an extremist’s understanding of education policy. Populated with visions of money-greedy businessmen with nefarious motives and secret plans laid out by an imagined Gates cabal, Ravitch’s view of education policy now intersects with the positions of groups like the American Principles Project. – See more at: http://www.dfer.org/blog/2014/07/heading_the_wro.php#sthash.zd4iGjdu.dpuf
What? What does it say about Diane Ravitch’s role in the educational debate? To me it says that she is pragmatic and willing to forge alliances when needed. I am certain it does not mean that we’ll be reading dozens of cranky gold standard posts in the future.
What an obnoxious blog post.
And how conspiratorial to imagine that there are money greedy businessmen with nefarious motives!
What a big steaming pile of false equivalency.
Is there a reason to believe Dr. Ravitch has an alliance with the American principles project?
app is an anti-pension group whose interests align with alec, the Arnold’s, pew and gates’.
ha! APP is hardly aligned w Gates.
Sheila,
The fact that the president of the Gates Foundation was also the president of the Walton Foundation suggests to me that the organizations’ owners wouldn’t be at loggerheads.
If the owners’ world views differed significantly, the presidency position would be very difficult for a person with conviction. It’s possible that I’m wrong but, when I add the shared candidate, the shared opposition to an increase in the minimum wage, and one’s anti-union stance compared to the other’s anti-public pension stance, and what some label predatory business views of the two, I form a conclusion. Maybe they don’t agree on a gold standard or marriage equality but, world standardization of services like finance and education would reflect a significant shared dogma. Based on the policies of the politicians we see in Wash. D.C. and their financial backers, I conclude interests have aligned in a more cohesive manner than, if they all just happened to sign the same petition.
Foundations aren’t corporations. They function independently. My only point is APP’s alignments as you stated aren’t accurate.
Sheila,
Thank you for the response. I am curious about app’s embracement of the arnold, pew, gates, koch anti-pension propaganda. It’s such an odd duck in their stable of issues. From near inception, the founder of the principles project site published the disclaimer, that the views at the site do not necessarily reflect his. I’m not sure how ethical it is for a founder to almost immediately raise the question of his support for the organization’s views when I assume it was his “stature” that gave the project credibility. Do you have any insight on the issue?
I know the people at APP & many of the people who align w them. They’re good people. I have referred to them as my right wing friends. They have been fighting strongly & aggressively against common core & for student privacy. Although my opinion about CC has become neutral my respect for them remains. Their ‘against’ positions have nothing to do w their commitment to student privacy.
On the whole they appear to me as more tolerant & ‘principled’ than those who speak out against them.
Now I’m writing a disclaimer : ) APP may be against LGBT however it’s not something I was aware of at anytime or in any communications w them. My response to Linda was strictly based on her comments.
For the record I personally support LGBT.
Sheila,
The only criticism I have read about APP, is the disparagement by DFER, at their site (which was quoted by Ann, above). It may be impossible to separate the interests of DFER, hedge funds and politicians who receive money from them. I speculate that, at a minimum, 80% of Democrats would oppose corporatization of public education so, IMO, DFER’s name is unfounded and their viewpoints self-serving.
If APP gains from exposure on the issue of education and the public becomes informed about the expansion of control by the 1% through multinational corporations, the App leadership, that you respect, and the Campaign for America’s Future leadership, that I respect, both win.
My knowledge about the marriage equality position of APP comes from their website and the objective biographical profile of the founder at Wikipedia.
It’s estimated that the middle class lost 36% of their wealth since 2003, while the wealthiest individuals gained all of the benefit from their productivity gains. I would lose respect for every national leader, including those at this site, if they failed to speak about growing economic inequality in the U.S.
The “Protecting Student Privacy Act of 2014” does nothing to protect student privacy. Simply an
effort to codify surreptitious change to FERPA by the Dept of Ed.
Is the “Hatch” Senator Orrin Hatch, of Utah? He’s an idiot.
What specific provisions SHOULD the legislation include? We need guidance.
Would it have been professional of the esteemed Senators Markey and Hatch to have consulted someone like Leonie before they drafted legislation–especially that they know absolutely nothing about the subject. Wouldn’t it be easier to draft legislation stripping FERPA of the amendments promoted by the Obama Administration that has turned this law into a paper tiger?
Liberal teacher, there are many corporations that want private student data. They speak louder in DC than parent groups.
Obviously!!!! You get what you pay for–and the one percent can pay for a lot. . .
Why do you think Sen Markey doesn’t know about privacy? Markey authored COPPA. He knows what he’s doing & has access to & consults w privacy professionals who have worked in the field going back to the 70s. There was plenty of input. Privacy professionals are also parents.
Making corporations & 1% into the enemy does little to protect data. In fact it’s a cop out for working w others.
Sheila, when the 1% and big corporations want my grandson’s address and all other facts about him, I say NO. They have no right to know anything about him. Only his parents, his teachers, and his principal do.
Right. I think you acknowledged that your grandson opts out of directory information? That’s where the give away & risk remains. I will never change your position on the 1% or corporations, Diane. Those are your talking points. They aren’t mine.
More important is the criticism of efforts by Markey. The 80-20 principle applies. You can’t always get 100%. The commenter criticizing Markey, the author of COPPA, stating he doesn’t know anything about privacy is simply not true.
Given your grandson may have opted out of directory information – there are millions of families across the USA who are not informed of the parental right to opt out. I encourage parents to become informed about this right & inform others, too.
Buyer beware for the most vulnerable.