Data Mining and Common Core

Why would any parent be concerned about data mining their children’s private information? After reading Scott F. Marion’s claim that this is just a “big bad wolf” scenario, one has to wonder if he’s taken any time to look at the facts.

Just recently U.S. Senator Markey (D- MA) wrote a letter to President Obama expressing concerns over “the increased collection and distribution of student data and their privacy.” It seems the big bad wolf bit the big bad United States Senator too.

Yes, the Feds have been gathering private information on students for years. The difference is that the privacy protections are no longer in place. The law that once protected a student’s privacy (FERPA) was re-written and parental consent is no longer required when sharing information on a student. There is a lawsuit pending right now charging the Ed Department with violating student privacy rights.

Marion even acknowledges that data collection has been going on for years. But then he goes on to say that the 400 point data points are a myth. He even asked for evidence. Well Mr. Marion, can I suggest going directly to the U.S. Department of Education’s web site because that’s where you will find the 400 data points listed.

The National Education Data Model (NEDM) is a comprehensive inventory of information that can be used by vendors and researchers. The 400 data points listed include; family income range, immunization status, mother’s educational level, religious affiliation, VISA expiration date and zip code.

We are continually assured that the information collected on our children is secure and anonymous. Something that often elicits a huge laugh from the IT techies. Why? Because many of them will tell you that they can identify a person with just a handful of data points.

The U.S. DOE openly promotes schools collecting data about students’ personalities and beliefs in the report called “Promoting Grit, Tenacity and Perseverance.” This document promotes the use of facial expression cameras, posture analysis seats, wireless conductance sensors and other measures of students’ beliefs and emotions. (see page 44)

All of this, and still Mr. Marion calls this a myth and can’t figure out why anyone would be concerned.

At a recent meeting in Amherst one parent confronted Mr. Marion about his disparaging comments directed at parents who have expressed their desire for the highest standards and the privacy protections for their children. The mother who confronted him in this public meeting was not amused.

What we’ve seen from Mr. Marion is a refusal to acknowledge what the U.S. DOE has posted and contempt towards parents who have genuine concerns for their children.

Maybe instead of denying the factual information that he can easily access at the U.S. Department of Education’s web site, he should take time to research, evaluate and then start listening to parental concerns.

Refusing to look at hard facts provided for him by the U.S. Department of Education and by parents who seek the best education for their children has shown a unwillingness to rationally discuss this issue in education reform.

Sources:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/03/13/lawsuit-charges-ed-department-with-violating-student-privacy-rights/ (lawsuit)

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/DigitalEducation/MarkeyLetter.pdf (Senator Markey’s letter)

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/demo_booklet/2013_SQ_M_R_g4.pdf (private info collected via standardized assessments)

http://nces.ed.gov/forum/datamodel/eiebrowser/techview.aspx?instance=studentPostsecondary (400 data points

Sincerely,
Ann Marie Banfield
Education Liaison, Cornerstone Action

First published in Seacoast Online