PARCC monitoring student's social media, wants schools to "punish" them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fail to see the problem with this. The kids should understand that what they post has consequences. It would be one thing if they hacked into private accounts or something, but if they're posting stuff publicly, they have to face the consequences. It's not like students have freedom or speech or anything.

Of course they have freedom of speech.

No, they don't. See Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier.

Not to mention Morse v. Frederick (the "bong hits 4 Jesus" case):

http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/get-involved/constitution-activities/first-amendment/free-speech-school-conduct/facts-case-summary.aspx

Really hope you are not a lawyer. I expected a higher level of legal discourse on DCUM somehow.

Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier and Morse v. Frederick are two Supreme Court cases about the limits of free speech in schools. I am not a lawyer. Could you please explain to me what is wrong about referencing these two cases?

It's because everyone knows that the First Amendment is not absolute. It hasn't ever been absolute. Hazelwood and Morse are two cases that imposed additional limitations with respect to public schools, but there are still First Amendment rights in school. So citing Hazelwood and Morse doesn't really mean much, broadly speaking, because we already know that First Amendment rights are not without limits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier and Morse v. Frederick are two Supreme Court cases about the limits of free speech in schools. I am not a lawyer. Could you please explain to me what is wrong about referencing these two cases?

It's because everyone knows that the First Amendment is not absolute. It hasn't ever been absolute. Hazelwood and Morse are two cases that imposed additional limitations with respect to public schools, but there are still First Amendment rights in school. So citing Hazelwood and Morse doesn't really mean much, broadly speaking, because we already know that First Amendment rights are not without limits.

But these two cases talk about the limits of First Amendment rights specifically in schools, which was one of the topics of discussion. Not the limits of First Amendment rights in general.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2015/03/14/pearson-monitoring-social-media-for-security-breaches-during-parcc-testing/

So Pearson is monitoring Twitter, and that's an invasion of privacy? Because there is an expectation of privacy for tweets? The things I learn.

PP who posted the Valerie Strauss article -- thanks, that brings a lot more clarity!

And I agree with the other PP quoted above; Pearson can monitor Twitter all they like*. What's concerning to me here is that they were able to connect a HS student's Twitter account with the student's school and testing supervisor. Pearson can monitor Twitter, and Pearson is authorized by the NJDOE to collect student data for the purposes of administering the test. But I can't imagine that they are authorized to use student data act on their social media data. How did they know which school the student attended?

I mean, I think it's *creepy* that they are monitoring kids' accounts, but I don't think it's *illegal* -- and if the kid is under 13, then the fault lies with Twitter not with Pearson, actually.

BINGO. That's the creep factor here - that they matched up the kid's tweet with all the other data they'd collected from the schools, and used it to put a disciplinary process into motion. Yuck, yuck, yuck. No matter how you feel about testing/common core/etc, I hope we can all agree that private companies should not be gathering our children's data like this. The contracts should have strict limits on what data they can collect and how they can use it, and when it has to be destroyed.

I doubt that they had to look at any of their data to make a connection. My guess is the same Twitter account that had the information about the test question had other tweets that clearly identified the kid's school and grade, and that there were no controls to keep the public from viewing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier and Morse v. Frederick are two Supreme Court cases about the limits of free speech in schools. I am not a lawyer. Could you please explain to me what is wrong about referencing these two cases?

It's because everyone knows that the First Amendment is not absolute. It hasn't ever been absolute. Hazelwood and Morse are two cases that imposed additional limitations with respect to public schools, but there are still First Amendment rights in school. So citing Hazelwood and Morse doesn't really mean much, broadly speaking, because we already know that First Amendment rights are not without limits.

But these two cases talk about the limits of First Amendment rights specifically in schools, which was one of the topics of discussion. Not the limits of First Amendment rights in general.

Nevermind

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2015/03/14/pearson-monitoring-social-media-for-security-breaches-during-parcc-testing/

So Pearson is monitoring Twitter, and that's an invasion of privacy? Because there is an expectation of privacy for tweets? The things I learn.

PP who posted the Valerie Strauss article -- thanks, that brings a lot more clarity!

And I agree with the other PP quoted above; Pearson can monitor Twitter all they like*. What's concerning to me here is that they were able to connect a HS student's Twitter account with the student's school and testing supervisor. Pearson can monitor Twitter, and Pearson is authorized by the NJDOE to collect student data for the purposes of administering the test. But I can't imagine that they are authorized to use student data act on their social media data. How did they know which school the student attended?

I mean, I think it's *creepy* that they are monitoring kids' accounts, but I don't think it's *illegal* -- and if the kid is under 13, then the fault lies with Twitter not with Pearson, actually.

BINGO. That's the creep factor here - that they matched up the kid's tweet with all the other data they'd collected from the schools, and used it to put a disciplinary process into motion. Yuck, yuck, yuck. No matter how you feel about testing/common core/etc, I hope we can all agree that private companies should not be gathering our children's data like this. The contracts should have strict limits on what data they can collect and how they can use it, and when it has to be destroyed.

I doubt that they had to look at any of their data to make a connection. My guess is the same Twitter account that had the information about the test question had other tweets that clearly identified the kid's school and grade, and that there were no controls to keep the public from viewing it.

It's a lot more than that. Pearson probably has a program to scrape and analze twitter, search for mentions of PARCC, find the students' school from a key word search, then match this up to their contacts database to find the school administrator. They are not innocently stumbling across things - they are deliberately using data analytic techniques to find information that may not have been present in just the Twitter feed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/w...breaches-during-parcc-testing/



So Pearson is monitoring Twitter, and that's an invasion of privacy? Because there is an expectation of privacy for tweets? The things I learn.


PP who posted the Valerie Strauss article -- thanks, that brings a lot more clarity!

And I agree with the other PP quoted above; Pearson can monitor Twitter all they like*. What's concerning to me here is that they were able to connect a HS student's Twitter account with the student's school and testing supervisor. Pearson can monitor Twitter, and Pearson is authorized by the NJDOE to collect student data for the purposes of administering the test. But I can't imagine that they are authorized to use student data act on their social media data. How did they know which school the student attended?

I mean, I think it's *creepy* that they are monitoring kids' accounts, but I don't think it's *illegal* -- and if the kid is under 13, then the fault lies with Twitter not with Pearson, actually.


BINGO. That's the creep factor here - that they matched up the kid's tweet with all the other data they'd collected from the schools, and used it to put a disciplinary process into motion. Yuck, yuck, yuck. No matter how you feel about testing/common core/etc, I hope we can all agree that private companies should not be gathering our children's data like this. The contracts should have strict limits on what data they can collect and how they can use it, and when it has to be destroyed.

That may be a creep factor...if it were true and you have no idea if that is what was done to identify the student. For all you know, the student herself had enough personal details on her twitter account to easily identify her. Kids aren't too smart about protecting their privacy on the internet.

So what we have is an 8 page thread driven by one OP (who likes to call herself 'we') filled with little factual information and a link that mentions that Pearson is monitoring public social media accounts that mention the PARCC (which is not spying by any definition) to ensure the integrity of the new test and protect against student cheating. Oh, and there is no mention of Pearson wanting schools to punish anyone.

Much ado about nothing from the same energetic anti CC poster who knows very little about CC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2015/03/14/pearson-monitoring-social-media-for-security-breaches-during-parcc-testing/

So Pearson is monitoring Twitter, and that's an invasion of privacy? Because there is an expectation of privacy for tweets? The things I learn.

PP who posted the Valerie Strauss article -- thanks, that brings a lot more clarity!

And I agree with the other PP quoted above; Pearson can monitor Twitter all they like*. What's concerning to me here is that they were able to connect a HS student's Twitter account with the student's school and testing supervisor. Pearson can monitor Twitter, and Pearson is authorized by the NJDOE to collect student data for the purposes of administering the test. But I can't imagine that they are authorized to use student data act on their social media data. How did they know which school the student attended?

I mean, I think it's *creepy* that they are monitoring kids' accounts, but I don't think it's *illegal* -- and if the kid is under 13, then the fault lies with Twitter not with Pearson, actually.

BINGO. That's the creep factor here - that they matched up the kid's tweet with all the other data they'd collected from the schools, and used it to put a disciplinary process into motion. Yuck, yuck, yuck. No matter how you feel about testing/common core/etc, I hope we can all agree that private companies should not be gathering our children's data like this. The contracts should have strict limits on what data they can collect and how they can use it, and when it has to be destroyed.

I doubt that they had to look at any of their data to make a connection. My guess is the same Twitter account that had the information about the test question had other tweets that clearly identified the kid's school and grade, and that there were no controls to keep the public from viewing it.

It's a lot more than that. Pearson probably has a program to scrape and analze twitter, search for mentions of PARCC, find the students' school from a key word search, then match this up to their contacts database to find the school administrator. They are not innocently stumbling across things - they are deliberately using data analytic techniques to find information that may not have been present in just the Twitter feed.

Yes, they are deliberately looking for information about their product on Twitter. No doubt about that. But almost every other for profit corporation does the same. It's hardly some new sinister thing that Pearson has come up with. And yes it's possible that they used their contacts database to find out the name of the school principal, but since that information is publicly available on every school's website, I can hardly have a fit about that.

I would be very surprised that a kid who doesn't have the sense to refrain from posting about test questions, would be keeping their school private online. In my experience, kids post things like "Go Whitman Vikings" all the time on all sorts of social media.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fail to see the problem with this. The kids should understand that what they post has consequences. It would be one thing if they hacked into private accounts or something, but if they're posting stuff publicly, they have to face the consequences. It's not like students have freedom or speech or anything.

Of course they have freedom of speech.

No, they don't. See Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier.

Not to mention Morse v. Frederick (the "bong hits 4 Jesus" case):

http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/get-involved/constitution-activities/first-amendment/free-speech-school-conduct/facts-case-summary.aspx

Really hope you are not a lawyer. I expected a higher level of legal discourse on DCUM somehow.

Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier and Morse v. Frederick are two Supreme Court cases about the limits of free speech in schools. I am not a lawyer. Could you please explain to me what is wrong about referencing these two cases?

I'm the one who posted the Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier cite, which is very meaningful to me since it happened while I was a high school newspaper editor.

My own take is that the extreme right-wing people who lead the charge against Common Core/PARCC is an inherently strident bunch incapable of critical thought. It goes with their Tea Party sensibilities. Opposition to CC and PARCC is pretty much exclusively a Koch brothers product, after all. So, you often are greeted with dismissive yet incoherent comments when you post a proof point. They don't want to hear it.

The OP of this thread -- who is probably a Bible-thumping right-winger who resents Common Core because it denies Creationism -- hoped to stir outrage. But in order to be outraged, you have to first accept a couple of flawed premises: 1) That PARCC tests are bad; 2) That students should be able to post whatever they want on social media without consequence; and 3) That Pearson has no right to monitor social media for commentary about itself or its products. In other words, the entire thread is a straw man.

You like your stereotypes, don't you? Sorry to burst your bubble.

I am OP and very left wing. Too bad you didn't learn anything from your high school journalism days about free speech and true critical thinking.

Common Core started from right wing business types like Jeb Bush who want to make our American kids little worker bees who don't question anything. How much more Big Brother can you get that what Pearson is doing spying on kids?

Get off your knees worshiping corporations like Pearson and stand up for America's children, who deserved to be treated as individuals, not cogs in the American business machine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You like your stereotypes, don't you? Sorry to burst your bubble.

I am OP and very left wing. Too bad you didn't learn anything from your high school journalism days about free speech and true critical thinking.

Common Core started from right wing business types like Jeb Bush who want to make our American kids little worker bees who don't question anything. How much more Big Brother can you get that what Pearson is doing spying on kids?

Get off your knees worshiping corporations like Pearson and stand up for America's children, who deserved to be treated as individuals, not cogs in the American business machine.

But I thought it was all Bill Gates?!

To be honest, I'm not sure how something like

CCSS.Math.Content.8.G.A.2
Understand that a two-dimensional figure is congruent to another if the second can be obtained from the first by a sequence of rotations, reflections, and translations; given two congruent figures, describe a sequence that exhibits the congruence between them.

or

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.5.1.b
Form and use the perfect (e.g., I had walked; I have walked; I will have walked) verb tenses.

is going to turn our children into unquestioning worker-bee widgets, but ok.

[Anonymous]

But I thought it was all Bill Gates?!

To be honest, I'm not sure how something like

CCSS.Math.Content.8.G.A.2
Understand that a two-dimensional figure is congruent to another if the second can be obtained from the first by a sequence of rotations, reflections, and translations; given two congruent figures, describe a sequence that exhibits the congruence between them.

or

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.5.1.b
Form and use the perfect (e.g., I had walked; I have walked; I will have walked) verb tenses.

is going to turn our children into unquestioning worker-bee widgets, but ok.

You don't get it, do you? The things of value that are in CC are already being taught and have been for years. It doesn't matter if they are standards or not--teachers will still teach them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You don't get it, do you? The things of value that are in CC are already being taught and have been for years. It doesn't matter if they are standards or not--teachers will still teach them.

No, I really don't get it. On the one hand, the Common Core State Standards are going to turn our children into widgets. On the other hand, there is nothing new about the Common Core State Standards. So I guess that our children are already widgets?

[Anonymous]

On the other hand, there is nothing new about the Common Core State Standards.

I never said that. I said that the two standards you posted will be taught whether they are standards or not. There is much about Common Core that is sorry.

[Anonymous]

This entire thread is infuriating. I'm a teacher... a dang good one with a portfolio of accolades from parents, students, and administers. I've applied for and received numerous grants to attend professional development opportunities worldwide. Yes, worldwide... so I know more about foreign education programs than most. I can successfully teach advanced classes as well as remedial classes. I mention this only to establish my credentials...

I am extremely against CCSC and PARCC. I was supportive at first, until I witnessed the insulting and demeaning curricula and related tests. So now I'm actively fighting these reforms, along with other teachers I respect. Frankly, I value my integrity more than my paycheck. I'll likely be fired one day for speaking out, so hopefully some of the parents who are unaware of the overtesting (18% of class time so far this year at my school... and the PARCC window is far from over) will listen to the dissenters so the sacrifice is worth it.

Oh... and no Tea Party member here. Solid Democrat. I would like to come back and read replies, but not if they are rude. I am interested in a reasoned and respectful discussion related to CCSS and PARCC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This entire thread is infuriating. I'm a teacher... a dang good one with a portfolio of accolades from parents, students, and administers. I've applied for and received numerous grants to attend professional development opportunities worldwide. Yes, worldwide... so I know more about foreign education programs than most. I can successfully teach advanced classes as well as remedial classes. I mention this only to establish my credentials...

I am extremely against CCSC and PARCC. I was supportive at first, until I witnessed the insulting and demeaning curricula and related tests. So now I'm actively fighting these reforms, along with other teachers I respect. Frankly, I value my integrity more than my paycheck. I'll likely be fired one day for speaking out, so hopefully some of the parents who are unaware of the overtesting (18% of class time so far this year at my school... and the PARCC window is far from over) will listen to the dissenters so the sacrifice is worth it.

Oh... and no Tea Party member here. Solid Democrat. I would like to come back and read replies, but not if they are rude. I am interested in a reasoned and respectful discussion related to CCSS and PARCC.

Can you post a standard you find "demeaning"?

Also, can you tell what school district you are in that has required 18% of your instructional time to be devoted to testing, and what you are including in that figure?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This entire thread is infuriating. I'm a teacher... a dang good one with a portfolio of accolades from parents, students, and administers. I've applied for and received numerous grants to attend professional development opportunities worldwide. Yes, worldwide... so I know more about foreign education programs than most. I can successfully teach advanced classes as well as remedial classes. I mention this only to establish my credentials...

I am extremely against CCSC and PARCC. I was supportive at first, until I witnessed the insulting and demeaning curricula and related tests. So now I'm actively fighting these reforms, along with other teachers I respect. Frankly, I value my integrity more than my paycheck. I'll likely be fired one day for speaking out, so hopefully some of the parents who are unaware of the overtesting (18% of class time so far this year at my school... and the PARCC window is far from over) will listen to the dissenters so the sacrifice is worth it.

Oh... and no Tea Party member here. Solid Democrat. I would like to come back and read replies, but not if they are rude. I am interested in a reasoned and respectful discussion related to CCSS and PARCC.

Can you post a standard you find "demeaning"?

Also, can you tell what school district you are in that has required 18% of your instructional time to be devoted to testing, and what you are including in that figure?

Not OP. Every test requires mandatory training and reading about procedure. Especially computer based tests:hours watching client/ user procedure on clips as well as three diffevent manuals proctors. So that's for 2 PARCC administrations this year. Three MAP administrations.Some schools also doing MSA and HSA administrations in addition. Yes, March to May is just testing. But all our formative assessments lead up to that..all year. We have to produce data showing growth in selected areas similar to test objectives in informal testing. I think his or her assumption of 18 percent is LOW.