Saturday, April 18, 2026

While we rally for a moratorium on AI, DOE officials mingle in San Diego with ed tech vendors and executives

 


On Thursday April 16, we rallied in City Hall Park, and called on the Mayor to place  a moratorium on the use of AI for two years.  Parents, students, teachers and advocates explained how AI poses clear risks to student privacy, their cognitive and skill development, creativity, emotional and mental health and the environment.  Here is our coalition's press release, and articles about the rally in Fortune, Daily News, and Politico.  

Serendipitously, the same day as our rally, the national group Fairplay released a letter, signed onto by more than 200 education and childhood organizations, as well as experts on mental health and medical professionals, asking for a five-year moratorium.  Josh Golin, the Fairply Executive Director, attended our rally and he is shown speaking above. 

 

After the rally, a bunch of us walked to the East entrance of City Hall, where students handed the Fairplay letter and our petition to Ailish Brady, Senior Advisor for Education, to the First Deputy Mayor. 

I also handed her a copy of the NYC Kids PAC candidate survey filled out by Zohran Mamdani when  he was running for mayor, in which he criticized "Eric Adams’ cavalier approach" to AI,  and promised to consult parents, teachers and students before implementing careful guardrails. 

Last week, at about the same time, at least seven high-ranking DOE officials were attending the ASU-GSV [Global Silicon Valley] conference in San Diego, mingling with ed tech vendors and executives, including Dr. Miatheresa Pate, the DOE chief academic officer, who led the aggressive AI expansion in NYC schools during the Adams administration and is still running it now. 

As Sue Edelman in her Substack article points out, the cost of attendee registration ranges from $2,450 to $3,850 per person -- all at a time when the Mayor has asked city agencies including DOE to make big cuts because of the city's billion dollar deficits. In addition, Dr. Pate was named a Google GSV Education Innovation Fellow, the conference itself was subsidized by Google, as was the development of the pitifully weak AI guidance put out by DOE a few weeks ago. 


Recently, the DOE placed Google Gemini, the company's AI platform on its TeachHub site, and is encouraging teachers to assign it to their students, despite the serious privacy and mental health concerns expressed by Fairplay, EPIC, and others. At the rally, I related a story a friend told me about what happened in her ten-year-old son's this week, related to the use of Google Gemini. See my comments below.

___

Hi, my name is Leonie Haimson, and I’m the co-chair of the Parent Coalition for Student Privacy.  Guess who wrote the following in response to a question asking him for his position on the use of AI in the classroom, when he was running for office last spring: 

“Eric Adams’ cavalier approach to AI in schools is in keeping with his lack of support for our schools and sensitivities to the needs of teachers, students, and parents. I support regulating Al. AI can be a useful tool if deployed effectively, but it can also harm children’s ability to think critically and to write. It should not be expanded without careful guardrails. As Mayor, I would work directly with teacher, parent, and student groups to establish those guardrails and move forward with any expansion after careful deliberation.”

Yet right now, Mayor Mamdani is continuing the course that Eric Adams begam – rushing ahead with the expansion of AI without careful guardrails or any actual consultation with teachers, parents and students. 

The only group who had input into the awful DOE AI guidance recently released was an AI advisory Council appointed by Chancellor Banks shortly before he left office whose members were primarily DOE educrats and ed tech vendors.  

I was appointed to an AI working group by Chancellor Ramos and though we were repeatedly told that we would be able to give feedback on the guidance before it was released we were never provided with that opportunity.  

In fact, the DOE completely sidelined and stonewalled us, and they refused even to give us the names of AI products currently used in schools along with their privacy policies, saying this would their violate their non-disclosure agreements with their vendors.   

Dr. Miatheresa Pate, DOE Chief Academic Officer, who is leading the push for more AI use in NYC schools is a Google fellow and this week she is speaking at an ed tech conference sponsored by Google.   

Sure enough, a few weeks ago the DOE put Google’s AI  product called Gemini on TeachHub and started encouraging teachers to use it, without any consultation with parents or privacy experts.  

Yesterday a friend of mine told me that her son, a fifth grader in a NYC public school, was assigned to  read a poem together with his classmates.  They were then asked to draw a picture about the poem.  But  teacher also told them if they didn’t want to draw a picture,  they could simply upload the poem into Google Gemini and it would create the image for them.  Is this the sort of education we want for our kids? 

Mayor Mamdani, you recently said that you don’t use AI yourself, so why are you foisting it on our kids, when research shows it will undermine not only their privacy but their creativity, cognitive skills, critical thinking and exacerbate climate change? 

We have a petition here signed by nearly 2,000 parents, educators and others, calling on you to stop before its too late, and impose a two year moratorium on the use of AI in the classroom, so that rigorous protections can be established to protect the quality of our children’s education, their safety, and their future. 

More than 200 education and childhood groups and experts including medical professionals signed onto the Fairplay letter, calling for a 5 year moratorium.  We hope that the Mayor will listen to our voices, stop catering to Google and other ed tech companies, and forge a new and more positive direction for our public schools.

 

Monday, April 13, 2026

Make your voice heard on AI, the capital plan and class size!

Thursday, April 2, 2026

PowerSchool/Naviance court settlement: your child may be eligible for a payment

Update: More on the settlement here.

 April 2, 2026

It was recently announced that as part of a class action court settlement, the ed tech company PowerSchool and the Chicago Public Schools agreed to pay a total of $17.25 million to students whose privacy was violated by Naviance, a college advising company acquired  by PowerSchool in 2021. In turn, PowerSchool was bought by Bain Capital for $5.6 billion in 2024.

The lawsuit alleged that the Naviance platform contained ad tracking technology that transmitted a wide range of personal data to Google, Microsoft and a company called Heap, including student names, ID numbers, graduation years,  demographic information, photographs and survey responses, as well as  their private communications with teachers.

These practices, the attorneys argued, amounted to  “unlawful wiretapping” and “eavesdropping,” in violation of several federal and state privacy laws.

Naviance is widely used in schools throughout the country for college application and advising purposes, including in many NYC high schools.  Any student who logged into this platform at least once at school or at home between August 18, 2021 through January 23, 2026 is eligible for payment through the court settlement. A preliminary estimate by the attorney is that each student may receive about  $50, depending on how many apply.

You (or your child if they are over 18) is supposed to have been sent a notice by snail mail or email already on how to file a claim as part of the court settlement, along with a Class Member ID number.  But if you haven’t received this notice, you can still submit a claim here.

We have long been concerned about the privacy and safety of PowerSchool programs in general and Naviance in particular, and we have communicated our concerns with DOE’s Chief Privacy Officer, to no avail.

Several years ago, we had shared reports in the publication The Markup, showing how Naviance had been found to allow colleges to send targeted ads to students through its platform, in some cases ads that discriminated by their race.  These ads were purportedly disguised as objective college recommendations.  Using personal data to send targeted ads violates the provisions of the NY Student Privacy Law.

Then, as you may recall, in December 2024,  a massive breach of the PowerSchool student information system exposed the personal data of millions of students nationwide, including  thousands of current and former NYC students.  As a result of this breach, the company has been sued by  many states and districts for failing to implement the most basic data security and privacy protections.   After this occurred, I again urged DOE to cancel its contracts with PowerSchool, which offers many different, highly invasive programs to NYC schools, but received no response.

If your child uses Naviance, beware of any recommendations or other communications that they may receive through this platform.

I’d appreciate it if any parents whose child currently uses the platform might help us investigate the way Naviance works in more detail, to assess whether the company may still be continuing to violate our privacy laws and basic ethical standards, including through their new AI-powered chatbot called “PowerBuddy”.  If you and your child are willing, please email us at info@studentprivacymatters.org.  Please also let us know if you or your child has not received notice of this settlement, so we can inform the plaintiff’s attorneys.

Finally, whether or not you receive a settlement payout, it would be great if you would consider donating to Class Size Matters, earmarked to help fund the Parent Coalition for Student Privacy. Our amazing PCSP co-chair, Cassie Creswell, executive director of Illinois Families for Public Schools, worked with the attorneys on the class action lawsuit and helped identify the original plaintiff. We could really use your support.

Saturday, March 28, 2026

Parents at PS 889 in Brooklyn speak out against DOE refusal to allow them to lower class size which will lead to third grade classes of 33 students

Below are testimonies from last week's NYC Council Education budget hearings by two parents at PS 889 in Brooklyn, by Ro White and Jessica Kurtz, explaining how DOE has refused to allow the school to make any changes to their enrollment to enable class sizes to be lowered to mandated levels, despite requests of the School Leadership Team, the principal and the Superintendent to DOE officials.  Because of these refusals, their third graders are likely to be crammed into classes of 33 instead of the mandated limit of 23 students. Shared with their permission. If your school is in a smilar position, please email us at info@classsizematters.org.  thanks!  

Good afternoon. I’m Ro White, a parent at P.S. 889 in Brooklyn, in District 22, one of the 3 worst districts in the city for class size compliance. I want to take you on a tour of my kids’ school, a school where 53% of students are in economic need. 

It’s been a long hearing. But I’d ask you to imagine being 7 years old, trying to focus at 2 PM when your lunch ended more than 4 hours ago because your school is so overcrowded that lunch starts at 10 in the morning. Imagine being 5 years old in kindergarten, in a class crowded far over the legal limit, and being told that is acceptable because a new school is “in the capital plan,” a school that will not open until you are in middle school. 

Imagine being a teacher with 33 students in front of you. For perspective, that is more than all the City Council members in attendance throughout the day today and all the DOE and SCA staff on the dais combined. These are actual examples for my kids, their teachers, and their school. And while a few people mentioned that the chairs on the DAYis are uncomfortable, at P.S. 889 students take music and theater in a room with no furniture at all because of overcrowding. 

Next year, unless something changes now, 3rd grade is projected to have 2 classes of 33 students each, when the legal limit is 23. DOE is requiring the school to admit 20% more students than the school has seats for.

Because this is a budget hearing, I ask the Council to press DOE on a basic question, using our school as a case study: how can DOE deny our school’s request for class size funding because of a lack of physical space, and at the same time insist that we continue to accept far more children than our school has seats and rooms for? 

Our principal and superintendent both requested to reduce enrollment for next school year based on the building’s physical limits. Someone at DOE denied it. DOE also had a class size webinar and asked parents citywide to submit feedback on class size. Many of us did, and we never received even an acknowledgement of our messages. We emailed, we followed up, and I even wrote to the Chancellor directly. No response. 

So, Chair Dinowitz, I hope you will press DOE on this directly: who is responsible for monitoring ClassSize@schools.nyc.gov, and who is accountable for both denying schools class size funding because they do not have space and denying requests to reduce enrollment based on space? You asked today whether DOE needs more time for full compliance with the class size law, and you did not really get an answer. Surely there is a middle ground on class size that City Council can demand right now before releasing another dollar to DOE.

Good afternoon. I’m Ro White, a parent at P.S. 889 in Brooklyn, in District 22, one of the 3 worst districts in the city for class size compliance. I want to take you on a tour of my kids’ school, a school where 53% of students are in economic need. 

It’s been a long hearing. But I’d ask you to imagine being 7 years old, trying to focus at 2 PM when your lunch ended more than 4 hours ago because your school is so overcrowded that lunch starts at 10 in the morning. Imagine being 5 years old in kindergarten, in a class crowded far over the legal limit, and being told that is acceptable because a new school is “in the capital plan,” a school that will not open until you are in middle school. 

Imagine being a teacher with 33 students in front of you. For perspective, that is more than all the City Council members in attendance throughout the day today and all the DOE and SCA staff on the dais combined. These are actual examples for my kids, their teachers, and their school. And while a few people mentioned that the chairs on the DAYis are uncomfortable, at P.S. 889 students take music and theater in a room with no furniture at all because of overcrowding. 

Next year, unless something changes now, 3rd grade is projected to have 2 classes of 33 students each, when the legal limit is 23. DOE is requiring the school to admit 20% more students than the school has seats for.

Because this is a budget hearing, I ask the Council to press DOE on a basic question, using our school as a case study: how can DOE deny our school’s request for class size funding because of a lack of physical space, and at the same time insist that we continue to accept far more children than our school has seats and rooms for? 

Our principal and superintendent both requested to reduce enrollment for next school year based on the building’s physical limits. Someone at DOE denied it. DOE also had a class size webinar and asked parents citywide to submit feedback on class size. Many of us did, and we never received even an acknowledgement of our messages. We emailed, we followed up, and I even wrote to the Chancellor directly. No response. 

So, Chair Dinowitz, I hope you will press DOE on this directly: who is responsible for monitoring ClassSize@schools.nyc.gov, and who is accountable for both denying schools class size funding because they do not have space and denying requests to reduce enrollment based on space? You asked today whether DOE needs more time for full compliance with the class size law, and you did not really get an answer. Surely there is a middle ground on class size that City Council can demand right now before releasing another dollar to DOE.


------- 

Hello, my name is Jessica Kurtz and I am a PS889 parent in Brooklyn’s District 22, a school that is struggling to meet the class size mandate. 

I've been trying my hardest to get an answer on the question of why the enrollment office can send us more Kindergarten kids than our actual capacity allows (and beyond what the class size cap allows). 

The enrollment office is sending us three Kindergarten sections of 25 each (when the state law clearly caps at 20 students per classroom and our capacity can in fact only support two sections of 20 each... that's 75 students enrolled vs. 40 true capacity!) Our funnel is too big and once students reach the upper grades they are eventually consolidated into two overcrowded classrooms as a result. The enrollment office is basically creating the problem that we then  need to fix!

  

It's super frustrating and there seems to be little to no transparency or accountability for how those decisions are being made. And our superintendents are deemed powerless- Superintendent Bove reached out to the enrollment office in November to request caps to both our Pre K & our K programs and was denied. Can anyone help us get through to the DOE on this enrollment issue?

  

There's also no plan in sight for the long term solution, which is that we ultimately need more physical space. I attended a February CEC22 meeting & the SCA gave a presentation- in that presentation they presented the five year capital plan and only two schools in D22 were included in the capacity projects (P206 + PS197). If my math is right, that leaves about 16 D22 schools with insufficient space to lower class size and no budget or plans from the SCA to address it. Including PS889 (and our co-located middle school MS890). And yet luxury builders scoop up prime lots across the street from our school on Coney Island Avenue and Hinckley Place.

 

I understand the Superintendent is trying to assess opportunities for extensions/ annexes and parents continue to send leads on vacant buildings in the area but these conversations have been going on for years and we still have no concrete space, plan or timeline. How do we move this forward from good intentions to action?

 

My daughter's reading has improved tremendously since the beginning of the school year. I credit this to the individualized attention she has been able to receive (from her fabulous teacher Mrs. Williams!) in her well proportioned class of 19. Now her second grade class is at risk of being collapsed into two sections of ~30 next year. I understand the challenges in meeting this mandate but truly believe it will lead to the best educational outcomes for all students once fully implemented. 

Thanks for your time & consideration on this matter.