Update on our lawsuit vs. NYSED uploading any MORE personal student data to inBloom, and yet more evidence of the blatant disregard the state has for our children's privacy

UPDATE: the arguments in court are now going to occur on Jan. 10, and NYSED says barring a court order they will not delay uploading names etc. beyond Jan. 22.

On January 3 in Albany, the NY State Supreme court will hear arguments concerning our  lawsuit asking for an immediate injunction to block Commissioner King and the Regents from uploading any more student personal data to the inBloom cloud.  

The original date of December 6 was postponed because our attorneys amended the brief, pointing out even more ways in which the NY State Education Department has violated the state's Personal Privacy Protection Law.  The amended petition is here.  The supplemental memo of law is here.  (You can also check out the original Article 78 petition  and the memo of law.)

Because of this, the state asked for more time to reply, and will serve its opposition papers on December 18.  Our attorneys have until noon on December 30 to file reply papers.  Our attorneys  tried to get a later date for reply in view of the intervening holidays, but SED would not agree to put off uploading student names beyond January 15th.

Sadly, we now have more evidence that much personal student data has already been uploaded to the inBloom cloud: first, last December,  to help with inBloom’s “infrastructure development”, according to the state, and again in July, for the data dashboard “road shows.”  

Why the state couldn’t use dummy data to help inBloom (or really Wireless Generation/NewsCorp) develop its system or to allow the dashboard companies to sell their wares, instead of  providing student unique ID numbers along with an abundance of other sensitive information that could be seen by anyone visiting these "roadshows", I have no idea.  The state's irresponsible decision to provide this data to help these companies develop their commercial products provides yet more evidence of how little respect state education officials have for our children’s safety and privacy.

The blatant disregard exhibited by our state education officials is immense, especially given how New York is last state remaining out of the nine states that inBloom originally claimed as its "partners."  This includes Louisiana, Georgia, Delaware, Kentucky, North Carolina, Massachusetts, Colorado and Illinois -- all of whom have pulled out of inBloom or put their data-sharing plans on indefinite hold because of the protests from parents.

Shortly after my trip to Chicago, Illinois officials decided inBloom was too controversial, and that they would create an entirely separate student data system and allow inBloom data-sharing to be completely voluntary on the part of districts.  Even those 35 districts receiving Race to the Top funds would not be required to share any data if they chose to withdraw from the project. Almost immediately, Chicago announced it would pull out of inBloom and it is likely all the other 34 RTTT districts in the state will follow soon.  Even before that, however, Illinois state officials said they would bar districts from disclosing any student health or disciplinary data, given the extreme sensitivity of this information.

Yet state education officials here in New York are doing the opposite.  Not only does Commissioner King insist on providing to inBloom the personal data of every public and charter school student in the state, even after districts have strenuously objected and returned their RTTT funds, he also continues to insist that he will share student disciplinary data (including how many days they had in-school or out of school suspensions) and detailed health records (including their disabilities and 504 diagnoses and accommodations.) 

Up to now, this highly sensitive data has been very closely held at the school and district level, as Mary-Fox Alter, Superintendent of Pleasantville, pointed out at a recent meeting of the Westchester-Putnam School Board Association.  As quoted in in LoHud News, Superintendent Alter said that “A child is better protected in the criminal justice system than in this,” given the strict rules of confidentiality required restricting access to criminal records of minors.  

 At the Westchester/Putnam school board meeting, I also pointed out that even if this information is not breached or abused, the data dashboards required by NYSED will offer at the touch of a fingertip all of a child's disabilities, academic and disciplinary records going far back in time, and that this is likely to create negative stereotypes in the minds of their teachers.  There is much research showing that teacher preconceptions often become self-fulfilling prophecies –with especially damaging results for those children who once struggled academically or had behavior problems.  

Despite the strong objections expressed by many  school board members and Superintendents at the meeting, Ken Wagner, the NYSED representative, was unable to offer any convincing rationale for the educational usefulness of this data-sharing plan that made it worth all the serious and potentially life-altering risks it poses for New York’s children. 

Chicago parents give thanks as their schools pull out of inBloom Inc., but NY Commissioner KIng remains fully committed; why?

Illinois State Superintendent Chris Koch

As reported in today’s Sun-Times, Chicago is dropping inBloom like a hot potato.  This $100 million project, created by the Gates and Carnegie Foundations, continues to lose adherents.  Already, seven other states originally listed as inBloom “partners” have dropped out or put their data-sharing plans on hold.  (See the timeline and list in my testimony here.)  Up to yesterday, Illinois and New York were the only two states still committed to sharing data with inBloom Inc. 

Some back story: Last Thursday night, November 21, I was an invited to speak at a forum on student privacy in Chicago, hosted by the Chicago Teachers Union and several activist parent groups, including More than a Score and PURE; see the video of my presentation here.  Unknown to me at the time, the Illinois state official who is heading the inBloom project, a man named Brandon Williams, was in the audience. 

Earlier that day, I had been part of a parent and teacher group which had briefed the editors of the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-Times about inBloom.  At these meetings, both sets of editors appeared seriously concerned about the vast privacy and security implications of the project.  Yet only one article had appeared in the Chicago press about this issue at that point, also in the Sun Times, two days before.

At the forum on Thursday night, Brandon Williams privately told the representative from the CTU that the issue was getting too “hot” and that Illinois Education Commissioner Chris Koch had decided to keep the state’s student data system, called ISLE, completely separate from inBloom, which before they had intended to be conjoined.  Now, district participation would be completely voluntary – even for the 35 school districts that had received Race to the Top funds out of  866 districts in the state.  These districts would NOT have to return their RTTT funds even if they decided not to participate in inBloom, because their data could be uploaded only into ISLE, the internal state data system.

This decision led Chicago officials to immediately drop out inBloom, the first of the 35 Illinois districts to publicly disengage.  Moreover, the Illinois State Education Dept. already had said that even if a district wanted to upload data to inBloom, no student health or disciplinary data could be shared, because this would be too sensitive – only purely “academic” data.

Commissioner John King and Regents Chancellor Merryl Tisch

Contrast these developments to what is happening here, where the NY Education Commissioner John King remains wholly committed to this project, despite scathing criticism from state legislators, superintendents, principals, school boards and parents.  The latest Superintendent to speak out against inBloom, John Bierwirth of the Herricks school district, has said that all Nassau County superintendents were “on the same page” opposing this project, and that “I don’t think there’s a person in Nassau County who thinks InBloom is a good idea."  He added that "the state education department hasn’t provided a good answer" when asked what the real purpose of this project is, and that “the commissioner is digging a hole deeper day after day.”

Indeed, at forums in all parts of the state, King is regularly assailed for his determination to provide children’s most private data to inBloom Inc. against the will of their parents.  This personal student data will be stored on a vulnerable cloud, to be provided with for-profit vendors, including those producing the data dashboards.  Last night, at a forum with more than 700 angry parents, teachers and students at Eastport-South Manor High School on Long Island, King was angrily confronted again and again on this issue. One parent said about his data-sharing plans, "I can't sleep at night thinking about this; Dr. King, how can you?" When he tried to repeat the stale inBloom talking points, he was interrupted by parents yelling from the audience. 

Despite this growing fury, the Commissioner continues to insist that even without the support of school boards, even if districts decide to return their RTTT funds as more than thirty have now done, even without the consent of parents, he will share an entire statewide data set with inBloom, including their student disciplinary and health data, and more specifically their suspension records, disabilities and 504 diagnoses.

At the same time, King and other NYSED officials are encouraging districts to share even more confidential  data with inBloom Inc., and to sign up for additional “personalized learning tools” produced by for-profit vendors, who will data-mine and use this information to help them produce products to be sold back to schools and districts.  Even as every other of the nine original inBloom states has apparently pulled away from the project, New York stands alone.  Why the difference?

We can only speculate. Earlier this week, in a front page story in the Albany Times Union, James Odato reported how the Regents fellows, the key officials who are “helping drive reforms” and implementing King’s agenda, are being paid for with $19 million “from some of the nation's wealthiest philanthropists,” including the Gates and Carnegie Foundations, the two backers of inBloom Inc.  Odato described how the Fellows inhabit a separate silo at State Ed: “The three-year-old operation, which now comprises 27 full-time staffers and a half-time intern, is unique in public education systems nationwide… the arrangement is stirring concern in some quarters that deep-pocketed pedagogues are forcing their reform philosophies on an unwitting populace, and making an end run around government officers.”  According to Odato, because they are privately funded, the Regents Fellows are not bound by ethics rules or the Public Officer's Law that govern the behavior of other government officials.

We also know through a FOIL submitted by activists in Louisiana that that Amrit Singh, the Regents Fellow in charge of inBloom in New York, was actively recruiting John White, the Louisiana State Superintendent, into the project last year, and helped persuade him to provide a statewide set of student data to inBloom Inc.  A few months after the Louisiana student data as uploaded, White ordered the data be deleted from the inBloom cloud, after protests by parents and school board members. 

We also know that the Gates Foundation gave at least $15 million to the NY State Education Department between 2007 and 2012, for this and other programs, including the Common Core. See our spreadsheet here.  In the Washington Post, principal Carol Burris pointed out how Gates Foundation has provided financial support to Common Core Inc., which produced the highly flawed math modules that NYSED purchased for $14 million, drawing on earlier research by Jessica Bakeman of Capitol NY. 

Last week, an article in the Catholic Education Daily reported that the Gates Foundation has donated more than $10.5 million to private companies like Common Core Inc., to help them develop Common Core aligned curricula.  Mercedes Schneider has explored how Gates has spent at least $150 million to develop these products and convince states to adopt the Common Core.  

We also know that last year, the NYC Department of Education received $1.8 million from the Gates Foundation through its private fundraising arm called the Fund for Public Schools, for the “integration of Common Core implementation strategies with new forms of teacher professional development to align with emerging functionalities and capacity of Shared Learning Infrastructure [SLI is another name for inBloom’s data system].  Thus, Gates has more than a quarter of a billion dollars invested in the Common Core and inBloom alone.

At this point, we don’t know what other financial incentives the Gates Foundation may have provided to NYSED officials since 2012 or now may be dangling in front of them, as they watch one state after another disengage from their data-mining project. All we know is now, New York is the last state standing that appears willing to sacrifice the privacy of its public schoolchildren at the altar of the Gates Foundation and inBloom Inc. 

Tuesday's elections disastrous for inBloom: Seven states out, two to go

Big News from Jefferson County, the only inBloom pilot district in Colorado. Anti-inBloom candidates swept the school board elections on Tuesday night, on Thursday their Superintendent resigned, and the existing school board unanimously voted to scrap inBloom. The school board president, Leslee Dahlkemper, was quoted as saying,  "We decided that it was important to listen to the community."   Congrats to the parents of Jefferson County, and especially activist Rachael Stickland who led the fight! See Columbine Courier, Colorado News, Michelle Malkin’s column , Politico and EdWeek. 

Now, only two states remain from the nine original inBloom “partners”: New York and Illinois.  

In Illinois, the parent coalition More than a Score, along with the Chicago Teachers Union, have just begun the fight. The Illinois Federation of Teachers passed a resolution against sharing any personal student data to vendors without consent, and I am going to speak at a public forum on inBloom in Chicago on November 21.

Here in New York, we are gaining strength every day.  On Tuesday, New Yorkers elected Bill de Blasio as Mayor by a huge margin.  De Blasio is already on record against inBloom, having written a letter last spring to the State Education Department and the NYC DOE against this, repeating his opposition this fall, and vowing to pull student data out of the inBloom cloud as soon as possible. Here is an excerpt from his NYC KidsPAC candidate survey:

District leaders and school boards throughout the state are speaking out in protest, returning their Race to the Top funds,  and refusing to sign up for the inBloom-linked dashboards. Superintendents from the Lower Hudson region have decided to send letters to inBloom, citing the provision in the state's contract allowing districts to opt out, and demanding that their student data be deleted.  

They are also demanding that the corporation "immediately notify us so that we can consider next steps."  South Orangetown Superintendent Kenneth Mitchell, president of the Lower Hudson Council of School Superintendents said, "Based on the contract, we believe we can do this."  

More and more, it seems inBloom's days are numbered.  If the Gates Foundation is wise, they will drop this unethical data-mining privacy-violating project, before they are targeted with lawsuits and the ensuing controversy brings down the Common Core as well.