A school in Salford, Manchester, UK, has recently implemented a fingerprint biometric system.
The method by which the school has communicated with parents and how the system has been implemented has concerned one parent enough, after gaining some information via a Freedom of Information request, to set up a Facebook page detailing how the system is being introduced in the school with children and about biometric systems in schools in general.
The forthcoming legislation, coming into force this September 2013, it seems, is providing a good and long needed neccessary platform to enable parents and the public to ensure schools act responsibly when using such biometric systems that process children's biometric data.
Current news from parents concerning biometric systems in schools are listed the social media links on this topic, on this page's right hand menu bar.
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Maryland introduce a bill Prohibiting Collection of Biometric Information from Students
USA - Maryland Schools stopped the implementation of biometric palm scanners for cashless catering in December 2012 after privacy concerns were aired by parents.
After a Board of Education meeting, Carroll County Public Schools Superintendent Steve Guthrie told WBAL “I made the decision to suspend it after concerns were being expressed by the community. There was division on those who were for the palm scanner and those who were against it. It is not my intent to alienate any segment of our community. It is my job to unify the community, not to create divisions.” A respectful and fairly unique stance taken by the school district with regards to the implementation of biometric systems. They are looking into an alternative system.
On February 7th 2013 a Bill, SB855, was introduced by Senator Getty to the US Maryland Government which reads:
FOR the purpose of prohibiting a county board or a person subject to the direction and control of the county board from collecting biometric information from students enrolled in a public school; defining a certain term; and generally relating to the collection of biometric information from students enrolled in public schools.
The scanners in Maryland were supplied by PalmSecure, a Fujitsu property. The above Bill is probably not the desired effect Fujitsu envisioned when they first trialed the infra-red vein scanning technology on primary school children in Scotland in 2006. The desired effect was articulated by Mike Nelson's the General Manager of Fujitsu Europe in 2006, who said at the time:
"Biometric solutions will increasingly allow us to move towards a cashless society and this project is one of the first real examples in the UK of an innovative and truly practical biometric solution in operation. I fully expect this to be the first of many similar implementations across Europe"
(The original link to the news article quoting Mike Nelson on Fujitsu's site has been removed (it was 7 years ago) but his comments are also reported here.)
Thankfully Fujitsu's vision of a cashless society, aided by infra-red palm scans, has not yet materialised and the existence of this Bill proves society's reluctance to use such technologies.
Is there a coincidence that these technologies are being aimed at the next generation in schools to get them young? ...to prepare for technology companies, and possibly a government's, dream of a cashless society?
Children embrace technology without the mature questioning that an adult mind brings, in this case the parents have intervened and a Senator introduced a Bill on the use of biometric technology in schools with children. Whether the Bill becomes enacted or not, a public debate will be had on the topic, which has to be a positive and healthly process for our society.
After a Board of Education meeting, Carroll County Public Schools Superintendent Steve Guthrie told WBAL “I made the decision to suspend it after concerns were being expressed by the community. There was division on those who were for the palm scanner and those who were against it. It is not my intent to alienate any segment of our community. It is my job to unify the community, not to create divisions.” A respectful and fairly unique stance taken by the school district with regards to the implementation of biometric systems. They are looking into an alternative system.
On February 7th 2013 a Bill, SB855, was introduced by Senator Getty to the US Maryland Government which reads:
Public Schools – Collection of Biometric Information from Students – Prohibited
FOR the purpose of prohibiting a county board or a person subject to the direction and control of the county board from collecting biometric information from students enrolled in a public school; defining a certain term; and generally relating to the collection of biometric information from students enrolled in public schools. The scanners in Maryland were supplied by PalmSecure, a Fujitsu property. The above Bill is probably not the desired effect Fujitsu envisioned when they first trialed the infra-red vein scanning technology on primary school children in Scotland in 2006. The desired effect was articulated by Mike Nelson's the General Manager of Fujitsu Europe in 2006, who said at the time:
"Biometric solutions will increasingly allow us to move towards a cashless society and this project is one of the first real examples in the UK of an innovative and truly practical biometric solution in operation. I fully expect this to be the first of many similar implementations across Europe"
(The original link to the news article quoting Mike Nelson on Fujitsu's site has been removed (it was 7 years ago) but his comments are also reported here.)
Thankfully Fujitsu's vision of a cashless society, aided by infra-red palm scans, has not yet materialised and the existence of this Bill proves society's reluctance to use such technologies.
Is there a coincidence that these technologies are being aimed at the next generation in schools to get them young? ...to prepare for technology companies, and possibly a government's, dream of a cashless society?
Children embrace technology without the mature questioning that an adult mind brings, in this case the parents have intervened and a Senator introduced a Bill on the use of biometric technology in schools with children. Whether the Bill becomes enacted or not, a public debate will be had on the topic, which has to be a positive and healthly process for our society.
Monday, March 04, 2013
Devices now read fingerpints up to 6 metres away
Back in 2011 it was reported in Odd Gadgets that devices could read fingerprints from 6 feet (2 metres) away. No more placing a finger on a scanner, reducing the risk of sharing harmful bugs and bacteria no doubt.
In 2012 the biometric technology by the same company can "effectively scan fingerprints through photographic capture from as far as six meters.
Though the AIRprint is technically capable of a six-meter scan, according to Ange the standard distance this device works is between two and six feet. As previously reported in BiometricUpdate.com, the AIRprint uses only one finger, but enhancements are being made to meet the standard for commercial use, which is the use of four fingers."
In 2012 the biometric technology by the same company can "effectively scan fingerprints through photographic capture from as far as six meters.
Though the AIRprint is technically capable of a six-meter scan, according to Ange the standard distance this device works is between two and six feet. As previously reported in BiometricUpdate.com, the AIRprint uses only one finger, but enhancements are being made to meet the standard for commercial use, which is the use of four fingers."
Thursday, February 28, 2013
A parent's communication with school implementing biometrics
Freedom of Information request sent to a school implementing a biometric system and a Letter raising concerns and links to aspects for the school to consider.
The law changes here in the UK. Come September 2013 schools must have the written signature of one parent and the consent of the child in order to process a students biometric data.
In light of this the UK Department of Education published these guidelines and template letters for schools to use in light of the pending leglislation:
Protection of Biometric Information of Children in Schools.
Government response to the consultation on draft advice on protection of information of children in schools
Friday, January 18, 2013
Biometrics at Blacon
Blacon High School, West Cheshire, UK, implemented a fingerprint biometric catering system in June last year, 2012.
A letter was sent out Tuesday 12th June telling parents that the system would be going 'live' the following Thursday of the next week, 21st June. With Blacon High School taking the children's biometrics on Monday 18th June.
In most instances of parents contacting this blog and the Leave Them Kids Alone site, this type of hurried biometric implementation has also been experienced. One could argue that this method allows less time for parental objection, so that a higher, more covert, proportion of pupil biometric take up is ensured.
Apart from all the privacy and civil liberties issues surrounding children submitting their biometrics for school functions, as this blog has detailed before, the question has to be asked:
Why would a school with 449 pupils (see 6th March 2012 Ofsted Inspection) buy a biometric system in 2012 when come September 2013 all UK schools have to by law, as detailed in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, collect one parental signature per child to enable the school to take and process a child's biometrics?
A letter was sent out Tuesday 12th June telling parents that the system would be going 'live' the following Thursday of the next week, 21st June. With Blacon High School taking the children's biometrics on Monday 18th June.
That gave parents just 3 - 4 working days to read the letter (we parents do not always read letters the day we get them), do some research into biometrics in schools (which throws up a myriad of issues) and contact the school if they did "not want your child to be included in the system".
Mmmm... a hurried state of affairs here it seems. Blacon High School's speedy communication in relation to biometric registration is very similar to how other schools have operated.
In most instances of parents contacting this blog and the Leave Them Kids Alone site, this type of hurried biometric implementation has also been experienced. One could argue that this method allows less time for parental objection, so that a higher, more covert, proportion of pupil biometric take up is ensured.
Certainly in my experience more than 3 working days notice is commonly given for normal school activities, dates to be put in diaries, to allow consent for school trips, food tasting, swimming, collection of monies, vaccinations, sports days, etc.
Not so in this instance.
Understandably some parents and the wider community were shocked at the notion of schools taking, storing and processing their children's biometrics - and at Blacon High School's speedy implementation of the fingerprint biometric system.
This resulted in articles and letters in the local papers with parents contacting political parties for support and accountability. Parents have taken legal advice, set up a Facebook Group "Refuse to use" and are contacting the wider community to spead awareness and gather support against the biometric system.
Apart from all the privacy and civil liberties issues surrounding children submitting their biometrics for school functions, as this blog has detailed before, the question has to be asked:
Why would a school with 449 pupils (see 6th March 2012 Ofsted Inspection) buy a biometric system in 2012 when come September 2013 all UK schools have to by law, as detailed in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, collect one parental signature per child to enable the school to take and process a child's biometrics?
Why is there no mention of the new biometric system on Blacon High School's website or their Data Protection Register entry? See the Information Commissioner's Office quote about the register "The main purpose of the public register is transparency and openness".
Not only does Blacon High School have to collect one parent's signature in order to collect a child's biometric data but the school has to be seen to make an effort to contact both parents. In Blacon High School's case 998 parents for the new cashless catering system and the school need to also have in place a duplicate, alternative system for those parents and children who do not consent.
How efficient is that a spend of our UK tax payers monies? Two systems. A bad school management decision? Who is accountable?
On a lighter note...
What is betting that Blacon High School give parents more than 3 - 4 working days to give their written consent in order for the school to run their newly purchased biometric system? If one child's biometric data resides on Blacon High School's biometric system without a signed parental consent form come September 1st 2013, the school will be breaking the law,
I suspect there may be a few eyes watching how Blacon High School complies with the forthcoming enforceable legislation over the coming months. I think more to come on this.
Monday, January 07, 2013
"...the definition of privacy means something different today than it did five years ago”
I didn’t know quite where to come from on this one from the School Transportation News, the fact
that on company "offers a touchless fingerprint scanning system, which claims to read fingerprints from up to 6 meters away" or the quote
that comes from Jay Ange, the Director of Sales, at IDair, Alabama, the company selling
the touchless fingerprint scanners.
“Still, privacy issues remain as the general public may not know exactly how biometric fingerprint technology works, but the definition of privacy means something different today than it did five years ago, Ange said.”
“the definition of privacy means something different today than it did five years ago”. I would agree 100% with that statement. We all need to be super vigilant about the information trail each of us leaves every day, how and where we travel, buy goods, use energy (with the advent of smart meters), images caught on CCTV and be especially aware if technology exists that scans your fingerprint from 6 meters away...
“Still, privacy issues remain as the general public may not know exactly how biometric fingerprint technology works, but the definition of privacy means something different today than it did five years ago, Ange said.”
“the definition of privacy means something different today than it did five years ago”. I would agree 100% with that statement. We all need to be super vigilant about the information trail each of us leaves every day, how and where we travel, buy goods, use energy (with the advent of smart meters), images caught on CCTV and be especially aware if technology exists that scans your fingerprint from 6 meters away...
Thursday, January 03, 2013
Parent pressure in Maryland USA scrap school palm scanners
Parent pressure in Carroll, Maryland, has persuaded the school district to scrap controversial palm scanners in 10 schools after parents "said the system violated their children's privacy".
John Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute and a constitutional lawyer asked School Superintendent Stephen Guthrie to review using an opt-in process, as Whitehead said "with private information and kids, I much prefer an opt-in" and here in the UK our parliamentarians agree in this.
This opt-out form of gaining consent was used in the UK and has been much criticized. Opt-in consent enacted into law May 2012 becomes enforceable September 2013.
Stephen Guthrie made this rather surprising statement "We felt the scans fell under normal school process." Really? Is it 'normal' for schools to take a child's biometric marker in exchange for food? Adults do not do that in society so why on earth would it be a "normal school process" to introduce a system, alien to the society outside a school, that normalises such a disproportionate use of biometrics - with children?
As with all biometric systems sold to teachers, a solution is pitched to speed up lunch lines, streamline operations and cut costs. Teachers being told it's normal technology to use in schools. Normal for whom?
Surely if these teachers in schools actually sat back and really thought about it... really? ...fingerprinting kids for lunch? Infra-red palm scanning for food? Is it really worth trading a child's personal biometrics to shave a few dollars off a budget?
Children have rights, and society's morals, ethics and civil liberties outside school must permeate to within a school too. Thankfully these parents enabled this to happen.
John Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute and a constitutional lawyer asked School Superintendent Stephen Guthrie to review using an opt-in process, as Whitehead said "with private information and kids, I much prefer an opt-in" and here in the UK our parliamentarians agree in this.
This opt-out form of gaining consent was used in the UK and has been much criticized. Opt-in consent enacted into law May 2012 becomes enforceable September 2013.
Stephen Guthrie made this rather surprising statement "We felt the scans fell under normal school process." Really? Is it 'normal' for schools to take a child's biometric marker in exchange for food? Adults do not do that in society so why on earth would it be a "normal school process" to introduce a system, alien to the society outside a school, that normalises such a disproportionate use of biometrics - with children?
As with all biometric systems sold to teachers, a solution is pitched to speed up lunch lines, streamline operations and cut costs. Teachers being told it's normal technology to use in schools. Normal for whom? Surely if these teachers in schools actually sat back and really thought about it... really? ...fingerprinting kids for lunch? Infra-red palm scanning for food? Is it really worth trading a child's personal biometrics to shave a few dollars off a budget?
Children have rights, and society's morals, ethics and civil liberties outside school must permeate to within a school too. Thankfully these parents enabled this to happen.
Sunday, August 12, 2012
Parental consent now a legal requirement in UK
In May 2012 the Protection of Freedoms Act was given
Royal Assent and passed into law in the UK. Chapter 2 of the Act, clauses 26-28,
deals with consent when processing a child's biometric data:
Chapter 2 Protection of biometric information of children in schools etc.
26. Requirement to notify and obtain consent before processing biometric information
27 Exceptions and further provision about consent and notification
28. Interpretation
The salient points of the Act are:
The UK is the first country in the world to address the issues of informing parents and requiring their consent when their children’s biometrics are being taken, stored and processed by a school or any such institution.
Further scrutiny will be needed to see how enforceable this law is and how 'informed' parental consent is. Informed consent is a complex issue. If the biometric vendor, as the sole supplier of information via the school to the parent, is the sole source of information that the school gives to the parent, fully informed consent could be questionable.
It is interesting to note that not one academic, educationalist, industry developer have given their support for children using biometrics, in fact many experts have have voiced their concerns. Only biometric vendors and schools seems to think biometrics use without parental consent with children is acceptable. I know whose advice I'd take.
It's a good job that if parents Google "Biometrics in Schools" then this blog appears on Google's first results page. Parents should also check out the Leave them Kids Alone website.
Chapter 2 Protection of biometric information of children in schools etc.
26. Requirement to notify and obtain consent before processing biometric information
27 Exceptions and further provision about consent and notification
28. Interpretation
- Each parent of the child should be notified by the relevant authority that they are planning to process their child's biometrics and notified that they are able to object.
- In order for a school to process children's biometrics at least one parent must consent and no parent has withdrawn consent. This needs to be in writing.
- The child is under 18 years old.
The UK is the first country in the world to address the issues of informing parents and requiring their consent when their children’s biometrics are being taken, stored and processed by a school or any such institution.
Further scrutiny will be needed to see how enforceable this law is and how 'informed' parental consent is. Informed consent is a complex issue. If the biometric vendor, as the sole supplier of information via the school to the parent, is the sole source of information that the school gives to the parent, fully informed consent could be questionable.
It is interesting to note that not one academic, educationalist, industry developer have given their support for children using biometrics, in fact many experts have have voiced their concerns. Only biometric vendors and schools seems to think biometrics use without parental consent with children is acceptable. I know whose advice I'd take.
It's a good job that if parents Google "Biometrics in Schools" then this blog appears on Google's first results page. Parents should also check out the Leave them Kids Alone website.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Children's Biometrics in the House of Lords
The Protection of Freedoms Bill had it's second reading in the House of Lords last week and some peers spoke in a positive manner about gaining consent of parents before schools take and process children's biometrics.
The Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) tweeted that "Pleased to see Lord Lucas supporting ASCL's objections to restricting biometrics in schools in yday's Lord's debate. http://t.co/TlxwoxxR"
As the ASCL rightly state there was one peer, Lord Lucas, who indeed spoke of the section on biometrics in school as a "daffy overreaction". (daffy?) Lord Lucas also commented that biometrics in schools...
"...have great benefits. They improve safety. They improve privacy. They greatly improve efficiency."
If biometrics in schools do have such above beneficial effects what has the ASCL or Lord Lucas to be frightened about gaining parental consent. Surely given the above claims, parents should willingly embrace this technology and thereby give consent. Schools gain consent for all manner of activities, it is a process they are familiar with.
I would be interested to see validation of Lord Lucas's claims. Claims that remind me of the previous Labour Government waffle justifying using childrens biometrics in schools for mundane tasks, and of course, claims made by companies selling access, registration and security systems to schools.
Lord Henley -
"it is right that parents should be asked to
make an informed decision about whether to accede to the processing of such
information. It is also proper that pupils should have a say."
The Lord Bishop of Bristol -
"I back the protection of biometric information
on children in schools, with parental consent being required for processing
information"
Lord
Kennedy of Southwark -
"Proposals regarding the express parental consent for the use of children's fingerprints are welcome"
The Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) tweeted that "Pleased to see Lord Lucas supporting ASCL's objections to restricting biometrics in schools in yday's Lord's debate. http://t.co/TlxwoxxR"
As the ASCL rightly state there was one peer, Lord Lucas, who indeed spoke of the section on biometrics in school as a "daffy overreaction". (daffy?) Lord Lucas also commented that biometrics in schools...
"...have great benefits. They improve safety. They improve privacy. They greatly improve efficiency."
If biometrics in schools do have such above beneficial effects what has the ASCL or Lord Lucas to be frightened about gaining parental consent. Surely given the above claims, parents should willingly embrace this technology and thereby give consent. Schools gain consent for all manner of activities, it is a process they are familiar with.
I would be interested to see validation of Lord Lucas's claims. Claims that remind me of the previous Labour Government waffle justifying using childrens biometrics in schools for mundane tasks, and of course, claims made by companies selling access, registration and security systems to schools.
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Infrared palm scans out-biometric fingerprints for school lunches
What is so wrong with school fingerprint biometrics that warrants over $100,000 being spent on biometric palm scanning equipment to replace an existing fingerprint payment system? Source Palm Harbor News, Florida
Did the fingerprint system break down, is it not secure enough or perhaps the new vogue in biometrics for kids is the infrared palm scanner?
Or maybe fingerprint biometrics are just not fast enough to propel students at the desired speed through cafeterias as "this high-tech scanning system will make the lunch line move faster" ...faster even than fingerprint biometrics? Undoubtedly, biometric vendors will be selling differing biometric systems to school by 'miles per hour' lunch line speeds!
"The new palm-scanning program, piloted at Boca Ciega High School, cost the district $105,000. It replaces a finger scan system used in county middle and high schools since 2005.
"Pinellas County Schools are the first in the nation to use a palm scanning system"
A proud claim indeed. Of course, we have Scottish children to thank for Boca Ciega High School's first infrared claim, although competition is hot on their heels by kids in Reading Schools District, Ohio.
The Amey/ Fujitsu palm scanning technology was first introduced to Scottish primary schools back in 2007. Presumably the Scottish trials went well enough to market infrared palm scanning to the US. After all the US had around 49 million school children as opposed to an approximate meagre 9 million in the UK. A more lucrative US market, especially when imminent legislation here in the UK may require full parental consent to be gained by schools for biometrics to be used with students.
The speed of which school lunch queues move seems to be an ever evolving, publicly expensive, obsession held by schools and biometric companies on both sides of the pond.
Here's an idea, maybe the thousands of pounds and dollars spent on such systems could be invested in childrens education instead?
Did the fingerprint system break down, is it not secure enough or perhaps the new vogue in biometrics for kids is the infrared palm scanner?
Or maybe fingerprint biometrics are just not fast enough to propel students at the desired speed through cafeterias as "this high-tech scanning system will make the lunch line move faster" ...faster even than fingerprint biometrics? Undoubtedly, biometric vendors will be selling differing biometric systems to school by 'miles per hour' lunch line speeds!
"The new palm-scanning program, piloted at Boca Ciega High School, cost the district $105,000. It replaces a finger scan system used in county middle and high schools since 2005.
"Pinellas County Schools are the first in the nation to use a palm scanning system"
A proud claim indeed. Of course, we have Scottish children to thank for Boca Ciega High School's first infrared claim, although competition is hot on their heels by kids in Reading Schools District, Ohio.
The Amey/ Fujitsu palm scanning technology was first introduced to Scottish primary schools back in 2007. Presumably the Scottish trials went well enough to market infrared palm scanning to the US. After all the US had around 49 million school children as opposed to an approximate meagre 9 million in the UK. A more lucrative US market, especially when imminent legislation here in the UK may require full parental consent to be gained by schools for biometrics to be used with students.
The speed of which school lunch queues move seems to be an ever evolving, publicly expensive, obsession held by schools and biometric companies on both sides of the pond.
Here's an idea, maybe the thousands of pounds and dollars spent on such systems could be invested in childrens education instead?
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Protection of Freedoms Bill: Committee Stage Report Bill
The Protection of Freedom Bill Research paper RP11/54 after discussion in the House of Commons:
"Biometric information - The provisions on the protection of biometric information in relation to children were not amended in Public Bill Committee. Several amendments were discussed but none was successful. Members probed the Government on issues relating to parental consent and safeguards on the use and retention of children’s biometric data. While supporting the principle of consulting parents, the Opposition was concerned about schools being able to manage their affairs effectively."
"Biometric information - The provisions on the protection of biometric information in relation to children were not amended in Public Bill Committee. Several amendments were discussed but none was successful. Members probed the Government on issues relating to parental consent and safeguards on the use and retention of children’s biometric data. While supporting the principle of consulting parents, the Opposition was concerned about schools being able to manage their affairs effectively."
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Solving problems and proving claims
There is no doubt that biometrics are here to stay and I'm no Luddite about that. The general use of biometrics in UK society has been introduced to us all via our children, that it 'if' we are even aware they are using the technology.
In my opninion this has been grossly mishandled by the biometric industry. The perception could be that it has been introduced it by stealth, aided by laws in the UK that have enabled this situation to happen. In EU countries where Data Protection laws are more stringent, childrens biometrics are very rarely processed in schools.
Claims about biometric technology cannot be scrutenised to any great extent as schools and the previous government's apathy on the subject has not enabled any research to be done. Hence assertions made by industry and schools in defence of the use of biometrics in schools needs to be questioned.
Quoting from ASCL's General Secretary Brian Lightman:
"It [biometrics] means that students eligible for free school meals can take them up without being stigmatised" So does a pin number system or alternative touch system. No 'expensive' cards necessarily needed. If a school can get pupils to pass exams then it can surely get a pupil to remember a pin number.
"...and parents know their children are not buying lunch at the chip shop." Use a pin number system or alternative touch system.
"These systems prevent fraud and, with dinner money, intimidation and theft by other pupils."
Use a pin number system or alternative touch system. I've heard many an argument that using biometrics reduces bullying, such a claim indeed. Bullying exists in schools, therefore the school should deal with different bullying situations and teach children what is and what is not acceptable behavior, in all circumstances.
"Systems using cards are more expensive to install, more open to abuse and not as effective as cards are often lost, stolen or simply left at home." Use a pin number system or alternative touch system.
However, it could be argued that there are more benefits to the pupils than the administration of a school of having a card system. I.e. to encourage pupils to look after their identity, be aware where it is, how they have used it, see possible consequences if their identity card is lost, etc, none of which biometrics can really offer in the same way at the moment.
If the introduction use of biometrics had been made in the adult market in the UK we could possibly teach our chidlren how to manage the use of our biometrics, learn to keep track of where we have left our biometrics, who can access our biometric data and the data held against it, possible interoperability of biometric databases and where biometric data might end up, etc. We are unable to do this and I would interested to know if schools are doing this - my guess is they are not.
"The information could not be used to identify a student outside of the school, by the police or any other outside organisation." How does he know that for sure? As the ASCL and the biometric industry have close links maybe he got told that by them?
The reality is that there is software that enables Automated Fingerprint Identification Systems (AFIS) to communicate with each other so the possibility is there - see this link. Have any checks been carried out to see if his statement is correct? - no.
“Schools and colleges have invested heavily in this technology" You bet they have Brian. Here's Staffordshire County Council spending up to £4 million pounds on it.
And lastly...
“Biometrics in schools are a problem for a small number of pressure groups, not for parents." I'm a parent and the Leave Them Kids Alone website was set up by a concerned parent too.
In fact, as far as I know, any website dealing specifically with the civil liberties issues raised by using biometrics in schools, have been set up and run by parents. Oh, and the reason why privacy groups have brought up the matter of schools fingerprinting children without our knowledge, is mainly because we parents have contacted them.
In my opninion this has been grossly mishandled by the biometric industry. The perception could be that it has been introduced it by stealth, aided by laws in the UK that have enabled this situation to happen. In EU countries where Data Protection laws are more stringent, childrens biometrics are very rarely processed in schools.
Claims about biometric technology cannot be scrutenised to any great extent as schools and the previous government's apathy on the subject has not enabled any research to be done. Hence assertions made by industry and schools in defence of the use of biometrics in schools needs to be questioned.
Quoting from ASCL's General Secretary Brian Lightman:
"It [biometrics] means that students eligible for free school meals can take them up without being stigmatised" So does a pin number system or alternative touch system. No 'expensive' cards necessarily needed. If a school can get pupils to pass exams then it can surely get a pupil to remember a pin number.
"...and parents know their children are not buying lunch at the chip shop." Use a pin number system or alternative touch system.
"These systems prevent fraud and, with dinner money, intimidation and theft by other pupils."
Use a pin number system or alternative touch system. I've heard many an argument that using biometrics reduces bullying, such a claim indeed. Bullying exists in schools, therefore the school should deal with different bullying situations and teach children what is and what is not acceptable behavior, in all circumstances.
"Systems using cards are more expensive to install, more open to abuse and not as effective as cards are often lost, stolen or simply left at home." Use a pin number system or alternative touch system.
However, it could be argued that there are more benefits to the pupils than the administration of a school of having a card system. I.e. to encourage pupils to look after their identity, be aware where it is, how they have used it, see possible consequences if their identity card is lost, etc, none of which biometrics can really offer in the same way at the moment.
If the introduction use of biometrics had been made in the adult market in the UK we could possibly teach our chidlren how to manage the use of our biometrics, learn to keep track of where we have left our biometrics, who can access our biometric data and the data held against it, possible interoperability of biometric databases and where biometric data might end up, etc. We are unable to do this and I would interested to know if schools are doing this - my guess is they are not.
"The information could not be used to identify a student outside of the school, by the police or any other outside organisation." How does he know that for sure? As the ASCL and the biometric industry have close links maybe he got told that by them?
The reality is that there is software that enables Automated Fingerprint Identification Systems (AFIS) to communicate with each other so the possibility is there - see this link. Have any checks been carried out to see if his statement is correct? - no.
“Schools and colleges have invested heavily in this technology" You bet they have Brian. Here's Staffordshire County Council spending up to £4 million pounds on it.
And lastly...
“Biometrics in schools are a problem for a small number of pressure groups, not for parents." I'm a parent and the Leave Them Kids Alone website was set up by a concerned parent too.
In fact, as far as I know, any website dealing specifically with the civil liberties issues raised by using biometrics in schools, have been set up and run by parents. Oh, and the reason why privacy groups have brought up the matter of schools fingerprinting children without our knowledge, is mainly because we parents have contacted them.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
...and figures from Freedom of Information Requests
After looking at the secondary school biometric figures yesterday I thought it might be useful to take a look at the primary school market.
I sent a Freedom of Information Act Request (FOIA) out last year to over 500 schools last February/March 2010, to both primary and secondary, about the use of biometrics in schools.
4% of primary schools that responded had biometric systems.
39% of high schools that responded had biometric systems.
These figures are by no means precise as the overall response to the FOIA was poor. The reality is that there are no collection of figures nationally and with poor response rates from schools it is impossible to gain any accurate figures.
Nevertheless, working with the results we have, this is does give a loose indication of where the UK school biometric market lies.
I sent a Freedom of Information Act Request (FOIA) out last year to over 500 schools last February/March 2010, to both primary and secondary, about the use of biometrics in schools.
4% of primary schools that responded had biometric systems.
39% of high schools that responded had biometric systems.
These figures are by no means precise as the overall response to the FOIA was poor. The reality is that there are no collection of figures nationally and with poor response rates from schools it is impossible to gain any accurate figures.
Nevertheless, working with the results we have, this is does give a loose indication of where the UK school biometric market lies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)