With Congress engaged in broader debates about education, technology and data privacy, this is a moment when FERPA modernization is no longer an abstract policy discussion. Congress should update FERPA so it can do what its original authors intended: safeguard student privacy and serve families.

FERPA was enacted in 1974 鈥� over 50 years ago 鈥� to codify with whom and under what circumstances schools could share students鈥� personally identifiable information. But since then, the ways in which student data is handled have seismically shifted. 

Today, districts and schools store and share data digitally 鈥� not on paper stored in filing cabinets. Yet FERPA remains rooted in a paper-record era that predates real-time dashboards and digital tools. The law does not yet account for the rapidly evolving technology-driven practices that affect student privacy.

Parents are rightly wary of how their children鈥檚 data is collected, stored and used 鈥� especially as data breaches continue to make headlines. A FERPA that reflects America’s current digital landscape is long overdue. 

Because FERPA has never been statutorily updated, states and school systems are left to navigate a murky and complicated legal landscape as they work to both protect students and share data in smart ways. This ambiguity can result in states, school districts or colleges and universities from responsible data-sharing practices out of fear of violating FERPA鈥檚 convoluted provisions.

All this ultimately denies families access to the very insights and information they need to advocate for their children. Heightened concern about student data privacy should be met with clearer rules designed to modernize security protections and build trust with families, not used as an excuse to prevent action or to cease sharing useful information with parents.

This is not what student data privacy should look like. And it鈥檚 certainly not what families deserve. The nation can 鈥� and must 鈥� do better.

A modernized FERPA must ensure that student information is safeguarded with the highest standards of security and ethical use, while empowering families with the information they need to make informed decisions. Parents are clear that they want access to this information: say they support requiring schools to provide access to transparent data on student achievement, discipline and enrollment for families and policymakers. And say easier access to information would help them feel more confident about their ability to help their child make decisions about life after high school. 

It鈥檚 time for Congress to modernize FERPA so it works for today鈥檚 families. That means setting strong, enforceable privacy standards to ensure student data is protected. It also means affirming families鈥� rights to access information that empowers them: data on academic progress, school quality and services available to help students thrive.

An updated FERPA should also unlock the potential of state data systems that securely connect longitudinal information across early childhood, K-12, postsecondary and workforce programs 鈥� systems that can enable parents, students, educators, policymakers and the public to understand what鈥檚 working for students and what鈥檚 not. Today, FERPA鈥檚 framework does not reflect how cross-agency data can be used to, for example, connect high school students with college scholarship programs or assess return on investment for a district鈥檚 tutoring programs.

Student privacy and parent empowerment are not competing goals. With the right legal framework, congressional leaders can achieve both. Parents shouldn鈥檛 have to choose between protecting their children鈥檚 information and knowing how to help them succeed.

Under proposed in February, students statewide could be required to submit birth certificates or other sensitive documents to secure their seats 鈥� one of several state efforts this year designed to  enshrining students鈥� right to a free public education regardless of their immigration status. 

Watson, a Republican, argues undocumented students are a financial drain on Tennessee鈥檚 public schools even though state officials don鈥檛 know how many are enrolled there. He sees a way to find out. 

鈥淚f someone is not able to produce their documentation then you would make the assumption that they are here illegally and it would allow you to begin to collect some data as to the number of students in a school system that are either undocumented or are here illegally,鈥� Watson said in an interview with 社区黑料. 鈥淪o that鈥檚 sort of a starting point for us, in terms of trying to understand what the financial cost is.鈥� 

The controversial legislation, which has drawn protests and could in federal money for Tennessee schools, has also sparked alarm among privacy advocates who warn efforts to compile data on students鈥� immigration status could be used not just to deny them an education 鈥� it could also fall into the hands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 

As the Trump administration ramps up deportation efforts and tech billionaire Elon Musk鈥檚 Department of Government Efficiency reportedly a 鈥渕aster database鈥� of government records to zero in on migrants, civil rights advocates warn that education data about immigrant students, such as home addresses, could be weaponized. 

鈥淭hat would be an easy grab for federal officials,鈥� said Cody Venzke, a senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union focused on surveillance, privacy and technology. 鈥淪chools are a geographically based governmental service and that makes that data particularly vulnerable.鈥�

Republican lawmakers in Tennessee, Oklahoma and Idaho seek to compel educators to collect records about students鈥� immigration status that have traditionally been outside their purview. Meanwhile, reams of existing information about immigrant students 鈥� including their birth locations and how long they鈥檝e lived in the U.S. 鈥� could serve as proxies to help authorities identify and track undocumented students or those with undocumented family members, said Elizabeth Laird, the director of equity in civic technology at the nonprofit Center for Democracy and Technology.

For Laird, a recent executive order signed by President Donald Trump to merge federal and state data, surveillance-driven immigration enforcement efforts and irregular data collection efforts across federal agencies set off alarm bells. Laird recently published on schools鈥� legal obligations to keep sensitive student data secure. 

鈥淲hat we鈥檝e seen in the last three months is unprecedented access to and consolidation of data about people across a number of federal agencies, and that means taxpayers, it means student loan borrowers, it means Social Security recipients,鈥� Laird said. 

Immigration enforcement officials have already to deport international college students, who came to the U.S. without their parents and whose IRS returns were once considered absolutely confidential. Additional irregular data collection efforts have been carried out across federal agencies in the name of rooting out fraud and waste. 

鈥淵ou don鈥檛 have to go very far to see the connection between the data environment that they’ve created in the name of fraud, waste and abuse and how it relates to immigration enforcement,鈥� Laird said. As Republicans argue that immigrants are wrongly accessing benefits and causing financial turmoil in public schools, she said, 鈥淚mmigration has become a fraud, waste and abuse issue.鈥� 

Officials at the White House and Education Department didn鈥檛 respond to requests for comment.

Data collection in the surveillance age

At just over 100 days into Trump鈥檚 second term, there is no evidence that K-12 students鈥� data have become a specific target for immigration enforcement, even after ICE scrapped a longstanding policy this year that restricted agents from carrying out raids at schools, churches and other 鈥渟ensitive locations.鈥� 

Watson told 社区黑料 his legislation is about ejecting undocumented children from public schools and not about removing them from the country altogether. But a recent Center for Democracy and Technology survey suggests that educators even pre-Trump were already sharing student information with immigration enforcement officials. Some reported that their schools provided student grades, attendance and discipline information to immigration authorities last school year, the survey found, as well as information collected by digital surveillance tools on school-issued laptops. 

A recent executive order seeks to make vast data collection a lot easier. With a stated purpose of promoting government efficiency, Trump in March to eliminate 鈥渋nformation silos鈥� between federal agencies that have historically existed to prevent the government from abusing its access to Americans鈥� , including adoption records, citizenship information, IP addresses and student loan histories. 

Under the order, the Trump administration is building a database of individual people unlike anything the U.S. government has had before 鈥� and one that鈥檚 been compared to . 

鈥淢ost breathtaking,鈥� Venzke said, is the Trump administration鈥檚 efforts to gain unfettered access to information held at state agencies. Experts said the broadly defined order could apply to schools, state education agencies

The U.S. Department of Education generally doesn鈥檛 maintain large datasets of student data beyond financial aid records 鈥� which include students鈥� and family members鈥� Social Security Numbers and Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers. are used by taxpayers without Social Security numbers to pay taxes regardless of their immigration status but could be leveraged as an indicator that someone is undocumented. 

The real student data trove, however, resides at the state level. In fact, states have maintained data about foreign-born students for years and the threat of immigration enforcement is 鈥渘ot limited to undocumented students,鈥� according to the CDT white paper. in the U.S. lost their visas in the first months of the Trump administration, although it recently in the face of court challenges. 

State education data is used to populate the U.S. Department of Education鈥檚 , which centralizes state-by-state information to guide policy development and includes information about students who were born outside the U.S. and have been enrolled in U.S. schools for less than three years. Though the data states provide to the federal government is aggregated, Laird warned that local education agencies could be compelled to share the underlying records that identify specific students. 

Schools also identify immigrant children and English learners in order to receive federal grants that support their learning. Additionally, under the federal Every Student Succeeds Act, which requires students nationwide to take standardized tests, immigrant students who have lived in the U.S. for less than a year can opt out of the English assessments 鈥� waivers the CDT noted 鈥渃an only be provided if schools know who these students are.鈥� 

Students cautioned against speaking out

Despite the recent executive order鈥檚 stated goal of preventing fraud, Laird said the mandate mirrors , issued during Trump鈥檚 first term, which sought to consolidate data for the explicit purpose of streamlining immigration enforcement. At least 鈥� South Dakota, South Carolina, Iowa and Nebraska 鈥� agreed to share driver鈥檚 license data with the Trump administration as it sought to pinpoint the citizenship statuses of every adult residing in the U.S. 

Julie Sugarman, associate director for K-12 education research at the nonprofit Migration Policy Institute said educators nationwide have taken steps to ensure students鈥� records aren鈥檛 used beyond their intended purposes, including for immigration enforcement. But the Trump administration鈥檚 vast data collection efforts present an unprecedented situation.

鈥淪tates generally would have a full spreadsheet that includes identifying information, so yeah, if the government was to go to states and ask for that, that would set off huge alarm bells,鈥� Sugarman said. 

鈥淲e鈥檙e in a time when the government is asking for things that they鈥檝e never asked for before,鈥� she continued. 鈥淪o I鈥檓 really not sure what might happen if the government went to a state and said, 鈥楪ive us your entire database with every piece of information about every student in public schools.鈥� 鈥�

Digital surveillance tools being used by federal immigration officials to track down deportation targets 鈥� including social media monitoring software 鈥� have become . Digital surveillance tools, which track students鈥� online communications and web searches, could offer valuable data to immigration officials, Laird said. In some instances, students鈥� digital communications are automatically shared with local law enforcement officers who, in communities nationwide, have been increasingly . 

Social media surveillance tools used by K-12 schools and university educators have previously been . 

In the last few months, some K-12 students have already been warned to be careful about what they post on the internet as the government moved to revoked the visas of foreign-born college students for their , and . 

Martin Milne, president of the Connecticut-based Assist Scholars, said his organization has told international K-12 students that their ability to learn in the U.S. is conditional 鈥� and can be eliminated at a moment鈥檚 notice. The nonprofit scholarship organization currently helps nearly 200 international students enroll in U.S. private secondary schools.  

鈥淲e鈥檝e sent a really general reminder to students applying for visas to be particularly mindful that obtaining a student visa is really a privilege and it鈥檚 not a right and it comes with important responsibilities,鈥� Milne said, recently used by the Trump administration. 鈥淎nd that if they abide by the responsibilities that come with being a visa holder, they鈥檙e not going to draw attention to themselves.鈥� 

Tennessee wants Trump鈥檚 permission

Back in Tennessee, a Republican-led effort to collect data about undocumented students and bar their access to public schools has stalled. Despite claims that immigrant students are a drain on school resources, a state audit warned the move could cost Tennessee as much as $1.1 billion in federal education money if officials fail to comply with federal laws that prohibit discrimination based on race or national origin. 

Still, the climate caused by the legislative effort and Trump鈥檚 deportation efforts has students on edge, Kyle Carrasco, a high school government and economics teacher in Chattanooga, told 社区黑料. Although his school doesn鈥檛 ask students about their immigration status, Carrasco said he suspects at least some are undocumented and several have already had family members taken into ICE custody. 

鈥淎t the end of the day, immigrants regardless of documentation status are paying taxes, they鈥檙e paying into the system that they 鈥� if these bills become law 鈥� will be withheld from,鈥� Carrasco said. 鈥淪o I don’t necessarily understand the reasoning and the logistics beyond why we need to be identifying and tracking these students.鈥� 

Watson, the state senator, hasn鈥檛 given up, telling 社区黑料 he hopes his bill will resurface after local officials receive assurance they won鈥檛 be penalized by the federal government. In an April 21 letter to the U.S. Department of Education, state Fiscal Review Executive Director Bojan Savic asked if Tennessee risked losing federal money for its failure to comply with civil rights laws. 

With Trump in charge, Watson said he didn鈥檛 think the letter was necessary. 

鈥淭his bill, were it to be enacted into law, would align with the strategies that the current administration is exercising,鈥� Watson said, 鈥渁nd it would not put our federal dollars in jeopardy.鈥�

The figures are stark. The number of kids who are chronically absent has doubled since 2016. More than one-quarter of all U.S. public school students missed at least 10% of the 2022-23 school year. That’s equivalent to more than three weeks of classroom time.

Accepting chronic absenteeism as the new normal simply isn’t an option. It can 鈥� and must 鈥� be stopped. 

The crisis is everyone’s problem, but it doesn’t impact everyone equally. The school districts that have experienced the largest spike in chronic absenteeism are low-income and majority nonwhite, with absentee rates 13% higher in the lowest-income districts than they are in the wealthiest ones.

This trend bears significant long-term costs, as attendance at school is strongly correlated with academic success, graduation rates 鈥� and even future job prospects. Students who are chronically absent are more likely to be socially disengaged and alienated, and to have an encounter with the criminal justice system. 

At , the network of public charter schools we help run in northern California, we have made tackling this crisis a priority. Caliber serves primarily low-income Black and Hispanic students from transitional kindergarten 鈥� an additional year of school before kindergarten for students needing extra support 鈥� to eighth grade. As at many schools, our attendance levels dropped after the pandemic and chronic absenteeism began to soar. During the 2022-23 school year, over 40% of students at Caliber schools qualified as chronically absent. 

At the start of last school year, we rolled out a pilot program to shift the narrative to one of chronic attendance. Our nonpunitive, data-driven approach could serve as a model for other schools.

A key component of our strategy is our Student Wellness and Attendance Team 鈥� our SWAAT team. Its members, who include school therapists, administrative staff and other professionals, track daily attendance and maintain a database that enables Caliber’s administrators to detect patterns across time. Using this data, we identified “red flag” days when students were most likely to skip school 鈥� like Fridays, especially before a holiday.

To counter that trend, we gave students a teaser: Mystery Fridays, a surprise event one Friday per month that celebrates them. They don’t know which Friday it will be, so there’s a strong incentive not to miss one.

Family outreach has been another key pillar of our strategy. Like many schools, we check in at home every time a student misses school. But we also discuss with parents what material their children missed, how they can get caught up and what future lessons will cover. Our goal is to reinforce the message that when students skip school, they’re missing out on valuable instruction and relationships with peers.

Instead of involving 鈥� which fails to engage students or address the root causes of absenteeism, and has been shown to have a negative, long-term impact on attendance 鈥� we refer students who miss 20% of class to a support panel. Its members work with the student, parent and/or guardian to discuss appropriate services for underlying issues, including housing instability and mental health challenges. Non-punitive solutions like counseling are prioritized in this early intervention effort.

By the end of the year, we had reduced chronic absenteeism by more than 13 percentage points, from 40% to 26.8%, and we’re off to a good start in 2024: both schools in our network averaged over 95% daily attendance in the first month of the year.

There’s still work to be done. One in four public school districts say nothing they’ve done has been effective in reducing chronic absenteeism, but chronic absenteeism won’t get better on its own. Our experience shows that with positive and proactive approaches, it can be reversed.

The burden of compliance reporting can feel overwhelming to districts already struggling with limited bandwidth. Like 86% of districts in Michigan, , where I serve as superintendent, has been identified for improvement due to student poverty and a lack of resources. As a result, we are managing multiple state mandates, as well as more than 100 grants, many of which have their own reporting system.

It can be overwhelming, but the process has opened our eyes to innovative ways to address ongoing problems. By leveraging the power of data and relying on teachers鈥� expertise to transform it into tailored instruction, we have given students better opportunities for success.

1. Look at your partnership agreement as an extension of your continuous school improvement plan. While the metrics and standards of an agreement may differ from those you鈥檝e established as a district, they deliver an additional set of insights to help discern if your goals for the next 18 to 36 months are on track for success.
   
   My district takes full advantage of data in determining whether to retain, refine or replace specific educational strategies, and whether changes are needed at the classroom, school or district level. For instance, identifying the root causes of low graduation rates both systemically and individually through data analysis provided us with the insights required to apply for and receive a grant for a college, career and graduation coach.

2. Embrace educators as the experts they are. Acknowledging vulnerability is one of the most important strategies superintendents have for building a strong team. Teachers are the best evaluators in determining what鈥檚 working 鈥� and isn’t 鈥� in the classroom. Encouraging them to help guide next steps is critical to moving the needle.
   
   Engaging our teachers in data analysis has empowered them to become skilled  in interpreting the findings and applying specific strategies to their daily instruction. We have used grant money to host teacher team meetings during the summer, and pay our educators their summer rate to attend. In these meetings, teachers apply their subject knowledge expertise to help all faculty members evaluate data and use it to plan for the fall.
   
3. Build a team outside of school to help navigate funding and compliance challenges. Everyone, from superintendents to education officials in county and state government, is overwhelmed by the deluge of data to wade through. By keeping students at the center, it is possible to find common ground and new opportunities to ensure their success.
   
   I recently spoke with a member of the attendance committee in Michigan’s Macomb County schools and a neighboring superintendent about the positive impact home visits had on keeping students engaged during the pandemic. A shared wish to continue the practice to help address chronic absenteeism led to a collaborative grant request. This fall, a came on board to help identify attendance barriers for students and provide social-emotional support to families. This partnership frees up resources for both districts in terms of funding, hiring and reporting.

Superintendents should also invite local and state legislators into their schools so they can better understand the undue pressures of compliance while learning more about their district鈥檚 successes. Legislators must see educators and administrators as the experts in the room, understand the differences among districts in their state and get a complete picture of students鈥� needs. When those who approve the budgets make it a priority to directly observe the impact of increased funding on academic outcomes 鈥� and the setbacks due to a lack thereof 鈥� they may approach future funding with a new frame of mind. 

The demands of compliance management and data analysis often overshadow the very work that funding was approved for. It almost feels like a self-fulfilling prophecy: Schools are allocated dollars to address significant problems, such as staff shortages or lack of appropriate resources for students, but can鈥檛 make the needed fixes because data and facts take priority over action and intervention. Superintendents must get creative to bring successful student outcomes back to the forefront by cultivating a collaborative team of experts eager to transform data into goal-focused action plans. Yes, the work is difficult, but when it comes to students鈥� educational futures, it is well worth it.

New York City鈥檚 free online therapy platform for teens may violate state and federal laws protecting student data privacy, lawyers from the New York Civil Liberties Union and advocates charged in a letter Tuesday to the city鈥檚 Education and Health Departments.

, a $26 million partnership between the city Health Department and teletherapy giant Talkspace launched in late 2023, connects city residents between ages 13 and 17 with free therapists by text, phone, or video chat.

In less than a year, roughly 16,000 students have signed up, Health Department officials said. Sign-ups disproportionately came from youth who identified as Black, Latino, Asian American and female and live in some of the city鈥檚 lowest-income neighborhoods, .

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 社区黑料 Newsletter

Information shared with a therapist is subject to stringent protections under the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA. But before connecting with a therapist through Teenspace, teens go through a registration process that asks for personal information like their name, school, mental health history, and gender identity. Advocates are concerned such information is being improperly collected and could be misused.

For one, teens enter the registration information before securing parental consent 鈥� a possible violation of federal student privacy laws, the letter contends.

And families don鈥檛 get a chance to review the privacy policy 鈥� which discloses that registration information can be used to 鈥渢ailor advertising鈥� and for marketing purposes 鈥� before entering the registration information, advocates allege. There鈥檚 an option for teens to request that their data be deleted from the company鈥檚 platform, but it鈥檚 hard to find, according to advocates.

鈥淚t鈥檚 all very invasive,鈥� said Shannon Edwards, a parent and founder of AI For Families, an organization that seeks to help families navigate artificial intelligence, who co-authored the letter along with NYCLU and the Parent Coalition for Student Privacy. 鈥淚t鈥檚 also very unclear that parents understand what they鈥檙e getting themselves into.鈥�

Advocates also pointed to the risk of a potential data breach 鈥� something the city has in recent years.

Advocates say similar about have been circulating for years and questioned whether city officials did sufficient due diligence or built in enough additional privacy safeguards before inking the contract.

鈥淚t鈥檚 the opacity of the relationship here, and the failure to make manifest what the city is doing to ensure there isn鈥檛 this data accumulation and sharing for inappropriate purposes,鈥� said Beth Haroules, a senior attorney at the NYCLU who co-authored the letter.

Health Department spokesperson Rachel Vick said the agency has 鈥渢aken additional steps to protect the data of Teenspace users and ensure information is not collected for personal gain, including stipulations that require all client data to remain confidential during and after the completion of the city鈥檚 contract and barring use of data for any purpose other than providing the services included in the contract.鈥�

Client data is destroyed after 30 days if a teen doesn鈥檛 connect with a therapist, officials said.

A spokesperson for Talkspace referred questions to the Health Department.

The extent to which Teenspace is subject to state and federal laws governing student privacy in educational settings is somewhat murky, given that the contract is with the city鈥檚 Health Department, not its Education Department.

But NYCLU attorneys contend 鈥渢he City cannot absolve itself of its responsibility to provide the protections inherent in federal and state laws鈥imply because the contract sits with DOHMH instead of DOE. The service is promoted on public school websites, and it is DOE鈥檚 responsibility to ensure that student data is protected, regardless of which City agency signs the contract.鈥�

Parents may be more inclined to trust the platform because it has a 鈥渟tamp of approval鈥� from the school system, Edwards added.

A Health Department spokesperson didn鈥檛 specify whether the program is subject to education privacy laws, but said it鈥檚 鈥渘ot a school based service.鈥�

Teenspace has been the city鈥檚 highest-profile effort to address the ongoing youth mental health crisis.

鈥淲e are meeting people where they are with a front door to the mental health system that for too long has been too hard to find,鈥� said Ashwin Vasan, the city鈥檚 health commissioner, in May.

Some teens have praised the program, noting it鈥檚 a way to bring mental health care to young people who may not otherwise have access.

But some mental health providers have argued it can鈥檛 replace the kind of intensive care a clinician provides, especially for kids with severe mental health challenges.

Company officials shared in May that they had helped 36 teens navigate serious incidents including reports of suicide attempts and abuse 鈥� cases they referred to child protective services, in-person therapists, or hospitals.

Talkspace CEO Jon Cohen previously told Chalkbeat the company uses an artificial intelligence algorithm to scan transcripts of therapy sessions to help identify teens at risk of suicide.

Even advocates critical of Teenspace鈥檚 privacy protections acknowledge the severe shortage of mental health providers and say teletherapy can play a role in filling the gap.

鈥淲e know you cannot find providers 鈥� there is such a need,鈥� said Haroules. But advocates said the city can do more to ensure its vendors are meeting strict standards for data privacy, especially with such sensitive information.

鈥淓veryone thinks, well, mental health is important for kids, these kids of services are required 鈥� when on the other side is: 鈥楬ow are they getting to it?鈥欌�� said Edwards. 鈥淚t doesn鈥檛 matter what the app is, there has to be a standard.鈥�

This was originally published by Chalkbeat. Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools. Sign up for their newsletters at .

FERPA permits parents and eligible students (typically over 18) to inspect and correct their education records. It also requires consent before disclosure of personally identifiable information from those records, though there are numerous exceptions. In addition, schools must notify parents and eligible students annually of their FERPA rights.

With the advent of education technology, FERPA is really showing its age. Though it has slightly since its enactment, the last congressional update was over a decade ago, and regulations from the Department of Education are also woefully outdated. (Updates to the regulations from the Department are frequently said to be imminent, but as of this writing, none are public.)

Privacy concerns have steadily increased over the last few decades, as technology continues to develop and make increasingly intrusive incursions into every aspect of life. While FERPA does provide at least for students 鈥� unlike, say, consumers in general 鈥� the fact is, it does not mandate adequate safeguards.

Students and families in today鈥檚 digital world deserve modern protections that accurately reflect contemporary society and their learning experiences. Here are a few suggestions for bringing FERPA into its next half-century.

First, it should reflect that the information contained in student records is much broader than documents in files or scanned into computers. FERPA needs to protect students鈥� online information; protected 鈥渆ducation records鈥� should explicitly and unambiguously include online data created by students, including web browsing and search histories, interactions with tech tools and artificial intelligence chatbots, and other digital activity.

Second, the concept of directory information 鈥� things like a student鈥檚 name, address, telephone listing, email address, photograph, date and place of birth, height and weight (for athletic team members) and student ID numbers 鈥� needs an overhaul for the digital age. Under FERPA, schools can share this information with a third party or the public generally, unless a parent has opted out. 

is supposed to be data that is not considered harmful or invasive if disclosed. But given rapid advances in technology, much of it could lead to commercial profiling, identity theft and other harms. The definition should be narrowed, and parents should be allowed to choose what specific information schools can share. And that sharing should be opt-in, item by item, not the current blanket opt-out.

Third, the FERPA statute did not contemplate the extent to which ed tech and other third-party companies would be integrated into students鈥� daily lives. The Department of Education has since 鈥� 鈥� to whom information can be shared without consent 鈥� to include ed tech vendors when they have a legitimate educational interest, perform a function the school would otherwise do, are under the school’s direct control with respect to use of student records and comply with other FERPA requirements. It would be helpful for Congress to very clearly indicate when FERPA-covered information may be shared with ed tech vendors and other third parties that students encounter on a daily basis.

FERPA should specify that students鈥� information 鈥� including and especially when shared with 鈥渟chool officials鈥� 鈥� should be used for educational purposes only and not be offered for sale or used for targeted advertising.

Lastly, it is critical that schools safeguard student information. . It should mandate administrative, physical and technical safeguards, including training for individuals handling student information and prompt responses to data breaches. Schools need funding to better understand cybersecurity issues, as well as to build out necessary infrastructure to collaborate and coordinate cybersecurity efforts. Ideally, Congress would add new cybersecurity funding for schools, because many lack the financial means to implement adequate safeguards.

FERPA was passed 50 years ago in response to rising concerns about new technology. Technology has continued to evolve, and so must FERPA.

A U.S.-based tutoring company on Tuesday pushed back against a conservative campaign to 鈥渄estroy鈥� it due to security fears over its Chinese owner.

In a posted online, said the parents鈥� rights group in recent months has misrepresented its operations, falsely claiming it has ties to the Chinese government. The company, based in New York, said the parents鈥� group is trying to persuade lawmakers and others that Tutor.com 鈥渋s somehow a puppet of the Chinese government and a threat to national security,鈥� according to the letter. 

Founded two decades ago, Tutor.com was acquired in 2022 by , a Beijing-based investment firm in Hong Kong, Singapore and Palo Alto, Calif. In the letter to attorneys representing Parents Defending Education, the company said the parents鈥� group has chosen to portray Tutor.com 鈥渁s a stalking horse to advance the advocacy group鈥檚 broader political agenda.鈥�

The effort by Parents Defending Education both echoes and influences a larger one by lawmakers nationwide to raise security concerns about companies linked to China, including fears that they could be compelled to share student data with the Chinese government.

But John Calvello, Tutor.com鈥檚 spokesperson and chief institutional officer, said the fears are misplaced.

鈥淔irst and foremost, it’s important to say: We are an American company,鈥� he said in an interview. 鈥淚 want to be very clear about that. And again, as an American company, you have to abide by all U.S laws and regulations.鈥�

Tutor.com, Calvello said, 鈥渃annot be compelled to share data鈥� with anyone.

He noted that it had recently undergone a voluntary review by the federal , which found, in his words, 鈥渘o unresolved national security concerns.鈥�

He also said the company has a designated security officer approved by the U.S. government to ensure data security compliance. And he said all of Tutor.com鈥檚 data is housed in the United States. 

According to the watchdog site , states, school districts, colleges and even the Pentagon have spent more than $35 million on contracts with Tutor.com over the past decade. Among the largest: nearly $1.6 million in 2015 for online homework tutoring for the U.S. Defense Department and $1.1 million in 2022 for tutoring at California State East Bay.

Following the pandemic, state and school district spending on Tutor.com, as with other tutoring providers, skyrocketed. In December, the New Hampshire Department of Education said it would through Tutor.com to every student in fourth- through twelfth grades, as well as to those prepping for GED exams. 

But many lawmakers have also sought to minimize China鈥檚 influence in both K-12 and higher education.

After Congress in 2018 targeted the nearly 100 Confucius Institutes on U.S. college campuses, restricting federal funding at schools with programs, their number dropped to fewer than five, according to a 2023 U.S. Government Accountability Office . 

In 2024, lawmakers are seeking to ban TikTok due to the social media application鈥檚 Chinese ownership. Primavera is a minority investor in ByteDance, TikTok鈥檚 parent company. ByteDance also owns the AI-powered homework helper .

But Tutor.com has been the subject of much of the scrutiny around student data. In February, U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, Lloyd Austin, saying the Pentagon鈥檚 relationship with Tutor.com is 鈥渋ll-advised, reckless, and a danger to U.S. national security.鈥�

Cotton said the Pentagon should end its dealings with the company, suggesting that students鈥� personal data, such as location, IP addresses and the contents of tutoring sessions, could be released to the Chinese government. He said the U.S. is 鈥減aying to expose our military and their children鈥檚 private information to the Chinese Communist Party.鈥�

In March, Manny Diaz, Jr., Florida鈥檚 commissioner of education, to public K-12 and higher education leaders statewide, saying Tutor.com鈥檚 ties to 鈥渇oreign countries of concern鈥� may compromise student data privacy. Diaz said the State Board of Education had adopted rules to protect student data 鈥渢o keep it out of the hands of bad actors,鈥� adding that school districts, charter schools and state colleges 鈥渕ust take the necessary steps to protect their students from nefarious foreign actors such as the Chinese Communist Party.鈥�

And last month, 13 lawmakers, led by U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Michigan, to U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, saying Tutor.com 鈥減oses a significant national security threat.鈥� They asked what measures the department had taken to assess 鈥渢he potential national security risks associated with Tutor.com’s relationship.鈥�

A spokesperson for Cardona did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Neily recently that Tutor.com鈥檚 Chinese ties are 鈥渟omething that just seemed to have slipped past the goalies.鈥�

During a segment on the company, the show鈥檚 host alleged that providers like Tutor.com can gather data from even the youngest students and 鈥渁dapt what they need to teach these kids to make sure they’re good, functional little robots.鈥� He asked Neily, 鈥淚s that the plan?鈥� 

She replied, 鈥淭hat very much seems to be the plan,鈥� adding, 鈥淟et’s be honest, this data is not being secured by America’s best and brightest.鈥�

Neily did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Tutor.com鈥檚 Calvello said much of the alarm around the company鈥檚 Chinese ties stems from the parents鈥� group, which he said has been 鈥減romoting falsehoods鈥� that lawmakers and others have amplified. As a result, he said, a few school districts have been under pressure to drop the service, with critics quoting the parents鈥� group鈥檚 materials. 

鈥淲e’re prepared to pursue legal avenues to protect our reputation and operations from false claims,鈥� he said.

Plans to discontinue the Iowa Youth Risk Behavior Survey and a new barrier for surveying Iowa students pose a threat to data collected on youth behaviors, advocates say, specifically young transgender Iowans.

The Iowa Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has no plans to administer the Youth Risk Behavior Survey this academic year, the first time since the survey started in 1991.

In a letter sent to Youth Risk Behavior Survey advisory committee members, Robert Kruse, the state medical director for the Iowa Department of HHS, announced Iowa will not participate in the 2023 Center for Disease Control and Prevention鈥檚 (CDC) youth risk behavior survey.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 社区黑料 Newsletter

鈥淭he Iowa Department of HHS will not be participating in the CDC鈥檚 Youth Risk Behavior Survey in 2023 in order to focus our efforts on maximizing the state administered Iowa Youth Survey (IYS) and improving survey participation,鈥� Kruse鈥檚 Jan. 27 letter to YRBS advisory committee members said.

The nationwide survey overseen by the CDC is administered every two years and asks students about their behaviors and relationships with authority figures, drugs, alcohol, sexual activity and gambling, to name a few.

Although students in Iowa will still be offered the IYS, they can not take it unless a parent has seen the survey in advance and given permission for their student to take it.

Parental permission

, signed into law by Gov. Kim Reynolds on May 26, requires that students must receive permission from their parents before taking a survey at school. The law prevents students from taking surveys 鈥渄esigned to assess the student鈥檚 mental, emotional or physical health that is not required by state or federal law鈥� without first acquiring the written consent of the student鈥檚 parent or guardian.

Parents must receive at least seven days notice of the survey, as well as a copy of the survey.

The law also containing written or visual sex acts, prohibits schools from teaching about 鈥済ender identity鈥� or 鈥渟exual orientation鈥� before sixth grade, prohibits a student from using a name or pronoun than they were given at birth and prevents teachers from knowingly providing 鈥渇alse or misleading鈥� information on a child鈥檚 gender identity to their parents.

Jenn Turner, chapter chair for the Polk County Moms For Liberty, sees student surveys as a way for young people to get ideas about things they may not have thought about before.

鈥淲e have found that many parents are not aware of what questions are being asked,鈥� Turner said. 鈥淚t ranges from what vegetables you eat to how many sexual partners to if you have considered suicide for children as young as 11. Some parents may determine that these questions are too mature, or cover topics their children are not ready for or do not understand.鈥�

Turner and Moms For Liberty support the recent law change, saying that it gives control to parents and allows for more transparency about what is going on in school.

鈥淧arents are the number one advocates for their children,鈥� Turner said. 鈥淭hey should ultimately be making these decisions for their children. This law provides another tool to help parents understand what is presented to their children in school.鈥�

Advocates of the IYS say this law will limit participation and usable data. The extra step of taking home a permission slip and having it signed and returned to a classroom will keep some students from taking the survey, in addition to parents who do not permit their children to take the survey.

Anne Discher, executive director of Common Good Iowa and member of the Iowa YRBS advisory committee, acknowledges permission from parents during school registration as reasonable but believes useful data could be harder to collect with permission required for individual surveys throughout the year.

Parental permission could skew results in another way, according to Discher.

鈥淐ertainly one might assume that the types of parents who would opt out might have things in common,鈥� Discher said. 鈥淚t could skew the survey and I think generally speaking the concern would be that participation would be so low you might not get useful data anyway.鈥�

In a Feb. 23 committee meeting for Senate File 496, State Sen. Herman Quirmbach raised a potential unintended consequence he sees with parental permission.

鈥淭he unintended consequence of that may be to protect child molesters,鈥� Quirmbach, D-Ames, said. 鈥淚f a survey to a student asking about that student鈥檚 mental state or their social state, if the parent can deny their student the ability to participate in that survey, then an abusive parent can use that denial to help shield them from any consequence of their child abuse.鈥�

The surveys are anonymous, but survey data could skew if Quirmbach鈥檚 speculation is correct, ultimately affecting future legislation and policy decisions.

Data disaggregation

Surveys like the risk behavior survey and the IYS are used by health departments, educators, lawmakers, doctors and community organizations to make policy decisions, direct campaigns and give direction to research.

The most recent risk behavior survey asked students about their gender identity; the IYS did not.

According to Discher, one of the goals of the Department of HHS in the past was to increase participation in student surveys to allow for the disaggregation of data.

鈥淚t was a strong goal to be able to disaggregate it by race and ethnicity, for example, or by LGBTQ+ status,鈥� Discher said. 鈥淭he conversations we had always had were how can we get more schools to participate so we can have better data for subgroups.鈥�

Eventually, there was a sense of pushback contrary to the former beliefs and goals of the department, Discher says.

鈥淚 find that this pushback which came from somewhere in the department or maybe not in the department,鈥� Discher said. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 know where the push for all of this came from, but it is very much counter to all of the work that we had seen the department do up to this point, which was try to get more data, better data, to disaggregate the data so they could really understand what was happening with youth in Iowa.鈥�

According to Kruse鈥檚 letter to the committee, the Iowa Youth Survey will be revised, but the revisions are not currently public, if finished. It is unclear if the IYS will enable disaggregation of data for students who identify as transgender.

鈥淚n advance of IYS in the fall of 2023, HHS will conduct a comprehensive review of survey administration,鈥� Kruse said. 鈥淢ost importantly, we are reviewing the analysis-to-action strategy and how HHS can tailor the data collection to inform how we meet the needs of Iowa youth, families, schools and communities.鈥�

Without the Iowa youth risk behavior survey, and if the IYS is not revised to include a question about gender identity, disaggregating data for trans youth will not be possible.

鈥淚 find it sad that that鈥檚 a piece of data that we are going to lose,鈥� Discher said. 鈥淚 find it kind of cynical that the state Legislature took all of these moves to make life worse, in particular for trans kids. To deny them gender-affirming care, to make them feel less like they鈥檙e an important member of their community and now we aren鈥檛 going to collect data on mental health for that group.鈥�

Although the letter sent to YRBS committee members stated Iowa would not participate in the risk behavior survey to focus efforts on maximizing the IYS participation, the survey switch-up feels more intentional than maximizing efforts, according to Discher.

鈥淚t is very hard for me to look at it and not understand it as part of a larger anti-trans push in our state,鈥� Discher said. 鈥淚n the Legislature, we passed a lot of very punitive, harmful bills and now we鈥檙e going to stop collecting data on the well-being of the kids that they鈥檙e harming. Did anyone sit and think of it in that exact way? I don鈥檛 know, but it鈥檚 very hard to not interpret it that way.鈥�

The 2021, IYS did include a , with answer options of straight, gay or lesbian, bisexual, another identity or not sure.

Explaining the examinations

The survey was first administered in 1991, with Survey participation peaked at 47 four times; 2009, 2011, 2013 and 2015. 

Iowa will be one of seven states not participating in the survey in 2023, joining Colorado, Idaho, Florida, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington and Wyoming.

The reasoning for participation varies from state to state and many states have their own survey as a replacement or in addition to the CDC鈥檚 survey.

According to , the youth risk behavior data helps health departments, educators, lawmakers, doctors and community organizations to inform school and community programs, communications campaigns and other efforts. The survey measures health-related behaviors and experiences that may lead to death and disability among youth and adults.

Although the IYS asks similar questions as the risk behavior survey, IYS is only taken statewide, so results cannot be easily compared among other states. Data from the IYS, though, can be broken up into smaller regions of Iowa, compared to the risk behavior survey, which gives data for youth in the state as a whole.

鈥淭he national survey only reports state-level data which makes it impossible to identify areas of the state with the greatest needs,鈥� Alex Carfrae, public information officer for the Iowa Department of HHS said in an email response to the Iowa Capital Dispatch.

IYS data is reported and analyzed at multiple jurisdiction levels, allowing more specific, targeted decisions to be made for specific areas such as counties, judicial districts and Area Education Agencies.

The two surveys have a history in Iowa, with the youth risk behavior survey taken every other year since 1991 and the Iowa youth survey taken every other year since 1999.

The IYS is answered by students in grades 6, 8 and 11, where the youth risk behavior survey has only been offered to students in grades 9-12. The CDC does offer a middle school version of the youth risk behavior survey, but .

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Iowa Capital Dispatch maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Kathie Obradovich for questions: info@iowacapitaldispatch.com. Follow Iowa Capital Dispatch on and .

I have written before in these pages about the importance of accurate and balanced methods of measuring school quality. In the same spirit, I recommend a new book by Steve Rees and Jill Wynns, . 

Wynns spent 24 years on the San Francisco school board, while Rees spent just as long running a company that helped school districts measure and report on the quality of their schools. Both have seen their share of mistakes, many of which lead to real pain: teachers reassigned and principals removed based on faulty data; English learners held back from entering the mainstream academic program even after they have become fluent; charter schools closed due to inadequate measurement of growth; even students denied graduation based on flawed interpretation of test results.

Rees and Wynns have now authored a highly readable guide that superintendents, principals, school board members, education reporters, teachers, and advocates can use to avoid these kinds of errors. They underline four flaws that are most common:

Growth v. Proficiency

The first is using children鈥檚 current test scores 鈥� rather than a measure of their academic growth 鈥� to judge the quality of schools and teachers. In high poverty schools, students often arrive several years behind grade level. Few of them are 鈥減roficient鈥� in math or reading. But too often states and districts give greatest weight to students’ current test scores, not their rate of improvement. 

Consider a middle school whose sixth grade students arrived three years behind grade level. If they are only one year behind grade level at the end of sixth grade, that would be spectacular progress. But in California, to use but one example, the school鈥檚 academic score would be in one of the two lowest categories.

Apples v. Oranges 

The second major flaw Rees and Wynns point out is related: when trying to measure academic growth, some states and districts fail to measure the same students over time. Instead, they measure a school or grade level鈥檚 average over time. But in a middle school, a third of the students each year are new arrivals, and another third from last year have departed. In four-year high schools, a quarter leave each year, another quarter arrive.  So annual school or grade level averages are measuring different kids.

The solution is obvious: Measure the same cohort of students over time, following them from one grade level to the next. Even better, remove from your measure students who have departed or recently arrived at the school.

Ignoring the Imprecision of Test Results

The third common flaw is failure to acknowledge the imprecision of test scores. 鈥淲hen we test kids, we鈥檙e trying to gather evidence of something that exists out of sight, somewhere between their ears,鈥� Rees and Wynns write. 鈥淲hatever their test scores reveal, it can only be an estimate of what they know.鈥�

Standardized tests are often used to rate children鈥攖ypically into four categories, which might be summarized as advanced, proficient, needing improvement, and far behind grade level. But imprecision means some of these classifications are dubious. 鈥淭he major test publishers include what they call classification error rates in their technical manuals,鈥� the authors explain. 鈥淚t is common to find a 25鈥�30 percent classification error rate in the middle bands of a range of test scores鈥攁nd that鈥檚 for a standardized assessment with 45鈥�65 questions.鈥�

鈥淚n Texas, Illinois, Maryland, California, Ohio, Indiana, Florida and many other states,鈥� they add, 鈥渢he parent reports make no mention of imprecision.鈥� Yet these reports tell parents whether a child is on grade level. Some states use a standardized test called the Smarter Balance Assessment. Its 鈥渢echnical manual reveals that the classification accuracy rate in these middle two bands (Levels 2 and 3) is about 70 percent. In other words, just seven out of every 10 kids whose scores land in the middle two bands will be classified correctly as having either met the standard or scored below the standard.鈥�  

Lack of Context

The fourth major flaw Rees and Wynns discuss is 鈥溾�檇isregarding context when analyzing gaps in achievement.鈥� Often, a school is compared to the statewide average, when its students are anything but average. They might be affluent, or poor, or recent immigrants. If so, do we learn anything about the quality of their school by comparing them to a state average? 

Rees and Wynns urge school and district leaders to compare their students to schools or districts with demographically similar children. 鈥淚f you can identify other schools with kids very much like your own who are enjoying success where your students are lagging, you can call the site or district leaders and see how their approach to teaching reading differs from your own,鈥� they suggest. 鈥淭hat last step, compare-and-contrast with colleagues who are teaching students very similar to your own, is where your analytic investment will pay off.鈥�

The authors point a finger of blame at schools of education, which rarely teach future teachers or administrators about data, assessment, or statistics. 鈥淪chools of education simply must stop sending data- and assessment-illiterate educators into the field,鈥� they declare.

They also urge state departments of education to disclose the imprecision of test scores whenever they report results, to do more to communicate the meaning of those results, and to create help desks that district and school leaders can turn to with data and assessment questions.

Perhaps their most novel recommendation is that we begin measuring 鈥渙pportunities to learn,鈥� to draw attention to yawning gaps. Some districts assign students to the school closest to their home, for instance, while others offer significant choices 鈥� hence greater opportunity. Most districts give teachers with seniority more ability to choose their schools, leaving the schools in low-income neighborhoods to settle for rookie teachers or those no one else wants 鈥� creating a huge opportunity gap for low-income students. Some schools offer the opportunity to take more advanced courses or more career-oriented courses.

A few districts work hard to match their supply of courses and schools to what students and their families want, but most don鈥檛. The result: yet another opportunity gap. 鈥淚f 90 percent of your sections are dedicated to college-level course work, and 50 percent of your graduating seniors have chosen a path to the workforce or the military, then your master schedule constrains the opportunities to learn that your students care most about,鈥� the book explains. 鈥淲ork force prep courses and multiple pathways toward work-related professions would be a needed addition for that school. The question for those leading or governing districts is how actively you listen to students when they tell you what future they鈥檙e aiming for, and the extent to which you direct your budget and staff to meet their desires.鈥�

A brief article cannot begin to suggest the depth and detail the authors plumb in this volume. In addition, every chapter of Mismeasuring Schools鈥� Vital Signs includes questions people can ask to uncover data and measurement problems 鈥� and methods to solve them 鈥� in their own districts and schools. There is even , which includes interactive data visualizations and resources such as a glossary of statistical terms and a 鈥渧isual glossary鈥� showing the types of charts and graphs you can use to communicate meaningful data.There鈥檚 an old saying in the management world: What gets measured gets done. As Rees and Wynns demonstrate, in public education we too often measure the wrong things, in the wrong ways. If we鈥檙e going to improve the lives of children, we have to learn how to measure what matters, accurately, and then understand what it means. Mismeasuring Schools鈥� Vital Signs is a good place to start.

A resounding 96% of apps used regularly in schools have data-sharing practices that 鈥渁re not adequately safe for children,鈥� according to a new report by the nonprofit Internet Safety Labs, which conducts software safety tests. In an analysis of apps commonly required or recommended by schools, the group found that many shared students鈥� personal data to marketing firms that build extensive profiles of children to sell products through targeted advertising.

鈥淎t a minimum, it fuels marketers鈥� and data brokers鈥� personal data profiles ultimately used to bombard young minds with highly targeted and persuasive advertising or opinions,鈥� according to the report. 鈥淎t worst, in the wrong hands it can lead to emotional trauma, aberrant seduction or even physical danger with location information.鈥�

Once their data reaches the 鈥淲ild West鈥� digital advertising ecosystem, students lose control of how that information is used and retained, said Irene Knapp, the group鈥檚 technology director and a former Google software engineer. Knapp said the widespread exchange of data between the apps and advertisers, including sensitive information such as mental health records, could come back to harm students later on. Such data could make it more difficult for students to get health insurance when they鈥檙e older, Knapp said, and could be used to serve them products based on their conditions. For example, the data could be used to 鈥渄iscover kids who have a propensity to gambling addiction and sell them Candy Crush,鈥� a reference to the mobile game known for its obsessive users.

鈥淚t gets difficult holding this advertising ecosystem to account because the harms and the original cause are far apart,鈥� Knapp said. 鈥淏ut that鈥檚 why we have to identify where these leaks happen and start to close them.鈥�

To reach its conclusions, researchers tested more than 1,300 digital tools that were required or recommended by a random sampling of 13 schools in each state, totaling 663 campuses serving nearly half a million students. Almost a quarter of the services included advertisements and 13% had targeted ads, researchers found. Schools routinely recommended tools that weren鈥檛 specifically designed with schools in mind, including Spotify and YouTube. Yet even among the digital tools specifically geared toward students, 18% contained ads and 9% used targeted ads 鈥� a finding the group argues is 鈥渟till too high to be safe for students.鈥�

Meanwhile, the tools routinely shared information with Big Tech data aggregators: 68% of apps shared data with Google, 36% with Apple and 33% with Facebook. More than three-quarters of the apps accessed users鈥� location information, researchers found, and more than half tapped into students鈥� calendars and contacts. The analysis found that school utility apps, which allow schools to share with students and parents information like lunch schedules and other announcements, were the most likely to pass student data to the Big Tech giants. Districts often contract with Blackboard and Apptegy for the apps. Neither company responded to requests for comment.

鈥淭hose community engagement platform apps, they came out to be pretty dangerous it turned out,鈥� said Lisa LeVasseur, the group鈥檚 executive director. 鈥淲ere we surprised? I鈥檇 say no. It鈥檚 disappointing.鈥�

Schools in the study sample recommended an average of 125 different apps, highlighting the ubiquity of technology in modern education, especially as the pandemic forced school closures and remote learning. Yet even as school districts鈥� reliance on tech companies grows, they generally lack the staffing to ensure that recommended technologies sufficiently safeguard student privacy, according to a recent report by the Center for Democracy and Technology, a nonprofit think tank.

The Internet Safety Labs report comes at a moment of heightened scrutiny around how technology companies use the data they collect about children. Earlier this year, the Federal Trade Commission announced that it would toughen its enforcement of education technology companies that sell student data for targeted advertising and that 鈥渋llegally surveil children when they go online to learn.鈥�

Just this week, the commission reached a record-breaking $520 million settlement with Epic Games, creator of the hugely popular video game Fortnite, and accused it of illegally collecting information about young children in violation of federal privacy rules and tricking players into making unintentional purchases.

Ultimately, Internet Safety Labs found that schools need more resources to thoroughly vet the technologies they use 鈥� especially as districts face greater cybersecurity threats. With limited accountability to ensure that software providers behave ethically, it鈥檚 up to schools to keep kids safe.

鈥淲ith technology right now, there鈥檚 no norms for product safety, none whatsoever,鈥� LeVasseur said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 as if you bought your car and you had to install seat belts, airbags, windshield wipers, lights, like all of the safety features. That鈥檚 what we have with technology right now. It鈥檚 all, 鈥楧o it yourself, try to be safe. Godspeed you鈥檙e on your own.鈥� 鈥�

This year, in a survey conducted by The Harris Poll, DQC partnered with the Kentucky Student Voice Team to ask high school students across the country about their experience with data in their pathways through K鈥�12 education and into college and the workforce. The respondents said loud and clear that they are in the dark about their own learning. 

Just 35% reported that their school informed them of what postsecondary or career paths are available to them, and the same percentage of students reported that their school told them whether the courses they鈥檙e taking are preparing them for higher education. Fewer than half said they received the most fundamental information they need to understand whether they are achieving basic standards for success in high school, let alone to make decisions about their futures 鈥� including whether they were meeting grade-level expectations, whether they were on track to graduate or how much academic progress they had made during the year. 

Students also lack information they need 鈥� including data on outcomes for students like them at different postsecondary institutions and in various careers 鈥� to determine their options after graduation. Eighty percent of students agreed they would feel more confident about their path if they had better access to information. 

Even worse, school leaders working to support students don鈥檛 have all the information they need, either. This year, DQC also partnered with AASA, The School Superintendents Association to about how they use data. Almost all respondents (98%) said they would feel more confident in their abilities to make decisions for their district if they had better access to information. Even more telling is that 93% of superintendents have started collecting new data during the pandemic; 94% of them agree that the new data is giving them useful information and insights. Despite their own efforts, one in four superintendents are still looking for greater access to data to support students, reporting that they have some of what they need to understand their district. Of those, more than half want data from their state on the outcomes of their district鈥檚 students after they leave high school. 

If the leaders working to support students don鈥檛 have the right data, how can students be expected to navigate the changing postsecondary landscape and the shifting economy? The task is clear: give students access to data about their own progress and potential pathways, and make sure they are able to use it to make decisions. 

Students need information to feel confident about their academic progress and the decisions they鈥檙e making for their futures. They need information on how they are doing in school today. And they need information about their education and workforce options and how their peers have fared on different college and career pathways. Otherwise, students are being asked to cross their fingers and hope they arrive at the best solution for their future.

To make this happen, states need to invest in their data systems so students and superintendents have access to the information they need in real time. Right now, the best information often lags, tracking how previous students did rather than how current students are actually doing. Students know exactly what they need to make important life decisions easier and these transitions more clear. It鈥檚 time for leaders to make sure they鈥檙e getting it.

The information would be voluntarily reported, anonymous and 鈥� notable at a time when some states are shunning data deemed politically unpalatable 鈥� collected nationwide. If implemented, the initiative would represent the largest-scale effort to date to document the experiences of the nation鈥檚 LGBTQ students. 

The push got a boost earlier this week from the White House when President Joe Biden, acting in recognition of Pride month, creating a committee to oversee the expansion of LGBTQ data collection throughout the federal government and directing the department to form a working group to advance policies to protect gay, lesbian and gender nonconforming students and families.     

The move comes after years of conversations among civil rights and education advocates who recognized both the need for the data and the complicated nature of collecting it in ways that are backed by scientific and medical best practices; invite LGBTQ participation; will generate information researchers need; and do not expose young people to the safety risks that coming out sometimes poses. 

鈥淣ot having questions asked about sexual orientation and gender identity creates an invisibility and makes it really hard for lawmakers and policymakers to be able to determine what the actual needs of the community are and how best to address them,鈥� says Sarah Warbelow, legal director for the Human Rights Campaign. 鈥淚f you don’t have the data, it makes it hard to argue to a policymaker that they have to change their policies in order to protect LGBTQ folks.鈥�

According to the American Civil Liberties Union, targeting LGBTQ Americans have been introduced in state legislatures this year, many aimed at transgender youth. 

In submitted in April, GLSEN, a nonprofit that advocates for LGBTQ students, noted that NAEP results are used for scholarly research and to make crucial decisions about education policy and distribution of resources to schools. 鈥淭o better determine how well our K-12 schools are serving the needs of all students, GLSEN urges the NAEP to add LGBTQ+ inclusive survey measures,鈥� the organization wrote.

The change, civil rights groups say, would push schools to take note of and inform solutions.

First administered more than 50 years ago, NAEP has always documented how well U.S. schools meet the needs of students of different races and ethnicities, those with disabilities, low-income children and other subgroups. The tests are administered to a representative sample of fourth and ninth graders, with the results used to identify unmet needs, illuminate disparities and highlight successes.

In a reply to GLSEN sent before Biden鈥檚 executive order, the department said it was considering changes to NAEP assessments that would allow for expanded gender categories. The National Center for Education Statistics, which administers the exams, 鈥渋s actively working towards including more gender identity options in future NAEP data collections both from school records (where we get student gender information) and teacher self-reports via the teacher survey questionnaire,鈥� the agency replied. 鈥淲e are exploring ways to disaggregate student record data into binary and non-binary as a start.鈥�

No timeline for either change was given. While silent on the topic of modifying NAEP to report sexual orientation, the reply letter noted that the center has been part of within the federal government about the issue. 

LGBTQ rights groups say it鈥檚 not enough 鈥� and is happening too slowly. According to a survey by , in 2021 reported that politics were harming their mental health and that COVID-19 adversely affected their living situation, with just a third calling their home affirming. Forty-two percent said they had seriously considered suicide in the past year, a rate that rises to more than half for trans and non-binary students. 

Particularly problematic: States can opt out of collecting data on sexual orientation and gender identity when administering some existing surveys, such as the two main Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reviews of youth welfare, Warbelow says. This can obscure bias in ways many people might not anticipate, especially as schools often have no formal record of a student鈥檚 orientation and young people are leery of outing themselves. 

鈥淲e have some indication that LGBTQ students are overrepresented in disproportionate school discipline,鈥� she says. 鈥淪o one scenario [could be] where a straight student and an LGBT student are engaged in a disagreement. Oftentimes, it starts by that straight student engaging in bullying. And you see the teacher or the administration end up sending both kids down to the principal’s office. And then the penalty ends up being stiffer for the LGBTQ student.鈥�

In recent years, scientifically and legally sound has gotten a major boost from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, which in 2020 recommended that the federal government begin capturing more information and this past March followed up with specific guidance on how best to do so. 

Last spring, in the wake of the National Academies鈥� reports, came together to press federal agencies to adopt the recommendations. If they succeed, the government will, for the first time, collect data that could be used to draw apples-to-apples comparisons. 

Often referred to as the nation鈥檚 report card, NAEP is uniquely suited for collecting sensitive demographic information, proponents of the change say. Because the exams don鈥檛 assess individual schools, the results can鈥檛 be misused by officials bent on finding gay teachers or trans student athletes, for example. People who are uncomfortable participating can opt out. 

鈥淲e want the federal government to be required to collect data, but the individual participant to have the flexibility to be able to say that they’re not going to disclose their sexual orientation or gender identity,鈥� says Warbelow. 

For reasons ranging from the well-intended to the political, LGBTQ people are poorly represented in official statistics. For example, an estimated 5 in 6 LGBTQ adults can鈥檛 be identified by federal surveys documenting everything from rates of disease to housing discrimination, largely because they rarely include pertinent questions. The experiences of LGBTQ youth in school and in their communities are even more poorly documented. 

While education researchers and policymakers can talk about historically underserved students using deep, wide-ranging data about household income, race, disability, English learner status and experience with housing insecurity and the foster care system, what鈥檚 known about queer students is often drawn from small surveys or by extrapolating from those that tabulate information in different ways.

For two decades, GLSEN鈥檚 own surveys have consistently found that students subjected to in-school bullying and victimization have poorer educational outcomes, including lower attendance, grade-point averages and rates of college enrollment, than their heterosexual, cis-gendered peers. Students who experience both anti-LGBTQ victimization and racism are most likely to skip school out of fear, report feeling like they don鈥檛 belong and experience high levels of depression, the organization noted. Other surveys show that LGBTQ youth are disproportionately homeless and in foster care. 

Meanwhile, CDC surveys show the number of teens identifying as LGBTQ is growing, adding urgency to the need for accurate information. Using two CDC surveys, concluded that the percentage of youth who identify as 鈥渘on-heterosexual鈥� rose from 8% to almost 12% between 2015 and 2017. 

Estimates from the University of California Los Angeles鈥� Williams Institute reveal that the number of individuals ages 13 to 17 who identify as transgender between 2017, when few of the surveys used to estimate the size of the population asked about gender identity, and 2020, when LGBTQ information was more widely solicited. 

States, however, are not required to include LGBTQ demographic information when they help conduct CDC surveys. This erases not just the kids, but the public health and safety crises they are experiencing. 

Initial shifts to including LGBTQ questions in federal research have shown that the problems are acute. The Census Bureau began collecting information about the sexual orientation and gender identity of people responding to its Household Pulse Survey a year ago. The initial surveys found that nearly half of LGBTQ people reported experiencing anxiety more than half of the days in a week 鈥� twice as many as non-LGBTQ respondents. 

Paige Kowalski, executive vice president of the Data Quality Campaign, has been part of the conversation about collecting more information about LGBTQ students for years. Schools and other institutions, she points out, have drawn lots of wrong conclusions based on simplistic interpretations of statistics.

鈥淪ometimes the narrative that people take away is that this group of students does not perform well,鈥� says Kowalski. 鈥淭he blame, the burden is shifted to the student and the family instead of the system and the policy.鈥� 

She wants the federal government to go further than compiling statistics, with their potential for misuse, to include the people affected 鈥� who understand 鈥� in designing new data systems and overseeing how the information is publicized and analyzed. 

鈥淭he tech piece is easy; you create another box to check,鈥� she says. 鈥淭he people piece is the hard piece 鈥� and we skip over it alot.鈥�   

Disclosure: Disclosure: Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Chan Zuckerberg Initiative provide financial support to Data Quality Campaign and 社区黑料.

When Newark students took a series of diagnostic tests last fall, some seven months into the pandemic, the results were alarming:

Nearly 80% of third graders and almost 90% of fourth graders would 鈥渘ot meet the passing score鈥� on the state math exams, according to a district analysis that was not made public. The projections suggested that far fewer students were on track to master grade-level math than in previous years.

After a spring of school closures and limited learning, students were seriously struggling in math.

鈥淒ue to the COVID-19 pandemic, learning loss among our students in mathematics is one of the most significant challenges faced by schools in Newark,鈥� district officials wrote in an application this January seeking academic recovery funds. 鈥淢any of our students have fallen even further behind than they were prior to COVID-19.鈥�

Many of those students likely continued to slip behind last school year as remote learning stretched into April, keeping students out of classrooms for 13 months. Yet, in more than two dozen public school board meetings since the global crisis began, district leaders have never given a detailed accounting of the pandemic鈥檚 toll on student learning.

Even after the fall test scores, which the district never publicly released, clearly showed that academic damage had already been done, Superintendent Roger Le贸n suggested publicly that learning loss could still be curbed.

鈥淧art of the strategy here is not to assume that there will be loss,鈥� he said at a board meeting in December, 鈥渂ut to assume that we actually can do something about it right now.鈥�

It isn鈥檛 just test scores. The district has taken other steps that, intentionally or not, have obscured the pandemic鈥檚 full impact on students.

After school buildings shut down last spring and , the district  during remote learning. And this past school year, several educators told Chalkbeat  even to students who never attended online class or completed any work 鈥� all while the district insisted its normal grading policies remained in effect.

鈥淭heir grades aren鈥檛 their correct grades,鈥� a district elementary school teacher told Chalkbeat this week, asking to remain anonymous to avoid retaliation. 鈥淵ou couldn鈥檛 fail any kids.鈥�

There is no doubt that district officials have closely monitored students鈥� academic progress over the past year and worked diligently on plans to address their needs. But they have not publicly shared data on student learning or gone into detail about the district鈥檚 plans for academic recovery. Le贸n has referenced plans for tutoring and Saturday school, but has not disclosed specifics 鈥� leaving it unclear how the district will spend more than $40 million in   specifically intended to address learning loss.

Newark is not the only school district that hasn鈥檛 voluntarily released academic data from the past year. Still, the lack of transparency means Newark families and the public have no way of knowing how far students fell behind during the pandemic, and no way of holding the district accountable for catching them up.

鈥淯ntil we have the numbers and we own what has happened to our children, we can鈥檛 fix it,鈥� said Deborah Smith-Gregory, a former district teacher and president of the Newark NAACP.

Newark community members have repeatedly asked the district for details about the pandemic鈥檚 impact on student learning.

At a closed-door meeting in December, school board member A鈥橠orian Murray-Thomas told district officials that 鈥渢he board and community want to know more information on how students are performing academically,鈥� according to meeting minutes. An official then gave the committee a presentation on the results of the diagnostic tests students took this fall, called the NWEA MAP Growth tests.

But at a public board meeting the next week, officials said nothing about the tests. When a board member asked Le贸n about his plans to address learning loss, he gave only a vague answer. He mentioned 鈥渙nline programs,鈥� 鈥渟ome changes to the curriculum,鈥� and 鈥渙pportunities before and after school, even on Saturdays.鈥� He did not specify what the programs, curriculum changes, or opportunities were, nor how many students were getting support.

Yet just a month later, in a grant application not available to the public, the district went into detail about students鈥� academic needs and a proposed program to catch them up.

In the application for a state grant to address learning loss, the district revealed that the fall MAP tests showed 鈥渟tudents in grades 3 and 4 are struggling in mathematics.鈥� The district estimated that only 22% of third graders would be able to meet grade-level expectations on the state math test, compared with 35% who met expectations in 2019. Among fourth graders, just 11% were projected to meet math expectations, compared with 32% who did so in 2019.

In response, the district proposed a four-week math program this summer targeting 600 rising fourth and fifth graders with the lowest MAP scores. The program would 鈥渃ompensate for the learning loss of the most vulnerable students during the COVID-19 pandemic,鈥� the district wrote in the application submitted this January, which the state would not release to Chalkbeat until June.

The state did not award Newark one of the roughly $156,000 learning loss grants. However, the district is getting more than $282 million in federal pandemic-relief funds, with about $40 million reserved for academic recovery efforts.

Whether Newark is putting any of that money towards an intensive math program this summer is unclear. A district spokesperson did not immediately respond to questions about the program, learning loss data, or recovery plans.

So what is Newark doing to address the unprecedented disruption in student learning, when most students were shut out of classrooms for over a year and many spent part of that time struggling to access online classes?

The district told the state last school year simply that it was offering 鈥淪aturday Academies; Extended School Day; Tutoring鈥� to address learning gaps, as well as lessons and counseling to meet students鈥� social-emotional needs 鈥� all services that many schools provided well before the pandemic. The district is also operating a summer learning program, as it does every year. Officials have not described publicly how they modified summer school this year to respond to students鈥� heightened needs.

Newark is certainly not the only school district in New Jersey, or , where student learning has suffered over the past year.

An  of mid-year test data found that about 37% of students statewide were below grade level in math and English. The analysis also found wide racial gaps, with more than half of Black and Hispanic students below grade level in math, compared with less than 30% of White students.

An  of test scores from 15 New Jersey districts and charter schools also found evidence of pandemic learning loss. During the first half of last school year, students in grades 3-8 made about 30% less progress in English and 36% less progress in math than they would be expected to make during that period in a typical year, according to the analysis, which was commissioned by the advocacy group JerseyCAN.

Patricia Morgan, the group鈥檚 executive director, said officials from the state down to individual districts must be forthright about learning loss before they can properly address it: 鈥淲e need to know where our students are to get them the resources they need.鈥�