There Is No Such Thing As De-Identified Data! Your Child's Privacy Is At Risk.

Though we've researched it to be sure, and said over and over again it wasn't true, ROPE (and parents) have been assured by public school data gatherers such as John Kraman (formerly the Executive Director of Student Information at the Oklahoma State Department of Education, now the Senior Advisor for Education & Workforce at the LARGEST DATA COLLECTION CENTER IN OKLAHOMA, Office of Enterprise and Management Services- OMES - the Director of which was recently arrested on an alcohol complaint with a woman apparently not his wife in the car) that public schools could take whatever data they 'needed' from our children because once it was 'aggregated' or 'de-identified', our children's privacy would be safe. 

This document - from an organization created by the federal government (the same one that changed FERPA laws to mean nothing for student privacy) tasked to provide information on how to protect student data - provides exactly these talking points while explaining what de-identified data means. 

Maybe we'll start getting some traction on our argument after legislators, parents and public school officials watch the following video, however, taken from testimony to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education during a hearing called, "How Emerging Technology Affects Student Privacy".  

Lynn watched a huge chunk of this testimony (attended by OK Congressman Steve Russell). She identified a number of very good places to watch for information, but the best information BY FAR, was provided by Joel R. Reidenberg of Fordham University. At 1:30 on the video, Mr. Reidenberg says, 

"...you can reverse engineer identity with a few characteristics..."

and

"25% of school contracts were not paid with by cash, they were paid with using their student's privacy - information for services"

This should SHOCK AND CALL TO ACTION EVERY PARENT WITH A CHILD IN PUBLIC SCHOOL.

Here are some other quotes from other places on the video that might interest you:

• 55:30 - Alison Knox of Microsoft says, "the third party provider must articulate how the data flows and who has access"
• 1:02 - Knox talks specifically about how marketers get student information and what happens if 3rd party contract terms are not clear
• 1:31-1:38 - Steve Russell explains that dis-aggregated data is a myth
• 1:38-1:39 - Representative Grothman gives examples regarding Google and how Google apps are getting student information because the application is free. He gives examples of the information Google gets and how they use the data to develop products. He also gives examples of how non-transparent the process is and how they can use data in ways not stated in the contracts.
• 1:40 - Ms. Sevier explains that PARENTS DON'T REALIZE THEY ARE GIVING UP THEIR STUDENT'S INFORMATION
• 1:47 - Mr. Reidenberg says parents/school officials must be careful of 'forced consent' when a student has to click "accept" and waive their privacy rights to participate in their own education.

We are living in an age where data is becoming all there is to teaching. All we seem to hear about is 'data driving decisions/instruction' - goodness, what did America do to become the foremost economy in the world before there were computers to tell teachers how to teach and children how to learn! I can't believe we were even able to put a man on the moon with the paltry technology available in the 50's and early 60's!

Today, we have a data collection network across Oklahoma that would be a wonder to behold, if it weren't creating data privacy issues for students ALL OVER OKLAHOMA. Just click here to see a PowerPoint presentation put together by John Kraman detailing all the many committees and process by which the state (under Kraman's direction) will collect information on your children. 

It is clear that often, teachers have no idea what kind of information the programs they are being told to use in their classrooms collect. It's clear even principals and superintendents don't have this information. Certainly, it seems as though there are school staff that DON'T WANT parents to have access to this kind of information and that is troubling.

Consequently, it's CLEARLY all up to PARENTS to determine to what their children are exposed to at school. 

Here is an online version of the Parental Bill of Rights passed last year. Please download a copy, read it and USE IT. Pass the information on to your school's staff and other parents. We must be informed if we are to stop the assault on the rights of students to their own - and their family's - privacy. Become your child's own privacy advocate today!

Steve Russell And The Holy Grail Of CD 5 - Common Core

Every election season without fail, candidates work to find that ‘Holy Grail’ of political issues designed to drop their political opponent in the polls while elevating themselves as the sensible alternative on that issue.  Taxation, The Affordable Health Care Act, Social Security - all have been used to position various candidates at the front of the pack with voters over countless election cycles.

This years’ political Holy Grail appears to be Common Core. 

As an early Common Core Paul Revere, I’ve watched concerns about this issue go from largely ignored in 2010 to a death knell for elective office in 2014.  Throughout the intervening years, as I’ve attempted to educate Oklahomans and lawmakers on this topic, I have been loath to hold legislators - other than the authors - responsible for their vote on Common Core in 2010 for several reasons.

Nothing less than an education omnibus bill intended to line up Oklahoma’s educational system with the edicts prescribed by the federal Race to the Top grant for which Oklahoma applied under then-Governor Brad Henry, SB2033 foisted Common Core onto the landscape of Oklahoma public education via one paragraph on page 30 of this 34 page bill actually entitled, “Teacher Incentive Pay”. 

Though not ordinarily one to give legislators a pass for voting on legislation without becoming educated on that issue, SB2033 was not an ordinary bill.

Authored by then-Senate Pro-Temp (Glenn Coffee) and then-Speaker of the House (Chris Benge), legislators unwilling to cast an ‘aye’ vote for SB2033 could find themselves crosswise with leadership – not a pleasant proposition. Not only that, but Republican messaging declared the bill a panacea for public education in Oklahoma, painting any Republican legislator voting against it into a corner as anti-public education. 

That Republican leadership oversold this bill seems evident in its troubled history in the House, where membership voted down the Conference Committee Report and forced several more votes resulting in passage of the bill at the 11^th hour of session, 2010.

Recently, former Edmond Mayor, Patrice Douglas has come out against challenger for Congressional District 5, former State Senator, Lt. Col. Steve Russell using his ‘yea’ vote on SB2033 as ‘proof’ that Russell is a Common Core proponent.

This charge is so silly, frankly, I’ve taken a week to address it in deference to other, more pressing business.  I feel the need to address it now, however, as we close in on the run-off election August 26^th.

Though I’ve previously stated my reasons for allowing legislators a pass on their SB2033 votes, it’s important for people to know that Steve was actually anti-Common Core when anti-Common Core wasn’t cool (thanks Barbara Mandrell). 

Back in the dark ages of 2011, when legislators had very little interest in discussing the Common Core other than to parrot the popular talking points, Steve signed on as co-author to HB1714 authored by Sally Kern.  As that bill was denied a hearing in the Common Education Committee that year, the bill was reintroduced in 2012.  To the best of my recollection, Russell signed on again as co-author, though the bill was again prevented a hearing by Common Ed Committee Chair Ann Coody.

Obviously, I’m a proponent of any Common Core opponent.  Hatred of Common Core, however, is not the only reason to vote for a candidate.  I can say this with conviction because, though I have spent a chunk of my life fighting a single issue, I’m not a single-issue voter.  Steve’s objection to Common Core arises from his belief in individual liberty and personal responsibility over state control and tyranny.  I believe Steve will enter Congress standing on that ideal and from that ideal he will govern.  Certainly, adoption of this ideal is the surest way to restore our Republic and once and for all rid ourselves of Common Core and other federal end arounds state sovereignty and individual liberty.