Are Cameras Permitted in Classrooms?
Federal and state laws impose restrictions on the privacy rights of students and the circumstances under which certain information may be collected, recorded and maintained. In general terms, when determining the legality of classroom cameras, federal and state laws must be considered in conjunction with other relevant policies. The extent of such inquiry appears largely tied to the location and the information gathered through the video recording process.
In addition to federal laws that may govern privacy, such as FERPA, COPPA, COPA, and CIPA, various federal and state constitutional provisions address probable cause, including searches and seizures (4th Amendment), unreasonable search and seizure in schools (Nevada Constitution, Article 1, Section 18), and privacy rights (Nevada Constitution, Article 1, Section 1). Multiple US Supreme Court cases addressing student psychology, health records and education interests have established standards for determining whether a search is reasonable. Nevada law, under NRS 392.4642(2)(d)(1)(I), already requires any school district "conducting or participating in a study or program that involves the monitoring or recording of classroom instruction for evaluation or assessment of a teacher , school or school district" to adopt an applicable policy.
Some NV School Districts have adopted policies permitting the use of classroom cameras for recording instruction provided the purpose of the recording is posted along with the Board policy. Other camera-use policies are more restrictive, stating that recordings shall not be made for the purposes of teacher instruction/evaluation, tenant/occupier status and services, and employee teaching evaluations if the data requested or collected contains confidential information. While some policies require notice be posted before class begins, others require notice to parents/guardians prior to the recording of their child’s image or comments.
Although various requirements may apply to the use of classroom cameras and the information that may be recorded, there is no singly acceptable standard for the use of cameras in Nevada classrooms. As such, the issue remains unsettled and largely dependent on the specific information that is recorded or obtained by that camera and what the school intends to do with that information. Concerns regarding the types of information recorded and the motives of the individual and school for recording is a common critique of classroom cameras.
Classroom Cameras and Privacy
The advent of classroom cameras means potential invaders on a number of levels from a parent, student, and teacher perspective. So likely, there are some security concerns.
School districts maintain that classroom cameras provide additional security for both students and teachers. They claim that the benefit of the camera is that they can monitor student behavior, bullying, and teacher performance. However, parents, students, and teachers have raised a number of concerns to classroom surveillance.
First, parents believe their child’s classroom activities are private and confidential. It’s become quite common for parents to include privacy language on their child’s permission slips. Teachers have similar privacy concerns. Teacher performance becomes the subject of unwanted public scrutiny. Oftentimes, parents with adequate means may try to establish personal relationships with teachers to obtain specific information about their child’s performance apart from other students. Such personal relationships degrade the integrity of the education system. This example is one of the more obvious and extreme concerns. Oftentimes, parents, students, and teachers are not aware that surveillance cameras even exist in their districts. However, when districts began implementing classroom surveillance, students became curious and wanted to know for what reasons the surveillance was being used. Because of interest and curiosity, students began to discover where the cameras were located and begin to test the boundaries to see for what activities they could use the cameras.
While such demonstrations of curious behavior are normal among children, the potential for invasion of privacy becomes evident when students begin to use the classroom camera to film others, spread rumors, and gossip. With a classroom camera in the room, children may film fights, inappropriate behavior, school pranks, and practical jokes. Once the filming becomes viral and goes viral, self-esteem issues start to develop. Embarrassing moments of teachers and students are broadcasted to the entire world. Such embarrassment often leads to children becoming withdrawn.
In addition, an argument can be made that the issue of disciplinary action in schools becomes complicated. Typically, a student is disciplined for violating a school policy, procedure, or rule. The student should be disciplined fairly and objectively. However, when teachers and students alike are aware that the classroom camera is being monitored and scrutinized by school and school security, the lines are blurred. Teachers may become paranoid and alter their behavior and speech around students. Students may feel they are always being watched and will eventually act out or rebel.
Teachers are also concerned because the classroom cameras will be used as tools to assess their performance and may on occasion, replace the students in class. Students may begin to think that the teachers’ lack of personal attention is because the teachers are too busy being filmed to teach. Teachers may also use classroom cameras as a shield to protect themselves. Teachers do not want to say or do anything in front of a camera that will cost them their jobs. School districts may not intend to terminate teachers based on classroom camera footage, but there can be pressure for teachers to motivate students, and everyone knows that the "camera adds 10 pounds." So the fear of bad footage should not be overlooked.
Moreover, classroom cameras that record conversations with no notice to staff and students violate their rights to privacy. Among the most compelling privacy concerns is the requirement of explicit consent to record and obtain the consent of the person being recorded is required under nearly all circumstances. Therefore, schools and school districts that record audio and video footage without a person’s explicit consent are violating their right to privacy.
Although a concern in some respects, students generally do not have an expectation of privacy in a classroom. Students are expected to participate in classroom discussions and assignments. However, they do not have an expectation for privacy from other students. In addition, teachers, administrators, and school district may have a general expectation of privacy in the classroom. However, once a recording device has been placed in the classroom and is recording real time footage of individuals, the right to privacy is diminished if not eliminated. As a result, classroom recordings are subject to strict scrutiny because of the on-going nature of the classroom setting.
Educational Institution Surveillance Policy
Federal laws and regulations do not specifically address classroom surveillance, which falls into a "no man’s land" between the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act ("FERPA") and the Family and Educational Rights Protection Act ("FERPA"). The legal starting point for evaluating the use of cameras in the classroom is the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (1985), which established that public school officials act as state agents under the Fourth Amendment for searches conducted on school grounds. The question then is whether classroom video surveillance increases the school’s role as a state agent, thereby implicating the Fourth Amendment.
A brief search of state laws and regulations does not turn up a single "go to" resource on classroom surveillance. Most states have several laws that purport to regulate the use of cameras in the classroom depending on the context. For example, the Louisiana Revised Statutes authorize the use of cameras to monitor educational institutions, while simultaneously exempting such activities from the State’s privacy statutes. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 22-32-113.6(1)(a); a Colorado statute allows local school boards to adopt policies to install video cameras on public school grounds.
Some school districts have specific policies regulating classroom surveillance. For example, the Montgomery County Public School System has a policy regarding the use of surveillance cameras. The policy provides that "Cameras will not be used in private areas, such as bathrooms, locker rooms, and nurses’ offices, except by law enforcement officials." Montgomery County Public School Policy JGA-RA (August 21, 2006).
Several state and local governments have either chosen an opt-out option as part of their family and educational privacy protection laws. Such an option includes a parental consent requirement for students under a certain age, or consent from the students themselves if they are over a certain age. CO. REV. STAT. § 22-32-113.6(1)(a); LOUS. REV. STAT. §§ 17:252.1-252.5; and LA. ADMIN CODE TIT. 28, PART CLXV (§§ CLXV 101-211).
The Federal Communications Commission has adopted regulations governing video cameras and spyware, requiring that the notice of a collection and use of parents’ information be given at the time of collection. 47 C.F.R. § 64.2004(a)(5).
Pros and Cons of Cameras in Classrooms
Before rushing to install cameras in classrooms, school districts should consider the potential benefits and drawbacks. Clearly the potential benefit is safety. Data from the National Center for Education Statistics indicates that during the 2015-2016 school year, there were over 100,000 non-fatal violent crimes reported at public schools. Non-fatal crimes reported at private schools were over 10,000. In addition to violent crimes, we see media reports every year about sexual assaults that occur on school property. Adding cameras to classrooms serves the dual purpose of protecting student privacy while enhancing physical safety. Cameras will also prove useful when investigating cyberbullying and incidents of cheating.
Weighing against safety is student privacy. Student privacy and educational records are protected under FERPA. School districts should be cautious of the FERPA implications of classroom cameras. School districts must inform parents that classroom cameras are installed. A school district may receive education records maintained in a form that does not permit personal identification of a student by name. The video may be analyzed and converted into a student identifiable strand. When a student is recognized on the video, a FERP request may be made. That video would then have to be redacted so that other students are not identified. This is a cumbersome and likely costly process and depends on whether the video has been maintained in a form that does not permit personal identification.
A second privacy consideration is how long classroom camera footage should be retained and who has access to it. We have seen media criticism when Districts store video footage longer than necessary and make it available to law enforcement agencies for no particular reason. If school district cameras are to be installed, we encourage boards to review their policies and update them so that they only retain video footage for a limited period of time and so that the footage is not generally available to law enforcement without a warrant.
We will discuss the FERPA issues further in a separate blog post.
Implementation and Technological Issues
The implementation of classroom cameras is fraught with technological and practical difficulties. The first of many implementation hurdles is that the cameras need to be discreet, typically hiding in plain sight on ceilings, in hallways, in lecture halls, or in other common spaces. This has the effect of increasing the chances for accidental tampering or destruction with the cameras, especially those situated in out of the way locations. Hence, establishing and maintaining functionality and accessibility is a primary concern for technologists.
There are multiple solutions that help address this. First, the cameras can be wired to a remote database for secure uploading. Typically this involves having a power source in the ceiling, or other protected location. In some cases this is infeasible (i.e. bringing wiring into an old building) and wireless might need to be used instead. But wireless networks introduce their own concerns. If guests on a network (e.g. students, families of students, faculty, staff, and support staff) are permitted to connect to the classroom network (and the cameras), then they may be able to bypass the security of the wireless connection to hijack the feed from the cameras. Likewise if the network can be accessed from outside of the school or college, hackers can hijack the wireless feed. This risk, however , can be mitigated through encryption.
Another technical issue with classroom cameras is the choice of resolution and compression algorithm used to store the classroom footage. Classroom cameras typically do not stream high definition video (720p or 1080p). First, a high definition video would be too large to be stored for more than a few days, as daily lecture activity over the course of one semester could consume tens of terabytes of space. Instead, most (but not all) classroom cameras have either lower pixel density, typically in the realm of a standard definition video (480p), or they use a high definition format with reduced pixel density as well as compression algorithms to reduce the size from hundreds of gigabytes per hour to under a terabyte per day. Further, since there already exists a plethora of online digital video services available to students, duplicating that availability through classroom cameras is redundant. Another reason for the reduced resolution of classroom camera is that classroom cameras mainly are useful for educational and administrative purposes. For example, many schools permit full public recording of lectures, which they make available on their Web site. While visitors to the Web site can choose to download the recordings, the compression applied by the school also reduces the data consumption that would result from a higher resolution image. Thus, the technical challenges of classroom cameras must be balanced against other practical concerns.
Case Law and School Precedents
Case studies and legal precedents are mixed across the globe when it comes to the legality of classroom cameras. While some institutions have successfully navigated the complex intersection of educational needs and privacy concerns, others have faced backlash.
In the United States, the use of cameras in the classroom continues to be adopted by both public and private schools across various states and districts. For instance, a Virginia school district recently won a court case involving allegations that the monitoring system violated state and federal law. The judge ruled that the security cameras did not violate the rights of students or teachers, as the cameras are placed in common areas and do not serve as a means of surveillance of private interactions.
Conversely, there have been legal challenges in the form of lawsuits filed against schools using cameras to monitor teacher-student interactions. For instance, in Texas, a controversy arose after a high school was outfitted with cameras after multiple allegations of inappropriate relationships between staff and students. Parents filed a lawsuit challenging the district’s policy of placing cameras in classrooms and hallways, claiming it was a violation of the children’s privacy. The court ultimately determined that the use of cameras was justified for the purpose of ensuring student safety, and denied the request for an injunction to stop the surveillance. However, the lawsuit highlighted the potential for dissent over the use of such technology.
Internationally, a similar case occurred in Canada, where a public school in British Columbia faced significant pushback from parents when it proposed to install cameras in a special education classroom. Despite arguments that the cameras would help monitor the student-teacher interactions to prevent abuse and bullying, parents filed a formal complaint with the intervention of the British Columbia Privacy Commissioner who investigated the matter. The outcome of that case remains less clear, but it sparked a debate about the role and reach of school surveillance.
In the longterm, the legality surrounding classroom cameras will likely continue to be shaped through a combination of local school board policy-making and judicial rulings. Key takeaways suggest that the context in which the cameras are used, whether for legitimate security and safety reasons or deemed an invasion of privacy, will differentiate the outcomes of future legal challenges. Ongoing dialogues between school districts and parent groups and students will likely continue to influence school policies on classroom cameras.
Teacher and Student Impact
The installation of classroom cameras can have a significant impact on the way teachers are able to teach and the way students are able to learn. As teachers are under increased stress and scrutiny to produce better test scores, the ability to adapt their teaching styles in reaction to the unique needs of their students is being reduced. The recording nature of the video camera limits the unique and ever-shifting relationship each teacher has with his or her students. Teachers are, in many instances, beholden to the whims of another individual, with whom he or she may have no particular relationship — a stranger who has never even stepped into the teacher’s classroom. The ability of a teacher to adapt to the needs of a student is being undermined by the voyeuristic efforts of an outsider, who in reality has no way of knowing how the "teaching moment" evolved.
On the other hand, these realities can provide valuable feedback to teachers who want to improve their craft. Teachers can analyze their teaching styles, test methods, class management skills and even classroom interactions with parents and students, among a myriad of other issues. Teachers should then be required to utilize the information to improve student performance and foster a better learning environment.
The effect on students is a little more complicated. Students may be more inhibited if they know they are being recorded. Classroom cameras do not just record visual imagery; they also pick up audio sound, which means the educator’s comments to the class may also be stored for the world to hear. If a teacher publicly states his or her opinion on a hot-button topic, such as religion, sexual orientation or extreme political views, a student may feel uncomfortable voicing his or her own opinions on these or related topics for fear of being ostracized by his or her peers.
Classroom Surveillance in the Future
As technology continues to evolve and expand, so too will classroom surveillance practices. We may see advanced systems that not only monitor viewing patterns but also integrate with students’ wearable technology, analyzing everything from attention levels to physiological responses. Such technology will also raise complex issues about consent and data ownership and protection.
Legal standards may also adapt to keep pace with these changes. Courts and legislatures may wrestle with definitions of "reasonable expectation of privacy" in the context of the evolving digital learning environment. They may also look to more unified federal standards or guidelines in order for expressions of privacy to have similar weight throughout the nation. States could follow California’s lead and enact statutes that better address privacy concerns raised by surveillance technologies in schools. However, state efforts could easily be pre-empted by inconsistent federal policy.
The future of classroom surveillance will be less about school board policy and more about a broad range of actors. Parents, students, teachers, administrators, and service providers will all have an interest in how increasingly sophisticated technology is deployed in the classroom and what privacy policies govern its use. Parents may demand technological tools to make informed decisions about their children’s’ safety . Students may demand to be included in the decision-making process around these issues. Teachers may demand clear guidance and support to navigate the growing complexities of classroom technology. Administrators may demand additional professional development to help them think through the implications of their technology decisions. If legislators and courts don’t step in quickly to make comprehensive policy decisions on surveillance technology in schools, each of these players will look to other instruments.
In the absence of comprehensive legal and regulatory frameworks, technology and teacher-created materials will likely increasingly fill the vacuum. To help teachers deal with the accelerated pace of change and the inherent tensions that arise in today’s classrooms, educational institutions and professional organizations will seek to increase internal professional development and resources around these issues. Teacher-created resources will also proliferate. Technology companies will increasingly develop "bundled" services that not only collect data on student learning but also provide professional development, curricular materials, live teaching supports, and even teacher evaluations based on that data. As these bundles grow, state and local governments may increasingly look to curtail the market concentration and monopoly power of these companies.