U.S. SCHOOLS use ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE TOOLS to monitor students’ digital behavior without consent or knowledge

A newly published peer-reviewed study reveals that a growing number of U.S. schools are using government-funded online surveillance tools to monitor students’ digital behavior—often without their knowledge or consent—and warns that such practices may have serious consequences for children’s development and well-being.

• 24/7 Student Surveillance Raises Privacy and Health Concerns: A peer-reviewed study found that 12 out of 14 school surveillance companies monitored students’ social media, emails, and online activity around the clock, often without clear consent from parents or students, potentially harming children’s learning, mental health, and social development.
• Heavy Reliance on AI and Lack of Human Oversight: Most companies used AI to flag student behavior, but fewer than half had human reviewers. Researchers warned this could lead to false positives and discriminatory outcomes, particularly for marginalized students, due to algorithmic bias and lack of transparency.
• Federal Funds Fuel Poorly Regulated Surveillance Tools: Many schools use federal education grants to fund these surveillance tools, despite limited evidence that they improve student safety. Researchers called for better oversight and questioned whether this is an appropriate use of government resources.
• Parents Left in the Dark and Policymakers Urged to Act: The study highlighted that parents often don’t know their children are being monitored and may not have opt-out options. Authors recommended federal legislation to improve transparency, address AI bias, and require parental consent for off-campus monitoring.

Online Surveillance of Kids in School Can Impede ‘Learning, Social Development, and Mental Health’

Conducted by researchers from the University of California, San Diego, the study assessed 14 companies providing online surveillance services to schools. The findings show that 12 of these companies conduct round-the-clock monitoring, both inside and outside of school hours. Surveillance included scanning students’ social media activity, online browsing history, emails, and documents written on school accounts. Most companies relied on artificial intelligence (AI) to identify problematic behavior, with only 43% using human reviewers to confirm flagged content.

The researchers expressed concern over the lack of algorithmic transparency in AI-powered monitoring systems. They noted that many language models used in such surveillance tools have shown significant bias—especially against non-white students. Without human oversight or clear guidelines, these biases may result in false alerts and discriminatory disciplinary actions.

Two companies admitted that their staff sometimes contact law enforcement at their discretion if a perceived crisis is detected. The study’s authors warned that this type of unsupervised intervention poses additional risks to students’ safety and mental health.

The report, published July 11 in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is the first in-depth review of the school-based online surveillance industry. It highlights not only privacy and cybersecurity concerns but also the psychological harm such surveillance can cause. According to the study, excessive monitoring can erode students’ “intimate privacy,” which may negatively affect their ability to learn, build relationships, and maintain emotional stability.

Despite these serious implications, the industry remains largely unregulated and shrouded in secrecy. The researchers pointed out that most of the companies fail to provide pricing information and operate with minimal transparency about their methods or data practices. Nearly half of the companies promoted the availability of federal education grants to fund their services—despite the lack of any reliable data proving their effectiveness in reducing school violence, bullying, or suicide.

To compile the report, researchers reviewed company websites, educational product databases, public contracts, and media coverage. They narrowed the list of over 100 companies to 14 based on specific criteria, including claims of monitoring student communication, generating individual alerts, and targeting schools as clients. Among the companies studied were Gaggle, GoGuardian, Bark, Securly, and Lightspeed Systems.

The authors emphasized that parents are often unaware their children are being monitored. Many school systems fail to notify families or offer opt-out options. They warned that this lack of communication may prevent students and guardians from making informed decisions about digital safety and privacy.

The researchers called for stricter government oversight, including potential legislation mandating transparency, banning AI bias, and granting parents opt-in rights for monitoring beyond school hours. Without such safeguards, they concluded, school surveillance technologies could continue to undermine students’ fundamental rights and long-term well-being.

Do your own research and don’t use Google. Try the search engine Brave BETA and get more truth news and real information. Bookmark Censored.news to your favorite websites for truth news about health, safety and education that’s being censored from mass media while you read this.

Sources for this article include:

NaturalNews.com

DailyMail.co.uk

ChildrensHealthDefense.org