1 of 24

Keeping Students Safe: Educator and Student Perspectives on Monitoring Applications Functionalities

https://research.ced.ncsu.edu/k12studentsafetymonitoring/

2 of 24

Research Practice Partnership

3 of 24

Project Team

4 of 24

Project Goals

  • Examine what and how monitoring applications were implemented in North Carolina districts
  • Examine the impact of the implementation of the monitoring software applications to protect students from threats and harms
  • Examine the data collected by the software, its access, and data privacy protection
  • Examine the monitoring needs of North Carolina districts and charter schools
  • Provide policy recommendations at the State and local levels

​

5 of 24

Monitoring Applications (MAs)

Tools that “provide teachers and schools with the ability to filter web content, monitor students’ search engine queries and browsing history, view students’ email, messaging, and social media content, view the contents of their screens in real time, and other monitoring functionality” (Grant-Chapman et al., 2021)

6 of 24

Why Do MAs Matter?

  • They have seen “widespread adoption” (Grant-Chapman et al., 2021, p. 1), especially since the Pandemic
  • Capable of collecting, moving, and storing massive amounts of student data
  • Highly variable transparency among all levels of education staff and administrators

7 of 24

Context of the Study

  • Focused on schools that used MAs during the Pandemic (i.e., 2020-2022)
  • MA data provided by NCDPI
  • Student, teacher, administrators were recruited, surveyed, and interviewed about their experience with MAs during that time
  • Challenges in sampling and response rate

8 of 24

Top MAs

MA

Number

Gaggle

134

GoGuardian

81

Securly

15

LineWize

11

Lightspeed

8

9 of 24

Monitoring Functionalities

Functionality

Description

Behavioral analytics (n=14)

Analyzing, summarizing, and reporting student behavioral data to inform future stakeholder decisions

Content filtering (n=13)

Preventing student access to harmful, distracting, inappropriate, or otherwise unapproved media

Third party app integration (n=13)

Integrating MAs with other hardware, applications, platforms, or services

Recording student activity (n=12)

Logging and storing online activity and engagement for analysis, compliance, etc.

10 of 24

Monitoring Functionalities (cont.)

Functionality

Description

Machine learning (n=9)

Using trained computer algorithms to aid behavioral analysis and surveillance

Student assessment (n=7)

Actively collecting data from students via surveys to measure learning and improve curricula

Escalation protocol (n=7)

A formal implementation of behavioral analytics: Screening notable cases for false positives and following a chain of command depending on priority, severity, etc.

11 of 24

Discussion 1

Think, Pair, Share

​

What MA does your district use?

​

What are your thoughts on these functionalities?

12 of 24

Interview Findings

13 of 24

Survey Design & Analysis

14 of 24

Theme 1:

​

Easier to pick up, more difficult to master

15 of 24

Theme 2:

​

Seeing and understanding the parts vs the whole

16 of 24

Theme 3:

​

MA effectiveness

vs student privacy

17 of 24

Survey Findings

18 of 24

Student Experiences

​

Perceived Helpfulness & Educational Impact

  • 87% felt apps didn't aid in resolving issues
  • 6.8% reported blocking of educational resources
  • Mixed feedback on self-harm assistance: The majority found no help or were unaware

​

19 of 24

Teacher Experiences

Real-World Impact & Incident Response

  • 20% teachers reported they did not have an incidents.
  • 19% teachers reported that they are uncertain about impact of the MAs
  • 67% reported no examples of resolving bullying or self-harm cases
  • Notable positive feedback: Timely alerts leading to prompt intervention
  • Annually the number of Incidents ranged from 2 to 100

20 of 24

Technology Facilitators and Directors

21 of 24

Discussion 2

What did you notice?

What do you wonder?

22 of 24

Implications

  • Identification of the features of monitoring software that could provide the most useful information to schools to guide future adoption;
  • Identification of primary stakeholder concerns upon adoption of monitoring software and methods designed to address such concerns;
  • Recommendations of identified ways to strengthen privacy protection at the state level.

​

23 of 24

Discussion 3

What do policy makers need to know?

24 of 24

Website & Infographic

References

​

Grant-Chapman, H., Laird, E., & Venzke, C. (2021). Student activity monitoring software: Research insights and recommendations (pp. 1–7). Center for Democracy & Technology.

​

​