Facebook’s Child Workforce
I’ve become comfortable with my gadfly role in technology. I know that Facebook would characterize their new “personalized learning” initiative, Summit Basecamp, as innovative if not downright charitable (hat tip Leonie Haimson). But again, gadly.
What gets to me is how the students involved – about 20,000 students in more than 100 charter and traditional public schools – are really no more than an experimental and unpaid workforce, spending classroom hours training the Summit algorithm and getting no guarantee in return of real learning.
Their parents, moreover, are being pressured to sign away all sorts of privacy rights for those kids. And, get this, Basecamp “require disputes to be resolved through arbitration, essentially barring a student’s family from suing if they think data has been misused.” Here’s the quote from the article that got me seriously annoyed, from the Summit CEO Diane Tavenner herself:
“We’re offering this for free to people,” she said. “If we don’t protect the organization, anyone could sue us for anything — which seems crazy to me.”
To recap. Facebook gets these kids to train their algorithm for free, whilst removing them from their classroom time, offering no evidence that they will learn anything, making sure that they’ll be able to use the childrens’ data for everything short of targeted ads, and also ensuring the parents can’t even hire a lawyer to complain. That sounds like a truly terrible deal.
Here’s the thing. The kids involved are often poor, often minority. They are the most surveilled generation and the most surveilled subpopulation out there, ever. We have to start doing better for them than unpaid work for Facebook.
“We’re offering this for free to people” – Whenever something is free, then you are the product.
LikeLike
Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth! What’s the alternative? Would these kids really be better off without these tools? I’m willing to bet: No!
My older daughter did Stanford EPGY and Hopkins CTY among other programs. Today she sports a PhD after her name.
Why deny similar benefits to lower income students? Did you look at the curricula?
I’m sorry but this looks like a very positive thing to me.
LikeLike
You may be right, but this doesnt justify what they can do with the children’s personal data – you mean that the personal data is the price to pay for getting whatever they are getting, and that this is a fair deal?
LikeLike
Click to access summit_privacy_policy.pdf
Does that look like a reasonable or unreasonable price to pay?
Compare that with what they are [not] getting today.
LikeLike
Can you compare the two programs on their privacy rights? Did your daughter give up her right to sue people to attend her program?
LikeLike
Oh please. This is piloted at my kids’ school, I refused to sign, and I’m neither low-income or stupid. The alternative is individualized learning from an actual human, with a feedback loop that requires human interaction, an actual textbook, and time to read, reflect, and ask questions.
LikeLike
Glad your kid is in a good school with good teachers. But given the achievement gap in most inner city schools, such a program should be considered a godsend.
LikeLike
I don’t see why. If it’s not appropriate for the children of the elite, it’s not appropriate for the children of the inner city.
When you talk about academic achievement gap, what are you measuring?
LikeLike
Measuring? Grades. Graduation rates.
Are you saying there is no gap?
LikeLiked by 1 person
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2010/08/01/education/01schoools-graphic2.html?ref=education
LikeLike
Also – Summit Basecamp is not curricula per se; it’s the method by which curricula is delivered.
LikeLike
I really appreciate you pointing this out. I hope your platform grows over time.
Let me know if I can help.
LikeLike
I’m pretty sure the way the court system in this country works is that, in fact, anyone can sue anyone for anything. Signing away that right is what is crazy.
LikeLike
This fundamentally changed in 2012: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/supreme-court-backs-binding-arbitration-agreements/2012/01/16/gIQAg4LuGQ_story.html
LikeLike
“We’re offering this for free to people,” she said. “If we don’t protect the organization, anyone could sue us for anything — which seems crazy to me.”
The Grinch put it best: “The impudence! The audacity! The unmitigated gall!”
LikeLike