Abstract
The right to privacy is based on a belief in the essential dignity and worth of the individual. Modern technological devices, along with advances in the behavioral sciences, can threaten the privacy of students. Fortunately, invasions of privacy in education have not been widespread. However, sufficient violations have been noted to warrant specific legislation and to promote a sharp increase in attention to procedures that will ensure protection of individual privacy. Technology that can reveal innermost thoughts and motives, or can change basic values and behaviors, must be used judiciously and only by qualified professionals under strictly controlled conditions. Education involves individuals, and educational experimentation is human experimentation. The educator must safeguard the privacy of students and their families.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bloustein, E. J. Privacy as an aspect of human dignity: Answer to Dean Prosser.New York University Law Review, December 1964,39, 962–1007.
Boyd, R. E., Tennyson, W. W. & Erickson, R. Counselor and client confidentiality.Counselor Education and Supervision, 1973,22, 278–288.
Committee on Government Operations, U.S. Senate.Protecting individual privacy in federal gathering, use and disclosure of information (Report No. 93-1183). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974.
Comptroller General of the United States.Questions persist about federal support for development of curriculum materials and behavior modification techniques used in local schools (Report of the Comptroller General, HRD-77-49). Washington, D.C.: U.S. General Accounting Office, 1977.
Computer Decisions. Direct brain-to-computer interface on the way.Computer Decisions, September 1974, 6(9), p. 13.
Cooley, T. M. A treatise on the law of torts (2nd ed.). Chicago: Calahan, 1888.
Cronbach, L.J. Essentials of psychological testing (2nd ed.). New York: Harper, 1960.
Education Daily. States get more than $130 million for migrant children under Title I.Education Daily, November 10, 1976, p. 5.
Goslin, D. A.The search for ability. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1963.
Goslin, D. A., & Bordier, N. Record keeping in elementary and secondary schools. In S. Wheeler (Ed.),On record: Files and dossiers in American life. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1969.
Grayson, L. P. Costs, benefits, effectiveness: Challenge to educational technology.Science, March 17, 1972,275, 1216–1222.
Grayson, L. P. Educational satellites: The ATS-6 experiment.Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 1974, 3(2), 89–123.
Grayson, L. P. Instructional technology: On diversity in education.AV Communication Review, 1976, 24(2), 117–134.
Griswold v. Connecticut. InUnited States reports, 381, 479–531. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.
Harman, W. H. Nature of our changing society: Implications for schools. In P. K. Piele & T. L. Eidell (Eds.),Social and technological change: Implications for education. Eugene: University of Oregon, Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administration, 1970.
Hogan, P. F. Improving the education of migrant children.American Education, April 1973, 9(3), 20–24.
Hupe, H. H. Cost-effectiveness of an interactive broadcast satellite.Astronautics and Aeronautics, January 1975, 23(1), 63–68.
Lewis, F. M.Every child’s requirement for privacy of personal thoughts (Address to first annual convention of the Scientific Information and Education Council of Physicians, Inc., Washington, D.C., May 20, 1972).
Lockwood, A. L. Values education and the right to privacy.Journal of Moral Education, 1977, 7(1), 9–26.
London, P.Behavior control. New York: Harper & Row, 1969.
Meyer, J. A. Crime deterrent transponder system.IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, January 1971, AES-7(1), 2–22.
Miller, A. R.The impact of instructional technology on the right to privacy. 1970. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 039 719).
Miller, A. R.The assault on privacy: Computers, data banks, and dossiers. New York: New American Library, 1972.
National Center for Educational Statistics.Projections of educational statistics to 1985–86. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977.
National Committee on the Education of Migrant Children.The uniform migrant student record transfer system. A position paper. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 107 440)
Olmstead v. U.S. InUnited States reports, 277. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1927.
Oppenheim, J. The coaxial wiretap: Privacy and the cable.Yale Review of Law and Social Action, 1962, 2(3), 282–288.
Osborn v. U.S. InUnited States reports, 385. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.
Pfeil, M. P. Computer harvests migrant records.American Education, November 1970, 6(9), 6–9.
Pope Pius XII. Address to the Congress of the International Association of Applied Psychology, Rome, April 10, 1958.
Privacy Protection Study Committee.Personal privacy in an information society. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977.
Read, P. B.On the confidentiality of student test scores. December 1974. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 102 210)
Rodriquez v. San Antonio independent school district. InUnited States reports, 411, 1–137. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974.
Rubenstein, A. M., & Brim, O. G., Jr. Privacy and behavioral research.Columbia Law Review, November 1965, 65, 1184–1211.
Russell Sage Foundation.Guidelines for the collection, maintenance and dissemination of pupil records (Report of a conference on the ethical and legal aspects of school record keeping). New York: Author, 1970.
Russell Sage Foundation.Student records in higher education. New York: Author, 1972.
Simon, S. B., & Clark, J.More values clarification. San Diego: Pennant, 1975.
Simon, S. B., Howe, L.,& Kirschenbaum, H.Values clarification. New York: Hart, 1972.
Skinner, B. F.Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971.
Testimony before Committee on Education and Labor, U.S. House of Representatives, August 12, 1977.Part 9: Family educational rights and privacy act of 1974. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977.
Warren, S. C., & Brandeis, L. D. The right to privacy.Harvard Law Review, December 1890, 4(5), 193–220.
Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L.Unobtrusive measures: Nonreactive research in the social sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1966.
Westin, A. F.Privacy and freedom, New York: Atheneum, 1970.
Wired hotel in Tokyo,Japan Electronic Industry, May 1971, p. 52.
Yalom, I. D. & Lieberman, M. A. A study of encounter group casualties.Archives of General Psychiatry, July 1971,25, 16–30.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Grayson (1976) for a discussion of the implication of widescale adoption of instructional technology for maintaining diversity in education.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Grayson, L.P. Education, technology, and individual privacy. ECTJ 26, 195–206 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766604
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766604