Education research can be a high-wire act between districts and researchers, balancing the need for straightforward access to data鈥攁nd frank conversations about study results鈥攚ith protection of student and teacher privacy.
If Louisiana鈥檚 two-year-old privacy law is anything to go on, that balancing act may get a lot trickier for researchers as states move to protect student data. That鈥檚 according to researchers speaking at a symposium at the National Center for Education Statistics annual meeting in Washington recently. Considered one of the strictest in the country, Louisiana鈥檚 law bars school districts from sharing nearly all personally identifiable information for students without a data-sharing contract or written consent from a student鈥檚 parent or guardian. The law imposes personal penalties of up to $10,000 or six months in jail for staff or researchers who share data improperly.
The law arose out of 鈥渞eal concern among parents鈥� not just that student data would be released, but of how the state and federal government and even private researchers might use it. 鈥淭here鈥檚 a real fear of us [at the state education department] and of researchers,鈥� said Kim Nesmith, the data governance and privacy director for the state, at the symposium.
Louisiana鈥檚 state education agency no longer directly collects individual student data. Instead, districts now report accountability and other student data to a data management company, eScholar, which provides the masked data to the state agency. The firm created and issued more than 700,000 new identification numbers in five months, and has updated five years of historic student data since the law went into effect in 2015.
In the meantime, the state has focused on training for school districts and more outreach to parents about the existing protections for student data.
鈥淗aving data governance that balances privacy and transparency is not for sissies; it鈥檚 tough, really tough, work,鈥� Nesmith said. 鈥淚 hate that [the data privacy law] is scary, because it causes people to be afraid and overreact, but it鈥檚 good because I don鈥檛 have to fight to prove the importance of [student privacy and data governance.]鈥�
State Concerns
Since 2013, 鈥渨e鈥檝e had the landscape completely shift鈥� with regard to state approaches to data privacy, according to Amelia Vance, education policy counsel for the nonprofit Future of Privacy Forum. Thirty-nine states have passed new laws dealing with student data privacy, with nearly two dozen that affect K-12 or early-childhood data. In an analysis of both the bills introduced and laws passed during that time, the forum found only about 1 in 5 focused on training staff to secure data; often many were introduced without input from researchers or district data experts. 鈥淵ou鈥檝e seen a lot of laws that react to the political zeitgeist more than respond to concrete privacy concerns,鈥� Vance said.
Read Education Week鈥榮 2015 report on data sharing and student privacy:
Some of the most stringent laws, Vance said, 鈥渢end to incentivize, instead of really good data practices, they incentivize doing nothing with data at all.鈥�
That has left educators and researchers to figure out workarounds for systems that don鈥檛 always gel with modern, data-intensive education systems.
Working Within Limits
For example, the Pelican State uses a broad definition of personal information鈥攂asically, any information that could be used on its own or with another piece of information to trace an individual鈥檚 identity, including a Social Security number, date of birth, medical or financial information, education achievement or transcripts over time, and even biometric information like height or weight. The law also requires that all personally identifiable data from Louisiana students remain physically in the state.
鈥淚t certainly raised some challenges,鈥� said Patrick Wolfe, a professor of education policy and a chair in school choice at the University of Arkansas who has studied Louisiana school choice issues since 2013, before the privacy law passed.
鈥淥f all the states I鈥檝e worked in ... Louisiana has the most strict education-data-access law that I鈥檝e seen so far. It does basically mean you have to do more planning at the front end.鈥�
For example, in one ongoing evaluation of the state鈥檚 voucher program, Wolfe had only a single week to analyze school data at a secure facility in Metairie, La. That analysis led to follow-up questions, which he had to do long-distance with help from a locally based Tulane University graduate researcher. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a little tricky writing computer code when you can鈥檛 see the data you are writing for,鈥� he said.
Wolfe continues to study Louisiana, but Nesmith said the law has had somewhat of a chilling effect on researchers working there.
鈥淚t just adds time and cost to research when you have to find workarounds to state laws like Louisiana鈥檚,鈥� Wolfe said. 鈥淵ou can still do solid research within the law as it stands. ... As an academic researcher I just wish they made it easier for us.鈥�
One recent attempt to create flexibility for education researchers to use student data under the law passed the state legislature, but was vetoed by the governor.
