A planned University of Washington study would’ve had preschool teachers wear cameras to record first-person footage of everything in the classroom, including the young children they were instructing, and use that footage to train AI models. If a parent was uncomfortable with all that, they had to manually opt-out — meaning that unless the researchers were given a formal no, a parent’s child would’ve been automatically opted into the experiment.
“With your permission, your child’s lead teacher may wear a small teacher-worn camera that captures the teacher’s approximate first-person perspective, and/or we may place a fixed video camera in the classroom,” reads a document given to parents and obtained by 404 Media in a new investigative piece. “These videos simply capture the normal interactions between teachers and children during regular classroom activities.”
The parents did a little more than opt out, however. They revolted, and the backlash was so heated that the University of Washington called off the experiment entirely, according to 404.
The documents given to parents sometimes used nebulous language and left key questions open-ended. They stated that the footage would’ve been used to “develop and evaluate AI models for assessing classroom interaction quality,” and that the “video data may be processed using cloud-based AI services.” But they didn’t specify what AI models or what AI companies would be involved.
Thorny questions abounded. What about the parent of a child who didn’t give consent? Would only they be blurred out in the footage? How would that realistically work? The documents only said the researchers would censor faces and names “whenever possible,” but that meant your child was still being filmed.
These looming uncertainties rattled parents.
“I am troubled by the idea of using my child’s likeness in unknown AI tools and how this could be abused,” one parent who chose to remain anonymous told 404.
“I was particularly concerned about families’ ability to give informed consent,” she added. “As a native English speaker, the vague language in the handout left me with a slew of questions. Many families in our school are migrants and non-native English speakers, but forms were not provided in any of their native languages.”
Experts in education were also raising eyebrows at the document’s language.
“Who may the data may be shared with? How long will it be maintained? Who is funding the research? Those are questions that I would want answers to, and the answers could exist,” Faith Boninger, co-director of the National Education Policy Center, told 404.
The University of Washington said it was putting the research on ice after parent backlash.
“Given the early responses from parents, we…
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
