First, what if the student decides to take the tag out of his jersey and leave the room? The staff at the computer wouldn't be able to tell if he/she did that and the tracking device would be useless. What if someone who isn't authorizes to use the program does? The system has no way to tell if non-staff uses it to access a child personal information. Really what is the problem to begin with. Is supervision too much of a problem? Is the number of incidents in which kids wonder off great enough to justify the use of RFID tags?
What about the future? Is this going to desensitize citizens to the integration of RFIDs?
Articles Used:
Generally, I agree with you. It is always good to demand statistics and reason for change, especially drastic change. However, when asking if the number of incidents is great enough to justify the use of RFID tags, that's when concern should roll in. Fear is the driving force behind every invasion of privacy, whether it be fear of civilian dissent (when governments use censorship and other means of control), fear of terrorists (Patriot. Act.) or other. If fear of child safety is the reason we have to justify chips under the skin, strong statistics are the worst part, not the best.
ReplyDeleteThis post shows an inquiring mind. I think that asking questions about the factual nature of the situation is valuable (as the blogger does..). I also think it is important to as the comment states think about the wisdom of looking at this as a small issue that can be defined in terms of statistics and looking at it as a larger question of what is the role of government represented in this sphere with Head Start. It is important to remember that the words Head STart although positive do mean relinquishing children at a young age to government schools. This is one step back from the chip, but is I believe important to consider. NICE Post!
ReplyDelete