Last week, my 8-year-old daughter used her school-managed internet browser to research information for a science report on cheetahs. She entered key words to discover sites describing the big cat’s sleek golden coat, tear-marked face, and explosive speed. She learned about its habitat, prey, and the unique features of its claws, designed to grip the ground like cleats. She then paused, looked up, and asked if the computer was “watching her type.”

I wasn’t sure how to answer. Just days earlier, I had learned about a proposed law in Massachusetts that could make her concern all too real. Under House Bill 633, private tech companies could be allowed to watch, store, and mine her educational data — every keystroke and click — without my knowledge or consent. As a father, a veteran high school English teacher, and a licensed instructional technologist, I’ve seen the good technology can do in classrooms. But I also know that when left unchecked, there’s potential for misuse.

At first glance, House Bill 633, An Act Relative to Student and Educator Data Privacy, appears to strengthen protections for student information. But after reviewing the bill and speaking with a data privacy attorney, I realized it does the opposite. It opens the door for “operators” — tech companies and app developers — to collect an astonishing range of data: not just grades and attendance, but search histories, GPS location, text messages, biometric scans, political beliefs, and even lunch purchases. Worse, it doesn’t require parental consent for most of this collection and fails to mandate independent audits or oversight. This isn’t protection. It’s digital surveillance disguised as education policy.

If we care about protecting our children and teachers, this bill must be revised before it becomes law. First, the scope of data collection must be narrowed to only what is absolutely essential for educational purposes. Second, parental or caregiver consent should be required before any personal information is gathered or shared. Third, the law must include independent oversight, regular audits, and clear consequences for violations. Finally, the bill needs to define “K-12 school purposes” with clarity and precision. As it stands, this vague phrase gives companies nearly unlimited justification to gather and exploit student and educator data.

The stakes are high. Just last year, a PowerSchool data breach exposed the personal information of more than 60 million students and 9.5 million educators, including medical alerts and Social Security numbers in some cases. Now, instead of tightening safeguards, tech lobbyists are pushing similarly flawed laws in other states, quietly building a surveillance infrastructure inside America’s classrooms. With federal lawmakers pushing to delay artificial intelligence regulation for another decade, the window to enact meaningful safeguards is closing. If left as-is, this bill will normalize the commodification of student data and turn classrooms into testing grounds for profit-driven analytics rather than safe spaces for learning and growth.

As my daughter added a final detail to her report — the cheetah cannot outrun all the threats it faces — I noticed an eerie parallel. She was learning about a vulnerable creature on the edge of survival, unaware that her own privacy was at risk. Schools should be sanctuaries of curiosity, not pipelines for children’s private data. I urge students, parents, teachers, and community members to contact their state representatives and demand real protections in Bill H.633. Technological tools should be used to enhance education, not serve as gateways for corporate surveillance and commercial gain.

Peter B-G Weller is an English and journalism teacher at South Hadley High School and a 2024-2025 Teach Plus Massachusetts Senior Policy Fellow.