NJ elementary schools implement iris-scanning building access

Right after we finish this post, we're immediately withdrawing our kids from their snobby Manhattan private schools in favor of some even better options -- in New Jersey. (Pause. Hold for laughter.) While attending one of three innovative elementary schools in the Freehold Borough School District won't necessarily make our little angels shoo-ins for the Ivy League, we'll sure feel better during the day knowing that they're being protected by the schools' new 242-point-comparison iris-scanning doors. Using a $369,000 federal grant, the district hired Eyemetrics Identity Solutions to implement hardware by LG and HP and software by IrisAccess and Newton Security that together form a system which only allows building access to so-called white-listed individuals. Each student is allowed to green-light four people, which puts a cap on the number of folks that have access to a given building, and also serves to prepare youngsters for the cut-throat social politics of high school.

[Via The Raw Feed]

[Sean @ Jan 24th 2006 7:16AM]

Don't really get what they're trying to achieve here. Couldn't that money have been better spent teaching the kids something? I don't see how this is going to make them any more secure seeing as how most of the incidents of school violence we've seen has been from actual students of the school therefore they'd already be whitelisted.

[XGM @ Jan 24th 2006 7:56AM]

Is it me or is the world getting paranoid. Maybee its just you americans and stuff, i dunno cuz it aint that bad here in canada. I do agree why didnt they spent it on learning material instead.

[G Money @ Jan 24th 2006 8:07AM]

I grew up in this area and there is like ZERO CHANCE of any trouble going down at any freehold school district or any other monmouth/ocean county school district. Yes i know an illegal mexican immigrant killed 2 teenagers of a woman whos home he was renting a room in Toms River but yes i agree this money could have been spent elsewhere.

[Papa Bear @ Jan 24th 2006 8:48AM]

Hey, watch those snide comments about Jersey schools. If I am not mistaken, the Freehold public schools hatched one Bruce Springsteen. Of course, snobby Manhattan private schools hatched Humphrey Bogart.

No, I am not sure where I am going with this.

[Chris @ Jan 24th 2006 9:00AM]

http://www.morganquitno.com/edrank05.htm

[george tempel @ Jan 24th 2006 9:20AM]

I live in Freehold Borough, and this isn't nearly as nifty as it seems. The superintendent did this same gig in his previous district to much fanfare as well. However, in our local case, it's a bit of a flop. The system misrecognizes people consistently. Additionally, comments from senior administration members indicate that the district is using this system to see how many hispanic folks sign up for the system and they'll be using that information to back-door some data collection on immigration, residency, demographics, etc. Many of these folks are off-the-radar, and loading the public schools here, and it's really underhanded for the administration to get all big-brother and try to do this. I, technophile that I am, will NEVER sign up for this superintendent sponsored boondoggle.

[Mattso @ Jan 24th 2006 9:21AM]

G Money, I have to disagree with you. I have lived in Freehold my entire life, (24 years) and while it's not one of the worst areas around, it certainly isn't completely safe. I understand the contention that the money could be spent elsewhere, but I usually agree with the implementation of such pilot programs because, if nothing else, it can give us a good idea of the true cost and efficacy of such a project. Then we have a benchmark to allow us to duplicate, revise, or just scrap the idea, depending on how it works. Sometimes you have to take the risk to get the reward.

As far as violence in schools usually being between the students themselves... this is true, and there should be ways of curbing such violence, but the concern of outside intruders still exists, and I'm all for testing new ways to keep them out. Keep in mind that the cost would come down if the technology became widespread. That's why you need programs like this. If it works well, it can become a reasonable standard rather than an expensive experiment.

[Dissent @ Jan 24th 2006 9:31AM]

If a kid wants to go on a shooting rampage, he's already gonna be whitelisted... and arent kids on rampages what has the nationwide soccer-mom consortium in a huff?

What a stupid, stupid waste of money.

[osttaM @ Jan 24th 2006 9:34AM]

"As far as violence in schools usually being between the students themselves...this is true, and there should be ways of curbing such violence, but the concern of outside intruders still exists, and I'm all for testing new ways to keep them out."

1. Testosterone. Kids think they're tough, that's why they fight.

2. Are you running a military facility or a school? People coming in? You make it sound like the joint is going to be invaded.

I agree though, the NJ government wastes OUR money on far less important things, keeping the kids in this state safe should definately be a priority.


GMoney - My father was a teacher at Toms River North since the day it was opened (1972 I believe, he retired last year). Don't say crap doesn't happen because it definately does. You get a large population of kids and your gonna have your 'tough guys', your 'thugs', and your bullies. Its life, they're kids, they think its "cool" and they have more testosterone running through their bodies then any other time in their lives (minus when they get drunk in college). Secondly - the shooting happened in Manahawkin (Stafford area actually), don't quote it if you don't know it.

[Dave @ Jan 24th 2006 10:27AM]

Sean, the money was spent to teach the kids something. It teaches them that Big Brother is watching and that there's no hope for the future. This is an important lesson and one that our government would like us to learn as quickly as possible. As Mattso so happily points out, if this program works out well, other similar programs will soon crop up all over. Soon you'll be forced to scan your iris before changing the channel on your TV.

[Tom @ Jan 24th 2006 10:40AM]

Yeah, Dave's got it dead on. This federally funded project gives the government iris information on a bunch of young folk that they can keep track of for the rest of there lives. This, combined with the federally funded project of obtaining DNA of all youngsters "so as to identify them if some catastrophe occurs" disturbs me deeply. Don't get me wrong, I love our president. He's like a big brother to me.

[Scott @ Jan 24th 2006 10:51AM]

Being a geek, I think this is a great solution to the access control problems schools face. The money was provided by a federal grant, so it's not like the school could have said "hey lets just put this towards books". Freehold parents should feel good that the school is taking a proactive approach to security.

[Bitches @ Jan 24th 2006 10:51AM]

Yeah keep laughing it up about NJ.

I love people like you. You move to NYC, settle in LES or Williamsburg Brooklyn, live in a shitty apartment with 3 other scumbags.... Change your look (trucker hat required) and personality completly. After 6 months you're a "NYer"

Bite me douchebags. You know you're not from anywhere any more exciting than Freehold anyway, so give it a rest.

Dumb idea by the way. Whoever thought of this is an idiot.

[Domo @ Jan 24th 2006 10:58AM]

Will they get eye cancer more easily?

[matt @ Jan 24th 2006 11:08AM]

i am from howell but i live in freehold school district, and I have to say, for the amount of tax money that the schools get and the way the constantly complain about how they need more money, its a disgrace that they blew their money on this... I mean all you really need to do is lock all of the doors except for the main enterance, and let every one else pass through the main office, this seems absolutly ridiculous....

[Mattso @ Jan 24th 2006 11:41AM]

Dave, go through the ordeal of having a child of your own abducted at school and then we'll see if you care to mention big brother. It's a school. It's not your home. Big brother is a term used to refer to the invasion of privacy, right? Whose privacy is being invaded in this case? All they are doing is limiting entrance into a building where many people's children reside during the day. We can protect our children however we want when they are at home, but when we have no control over what happens, when they are at school, I think it makes perfect sense to use technology reasonably to keep them safe. What's the harm? Beyond some huge leap you took from this to changing the channel on your TV, that is.

This technology will make it harder for screw-ups to happen by the people who allow access to the schools, such as security guards (who aren�t paid very well and aren�t always the most reliable people) and other office personnel, who don�t want to be confrontational or simply don�t care enough to question someone coming into the school. It doesn�t happen like that everywhere, but it happens, and this can limit those situations. Also, as Scott pointed out, it was a grant given to them specifically to implement this, so the money wouldn�t have been going to the district otherwise. You can blame the person in the government for approving the grant, but to say the district could have used it on other things is incorrect.

For those of you who think iris scanning is such a scary thing with horrible implications� it�s just a form of identification. We all have to carry forms of ID with us for a number of reasons, so instead of needing to keep your drivers license with you, you�ll have to have your eyes open. If the government wants to keep track of you, there are a number of ways to do it, so iris scanning isn�t the devil

[Dave @ Jan 24th 2006 12:24PM]

Well, Mattso, I never said the money could be used on other things--and I did suggest government was to blame. The problem with iris scanning and other biometric forms of identification--other than the fact that they are not infallible--is that they are TOO convenient.

No matter how easy, we should not be forced to present our identification at every turn. Is being forced to submit to an iris scan any different than being asked to present your papers? My point is that programs such as these indoctrinate children into this mindset.

I am sorry if you do not feel your children are safe in school--and I understand your concern; but perhaps you should also be concerned about your child's future in a society that has no regard for privacy--where the people must answer to their government rather than the other way around.

[rip @ Jan 24th 2006 12:43PM]

Laugh all you want. But NJ has one of the best education systems in the country.

I guess the ignorance and poor knowledge of the facts comes from going to a Manhattan school...

[Dan @ Jan 24th 2006 1:31PM]

So Mattso -

How many kids have been abducted from New Jersey schools, out of how many students, say, in the last ten years?

But hey, just so long as we manage to make school seem even more like a prison, right?

[Mattso @ Jan 24th 2006 1:37PM]

I just happen to think that people's privacy does not hinge on this technology being implemented in schools. As I said, if the government wants to invade your privacy, and intrude on your rights, there are a number of things they could do besides using iris scanning. I am certainly opposed to the invasion of privacy you speak of, but I think this particular case has little to do with it. To me, in this case, an iris scan is not much different than the security guard at the door asking you for your driver's license to identify you as someone who should be allowed into the school. There are certain places where public access should be prohibited, and schools are included under that category, are they not? I wouldn't mind being iris scanned to enter my office or an airport, because I would feel safe knowing that I have nothing to hide and that someone else might. Are there other implications to this? Of course there are, and I think your point has validity. Unfortunately we can't always trust our government to do things the right way, so I can't disagree with you completely.

[Adam R. @ Jan 24th 2006 1:51PM]

Here are some facts you guys are missing.
1. As a federal DoD grant, the money could only be used for this project. We couldn't spend it on anything else for that would have been in violation of the grant.

2. As for this being big brother, the equipment reads the iris (not the retna which is much more unique) and relays the information to a server that we have in the school district. The server is private, and not connected to any sort of outside connection. As part of the grant, we are not allowed to release any information held on this server. So big brother, this is not. Conspiracy Theory, this is not.

3. This system is not for the students. It is for parents and visitors. This to prevent someone who the school doesn't know from picking up a student and possibly kidnapping then and whatnot. In the server system, parents and visitor are cross referenced with the students that they may pick up and if someone scans and is not in the system, the doors wont open and they have to buzz in to the main offices. However, all parents and visitors still need to check into the main office so this is not a bypass to a face to face check in. This is just so that the office doesn't need to keep checking the main door for people entering and to verify that the person says who they are. Also, as of right now, this is a completely optional system to parents and visitors. We still have the old way of doing it.

If you don't believe me you can check http://freeholdboro.k12.nj.us/ under district information. My name is listed there.

I hope that answered some of your questions.

[G Money @ Jan 24th 2006 2:37PM]

Poster #9 Osttam you got to be joking right? "Toms River North" has bad things happen to it? You have to ne kidding me? This is probably one of the richest schools in jersey. They have a baseball field that rivals those of Singla A baseball, and didnt they just biuld a basketball arena that would rival most low level D1 schools? Hell its better than Monmouth Universitys Gym. Gimmie a break.

When i say bad stuff i mean real violence, not stolen ipods, or stolen diesel sneakers, or a tuff spikey hair, deep tan, jersey shore guido in training causing a little trouble, and rebelling. Toms River North is probably the best school of all the TR schools. Maybe *Maybe* if you had said south i woulda gave you a little bit of credibility.

[george tempel @ Jan 24th 2006 3:14PM]

DoD grant? Department of DEFENSE? No, probably a DoE grant. It would be deeply disturbing for DoD funds to be applied to elementary schools.

The system scans the iris,which isn't nearly as unique as the retina. Thus, it doesn't provide the security folks would have you believe.

The main office is down the hall and around the corner from the front door. Thus, this system just frees the secretaries at the desks from having to look up at the CCTV image and press the button to unlock the door. This system does NOT prevent "wrong" folks from entering the school, or prevent students from being released to the "wrong" people. In fact, the after school pickup is a bit of a zoon at Park Avenue Elementary, where teachers bring students to the front entrance, try to scan the crowd, and sometimes try to make eye contact to verify a known parent or guardian or authorized individual is present to receive a child. However, often the kids are just flooding out the doors. Thus, this system installed for ENTRY into the school in no way guarantees that children are correctly discharged to the right people. In fact, just a few moments ago, when picking up two children, I witnessed one adult dash into the school's OPEN front doors to use the bathroom without doing the eye scan or signing in at the main office. Additionally, some children are discharged out a side entrance with NO checking for "correct" parent or guardian. Thus, the belief that this system is for security and matching children to adults is fallacious.

While optional at present, there are public plans to make the system "operational". The school does collect digital photos and name/address/personal information when people "register" for the eye scan system, and as discussed a senior school adminstration member did reveal to me that the school is using the information to monitor the hispanic population, which is probably in direct violation of the intended purposes (ie: security).

As for cost coming from the feds, one has to wonder if that covers upkeep and system maintenance, or is that the burden of the local taxpayers who didn't ask for the system in the first place? As this was one of the first plans executed by the superintendent when he arrived from his previous district. It would be very interesting to see facts documenting the effectiveness of such a system, and whether federal and/or local money is being spent wisely and effectively.

[Adam R. @ Jan 24th 2006 3:45PM]

You're right its not DoD, it was Dept. of Justice. I didn't notice that till now. Quick typing got to me.

The system has helped us already, and I will submit that others are entitled to their own opinions, but I can tell you that it a benefit to our security during the school day.

As for your comment about the montioring of the hispanic population, your information is wrong and the "senior school admin. member" is also wrong. And overall, this information will not leave the schools private server, because, as mentioned before, that would violate the grant.

The program runs for 3 years I believe, afterwhich it is the school boards decision to keep the program or not. I'm not sure who takes over the upkeep of the system; whether the company does it and we pay for it, or the DoJ pays for it. I do not have the information infront of me.

[george tempel @ Jan 24th 2006 3:59PM]

Adam R (#23): then you'll need to talk to your staff at Park Avenue Elementary and discuss why they're telling folks such as myself that they find it "interesting" in examining the statistics involving the hispanic population and this system. Your assertion that the "information will not leave the schools [sic] private server" does not address the use of said information.

Yes, proponents and opponents of the system are indeed entitled to opinions, and I've enjoyed our discussion.

[Jordan @ Jan 24th 2006 9:40PM]

Yeah, the only problem I have about this article is "Right after we finish this post, we're immediately withdrawing our kids from their snobby Manhattan private schools in favor of some even better options -- in New Jersey. (Pause. Hold for laughter.)" I totally resent that.

[ezKiel @ Jan 25th 2006 3:08AM]

What an absurd waste of money.

What security does Iris scanning accomplish if you want to get it in easy as "Hey kid let me in or I'll cut you". That money would have served far better elsewhere.

Paranoid 'mericans.

[Dissent @ Jan 25th 2006 3:52AM]

lmao

Adam, are you kidding me?

So if the eye scanner doesnt match for someone, they can just "buzz the office" to be let in?

"Oh hi, im here for Johnny, can i come to the office to check in?"

"Sure! *BZZ*"

*Intruder enters, ignores the office, goes about raping and kidnapping at will*

Dramatized a bit, but really... this is 400 mil that isnt going to do crap to protect kids.

[Trace @ Jan 25th 2006 9:31AM]

I don't think that it is of real benefit to the students, but I can see the interest in having added security. But what about this: Are there any medical implications of scanning the eyeball multiple times every day?

Oh, and people, have you ever written a grant? Most of the time they are for specific things, this one may have been for general security, or even specifically for this programme. If they'd used it for educational purposes they'd have been defaulting on the grant.

Perhaps we Americans should be less interested in a false sense of security (there are still windows that someone could break or friends to let them in anyway) and instead write grants for EDUCATIONAL purpose.

A great American Democrat, FDR, once said, "The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself." We are too afraid of the rest of the world to even think straight. I moved to London in October, and here they have secutrity from the bombings, but life goes on.

[jared @ Jan 25th 2006 3:04PM]

This story is yet another in a long line of sad security stories with the following basic plot:
a) company develops technology of marginal usefulness
b) company hypes utility of technology by showcasing it in a product that plays upon some large population sector's basic fears of {terrorism, drug dealers, child pornographers, kidnappers}
c) self-hyping company catches (or actively seeks) ear of professionally-self-hyping politician
d) ...the great circle of life in the bizpol ecosystem churns; interests mate and give birth to tax dollars...
e) money is wasted on bullshit technology
f) waste is spun as a strategic victory in the war on {terrorists, drug dealers, child pornographers, kidnappers}

agitate, rinse, repeat.

Note the superintendent's assertion that they "had a swipe card system in place, but the technology was obsolete." That's code for "the technology wasn't sufficiently flashy to get my name in the paper."

What ever happened to teaching your kids not to get into a stranger's car? Family passwords?

When parents (and for that matter, children) are taught to trust their safety to an eye scanner, that's exactly the kind of life lesson that leads to stupid decisions in much more dangerous situations later in life.

[Mark @ Jan 26th 2006 8:27PM]

Mattso: We all have to carry forms of ID with us for a number of reasons ... I would feel safe knowing that I have nothing to hide and that someone else might.

Absolutely zero of the reasons we carry ID are for everyday government tracking. I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of why we are opposed to tracking. In the workplace, we don't make handouts of certain proprietary information because once it physically leaves your hands, it leaves your zone of control. Instead, this information is shared in boardroom presentations or one-on-one meetings.

In the old system of school identification, you share your information with the school receptionist and it stops there. In this system, it goes off to a server that's managed by God-knows-who and that has unknown (by the user) security. In the old system, I'm putting faith in the idea that the receptionist is benign. In the new system, I need faith in a) the technology, b) the maintainers of the technology, c) the government officials who own the technology, d) any future government or organization that will forcibly or non-forcibly inherit those files.

Adam R: This is just so that the office doesn't need to keep checking the main door for people entering and to verify that the person says who they are.

In other words, this project is a big, fancy whiz-bang that saves the school no more than 5 minutes worth of effort per day that are probably being used to play Solitaire anyway? With almost nothing to gain from using the system benignly, is there any wonder why people are looking for ulterior motives. Besides, 76% of all kidnappings are by acquaintances or relatives anyway.

The money came from our taxes one way or another. I'm personally peeved that it went to a nigh worthless system instead of, say, towards safer roads and pedestrian access, which would have guaranteed to save the lives of countless more children than kidnapping paranoia.

[Christopher Kidwell @ Feb 7th 2006 9:34PM]

The problem is, that most children are not abducted by strangers, but are abducted by people they know or knew, i.e. mom and dad, grandma and grandpa.
There are EXTREMELY few cases where a student or child is kidnapped by a stranger. Those usually take place on the streets OUTSIDE of school, so who is this really protecting?
There is also a problem, if mom and dad have to send someone who is not on the school's pre-approved list to pick them up, say grandma or grandma, because they are in an accident or can't get ahold of one of the other two people who are approved.
This is a waste of money, a better thing to teach children would be "if someone tries to take you somewhere, and you don't want to go, KICK AND SCREAM LIKE MAD!"
If people would step in when they see something like this happening between a child and adult, and don't automatically say "Oh, it's just a kid being difficult", we wouldn't have all the missing children.

[the best @ Mar 31st 2008 6:53PM]

wow, you are hilarious. not...