North Penn could consider cameras in classrooms

A request that North Penn School District parents have made repeatedly in recent years has gained momentum in recent weeks thanks to a nearby court case.

Could the school district consider adding cameras to some classrooms? And if so, how — and how soon?

“It’s been years now, where certain members of our community have been advocating for cameras in classrooms; some people advocate for cameras in classrooms at large, and others more recently are advocating for cameras in classrooms where non-verbal students spend most of their day,” said Superintendent Todd Bauer.

“We really want to fully understand the scope of the ask, and the process if we move in this direction,” he said.

During the pandemic of 2020-21, some parents called for cameras in district classrooms due to concerns over classroom exercises and the content of certain books that have sparked nationwide debate about whether they’re appropriate for classrooms.

More recently, several parents made public comments to the board in March, asking staff to consider adding cameras in special education classroom, in light of a case in the Central Bucks School District where the district superintendent has been put on leave amid allegations that a teacher and aide abused and neglected nonverbal children at an elementary school and administrators misled investigators.

“Many students in special education face communication disorders, speech delays and other challenges, making it extremely difficult and often impossible for them to express their daily experiences, or share how they are treated at school,” said one parent who made the case for cameras in March.

“When any individual is unable to advocate for themselves, it creates significant gaps and uncertainty. By incorporating cameras in special education classrooms, we can bridge these gaps, and protect the rights of both students and teachers. The use of these cameras will not only foster a safer learning environment, but also enhance teaching practices, and help clarify any disputes that may arise,” the parent said. Several other parents made similar comments in both the March and April board meetings.

On Monday night, Bauer told the board’s safe schools committee that he and staff have met with those parents and heard their concerns.

“We have cameras throughout the school district, in all communal places — most hallways if not all, large spaces like gyms, auditoriums, external cameras, where kids drop off, parking lots. There are plenty of surveillance cameras around the school district, but we do not have cameras in academic spaces,” Bauer said.

“It’s my understanding that cameras in schools cannot have audio, due to the PA wiretap law and some of the privacy restrictions. We can have audio on buses, so our cameras on all of our buses do have audio, but cameras in our schools do not,” he said.

Administrators, working with the district’s solicitor, have started developing a to-do list of questions that would need to be addressed and answered, looking at states where laws allowing such cameras are in place, and starting with a goal of installing cameras in classrooms where nonverbal students spend most of their school day.

What does it look like?

“If we’re going to move in this direction, what does it look like? There are obvious questions: cost, how many classrooms are we talking, how many cameras are we talking, how much network space, how much power, how much manual labor to install, all those things. Certainly we don’t want cost to be a limiter in us providing a safe environment, but it’s part of the conversation,” he said.

District facilities staff are working with the special education department to identify how many classrooms could need such cameras, and what hardware and software would be needed to install them, the superintendent told the board. Staff have also held early meetings with employee groups, including the district teacher and support staff unions, to begin to raise the issue.

“Everyone has been very collaborative. I’m not saying everyone is gung-ho in favor, but everyone understands both sides of the discussion,” Bauer said.

“Some people think there should be an expectation of privacy in a classroom. It is not common for most people to have a camera watching them work all day every day. It is definitely not normal. And I’m not aware of a district in Pennsylvania that does this. But that has never stopped us before,” he said.

Solicitor Kyle Somers added several other questions that would need to be addressed, since no state law is in place now spelling out how to do such cameras: what if a parent declines to participate? What if state laws change or court cases cause changes elsewhere? And who would have access to such video?

“One law that comes to mind is the right-to-know law. There’s been no one who has said, ‘We have a desire for these videos to be streamed publicly,’ or for parents to be logging in and watching all day long, or the district to be constantly viewing these videos. They should be available in case something happens, in case there’s a concern, in case there’s a report of something,” Somers said.

Legal changes needed?

Once such recordings have been made, would they be subject to right-to-know requests, similar to school bus camera footage? If so, would the video need to be modified or otherwise processed to protect student identities?

“There are different outcomes in some (cases), including that in at least one case, a video from a school bus needed to be provided, but the school needed to redact all of the images of the faces of the students. That’s something that, if we’d have to be doing on a regular basis, there would potentially be significant costs,” Somers said.

Legislation exempting such videos from right-to-know requests statewide could answer some of those questions, the attorney added, and the board could choose to contact local lawmakers to urge such laws. Would such recording also become part of student files or records? And would they run afoul of legislation meant to protect student or staff privacy? All questions that need to be answered, the attorney said.

“What kind of environment does it create, having a camera? Or does it not change anything at all? Those are some of the considerations — not necessarily bars, but things for everyone to think about as we move forward,” Somers said.

Bauer added another consideration: what if such a student is in multiple classrooms in a day?

“If you think about a high school schedule, a student with a six-day cycle, with eight periods a day, a student may have 15 classes. So, are we putting cameras in all 15 classes? The legislation (in other states) read, ‘Where any nonverbal student spends more than 50 percent of their day,’” Bauer said.

District-level rules, and/or any state law, could also specify who would have access to such video, limiting access to certain administrators only, and/or security staff.

“We have someone sitting at a security desk at the high school, where there’s dozens of cameras up and someone is watching those cameras. That would not be the case in this type of situation. It’s a resource that’s there in the event we need to reference it,” Bauer said.

“When my dog was a puppy, I could actually log in and look in to see how Duke was doing (at the day care). It is not that type of environment, where someone could log in at any time during the school day. It would be a closed circuit, a resource if necessary,” he said.

How soon, and how many?

Board President Cathy McMurtrie asked when and how district staff and the attorney would begin answering those questions, and Somers said that’s part of what staff are still discussing and can present to the public via various board committees as they learn more.

“There are a number of items that we’ll have to make sure we’ve thought of. Those aren’t necessarily conversations that would come before the board, but they are things we certainly need to think about,” he said.

Bauer said his tentative plan is to present in more detail to the full school board and public in June or July, and next steps could follow quickly, with some cameras possible as soon as the start of the next schoolyear.

“If we move forward, is this something we could pull off for the fall? I think we could pilot it in a few classrooms in the fall. If we’re talking 50 or 60, that might be a big lift, when we already have a summer planned of other projects, but I do think we could start on a small scale,” he said.

Committee chairman Jonathan Kassa said he’s also heard from parents, and he is looking forward to seeing the rules and regulations put on paper and talks continue with local lawmakers on any changes needed at the state level.

“We’ve already had some discussion with some local electeds, just to make sure that they’re aware of it, and so we can learn what might be happening in the state house,” he said.

Only one public comment was fielded by the committee, from resident Jason Lanier, who asked if the district could  post publicly the policies for parents announcing which classrooms have cameras operational and said he thought recordings could also help shed light on student discipline issues.

“It would be a good way of resolving a lot of questions, and things that I’ve talked to teachers about, which they tell me goes on on a regular basis. They don’t want to come forward, but they tell me kids are acting out, and if this is recorded, then it can be addressed, and there’s no problem understanding what exactly happened in a classroom,” Lanier said.

North Penn’s school board next meets at 7 p.m. on May 6 and 15 and the safe schools committee next meets at 5:45 p.m. on May 27. For more information visit www.NPenn.org.

This article appears courtesy of a content share agreement between North Penn Now and The Reporter. To read more stories like this, visit https://www.thereporteronline.com