Scanning student homes during remote testing is unconstitutional, judge says

Expand Jeff Greenberg / Contributor | Universal Image Group

As the pandemic unfolded in the spring of 2020, an Educause survey found that increasing numbers of students – who had little choice but to take tests at distance - increasingly supported potential invasions of school privacy. Two years later, for example, it is considered standard practice for some schools to record students throughout remote testing to prevent cheating, while others conduct room scans at the start of the test. /p>

Now, in an apparent victory for the privacy of students around the world, an Ohio judge has ruled that this latest practice of scanning rooms is not just an invasion of privacy, but a violation of Fourth Amendment protection against unlawful searches of American homes.< /p>

The decision came after Cleveland State University student Aaron Ogletree agreed to perform a room scan before a chemistry exam, even though his professor had changed his policy and that he did not expect this to happen before the exam. Because there were other people at his house, he took the test in his bedroom, where he says he has sensitive tax documents spread out on a surface. These confidential documents, he claimed, could not be moved before the test and were visible in the room scan record, which was shared with other students.

After the test, Ogletree sued the state of Cleveland for violating his Fourth Amendment rights, and Ohio Judge J. Philip Calabrese yesterday ruled that Ogletree was right: the scans parts are unconstitutional.

Prior to the ruling, the state of Cleveland defended its practice of digitizing bedrooms, saying it had become common during the pandemic and, therefore, more socially acceptable.

Under the Fourth Amendment, only unreasonable searches are protected, and the university did not consider their room scans to be unreasonable. Part of the school's logic was that Ogletree knew there would be a scan of the room and was not pressured to scan his room. They say he could also have prepared to remove all sensitive documents from the room or simply chose to take the test in another room. The university claimed that room scans were considered so universally harmless by students that no one had ever complained about the practice before Ogletree.

Calabrese did not accept this defense, partly because "scans of the rooms go where people otherwise wouldn't" - such as Ogletree's bedroom - and partly because the house has always been considered a central protected space where privacy could reasonably be assumed in the United States.

“While schools may routinely use remote technology to scan homes without objection from some, most, or nearly all students, it does not follow that others will not object to virtual intrusion into their homes or that the systematic use of any of the practices such as room scans does not violate a right to privacy that society agrees is reasonable, both factually and legally,” Calabrese wrote.

A Cleveland State spokesperson provided Ars with this statement: "As requested by the Court, counsel for Cleveland State University will speak with counsel for Mr. Ogletree on appropriate next steps. Ensuring academic integrity is critical to our mission and will guide us as we move forward. While this matter is the subject of active litigation, we are unable to comment further."

Are remote analytics on a slippery slope to more illegal research?

Calabrese's decision boiled down to what the law considered reasonable for schools trying to prevent cheating.

Ultimately, since Cleveland State used unevenly room scans - they are optional at teachers' discretion - and the school had various other methods to combat cheating, the judge said the room scans could not be considered a justified invasion of privacy. He also said that because the pandemic and Ogletree's family health issues were preventing the student from accessing other options like in-person testing, any student "who valued privacy" would have to sacrifice the right to privacy at home to stay registered. This benefit, unlike the loss of benefits from social support programs without the approval of a state housing search...