JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

A growing number of U.S. schools are implementing commercially available social media surveillance (SMS) of students in an effort to address youth mental health and school safety. Although SMS technology is increasingly being purchased and used by schools, little is known about how it is perceived by stakeholders, including the students whom it purportedly aims to help.

Objective:

This study assessed attitudes toward SMS in schools among four stakeholder groups, and examined the reasons given for holding supportive, neutral, or unsupportive views toward the technology. A secondary aim was to explore differences in attitudes as a function of gender, race/ethnicity, and sexual orientation and gender identity.

Methods:

During October 2019, we conducted a web-based survey of young adults (ages 18-22 years; n=206), parents (n=205), teachers (n=77), and school administrators (n=41) via Qualtrics online panels. The survey had closed-ended, Likert-type survey items to assess perceived benefits, risks, and overall support of SMS in schools, as well as open-ended items that allowed respondents to answer in their own words. We used analysis of covariance to test for differences between the four stakeholder groups on the closed-ended survey items. Using a convergent, parallel mixed-methods design, we also conducted thematic content analysis of open-ended responses to qualitatively examine the reasons for holding supportive, neutral, or unsupportive views across stakeholder groups.

Results:

Tests of group differences on closed-ended questions showed that young adults perceived lower benefit (p<.001), higher risk (p<.001), and expressed lower overall support (p<.001) of the use of SMS in schools relative to all other stakeholder groups. In addition, individuals identifying as non-heterosexual also perceived lower benefit (p=.002), higher risk (p=.02), and expressed lower overall support (p=.02) relative to their heterosexual counterparts; non-White identifying respondents also perceived higher risk (p=.04) relative to their White counterparts. Qualitative thematic analysis revealed similar themes across stakeholder groups and within levels of overall support. Specifically, individuals in every stakeholder group who indicated overall support of SMS were likely to cite enhanced school safety as the reason. Individuals who were unsupportive, however, raised a variety of concerns, including skepticism about the utility of SMS, perceived privacy violations, and fears of inappropriate or discriminatory use of data. Young adults also raised concerns about the erosion of trust between students and school institutions/administrators and the chronic adverse effects of constant or prolonged surveillance.

Conclusions:

There has been little discussion or evaluation of the growing use of SMS technologies in schools. While this study of stakeholder views takes one step in this direction, further work is needed to enhance awareness and understanding of these technologies and their potential consequences. Failure to do so could erode trust between educational institutions and the groups they aim to serve, including students and parents.