How Facial Recognition Technology Could Change College Campuses Completely

By Evan Greer and Evan Selinger


People mention kids these days don’t care about privacy. Yet they are wrong. Just because TikTok videos and Instagram selfies are popular doesn’t mean privacy is dead.


Young people around the world are setting boundaries for their statistics and protecting their right to privacy. Last week, backlash from students forced UCLA to drop its controversial plan to be one of the initial major universities In the
U.S. To use facial recognition surveillance to scan and analyze the faces of each person on campus. And once students at Oakland Community College were initially told by administrators they weren’t allowed to hold a forum on campus to talk about the school’s potential use of face surveillance, the school caved under pressure right after students and activists raised First Amendment concerns.


These victories are segment of a growing movement to prevent a Orwellian technology from turning the college experience into a Black Mirror episode. More than 50 famed institutions of higher learning, including Harvard, MIT, University of Michigan, and Columbia, have taken a stand for their students’ generic rights by confirming that they have no plans to use facial recognition technology on their campuses. However dozens of other schools have refused to answer even generic questions about whether or not they’re considering trial and error with face surveillance or using it on their campus population.


Corporations hoping to create a ton of cash selling facial recognition software are aggressively marketing it to schools. They make all kinds of claims about expected advantages in their pitch: everything from deterring crime to busting students for smoking and preventing potential school shootings.


Don’t believe the hype or fall for the misguided conviction that meager gains are worth the terrible charges for acquiring them. In reality, facial recognition systems make campuses far less safe, a lesson high schools are learning the hard way. While appeals to preventing “the next Parkland” are emotionally hard-hitting, and while installing facial recognition systems might seem to be a sound proactive measure, the facts suggest otherwise. Simple techno-fixes aren’t going to be effective, and facial recognition technology can make schools feel more like prisons, even for marginalized students who already feel watched at every turn.


Imagine walking down the quad on your way to class stressing about a test any time you’re suddenly swarmed by armed police or campus safety because a facial recognition algorithm falsely matched you with someone else who was entered into a non-transparent watch list. Or getting locked out of your dorm in rain as the camera that scans your face for entry didn’t recognize you. Sure, it may be inconvenient to bring a meal card or wallet to the cafeteria, nevertheless wouldn’t it be worse to get charged for another student’s purchases if an automated payment system, which often don’t account for racist generalizations, determines you look the same? Or for hackers to sell a stolen database of everyone’s face scans, including yours?

Even in case you trust your campus administration to use the technology responsibly, abuse is inevitable. AI firms that are in the facial recognition technology corporation tell us that “data breaches are a segment of life” and history has shown that policies against misusing surveillance technology aren’t infallible. What occurs any time whenever a criminal, a law enforcement business, or just a straight-up stalker gains access to the system?


And the U.S. Government’s own studies show that commercial-grade facial recognition software exhibits systemic racial and gender bias. You’re way more likely to get screwed over by the software if you’re a student of color, a woman, or transgender. Implementing this technology on college campuses will automate and exacerbate existing discrimination within academic institutions and the criminal justice system. For students of color, and LGBTQ+ students, the impacts of facial recognition would be deadly, or land an innocent person in jail.


We have no idea what the long term psychological impacts of experimenting on students with this technology is, nevertheless we can guess: Students who are under constant surveillance will be further stressed out, and the anxiety can compromise academic efficiency and in general wellness.


Well-intentioned administrators and teachers might believe that limiting the use of facial recognition technology to non-threatening situations might mitigate those risks — think about the advantages of speeding up lines at big campus events or taking attendance in large lecture halls. Unfortunately, as the pushback against facial recognition technology at concerts demonstrates, there’s no such thing as a truly safe way to deploy facial recognition technology. “A future where we are always subjected to corporate and government surveillance isn't inevitable,” Tom Morello of Rage Against the Machine wrote for BuzzFeed, “but it’s coming fast unless we act now.”


Given the several ways the technology can be used and the ease of adding its functions to existing cameras, any deployment will normalize the practice of handing our sensitive biometric statistics over to private institutions just to get an education. Indeed, some educators are using facial recognition technology to infer students’ emotions to decide things like whether they find material engaging or boring. However facial characterization tends to be underwritten by junk science and integrating it into education risks dehumanizing students and favoring overly-reductive approaches to teaching. Frankly, students can routinely be taught and assessed in far less privacy-invasive ways.


Some facial recognition proponents claim the big problems will go away once the technology improves. This isn’t true. If facial surveillance ever works flawlessly, it will be even more dangerous. Once students can be tracked everywhere they go, they’ll be anxious about exercising free speech and free association — whether it’s meeting up to discuss controversial ideas or organizing a protest. Indeed, the mere prospect of widespread facial surveillance will have a chilling effect on campus expression. Students who are afraid to be themselves and express themselves will pull back from important possibilities to experience intellectual growth and self-development — and students from marginalized communities will be the most affected.


Facial recognition technology is uniquely dangerous. That’s why thousands of students, faculty, and alumni have joined a campaign launched by Fight for the Future and Students for a Sensible Drug Policy calling on administrators to ban the use of this technology for campus surveillance. Groups like the ACLU, Mijente, Color of Change, and the National Center for Transgender Equality endorsed it, also. Students across the nation are planning a national day of action on March 2, and it’s easy to get involved.


Facial recognition technology isn’t widely used on college campuses however. Let’s keep it that way.


Evan Greer is the Deputy Director of Fight for the Future.


Evan Selinger is a Professor of Philosophy at Rochester Institute of Technology.