Classroom cameras cause campus controversy

By: Kevin Waltz

Editor-in-Chief

By: Lauren Alford

News Editor

Do you ever feel like you’re being watched? You should. There are hundreds of cameras around campus watching you. They’re in parking lots, hallways, the library and the campus center as well as every other building on campus. As of this summer, you may even be monitored while you learn.

Faculty and students arrived at the science building for the first day of summer session only to find new sets of eyes watching their every move in labs and classrooms.

“It was a Monday morning. Usually when I get here I’m the only person here,” said Chemistry Professor Jeffery Thompson. “When I got here there were already electricians in the halls who were stringing wire. I said ‘what are you guys doing?’ he said ‘well, we’re installing security cameras.’”

Faculty members were not notified of any camera installations prior to the start of both the summer session and the fall semester.

“We weren’t officially told until we saw the wires going in,” said Chemistry Professor Danica Nowosielski. “We were not informed, [and] I don’t think students have been either.” 

She added. “That’s an issue for them as well.”

No official announcement was ever made to students about additional cameras being added inside any science labs or classrooms.

According to Executive Director of Communications and Marketing, Dennis Kennedy, these new cameras are another step in the process of growing the campus network of surveillance cameras.

“We’ve been growing the network of video cameras over 20 years,” said Kennedy “This seemed like the logical next step.”

For faculty, the logical next step was bringing the installation to the attention of the Hudson Valley Community College Faculty Association, who then filed a formal grievance with the college.

According to Robert Whitaker, President of the Faculty Association, the cameras are a violation of their contract with the college.

“We were very concerned,” said Whitaker. “Our contract has very clear language regarding how faculty can be observed in the classroom.” 

He continued, “We’re also concerned with academic freedom, the free exchange of ideas in the classroom, which is essential to teaching and learning.”

Article VII Section B and Article XIII of the Faculty Association’s contract, available on the Hudson Valley Community College website, provides a guarantee of academic freedom in the classrooms as well as regulations as to how faculty can be observed.

“Our responsibility in the Faculty Association is to enforce the terms of the contract and also make sure that our contractual rights were protected,” said Whitaker. “That’s why we felt that it was necessary to bring this forward.”

The Faculty Association and the college are currently in legal arbitration over the cameras.

The primary reasons cited by the college for installations of cameras revolve around the security of lab equipment and lab safety.

“The labs have both high value equipment and hazardous chemicals and materials,” said Kennedy. “Allowing for [camera] usage in labs would provide an expanded safety measure.” 

He added, “We view it as one additional step to keep the campus community safe.”

The cameras that were installed, along with all other security cameras on campus, are monitored by Public Safety. 

“We’re the ones who coordinate all the cameras on campus,” said Director of Public Safety Fred Aliberti. “They’re a great tool for us. They’ve solved a lot of cases and have achieved a lot of prevention just by their mere presence.”

However, many faculty members said they do not believe that the college’s reasoning for the new cameras is strong enough to justify the installation.

“I am vehemently opposed to having cameras in the classroom,” said Thompson. “I think that the important issue here is your privacy as a student.”

“We feel like the problems that the college is pointing to really could be addressed in other ways,” said Whitaker. “There are cameras in hallways, corridors and parking lots. We have no problem with that, but a classroom is a different sort of space.”

There have also been questions as to how effective the cameras will be at achieving lab safety.

“I can understand the security issue and the prevention of theft,” said Nowosielski. “As far as the lab safety, I don’t know that I really think it makes the lab any safer.”

“I’m not quite sure how cameras enhance safety,” said Whitaker. “All they do is just capture an image of what happens.” 

He added, “They don’t actually stop chemicals of being spilled. They don’t stop other sorts of problems.”

Not all faculty are entirely opposed to the new cameras. 

“I’m sort of in the middle,” said Chemistry Professor Michael Shea. “I understand why these cameras are present. I don’t personally have a problem with them.”

Some of the faculty members said they are worried about the rights of students and their expectation of privacy.

“We also have a real concern for the privacy rights of our students,” said Whitaker. “We know that some students don’t want to be filmed and don’t want to be recorded in the classroom, many of them are not comfortable with that.” 

“I firmly believe that you as a student have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the classroom,” said Thompson. “Obviously, the administration at Hudson Valley Community College disagrees.”

Thompson went on to provide an analogy for the situation: You go to a clothing store and you wish to purchase a garment, but you don’t know if it’s going to fit or not. 

“You go into the dressing room and you try the garment on. Should the owner of the store surveil you? Should they have that right? Should there be surveillance cameras in that dressing room?” Thompson asked.

He continued, “Now the owner of the store is going to say, ‘yes I have that right, because I’m suffering tremendous losses as a result of theft.’ and you suggest, ‘no it’s not, because my right to privacy supersedes your right to security.’” 

Thompson added. “I don’t believe that any of these reasons outweigh your right to privacy.”

Students have varying opinions on the installations. One student, who wished to withhold her name, first heard about the cameras from her professors.

“In the beginning of the semester [faculty] told us about it,” she said. “So far none of them like it, especially the audio part.”

One of the biggest contention points is whether or not the cameras have the capability to record audio. 

“They don’t record audio now. Nor do we have the equipment or technology to record the audio,” said Kennedy. “No camera on campus records audio.”

The cameras being installed in classrooms are various models of Pelco. Public Safety further elaborated on the capabilities of the cameras.

“The newer ones do have that potential,” said Aliberti. “We’ve never used that potential, nor have we ever intended to use it.” 

He continued, “They have the capability but they need to be modified in a variety of different ways to be able to record and then store the .”

In order for Public Safety to be able to record audio, the cameras would need to be outfitted with microphones. Public Safety would have to get a new data server to process the audio as well.

For many faculty members, the capability of recording audio at all is problematic for a variety of reasons.

According to Whitaker, this capability is one of the main causes of concern for academic freedom.

“We feel like the placement of a camera and the possibility of recording audio just presents a real chilling effect on that kind of interaction between students, and between students and faculty, that is central to teaching and learning,” said Whitaker. 

As stated by Whitaker, there’s a concern that students may be less comfortable participating in class knowing that they’re being actively monitored.

Student Senate President Zion Sherin said he sees both sides of the argument as legitimate.

“It makes sense that they would want to have cameras [in the labs],” said Sherin. “But then as they discuss the topic, I also understand why individuals would not want to be taped while they’re in the classroom. It can make people feel uncomfortable.”

Sherin also said he understands the faculty’s concern about academic freedom.

“If a student were to express different views that were considered unpopular in a respectful way, I think that the individual should be able to do that,” he said. “Even a professor should be able to do it.” 

Sherin added, “However, I don’t think an individual should feel that the whole world has to know.”

With the discussion of the issues posed by the camera installations, questions have been raised about whether the cameras inside classrooms violate students’ rights guaranteed to them by FERPA.

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) regulates student records, and specifically protects students grades and attendance records.

“There could potentially could be [a FERPA violation] when we’re in lab. I’m sitting there grading while the students are working and that camera is looking over my shoulder,” said Nowosielski. 

She explained, “It’s one thing for me to see the grades. I’m a faculty member. I’m allowed to. But whoever’s looking at that footage? There potentially could be a FERPA violation.”

However, the Faculty Association have not raised FERPA as an issue.

“We’ve been advised legally that we do not have the standing to bring a FERPA action against the college. Only students can do that,” Whitaker explained. 

Whitaker said faculty are very concerned about student rights. 

“We think that is something the college should pay very close attention to and be very concerned about, but legally that’s not something that we can try and enforce,” he explained.

Shea, who describes himself as in the middle on the issue, is concerned about the possibility of the cameras seeing his computer. According to Shea, the cameras in the Science Center labs are positioned directly above his lab bench in the front of the room. 

“Sometimes students will ask, ‘Dr. Shea, how did I do on that exam yesterday?’ So of course I type in my HVCC password and open my Excel files so that I can provide the student their score,” Shea said. 

He continued, “Therein lies my concern as I do not know how this camera feed is being used or who is viewing it. I do not want my username or password on the feed, and I do not want my students grades on the feed.”

Though many questions have been raised about the legality of the camera installations, that hasn’t stopped students from developing their own opinions.

Miranda Pleasant, a human biology major, who learned about the cameras in the moments prior to commenting, said she is in support of the installations in classrooms and labs.

“I don’t have any issue with it,” Pleasant said. “I think it’s great for educational purposes to see how the students in the lab work with lab materials, their teachers and their partners. I think it’s a great way to see how classes are being led and taught.” 

Pleasant said she was surprised that labs and classrooms didn’t already have cameras.

“I don’t think them recording us has anything to do with our education. It has more to do with safety standards,” said an anonymous polysomnography major.

Lab safety is another debated issue. There are concerns as to how effective a camera will be at preventing and handling accidents in a lab, further calling their necessity into question.

“I think they’re there to protect students mostly though, like in the case of an acid spill. To see if a professor put students in harm,” said an anonymous student.

“We had a lot of people falling or having some type of [medical] episode,” said Aliberti. “Another incident that was mentioned occurred, some chemical spill or whatever it was that [happened] there. I just put that all in the totality of everything that we were experiencing there.”

According to faculty, one incident that was cited as a reason for the cameras was a chemical spill in one of the labs last summer.

“I have been aware of [the chemical spill], but it wasn’t reported to us,” said Aliberti. “It would be a good thing for something like that to be reported to us. Normally that’s the case.” 

Alberti said he doesn’t know why that incident was not officially reported to Public Safety. He said the spill was dealt with through Human Resources.

Many said the responsibility of lab safety and supervision should fall on the faculty.

According to Whitaker, faculty feel that with their presence in the lab directly supervising and assisting students, there are other measures that can be taken to promote safety and minimize theft that don’t require putting cameras in all these areas. 

“We have a contract that states very clearly when and how we can be observed in the course of doing our jobs and we think that right needs to be protected,” Whitaker explained.

Sherin also said he is concerned about potential changes in how teachers are observed.

“We should be doing more on asking students how our professors are performing instead of by essentially spying on the faculty,” said Sherin. 

He clarified, “I don’t mean that the administration would be doing it in a malicious way, I just mean that you’re looking in on them without them knowing it.”

For Hudson Valley Community College, one question remains: When does surveillance go too far?

As faculty and the college fight over the fate of classroom cameras, Thompson has a suggestion for the college.

“We should rename [the Science Building]. We don’t have a name on this building. Most of the buildings on campus, they have a name associated with them. This is just the Science Building,” he said. 

Thompson continued, “I think we’re going to rename this the George Orwell Science Building, what do you think?”