近距离内射合集

Last month, I asked Albuquerque Public Schools if families could opt out of having their children鈥檚 voices recorded by Amira, the artificial intelligence-powered reading assessment app now used in New Mexico classrooms. I wasn鈥檛 asking to skip the assessment itself 鈥� only the AI voice recording.

After waiting nearly three weeks, being connected with four administrators and sending a follow-up email, I received an answer.

The response? If I opted out of AI voice capture, my child would have to opt out of the reading assessment entirely, even though alternatives exist. But APS parents aren鈥檛 given these options.

Think about that. APS parents are being told their only choices are AI voice recording or no assessment.

This isn't about being anti-technology. It's about consent. It's about privacy. It's about whether tech companies should have access to our children's data 鈥� their voices, their reading patterns, their mistakes 鈥� without meaningful parental choice. And it鈥檚 about transparency from APS. In conversations with other parents, I found many had no idea their children鈥檚 voices were being recorded.

Here's what we know: Amira collects student data, including voice recordings, and stores it on an Amazon Web Services cloud. Amira says school districts maintain control over student data. But APS parents aren鈥檛 told how our children鈥檚 data is handled. We aren鈥檛 told how long the data is kept or what happens if there鈥檚 a data breach.

Instead, the opt-out procedure implies that questioning AI makes you difficult. Parents must complete a 鈥淧arental Refusal Form鈥� to indicate the assessments they are 鈥渞efusing.鈥� There is no option to opt out of only voice recording 鈥� just entire assessments. Signing the form indicates that you discussed the refusal with an administrator and you understand "the consequences that refusing student participation may have for your student, your student's teacher, and your student's school." This language may discourage families from asking questions or exercising their options. It also raises an obvious question: What consequences are parents expected to consider before exercising this choice concerning their child's education?

The lack of alternatives matters even more given questions about the accuracy of test results. Many parents and teachers have raised concerns that AI-based assessments may not accurately capture their students鈥� abilities, particularly those with speech differences, accents or communication-related disabilities. I鈥檝e seen this firsthand with my own child: Results from AI-proctored assessments don鈥檛 match those from teacher-graded, in-person assessments. If district instruction and progress tracking rely on assessment data, the district needs local evidence that the results accurately measure student performance.

Although Amira cites research supporting its effectiveness, this work is largely conducted, funded or commissioned by the company itself. Districts and parents should call for more independent, peer-reviewed evaluations of how AI tools like this one perform across diverse student populations.

APS appears to be moving quickly toward AI adoption, while important questions about transparency, parental choice and oversight remain unresolved. AI may well have an important place in education. But parents should not have to choose between their children鈥檚 privacy and their children鈥檚 assessment. APS can do better. It can proactively provide clear information and practical alternatives. Most importantly, it can ensure families remain partners 鈥� not bystanders 鈥� as new technologies enter our classrooms.

Lisa Marchiondo is the parent of children at Albuquerque Public Schools and an associate professor of management at The James & Gail Ellis School of Business Leadership at the University of New Mexico.