Some district leaders say they’ve been inundated with huge data requests that appear politically motivated and can be massively expensive and difficult to decipher. At least one school board has asked lawmakers to help slow a “runaway train.”

In general open governance is good. These requests look silly at the same time, e.g. asking about CRT. At the same same time,

The Owatonna People’s Press last month reported the Owatonna school district spent $300,000 to fulfill a data request related to an equity plan and assessment and a word search of district correspondence containing words and phrases such as “Black Lives Matter,” “systemic racism” and “critical race theory.”

It’s crazy that it cost $300k to do that. I think ideally, requests like this wouldn’t be an issue even if they’re not really in good faith, because responding to them would take someone a few button clicks.

    • m_f@midwest.socialOPM
      2·
      14 days ago

      I’m a little unclear on what exactly the work Owatonna had to do for the request mentioned for them. Other school districts mention doing more than just a keyword search, but what exactly is involved with “fulfill a data request related to an equity plan and assessment and a word search of district correspondence”. The article they linked to has no additional information, or my adblocker is too aggressive. It shows people with piles of paper, but why are they printing all that out like that in the first place?

      LLMs would actually make it very easy to address some of the issues, like this:

      “Literally, they wanted, for instance, a review of every course with, quote, ‘a sociological theme for issues of equity.’ That’s not a keyword search,” Pekel said.

      They’re pretty good at taking in text and spitting out answers to questions like “Does this text address theme X?”. Though when legal gets involved, maybe it requires a person to blame if a document gets missed.