On February 17, Superintendent Barry Galasso released a district-wide email mandating that all students have their cameras on during class. This change in policy is just one of the Valley Road administration’s latest moves to shift back to a “normal” school year. The latest camera policy has its warrants; the Princeton Public Schools (PPS) administration reasons that online learning is hard for everyone, especially when one’s camera isn’t on during class. For students, sitting in their rooms during a lesson makes distractions more noticeable. Interruptions like a sudden sound in the house or a text from a friend make it easy to disconnect without the accountability of being on-camera. For teachers, talking to a screen of black tiles is demoralizing and monotonous with no student feedback. However, despite its positive intentions of encouraging more student participation and improving the teaching experience, this latest change fails to take into account one crucial issue: This is not a normal school year. In the process of attempting to move back to “normal” when the global situation and the last semester have been anything but conventional is a drastic oversight of the needs of the district’s student body. Crucially, the latest camera policy ignores the critical negative repercussions it has on the most vulnerable members of the PPS community.

In the policy, Galasso has given students the option to opt out of this camera requirement by having their parents contact the student’s teachers, counselors, and school administrators. However, this option is merely a fig leaf covering the true issue. Many students are reluctant to take so many steps to try to justify their reasoning to their parents, let alone many staff members. They may feel like their reasons for not wanting their camera to be on are not good enough, and simply opt to suffer silently.

Additionally, students that do successfully opt out will be singled out in a class Zoom, signaling to all their peers that they have extenuating circumstances that allow them to turn their cameras off. This exacerbates the already existing problem by directing more attention onto those students as the exception from the rule.

Students have numerous reasons to be uncomfortable or unwilling to turn on their cameras during class. For instance, many students are not comfortable showing their home environments to their classmates or teachers. Although virtual backgrounds are an option, these are rarely used and will flag these students for not wanting to show their homes. Moreover, some students do not have the internet capacity to handle the additional video input that turning on their cameras requires. During the 2018–2019 school year, 12.5% of the student body had family incomes at or below the poverty line. For these students of lower socioeconomic status, lack of access to a stable internet connection should not be a reason they are isolated as the only ones with their cameras off. It is wrong to force these students to either expose what they are uncomfortable with sharing, or label them as being uncomfortable by singling them out as the only students with their cameras off.

Beyond being classist, this policy also targets students with disabilities or other conditions. Many PHS students have chronic conditions that can present during class times, and require time and privacy to handle. Although there are accommodations available to students like 504 plans that allow them to take breaks from class if necessary, these require copious amounts of paperwork as well as official medical diagnoses to be valid. It is extremely difficult to get access to accommodations even if students need them. This lengthy process shouldn’t be necessary if a student needs to take a few minutes with their cameras off for privacy during a panic attack or tic attack.

Even for students who don’t face hardships at home, screen breaks are a necessary component to online learning. With hour-long classes that often run long as well as shortened breaks, students need access to camera breaks during class to use the restroom, get water, or stretch. Paired with the district’s latest moves to increase daily class times, the mandatory camera policy has only further amplified this problem.

The solution to the problem of student engagement is not a strict and official mandate. The solution requires compromise. It is incredibly invasive and overreaching for the district to create this requirement, despite the potential benefits. Instead, a strong recommendation from the district for students to turn on their cameras would suffice, as well as increased participation requirements for students whose cameras are off. For example, the district could ask all students with their cameras off to utilize interactive Zoom functions such as reactions to express their attention. Teachers could also call on students with their cameras off or ask them to verbally participate to increase their engagement with the class and ensure that they are present and learning.

The district’s first priority must always be student wellbeing. The latest stringent camera policy, while positive in intent, fails to recognize the disadvantaged in today’s learning environment. Without this understanding, the district cannot properly carry out its mission and has thus jeopardized its most vulnerable students.