Smart glasses and other wearable technologies were banned from Cambridge Public Schools by a policy order passed Tuesday by the School Committee. The committee also discussed guidelines for screen time and artificial intelligence.
Smart glasses – which can subtly record what the viewer looks at and privately show the user information from the Internet – have grown in use since the company Meta released its first pair with built-in AI in 2023.
They have been nicknamed “pervert glasses” due to frequent reports of wearers recording young women without consent and posting the video to social media platforms. Member Richard Harding said this happened to his daughter at a festival, saying “it was disgusting.”
The order about smart glasses by members Arjun Jaikumar and Luisa de Paula Santos and vice chair Caitlin Dube also condemned the devices for being able to “provide access to technology or information that could be used to compromise the integrity of in-class examinations, quizzes, assignments or other academic activities.”
Member Elizabeth Hudson brought up concerns of redundancy: The technology is already prohibited in the Cambridge Rindge and Latin School student handbook, and recording without consent is a felony in Massachusetts.
Having a districtwide policy expands the restrictions to elementary and upper schools and allows the district to issue its own consequences, rather than involving law enforcement, Jaikumar said.
Smart glasses weren’t named as an existing student discipline problem. The order was a starting point to guard against abuses as the technology is developed and studied, Jaikumar said.
“I would view this as a preventative measure,” Jaikumar said, “an opportunity for us to put a stake in the ground to, as a district, examine a tech that is not currently an issue and develop guidelines and a philosophy before it’s an issue.”
Superintendent David Murphy approved the approach. “I see this as striking the necessary balance and providing the administration with the discretion that we would most definitely need to respond to specific situations,” he said.
With an amendment by Hudson to include other types of wearable technology and recording devices, all members voted in favor of the order. Students who need the technology for a disability or medical reason are exempt from the rule with written permission from the superintendent.
Other tech
The committee had more concerns surrounding technology and AI. In May, the district released a report on academic screen time, with insights from elementary and upper school classroom observations, student and educator feedback and data from the Chromebook computers issued to students. Based on this report, the district came up with guidelines for screen time and technology for the 2026-2027 school year that include “limited individual device use” for younger grades, “no devices as rewards or free choice,” prohibiting the use of generative AI in grades K-5 and “evening boundaries for digital homework,” among others.
Much of the discussion focused on finding a balance between using technology as a tool in the classroom and harm from excessive use. “We understand that technology is not something that we can be afraid of, that it is an ubiquitous presence in our lives to some degree. But we understand that if not harnessed properly, some of the technologies that have developed in recent years pose the risk of diminishing the fundamental work that we do, which is to expand students’ capacity and to impart abilities, skills and knowledge that they will need to operate in the world.” Murphy said.
