Universities Hiring Students As Spies: Ethical Or Not?

Do universities hire students to spy? The short answer is yes, but it's a little more complicated than that. While universities may not directly employ students to spy on their peers, there have been instances where universities have been accused of encouraging staff, including cleaners and catering personnel, to keep an eye on students and report any suspicious behaviour. This was particularly prevalent following the implementation of the UK government's Prevent strategy, which aimed to combat radicalisation on university campuses.

In addition, universities have been known to utilise surveillance software to monitor student engagement, particularly during the remote learning era brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. This software can track various aspects of a student's academic life, including attendance, library visits, and interactions with virtual learning environments.

However, the most common form of student spying in universities may be through the recruitment of students by intelligence agencies. Agencies such as the CIA and FBI in the United States have been known to recruit students for espionage activities, both domestically and abroad.

So, while universities may not explicitly hire students to spy, there are certainly elements of student life that are subject to surveillance and monitoring, whether by the institutions themselves or external organisations.

• Learning analytics tools
• Monitoring of website visits | | Surveillance targets | - Students' attendance at lectures, library visits, etc.
• Students' engagement with their studies
• Students' website visits | | Reasons for surveillance | - To monitor students' academic progress and provide support
• To identify students at risk of radicalisation or mental health issues | | Concerns | - Lack of transparency and oversight
• Potential invasion of privacy and data misuse
• Creation of false assumptions about students |

International espionage

Universities have become a hotbed for international espionage, with foreign spy agencies actively recruiting students and faculty members, and using campuses as a cover for intelligence-gathering operations. This phenomenon is not new, but it has evolved and intensified in recent years, driven by two main factors: the growing intimacy between intelligence agencies and academia, and the globalisation of higher education.

A Breeding Ground for Espionage

Spy agencies view universities as prime recruiting grounds, as individuals in their late teens and early twenties tend to be more pliable and susceptible to manipulation. Campuses provide the perfect environment for foreigners and locals alike to gather intelligence. Spies can easily slip into lectures, seminars, and social events, befriend individuals with access to sensitive information, and cultivate them as assets.

A notable example of this was the case of Kenneth Moskow, a top CIA spy who enrolled undercover in Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. He gained access to a network of up-and-coming individuals from around the world, whom he could potentially cultivate as sources of information or recruit as agents.

Intelligence Agencies Infiltrating Campuses

Intelligence agencies from countries like China, Russia, and Cuba are actively recruiting students and faculty members at American universities. They seek individuals who can provide insights into US policy, access sensitive research, or attain high-level government positions in the future. In turn, US agencies like the FBI and CIA recruit international students and send them back to their home countries as American agents.

This reciprocal espionage was illustrated in the case of a professor at a top-tier American university. In 2010, he was approached by a Russian intelligence officer posing as a diplomat. The FBI encouraged the professor to maintain contact, and he became a double agent, receiving gifts and payments from the Russian while sharing information with the FBI.

Academic Espionage in the Digital Age

With the rise of remote learning, universities have increasingly turned to surveillance software to monitor student engagement. While this is often justified as a means to ensure attendance and provide support, it raises concerns about student privacy and the potential for data misuse. Universities collect vast amounts of data on student activities, including attendance, library usage, and interactions with learning platforms.

Some universities have implemented automated systems that notify students of low engagement or contact them through student support advisors. While this may seem innocuous, there are fears that it could lead to data-driven demands and intrusive monitoring of student behaviour. Additionally, there is a risk that student data could be sold to third parties or misused by universities themselves.

Universities have become a battleground for international espionage, with spy agencies exploiting the academic environment to recruit assets and gather intelligence. While this is not a new phenomenon, the digital age has introduced new tools and methods for surveillance and intelligence gathering. As universities strive to balance student support and privacy, the line between monitoring and surveillance becomes increasingly blurred.

FBI and CIA recruitment

According to Daniel Golden's book, Spy Schools: How the CIA, FBI, and Foreign Intelligence Secretly Exploit America's Universities, US universities have become a hotbed for espionage activities, with foreign spy agencies from Russia, China, and Cuba vying for recruits. The FBI and CIA are also known to recruit from these institutions, targeting international students and faculty.

The CIA and FBI view universities as prime recruitment grounds, especially for young and impressionable individuals who can be easily manipulated. This practice is not new, and in the post-9/11 world, the relationship between US intelligence agencies and academia has only grown stronger, with agencies actively engaging with universities to foster dialogue and open doors for recruitment.

The CIA, for example, offers a range of student programs, including internships, co-operative education, and scholarship opportunities. These programs are designed to provide students with hands-on experience in intelligence work while also allowing the agency to identify and recruit talented individuals. The CIA's Directorate of Analysis offers fellowships for undergraduate and graduate students attending Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs), spanning various disciplines such as cyber threat analysis, political analysis, and science and technology analysis.

The CIA also provides financial assistance through the Stokes Scholarship Program, which offers tuition assistance of up to $25,000 per academic year for STEM majors and $18,000 for non-STEM majors. In return, scholars must sign a Continued Service Agreement to work at the CIA for a specified period.

The CIA's recruitment efforts also extend to prestigious universities like Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, where CIA officers enroll undercover to gain access to influential individuals from around the world. While they are cautioned against formal recruitment, they can cultivate potential informants through casual interactions, leveraging the camaraderie and connections formed during their time as students.

The FBI, on the other hand, has been known to visit international students, with 31% of staff at US universities reporting FBI visits within a year. While the FBI's recruitment strategies may be less overt than those of the CIA, they nonetheless recognize the value of universities as a source of potential agents and informants.

Both the FBI and CIA exploit the traditional academic ideals of transparency and independent scholarship, taking advantage of the global nature of higher education to further their intelligence-gathering objectives.

Academic spying

Universities have been accused of spying on their students in a variety of ways. In the UK, universities have been using surveillance software to monitor students' engagement with their studies. This includes tracking attendance at lectures, library visits, and the use of learning materials. Such monitoring has been justified as a way to identify and support students who may be struggling with their studies. However, critics argue that it invades students' privacy and may create false assumptions about their performance and well-being.

Some universities have also introduced training schemes for staff to spot students at risk of radicalisation. As part of the UK government's Prevent strategy, cleaners and catering staff at London South Bank University (LSBU) have been asked to report any signs of radicalisation among students. While the university advises against making assumptions based solely on outward appearances or religious affiliation, critics argue that the definition of radicalisation is vague and that such surveillance undermines the purpose of higher education, which should allow students to explore different ideological perspectives without fear of scrutiny.

In addition to monitoring by the university itself, external intelligence agencies have been known to recruit students and faculty members for espionage purposes. According to Daniel Golden's book, "Spy Schools", both foreign and domestic spy agencies view universities as prime recruiting grounds, especially in the context of globalised higher education. International students and faculty members may be targeted by their own governments or by the host country's intelligence agencies. In the US, for example, the FBI and CIA have been known to develop sources among international students and send them back to their home countries as American agents.

Universities have also been implicated in espionage activities through the theft of sensitive research. In one case, a Chinese graduate student at Duke University accessed Pentagon-funded research on invisibility and metamaterials without authorisation. While the student denied any wrongdoing, the incident highlights the potential vulnerabilities within academic institutions and the value of intellectual property in the context of international espionage.

Surveillance software

Universities are increasingly using surveillance software to monitor students, with the Covid-19 pandemic and shift to remote learning accelerating this trend. In the US, at least 27 universities are using tracking software to monitor student engagement, including what lectures they attend, what books they take out of the library, and their attendance at seminars and workshops.

Examples of Surveillance Software

• Solutionpath Stream – used by the University of the West of England (UWE), this system tracks how often students log on to their virtual learning environment, whether they click on any content, hand in work, take out books, access journals, view reading lists, print, scan or photocopy documents, and log on to university computers.
• Avigilon – video analytics technology used by Grand Valley State University.
• Rave Guardian – an app that advertises itself as a safety tool for students, allowing them to make anonymous tips to the police and share their location in an emergency. However, it continuously runs GPS location tracking, even when the app isn't open.
• SpotterEDU – an app used by the University of Georgia to track the attendance of student athletes using a Bluetooth beacon installed in the classroom.
• LiveSafe/Safe Walk – apps that use GPS tracking to allow students to virtually walk their friends home.
• Exposure Notifications – a range of apps that use Bluetooth technology to track Covid-19 exposure.
• Face Analysis Comparison & Examination System (FACES) – a system used by the University of South Florida Police Department, which enables police to upload a mugshot and compare it with a database of 25 million Florida driver's license photos.
• Body-worn cameras (BWCs) – these are attached to police officers' uniforms and capture interactions between police and members of the public. 35 out of 50 universities researched by Comparitech are using these in some way.

Concerns About Surveillance Software

There are concerns that the use of surveillance software by universities could be a breach of students' privacy and could deter them from engaging in political activities. There is also a lack of transparency about how data collected by universities is used and stored.

Some commentators argue that surveillance software is unnecessary and doesn't work, and that it could create false assumptions about students that could be detrimental to them. There are also concerns that universities could sell data about students to generate income.

Government's Prevent strategy

The UK government's Prevent strategy has been widely criticised for encouraging university staff to spy on students. London South Bank University (LSBU) has introduced a training scheme for cleaners and catering staff to help them identify students at risk of being drawn into radicalisation. However, the criteria for what constitutes evidence of radicalisation are vague and broad, including factors such as being "at a transitional time of life" and having a "need for identity, meaning and belonging". This has led to concerns that staff will make assumptions based on students' outward appearances, such as their religion or ethnicity.

The Prevent strategy has been particularly focused on monitoring the religious activities of students. For example, LSBU's policy on the use of its prayer room is explained in its safeguarding literature, with the Head of Health, Safety and Resilience meeting regularly with the university's security and reception services manager to report back to the Safeguarding Committee. Similarly, Cambridge's Peterhouse College has made the dean of the chapel responsible for implementing the government's Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015, turning chaplains into government informants.

Critics argue that the Prevent strategy undermines the purpose of universities as spaces for exploring different ideologies and engaging in open discourse. It also raises concerns about the invasion of privacy and the potential for false assumptions and algorithmic conclusions that could negatively impact students' long-term records.

While the government justifies these measures in the name of national security, the impact on students' rights and freedoms cannot be overlooked. Universities have become accomplices in surveillance, monitoring students' website visits, library choices, and even their cafeteria orders. This has led to a culture of suspicion and anxiety on campuses, with staff and students alike unsure of who or what to trust.

To address these concerns, universities and the government should work together to find a balance between security and individual freedoms. This could include increased transparency and legal assurances on how student data is collected, used, and stored, as well as clear guidelines on the limits of surveillance to protect students' privacy and right to free expression. Additionally, universities should focus on providing support and resources for students who may be struggling or at risk, rather than solely relying on punitive measures.

Frequently asked questions