Two California parents are suing Curriculum Associates, the developer behind the widely used i-Ready learning platform, claiming the software illegally harvests and shares student data. This class-action lawsuit is part of a growing conflict over school-mandated educational technology (EdTech) programs, parental rights, and children’s digital privacy. As school districts increasingly rely on digital tools, families are pushing back against the passive collection of sensitive student information.
What Happened
The lawsuit, originally filed in late 2025 and moving through federal court as detailed by the EdTech Law Center, alleges that Curriculum Associates gathers massive amounts of personal data without direct parental consent. According to reporting from FOX 13 Tampa Bay, the plaintiffs claim the software collects over 80 categories of personal and behavioral information, including names, birthdates, race, IP addresses, and detailed psychological profiles. Forensic analysis cited in the suit indicates that student data has been transmitted to Google's commercial ad business and Google Analytics.
Curriculum Associates, which makes over $750 million in annual revenue, defended its practices in a February 2026 motion to dismiss, arguing that the lawsuit is an attempt to litigate educational policy. The company maintains that it discloses its data collection policies and obtains the necessary consent directly through its school district clients, such as the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), which holds a $20 million contract with the company.
However, parents argue that a school district cannot simply sign away a child's privacy rights. As we previously reported, this defense is facing legal challenges under federal law.
The Bigger Picture
The legal battle shows a systemic issue in how EdTech vendors deal with federal privacy laws. Many companies rely on agreements with schools to act as "school officials" under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). But legal experts note that these school contracts do not exempt vendors from COPPA compliance, the federal law protecting children's online privacy. In fact, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has previously ruled that placing the burden of COPPA compliance entirely on schools is illegal.
Under the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), operators must provide direct, clear notice to parents before collecting any personal data from children under 13. Newly implemented COPPA amendments in April 2026 expanded the definitions of personal information and increased potential fines for violations.
Beyond privacy concerns, educators and parents are questioning the academic value of the software itself. Despite serving over 13 million students, i-Ready completely lacks independent, peer-reviewed research showing that it improves learning outcomes. Both California and Michigan state education departments recently rejected i-Ready as an approved K-3 dyslexia screener because it failed to meet the screening criteria required to identify struggling readers early.
What This Means for Families
For parents, this lawsuit exposes how much data is being gathered on children during a normal school day. Many students are required to spend 45 minutes per week on separate math and English lessons within the app. This forced screen time has driven some school districts to rethink their contracts or scale back device use, following warnings from the U.S. Surgeon General about excessive classroom screen time.
In districts like Charlotte-Mecklenburg, families are actively debating whether these digital tools help or hinder development, with parent advocacy groups demanding a return to human, face-to-face interaction.
What You Can Do
- Ask your school principal or district administration for copies of the data privacy agreements (DPAs) they sign with EdTech vendors like Curriculum Associates.
- If you are uncomfortable with the level of tracking or screen time, ask what paper-based or alternative offline assignments your school can provide.
- Attend local school board meetings and ask board members to verify independent, peer-reviewed efficacy data for any software contracts before they are approved or renewed.