The first day of school in Los Angeles, California, on 14 August 2025. Photograph: Marcio José Sánchez/AP
California parents are suing the education software company Curriculum Associates, whose online program i-Ready is used by thousands of schools for diagnostic testing, tracking student progress, and online assessments. The lawsuit claims the program violates privacy laws, fueling a wider debate over data collection, screen time, and the educational benefits of such technology.
Lawsuit Alleges Unauthorized Data Collection
The lawsuit alleges that Curriculum Associates collects student data and shares it with third parties for commercial purposes without adequate consent from parents and students. The plaintiffs also accuse the company of unjust enrichment, or wrongfully profiting from the collection and sale of student data. Curriculum Associates denies all allegations.
This lawsuit is part of a series of recent allegations against education technology companies, known as “edtech,” a $187 billion industry that continues to grow. Curriculum Associates holds a $20 million contract with the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) that began in 2023. The company reports over $750 million in annual revenue, primarily from contracts with school districts nationwide.
Data Collected by i-Ready
The lawsuit cites Curriculum Associates’ terms-of-service policy, which details the collection of data including a student’s race, gender, grade level, responses to i-Ready assessment questions, time spent on each question, IP address, school name, disability status, and eligibility for school lunches.
Lila Byock, who has two children in LAUSD schools, and Nicki Petrossi, whose children formerly attended public school in the Fullerton school district, are plaintiffs on behalf of their children. They claim Curriculum Associates provided no notice about its data practices.
“Parents do not know that this is happening. We trust that our kids are protected, and that includes their data,” Petrossi said. “Us checking off a box, giving permission for them to use the internet at school should not entail this level of data farming on them.”
Some data is used by the company to adjust its adaptive products, like the i-Ready assessment, to provide usage reports to schools and districts. Curriculum Associates details these practices in company policies but denies the allegation that they constitute unnecessary data collection without consent.
Consent and Privacy Concerns
Curriculum Associates discloses information to school and district customers about this data collection and obtains consent through them. The plaintiffs allege this is not adequate consent under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule, which requires companies to provide parents with clear notice of data practices when their children use their products.
In LAUSD schools, i-Ready is used for diagnostic testing for two days, in three separate sessions over the school year. Students complete English and math testing, and their scores are reported to schools and the district. Time spent on i-Ready lessons varies, but many students are required to use i-Ready for 45 minutes each on English and math lessons per week.
Parent Group Calls for Tech Policy Review
Byock and Petrossi are not alone. The lawsuit comes amid growing parental doubts about edtech, leading to the formation of Schools Beyond Screens, a parent group advocating for less tech in schools.
Jodi Carreon, national director of Schools Beyond Screens, of which Byock is a founding member, first became concerned about tech use when her child was in kindergarten on Zoom during the Covid-19 pandemic in the San Marcos Unified School District. She initially thought platforms like i-Ready would be temporary, but her son continued using them after returning to school.
“Right now, it has been a very optimistic approach. We’re assuming that technology is going to help the learning process. What we’re asking is to take a more critical look at [technology], examine: has it actually helped learning, has it harmed learning, just determine what the evidence is showing,” Carreon said of Schools Beyond Screens’ mission to encourage districts to change tech policies.
Edtech Uses Class Time and District Funds
The LAUSD teachers’ union, United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA), also has concerns about edtech usage. Julie Van Winkle, vice-president of the American Federation of Teachers branch of the union, noted a “significant uptick” in private contracts since LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho took office in 2022. Carvalho was placed on leave in February 2026 after the FBI raided his home and LAUSD headquarters, reportedly tied to an investigation of edtech company AllHere, paid $3 million to develop a chatbot for the district in 2024. Carvalho was reportedly a major proponent of the company.
Since 2022, LAUSD has committed over $6.7 billion to private contracts, with $1.6 billion going to edtech companies, according to the union.
Although i-Ready lessons are not technically required by the district, Van Winkle said some principals recommend it for struggling students or require it on their campuses.
LAUSD maintains that i-Ready is a useful tool for educators to personalize lessons based on test results.
“The District continues to review implementation practices and feedback from students, families and educators to ensure digital tools are being used appropriately, effectively and in ways that support student learning and well-being,” an LAUSD spokesperson said in an email statement.
Student and Teacher Experiences
Ciaran Duff, a senior at Hamilton High School in West LA, said peers have missed rehearsals or even English classes to finish required i-Ready testing. Duff noted the program only tests math levels up to algebra 2, and some pre-calculus. Students in higher math levels struggle with tests covering material learned years earlier. Several peers skip through questions without attempting them.
Marcela Chagoya, a special education teacher at Stevenson Middle School in Boyle Heights and union board director for UTLA East LA, said her sixth-graders have difficulty scoring well on i-Ready assessments and lessons, routinely testing significantly below grade level. For many, Chagoya says i-Ready is not accessible.
“What our students need, particularly, and all students, really, is that human face-to-face interaction,” Chagoya said. “The increase of screen time is very concerning to us as educators, because we came into this because we like to teach and teaching is not putting our students in front of a screen. For special education students specifically, the i-Ready program doesn’t reach all of them.”
Chagoya added she has had to “scramble” to help her students keep up with i-Ready testing that doesn’t meet their needs.
The Edtech Debate Hits Home for LAUSD
Since 2023, LAUSD has increasingly relied on edtech platforms like i-Ready. Students use Chromebooks or iPads in all classes and complete activities on other platforms such as IXL and Khan Academy. The district maintains that i-Ready is a useful diagnostic tool.
However, LAUSD is currently overhauling its tech policies. The school board approved a measure to limit student screen time for the next school year in April. Board members say they hope to “recalibrate” screen time, which went largely unregulated post-Covid-19.
Van Winkle said when she first taught in the early 2000s, educators worried about tech access for low-income students. Now, she says the situation has reversed.
“Limitation on technology is a privilege only to people who have the means to be very involved in that way in their kids’ lives, and meanwhile a lot of our students, but particularly the ones in lower socio-economic areas and situations … they’re the guinea pigs for all these tech companies that Carvalho has just opened the gates to at our schools,” Van Winkle said.
