Gaza: A US based charity planning to use artificial intelligence to monitor classroom conversations in its schools in Gaza has raised concerns about children's privacy, freedom of expression and the role of technology in education during war.
Gaza Children Village, which operates schools known as Academies of Hope in central and southern Gaza, plans to use an artificial intelligence system to identify speech it classifies as hateful, antisemitic or inciting. According to an Associated Press report published on Friday, the system would alert the charity's founder when potentially harmful language is detected.
The proposal has raised questions about who would access the recordings and whether the system could distinguish harmful speech from discussions about politics, history and children's experiences of the conflict.
The charity is led by Dr. David Hasan, a neurosurgeon who teaches at Duke University medical school in North Carolina. Hasan has said the organisation aims to promote peace and tolerance through education and prevent the spread of hostility between Palestinians and Israelis.
According to the report, Hasan described the proposed monitoring system during a webinar in September. He said recordings would be retained for 72 hours and that alerts would allow him to contact teachers to discuss the context of remarks identified by the system.
The technology had reportedly been tested, with plans for deployment in dozens of classrooms. However, the exact start date and the extent of its use remain unclear. It has not been independently established whether the system is already operating across the schools or how accurately it can identify harmful speech.
The proposal has prompted concerns within the charity's wider network. Bishara Bahbah, a member of its board, told the Associated Press that he had not been informed about the monitoring plan. He questioned whether classroom surveillance could discourage teachers and students from speaking freely and argued that ensuring children have access to education should remain the immediate priority.
The report also said an aid organisation working with Gaza Children Village was reconsidering its relationship with the charity because of the proposal.
Questions have also emerged about the technology's development. Hasan reportedly identified PollyLabs, a New York based nonprofit, as a collaborator in earlier communications. However, PollyLabs told the Associated Press that it had no role in developing or deploying the technology. The disagreement leaves the system's developer and deployment arrangements unclear.
Gaza Children Village says its work includes education, meals, healthcare and psychological support for children. Its Academies of Hope use the Palestinian Authority curriculum as their main educational framework, with changes intended by Hasan to remove material he considers supportive of violence or antisemitism.
Hasan has described these changes as part of a broader effort to promote peace and prevent radicalisation. However, the curriculum changes and the proposed monitoring system raise separate questions about who should determine what children learn and how classroom discussions should be assessed.
Monitoring published textbooks is different from recording conversations between students and teachers. A classroom discussion may involve a student describing a personal experience, asking questions about the conflict or repeating something heard elsewhere. Determining whether such speech constitutes hate or incitement requires an understanding of its meaning and context.
Concerns about privacy are particularly important when children are involved. It remains unclear whether students, parents and teachers would be informed about the recordings, whether consent would be required and what protections would prevent unauthorised access to the information.
It is also unclear whether the reported 72 hour retention period would apply only to recordings or also to transcripts, alerts and other information produced by the system. Independent testing would be needed to establish how accurately the technology identifies harmful speech, particularly when dealing with Palestinian Arabic and regional expressions.
The debate comes as Gaza continues to face a severe education crisis following years of war and destruction. Many schools have been damaged or destroyed, forcing children to rely on temporary classrooms and alternative learning arrangements.
A Reuters report published on September 21 said hundreds of thousands of students were expected to attend in person classes during the 2026 to 2027 academic year through temporary schools and learning centres. The report cited an estimate that 98 per cent of schools in Gaza had been damaged or destroyed.
UNICEF reported in April that about 700,000 children aged four to 17 had missed nearly three consecutive school years of formal in person education. The agency also estimated that around 420,000 children had no face to face learning at that time.
These figures highlight the challenges facing children, families and educators as efforts continue to restore education. For many children, access to a classroom provides not only learning opportunities but also routine, social contact and psychological support.
The proposed monitoring system raises questions about how schools can promote tolerance and prevent incitement while protecting children's privacy and their ability to discuss difficult subjects openly.
The charity says its goal is to encourage peace and tolerance, but the effectiveness and consequences of the proposed technology have not been independently established. Questions about consent, data protection, oversight and the system's accuracy remain unanswered.
As Gaza works to restore educational opportunities for its children, the proposal has brought renewed attention to the need for transparent decisions about classroom monitoring and safeguards that protect the welfare and rights of young learners.