A federal class-action lawsuit against Curriculum Associates is putting a harsh spotlight on i‑Ready, the learning platform used in thousands of K–8 classrooms, including nearly 60 school districts in Florida. The suit claims the program quietly scoops up extensive student data, then sometimes passes it along to outside tracking systems. According to the complaint, that information goes well beyond test scores and basic demographics, reaching into persistent identifiers and behavioral metrics that can be linked over time to build detailed student profiles.
The case picked up steam this week as local TV coverage brought the issue squarely into Florida living rooms. The parent leading the lawsuit said she was stunned by how much information i‑Ready collects, according to FOX 13 Tampa Bay. That report quotes plaintiff Nicki Petrossi and attorney Andrew Liddell, who argue that the company compiles in-depth behavioral profiles on students, while also noting just how widespread the program is across Florida districts.
The court filing, submitted on Dec. 22, 2025, leans heavily on technical forensic work that tracks what happens behind the scenes when a student uses i‑Ready. Pages in the platform trigger Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager, which in turn send persistent identifiers such as “cid” and “_gid” along with other data, according to the Court Complaint. The exhibits reproduce sample analytics payloads that include lesson titles, grade level and completion outcomes. Plaintiffs say that when this kind of data is combined with advertising cookies, it can be used to assemble long-term profiles of individual students, a core argument in their wiretapping and privacy claims.
Curriculum Associates has pushed back hard in court, denying the allegations and asking a judge to throw the case out. In its legal response, the company characterizes the lawsuit as an “ideologically-motivated crusade,” a phrase that has been highlighted in local coverage. The company maintains that i‑Ready is sold only to school customers, that student data is used to support instruction and improve the product, and that parents or districts can ask for student information to be corrected or deleted, in line with its privacy statement. Plaintiffs respond that these assurances do not squarely confront the forensic evidence showing real-time data flows to third-party analytics platforms.
What This Means For Florida Schools
School districts that lean on i‑Ready could soon be fielding a lot more questions from parents and board members. Education sources say districts may be pressed to spell out which third-party services are embedded in their i‑Ready deployments and whether any analytics traffic is limited or blocked. NBC 6 South Florida reports that major local districts already rely on the platform and that parents there have raised concerns about transparency and screen time. Technology directors and school boards may feel growing pressure to audit how these tools are set up while the lawsuit works its way through early court stages.
Legal Claims At Issue
The complaint strings together a mix of federal and state causes of action, including alleged violations of the federal Wiretap Act, California invasion-of-privacy laws, state computer-fraud provisions, and consumer-protection and unjust-enrichment theories, as summarized on the plaintiffs' counsel's case page. If the court allows any of these claims to survive the company’s motion to dismiss, the case could force districts to rethink how they negotiate contracts and oversee analytics-heavy instructional software.
What Parents And Districts Can Do Now
For families worried about how their child’s data is handled, one immediate step is to ask the district for a list of its vendors and for the data-handling terms in any contract that references i‑Ready. Curriculum Associates’ privacy policy outlines how a parent or district customer can request that student data be corrected or removed, and families can review public court filings or reach out to plaintiffs’ counsel for more detailed information. Districts, meanwhile, may choose to review embedded analytics tools and tighten contractual limits on third-party tracking while the legal questions are sorted out in court.
The case is still in early motion practice. Curriculum Associates filed its motion to dismiss in February, and the plaintiffs submitted an opposition in early April. The judge has not yet ruled. We will continue to track new filings and any responses from Florida districts, updating this report as additional documents and statements emerge.
