There is no denying the potential for learning and motivation that drones bring to an educational setting. However, as with any technology, there are rules that need to be followed in order to ensure the safety of students and avoid any legal issues. The key to success in the school setting is to know these rules and implement a common-sense approach through policies and practices that are institution-wide. It is critical that administrators and educators make this a priority.
The outdoor flight of drones falls under the control and supervision of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). However, the indoor use of drones does not fall under the jurisdiction of the FAA. This means that drones used inside a building do not have to be registered or follow the guidelines and regulations for outdoor flight that are outlined in this chapter. The UAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) Q&A page on the FAA website provides more information on these guidelines (https://www.faa.gov/uas/registration/faqs/). You’ll learn that the FAA is only concerned with navigable airspace and potential threats that would occur in this area.
The indoor use of drones does present its own challenges, as there are obviously more potential obstacles for the drone to encounter (walls, doors, ventilation systems, people, desks, and any other barrier that it can find). Depending on the size and construction of the device, teachers can use the drones inside the classroom, halls, and gyms. Indoor flight is more controlled in a confined space, where the drone cannot escape. The only issue that teachers should be aware of is the proximity to students or other humans. Indoor use alleviates federal regulations for the institution and instructor but does not discharge the concern of liability.
When using the drone inside, the focus should be on the activity and the design of the drone. Ensure that drones have bumpers or protectors that stop the propellers from striking objects and people. This will prevent harm to students and to the device itself. Indoor flight is a good solution for educators who still want to have students experience the motivational and educational benefits of drones without dealing with extraneous regulations or issues. Using drones indoors allows a multitude of uses but limits the focus to distance, height, and videography.
Drones are an evolving technology that has seen an enormous growth in popularity. As with any technology that experiences an explosion in usage, regulators have to rush to catch up. For most educators, using a piece of technology that falls under FAA control is something that they have probably never considered. For amateur aviators who have flown model helicopters for years, however, this is nothing new.
It is important to remember that UAVs and the policies that affect their operation are still in their infancy, so practices and legalities are likely to change in the future. Educators and users should be aware of these changes and understand that the legal considerations covered in this book may have already changed. It is always best to check the FAA website for current guidelines (FAA.gov). For now, the FAA has set up an initial series of guidelines that constitute what they consider safe and legal use of drones at this time.
There are several types of forbidden airspace that operators must avoid. First, users are required to stay below 400 feet. The vertical height that a drone is permitted to fly helps operators avoid what is considered navigable airspace. The FAA considers anything more than 500 feet as open airspace, where planes and helicopters operate. It is critical that UAV operators stay clear of manned aircraft. There have already been a number of incidents where drones have come into close contact with helicopters and airplanes, presenting a host of dangerous scenarios. Drones could potentially damage or disable engines or rotors on aircraft causing the manned aircraft to crash.
There are other restrictions to flight, including certain places where use is not allowed at all. For example, flying is not allowed within five miles of an airport unless the operator contacts and obtains permission from the tower. Another place to avoid is large, occupied stadiums. Stadiums that have a capacity of 30,000 seats or more are prohibited airspace for a distance of three miles around the event. Some states or local governments may have enacted other laws that govern how close operators may be to groups of people, even at high school sporting events.
Drones must stay under the control of the operator and not be used in a reckless or careless manner. This means that in addition to other aircraft, users need to avoid other humans as well. Although this comes from the FAA guidelines, it is just common sense and good practice to ensure that others are not at risk from being struck by the drone.
At this point, some readers may be thinking, “What am I getting myself into here, and how do I know how close an airport is located?” The good thing is that there is an app for locating no-fly zones. The B4UFLY app from the FAA uses your smartphone to do the research for you. This app is available in both Android and iOS platforms. Additionally, some more-advanced drones have a built-in application using their integrated GPS. For example, the DJI Phantom will not take off in Washington, DC, when in GPS mode. If you are experiencing an issue where the drone won’t fly and you have a model with this capability, this may also be something worth looking into when troubleshooting.
Another important consideration when buying and using a drone is its weight. The weight of the drone is important in two regards. First, UAVs cannot exceed 55 pounds in total weight. This isn’t an issue for most commercially viable models, but if you were working at an institution that had a drone club that was building from one from scratch, it is an important consideration. Second, if the drone weighs more than half a pound, it needs to be registered with the FAA. The online registration (https://www.faa.gov/uas/registration/) costs $5 and is valid for three years. Once the registration is processed, the owner must put a number on the drone. This can be done in the battery compartment as long as access to the compartment does not require any tools. Registering the drone allows officials to trace the owner of a drone flying illegally.
When flying the devices, operators must maintain a visual line of sight on their drone at all times. This means that you have to be able to physically see the drone with your eyes rather than on a screen. A popular modification or addition to drones has been using virtual-reality goggles, such as the Oculus Rift. However, this is a safety concern, as flying by video may limit the field of vision for the user. The drone camera may not pick up wires, trees, and other obstacles—especially with moving left, right, and backwards—so flying by line of sight is still the optimal method.
A major consideration of drone usage is the category under which it falls. Open use is limited to individuals who are using the drones for recreational, hobby, and educational purposes. But commercial usage has its own limits, as the FAA has strict oversight that requires these types of users to obtain special permission. This is the reason why you do not see reporters on the nightly news flying drones around news scenes. This aspect of the law is currently evolving, and operators should ensure that their use aligns to the current legal interpretations.
It is important to note that these guidelines represent the FAA’s early operating and safety guidelines for drone operators. Drones are a relatively new technology, so the legislation is continually changing around them. It appears in some instances that there is a relaxing of the laws—as in the case of commercial usage where some companies are being given exemptions to fly drones when they were previously were denied—while on the other hand, more places are becoming restricted airspaces. Uses that do not align with the exempted cases can apply for an exemption through the FAA. The FAA’s FAQ page for the Section 333 Petition for Exemption offers more information on this and other exemption concerns (www.faa.gov/uas/legislative_programs/section_333/333_faqs/).
In addition to the FAA oversight, it is important to know that some local municipalities have created their own ordnances that must be obeyed. For example, Los Angles requires that drone users register their devices with the city and fly a minimum of 25 feet away from people (Queally, 2016). Chicago prohibits the flying of drones over churches, schools, hospitals, and private property without permission (National Public Radio, 2015). These are just a few examples of why you must stay up to date on drone legislation, as the FAA is not the only organization that has asserted oversight on the usage of drones.
Avoid adverse legal situations by ensuring that all operators adhere to all legalities. Educators and administrators should consult with school attorneys in regard to operating a drone at their institution—to be certain that there are no unknown liabilities. Then follow the current regulations to the letter while keeping in mind that the legal status and oversight of drones is continually evolving as this technology emerges and grows. The content covered in this section may change depending on legislation—all the more reason to get the school attorneys on board.
Drones provide an interesting perspective when filming high school sporting events. They can capture media and show the movement of athletes in a unique way that would otherwise be unfeasible or cost prohibitive. Numerous sports, and band groups are using the drones to record video. As a result, organizations and institutions have begun to review the use of drones during sporting events based on their competitive advantage and safety issues. For example, the North Carolina High School Athletics Association has instituted a ban on drones during all high school sporting events (Cook, 2015). Even some large districts such as the Broward County Athletic Association in Florida have instituted prohibitions on the use of drones during athletic events (Brousseu, 2015).
The issue of use in some of these cases may be due to the operation of drones by individuals who are not associated with the institution itself. Instead of limiting the use of drones to select individuals, organizations should implement specific policies to address their needs. And as research and knowledge about the safety and benefits of drones emerges, policy is likely to change.
Owners of properties can still regulate the use of their land, and this includes the airspace. If flying a drone off of school property and on private property, it is important to ensure that there is permission to be there. Operators of drones need to respect private property laws—especially because privately owned property presents an interesting and unvetted legal issue. The often-used example is that of an unsolicited photo of a child: if a child is photographed in a fenced yard, the image is private; if the child’s image is photographed in a park, then it is public. The case changes when a drone can go up 400 feet and make a six-foot fence meaningless. This creates unchartered territory as to what is considered private viewing versus public viewing.
The best rule of thumb when taking pictures or recording video that will be used or made public in one format or another is to ask permission and get media releases. Ensuring that permission is obtained for the location and the people there will eliminate any potential issues that could emerge. Most institutions have media-release policies, so it is best to adhere to them. Permission is essential when working with children, especially if images focus on one or two children in particular. Generally, in regard to public places, groups of people or children do not require permission to use the image if the individuals cannot be identified.
Local municipalities and organizations can also have their own laws and rules on photography, including aerial photography and privacy, so do your homework. An example of this would be the Florida Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act (FUSA), which requires drone users to obtain permission to capture images of private property or people on private property (O’Connor, 2015).
The development of polices that address drone usage within an organization are critical for both teachers and administrators. Organizations should examine if drones can be incorporated into their acceptable use policies (AUPs) or if there is a need to create an independent policy that addresses this specific technology. Because the legal implications—both civil and criminal—are of serious consequences, organizations need to ensure that all bases are covered.
For educators, it is important to ensure that the organization has implemented a policy before students are involved. When there is a policy in place and it is being followed, it affords a level of protection because usage falls within acceptable practices. As drones can be controversial and even present a potential safety issue, having administrative support and protections enables usage without the fear of potential penalties. That way, if there is an unfortunate incident where damage or injury occurs, the outcome will be less critical to the students and the school alike.
Policies should include reference to FAA guidelines and what is considered acceptable usage for drones within the organization’s scope. This includes what users can and cannot use the drone for, where it is permissible to fly the drone, and who may operate the technology. Will the teacher be the only one permitted to fly the drone outside of the building? Hopefully not, but this is one of the questions that needs to be covered within a policy.
Appendix A has an example of a drone policy that has been written and implemented within a higher-education institution. The contents were created after examining other organizational policies, discussion with administrators, and involvement of legal counsel. This example may not work in every organization but can serve as a good place to start with discussions within a district. As the legal environment surrounding drones continues to evolve, it is important that policy is reviewed and updated on a continual basis. Organizations should consult with their legal counsel on all new policies.
Subsequently, institutions should develop their own policies in regard to external use of drones on school grounds. This should limit outside use when it’s considered trespassing and is prosecuted as such. This will also ensure that the use of drones is restricted to trained school personnel, protecting the privacy of students and the well-being of all persons on the school campus.
One of the biggest concerns surrounding the use of drones is the potential liability that their use can present. Educators should be aware that there is a risk of injury, damage to the drone or other property, and even civil penalties. The key to successful implementation is to be aware of potential risks and practice safe operations. It is no different than the use of chemicals in a science lab, where preparedness and safety procedures are developed and adhered to in order to avoid negative situations.
Institutions should consult with their legal counsel prior to implementing a drone program to ensure that policies and practice align to relevant laws. Administrators should also review insurance coverage so that the use of drones is covered by the institution’s policy in regard to liability.