Search

A socio-legal analysis of the UK governance regime for data collected from children at school for teaching and learning contrasts the government-mandated data collection by schools to inform educational policy and planning with data processed and shared with third parties by commercial EdTech providers. We find the former is effectively governed by the government's 'Five Safes Framework' with some problematic exceptions. By contrast, EdTech providers process a growing volume of personal data under the DPA 2018/UK GDPR with a looser enforcement regime. While schools have few mechanisms and insufficient expertise or resources to hold EdTech providers accountable for processing children's data, EdTech providers have considerable latitude in interpreting the law. Consequently, and paradoxically, regulations governing (mostly) deidentified data used for public purposes are more systematically enforced than those governing personal (identifiable) data used for public and commercial purposes. We conclude with recommendations so that education data can serve children's best interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Among the parental mediation strategies promoted by policymakers to ensure children's safety in a digital age is the use of parental control tools. A rapid evidence review was conducted to identify which families use parental controls and why, and the outcomes of such use, beneficial or otherwise. Of 1,656 articles returned by a keyword search of five research databases, the full text of 40 studies was coded to answer the research questions. The available research revealed that the use of parental controls depends on the age of the parents and children, their digital skills, parental involvement, and the motivation to reduce exposure to online risk. However, the consequences of use were mixed, with evidence of parental controls having both beneficial and adverse outcomes, limiting other outcomes or simply having no outcomes. While the review found little support for advocating parental controls as a stand-alone strategy, parents valued them when embedded in a broader approach to parental mediation and parent – child relations. The conclusions highlight the importance of a child-centred approach that holistically evaluates the potential of parental controls. Prior State of Knowledge: Parental controls are widely recommended by policymakers and technology industry as a way for parents to keep their children safe online, but research usually examines parental mediation in general, rarely focusing on the use or effectiveness of parental controls in particular. Novel Contributions: A review of the effectiveness of parental controls reveals mixed results: some uses of parental controls bring benefits, for example to children's safety, but others have no effect or limit children's opportunities, and some have adverse results, for example to family communication. Practical Implications: Policymakers and technology developers should not rely on the use of parental controls to ensure children's safety in a digital world, because the evidence does not support the efficacy of parental controls and, if poorly designed, they may introduce problems for families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing on an ongoing international research project, Global Kids Online, this article examines the theoretical and methodological challenges of conducting global research on children's rights in the digital age at a time of intense socio-technological change and contested policy development. Arguing in favour of critically rethinking existing research frameworks and measures for new circumstances, we report on the experience of designing a research toolkit and piloting this in four countries on four continents. We aim to generate national and cross-national insights that can benefit future researchers and research users concerned to build a robust evidence base to understand children's rights in the digital age. It is hoped that such experiences will prompt wider lessons for the unfolding research and policy agenda.