Sally Yoon is an IPilogue Writer, IP Innovation Clinic Fellow, and a 2L JD Candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School.

As discussed in , Human Rights Watch (HRW) released a in late May outlining the privacy risks school children face across the globe. After a short summary, the report immediately explores ways we can address the risks, through a comprehensive list of recommendations to governments, ministries and departments of education, education technology companies, advertising technology companies and other third-party companies that may receive data from EdTech Products.

Recommendations to the government, education technology companies, AdTech companies and other third-party companies receiving sensitive data all included urgent remedial action to address the children who have been exposed to the risk of misuse and exploitation – identify, remove, and prevent the further spread of children’s data. Governments were also specifically suggested to bear the responsibility of demanding AdTech companies delete all children’s data received from EdTech during the pandemic. Further recommendations also included law reform to adopt, update, strengthen, and hold accountable child data protection laws “to deliver a modern child data protection framework that protects the best interests of the child in complex online environments.”

Alarmingly, the report found that out of the 49 countries examined, 14 countries lacked any form of data protection whatsoever, while others merely referred to children or were outdated and did not address more modern technology. The do include a specific section on consent and children and the importance of adult supervision for data collection for children below the age of 13. However, Canada still falls behind in implementing modern privacy legislation that addresses child consent. For example, under the , businesses cannot sell personal information of children who are less than 13 years of age, unless the child’s parent or guardian affirmatively authorizes the sale. Moreover, sets the age of consent at 16, requiring parental consent from those 15 years old or younger. Section 15 in Canada’s Bill C-11 mandates that “an organization must obtain an individual’s valid consent for the collection, use or disclosure of the individual’s personal information,” but does not specifically address a minimum age for consent.

Additionally, the report provided recommendations for ministries and departments of education. These recommendations included monitoring endorsed educational services and the companies providing those services, as well as creating written contracts regarding children's data protection between institutions and EdTech providers — not with the child. Moreover, EdTech companies are advised to write their privacy policies in “clear, child-friendly, and age-appropriate language” and provide separate legal terms for guardians and educators.

With all this said, we perhaps should not be too eager to place all the blame on governments and companies. In its final segment, “Failure to Protect”, the report highlighted testimonies from parents and educators. This showed how students, parents and educators alike were all operating in blind faith during the pandemic. The exceptional situation of the pandemic made everyone too willing to accept and comply with quickly-changing environments – children trusted their parents, parents trusted the teachers, and teachers trusted their schools and their governments.

The report's recommendations highlight a collective responsibility in ensuring the safety of our children online. We are all responsible to remedy past wrongs and prevent further risks to our children by addressing modern technology’s most glaring privacy issues.

The post Your Child is Being Watched: EdTech and Children’s Privacy Part 2 appeared first on IPOsgoode.

Sally Yoon is an IPilogue Writer, IP Innovation Clinic Fellow, and a 2L JD Candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School.

Pandemic-related school closures pushed the adoption of educational technology (“EdTech”) in classrooms to new heights. In fact, that the industry will surpass $377 billion by the year 2028. In response to the pandemic, Teachers across the globe were forced to adapt to online settings and were left scrambling for fun virtual tools to keep their children engaged in the classroom – but at what cost?

On May 25^th, Human Rights Watch (“HRW”) – “a global investigation of the education technology (EdTech) endorsed by 49 governments for children’s education during the pandemic.” A thorough analysis of the selected EdTech products showed that a vast majority of the government-endorsed online learning platforms risked children’s privacy and violated children’s rights. Many of the products were found to collect children’s personal information without the child’s or parent’s consent. This included data like “who they are, where they are, what they do in the classroom, who their family and friends are, and what kind of device their families could afford for them to use”– information unrelated to education.

The findings from the HRW also included , CBC Kids, Math Kids, ABRACADABRA, LEARN, Active for Life, Mathies, Prof Multi, Storyline Online and Storyweaver. Aside from LEARN, Math Kids, and Prof Multi, the other products were found to collect and transmit data, some via means of a third party. Notably, these platforms also all had government affiliation – all products were promoted by the Government of Quebec through “L’ecole ouverte,” a website that suggests digital education resources “approved by a team of experts from the Ministere de L’Education,” while “Mathies” was developed by Ontario’s Ministry of Education.

To illustrate how tracking technologies are so deeply integrated into children's lives, the report opens with a compelling story about a student named Rodin. Rodin logs onto his virtual classroom, draws on the virtual whiteboard during break time, and posts his homework using a social media platform— just like every other school day during the pandemic. However, what he doesn’t realize is the countless tracking technologies that surveil his online interactions by following him across the internet. Information about his browsing habits, location, and family contacts is passed along to advertising technology (“AdTech”) and other companies to eventually “piece together an intimate portrait” of him and to figure out what may influence him and make predictions about his future behaviour. These valuable insights can then be sold to other parties, who wish to target children just like Rodin in the future.

While they may impress us with their tech-savvy abilities, children are children. We cannot expect them to freely make decisions online and understand their full impact. Although parents are often willing to sacrifice whatever it takes to ensure their children’s safety, they have only limited control. The surveillance took place in virtual classrooms via various EdTech products where neither children nor their parents could object to it. With no proper protective measures in place, children around the world were left open to harm, all in the name of education. 

Part 2 will discuss the HRW report’s recommendations and the initiatives being taken to address the risks that EdTech poses to child privacy.

The post Your Child is Being Watched: EdTech and Children’s Privacy Part 1 appeared first on IPOsgoode.