Group items tagged

My question is why we keep putting so much of this discussion in the context of crime and victimization?" asked Anne Collier of ConnectSafely.org. "The vast majority of the behavior we're talking about is adolescent behavior and risk taking. It's not criminal behavior."

For years we've been telling parents to put the computer in the living room, keep and eye on what your children are doing, go and hit the history button and review where they've been," Balkam explained. "Well all that advice holds true but it gets completely upended by mobile phones, PDAs, and anything that can walk around."

A recent survey indicates that as of last year, 71 percent of teens 12 to 17 own a mobile phone (that's up from 45% in 2004). Eighty-seven percent of 17-year-olds and over half of children 12-13 years of age have one.

The research indicates that the movement toward Web 2.0 use to engage students and address individual learning needs is largely being driven in districts from the bottom up – starting with teachers and students

Overall, the research confirms school districts are using or planning to use several types of Web 2.0 technologies, but reveals there is still resistance to using online social networking for instructional purposes.

ther key results of the survey include: The three most frequently cited reasons for adopting Web 2.0 technologies are: addressing students’ individual learning needs, engaging student interest, and increasing students’ options for access to teaching and learning. Online communications with parents and students (e.g., teacher blogs) and digital multimedia resources are the Internet technologies most widely used by teachers, and a majority of districts have plans for adopting these technologies or promoting their use. Teacher-generated online content (e.g., multimedia lessons, wiki-based resources) is likely to be the next area of growth in the use of Web 2.0 technologies. Almost half of districts have plans for adopting or promoting the creation and sharing of this content through Web 2.0 tools.

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) is organising on 5 May 2009 (pm) a public presentation on protecting children from harmful content and conduct online. The issue of child protection in regards to online technologies is of major and continuing concern to policy- and law-makers, the wider ICT industry and its end-users. In spring 2008, the EESC unanimously adopted its most recent of several opinions on this topic

This is a follow up to the post on the Meeting on 5th May here.The Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a multiannual Community programme on protecting children using the Internet and other communication technologies represents the latest in a series of initiatives introduced by the European Parliament and Council to promote children’s safety and well-being in the information society.

I’m not aware of any federal Internet safety commissions that met during the Bush administration. From what I can tell, that administration paid very little attention to Internet safety other than to add to the exaggerations and fear-mongering about so-called Internet predators. So is there any point in taking yet another look at Internet safety? Yes, if only because things have changed dramatically over the past few months. To begin with, we have a new administration led by a president who actually understands the Internet as well as the constitutional issues that arise whenever government tries to control online speech, access or even safety.

When the new working group convened Thursday, our first speaker was Susan Crawford, who works at the White House as special assistant to the president for science, technology and innovation policy. A law professor and founder of OneWebDay, Crawford brings a refreshing understanding of the government’s need to balance safety and security with civil liberties, privacy and even the First Amendment rights of minors. Her opening remarks helped set the tone for the group by admonishing us to “avoid overheated rhetoric about risks to kids online,” pointing out that “risks kids face online may not be significantly different than the risks they face offline.”