A leading international research facility analyzed the privacy safeguards of 164 educational platforms used during the epidemic, spanning 49 countries including Spain. The findings provoke reflection about how data flows are managed in education technology. It was found that 89% of these EdTech tools collected children’s information without obtaining proper consent, and much of that data was sold to third parties, notably online advertising networks. In this sense, students around the world have effectively become the product in a digital economy where free services often come at the cost of personal privacy.
The data traffic in question thrives on patterns created from information gathered without user permission and outside established rules. This trafficking enables advertisers to map how children spend their time, where they reside, and what devices they can access. The report describes targeted, interest-based advertising as a significant opportunity for advertising firms, which is particularly risky at an age when young users can be easily swayed.
Some companies that offer these educational tools have rejected the presented findings. Third-party actors and advertising companies claim they do not receive data from minors. Yet the study’s methodology, conducted in 2021, leaves little doubt about the reality of data collection. In the absence of robust regulations, meaningful penalties, or strong enforcement, skepticism remains about whether ethics and codes of conduct can curb the digital economy that surrounds them.
The report urges regulators, EdTech vendors, and advertising entities to take straightforward, practical steps. These include performing independent privacy audits on tools used in classrooms and ensuring the swift deletion of data collected from minors. The scope is broad, as critics note, when companies dispute the evidence and authorities concede that monitoring data protection compliance has fallen short. The work of scholars such as Dan Cohen, a geographer who studies how public education is shaped by market forces, highlights how investor interest can drive the commodification of public schooling and strain the links between students, schools, and communities. The critique extends to the way commercial practices influence digital learning more generally.