In the content of research there are often challenges in disaggregating data. For example, consider classroom based research in which (1) there are challenges in excluding students from capture in video data, and where all students are using the same learning platform (which also provides research data); and (2) where group-work or whole-class features of the learning environment are central to the research which aims to avoid falling into the trap of individualistic learning models. How, in these cases, should consent be navigated with learners (who may be minors), parents, and other gatekeepers (e.g., teachers, school leaders)?There may be circumstances where given the design of the research is intended to support learning, opt out, or consent waiver, approaches are appropriate. The IEEE report notes the below, although it is not quite true to say children have no standing regarding consent (see e.g. discussion of Gillick competence and Fraser guidelines; this paper Harris, J., & Porcellato, L. (2018). Opt-out parental consent in online surveys: Ethical considerations. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 13(3), 223-
1. provides some further interesting discussion). See also [Steps for Engaging Young Children in Research](recpwpukpvgwavztb)."*Issue: *Technology choice-making in schoolsChildren, as minors, have no standing to give or deny consent, or to control the use of their personal data. Parents only have limited choices in what are often school-wide implementations of educational technology. Examples include the use of Google applications, face recognition in security systems, and computer driven instruction as described above. In many cases, parents’ only choice would be to send their children to a different school, but that choice is seldom available.How should schools make these choices? How much input should parents have? Should parents be able to demand technology-free teaching?There are many gaps in current student data regulation. In June 2018, CLIP, The Center on Law and Information Policy at Fordham Law School published, ”Transparency and the Marketplace for Student Data”.6 This study concluded that “student lists are commercially available for purchase on the basis of ethnicity, affluence, religion, lifestyle, awkwardness, and even a perceived or predicted need for family planning services”. Fordham found that the data market is becoming one of the largest and most profitable marketplaces in the United States. Data brokers have databases that store billions of data elements on nearly every United States consumer. However, information from students in the pursuit of an education should not be exploited and commercialized without restraint.Fordham researchers found at least 14 data brokers who advertise the sale of student information. One sold lists of students as young as two years old. Another sold lists of student profiles on the basis of ethnicity, religion, economic factors, and even gawkiness." (IEEE, 2019, p.115-116)