The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction

The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction

dcf.state.fl.us
from dcf.state.fl.us More from this publisher
13.07.2015 Views

online games and activities, and scholarly articles or other materials with an educational focus.Major federally funded research programs on the topic of Internet safety were included becausethe recommendations they yield contribute to public awareness about the topic.Web pages with lists of Internet safety rules with no other interactive content did not meet thecriteria for inclusion in this inventory. Software packages marketed to parents, schools, andlibraries for blocking, recording, or monitoring Internet usage by youth were also outside thescope of this inventory because they are products of private commercial enterprises.1. Methodology of ReviewThe search for English-language materials was conducted both online and through documentreview. The search engines Google and Yahoo were used to scan for the term “Internet safety,”and a list of hits was compiled for review. Programs that were linked to these sites as additionalresources also were included in the equivalent of an electronic “snowball sampling” strategy. 93The home pages of federal agencies and departments were included, and the page searchfunction, if available, was used to search for the term “Internet safety.” In addition, personsworking in federal agencies were asked to describe their own departments’ efforts in this area. Inall, 18 federally funded programs were identified, 16 of which are educational programs forchildren, youth, or adults. Two are federally funded research projects that includerecommendations to prevent the online victimization of children. (See appendix 1 for adescription of all 18 federally funded programs.) Appendix 2 lists a representative (but notexhaustive) set of nonfederally funded Internet safety programs. It is not within the scope of thisinventory to discuss these programs in detail or to evaluate the programs identified.Pursuant to Pub. L. No. 108–447, this inventory was prepared in coordination with theCoordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. On January 7, 2005, J.Robert Flores, OJJDP Administrator and Vice Chair of the Coordinating Council, sent a letter toCoordinating Council members requesting, among other things, their cooperation in preparingthis report. Mr. Flores also discussed the preparation of the inventory at the meeting of theCoordinating Council on March 4, 2005. OJJDP appreciates the cooperation of Council memberagencies in providing and reviewing information incorporated in this report.a. History of Federal Involvement in Internet Safety Programs for YouthThe federal government’s first broad foray into the field of Internet safety for children wasmarked by the passage of the Child Online Protection Act of 1998 (COPA). COPA created acommission to “identify technological or other methods that will help reduce access by minorsthat is harmful to minors on the Internet.” The COPA Commission was charged with evaluating93 Snowball sampling is an approach where informants are asked to identify other persons knowledgeable about thetopic of study. When these persons are interviewed the researcher accumulates more and more information about thetopic. The chain of “recommended informants” initially diverges, but finally converges as a few key persons emergeas the most frequently mentioned names. Patton, Michael Quinn (1990). Qualitative Research & EvaluationMethods. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, p. 237.111

the accessibility, cost, and effectiveness of technology designed to prevent children fromaccessing sexually explicit material over the Internet and also with assessing the possible effectson privacy of that technology. The commission released its final report in 2000, reporting on theviability of filtering and blocking services, labeling and rating services, age verificationstrategies, “green spaces” containing only material appropriate to children, monitoring and timelimitingtechnologies, acceptable-use policies and family Internet- use contracts, and options formore vigorous prosecution of persons who distribute illegal online material.b. Programs Identified for This InventoryThe 18 programs identified through the search methodology are described below. They areprimarily organized according to funder and secondarily organized by function (educationalprograms first, research programs second). The narrative descriptions are based on informationprovided in the referenced Web sites. Note that inclusion in the inventory does not constitute anendorsement. In producing this inventory, no attempt has been made to evaluate the content oreffectiveness of any program.2. U.S. Department of Justice Funded Programsa. i-SAFE AmericaProgram name: • i-SAFE America, Inc.Contact • www.isafe.orginformation:Funder:• U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency PreventionAudience: • Children and youth grades K–12Focus/scope: • Safety in online relationships; avoiding pornography and otheroffensive materials; copyright, plagiarism, and intellectual propertytheft; Internet citizenship; cyberbullying; identity theft and privacyconcerns; hacking and malicious programmingMedia: • Workbooks and Web-cast videos for students; instructor materialsDelivery: • Classroomi-SAFE America, Inc., a nonprofit foundation founded in 1998, is dedicated to educating andempowering youth to safely and responsibly take control of their Internet experiences. i-SAFEproduces and distributes a curriculum for classroom use in grades K–12. The i-SAFE program isdesigned to teach students to recognize and avoid dangerous, destructive, or unlawful behavioronline and to respond appropriately. The i-SAFE curriculum includes online exercises andactivities, pen-and-paper activities, and class projects. Training and technical assistance forteachers are provided free of charge.112

online games <strong>and</strong> activities, <strong>and</strong> scholarly articles or other materials with an educational focus.Major federally funded research programs on the topic of Internet safety were included becausethe recommendations they yield contribute to public awareness about the topic.Web pages with lists of Internet safety rules with no other interactive content did not meet thecriteria <strong>for</strong> inclusion in this inventory. Software packages marketed to parents, schools, <strong>and</strong>libraries <strong>for</strong> blocking, recording, or monitoring Internet usage by youth were also outside thescope of this inventory because they are products of private commercial enterprises.1. Methodology of Review<strong>The</strong> search <strong>for</strong> English-language materials was conducted both online <strong>and</strong> through documentreview. <strong>The</strong> search engines Google <strong>and</strong> Yahoo were used to scan <strong>for</strong> the term “Internet safety,”<strong>and</strong> a list of hits was compiled <strong>for</strong> review. Programs that were linked to these sites as additionalresources also were included in the equivalent of an electronic “snowball sampling” strategy. 93<strong>The</strong> home pages of federal agencies <strong>and</strong> departments were included, <strong>and</strong> the page searchfunction, if available, was used to search <strong>for</strong> the term “Internet safety.” In addition, personsworking in federal agencies were asked to describe their own departments’ ef<strong>for</strong>ts in this area. Inall, 18 federally funded programs were identified, 16 of which are educational programs <strong>for</strong>children, youth, or adults. Two are federally funded research projects that includerecommendations to prevent the online victimization of children. (See appendix 1 <strong>for</strong> adescription of all 18 federally funded programs.) Appendix 2 lists a representative (but notexhaustive) set of nonfederally funded Internet safety programs. It is not within the scope of thisinventory to discuss these programs in detail or to evaluate the programs identified.Pursuant to Pub. L. No. 108–447, this inventory was prepared in coordination with theCoordinating Council on Juvenile Justice <strong>and</strong> Delinquency <strong>Prevention</strong>. On January 7, 2005, J.Robert Flores, OJJDP Administrator <strong>and</strong> Vice Chair of the Coordinating Council, sent a letter toCoordinating Council members requesting, among other things, their cooperation in preparingthis report. Mr. Flores also discussed the preparation of the inventory at the meeting of theCoordinating Council on March 4, 2005. OJJDP appreciates the cooperation of Council memberagencies in providing <strong>and</strong> reviewing in<strong>for</strong>mation incorporated in this report.a. History of Federal Involvement in Internet Safety Programs <strong>for</strong> Youth<strong>The</strong> federal government’s first broad <strong>for</strong>ay into the field of Internet safety <strong>for</strong> children wasmarked by the passage of the <strong>Child</strong> Online Protection Act of 1998 (COPA). COPA created acommission to “identify technological or other methods that will help reduce access by minorsthat is harmful to minors on the Internet.” <strong>The</strong> COPA Commission was charged with evaluating93 Snowball sampling is an approach where in<strong>for</strong>mants are asked to identify other persons knowledgeable about thetopic of study. When these persons are interviewed the researcher accumulates more <strong>and</strong> more in<strong>for</strong>mation about thetopic. <strong>The</strong> chain of “recommended in<strong>for</strong>mants” initially diverges, but finally converges as a few key persons emergeas the most frequently mentioned names. Patton, Michael Quinn (1990). Qualitative Research & EvaluationMethods. Sage: Thous<strong>and</strong> Oaks, CA, p. 237.111

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!