Technology is a mundane and an integral part of the everyday life, teaching and learning. The digital is no longer something we need to get used to, but a way of living. It is due to this normalisation of technology in our lives and educational settings that makes it more difficult to be critical about the technologies we use and the effect it has on society. In many ways, technology has reshaped our experience and our condition humanity. The ways we interact with each other, the way we access information, how we perceive time and even how we experience ‘space’ have changed (Frith, 2012).

Teachers and technology specialist often try to bring the latest app or digital tool to the classroom in the hope that it will make the lessons more engaging for the digitally savvy students. Digital innovations change and created so quickly that there is often very little time for educators to evaluate the next app or digital tool they will use with their students. It very easy to sign-up students with just one ‘click’ without reading the hundreds of pages of small print. This absence of critical evaluation of the technology that is adopted contributes to the creation of a type of ‘soft surveillance’ in the classroom. Soft surveillance occurs when teachers in a position of influence/power “participate in, actively engage with, and initiate surveillance themselves” knowingly or unknowingly sharing student’s information publicly. (Lyon, 2017)

Of course, not all technology is created equally. As William Gibson clearly said, “the future is already here, it is just unevenly distributed”. Technology use in schools is not equally distributed around the world, and many of the scenarios I will describe will only resonate in a few privileged educational settings.

Reflection Questions:

• Up to what extent are the surveillance mechanisms taken in Denmark protective? Can these mechanisms pose a risk?
• Who is generating data? Who has control of the data? Who shares the data? Who profits from the data?
• Does surveillance mean to care?