The recent rise of so-called ‘surveillance schools’ is often justified given the need to engender a safe and secure educational environment for students—a fusion of pedagogical and security motives. This article contributes knowledge regarding the attitudes and lived experiences of teenagers in response to school-based surveillance. Focus groups centre discussions on two areas: the effectiveness of policies regarding technology in the classroom as well as school-wide restrictions on Wi-Fi access and the effectiveness of surveillance technologies geared to actively monitor student online activities. We explore a bifurcation of attitudes revealing both resistance to surveillance school practices as well as strong support for monitoring technologies perceived to be effective in addressing cyber-risks like cyberbullying. Our findings point to the need for empirically assessing the contexts where support or antagonism towards surveillance occurs, suggesting neither isomorphic resistance nor wholescale acquiescence.
AdorjanM.RicciardelliR. (2019). Cyber-risk and youth: Digital citizenship, privacy and surveillance. London: Routledge.
2.
AllenK. (2012). Off the radar and ubiquitous: Text messaging and its relationship to ‘drama’ and cyberbullying in an affluent, academically rigorous US high school. Journal of Youth Studies, 15(1), 99–117.
3.
BaileyJ.SteevesV. (Eds). (2015). eGirls, eCitizens. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
4.
BarronC. (2014). ‘I had no credit to ring you back’: Children’s strategies of negotiation and resistance to parental surveillance via mobile phones. Surveillance & Society, 12(3), 401–413.
5.
BergB. (2004). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Long Beach, CA: Pearson.
6.
boyd d. (2008). Why youth ❤ social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In BuckinghamD. (Ed.), Youth, identity, and digital media (pp. 119–142). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
7.
boyd d. (2014). It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. London: Yale University Press.
8.
BrunoF. (2012). Surveillance and participation on Web 2.0. In BallK.HaggertyK.LyonD. (Eds), Routledge handbook of surveillance studies (pp. 343–351). New York, NY: Routledge.
9.
BurkellJ.SaginurM. (2015). ‘She’s just a small town girl, living in an online world’: Differences and similarities between urban and rural girls’ use of and views about online social networking. In BaileyJ.SteevesV. (Eds.), eGirls, eCitizens (pp. 129–152). Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
10.
CalvertC. (2000). Voyeur nation: Media, privacy, and peering in modern culture. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
11.
CassidyW.BrownK.JacksonM. (2012). ‘Under the radar’: Educators and cyberbullying in schools. School Psychology International, 33(5), 520–532.
12.
CassidyW.FaucherC.JacksonM. (2013). Cyberbullying among youth: A comprehensive review of current international research and its implications and application to policy and practice. School Psychology International, 34(6), 575–612.
13.
ClarkeR. (1992). The resistible rise of the national personal data system. Software Law Journal, 5(1), 25–59.
14.
FiskN. (2016). Framing internet safety: The governance of youth online. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
15.
GarlandD. (1997). Governmentality and the problem of crime: Foucault, criminology, sociology. Theoretical Criminology, 1(2), 173–214.
16.
GarlandD. (2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
17.
GirouxH. (2003). The abandoned generation: Democracy beyond the culture of fear. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
18.
HaggertyK. (2006). Tear down the walls: On demolishing the panopticon. In LyonD. (Ed.), Theorizing surveillance: The panopticon and beyond (pp. 23–45). Mill Street, Uffculme: Willan Publishing.
19.
HierS. (2002). Probing the surveillant assemblage: On the dialectics of surveillance practices as processes of social control. Surveillance and Society, 1(3), 399–411.
HindujaS.PatchinJ. (2014). Bullying beyond the schoolyard: Preventing and responding to cyberbullying (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
22.
HopeA. (2005). Panopticism, play and the resistance of surveillance: Case studies of the observation of student internet use in UK schools. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 26(3), 359–373.
23.
HopeA. (2010). Student resistance to the surveillance curriculum. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 20(4), 319–334.
24.
HopeA. (2016). Biopower and school surveillance technologies 2.0. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 37(7), 885–904.
25.
LenhartA. (2009). Teens and sexting: How and why minor teens are sending sexually suggestive nude or nearly nude images via text messaging. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
26.
LivingstoneS. (2003). Children’s use of the internet: Reflections on the emerging research agenda. New Media and Society, 5(2), 147–166.
27.
LivingstoneS. (2008). Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: Teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression. New Media & Society, 10(3), 393–411.
28.
LivingstoneS.Sefton-GreenJ. (2016). The class: Living and learning in the digital age. New York, NY: New York University Press.
29.
LyonD. (Ed.). (2003). Surveillance as social sorting: Privacy, risk, and digital discrimination. New York, NY: Routledge.
30.
MadrizE. (1997). Nothing bad happens to good girls: Fear of crime in women’s lives. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
31.
MannS.NolanJ.WellmanB. (2002). Sousveillance: Inventing and using wearable computing devices for data collection in surveillance environments. Surveillance and Society, 1(3), 331–355.
32.
MarxG. (2003). A tack in the shoe: Neutralizing and resisting the new surveillance. Journal of Social Issues, 59(2), 369–390.
33.
MarxG.SteevesV. (2010). From the beginning: Children as subjects and agents of surveillance. Surveillance and Society, 7(3/4), 192–230.
PearceN.CrossD.MonksH.WatersS.FalconerS. (2011). Current evidence of best practice in whole-school bullying intervention and its potential to inform cyberbullying interventions. Journal of Psychologists and Counsellors in Schools, 21(1), 1–21.
36.
PelfreyW.WeberN. (2014). Talking smack and the telephone game: Conceptualizing cyberbullying with middle and high school youth. Journal of Youth Studies, 17(3), 397–414.
37.
RobinsonL. (2009). A taste for the necessary: A Bourdieuian approach to digital inequality. Information, Communication and Society, 12(4), 488–507.
38.
RoseN. (1996). Governing ‘advanced’ liberal democracies. In BarryA.OsborneT.RoseN. (Eds.), Foucault and political reason: Liberalism, neo-liberalism and rationalities of government (pp. 37–64). London: UCL Press.
39.
ShearingC.StenningP. (1985). From the panopticon to Disney World: The development of discipline. In DoobA.GreenspanE. (Eds.), Perspectives in criminal law (pp. 335–349). Ontario: Canada Law Book Inc.
40.
SteevesV. (2006). It’s not child’s play: The online invasion of children’s privacy. University of Ottawa Law and Technology Journal, 3(1), 169–188.
41.
SteevesV. (2010). Online surveillance in Canadian schools. In MonahanT.TorresR. (Eds.), Schools under surveillance: Cultures of control in public education (Kindle Ed.). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
42.
SteevesV.MilfordT.ButtsA. (2010). Summary of research on youth online privacy. Ottawa: Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada.
43.
StewartD.ShamdasaniP.RookD. (2007). Focus groups, theory and practice. London: SAGE Publications.
44.
StraussA. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. New York, NY: Cambridge.
45.
StraussA.CorbinJ. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.
46.
TankebeJ. (2013). Viewing things differently: The dimensions of public perceptions of police legitimacy. Criminology, 51(1), 103–135.
47.
TapscottD. (2009). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world. New York, NY: Mcgraw-Hill.
48.
TaylorE. (2012). The rise of the surveillance school. In BallK.HaggertyK.LyonD. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of surveillance studies (pp. 225–231). New York, NY: Routledge.
49.
TaylorE. (2013). Surveillance schools: Security, discipline and control in contemporary education. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
50.
TwinnS. (1998). An analysis of the effectiveness of focus groups as a method of qualitative data collection with Chinese populations in nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 28(3), 654–661.
51.
WongD. S. W.ChengC. H. K.NganR. M. H.MaS. K. (2011). Program effectiveness of a restorative whole-school approach for tackling school bullying in Hong Kong. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 55(6), 846–862.
