This week, our guests focus on digital surveillance, academic accommodations, and Indigenous perspectives on technology.

Ian Linkletter discusses “Academic Surveillance in Higher Education.” He highlights how exam proctoring software and LMS logs can track students in ways many do not realize. Chris Gilliard shares insights on how digital surveillance can disproportionately affect marginalized communities. Check his blog for more details or, if possible, read his articles in The Atlantic and Wired.

We also had a follow-up on accommodations. CAL team members explained the difference between accommodations and concessions. They also introduced campus resources, like specialized tutors, mental health supports, and the Student Wellness Centre. Many students are unaware of how much help is available.

Finally, we heard from Nodin Cutfeet of the Waniskaw Foundation on Indigenous digital literacy. Nodin showed how technology can preserve culture, connect remote communities, and guide new storytelling methods. Look out for upcoming info on log data and tracking by Colin Madland.

Key Points:

  • Many students and faculty are still unsure how long data from monitoring tools is stored and who exactly can access it
  • Some institutions are quietly updating their policies on remote testing and surveillance after concerns surfaced in public forums
  • Many learners do not realize accommodations can include digital strategies, such as alternative exam formats or specialized software
  • There has been increasing interest in peer-led workshops that teach both data protection and respectful use of technology
  • Some guests expressed that balancing cultural integrity with modern technology requires ongoing dialogue, not just a one-time consultation
  • A few campus groups are starting to question whether “academic integrity tools” might conflict with students’ rights, especially those with documented needs for flexible testing methods

My reflection:

Reflecting on this week’s materials, I see how technology can be both an asset and a liability. Digital tools support cultural continuity, especially in Indigenous communities, by connecting people over great distances and introducing new ways to share ideas. At the same time, tools meant to make life easier can also turn into surveillance devices, raising worries about privacy and fairness. Hearing from speakers like Ian Linkletter and Chris Gilliard highlights the need for critical digital literacy. We should know how and why our data is collected, who can view it, and the power structures that guide its use. The CAL team’s talk on accommodations reminds me that technology should be open and adaptable for learners with different needs. Overall, these sessions show me that while digital innovation can be helpful, it also carries responsibilities to ensure it stays fair and respectful of everyone.