Space and power in school: ClassDojo as a digital social space
Discipline, visibility, and parental engagement in twenty-first-century lower primary education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31074/gyntf.2026.2.50.67Keywords:
educational technology, digital learning environments, home–school relations, primary education, classroom managementAbstract
In twenty-first-century education, “social space” is no longer confined to the physical classroom: digital platforms—including ClassDojo—create new arenas of interaction that reconfigure pedagogical practices and power relations. During the early primary years, as they transit from preschool to primary school, students must adapt to new rules, norms, and assessment frameworks; here, ClassDojo plays a dual role. On the one hand, it renders student behaviour and performance visible and trackable; on the other, it strengthens parent–school communication and partnership. Through continuous documentation and feedback, the platform increases student visibility and can restructure classroom roles, which may entail both support and disciplinary control (Manolev, Sullivan, & Slee, 2019; Lupton & Williamson, 2017). The spread of educational technology is often justified by increased efficiency and reduced administrative burdens (Selwyn, 2018; Jarke & Breiter, 2019; Collie, 2021), yet it also gives rise to dilemmas around data governance and the exercise of power (Manolev, Sullivan, & Slee, 2019). This study examines how, in the lower primary grades, ClassDojo operates simultaneously as a disciplinary/monitoring mechanism and a community-building tool, and how it reorders the teacher–student–parent network in the digital age.
Downloads
References
Collie, R. J. (2021). COVID-19 and teachers’ somatic burden, stress, and emotional exhaustion: Examining the role of principal leadership and workplace buoyancy. AERA Open, 7(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420986187
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-Determination Theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness Guilford Press.
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. E. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining “gamification”. Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference, 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040
Foucault, M. (1990). Felügyelet és büntetés: A börtön történetE. Gondolat.
Hartong, S., & Manolev, J. (2023). The construction of (good) parents (as professionals) in/through learning platforms. Tertium Comparationis, 29 (1), 93–116. https://doi.org/10.31244/tc.2023.01.05
Hope, A. (2016). Biopower and school surveillance technologies 2.0. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 37(7), 885–904. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2014.1001060
Jarke, J., & Breiter, A. (2019). Editorial: The datafication of education. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1573833
Kervin, L., Danby, S., & Mantei, J. (2019). A cautionary tale: Digital resources in literacy classrooms. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(4), 443–456. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1620769
Kitchin, R., & Dodge, M. (2011). Code/Space: Software and everyday life. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262042482.001.0001
Knopf, H. T., & Swick, K. J. (2008). Using our understanding of families to strengthen family involvement. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(5), 419–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-007-0198-z
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Blackwell.
Lewis, R., Romi, S., Katz, Y. J., & Qui, X. (2008). Students’ reaction to classroom discipline in Australia, Israel and China. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(3), 715–724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.05.003
Livingstone, S., & Third, A. (2017). Children and young people’s rights in the digital age: An emerging agenda. New Media & Society, 19(5), 657–670. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816686318
Lupton, D., & Williamson, B. (2017). The datafied child: The dataveillance of children and implications for their rights. New Media & Society, 19(5), 780–794. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816686328
Manolev, J., Sullivan, A., & Slee, R. (2019). The datafication of discipline: ClassDojo, surveillance and a performative classroom culture. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(1), 36–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1558237
Rogers, E. M. (2015). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Simon and Schuster.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.81064-8
Selwyn, N. (2016). Education and Technology: Key issues and debates (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474235952
Selwyn, N. (2018). Should robots replace teachers? AI and the future of education. Polity.
Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35(2), 245–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2006.12087989
Thompson, B. C., Mazer, J. P., & Flood Grady, E. (2015). The changing nature of parent–teacher communication: Mode selection in the smartphone era. Communication Education, 64(2), 187–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2015.1014382
Thornberg, R. (2010). School children’s reasoning about school rules. Research Papers in Education, 25(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671520701651029
Williamson, B. (2017). Big data in education: The digital future of learning, policy and practice. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529714920
Williamson, B., & Hogan, A. (2020). Commercialisation and privatisation in/of education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 52(2), 129–130.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2011). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203839010
ClassDojo (2024). About ClassDojo. https://www.classdojo.com/about/(2025.10.30.)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Julianna Halvax
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
