Comment: ¥30 million for AI cameras in lecture halls – Nanjing’s U-turn is not enough

One of China’s top universities has stopped tracking who looks at the front. The cameras are still there – and Britain should take note

Nanjing University has switched off a single metric after a public outcry: how many students in a lecture hall are looking at the front. The cameras, worth more than ¥30 million, stay – and that is exactly the problem.

A comment by Juliane Wehrhahn, AI editor at Net Trends. It reflects the author’s view. The facts are taken from the sources linked below.

Nanjing University in Jiangsu province is one of China’s leading universities. It ranks sixth in the 2026 ShanghaiRanking of Chinese universities. That is why the way it handles cameras in lecture halls is more than a footnote.

What Nanjing measured

According to the South China Morning Post, the university spent more than ¥30 million on a “smart classroom” system. Cameras and AI software are installed in over 100 lecture halls and several shared spaces. They count who is there, who is late and who is looking at the front.

That last figure is known in Chinese as the “taitou lü”, roughly the “head-up rate”. It measures the share of students looking at the lecturer rather than at their phone, laptop or desk. In October, the university said attendance would be logged for one week as part of teaching inspections.

Then screenshots surfaced online: live images from lecture halls next to real-time figures on attendance, lateness and attention. Some lecturers reportedly warned that the data could affect grades or access to exams. On 4 November the university dropped the head-up rate.

Download graphic (JPG, 1,800 × 1,872 pixels)

The university insists the system does not collect facial or other biometric data – physical features that can identify a person, such as the face. It says there is no link to grades and that no higher authority ordered the checks. The screenshots, it says, came from a trial on one campus in May.

The head-up rate measures obedience, not learning

You do not need to be an education researcher to spot the flaw. Looking at the front does not mean learning. A student who takes notes, reads the slides or simply thinks lowers the rate – and may well learn more than the one dutifully staring at the board.

So the metric rewards posture, not understanding. It turns the lecture hall into a place where people feel watched. And it shifts the blame for dull lectures onto students rather than teaching.

To be fair, phones in lectures are a real nuisance. One lecturer even told VnExpress the cameras mainly serve to assess teaching staff. That could be a legitimate aim. But it does not require a statistic on where every single head is pointing.

Only one number has been switched off

The university’s U-turn is a win for the students who complained publicly. But it is smaller than it sounds. One metric has gone. The university has not announced removing the cameras or ending attendance tracking.

Anyone who spends ¥30 million on equipment is unlikely to leave it idle. The infrastructure is in place. A new metric can be switched back on at any time without anyone touching a screw.

Nanjing is not an isolated case either. Business magazine Caixin reports that several Chinese universities use similar systems, some of which also count how many front-row seats are taken. As early as 2018, Hangzhou No. 11 Middle School tested a Hikvision system that, according to Sixth Tone, logged six behaviours and seven facial expressions.

What UK law would say

Since Brexit, the EU’s AI Act, which bans emotion recognition in education, does not apply in Britain. Here, the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 set the limits. Biometric data used to identify people is special category data under Article 9 and may only be processed under strict conditions.

The Information Commissioner’s Office has shown it takes this seriously in schools. In July 2024 it reprimanded Chelmer Valley High School in Essex for using facial recognition for canteen payments without a proper data protection impact assessment. As early as 2022, the ICO warned that “emotion analysis” technology was immature and risky.

Download graphic (JPG, 1,800 × 1,721 pixels)

Britain should not dismiss Nanjing as a distant Chinese story. Remote exam proctoring software is familiar at UK universities too. The question of how much measurement a lecture hall can take arises everywhere.

What should happen now

A genuine fresh start in Nanjing would have three parts. First, disclose what data the cameras still collect and how long it is kept. Second, let students and staff have a say in what the technology is used for. Third, an independent check of whether the system really does not analyse faces, as the university claims.

Trust does not come from switching off one number. It comes when the people affected can verify what is being measured about them.

The case shows how quickly teaching technology can become a tool for measuring behaviour. Whether Nanjing will restrict the cameras further remains to be seen.

Sources and status

• VnExpress International: Nanjing University stops AI attention tracking, 8 November 2026 (based on reporting by the South China Morning Post)
• The Cool Down / Yahoo News: classroom screenshots, 13 November 2026
• Sixth Tone: Camera Above the Classroom, 26 March 2019
• ICO: Essex school reprimanded after using facial recognition technology for canteen payments, July 2024
• UK GDPR, Article 9
• Personal Information Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China (PIPL), English translation by DigiChina, Stanford University
• Original article on Net Trends (in German)

Research and data as of: 13 November 2026.

Transparency note: AI-assisted tools were used in researching, structuring and writing this article. The sources used are listed in the article. Publication takes place only after manual editorial approval. Country edition based on an article by Net Trends, researched for the United Kingdom.