BACKGROUND: Contact tracing is considered a key measure in preventing the spread of infectious diseases. Governments around the world adopted contact tracing to limit the spread of COVID-19 in schools. Contact tracing tools utilizing digital technology (eg, GPS chips, Bluetooth radios) can increase efficiency compared to manual methods. However, these technologies can introduce certain privacy challenges in relation to retention, tracking, and the using and sharing of personal data, and little is known about their applicability in schools. OBJECTIVE: This is the second of two studies exploring the potential of digital tools and systems to help schools deal with the practical challenges of preventing and coping with an outbreak of COVID-19. The aim was to explore the views, needs, and concerns among secondary school stakeholders (parents, teachers, pupils) regarding the implementation of three digital tools for contact tracing: access cards, proximity tracking, and closed-circuit television (CCTV). METHODS: Focus groups and interviews were conducted with secondary school students, parents, and teachers. The topic guide was informed by the Unified Theory of Technology and Acceptance. Data-driven and theory-driven approaches were combined to identify themes and subthemes. RESULTS: We recruited 22 participants. Findings showed that there is no single solution that is suitable for all schools, with each technology option having advantages and limitations. Existing school infrastructure (eg, CCTV and smart/access cards technology) and the geography of each school would determine which tools would be optimal for a particular school. Concerns regarding the cost of installing and maintaining equipment were prominent among all groups. Parents and teachers worried about how the application of these solutions will affect students' right to privacy. Parents also appeared not to have adequate knowledge of the surveillance technologies already available in schools (eg, CCTV). Students, who were mostly aware of the presence of surveillance technologies, were less concerned about any potential threats to their privacy, while they wanted reassurances that any solutions would be used for their intended purposes. CONCLUSIONS: Findings revealed that there is not one tool that would be suitable for every school and the context will determine which tool would be appropriate. This study highlights important ethical issues such as privacy concerns, balancing invasions of privacy against potential benefits, transparency of communication around surveillance technology and data use, and processes of consent. These issues need to be carefully considered when implementing contact tracing technologies in school settings. Communication, transparency, and consent within the school community could lead to acceptance and engagement with the new tools.