How does the panopticon function in governing the lives of students in modern schools? Angela Morgan (2005) describes the dark side in special education specifically depicting how power relations during the statementation process disgustingly resemble the prison system that is the panopticon. Foucault’s conceptualization of power within the panopticon and its use to control and resist contribute to an understanding of power relationships within schools, explained Patricia .H. Hinchey (2010) in her argument for why critical theory matters in the classroom. Hinchey dedicated an entire chapter to authority critically analyzing power relations within school culture, specifically highlighting how cultural capital plays a significant role in student
…show more content…
At the center of the room was a guards’ tower standing tall. Atop the tower was a room covered with windows that allowed the guardsmen to view the actions of every prisoner; however, the uni-directional windows blocked prisoners from knowing what was happening in the tower. Structurally, the panopticon served its functional purpose of having a guard watching over its prison population. Though in practice having a single guard watch over all the inmates at all times was impossible, the tower effectively controlled the prison population by having the prisoners monitor their own and each other’s behaviors, an element known as automatic functioning of power. In essence, the tower served as a symbol of authority and surveillance and meant to be feared. The tower represented sovereign (hierarchical) power (Morgan 2005), where it is clear and visible who is/are the dominant …show more content…
Hinchey (2010) sorting mechanisms practiced in schools, like grades, report cards, ability grouping of students, and tracks, all contribute to the panopticon. Teachers grade their students on a curriculum and rubric of their choosing. Students are placed in ESL, regular, gifted, or honors classes and promoted or demoted based on their performance. Report cards are how parents monitor their child’s progress in schools. All of these methods place the child under surveillance and in the watchful eye of those in the tower. Hinchey argues, “theoretically, children receive the grades and placements they have ‘earned’ by virtue of their ability and application. The reality, however, is far different. Their particular cultural background has far more to do with how children fare in schools than does their ability” (p90). As a culture, in whatever context, we create a template of an ideal that we then identify as the right way to live, speak, act, and do things and anyone that does not fit our ideal representation belongs in a powerless group (Hinchey 2010, p80). In the panopticon, the powerless are the individuals in the periphery. Particularly, Hinchey narrates the all too common story of how non-English speaking immigrant children in school are often marginalized and excluded from groups and activities by their peers because of the language barrier. Moreover, teachers treat ESL students and
At the center of the room was a guards’ tower standing tall. Atop the tower was a room covered with windows that allowed the guardsmen to view the actions of every prisoner; however, the uni-directional windows blocked prisoners from knowing what was happening in the tower. Structurally, the panopticon served its functional purpose of having a guard watching over its prison population. Though in practice having a single guard watch over all the inmates at all times was impossible, the tower effectively controlled the prison population by having the prisoners monitor their own and each other’s behaviors, an element known as automatic functioning of power. In essence, the tower served as a symbol of authority and surveillance and meant to be feared. The tower represented sovereign (hierarchical) power (Morgan 2005), where it is clear and visible who is/are the dominant …show more content…
Hinchey (2010) sorting mechanisms practiced in schools, like grades, report cards, ability grouping of students, and tracks, all contribute to the panopticon. Teachers grade their students on a curriculum and rubric of their choosing. Students are placed in ESL, regular, gifted, or honors classes and promoted or demoted based on their performance. Report cards are how parents monitor their child’s progress in schools. All of these methods place the child under surveillance and in the watchful eye of those in the tower. Hinchey argues, “theoretically, children receive the grades and placements they have ‘earned’ by virtue of their ability and application. The reality, however, is far different. Their particular cultural background has far more to do with how children fare in schools than does their ability” (p90). As a culture, in whatever context, we create a template of an ideal that we then identify as the right way to live, speak, act, and do things and anyone that does not fit our ideal representation belongs in a powerless group (Hinchey 2010, p80). In the panopticon, the powerless are the individuals in the periphery. Particularly, Hinchey narrates the all too common story of how non-English speaking immigrant children in school are often marginalized and excluded from groups and activities by their peers because of the language barrier. Moreover, teachers treat ESL students and