Adam Russell
The Panopticon in the Classroom
When talking about Foucalut and the prison structure of the panopticon, we see it as an apt metaphor for the way people regulate behavior in society. As James put it in class the other day, the panopticon is everything: we are governed by the idea of a presence watching and punishing us for not obeying societal rules. Of course, this metaphor applies to the literal interpretation of security surveillance, government authority, police, and various other ways people are monitored, but it also applies to the methods in which we follow the codes of society. Our complete ideology is constituted under a watchful eye that keeps us on what society considers “the right path.” Similar to Freud’s concept of the Superego, we are all governed by the threat of consequences and thus we regulate ourselves under the label of morality and good consciousness in order to function in a social structure.
The conditioning we receive from society’s ethos can be an incredible tool for classroom management. To do so, a teacher must establish presence in the classroom. Presence is hard to define because it relates to the indefinable qualities of charisma that people respect and identify as an authority figure. In many ways, this respect is created through of consistency of ethic and a strong sense of personal standards. This individual must be a reflection (or representation) of accepted social behavior. Much of what creates this person is the watchful gaze of authority. They have regulated their behavior throughout their life in such a way that they epitomize the image of success in the culture. Many of these people are teachers, and much of the presence they maintain in the classroom is a direct result of that cultural assimilation.
Thus, teachers are what you might call “success stories” of the panopticon; for the most part, they have allowed the eye to regulate their behavior so that they can not only function in society, but use it as a tool for personal success. It is up to the teacher to be that representation of society to students and, for some students, a model of success when they do not have a proper role-model at home. Much of this is carried out within the minutia of classroom management procedures. Part of establishing presence is in the way the teacher controls the classroom. Of course, the degree of control varies based on the age and maturity of the students, but it still must be established on all levels if the teacher wants to achieve respect. Once it’s established, the student becomes a regulator of their own behavior out of respect for the teacher and the methods he uses to control the classroom. Foucault states that “he who is subjected to a field of visibility, and who knows it, assumes responsibility for the constraints of power [. . .]; he inscribes in himself the power relation in which he simultaneously plays both roles; he becomes the principle of his own subjection” (par. 12). Essentially, the subject subjugates his own behavior in such a way that the teacher does not even need to exhibit authority and allows the class to flow in a reciprocal manner. Do students behave because they fear consequences from the teacher, the institution, and their parents? In some ways yes, because we have all been conditioned to see those entities as authority figures. However, a good teacher wields these powers in such a way that the student is unaware of it and allows the pedagogical environment of the classroom to facilitate cultural acclimation and learning.
I had not applied this idea to classroom management until you discussed it in class and in your paper. When education was addressed, I likened the classroom to a laboratory. One in which teachers are like doctors constantly monitioring instruction, searching for new and better techniques. I can now easily see how it fits with classroom management also.
I like the idea of a laboratory. I’ve never thought of it that way. I think both metaphors apply when it comes to creating a pedagogical environment. Classroom management is the most important thing in the classroom. Without proper control over a classroom, much of what the teacher tries to achieve is wasted. Since I’m only familiar with teaching on the high school level, I’m curious as to how college professors go about creating presence in the classroom. Of course its different from high school, but they still must manage the behavior of the classroom so that learning is optimized.
You know I understand where you both are coming from, but I am not sure I agree. I agree that the teacher needs to have control of the classroom, but I dont think that creating a watchful presence like a laboratory is the healthiest and most productive way to go about it. This type of presence presupposes that the students behavior is wrong and detrimental to the learning process. I dont think this is true. It also aids in the tracking process, something I despise. I think creating the type of presence you are talking about in the classroom creates just another authority figure to rebel against. Of course this is not true for all students, but I think that a dominating, always present, watchful eye of the teacher can be oppressive and unbeneficial to the learning process. I think there are other ways to garner respect and create a trusting environment in a classroom, and I also think that often times the teacher’s agenda and what they are trying to achieve is not what the students need. So if the teacher is less dominating and the classroom is more democratic students will be more likely to want to learn, which in turn makes the teachers job easier. IDK, its just my opinion.