This blog post explores power dynamics between parents and school leadership using a Foucauldian panopticon perspective. It examines the power and control exerted by school leadership across the education system as a whole, the influence and decision-making role of parents, and the potential for authentic dialogue to create a more equitable educational environment.
In my pursuit of my doctorate in education, the reading list is extensive, and I end up down numerous avenues of possible theoretical and conceptual frameworks, under the false sense of security that I’ve found my niche and the underpinning theories of a groundbreaking sociologist, only to discover I haven’t. The journey is a lot of ‘one step forward and two steps back’, but I’ve been reliably informed that I will emerge from the fog at some point (hopefully in the next few years). I’ve been reading about Bourdieu, Foucault, Gramsci, Habermas, and Derrida, from a sociological perspective. Previous posts explored the role of parental participation more through a Bourdieusian lens, focussing on the idea of capital. Given that the theme of power and control feature heavily in issues around societies inequalities, the work of Foucault seemed to be the next logical step for a post.
Note
Before we go further, I use the term ‘parent’ to encompass any adult, outside of school, who has a significant caring responsibility for a young person. In additition, I use the term ‘participation’ to mean the decision-making abilities and influence of parents in schools, as opposed to parental involvement and engagement which focuses more on parents engaging with children’s learning to better their educational outcomes.
Introduction
If you’ve been keeping up with the last few posts (and if not, why not?), you’ll know that my area of research sits with the role of parents in schools and how we can better ensure their meaningful participation in our communities. In my reading, I’ve discovered the (possibly obvious) idea that the main barrier to parental participation is the power dynamic between parents, teachers and school leaders. Being a relatively new recipient of sociological knowledge, the existence of Foucauldian discourse and the idea of ‘panopticism’ is fascinating; however, it may send a chill down your spine or make your hair stand on end.
In my continued exploration of discourse around parental participation in schools the following article focuses on the topic through a Foucauldian, panoptic lens, and I look to examine the role of parents in this light. When we look at how panopticism impacts us on a society level, are we sure we want to foist the same experience on our parent communities, if we can avoid it? This article will not be without its flaws, or without criticism, but here we go…
Who is Foucault anyway?
Michel Foucault (1926-1984) was a prominent French philosopher and social theorist whose work had a profound impact on various disciplines, including philosophy, sociology, history, and cultural studies. His ideas centered around power, knowledge, and the ways in which institutions shape and control individuals. It starts to sound a bit ‘tin foil hat’; however, the majority of society goes about life without critically thinking about how the higher powers of societal authorities shape our lives under the guise of us believing we have free choice. The aim of this article isn’t to incite revolt or to convince you to be ‘anti-establishment’, but more to get you thinking, possibly in ways you haven’t before. I know I hadn’t really. My thoughts on societies functionality had been normalised: that’s the way it’s always been, and I hadn’t come to any apparent harm, so why question it? My positionally and privilege means that I hadn’t come to any harm, but many have, and hence why we should question it.
Foucault argued that power is not solely repressive but operates through various disciplinary techniques that regulate and normalise behaviour. In summary, he put forth the idea that if people in society know they are being watched, they are more likely to self-regulate their own behaviour, which in turn supports the state to implement law and keep people in line. He examined the historical development of disciplinary institutions such as prisons, schools, and hospitals, revealing how they produce and maintain power relations.
One of Foucault's key concepts is the notion of ’biopower’, which refers to the mechanisms of control exerted over entire populations through techniques such as surveillance, regulation of bodies, and normalisation of behaviour - in other words, the construction of an idealised norm of conduct to which people could be rewarded or punished for, or for not, following. He explored the intersections of power and knowledge, emphasizing that knowledge is not neutral but is shaped by power structures and serves to enforce social control.
Foucault's work challenged traditional approaches to history and social theory by emphasising the importance of studying marginalised groups, resistances, and the micro-level operations of power. His ideas have influenced a wide range of fields, including gender studies, postmodernism, and critical theory in our efforts to understand and transform power dynamics in society.
Foucault introduced the concept of the panopticon, a metaphorical prison designed to exert power and control over individuals through constant surveillance (see the image above where the cells line the external wall, facing a central rotunda). Applying this framework to various institutions, such as schools, allows us to examine the power dynamics that exist within their communities. Whilst I do not liken schools to prisons, hence the metaphorical aspect, the ways in which power is distributed between authority figures and community members are, in some ways, akin to one another. In this blog post, I want to delve into a Foucauldian panopticon perspective of parental participation in schools, exploring how the system reliant on an imbalance of power impacts the parents in our school communities.
The panopticon: a symbol of power and control
The panopticon is described as a building with exposed, backlit cells lining the peripheral prison wall, facing inward toward a central watchtower. With this lighting, one can observe the cells‘ residents, while the watchtower is darkened and closed off with Venetian blinds and partitions so the watchers remain undetected. Power is exerted by the watchtower, concealing the watchers inside, while the inmates are exposed from all angles. This design creates a perpetual state of uncertainty and the feeling of being watched, leading to self-discipline of the inmates. This metaphor can be translated to society as a whole, and translating this metaphorical framework into the context of parental participation in schools reveals interesting dynamics.
In schools, the taking of registers, the writing of reports, the use of timetables, the strict adherence to the wearing of a standardised uniform, and the outdated examination processes could all be seen as panoptical control, which ensures individuals behave in a prescribed manner, and reproducing the means of control through acceptance and normalisation of these control mechanisms. Foucault suggested that the successful execution of power, classifying certain behaviours as ‘normal’ and labelling ‘miscreant’ individuals in an attempt to influence self-perception, never questioning the application of such labels.
Foucault’s view of panopticism in society emphasises how a small number of people can excercise control over a large number of people, not only through observation and records, but through individual’s self-regulation which adheres to the ‘normal’ way to function and behave. Is having a small group of individuals exercising unquestioned control over a large number of community members really what we want for our schools, or do we want a more democratic, collaborative, and authentic sharing of power between school leaders and our parent communities?
Parental participation through a panopticon lens
In education, parental participation is often encouraged through policy and cited by schools as being central to their school and aims and values. As explored in previous posts, participation infrequently extends beyond ‘consultation’, whereby parents are permitted to voice their views; however, the ultimate decision-making power lies with teachers and school leadership. We can analyse participation through a panopticon lens and recognise the underlying power structures at play. When parents are actively involved in their children's schooling, they are typically under the constant gaze of the educational system. Theoretically, this surveillance, whether intentional or not, fosters a sense of self-discipline among parents as they conform to societal expectations and norms. This compliance is reinforced by the fear of being judged or labeled as negligent if they fail to meet the expectations of the school or deviate from the prevailing norms. However, we know this is not always the case, as we have all experienced examples of parents who appear to be disengaged in their child’s education, but not through an absence of caring. There are often internal school factors, and larger societal factors influencing their ability to participate. The panopticon structure sounds ideal, from a school perspective, as if fully effective, all parents would be conforming to the school’s expected behaviours. Theoretically, in knowing the possibility that the school is watching, parents would be self-policing their participation on an ongoing basis. Again, from experience, we know this is not always the case.
Looking at the current power interplay in the majority of schools, I argue that more needs to be done to redistribute the power in favour of parents for us to use their knowledge and cultural understandings to better meet the needs of the students in our schools.
Shifting the power dynamic
What if we were to switch-up the dynamics? What if parents were the dominant force in the panopticon, where parents are situated in the watchtower, and teachers and school leadership become the observed? Would this power dynamic better improve parents‘ influence in shaping policies, curricula, and decision-making processes? I do not think teachers and school leaders would like this option. Why should parents? A complete role reversal is most likely not the answer, and not viable, due to a limited professional knowledge parents possess about the education system; however, it is undeniable that a better power-sharing structure between parents and school leadership is needed. We must move away from expecting international parents to mould to our (the UK’s) cultural norms, as if it is an easy ask, and go to where our parents are, harnessing their views and experiences for the betterment of their children’s educations.
While the panopticon model suggests a passive acceptance of surveillance and power, it also offers room for resistance. Foucault argued that power relations are not fixed, but rather produced and reproduced through ongoing processes. To challenge the panopticon, parents and students can assert their agency, question existing power structures, and engage in critical dialogue with school leadership. Instead of being reactive to parental disquiet and limiting participation to those with the necessary capital, why not be proactive in equitably redistributing power in favour of parents using their multicultural experiences and knowledge to our advantage?
By critically examining the discourse of power and control in schools, through a panopticon lens, we can better understand the influence and decision-making power of parents possess in our learning communities. Parental involvement is undoubtedly important for school development, students' well-being and academic success, and it is essential to strike a balance that promotes individuality, critical thinking, and inclusivity for all parents. It is essential for school leaders and teachers to be aware of the influence they exert and to engage in meaningful dialogue with parents that challenges existing power structures. Schools must actively and authentically encourage diverse perspectives, empower parents to challenge dominant norms, and ensure that decision-making processes involve all stakeholders, including marginalised groups. By fostering a more inclusive and equitable educational environment, we can mitigate the potential negative consequences of the absence of parental influence and embrace a broader range of perspectives for the betterment of education as a whole.
Comentários