In Foucault's story Panopticism there is a main focus on discipline. The town is separated into different sections and rows to make sure everyone is being disciplined correctly. Looking further into discipline Foucault focuses on many different ways that they do this, one being laboratories. In my past experiences I have noticed some forms are laboratory work throughout the school system. I believe that this had both negative and positive effects on my schooling to this day.

When Foucault describes laboratory uses, what he wants to do is alter the behavior of certain individuals so he can correctly train them to become better and then he monitors the effects his changes made on each person. He uses this for punishment for prisoners, techniques to help workers improve in their daily jobs, and used in orphans in education (Foucault, 243). He uses his laboratory experiments in both positive and negative ways, which relates to the main concept of discipline. One being to the prisoners, which is negative, and the other being to the workers, which is positive. Using these methods he helps to improve people and also make others better people for the future. The specific theme in this story is discipline. (Foucault, 243)

A time in my life where I saw this used extremely often was through out high school. The way that this worked is you were separated by levels into skill advancement. There was four levels, one was the slow learners and four was the advanced learners. In the level one classes the students tended to act out more then the students in level four classes. This is how discipline varies from level to level. The way teachers would talk to level one students was different then the way they talked to level four students.

Each level was taught at a different pace, this was a very positive and beneficial part of the level system. This way each student had the chance to follow the material and earn a good grade even if they were not an advanced learner. The negative effects of the level system was that if you were in a lower level there was not as much work, so you could slack off a bit. Knowing students who could have taken level three classes but chose to take level two's just so they could have an easy year. It also could be discouraging to the students, because if you are not accepted into the higher levels you may not feel as though you are capable of succeeding in a harder class which can lower some students self esteem. Teachers also monitor students in different levels differently. Although this was not an experiment on students it can relate in the way that you are separating students and disciplining them differently.

Looking back on the level system I had always seen it as something very positive but now when I think of the levels in terms of skill levels it is a little discouraging. I was never in the higher-level classes and I feel as though that may not have prepared me for college as much as it should have. I was not challenging myself because I felt I could not take the advanced courses and would fail if I tried. I do not believe the level system should be changed because it does fit the needs of all students whether they are advanced learners or slower learners, it gives each student the equal opportunity to succeed. What should be changed is that you are not separated into level, but the guidance counselors are the ones that make your schedule and place you in the classes without the label of each class advancement. This could make students feel as though they are just as equal to all the other students in the school.

Foucaults Panopticism related to my schooling because I felt that we were being separated and taught in different ways. This related to the laboratory concept because we were observed, placed into different levels, taught in different ways as well as disciplined. This laboratory work must be done and analyzed very closely at each different schooling system because it can be both negative and positive for the students. 

