The Foucauldian Toolbox and Sites of Inscription

            Foucault’s analysis and account of how power acts in Discipline and Punish makes it clear that there are many avenues or places to begin an inquiry. Therefore, organizing and outlining the possible targets of my analysis for the latter part of paper is a decisive move that I am (still) currently working towards.

The question, more simply put, is what immediate evidence is most pertinent and representative of change here at Drury? That is, should I be focused on the conduct and relationship between faculty and the administration, the reorganization of departments, or possibly the documents that detail the direction of the university? The likely answer to this is, a little bit of it all. However, I must be cognizant of the number of types of analysis I attempt here, as this is only one part of a relatively short paper.

I have given serious thought to the use of my analysis of Drury’s mission statement and its “vision statement” for the 2015-2018 time period. This is a good source because it is representative of the values of those that have made the decisions, and will presumably continue to do so, that change the trajectory of Drury. It is also a good source in Foucauldian terms because some of the ideas laid out in this document have received some resistance and Foucault considers sites of conflict as a place to begin an analysis. It is also possible that an analysis of the change in the physical layout of the newly formed Humanities department could be seen as an expression of power; this particular idea is hard for me to ignore after having read about the effects of spatial organization in Discipline and Punish.

Most importantly, the documents I choose should allow me to discuss curriculum change in the most positive sense. By positive I mean additive, I must be able to contribute to evaluations of change and produce the possibility of further constructive discussion.