Rose summarises the research method Discourse Analysis II as focusing on the production by institutions and the human subjects they produce. It looks at how “visual images and objects are produced in particular ways by institutional apparatuses and technologies” (Rose 2001, p. 169). This differs from Discourse Analysis I, which focuses more on the meanings of visual images and texts.
Rose gives the example of the “archive” to illustrate the method. The archive is an institution, which classifies certain information. Rose questions the meanings placed within the archive and illustrates how archives embody power in the collection of certain things. The rules of what should be included in the collection all help produce institutional knowledge and power.
This method comes from Foucault and his theories on discipline, knowledge, power and docile bodies. It demonstrates how docile bodies’ discipline themselves (Rose 2001, p. 166). The panopticon is a perfect example, used as a machine for altering minds through self-surveillance. Surveillance is an efficient form of producing docile bodies and social order. Discourse Analysis II “concentrates most on the sites of production and audience, in their social modality” (Rose 2001, p. 167), which is important to remember in comparison to Discourse Analysis I, which focuses texts and visual images. Discourse Analysis II works around the “insistence on the power relations articulated through these practices and institutions” (Rose 2001, p. 168). Some criticisms of method are the lack of interest in apparatus’ that do not fit into the surveillance theory and the lack of reflexivity (Rose 2001, p. 168, p. 185).
Foucault uses the terms “institutional apparatus” and “institutional technologies” inconsistently (Rose 2001, p. 166). The term “institutional apparatus” is “the forms of power/knowledge that constitute the institutions” (Rose 2001, p. 166). Examples Rose gives are laws, morals and regulations and the discourse that articulates this (Rose 2001, p. 166). The term “institutional technologies” can at times be difficult to differentiate from apparatus (Rose 2001, p. 166). They are the techniques and tools used to practise this certain knowledge/power (Rose 2001, p. 167). Technologies are erratic sets of tools and methods, according to Rose (Rose 2001, p. 167). Photography is an example, appearing as a truth it can be altered to propel power and knowledge of the institutional apparatus. Institutions such as hospitals, prisons, websites, art galleries and museums can be studied with the discourse analysis II. Any institution that dictates knowledge and power using institutional apparatus’ and technologies can be studied by this method. Maastricht University, being an educational institution, can also be studied.
Disciplining surveillance methods are used by Maastricht University in order to educate its students on its particular views and morals. The University is divided into separate faculties, disciplining the students to focus on one area. This is similar to the used of classification systems in archives, museums and galleries. These institutional apparatus’ (discourse on education and classification systems) are enforced using institutional technologies. One example that can be examined is the classroom layout. There are multiple different educational layouts within Maastricht University and the FASoS Faculty. Classrooms, study areas, lecture halls and cafes are all designed for a different purpose of discipline and surveillance.
Classrooms are organised for the PBL learning method. The teacher sits among the students, indication no one is in charge and all are learning together. This in turn helps dictate the social positions (Rose 2001, p. 173) created by Maastricht. The teachers feel more approachable, despite being the experts in the field. By giving more power to the student through facilitation, they are disciplined into saying the ‘right thing’ and are thus produced as docile bodies. As discipline is produced by pressure to say what is correct, surveillance is by the students themselves.
Lecture rooms contrast to this as they are for direct teaching. The students are not supposed to speak or distract. This is seen through the layout of chairs and the room, all facing towards the lecturer and Smart board. Whiteboards and PowerPoint presentations also illuminate the apparatus. Whiteboards are designed to write during class and PowerPoint’s are observed. In lectures, everything is supposed to be taken as a direct truth, in PBL we are supposed to question and challenge each other, illustrating Foucault’s regimes of truth.
Like art galleries, Universities remain excluded to some groups in society, those who don’t receive the marks or cannot afford it. Better universities are in wealthier areas therefore rent and living expenses are higher. This also helps in creating power and knowledge regimes within institutions. It can be seen by applying Discourse Analysis II to Maastricht University that it aligns with Foucauldian theories on power/knowledge, discipline and surveillance.