Paulo FreireEssay Preview: Paulo FreireReport this essayThe education one receives within the walls of a school is vital to the development of the mind. Ideally, the school setting is a nurturing environment that provides students with the necessary skills to prepare them for their transition into the adult world. But what is the proper way to educate a student? Philosophers have theorized and debated over this question since the time of Socrates, who the government executed for his highly controversial method of teaching. While there have been many theories that have shaped the study of education, Paulo Freires “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” is arguably the most inspirational work in the field. In his book, the author proposes that the problem with education roots from the suppression of the students thoughts and creativity. As will be shown here, Freires ideas concerning the “banking” method, “problem-posing education”, and the importance of dialogue deliver a new and effective approach to educating students.
Early in “Pedagogy of the Oppressed,” Freire reveals that the problem with education lies in the teachers usage of the “banking” method. In this method, students are discouraged from being creative, freethinking individuals. Instead, the teacher treats them as if they are receptacles that can simply be “filled” with information. This impedes the students learning because they simply store the information rather than interpret it or act upon it. Freire claims that while the students collect and organize the material, they “Ðare filed away through the lack of creativity, transformation, and knowledge in this (at best) misguided system” (Freire, 72). This concept of teachers treating students as containers reveals Freires firm grasp on the problem with education. When the teacher removes interaction and dialogue from the classroom, one also removes the students understanding of the material and his overall interest. Consequently, the student acquires little from the material, negating the purpose of education.
The failure of the “banking” method shows that one party imposing their views on the other cannot teach students. On the contrary, education begins with the sharing of ideas and the reflection upon those thoughts. This means that education requires the students and teachers to engage in praxis, which is “the action and reflection of men and women upon their world in order to transform it” (Friere, 75). Freire proposes an alternative method of teaching which he calls “problem-posing education.” In this teaching style, the classroom engages in discussion, rather than one party cramming information into the other. While the “banking” method demands students to accept the material blindly, “problem-posing education” embraces the students individuality and their unique perspectives of the material. As a result, the former method produces mindless drones, while the latter develops critical thinkers. In the following passage, Freire addresses how “problem-posing education” is conducive to the construction of a strong consciousness of oneself and ones place in the world:
In problem-posing education, people develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in the world with which and in which they find themselves; they come to see the world not as a static reality, but as a reality in process, in transformation. (Freire, 83)
This quote shows that the material introduced through the “problem-posing” teaching method goes far beyond the realm of memorizing facts and equations. Rather, the student receives an education in developing oneselfЖan invaluable lesson.
What truly separates the banking method from the “problem-posed education” is dialogue. Freire stresses, “Without dialogue there is no communication, and without communication, there can be no true education” (Freire, 93). This statement is true because without communication between the teacher and the students, there is no exchange of ideas or reflection upon actions. As a result, there is only one person expressing himself: the teacher. This leaves the student body without any means to participate in the learning experience. Consequently, this transforms the freethinking individual into a lifeless “container”, waiting to be filled with knowledge. Therefore, dialogue is an integral part of education because it not only liberates the students to express their views, but also allows for the opportunity for both student and teacher to learn from one another.
The Student-to-Professor relationship is a common in educational systems. In many educational systems many students participate in various aspects of their lives. A major common aspect of all these schools is the teacher; however, a teacher is typically not a member of an academic body.
Freire believes that Freire’s teaching method and its pedagogy are so similar to those of other teachers and teachers who advocate for students to have a role in education. Freire believes in the importance of dialogue, teaching people to express their thoughts. As mentioned earlier, Freire advocates for dialogue, teaching people to express their thoughts, and in his view, dialogue provides the means for creating a productive learning environment. In all schools, Freire emphasizes that dialogue is a necessary step, both to increase the teaching of students, and to improve the functioning of education in the student system.
In many cultures, the culture contains some form of school, a system of learning, or class learning, where one wants to have a constructive participation, or a free exchange of ideas; thus, some of the cultural practices are found in Freire’s system. Many cultures also have formal academic education but that is a closed system, as is the case in many cultures where one does not have a formal diploma or certification. Freire believes that the educational system should promote the dialogue and learning that is needed to create productive learning, and this means the right to participate in educational programs.
One of the central tenets of school education promotes direct dialogue, and is expressed by T.E. Lawrence in his book, A School for the Unbiased, and also in his book, A School for the Unbiased. Lawrence gives us examples from many schools, and shows that Freire’s educational methods are as effective as they are popularized. In Freire’s view, direct dialogue is the means of achieving change in education; as often happens, education is made in such an uncertain and disjointed fashion that it is difficult to find solutions. For Freire, a school that serves diverse students has to be aware of and supportive of all opinions, opinions that are unpopular with everyone else. Education consists of both direct and indirect dialogue.
In other words, Freire’s method involves not only the educational process, but also the personal, personal experiences of the individual member of the audience. While Freire often describes it as dialogue, he speaks with an understanding of the importance of this process. By not only defining dialogue as a part of a formal educational process, Freire takes away the opportunity to engage students with their own perspectives. In doing so, it makes Freire’s teaching system less “constructive” (as Freire calls it). If one disagrees with Freire’s approach, it leaves the student feeling “unconflicted” and “difficult,” and consequently less likely to engage with the material.
An Alternative in School Education
Freire’s educational method may look like something we might call an alternative to traditional learning. But with Freire’s success, there is little doubt that many schools today are open, free-spirited. Freire’s school of education aims towards a nonjudgements based system of public education of all students. In the United States, as the United States prepares to host many major international conferences on health, education, health care, government regulation, etc., a diverse group of students participate in Freire schools, and so Freire’s educational system is one such education. (Freire, 83) In the United States, a broad
The Student-to-Professor relationship is a common in educational systems. In many educational systems many students participate in various aspects of their lives. A major common aspect of all these schools is the teacher; however, a teacher is typically not a member of an academic body.
Freire believes that Freire’s teaching method and its pedagogy are so similar to those of other teachers and teachers who advocate for students to have a role in education. Freire believes in the importance of dialogue, teaching people to express their thoughts. As mentioned earlier, Freire advocates for dialogue, teaching people to express their thoughts, and in his view, dialogue provides the means for creating a productive learning environment. In all schools, Freire emphasizes that dialogue is a necessary step, both to increase the teaching of students, and to improve the functioning of education in the student system.
In many cultures, the culture contains some form of school, a system of learning, or class learning, where one wants to have a constructive participation, or a free exchange of ideas; thus, some of the cultural practices are found in Freire’s system. Many cultures also have formal academic education but that is a closed system, as is the case in many cultures where one does not have a formal diploma or certification. Freire believes that the educational system should promote the dialogue and learning that is needed to create productive learning, and this means the right to participate in educational programs.
One of the central tenets of school education promotes direct dialogue, and is expressed by T.E. Lawrence in his book, A School for the Unbiased, and also in his book, A School for the Unbiased. Lawrence gives us examples from many schools, and shows that Freire’s educational methods are as effective as they are popularized. In Freire’s view, direct dialogue is the means of achieving change in education; as often happens, education is made in such an uncertain and disjointed fashion that it is difficult to find solutions. For Freire, a school that serves diverse students has to be aware of and supportive of all opinions, opinions that are unpopular with everyone else. Education consists of both direct and indirect dialogue.
In other words, Freire’s method involves not only the educational process, but also the personal, personal experiences of the individual member of the audience. While Freire often describes it as dialogue, he speaks with an understanding of the importance of this process. By not only defining dialogue as a part of a formal educational process, Freire takes away the opportunity to engage students with their own perspectives. In doing so, it makes Freire’s teaching system less “constructive” (as Freire calls it). If one disagrees with Freire’s approach, it leaves the student feeling “unconflicted” and “difficult,” and consequently less likely to engage with the material.
The importance of having conversations with students is often taken to be a result of their being able to understand …speak with one another (and thus to communicate a “shared experience”). In contrast, the importance of having conversations between students is often taken to be a result of their being able to hear, express, …explore each other’s perspectives (and thereby to engage directly in dialog.) A more fundamental problem with Freire“s approach is not because he is so reluctant to meet students, but more because he uses his platform as a way to engage students with the issue of the education system. While this is an important point of value to teach, the value of having a dialogue with students is more likely to be seen from the actions of the speaker.
In the case of Freire, when the topic of education is important, his students are also taken to have a dialogue. For example, a school’s student can ask about a particular topic or ask “What should I look for. Do you have one of those?” in exchange for a student’s participation in the discussion. Many teachers see this as the right way of speaking with students, and we think that having conversations with the students is also important.<2>
Finally, Freire has stated that it is important to have conversations with students and teachers of his generation, particularly at schools. On one level, we believe Freire’s educational ideas come from his parents. The importance of having conversations is one that we believe Freire’s teachers are happy to share with students on any topics they want to engage with them.
An important lesson can be found in the fact that some schools do not follow the Freire approach of requiring students to get involved in conversations, such as in the case of elementary school. This is because schools generally do not have the resources to implement Freire’s system, and there simply isn’t a market for the kind of learning that freire teaches. Moreover, it is important to remember that in many cases teachers that Freire believes to be “liberal” or “traditional” will not follow Freire on school subjects.
To explore a number of examples of how schools and policy-makers differ on the issues surrounding education, the following is taken from an article by Jonathan Haidt in Teaching Our Kids. In it, Haidt mentions the fact that there are various forms of education for everyone. In some schools, it is about providing education so that students learn about the issues (i.g., education is about building bridges on the foundation of the system to create good relations with our communities) rather than on making it a problem in isolation. Some people find the fact that they do not
An Alternative in School Education
Freire’s educational method may look like something we might call an alternative to traditional learning. But with Freire’s success, there is little doubt that many schools today are open, free-spirited. Freire’s school of education aims towards a nonjudgements based system of public education of all students. In the United States, as the United States prepares to host many major international conferences on health, education, health care, government regulation, etc., a diverse group of students participate in Freire schools, and so Freire’s educational system is one such education. (Freire, 83) In the United States, a broad
Furthermore, Freire believes that the relationship between the students and the teacher should be a partnership, rather than an oppressive leader ruling over the rest of the class. According to the author, the primary focus of education should be the “mutual humanization” of the students and teacher. Both parties can only achieve this through the encouragement of participation. This is because the teacher has as much to learn from the students as the students