I’m not sure of an effect this would have on the reader. When I read it I found myself reflecting on all the different teachers and students I have been around in schooling. I thought about the teachers that promoted creativity and the teachers that simply poured and expected us to fill. I have certainly felt this way about education. I think this is a great reason why kids hate school. Their jobs as students are so stripped down and lacking action.
Identify passages where Freire is specific about the roles that teachers and students have in the problem-posing process. Explain your thoughts on this type of education.
“Through dialogue, the teacher-of-the-students and the students-of-the-teacher cease to exist and a new term emerges: teacher-student with student-teacher. […] They become jointly responsible for a process in which all grow” (par. 28).
I whole-heartedly agree that this type of education is revolutionary and futurity. This is the type of education that will answer more pressing questions of our generation. This is also the type of education that welcomes more utopian communities in the world. The discussion problem-posing education brings is the kind of discussion that makes students less afraid to ask questions and more apt to work through things until they fully understand them.
Compare the container student and the problem-poser student. What are is their relationship, similarities/differences? What is their relationship with the teacher?
The container student says, “Yes, uh-huh” and “okay, alight.” The problem-poser student says “but why,” what if it was like this.” The container student takes notes and asks questions last while the problem-posing student is being socratic and taking notes while the discussion is taking place.
Why do you think Freire wrote this piece? How could we use this essay to better understand education?
I think Freire wrote this piece to change the world. He refers to revolution and to liberation repeatedly. Freire believes in a liberated society, “Problem-posing education does not and cannot serve the interests of the oppressor” (par. 53). Freire identifies one of the key ways that education can be oppressive I believe if we reflected on the way society teaches today and worked to identify all the different ways we deposit information we could really improve educational standards.
Freire is saying that the “banking” concept is oppression. Students aren’t being taught to learn, they are being taught to answer questions, “The capability of banking education to minimize or annul the student's creative power and to stimulate their credulity serves the interests of the oppressors, who care neither to have the world revealed nor to see it transformed” (par. 10) Friere provokes the readers sense for a better world. He continually refers oppression and liberation. This sort of created a “good-guy-bad-guy” scenario for me. I wanted to know how to break the oppression and how to identify it. Based on the things I read about Freire he was invested in a liberated world, a world of individuals who weren’t afraid to think for themselves and be critical of society. It is because of this that I also believe the Pedagogy of Ideology was meant for everyone to read. I think it is obviously most suited for the educators of today’s society, intended to teach them how to break the mold but equally there to break the world.
I find him effective. This is the type of reading that gets me excited that makes me want to get stoned on the back porch and talk for hours about subject vs. object, todays brave new world, fascism and direct-action.