Mickey Mouse Monopoly
Below is an interesting documentary on the effects that cartoons, television, media, and visual culture as a whole has on our children, and what they imply. Children learn and are influenced greatly from visual culture. Understanding these effects are important for teachers to know and understand while educating.
Paulo Freire
A few points about Paulo Freire I would specifically like to talk about is the idea of “praxis”, using literacy to empower and end oppression, and problem-posing or critical education.
To begin, the term “praxis” has the definition, according to dictionary.com, of this: practice as distinguished from theory; application or use, as of knowledge or skills. So, in short, this means reflection and action. So, Paulo Freire believed in studying and critically thinking about a topic and issue. From there one must take appropriate action found from this critical thought. This not only helps the person understand the topic but it also helps them use the correct action and possibly fix the problem that they were originally studying.
This fluidly transitions into problem-posing and critical education. Problem-posing education is where the teacher is no longer the one who teaches, but one who is also taught in the dialogue between students. This allows the classroom to be an environment where people are learning to bounce ideas off of one another, learning to communicate, and just generally learning from one another’s thoughts and ideas.
In critical education the teacher becomes the facilitator. Here the relevance of the material the students are learning becomes more emphasized. By helping the students understand why the material their learning is relevant and important to their lives they are more likely to engage in learning and have a want and will to learn. This helps create better dialogue and bring in more thoughts to the classroom.
Using literacy to empower people and end oppression is very similar to bell hook’s idea of using education as a practice of freedom, if not identical (as he was an inspirer of hers). Through literacy and the knowledge of reading and writing anyone can learn almost anything. If you know how to read, you can read your way into any book. If you know how to read any book, you have the power to learn anything. Books and other sources of learning help people develop knowledge. By educating themselves they are freeing themselves of ignorance. If they free themselves of ignorance, this person can move up and on with their lives. They could get a high school or college degree with this knowledge. These are things that not everyone has the opportunity to do, because they have not been empowered through literacy and education.
At the end of the day there is much to learn from Paulo Freire. Much more than I could even try to put into a two page paper. He has inspired many people. Through this inspiration comes empowerment, and through empowerment comes the strength people need to better themselves.
To begin, the term “praxis” has the definition, according to dictionary.com, of this: practice as distinguished from theory; application or use, as of knowledge or skills. So, in short, this means reflection and action. So, Paulo Freire believed in studying and critically thinking about a topic and issue. From there one must take appropriate action found from this critical thought. This not only helps the person understand the topic but it also helps them use the correct action and possibly fix the problem that they were originally studying.
This fluidly transitions into problem-posing and critical education. Problem-posing education is where the teacher is no longer the one who teaches, but one who is also taught in the dialogue between students. This allows the classroom to be an environment where people are learning to bounce ideas off of one another, learning to communicate, and just generally learning from one another’s thoughts and ideas.
In critical education the teacher becomes the facilitator. Here the relevance of the material the students are learning becomes more emphasized. By helping the students understand why the material their learning is relevant and important to their lives they are more likely to engage in learning and have a want and will to learn. This helps create better dialogue and bring in more thoughts to the classroom.
Using literacy to empower people and end oppression is very similar to bell hook’s idea of using education as a practice of freedom, if not identical (as he was an inspirer of hers). Through literacy and the knowledge of reading and writing anyone can learn almost anything. If you know how to read, you can read your way into any book. If you know how to read any book, you have the power to learn anything. Books and other sources of learning help people develop knowledge. By educating themselves they are freeing themselves of ignorance. If they free themselves of ignorance, this person can move up and on with their lives. They could get a high school or college degree with this knowledge. These are things that not everyone has the opportunity to do, because they have not been empowered through literacy and education.
At the end of the day there is much to learn from Paulo Freire. Much more than I could even try to put into a two page paper. He has inspired many people. Through this inspiration comes empowerment, and through empowerment comes the strength people need to better themselves.
Teaching Philosophies
Freire, Belenky, Freedman
Abstract
The purpose of this writing is to examine, compare, and reflect on the multiple teaching philosophies as told by authors Belenky, Freedman, and Freire. Many of the concepts held by these authors are similar, and/or build upon one another, yet still hold key differences.
Keywords:
Belenky, Freedman, Freire, banking, education, connected, teaching, multiculturalism, oppression, liberation, emancipation
Authors Belenky, Freedman, and Freire are philosophers of education and all three have written excellent literature on their shared interest and passion. Many of their ideas have shared concepts, and much of their research have also come to similar conclusions to one another’s. My intention is to compare, contrast, examine, and reflect on each of their ideologies about teaching.
Beginning with Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed the reader is introduced to a class of education called the banking educational system. This is an educational system that many students, or former students, have very likely encountered before. The concept of banking education begins with the teacher. The teacher is the source of knowledge for the student, and the student is receptacle of knowledge. The teacher simply deposits information into the receptacles (the students) and they are expected to know, memorize, and later regurgitate the knowledge that has been deposited into them. The student is assumed to be entirely ignorant. Freire argues that this method of teaching is oppressive.
Paulo Freire not only acknowledged that banking education is both common and also oppressive but has also provided his own solution to the situation: a liberating educational method. This is called problem-posing education. In problem-posing education the students are also teacher, and the teacher is also a student. Students and teachers share knowledge through dialogue. A classroom opens up to debate and discussion, and information is not just given, but also thought upon. Students no longer simply know what has been taught to them, but they begin to also understand the information, and build this understanding beyond classroom context (Freire P. 1970). The reason Paulo Freire’s writing was mentioned first is due to the fact that the other two author’s ideologies seem to build upon his concepts. For instance, Belenky mentions Paulo Freire’s banking concept multiple times while explaining her own educational philosophy: connected teaching. She begins explaining this ideology by explaining banking education.
In connected teaching, as told by Belenky, student’s feel emancipated when they are able to acknowledge that teachers are also human rather than omniscient beings which hold all information, and all said is true and just. Students become more responsive when making connections to their teachers.
This is where the midwife teacher is introduced. None of the women interviewed wanted a banking educational system. A midwife teacher does the opposite than a banker teacher would do. The concept of a midwife teacher is that the teacher does not tell the students information, or what actions to take, but pulls from the student’s thoughts and helps direct the students. In this case, the educator gather’s their students’ thoughts and nurtures them into maturity.
“The teacher managed not only present herself as a person while retaining her objectivity but to present objectivity as a personal issue. By her as well as her word she made it clear that to overlook or ignore or throw out a piece of data or another person’s words was a violation of her own person... Instead, it had to be acknowledged in full view of the class, understood, and even used to illuminate the material the class was studying.”
The last educational philosopher, Freedman, also has a similar approach on how to conduct learning in a classroom. Freedman continues the emphasis on student-directed learning, while opposing ideas such as banking education. He continues the support for dialogue in the classroom while adding a new element: multiculturalism. Freedman states that in education, and particularly art education, the student’s standards and averages are based upon the history and successes of white males. The author states that education should diversify in order to meet their student’s needs and expand their knowledge, even if the student body is mostly or even entirely homogeneous. This type of education assists students to develop understandings of their own history or the world around them while making personal connections. Multiculturalist education systems also help gain student interest in the curriculum while enriching the learning experience.
While reading the chapters by each author I began to reflect upon my experiences as a student. My conclusion is that it is quite possible that the reason I was drawn so close to the world of art is that it often strays very far away from the banking educational system, which I find to be a dreadful, bleak experience. Instead of simply forcing information upon the student, in art the student must do their own work, come to their own conclusions within their art work, and build upon their current and past abilities of an artist. While still entirely possible to come across, I believe that banking education occurs less often in an art classroom. However, I do understand that it is entirely possible that this is also only my experience. Additionally, I really liked the idea of the “midwife teacher”, where the educator pulls the information out of the student, rather than giving them the answers. I think this is an excellent method to help students understand the information, rather than just have it memorized.
All of the authors are, in my opinion, excellent philosophers of given their fields. Freire gives us an excellent foundation for teaching. He describes banking education, where a student is just a receptacle for knowledge, as oppressive. Once banking education is explained, he gives an excellent alternative, where teacher is both the educator and the learner, and the student is also both, simultaneously. This creates dialogue, which is also important to Belenky and Freedman. Belenky uses the foundation Freire has given us and gives us connected learning, where the student makes associations with their educator, rather than them assuming position of omniscience. She also gives us the midwife teacher, who pulls information from their students as opposed to supplying them with answers. Finally, Freedman introduces the whole world to us (literally) by giving us multicultural education, where the focus of education is not simply based from the history and successes of white males.
The purpose of this writing is to examine, compare, and reflect on the multiple teaching philosophies as told by authors Belenky, Freedman, and Freire. Many of the concepts held by these authors are similar, and/or build upon one another, yet still hold key differences.
Keywords:
Belenky, Freedman, Freire, banking, education, connected, teaching, multiculturalism, oppression, liberation, emancipation
Authors Belenky, Freedman, and Freire are philosophers of education and all three have written excellent literature on their shared interest and passion. Many of their ideas have shared concepts, and much of their research have also come to similar conclusions to one another’s. My intention is to compare, contrast, examine, and reflect on each of their ideologies about teaching.
Beginning with Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed the reader is introduced to a class of education called the banking educational system. This is an educational system that many students, or former students, have very likely encountered before. The concept of banking education begins with the teacher. The teacher is the source of knowledge for the student, and the student is receptacle of knowledge. The teacher simply deposits information into the receptacles (the students) and they are expected to know, memorize, and later regurgitate the knowledge that has been deposited into them. The student is assumed to be entirely ignorant. Freire argues that this method of teaching is oppressive.
Paulo Freire not only acknowledged that banking education is both common and also oppressive but has also provided his own solution to the situation: a liberating educational method. This is called problem-posing education. In problem-posing education the students are also teacher, and the teacher is also a student. Students and teachers share knowledge through dialogue. A classroom opens up to debate and discussion, and information is not just given, but also thought upon. Students no longer simply know what has been taught to them, but they begin to also understand the information, and build this understanding beyond classroom context (Freire P. 1970). The reason Paulo Freire’s writing was mentioned first is due to the fact that the other two author’s ideologies seem to build upon his concepts. For instance, Belenky mentions Paulo Freire’s banking concept multiple times while explaining her own educational philosophy: connected teaching. She begins explaining this ideology by explaining banking education.
In connected teaching, as told by Belenky, student’s feel emancipated when they are able to acknowledge that teachers are also human rather than omniscient beings which hold all information, and all said is true and just. Students become more responsive when making connections to their teachers.
This is where the midwife teacher is introduced. None of the women interviewed wanted a banking educational system. A midwife teacher does the opposite than a banker teacher would do. The concept of a midwife teacher is that the teacher does not tell the students information, or what actions to take, but pulls from the student’s thoughts and helps direct the students. In this case, the educator gather’s their students’ thoughts and nurtures them into maturity.
“The teacher managed not only present herself as a person while retaining her objectivity but to present objectivity as a personal issue. By her as well as her word she made it clear that to overlook or ignore or throw out a piece of data or another person’s words was a violation of her own person... Instead, it had to be acknowledged in full view of the class, understood, and even used to illuminate the material the class was studying.”
The last educational philosopher, Freedman, also has a similar approach on how to conduct learning in a classroom. Freedman continues the emphasis on student-directed learning, while opposing ideas such as banking education. He continues the support for dialogue in the classroom while adding a new element: multiculturalism. Freedman states that in education, and particularly art education, the student’s standards and averages are based upon the history and successes of white males. The author states that education should diversify in order to meet their student’s needs and expand their knowledge, even if the student body is mostly or even entirely homogeneous. This type of education assists students to develop understandings of their own history or the world around them while making personal connections. Multiculturalist education systems also help gain student interest in the curriculum while enriching the learning experience.
While reading the chapters by each author I began to reflect upon my experiences as a student. My conclusion is that it is quite possible that the reason I was drawn so close to the world of art is that it often strays very far away from the banking educational system, which I find to be a dreadful, bleak experience. Instead of simply forcing information upon the student, in art the student must do their own work, come to their own conclusions within their art work, and build upon their current and past abilities of an artist. While still entirely possible to come across, I believe that banking education occurs less often in an art classroom. However, I do understand that it is entirely possible that this is also only my experience. Additionally, I really liked the idea of the “midwife teacher”, where the educator pulls the information out of the student, rather than giving them the answers. I think this is an excellent method to help students understand the information, rather than just have it memorized.
All of the authors are, in my opinion, excellent philosophers of given their fields. Freire gives us an excellent foundation for teaching. He describes banking education, where a student is just a receptacle for knowledge, as oppressive. Once banking education is explained, he gives an excellent alternative, where teacher is both the educator and the learner, and the student is also both, simultaneously. This creates dialogue, which is also important to Belenky and Freedman. Belenky uses the foundation Freire has given us and gives us connected learning, where the student makes associations with their educator, rather than them assuming position of omniscience. She also gives us the midwife teacher, who pulls information from their students as opposed to supplying them with answers. Finally, Freedman introduces the whole world to us (literally) by giving us multicultural education, where the focus of education is not simply based from the history and successes of white males.
References
Freedman K. J. (1996) "Multiculturalism. “Postmodern Art Education: An Approach to
Curriculum. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association, (pp.77-90)
Belenky M.F. (1997) Women's Ways of Knowing. New York, NY: Basic. (pp.215-25).
Freire P. (1970) "Chapter 2." Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum. (pp.70
86).