Paulo freire: ‘banking’ concept of education

Paulo Freire is saying that the teacher-student relationship is poor because of the fact that the teacher is just narrating about the subject of which the students are just listening and are not really involved. Freire is knowledgeable on the subject that the teacher is narrating, but the students are having troubles understanding the narration because of the words that the teacher speak of being foreign to them. If the teacher would go more into detail about the subject and not just lecture about a portion of the subject but get the students involved, they would not feel so alienated on the subject. Students can’t learn much just by memorization and repeating what they see or hear such as, “ four times four is sixteen; the capital of Para is Belem. ” “ The student records, memorizes, and repeats these phrases without perceiving what four times four really means, or realizing the true significance of “ capital” in the affirmation “ the capital of Para is Belem, “ that is, what Belem means for Para and what Para means for Brazil.

” In which I totally agree on because all through school I was a student that would just copy or say the subject without really learning what I was copying or saying. Students are similar to empty receptacles, and teachers knowledge is what goes into the receptacles the more the teacher teaches the students the more the empty receptacles ( the students ) will fill with the knowledge of the subject of which the teacher is teaching about. Paulo Freire speaks of the banking concept of education in which the students are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. Thus this is the student’s only account on what the teacher has taught them. I feel that the banking concept has its faults because both the students and the teacher can learn from one another. Which none of one or the other is the depositor nor the depository when they both are learning from each other.

Freire contradicts himself with the sentence. “ Education must begin with the solution of the teacher-student contradiction, by reconciling the poles of the contradiction so that both are simultaneously teachers and students. ” Paulo Freire has pointed out with numerous examples of the banking concepts of education in the Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Here are a few examples of the banking concepts in which Freire speaks of. “ The teacher teaches and the students are taught.

“ The teacher talks and the students listen – meekly. ” “ The teacher confuses the authority of knowledge with his or her own professional authority, which she and he sets’ in opposition to the freedom of the students. ” The banking concepts of education maybe useful to and certain extent but may also create havoc upon the students critical thoughts that may change or transform the world as we know it. If some of our greatest thinkers went just upon the banking concepts and didn’t learn from the whole perspective we might not have some of the technology that we have today. That is why its best to learn from all the possible ways offered, instead using the one-sided banking theory. Thus in theory of the transformation of our world it would be frowned upon with the humanitarianism of the oppressors in which they profit from the extensive learning of the whole outlook based on the subject or subjects being taught to the students.

I agree on what Freire has stated upon learning the whole outlook but I would not judge on either the oppressors or the oppressed. The achievement of a healthy society is based on the integrated of both the oppressed and the oppressors. For the oppressed to have a healthy society they need to be integrated into a healthy society before they can become the oppressors in which case the oppressors have the power to change the society of consciousness of the oppressed. Freire now is disagreeing with the one-sided views of the banking concept teaching process. He states that to achieve a functional, and healthy society we need both sides to work together as one.

In this statement he’s saying that the combined thoughts, and concepts of both oppressed, and the oppressors are needed to maintain a well balanced two-sided functional, and healthy society in which to live upon within. The banking concept for the adult students may prevent them from considering reality critically. Part of the banking concept is “ humanism,” which cover ups or masks the effect upon people which then turns them into “ automatons–the into a negation of their ontological vocation to be more fully human. ” Once again that is why it’s most important to learn from the whole perspective and not just the one-sided banking concept. Thus if we all are taught in the automaton way the world is un fulfilling compared to the teaching theory of the humanism way.

Many educators either do not know or do not care, that they are educating the students based upon the banking concept, thereby only dehumanizing those students. They appear to not realize that certain “ deposits” have contradictions regarding reality. I believe that they are not knowing that they are teaching their students a poorly one-sided teaching method. Thus, we need to figure out a conventual way to educate the teachers in a new teaching format.

When passive students finally identify these contradictions they “ turn against their domestication and then attempt to domesticate reality. They discover through true experience that their life is “ irreconcilable” with their goal to become truly human. They learn through living with reality that is a process of constant change, thereby making them un domesticate in their reality and becoming more free with their thought and learning process. Educators who are revolutionary humanists have difficulty waiting for the students to fight for their freedom from the dehumanization of the banking concept. To do this, the educator and student must be partners and have “ trust in people and their creative power. They must combine their learning and teaching in a productive way to create trust between each other to create more of a human way of learning and thinking process.

Acclimating to a partnership such as the teacher being “ student among students,” would contradict the banking concept. Reducing the strength of the oppressor and increasing the strength of the oppressed would “ serve the cause of the liberation,” which defies the banking process. I agree with Freire that the teacher and student need to have some kind of middle ground to create a healthy society, which they would neither oppress nor liberate each others thought process. If the oppressor lessens his hold on oppression and the liberator becomes less liberal, they can create this middle ground, thus making a healthier society together. To assume the banking concept of the division of humans and the world would merely mean that he or she is not with the world or other humans. The individual is the spectator not the re-creator.

He or she is not aware that he or she is the processor but is empty-minded and easily accepts fresh idea from reality from the outside world. This would cause them to think of things not as “ my books or my car,” but as “ that book or that car. Thus the distinction between accessibility and consciousness is null. Objects which surround him or her then become separate to the conscious mind making them distinct. Therefore, I know of them but they are not in me.

I then think that from what I understand that he or she pretty much lives in a box and not of the real world. The educator’s role to control the way the world “ enters into” the student’s causes a logical way of banking information into the conscious mind. Spontaneous thoughts are accomplished when the teacher does his job efficiently by helping the student to organize his or her thoughts and create true knowledge. Thus, education should become more adaptable to help the student to become more adaptable in the world.

Therefore making the educated person fit in the world better than if he or she were uneducated in adaptability. This way of learning is better suited for the oppressive types whose peace depends on how well others fit in the world the oppressors created with little question as to why they created it. My thoughts on this are that when education is more adaptable, then the educated person will fit in and adapt better than if they were to resist adatpability.