Pedagogy of the Oppressed Response

     I clearly spoke too soon about unpacking complex theories in my post on Narrative Learning in Third Update on Adult Learning Theory. For me, the language in Pedagogy of the Oppressed was dense, nearly the epitome of academic jargon meant to obscure meaning rather than enlighten at first. However, as I started to adjust to the writing style, I found so many thought-provoking topics, and I try to touch upon a few of them here.

The more things change…

     I can easily see why this book is a classic, seminal text. The concepts presented here seem to be timeless. As long as oppression exists, texts that attempt to illuminate the corrosive effects of power imbalances will exist. However, this book sets out to not only describe the situation, but to also offer constructive and transformative ways to address oppression. While I was reading Chapter One, many of the concepts resonated with me. However, one quote jumped out at me. When describing the features of the relationship between the oppressed and the oppressors, Freire writes in a footnote, “fear of freedom is also to be found in the oppressors, though, obviously, in a different form. The oppressed are afraid to embrace freedom; the oppressors are afraid of losing the ‘freedom’ to oppress” (p.46). This quote immediately brought to mind an article I read recently. In the article “Whites Believe They Are Victims of Racism More Often Than Blacks,” a study conducted at Tufts University’s School of Arts and Sciences and Harvard Business School reveals that while there was a general consensus that racism against black people had decreased, white participants expressed the belief that discrimination against whites has increased as racism against blacks has decreased. I think this perceived “reverse racism” is the exact phenomenon Freire is describing when he writes that the oppressors fear losing the freedom to oppress. As a frequent user of social networks, I often witness outcries of “oppression” or “reverse racism” when a member of an oppressed group requests that someone not do or say something relating to actual oppression, e.g. not using racial slurs or not appropriating elements from ethnic cultures. So while it has been 44 years since this book has been published and many things have changed, the essence of oppression is still very much in evidence. Link to the article here.

The Myth of the American Dream 

     On page 139, Freire gives a list of the commons myths an oppressive order espouses to promote an artificial “free society.” Some of these myths are that the order respects human rights, there is a universal right to education, all men are equal, private property is fundamental to being a well-rounded citizen, and that meritocracy and industriousness are the sole elements that will determine whether a person is in a position of superiority or inferiority. This section was interesting because many of these myths reflect what we discussed in class about what the American dream means. I find it telling that some many of essentials of the American Dream are mirrored in this list. I’d already come to the realization that the U.S is not a truly free society, but the correlations are stark.

Banking System Education

      I had briefly been introduced to this concept before in an undergraduate Literature course, but we did not go in depth into the banking system of education. Essentially, it is the antithesis of andragogy. Everything I’ve read so far in this class about adult learning and transformative education indicates that this is detrimental to students despite its pervasiveness in education systems. I will admit that I find a certain level of comfort with this system. This is, of course, the system I was basically raised on. From kindergarten to junior year in undergrad, this was the dominate model of teaching I experienced. Sure, some professors made it more bearable than others by being enthusiastic storytellers (thereby partially engaging in narrative learning). But, for the most part, my education has been consisted of me as the receiver of knowledge and the professor as the disseminator of knowledge. For a long time, I was incredibly discouraged by this, because it seemed impossible that I could catch up to the knowledge level of my professors. I didn't think there was anything I could bring to a discussion because I hadn't read all of the theories. My opinions and experiences were not especially pertinent in banking system classrooms. However, in the latter part of my junior year of college, I began to take classes that had components of self-directed learning, and, while I didn't know the terminology, I felt deeply engaged in the class material. Suddenly, there were research projects that I could choose, and professors who encouraged my interests no matter how wild they may have been. In researching my non-conventional topics, I also felt like I was teaching the professors about my particular areas of interests, similar to the student-teacher concept that subverts the traditional teacher-as-active and student-as-passive model that Freire mentions on page 80. I had a sense of control of over my education that I never felt in a banking system-based course. Admittedly, there is a kind of security in the lecture model for students because the burden of responsibility for a lesson’s success is usually on the teacher, but I do get more fulfillment in a course where I have partial control.