PAULO
FREIRE’S PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION
1. Paulo Freire and His Educational
Philosophy and Program
In all the years we have been studying, have
we ever been bothered by the question: what is education? Or what its purpose
is? Have we ever felt the need to evaluate whether the education we are getting
is what we really need? Or whether the way we are taught in our classes is that
which is best for us?
At the start of every semester or school
year, we are confronted by many school assignments: the books that need to be
read; the researches to be undertaken or reports to be made, that our main
concern is to get things done. As to where all our efforts are going to or what
purpose of objective they are intended to achieve, are things that we hardly
have time with.
Understandably, we do not ask these
questions, because ordinarily one does not ask questions, except those who have
nothing else to do, until something goes wrong. Take the cell phones we are
using, have we ever bothered to examine them? Not until it malfunctions and
something goes wrong with it.
Education however has something to do
with our life, our future. When something goes wrong with it, perhaps it is
already too late to examine or evaluate as we may have already graduated from
college. Some graduates are lost and confused, not knowing what to do with
their life. Why? In the very first
place, how could they have prepared themselves for life’s challenges, when in
the long years they have been in school, it was not clear to them, what and for
what purpose they are in school for.
Reflecting on what exactly we are doing
in school and what our purpose is, is precisely the concern of the philosophy
of education. We shall be guided by the philosophical thought of Paulo Freire.
3)
Who
is Paulo Freire?
Paulo Freire is a Brazilian educator.
Confronted by the dehumanizing poverty of his people, he saw a direct link
between his people’s oppressed condition and the kind of education dominant in
his country. His analysis showed that the kind of education in his country
shaped in his people qualities and character traits, which perpetuated their
poverty as well as their exploitation by the few who rule society.
As he saw the potency of education as an
instrument for the perpetuation of his people’s poverty and oppression, he also
saw in it, particularly in a liberatory kind of education, the way to his
people’s liberation from their oppressed condition.
It is with this insight that he began to
design his philosophy of education, particularly his teaching method, whose
precise purpose is to help his countrymen discover the causes of their
oppression, as a first step to the realization that through collective action
they can liberate themselves from their oppressed condition.
4) His Literacy Programs
Guided by philosophy and method, he
launched nationwide literacy programs in his country, through which he and his
co-workers, not only taught reading and writing to thousands of his peasant
countrymen, but more importantly awakened in them the hope that with their
knowledge and skill in reading and writing, they can have a more meaningful
participation in the day-to-day decisions which affected their lives in the
Brazilian countryside, thereby having a direct hand in shaping their future as a people.
5) Relevance to Us
Freire’s educational philosophy and program
is most relevant to us, considering that like the Brazil of his time, majority
of our people are poor and have no meaningful participation in the
decision-making process in our country. Like the Brazil of his time, our people
must come to realize that poverty is not our fate, as it is within our power to
liberate ourselves from the poverty and injustice which is widespread in our
country, through our collective action.
2. Man’s vocation is to become fully human
1)
Freire’s
Concern: Man Becoming Fully Human
It will be seen from what I have just
shared with you that Freire’s concern for education is basically a concern for
the human person, whose vocation according to him is to become fully human. He
developed his educational philosophy and advanced his educational programs,
precisely for the very purpose of enabling men and women, especially the
oppressed, attain their full development as human persons.
2) The Very Aim of Education Itself
On reflection, this very aim of the
human person as seen by Freire is the very aim and purpose of education and the
learning process itself. For what happens to us when we learn, which what
should take place in all activities we do in school? When we learn, is it not
that we gain something or something is added to us? In other words, we grow and
develop. The one thus who entered school must no longer the same person who
will leave school, as something has already been added to him or he has already
gained something which was not with him before.
What do we gain? What is added to us?
Most focus only in the acquisition of knowledge or skills. But is this all
there is to education? They forget that through education they must also form
their character. But as to what character will be formed in them does not
depend on the students alone, but more primarily on their teachers, who by
their method of instruction, shape the kind of person their students come to
be.
Some schools focus only in making
competent professionals out of their students, without paying attention to making
good persons and citizens out of them; persons and citizens who should be able
to think and decide for themselves and who are committed to the advancement not
only of their personal welfare but also the welfare of the people as a whole.
It is understandable thus why Freire, concerned in advancing the full
development of the human person, was led to see in education the means and path
for the liberation of his people from their oppressed condition.
3) Man’s Historical Reality-Dehumanization
Sadly however, says Freire, man’s
historical reality is one of dehumanization. He is the slave of a condition
which hinders his pursuit of self-affirmation as responsible person; a
condition of domination, where the few impose their will on the many; a
condition where the majority of the people are kept poor and are deprived of
any meaningful participation in the making of decisions affecting their
welfare.
Sadly too, the very method of
instruction in the classroom and in society in general, shape in the students and
the citizens’ qualities, which perpetuate the domination of the few over the
many, as they for instance are not taught to think critically, thereby making
them easy victims of the deceptions of the few so that they can continue their
domination over the many.
Teachers may not realize it and students
may not be aware of it, but the kind and manner of education is practiced in
the classroom, shape in the students qualities which, instead of helping their
students to grow and develop as persons, on the contrary hinder the development
of their human person. Freire calls this dominant mode of instruction in the
classroom and in society itself as the banking
method, one which in fact serve as obstacles to the full flowering of their
humanity as persons, thereby allowing their continued oppression and
exploitation by the few who rule society.
Before I share Freire’s analysis of the
banking method as well as the method of education which he proposes as
instrument for man’s liberation from his present social condition, I wish to
invite you to examine yourself, how, based on your own experiences is teaching
done in the classroom and what qualities this manner of teaching develops in
the students.
Please note and reflect on the
following guide question:
1) How is teaching done in the classroom? What does the teacher
do or what is his role in the classroom? What to the students on the other hand
do or what roles do they take in relation to that of the teacher?
2)
What qualities do there manner or method
of teaching shape in the students?
3) Will these qualities help or hinder the transformation of
society?
3. Banking Method
By its very name, in the banking method,
teaching is depositing. The role of the teacher is to fill the minds of the
students with pre-selected, ready-made knowledge. The students on the other
hand are viewed as empty containers who merely passively receive and
uncritically memorize and repeat what is deposited in them.
In this method, the teacher speaks, the
students merely listen; the teacher thinks, the students merely conform to his
thoughts; the teacher dictates, the students merely take down notes; the
teacher spoon-feeds them and the students entirely swallow what is taught to
them. The teacher chooses and enforces his choices and the students merely
comply.
In this method then, the students will
not develop the ability to think critically: the ability to evaluate, to
question the validity/truth of a claim; the ability to think and decide for
themselves. They are shaped to become mere passive receivers; blind and docile
followers who would not question or challenge their teachers/leaders or the
existing system in society and with no creative power to participate in the
transformation of society.
This to Paulo Freire is dehumanizing,
for apart from inquiry and responsible participation, man cannot be truly
human.
It is for this reason that for Paulo
Freire, the Banking Method is an instrument of oppression and domination; an
instrument for preserving the status quo or the existing unjust and
exploitative social order.
To liberate themselves from their
condition of oppression and domination, Freire believes that the oppressed must
critically recognize the causes of their oppression, so that through
transforming action, they can create a new situation and thus make possible the
pursuit of their development as human persons. This they can attain through the
dialogical method of education.
4. Dialogical (Problem-Posing) Method
Paulo Freire opposes the Banking Method
and believes that if education must be liberative, it must be dialogical. He
believes that the role of the teacher is not to deposit but to dialogue with
his students. His role is not to provide ready-made answers which he will only
pass to his students. His role is to pose problems to them. While the teacher
may share his own thoughts, this is not in order to impose these on them, but
to challenge them to think and decide for themselves; so that they may
themselves search for the answers.
As the teacher listens to the thoughts
or answers of his students, he at the same time reexamines his own thoughts and
the answers of his students, he at the same time re-examines his own thoughts
and answers. He is not a “know-it-all” who would simply pass his knowledge to
his students, but one with a genuine desire to listen and even to learn from
his student.
He is then not just a teacher, but a
teacher-student; one who is himself taught in dialogue with his students; one
who also learns in the course of his teaching. His students likewise are not just
students but student-teachers; not passive receivers but active participants.
They are not docile listeners or followers but critical co-investigators, who,
in dialogue with the teachers, seek the truth themselves and who, in sharing
their own thoughts would give others (their teachers and classmates), the
opportunity to also learn from them.
5. Ways the Method can be Applied
How is this to be done? For one, a
teacher, instead of using the straight lecture (spoon-feeding) method, should
use the question and answer method. The questions to be posed should not be a
mere means for the teacher to dictate his views on his students. They must
challenge them to reexamine established beliefs and test the truth of popular
claims and views.
Another is for the teacher to form
discussion groups, which will serve as a venue for students, to voice their
ideas and opinions. Through these discussion groups, the teacher after posing
the problem, will initially withhold his own views and simply listen. Acting at
the start merely as a facilitator, he would guide the participants, so that
they would dwell only on the issue involved and avoid introducing irrelevant
matters. Giving the members of the group the opportunity to fully expound on
their views, he will also remind them not to dominate the discussion and allow
others the opportunity to be heard.
Through this exercise, the students will
not only learn to argue, but also to listen while others are speaking and to
respect views different from what they hold.
Tom Heaney in issues in Frerean Pedagogy
recounts how this method was used in one instance.
Maria, one of the students in a
literacy class, arrived late. She explained that her husband did not want her
to go to class and argued that the children are being neglected. Her teacher,
instead of giving advice or encouragement, asked the group for help. The
members reflected on Maria’s experience and in the process identified several
issues: a husband’s “putative” rights over his wife, acceptance of domestic
violence against women as normal and that the wife had the major responsibility
for her children.
Finally, it was Maria who
interrupted and said, “You’ve told me the way things are; I’ll tell you how
they should be and together let’s talk about how to make them so, thus shifting
the focus from the patronizing solicitude of some who accepted the present
reality to a strategy of social transformation.
6. Paulo Freire’s Challenge
This however would only be possible if
the teacher has deep confidence in the ability of his students to think and
decide for themselves and the humility that he can also learn from them.
By posing problems to his students, the
teacher should be able to urge them, not only to think but also to respond or
act. Personally confronting a problem, the student would feel challenged to
seek for answers and solutions. Having personally wrestled with a problem and
succeeding in finding an answer, he can no longer remain passive and
unconcerned. He feels himself committed to effect change in himself, in others
or in society.
Paulo Freire challenges us to use the
dialogical method and so that through it, students may be helped to fully grow
and develop as human beings; help form in them critical consciousness as well
as commitment to act, thereby shaping them to be active participants in the
transformation of society.
It is only through this method he says
that we can bring about the transformation of society. Thus, he issues the
warning to revolutionaries who despite their sincere desire to liberate the
people from their condition nevertheless have no faith in the people’s ability
to think and decide for themselves. He says, we cannot liberate the people from
their oppressed condition using the instrument of the oppressor.
To this end, the school curriculum says
Paulo Freire, must address issues like the exploitation of workers, and other
forms of oppression. Any curriculum he says which ignores these issues is
supportive of the status quo and inhibits the expansion of consciousness, as
well as blocks creative and liberating social action for change. To him then,
discussion of these should find their way in the different subjects taught in
school. Subjects should not be discussed in the abstract, but must reflect the
day to day experiences of our people, challenging students to respond to them
though collective, transforming social action.
The curriculum for him must be geared towards
the transformation of society. Education thus is learning to take control and
achieving power for social transformation. Education, thus, for Paulo Freire
should be liberatory. It should encourage learners to challenge and change the
world, and not merely to uncritically adap
