All it takes is
one glance to know that there is room for improvement; the one glance that I’m
referring to is towards the American education system. Philosopher John Dewey recognized this about
100 years ago when he wrote Democracy and
Education. As well as another prominent education philosopher from the 1960’s
Paulo Freire author of Pedagogy of the Oppressed.
In both of their books they
challenge the current education system and why it’s not working but also offers
suggestions as to how it can be improved. The suggestions are his themes
throughout the book. After reading Democracy and Education and Pedagogy of the Oppressed I discovered that
both Dewey and Freire share common themes. The main theme that I would like to dive
deeper into is the importance of students learning information that is both
meaningful and has value to them outside of the classroom.
I still remember hearing over in over in high school students in algebra asking the teacher, “When am I ever going to use this in real life?” Students ask this question all throughout their schooling and teachers never really have a concrete answer to this question. The suggestion that Dewey offers to give reasoning to this questioning is that maybe we need to re-evaluate why certain material is being taught. According to Freire the information that is learned in school should be able to transfer into the real world in order to make a difference. They would both be in agreement with the understanding that students shouldn’t be taught information that can’t translate to real world application in some way; instead of producing regurgitating robots of useless information we need people that will come to their own understandings and change the world with their knowledge. When students are learning material that has no real world application, why should they have to learn the material?
In the first chapter of Democracy and Education, Dewey says that the danger of formal
education is that the subject matters of school would be isolated from the subject
matter of life-experiences. “There is the standing danger that the material of
formal instruction will be merely the subject matter of the schools, isolated
from the subject matter of life-experience. Thus we reach the ordinary notion
of education: the notion which ignores its social necessity and its identity
with all human association that affects conscious life, and which identifies it
with imparting information about remote matters (Dewey, pg. 9).” He brings up a relevant point because both
students and teachers should know why the information they’re teaching/learning
is necessary.Freire also states in Pedagogy of the Oppressed, that he believes that this type of education impairs students as well. The method that he used to describe this is the banking model education system. “This is the “banking” concept of education, in which the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filling, and storing the deposits…knowledge emerges only through intervention and re-invention, through the restless, impatient continuing, hopeful inquiry human beings pursue in the world, with the world and with each other (Freire, pg. 53).” Teachers provide students with information that they receive, memorize, and repeat; because of this method humans are unable to grow in their understanding and knowledge of the world because they aren’t given room for free thought. Both philosophers believe that students are storing up a catalogue of useless information. Learning is just as much for the individual as it is for the good of the whole society. When we are fed information like Freire explains with his banking model method according to Dewey students begin to isolate school from life experiences. The knowledge gained through school should be applicable outside of the classroom.
Recognizing that there is a problem with the education system is the first step towards reforming the system but next there must be a plan of action; Dewey and Friere recognize that there is a problem and they provide us with ways of reformation. One of the similar solutions that they have is the importance of dialogue and community among students.
Freire’s theory of the
“dialogicity” of education is education as a practice of freedom. He believes
that education should be like a dialogue. A classroom should be run in a
dialogue sort of way where one person doesn’t exceed in power over another. He
breaks down the word “dialogue” into two different dimensions it is reflection
and action. Human existence must work in a way that each person is dialoguing
with one another in order to have changed; one person can’t impose all of their
knowledge onto another person(s). “…dialogue is the encounter in which the
united reflection and action of the dialoguers are addressed to the world which
is to be transformed and humanized (Friere, pg.71).” The importance of dialogue
roots deeply into the overall philosophy of Freire; he believes that no person
should be superior to anyone in a classroom that includes the teacher. There is
no distinction between teacher and student but both are learners. He
illustrates this through a quote found on page 74, “Authentic education is not
carried on by “A” for “B” or by “A” about “B,” but rather by “A” with “B”
mediated by the world-a world which impresses and challenges both parties,
giving rise to views or opinions about it.” In an actual classroom this would
work by a teacher giving his/her view on something and allowing the classes to
dialogue on the topic with no one correct answer. He believes that it’s
important that individuals become masters of their own thinking and discussing
with others their views; He would want a classroom to be set up as more of an
open forum.
Dewey also has many similarities to this same idea
of Freire when it comes to dialogue in context of the community. He connects his view of
education to the needs and strengths of the democratic society he believes that
school should be a community. School is a
place of companionship and shared activity, school should be a social
atmosphere as well. In a school community everyone works together for one
common goal similar to a democracy we must all work together. I agree with
Dewey in a democracy it is imperative that we make compromises and to focus on
the benefits of others as whole. He
believes that school should empower students to use the information learned and
apply it to the real world through their own critical thinking and
understanding. He would probably favor an authority figure as oppose to Friere
but an authority figure with minimal power. Freire and Dewey believe that our
own personal reflections and understanding of the world shouldn’t stem from the
sole views of an authority figure; we must have use our own mind and with that
influence our communities for the better.
I agree with
both John Dewey’s and Paulo Freire’s view on the importance of students
learning information that is both meaningful and has value to them outside of
the classroom. Hopefully through their suggestions of reforming the education
system we are able to build a more fruitful community of learners. Where students
will be encouraged to think for themselves and influence their community with
the knowledge gained through school.
