Paulo Feiire The Banking Concept Of Education Summary
Lifeless, oppressing, solidarity; all words used by Paulo Freire about his opinion on the banking concept of education which he feels strongly against. In his essay he does make good points about his perception of the banking concept and problem posing ways of education. Giving reasonable evidence to support his claims and having many agree with his feelings and the reasoning’s behind those feelings. By viewing the students as depositories and the teachers as the depositors, supports Freire’s belief that the banking concept is lifeless and disconnects students from creativity. Another issue Freire connects with the banking concept is that there is no relationship between the students and teachers. He states strongly that this method of teaching separates students from reality and students are never challenged to consider what reality truly is (321?). While I do agree with Paulo Feire to a point I cannot fully support his conclusion that the banking
…show more content…
concept of education is misguided and always oppressive. In the “Banking” Concept of Education students are viewed as depositories while the teacher is the depositor.
This method of “filling” students with information is “static” according to Freire and the significance of what is being educated is drained from the words. Instead of gaining the significance to what is being taught the “words are emptied from their concreteness and become hollow” (318). This is one of the reasoning’s behind why Freire believes the banking concept of education is a poor method of teaching.
On the other hand, there are some instances where there is no depth to what is being taught, in other words you cannot argue with the fact that two plus two is four, that is what it is and there’s nothing else to discuss and sometimes the best way to gain the knowledge one needs to know is by using the method of regurgitation and the act of “depositing”. Freire would disagree with this statement because he believes that no matter what one is learning the banking concept is not how things should be
taught.
Along with Freire stating that the banking concept is lifeless and “necrophilic”, Freire believes that it is also very oppressive and it supports the idea that the teacher knows everything while the student knows nothing, stated in the text, “knowledge is a gift bestowed by those who consider themselves knowledgeable upon those whom consider to know nothing” (319). Usually though teachers do know more than the students that is why they are teachers and sometimes one needs to accept that. There is nothing wrong with needing to be taught and Freires assumption to the banking concept views students as being ignorant is not always wrong and sometimes that is the case.
Nevertheless, the problem posing method to education is not always the answer. For a teacher and students to discuss every thing being taught is unreasonable. You cannot pose a problem for every issue; if debates or discussions on a topic would help the students better understand the material than an educator should choose the problem posing method of teaching but in other subjects such as math and science “banking” the information into students’ heads can be found beneficial.
Futhermore, to some extent I do agree with Paulo Freire, but to completely state that the banking concept of education is a completely oppressive and lifeless way to educate and that teachers should choose problem posing methods is a very bold and not very accurate statement. Yes the banking concept may not be the best method of learning for everyone but a lot of the time it is the only way to get certain points across to those learning. Freire has strong points for his reasoning but there are many arguments to have against them and that is why the banking concept is not the oppressed method of teaching he makes it out to be.
concept of education is misguided and always oppressive. In the “Banking” Concept of Education students are viewed as depositories while the teacher is the depositor.
This method of “filling” students with information is “static” according to Freire and the significance of what is being educated is drained from the words. Instead of gaining the significance to what is being taught the “words are emptied from their concreteness and become hollow” (318). This is one of the reasoning’s behind why Freire believes the banking concept of education is a poor method of teaching.
On the other hand, there are some instances where there is no depth to what is being taught, in other words you cannot argue with the fact that two plus two is four, that is what it is and there’s nothing else to discuss and sometimes the best way to gain the knowledge one needs to know is by using the method of regurgitation and the act of “depositing”. Freire would disagree with this statement because he believes that no matter what one is learning the banking concept is not how things should be
taught.
Along with Freire stating that the banking concept is lifeless and “necrophilic”, Freire believes that it is also very oppressive and it supports the idea that the teacher knows everything while the student knows nothing, stated in the text, “knowledge is a gift bestowed by those who consider themselves knowledgeable upon those whom consider to know nothing” (319). Usually though teachers do know more than the students that is why they are teachers and sometimes one needs to accept that. There is nothing wrong with needing to be taught and Freires assumption to the banking concept views students as being ignorant is not always wrong and sometimes that is the case.
Nevertheless, the problem posing method to education is not always the answer. For a teacher and students to discuss every thing being taught is unreasonable. You cannot pose a problem for every issue; if debates or discussions on a topic would help the students better understand the material than an educator should choose the problem posing method of teaching but in other subjects such as math and science “banking” the information into students’ heads can be found beneficial.
Futhermore, to some extent I do agree with Paulo Freire, but to completely state that the banking concept of education is a completely oppressive and lifeless way to educate and that teachers should choose problem posing methods is a very bold and not very accurate statement. Yes the banking concept may not be the best method of learning for everyone but a lot of the time it is the only way to get certain points across to those learning. Freire has strong points for his reasoning but there are many arguments to have against them and that is why the banking concept is not the oppressed method of teaching he makes it out to be.