Rhetorical Analysis of Paulo Freire’s
Rhetorical Analysis of Paulo Freire’s
The “Banking” System of Education
Paulo Freire focused his writings mainly on expressing his views and suggestions on the education system, or how to educate the world’s population. He expressed his views bluntly, and they sometimes seemed radical. However, Freire experiences a great deal of rhetorical success with his writings through his knowledge of the subject and through his techniques of appealing to the audience.
One part of Paulo Freire’s rhetorical success in his writing’s on education comes from his vast experience in the field of education. He worked, first, in underprivileged areas in Brazil, where he formulated methods for teaching illiterate adults to read and write; therefore, using his methods, he knows how extract results and how to educate those that feel they can survive without it (Freire 316). Also, he taught them to think critically so that then they have the tools to take power over their own lives (Freire 316). An argument might be that his methods wouldn’t stand true for affluent countries with high literacy rates; however, Freire also taught in Europe and in the United States, and he worked with various educational programs, such as UNESCO, proving that his methods stand firm for all types of students (Freire 316). Finally, Freire was a professor of educational philosophy at the Catholic University and published numerous books and essays on education (Freire 316). This shows that his success earned him a position at a university, meaning the higher level world of academia believes in his methods, but they had to be convinced first, and his writings helped with that concvincing. His methods “[have] stood as a model for educators around the world” (Freire 316). Therefore, with all of these factors combined exemplifies why Freire holds the reputation of a respected and innovative educator in the world of academia. His experience and success make him a respectable and reliable source in his subject of writing, which provides the framework to where his specific techniques and style of writing can then take over to win over his audience.
Freire writes for an academic audience, or his audience is the world of academia; however, within that world are two distinct groups—the teachers and the students. Although, there are two distinct groups, Freire’s argument applies to both since his argument calls for action on the part of the teacher and on the part of the student. For example Freire describes this partnership by saying, “[f]rom the outset, her efforts must coincide with those of the students to engage in critical thinking and the quest for mutual humanization” (321). This rhetorical technique brings the audience together and therefore appeals to their sense of humanity and/or unity, which is key in Killingsworth’s triangular model of the author, the audience, and the value. Freire is the author who appeals to the audience with a high valued argument of transforming the education system, and connects the audience together and to him by proposing a partnership between teacher and student. Another part of Freire’s rhetorical success comes from his specific writing techniques and tendencies that win over his audiences. Freire first connects to the academia audience by writing on a topic they live: education. This initially sparks the interest of the audience with the correct context. Killingsworth states that “[r]hetoric has been situational from the start. It is always deeply contextual in its references to people, time, place, and action” (24). Therefore, the exigence of any rhetorical argument contributes to the success or failure of the rhetorical argument. For example, Freire begins his writing with an introduction of the situation by writing, “[a] careful analysis of the teacher-student relationship at any level, inside or outside the school, reveals its fundamentally narrative character” (318). By starting his work with this sentence, Freire establishes the situation—“the teacher-student relationship at any level”—for the reader so that he or she knows the context from the beginning; therefore, the reader does not waste any time trying to play catch up with the author. This technique is vital to any successful rhetorical argument because it establishes a context for the reader to then be persuaded by the author instead of the reader becoming confused of the context.
Next comes the hook, where he challenges previously established methods, throwing them out the window and starts to convince his audience why his radical method takes precedence. This part makes or breaks the rhetorical success of his writing, where can lose the audience or flip them. For example, he explains the banking system of education, and then goes on to challenge it. He writes, “[i]nstead of communicating, the teacher issues communiqués and makes deposits which the students patiently receive, memorize, and repeat” (Freire 318). This is a critical point in the work where Freire might lose some of the more conservative audience members; however, as a whole, the academia audience will stick around to wait until he fully develops his argument. A factor contributing to parts of the audience sticking around is the experience Freire brings to the educational system and the respect he has earned; therefore, they want to see what he has to say. He goes on to develop his point of view, appealing to the logical and emotional side of the audience. He accepts the intentions of the teachers using the banking system, yet explains the negative aspects of it. He writes, “[t]hose who use the banking approach, knowingly or unknowingly (for there are innumerable well-intentioned bank-clerk teachers who do not realize that they are only serving to dehumanize), fail to perceive that the deposits themselves contain contradictions about reality” (Freire 320). Freire pushes a button by calling out the teachers. Since he does not forcefully attack them and logically lays out his claim, it appeals to the audience’s sense of logic and keeps them around.
Next, he connects his argument to the audience by appealing to their more emotional side. He claims in his problem-posing system that “arguments based on ‘authority’ are no longer valid” (Freire 324). This is another crucial point where he attacks the old methods harder, yet he follows it up with an appeal to the students and teachers by claiming his system is much more unifying and humanizing saying, “the teacher is no longer the-one-who-teaches, but one who is himself taught in the dialogue with the students, who in turn while being taught also teach….people teach each other, mediated by the world, by the cognizable objects which in banking education are ‘owned’ by the teacher” (Freire 324). Here is where his argument becomes radical and again may lose some more people, but again the majority stays because he appeals to their human/emotional side. He uses the phrase “people teach each, mediated by the world”, which brings the audience closer to each other through their connections as humans and it also brings the audience closer to Freire through his humanity also. Not to mention, this brings in the students in the audience that are excited about the new way of learning especially one where they have equal authority. Overall, Freire may lose some audience members through his more radical ideas, and his bluntness in attacking long-standing traditions; however, the majority of the audience sticks around based on his appeals to their logical side and their emotional side. He even appeals to the audience’s curiosity through the concept of a new proposal.
Freire has two factors that help with his rhetorical success in his writings. The first being his established reputation as a respected educator through his years of experiences, knowledge, and success, which will initially earn him an audience. Next, his specific techniques and tendencies help keep and convince the audience that his way is better. For example, he appeals to audience’s sense of logic by explaining how the baking system is flawed, and how the problem-posing system improves education. He also appeals to the audience’s sense of emotion through unity of humanity and how the problem-posing system exemplifies that. Finally, he appeals to the audience’s sense of curiosity of the thought of a new proposal. All of these factors contribute to Freire’s rhetorical success.
Works Cited
1. Freire, Paulo. “The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education.” Ways of Reading : An Anthology for Writers. Eds. David Bartholomae & Anthony Petrosky. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2011. Pgs. 316-330. Print.
2. Killingsworth, M. Jimmie. Appeals in Modern Rhetoric: An Ordinary-Language Approach. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois UP, 2005. Print.
Cited: 1. Freire, Paulo. “The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education.” Ways of Reading : An Anthology for Writers. Eds. David Bartholomae & Anthony Petrosky. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2011. Pgs. 316-330. Print. 2. Killingsworth, M. Jimmie. Appeals in Modern Rhetoric: An Ordinary-Language Approach. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois UP, 2005. Print.
The “Banking” System of Education
Paulo Freire focused his writings mainly on expressing his views and suggestions on the education system, or how to educate the world’s population. He expressed his views bluntly, and they sometimes seemed radical. However, Freire experiences a great deal of rhetorical success with his writings through his knowledge of the subject and through his techniques of appealing to the audience.
One part of Paulo Freire’s rhetorical success in his writing’s on education comes from his vast experience in the field of education. He worked, first, in underprivileged areas in Brazil, where he formulated methods for teaching illiterate adults to read and write; therefore, using his methods, he knows how extract results and how to educate those that feel they can survive without it (Freire 316). Also, he taught them to think critically so that then they have the tools to take power over their own lives (Freire 316). An argument might be that his methods wouldn’t stand true for affluent countries with high literacy rates; however, Freire also taught in Europe and in the United States, and he worked with various educational programs, such as UNESCO, proving that his methods stand firm for all types of students (Freire 316). Finally, Freire was a professor of educational philosophy at the Catholic University and published numerous books and essays on education (Freire 316). This shows that his success earned him a position at a university, meaning the higher level world of academia believes in his methods, but they had to be convinced first, and his writings helped with that concvincing. His methods “[have] stood as a model for educators around the world” (Freire 316). Therefore, with all of these factors combined exemplifies why Freire holds the reputation of a respected and innovative educator in the world of academia. His experience and success make him a respectable and reliable source in his subject of writing, which provides the framework to where his specific techniques and style of writing can then take over to win over his audience.
Freire writes for an academic audience, or his audience is the world of academia; however, within that world are two distinct groups—the teachers and the students. Although, there are two distinct groups, Freire’s argument applies to both since his argument calls for action on the part of the teacher and on the part of the student. For example Freire describes this partnership by saying, “[f]rom the outset, her efforts must coincide with those of the students to engage in critical thinking and the quest for mutual humanization” (321). This rhetorical technique brings the audience together and therefore appeals to their sense of humanity and/or unity, which is key in Killingsworth’s triangular model of the author, the audience, and the value. Freire is the author who appeals to the audience with a high valued argument of transforming the education system, and connects the audience together and to him by proposing a partnership between teacher and student. Another part of Freire’s rhetorical success comes from his specific writing techniques and tendencies that win over his audiences. Freire first connects to the academia audience by writing on a topic they live: education. This initially sparks the interest of the audience with the correct context. Killingsworth states that “[r]hetoric has been situational from the start. It is always deeply contextual in its references to people, time, place, and action” (24). Therefore, the exigence of any rhetorical argument contributes to the success or failure of the rhetorical argument. For example, Freire begins his writing with an introduction of the situation by writing, “[a] careful analysis of the teacher-student relationship at any level, inside or outside the school, reveals its fundamentally narrative character” (318). By starting his work with this sentence, Freire establishes the situation—“the teacher-student relationship at any level”—for the reader so that he or she knows the context from the beginning; therefore, the reader does not waste any time trying to play catch up with the author. This technique is vital to any successful rhetorical argument because it establishes a context for the reader to then be persuaded by the author instead of the reader becoming confused of the context.
Next comes the hook, where he challenges previously established methods, throwing them out the window and starts to convince his audience why his radical method takes precedence. This part makes or breaks the rhetorical success of his writing, where can lose the audience or flip them. For example, he explains the banking system of education, and then goes on to challenge it. He writes, “[i]nstead of communicating, the teacher issues communiqués and makes deposits which the students patiently receive, memorize, and repeat” (Freire 318). This is a critical point in the work where Freire might lose some of the more conservative audience members; however, as a whole, the academia audience will stick around to wait until he fully develops his argument. A factor contributing to parts of the audience sticking around is the experience Freire brings to the educational system and the respect he has earned; therefore, they want to see what he has to say. He goes on to develop his point of view, appealing to the logical and emotional side of the audience. He accepts the intentions of the teachers using the banking system, yet explains the negative aspects of it. He writes, “[t]hose who use the banking approach, knowingly or unknowingly (for there are innumerable well-intentioned bank-clerk teachers who do not realize that they are only serving to dehumanize), fail to perceive that the deposits themselves contain contradictions about reality” (Freire 320). Freire pushes a button by calling out the teachers. Since he does not forcefully attack them and logically lays out his claim, it appeals to the audience’s sense of logic and keeps them around.
Next, he connects his argument to the audience by appealing to their more emotional side. He claims in his problem-posing system that “arguments based on ‘authority’ are no longer valid” (Freire 324). This is another crucial point where he attacks the old methods harder, yet he follows it up with an appeal to the students and teachers by claiming his system is much more unifying and humanizing saying, “the teacher is no longer the-one-who-teaches, but one who is himself taught in the dialogue with the students, who in turn while being taught also teach….people teach each other, mediated by the world, by the cognizable objects which in banking education are ‘owned’ by the teacher” (Freire 324). Here is where his argument becomes radical and again may lose some more people, but again the majority stays because he appeals to their human/emotional side. He uses the phrase “people teach each, mediated by the world”, which brings the audience closer to each other through their connections as humans and it also brings the audience closer to Freire through his humanity also. Not to mention, this brings in the students in the audience that are excited about the new way of learning especially one where they have equal authority. Overall, Freire may lose some audience members through his more radical ideas, and his bluntness in attacking long-standing traditions; however, the majority of the audience sticks around based on his appeals to their logical side and their emotional side. He even appeals to the audience’s curiosity through the concept of a new proposal.
Freire has two factors that help with his rhetorical success in his writings. The first being his established reputation as a respected educator through his years of experiences, knowledge, and success, which will initially earn him an audience. Next, his specific techniques and tendencies help keep and convince the audience that his way is better. For example, he appeals to audience’s sense of logic by explaining how the baking system is flawed, and how the problem-posing system improves education. He also appeals to the audience’s sense of emotion through unity of humanity and how the problem-posing system exemplifies that. Finally, he appeals to the audience’s sense of curiosity of the thought of a new proposal. All of these factors contribute to Freire’s rhetorical success.
Works Cited
1. Freire, Paulo. “The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education.” Ways of Reading : An Anthology for Writers. Eds. David Bartholomae & Anthony Petrosky. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2011. Pgs. 316-330. Print.
2. Killingsworth, M. Jimmie. Appeals in Modern Rhetoric: An Ordinary-Language Approach. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois UP, 2005. Print.
Cited: 1. Freire, Paulo. “The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education.” Ways of Reading : An Anthology for Writers. Eds. David Bartholomae & Anthony Petrosky. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2011. Pgs. 316-330. Print. 2. Killingsworth, M. Jimmie. Appeals in Modern Rhetoric: An Ordinary-Language Approach. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois UP, 2005. Print.