In Chapter 2, Paulo Freire discusses the teacher-student relationship as a narrative character. Freire argues that the relationship between teacher and student is a narrating one where the subject is the teacher and the patient, listening to objects is the student. This then turns into a “narrative education that is only the sonority of words, not the transformation of power.” Narration only leads students to memorize mechanically the narrated content, not absorbing it. Education thus becomes an act of depositing, in which the students are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. Instead of communicating, the teacher issues communiqués and makes deposits, which the students patiently receive, memorize, and repeat. This is the "banking' concept of education, in which the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits. In my perspective, I believe that just like Freire mentions, education is a mutual process where teachers and students should learn the same in order to become more fully human.
This concept keeps making me think about my education and what I can do to change things. As a student, a lot of times during lectures, I tend to stay quiet because I feel intimidated to ask the wrong questions or annoy the professor. However, now I feel that I should of have done the opposite and actually question what I want to understand and grasp while in class. I’ve had classes where the professors would like me to understand the material the way he or she wanted it. I couldn’t make my own suggestions or interpretations because there would at least be one thing wrong about what I said. In conclusion, like Freire mentions, the solution is not to become part of the system but instead change the structure of the banking concept in order to begin to think on our own. We must stop the depositing of information into our brains and actually learn how to implement these concepts in real life. This is the only way we can become transformers of the world.
I can definitely relate to your experience in the classroom. It can be quite intimidating to question professors. We often forget that professors are human too. The banking system of education has been deeply rooted in our society, that it stumps our curiosity. We as students need to embrace our learning experience and challenge the education system that hinders our critical thinking and creativity.
ReplyDeleteMy ideal learning experience would be where there is mutual learning and equal contribution from teachers and students. I have had a few professors in the past that do welcome questions and feedback to best fit our learning experience. Have you had a classroom experience that allows this kind of learning methods?
Great Post Nancy!
I always felt that I would never be afraid to ask questions in class, since as it's been widely accepted that no question is "wrong." However, when I reached college, I felt that my inquisitive nature disappeared once I stepped into the 400 seat lecture hall that is packed to the point where students have to sit on the steps to listen in. Eventually, I stopped questioning the fact that, majority of the time, I was just expected to memorize and repeat the information given to me. I can't say that every class I have taken was like that, but it's gotten to the point where sometimes I question why some people say that they had so much fun learning in college. Is this only happening to me? Maybe the way I learn isn't the correct way?
ReplyDeleteHowever, even with my mind swirling with these questions, I don't seem to ever find the courage to do anything about it. Maybe it's about time I take a stand to change the way the banking method has taken over my education. I think that many people can emphasize feeling like they've turned into robots who are so caught up in struggling to learn so much material in such a short time, that they don't have time to think about the learning system they've been thrust into. Does anyone else feel this way?
Thanks Nancy!
I do believe that learning can be a mutual process on both sides, but in the classroom or lecture hall, where students come to learn, I think that there should be more emphasis on teaching the students. While I do believe that learning should be an interactive process, in schools, we should be more concerned about teaching a large number of students than a few teachers.
ReplyDeleteWhile I disagree with the use of the banking method, I don't think that we need to completely overthrow the system that we have in place. It is always concerning when a teacher or a professor says, "let me tell you how to think about it," because it seems like they are trying to fixate us into this robotic thinking mode, but sometimes, it's simply that the professor has a more complete understanding of the specific subject or the material being taught. It could also be a methodology that is so ingrained into their minds that as educators they don't even notice what they are doing.
The classroom is a place where our curiosity should be welcomed. But I agree with everyone when they say that they feel like questions aren't welcomed in a huge lecture hall. All throughout high school, I was always one of those who asked questions. Sitting in a 20 person classroom-- asking a question or two wasn't a big deal. But coming to UCLA, I found it difficult. I disagree with the banking method. Learning should be a two way street.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree when you said we need to and should question our professors. Just because we are at UCLA does not mean we have the best education or that we have to agree one hundred percent with the lectures the teachers provides to us. Coming in as a transfer student I was surprise that the level of teaching did not improve drastically as I expected in comparison from my community college education. I agree with Paolo Freire concept of popular education where one has the ability to teach everybody else and at the same time learn from the in the process. That process can be clearly seen in most if not all the CPO projects where they seek out to not only educate but help everyone (including themselves) to understand and analyze the content by providing them with guidance and the sources necessary consequently overcoming the traditional method of learning that is practiced in schools.
ReplyDeleteIn my first quarter at UCLA, I take a philosophy GE class. At the beginning, our TA told us that we could write whatever we thought about the material on our paper and midterm. But it turned out later that we were graded by how much our thoughts were close to professor's. When we asked TA for the reason of low grades, she simply answered that what we thought was not right. The truth is that for a new learner, we hardly can think of the materials in a right way. Later that quarter, I found out memorizing professor's lecture notes was a better way to get through the class without wasting too much time and making lots of mistakes. I know what I remembered is right, but I just do not get it why the professor not just tell us to memorize at the first place. Proclaiming creativity, while grading in an opposite way is just a disguise.
ReplyDeleteThanks for this post Nancy! I too often find myself just trying to memorize information so I can pass a test but when I look back I don't really remember much. I think that is a result of 15 years of this form of education that I have received. I think we can all challenge ourselves and those around us to engage is a learning experience that is more equal. However, I do agree with Noor that it might not be feasible to completely overthrow the system and change everything. Professors do have alot to share with us- they should be open to learning from us as well but it might not be possible in a 200+ lecture hall. We can all begin by challenging the system on an individual level but I'm not sure a total overthrow is possible or practical!
ReplyDeleteGreat comments and feedback ladies!
I completely agree with Freire when he says that we need to change the system of "banking" where students capacity is capped at rote memorization. Especially in higher education, unique and creative thought should be encouraged not condemned. I understand that professors have to stick to a given syllabus and have to get through a certain amount of material in the class time but I believe having discussion sections should be where students get to ask questions and should feel free to interact with the "teacher." Many classes as mentioned above however do not support that. My english teacher from high school always told me, "If you can back up your argument with coherent and relevant thoughts and examples then your argument is not wrong."
ReplyDeleteComing to UCLA from high school was a huge change. In a high school classroom, everyone talked (well mostly everyone), everyone knew everyone, and the teacher new everyone. We joked. We laughed. In some classes...it felt like a home away from home. Once I graduated that stage of my life and came to UCLA, things were drastically different (probably for an understandable reason). The school was huge. The classroom transformed from a capacity of 30 to one of 300. It definitely wasn't the same. People rarely asked questions in class, especially in the south campus classes. Nobody questioned the professor. I agree with Paulo Frerire. We should be able to question our professors, just like we did our teachers. It almost seems like asking questions in a class here at UCLA is condemned. It should be encouraged. In the classroom setting, teachers asked whether or not a student understood a concept. Here, the explain the concept and expect you to figure it out on your own. This transformation of the banking system is a positive thing and something I agree with. Asking questions not only helps the students but can also teach the professor. Although professors and teachers are superior and much more wise in a certain topic, doesn't mean they can't keep learning through questions asked by students.
ReplyDeleteI think everyone can relate to being shy in the classroom when confronted with questions they are scared to ask. But I think that the "banking" system for education definitely has its flaws. I think a problem with it is the lack of engagement that there is when trying to listen to someone talk about something that you may not fully understand for an hour. All types of learning should be implemented in order to maximize the learning instead of leaving a substantial portion to the individual.
ReplyDeleteOn winter Quarter I took a class called Education 92F with professor Bruce Barbee. It is a class about academic success in the undergraduate college experience and where Paolo Frerire's concept "banking" system was first introduced to me. The thing about the "banking" system is that both students and professors don't get much out of it. There is an order or a hierarchy of learning where just listen, memorizing and regurgitating information is at the lowest of this hierarchy. If we really want to learn we have to go further and question what is presented to us. Our professors might not agree with what we have to say, but at least they know we have a deep interest and grasp on the subject.
ReplyDeleteHigh school is a lot more different than college. In high school due to the small population, students and teachers are able have a stronger interactive connection. Whereas in college, due to the huge population, the professor to student ratio is very limited and allows for not much interaction between the two. However, I think we need to keep in mind, if the student really is interested in the subject they will find their way in order to grasp a strong connection with the professor and create an environment where they will be able to questions the professor. If there is no strong connection, things will flow how society has created our atmosphere: not asking questions in front of huge crowds so one won;t humiliate themselves in case the questions is stupid. Overall, I disagree with the banking system.
ReplyDelete