Response to "PAULO FREIRE: CHAPTER 2 OF PEDAGOGY OF THE OPPRESSED"

This is how I felt after reading this.

I hate writing one word sentences, but I am going to.  Ugh.  I came across words in every other sentence that I have never heard of.  This text was extremely hard to read and at times pretty difficult to follow, but I feel I got the main point that Freire was trying to get across.  Before I get into that, I wanted to mention that this text felt like it was written as a logic equation first, then translated into a worded argument.  The way he sets up his arguments, it become very hard to disagree with what he is saying as he does well to prove his points.  I am going to take his word for it that he has made logically sound arguments because I am not going to (or in the mood) to see if it is logically accurate.

His idea that students are considered information banks was very interesting.  I think that it is dis concerning that students are treated this way and teachers have the mentality that they are information providers for students and themselves are the sole sources of information.  I think that this is probably true in some cases, but not in all as Freire makes it sound like a worldwide epidemic that all teachers suffer from.  I find it hard to believe that all teachers treat students as empty banks to store storage.  Their minds maybe more emptier than ours, but with knowledge poured in, it will eventually grow in time.  Pouring knowledge into students is necessary and I think Freire makes a valid point in saying that it may create a lack of creativity.  Although, one needs knowledge to be creative with it.  If someone only knows one thing, then there isn't really any chance of being creative, because they only know the one thing.  With more and more knowledge at the students fingertips, they will be able to make connections between them and possibly make connections that no one else has thought of.  Pouring knowledge into people is necessary.  The way I think about it is that if everyone started from scratch with their education and didn't learn previous knowledge created by society, then they would have to relearn and discover these new ideas.  By pouring this prior knowledge into students, we can skip the step of them having to create these previously created ideas and instead build upon them.  Society would never grow if we just taught them to be creative.  The students need all the prior knowledge so they can build upon it so that every new generation isn't reinventing the wheel.

I don't know though, he makes a good point, but I feel like he is talking in absolutes.  His points are very valid and I think he is very right in pointing out a potential serious problem with education.  We don't want robots, but we don't want to reinvent the wheel every generation.