EDUS 673f17...an online space to extend our classroom community.
Thursday, October 12, 2017
Oct. 18...Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed
Pedagogy of the Oppressed can be a difficult read. I am less interested in seeing that you get deep into the specifics of Freire's ideas and more interested in using it as a way to begin to think about what critical pedagogy is and how and whether it has a place in today's public schools in the U.S. So, for this post, please ask a question about the reading or about critical pedagogy in general.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
After reading the sections of "Pedagogy of the Oppressed," my question is: how can you practice critical pedagogy, which aims to shake up the system, while still operating within that same system? I understand how it works in theory, but also see the ways in which critical pedagogy could be considered "rocking the boat," which is something that can be dangerous for educators who need to keep their jobs to survive. We have a duty to not just replicate and maintain the status quo, but as Freire pointed out, the oppressor will consider any pursuit of liberation to be a threat to their "truth" and existence, which can result in retaliation.
ReplyDelete-Jamiee Freeman
I'll be honest, after reading Chapter 1 of "Pedagogy of the Oppressed", I didn't really know what I had just read. For some clarification, I did further research via Youtube. After getting a better understanding of the concept, my question is: how can critical pedagogy look like when the teacher him/herself has been brought up in a way that contradicts this idea? What can this look like in a classroom today and how can it be achieved? I know I wasn't brought up in a way that allowed me to question what was happening in my own learning and why I wasn't allowed to have some say in it.
ReplyDeleteCallie G
After reading the first chapter of "Pedagogy of the Oppressed," I was quite a bit confused, but then I did, like Callie above me, watched some YouTube videos speaking on this idea in order to give myself a greater idea of what this concept is. After rereading some parts of the text and watching the videos, my question is: how do we teach within a system that is very dominated and standardized, where the information must be presented as it is in print? How do we teach our students more - how do we teach them the truth, especially when it comes to any content that is historically driven - when we are in a system in which a dominant power controls what we are or are not able to do? This really made me think about how teachers are bringing in social change and its education into their curriculum, however, it made me also realize how it is possible in some schools, but not possible in others. While some schools are moving forward, teaching their students about injustice in a very powerful way, there are other schools, such as the school district that just banned "To Kill a Mockingbird" because it made the students uncomfortable.
ReplyDelete- Lyly Lieu
Like many of my classmates, I found the Freire reading hard to understand. I was grateful for Kurt's notes summarizing the reading! Part of his summary that struck me was the discussion of verbalism versus activism. Verbalism is considered empty talk, and activism is considered empty action. Freire had a problem with both of these, and so do I! How can we practice critical pedagogy while doing anything mindlessly- whether it be words or actions. This makes me think of the connection to social issues in the classroom. If we say all the right things and don’t follow through with our actions or do the right things but contradict our actions with our speech, our students will see right through us. Mindless actions or words should cause us to reflect and think if what we’re saying or doing actually holds any weight to us. If it is something we actually do care about, feel passionate about, and want to advocate for, then our actions and speech should align and both be working towards authenticity and transformation.
ReplyDelete-Stephanie Liggitt
This reading was very difficult for me to wrap my head around, but after rereading it a couple of times, and looking at the article, it started to make more sense. One thing I focused in on from the article is when he talked about the oppressed. My question would have to be, how do we as teacher do as much as we can for our students that are held down by whoever or whatever, without stepping over that line and getting into trouble? There is only so much we are allowed to do without getting into trouble. I mean you can get into trouble for driving a student who is homeless to school. I have always thought about that questions, but I feel as if our standards, and different environmental factors hold them back, and do not allow them to be their true selves. We are supposed to encourage them and help them, but we are limited to what we can actually help them with when it comes to anything outside of school, and some things in school.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading some of Freire and looking at the summary, the question which stands out to me most is: How can teachers teach and inspire student's to develop critical consciousness in their learning, and also, in their lives, through a mutual process if they are held to standards created by what Freire might consider an oppressor?
ReplyDeleteAfter this reading, I was interested in how the oppressed can free themselves and the oppressors. It seems to be a difficult concept to implement since we haven't fully reached true liberation yet. My question is how can we use public schooling to help encourage oppressed students to free themselves and their oppressors? How can we get students involved in finding equity for themselves?
ReplyDeleteMichaela Richmond
I would like to pose the idea that perhaps we as teachers are the oppressed and the standards to which we are held and are expected to have our students meet are limiting and undermining our profession. We are often unable to use what we have learned or questioned about our theories and practices. Perhaps OUR oppressors are aiding in this cycle that public schools continue to churn out.
ReplyDelete-Maris
Like my other classmates, I was still clueless about what I was reading. After researching more to simplify Freire's ideas, I learned that critical pedagogy is the establishment of classrooms in which students and teachers learn together. Critical pedagogy allows students to speak with greater authority because they are drawing on knowledge they already possess. The major focus of this idea seems to be understanding and disrupting power imbalances that are present in schools, especially connected to issues of race and class.
ReplyDelete-Jin Kim
I did additional research into the idea of critical pedagogy and how it is implemented into today's society. I think it's vital that critical pedagogy is used in our classrooms, but I don't think it often is. Attending the MERC Conference also reinforced this idea, too! I believe it is crucial to take in your students' prior knowledge and their real life experiences and use them in the classroom. I think a big issue we have as educators (we're almost there, anyway) is the stress of the SOLs and students' scores. So, my question to everyone would have to be, how do you plan (if you do) to facilitate a critical pedagogy into your classrooms but still ensure your students are well prepared for the SOLs?
ReplyDeleteAshleigh
I really struggled with this reading, even after further searching the internet for "dumbed down" explanations. With that being said, the following quote regarding activism got me thinking, "The latter — action for action’s sake — negates the true praxis and makes dialogue impossible." Considering our recent talks on how we as teachers need to take a stance and become activists for what we believe is right in education, how do we do so without it being "action for action's sake"? Additionally, how we stand up (whether it's against oppression, state standards, etc) for what we believe is 'right' for our students in a way that makes dialogue possible?
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that Freire thinks of the relationship between teacher and student to be "co-creators". Depending on where you teach, your principal might accept this idea or not. My question is, "How can a teacher co-create with their students in a way that doesn't seem too progressive and scare off their team members and administration?"
ReplyDeleteChapter 1 was hard to grasp, but it talked about the oppressor and the oppressed. The oppressed is fearful of freedom due to the guidelines of the oppressor. This means the oppressed needs to move forward with autonomy and responsibility. However, it's difficult to strive for freedom when there are risks that follow. Freire talks about risks, how can we encourage critical pedagogy knowing people are solely focused on the risks? Freire also spoke a lot about existentialism, which focuses on exploring meaning, choice, freedom, and responsibility. I've learned about existential therapy where the goals are to recognize factors that block freedom, to challenge perspectives on choice, and to accept freedom and responsibility that go along with action.This therapy is designed for people who are seeking personal growth and discovering one's being. In a sense it seems logical to address meaning, choice, and freedom in schools, but to what extent?
ReplyDelete-Hannah C.
I have to admit that it is a little demanding for me to understand the whole meaning of Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed. However, after reading, I am impressed on his perspective that the core of the oppressed education lies in the oppressed system, rather than individuals. So the critical pedagogy should pay more attention to the system. Based on this view, I want to ask—how can we begin to teach or stimulate student critical consciousness to change the traditional pedagogy of the oppressed? Is this “new” pedagogy advocated by Freire appropriate for all public schools (because of different resources, teachers’ and students’ abilities, and locations for a variety of schools)?
ReplyDelete－Feifei Xu
As I understand it, this reading places the education system in the role of the oppressor and the students in it, the oppressed. Freire then clarifies that only the oppressed have the ability to liberate themselves. This brings me to the following quote: "Any attempt to 'soften' the power of the oppressor in deference to the weakness of the oppressed almost always manifests itself in the form of false generosity; indeed the attempt never goes beyond this"(p44).In our current education system, I see this attempt manifested in the form of ranking students through standardized testing. This is "one size fits all measure" to try to place students in academic ability groups. The problem with this is that many students's standardized test scores don't accurately reflect their academic potential. Student's get left behind unnecessarily or placed ahead because they are just good at multiple choice test.
ReplyDeleteI think the critical pedagogy is more student-as-individuals focused and less student-performance-category focused. Critical pedagogy then seems only practical in small group learning environments. Is it even possible to practice critical pedagogy with a daily rotation of a 100 or more students (as happens in grades 6-12)?
Well it didn't save... I do not have much to say about this article. Like many of my classmates I found it dense and confusing. I think the thing that I was most curious about was what to do if one these theories that speaks to you does not line up wiht your principal's ideas. For example being co-creators. I know that someone else asked this but I was wondering it too as I was reading. Sometimes the school does something like impliments class dojo that I don't really agree with and it just leaves me wondering how to get around things like this so we can still do what we want.
ReplyDelete-Farrell Bishop
According to Freire, "Critical Pedagogy is a teaching method that aims to help in challenging and actively struggling against any form of social oppression and the related customs and beliefs." Pretty much this is saying that critical pedagogy is used for teachers to teach students about social injustice. Why is this important for our society? How can we as educators help students develop critical consciousness on this matter?
ReplyDelete-Mary Stoots
Like many of my classmates mentioned, this was a pretty dense reading. I did watch a youtube video to try to understand his theory a little better. If I understood this correctly, the school system would be the oppressor and the students are the oppressed. My question is how if we are the oppressors, would we help to liberate the oppressed? I know that in our own classrooms we can try to take the focus off of grades, but we cannot do anything about standardized test and things that are government mandated. -Arica Fowler
ReplyDeleteThe questions that I came away with after completing the reading were how do we as teachers make sure that we do not simply become the "oppressors" when we are required to work within an oppressive system? How can we both serve our students in the best manner that we can, but also meet the requirements placed upon us by an oppressive system? How do we challenge the system in such a way as to affect change, while still being beholden to that very system for our livelihoods?
ReplyDelete-Marc Heaton
How do we stay conscious enough to reflect on our own practices so that they don't become "oppressive" or the very domination critical pedagogy is supposed to help us teach students to challenge?
ReplyDeleteWhere is the line between helping students question this sort of domination and not letting such questioning completely disrupt the learning that takes place in the classroom?
I believe that Freire’s view of critical pedagogy is that it is a way to teach students to resist their oppressors. I think he believes that education is critical to this approach because of the ability for Oppressor and oppressed to kind of exist in a more closed system. In this case, Teacher and students. This kind of paints this very grim picture of school, where students are being encouraged to rise up against their teachers, but I know that’s not what Freire is really getting at. I think it all comes down to the idea of co-intentional education. Freire’s goal is not that the oppressed overthrow the oppressors, and thus become themselves a new set of oppressors, it’s that they work together to remove that relationship entirely.
ReplyDeleteDoes this belong in public schools? Sure. Perhaps more now than ever as we seem to be moving backwards in terms of social justice. I honestly would’ve never guessed that the KKK would become a thing again. But my view of social justice is also very subjective. I have trouble seeing this ever being implemented into public schools due to the scale and intensity that this demands. Similarly, to assume that this would happen in all (or even a large majority) public schools seems to be making a statement that everyone agrees about what is justice and injustice at this point. The debate for feminism, the environment, privilege, LGBTQ, and race issues are all still ongoing with some very polarized agents. How could we encourage public schools, which are controlled through the government, to adopt a highly political agenda which may not align with that current government? We can’t even seem to agree on whether schools are purely a vocational pursuit or an enlightenment better human being pursuit.
-Peter LaBarr
From the reading, I got that the school system is pushing its ideas and methods onto the students whether they seem fair or not. However, teachers should be pushing against it with critical pedagogy. We've talked about risks and how being an activist may come with some risks that others aren't willing to take. How can we encourage teachers to follow this idea when there's so much going against them and the risks are very high?
ReplyDeleteJennifer Coronado
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhat does a pedagogy of trust and love look like? How is it different if we give students more freedom and control because we believe in their full potential?
ReplyDeleteDoes critical pedagogy work with privileged students?
What really stuck with me was the idea from the reading is this notion of dialogue oriented approach which is often misrepresented into a method which misses the point of processing and theorizing through experience. In what way can we make this critical pedagogy translated into a more affect approach rather than a method of teaching?
ReplyDelete