Goran's blog

Introductory Bio

Kathleen Goran is a grad student in The Literacy and Language Instruction program at Michigan State University. She has two years teaching experience in a second grade classroom in Southside Chicago. Currently, she is working as a clerk at the Administration Building for Warren Consolidated Schools while she finishes her degree.

Blog Entry

As a movie buff, I am making this assignment work for me as Paulo Freire would have liked.

Think Pleasantville. In this 2008 drama, high school students David and Jennifer find themselves trapped in a 1950s black and white society. Moms wear floral dresses and pearl necklaces. Dads return from work at five o’clock to a warm cooked meal. Children are content accepting reality for what it is, a dehumanizing lie that alienates them from their own decision-making.

School is a well-oiled banking system churning out hundreds of disciples each year. Here, students memorize and repeat geographical features of Pleasantville and take down copious notes from their teacher detailing that Pleasantville exists separate from the world, bordering nothing, leading to nothing. In fact, Pleasantville is the world. When David (who was originally elated at the idea of integrating into the mindless culture seemingly free from conflict) inquires to what is outside Pleasantville, the class gasps. “Why, nothing is outside Pleasantville,” the teacher responds. Whereas David gradually starts to turn against his domestication and his oppressors, the others resist. Absolute ignorance is all they know. It’s pleasant.

Who wants just pleasant? Paulo Freire, author of Pedagogy of the Oppressed, would be proud of David’s ensuing actions. He leads a mind-awakening revolution and transforms society to one that liberates instead of pacifies. The people of Pleasantville, adults and children, students and teachers, start to become engaged in a revolution of critical dialogue. Freire argues that the banking system of education needs to be replaced by problem-posing education which is grounded in communication and authentic thinking. The outdated “banking” concept of education treats students as buckets that are filled by teachers. The more full the bucket, the more passive and “successful” the student. However, Freire states that these buckets are the ones most separated by society. They aren’t encouraged to think critically for themselves nor do have knowledge that is meaningful enough to do so. They are worker bees and they are treated by their oppressors (the teachers) like they are suited for nothing more.

“But one does not liberate men by alienating them.” (Power of the Oppressed, 62). As I read Freire’s powerful words, I started to feel hopeful about the next generation of kids. The school I taught at was run like a military school by administration and several of the veteran teachers. And yes, the kids did listen . . . to an extent. We were told, as novice teachers, that the children couldn’t handle anything more than silence. Hallways were silent. Lunchrooms were silent. Classrooms were silent. In this system, Freire would also say that their minds were silent. And, just like he explains, certain students would occasionally rebel against those seeking to domesticate them, sometimes in extremely violent ways.

But back to me being hopeful . . . I was hired in along with ten other freshly graduated, eager minded teachers on the primary team. Our teaching philosophies were based on communication, choice, and reflection. All classrooms used morning meetings, readers and writers workshops, authentic assessment, and inquiry-based learning centers. Students were encouraged to question their learning and gave their input to what content would be taught in the upcoming weeks. I learned quickly that my students didn’t put forth much effort when they were only working to appease me or their parents. They only did what was required and nothing more. The real learning occurred when that fire inside them was lit, the one that realized the importance of learning and how they fit into it. None of us wanted our kids simply to function at minimum wage in their dangerous world of Englewood. Even as young as second grade, as the year progressed and we built trust, these seven-year-olds voiced their hopes to become something much more in life. They didn’t just learn from me. They learned from each other and I learned from them.

The process of becoming stands apart from the traditional banking system of education. It works with the nature of man, man as a revolutionary force. It works to liberate and enlighten. And isn’t that what we as teachers want to do most? Pleasantville, despite the name, leads to nothing. It’s prospect of change that gives us hope. In my mind, hope beats pleasant any day of the week.

From Pedagogy of the Oppressed

Introductory Bio

Fan Wu is a graduate student in teaching and curriculum program at Michigan State University. She has been teaching Chinese at Ann Hua Chinese School for six years, and at Forsythe Middle School for two years.

Blog Entry

I have learned in China for more than 20 years, and now pursuit a MA degree in U.S.A, with those two learning experiences, I have to say that there are cultural differences between Chinese and American Education. Chinese education is closer to the Oppressed Pedagogy, and American Education is closer to the Libertarian Education.

Paulo Freire’s article From Pedagogy of the Oppressed discussed many negative parts of the Oppressed Pedagogy. For example, learning is passive, and the processes of recording, memorizing, and repeating do not help a student to develop critical consciousness and creative power. It seems like the Oppressed Education is not a good pedagogy.

If the oppressed pedagogy is a bad teaching, why does it work quite well in China? The data of Program for International Student Assessment (PISA 2010) shows the test scores of American students are only at average. Reading is at No.17, Science at No.23, and Math at No.31. But Chinese students, by Oppressed Pedagogy, got No.1 in ALL subjects. President Obama said: “As it stands right now, America Education is in danger of falling behind.”

Most Chinese-American families adapt the Oppressed Pedagogy to parenting their children, why do Chinese American families raise more stereotypically academically-successful kids? Why do those children have fewer problems when they are teenager?

Yesterday, I read Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother; the author is Amy Chua, Yale law professor. In the book, she talked about her "Eastern" style of parenting. Chua’s two daughters are not allow to go on play days or sleepover; they had to practice their musical instruments for hours everyday, they will be called “garbage” when the report cards are not all A’s. With her oppressed pedagogy, her daughters, now in their teens, have turned out very well. They all appreciate their mother’s oppressed education, so they could study at the top universities and have bright futures.

I start to think twice about the Oppressed Pedagogy. Libertarian Education emphasis students’ creative and critical thinking, but it gives students too much freedom and too many choices. It doesn’t teach students another important thing--“OBEY”. The reason Chinese adapt the Oppressed pedagogy is because Chinese believe when children are not maturity, and their cognitions are not well developed to make a good decision, it’s not a good idea to give them too much freedom and choices, the children will spend too much time on video games, watching TV, or cause the society issues, such as pregnant high school mothers. At those ages, Chinese believe Obey is more important than be creative. Chinese students believe that parents and teachers have more life experiences, so they trust parents and teachers’ guides, and they obey and listen to the directions.

Another reason Chinese adapt the Oppressed Pedagogy is because Chinese have very high expectation to education. Chinese parents will say “study hard” instead of “have fun” when their children go to school, because Chinese believe learning is not only for fun; learning is a very serious thing, which has a big responsibility. Students should do a lot practices to make the learning prefect, and students should have self-control to obey the classroom rules.

Look at my three children, I think what kind of Mother I should be; look at my students, I wonder what kind teacher I should be? I remember I read a psychology research paper about strict, permissive and Authoritative parents, it states:
* Strict, authoritarian parents have kids who excel in school, don't get in trouble, and are depressed
* Permissive parents have kids who feel good about their bad grades, will smoke a joint but probably won't use heroin. In other words, they have moderate self-esteem, lots of friends, poor performance; get in trouble, but not too much.
* Authoritative parents who are strict, but communicate love, have kids who tend to do well, have good friends, stay out of trouble, and feel good about themselves

From this research, it answered my question, and I should to be a teacher and parent of Authoritative with communicate love and respect. Instead of only practicing libertarian education, I will adapt more Oppressed Pedagogy, meanwhile, show my students and children my love.

All in all, as Paulo Freire pointed out the limited of Oppressed Pedagogy, but its positive part is obviously too. By oppressed Pedagogy, students have trust relationships with teachers and parents, so they obey teachers and parents’ guides, no matter willing to or not willing to, because it is no negotiable. PISA data proofed, Chinese students, by Oppressed Pedagogy, their basic learning foundation were much more solid. Tiger mother Amy Chua’s article shows that Chua practiced Oppressed Pedagogy to her own children. Now her children are studying at top universities and they appreciate what their mother did to them. Research shows the best parenting style is Authoritative with communicate love. When educators emphasis the important of the libertarian education, they should further consider to the positive part of Oppressed Pedagogy too.

Introductory Bio

Xinyi XU is a graduate student in teaching and curriculum program at Michigan State University. She also teaches a language immersion program at an elementary school as the kindergarten Chinese teacher.

Blog Entry

The Oppressed Pedagogy reminds me the traditional education I have experienced. As a student who was born and raised in China, I totally understand the pressure of study. Chinese teachers believe in thousands upon thousands of diligent and assiduous practices make students outstanding. For instance, one of our assignments was to recite and copy more than 500 ancient poems and hundreds of ancient articles to prepare for 30% part of the Chinese language subject in college entrance examinations. What’s more, in order to have a better grade, we had “modules” of writing to follow, and teachers explained the answer according the “standard answer” which sometimes did make any sense. Nobody likes this type of mechanical memory and drill, but we have no choice but to be pushed. From then on, I kept thinking if this is the right pedagogy of teaching. How to make the education make more sense and be meaningful. Education is supposed to “educate” people but not to oppress our students.

Paulo Freire pointed out that the oppressed education actually is banking education. Teachers are the depositors and students are the depositories. The whole process of education is “depositing”. So, the teachers are dominating the learning and students are passively accepting whatever they have been told. Students do not THINK and teachers are the subjects of learning. Freire called it is as “teacher of the students”.

Therefore, Freire argued that how problem-posing education could take place of oppressed pedagogy. Problem-posing education emphasis the importance of the independent and critical thinking from students. It is more democratic. Teachers are the one who post the questions but not throw out the whole answer. So, students can being conscious of learning. In the meanwhile, teacher is not the one who teaches, but also the one being taught. Freire indicated as “students of teacher”. The learning happens in dialogue which is the true communication. Teacher and students are co-investigators.

I totally agree that teacher should not be the one deprives students freedom and abilities of thinking. I don’t want to be those teachers strangle students’ creativity and criticality. However, as we all known, it is always not easy to apply the theories into practices in a daily base. Students, especially the young learners, are curious about new things. However, they could be also easily frustrated by learning even it is something they want to know. People are easy to give up unless there is strong motivation and initiative. I think teacher’s job is to support students learning. When students are lost, teacher is the one inspires them to find their potential and interest. On the way students are pursue their dreams, teacher is the one supports them essentially and spiritually. When the students encounter the barriers, teacher is the one encourage and motivate them. In the whole process, teacher is also learning. We cannot summarize all the strategies teachers are using, because it could be really different for different student’s needs. Teaching is not a easy job. What also makes teaching enjoyable is the learning from our teaching.

Introductory Bio

Kathleen Goran is a grad student in The Literacy and Language Instruction program at Michigan State University. She has two years teaching experience in a second grade classroom in Southside Chicago. Currently, she is working as a clerk at the Administration Building for Warren Consolidated Schools while she finishes her degree.

Blog Entry

As a movie buff, I am making this assignment work for me as Paulo Freire would have liked.

Think Pleasantville. In this 2008 drama, high school students David and Jennifer find themselves trapped in a 1950s black and white society. Moms wear floral dresses and pearl necklaces. Dads return from work at five o’clock to a warm cooked meal. Children are content accepting reality for what it is, a dehumanizing lie that alienates them from their own decision-making.

School is a well-oiled banking system churning out hundreds of disciples each year. Here, students memorize and repeat geographical features of Pleasantville and take down copious notes from their teacher detailing that Pleasantville exists separate from the world, bordering nothing, leading to nothing. In fact, Pleasantville is the world. When David (who was originally elated at the idea of integrating into the mindless culture seemingly free from conflict) inquires to what is outside Pleasantville, the class gasps. “Why, nothing is outside Pleasantville,” the teacher responds. Whereas David gradually starts to turn against his domestication and his oppressors, the others resist. Absolute ignorance is all they know. It’s pleasant.

Who wants just pleasant? Paulo Freire, author of Pedagogy of the Oppressed, would be proud of David’s ensuing actions. He leads a mind-awakening revolution and transforms society to one that liberates instead of pacifies. The people of Pleasantville, adults and children, students and teachers, start to become engaged in a revolution of critical dialogue. Freire argues that the banking system of education needs to be replaced by problem-posing education which is grounded in communication and authentic thinking. The outdated “banking” concept of education treats students as buckets that are filled by teachers. The more full the bucket, the more passive and “successful” the student. However, Freire states that these buckets are the ones most separated by society. They aren’t encouraged to think critically for themselves nor do have knowledge that is meaningful enough to do so. They are worker bees and they are treated by their oppressors (the teachers) like they are suited for nothing more.

“But one does not liberate men by alienating them.” (Power of the Oppressed, 62). As I read Freire’s powerful words, I started to feel hopeful about the next generation of kids. The school I taught at was run like a military school by administration and several of the veteran teachers. And yes, the kids did listen . . . to an extent. We were told, as novice teachers, that the children couldn’t handle anything more than silence. Hallways were silent. Lunchrooms were silent. Classrooms were silent. In this system, Freire would also say that their minds were silent. And, just like he explains, certain students would occasionally rebel against those seeking to domesticate them, sometimes in extremely violent ways.

But back to me being hopeful . . . I was hired in along with ten other freshly graduated, eager minded teachers on the primary team. Our teaching philosophies were based on communication, choice, and reflection. All classrooms used morning meetings, readers and writers workshops, authentic assessment, and inquiry-based learning centers. Students were encouraged to question their learning and gave their input to what content would be taught in the upcoming weeks. I learned quickly that my students didn’t put forth much effort when they were only working to appease me or their parents. They only did what was required and nothing more. The real learning occurred when that fire inside them was lit, the one that realized the importance of learning and how they fit into it. None of us wanted our kids simply to function at minimum wage in their dangerous world of Englewood. Even as young as second grade, as the year progressed and we built trust, these seven-year-olds voiced their hopes to become something much more in life. They didn’t just learn from me. They learned from each other and I learned from them.

The process of becoming stands apart from the traditional banking system of education. It works with the nature of man, man as a revolutionary force. It works to liberate and enlighten. And isn’t that what we as teachers want to do most? Pleasantville, despite the name, leads to nothing. It’s prospect of change that gives us hope. In my mind, hope beats pleasant any day of the week.

Introductory Bio

Alysha Looney is a graduate student in the Literacy and Language Instruction program at Michigan State University. She has four years teaching experience at the kindergarten level, and lives and teaches in Michigan.

Blog Entry

Paulo Freire describes the Oppressed Pedagogy as an education banking system, where teachers attempt to control thinking and actions by filling students buckets, while the students passively accept this deposited information. Students do not engage in discussion, ask questions, participate with groups, show creativity…. students know nothing and the teacher fills their buckets with information that they deem important. Freire describes that teachers who use this banking approach knowingly or not, fail to perceive that the deposits themselves contain contradictions about reality. Eventually, these contradictions may lead formerly passive students to turn against their domestication and attempt to domesticate reality (Power of the Oppressed, pg. 60).

This "old school" style of teaching reminds me of military style schools, where teachers used rulers to swat students' desks, students worked silently in classrooms, information was drilled into their minds by rote learning, and so on. Students work silently in this routine fashion day after day, until finally an opportunity arises where they experience the "outside" world and see society in a new light. This sparks an interest and an opportunity for meaningful experiences now seem much more appealing. You see this often, where children are conformed to certain standards and please everyone but themselves, and finally they rebel against their parents/teachers.

Personally, I do not have experience teaching in a setting that Freire describes in his article, nor do I ever want to! Even as I reflect back on my own education growing up, I cannot relate to the banking concept of education. Instead, I was fortunate to experience the "trading concept" of teaching. Where the teachers and students would offer new information and concepts, learn from each others experiences, engage in open communication, and where reflection is valued.

One of the greatest opportunities I have as kindergarten teacher, is to allow for creative and meaningful experiences to happen naturally. I am able to guide discussions and create activities that excite and motivate these young learners. We build these awesome connections within our classroom community and contribute so much to our learning! I cannot imagine the banking concept in my kindergarten classroom, but instead envision hands-on play, students learning from each other during group projects, and it wouldn't be a typical day in kindergarten without hearing the words "Why?" or "How do you know?" Educators have a challenge to change the views of oppression in classrooms, and instead create multiple paths for students to learn- simply guide their questions, create authentic experiences and provide safe learning environments. It all sounds so easy, however as educators we know it's a difficult task, but I'd rather take that challenge than simply filling bank deposits.