The Pedagogy of the oppressed Chapters 2 and 3
When I was in high school, and in elementary some of the teachers were teaching us several topics that I found uninteresting, boring and irrelevant. I’ve been always thinking during those times that what they are trying to teach us is something important. But, I always notice that those things that they taught us have no connection in reality. I know that maybe there is, but they are just narrating all the information and we students try to absorb all the information without knowing its relevance. The treatment is always one-sided, the teachers are superior and we are inferior. As I’ve read the Pedagogy of the oppressed Chapters 2 and 3, I’ve realized that this unfair and unjust relationship between students and teachers is a form of oppression. In addition, this banking concept of education makes students an object like a mere container of ...view middle of the document...
For me this kind of treatment is very unfair and unjust. We students respect teachers not because they are more knowledgeable and superior than us. We respect them because we appreciate their act of teaching us new things that we can use on our daily lives. Actually, we don’t need all of those information that is irrelevant but we are forced to learn those for the sole-purpose of getting high grades. But in reality those information will be soon forgotten because those are alien to our consciousness. I believe that true learning is not memorizing and depositing information to our minds, but it is how well we relate what we’ve learned to the real life. If all the teachers in the world would not let go of their pride students would not learn how to love the world but would learn how to oppress it. This kind of treatment has a psychological effect of altering the psyche of an individual. If this happened it would resulted to a dead development, where people wanted to oppress others instead of helping them to grow.
Dialogue is the only way to resolve this oppression of students. Through dialogue the one-sided communication is broken as the teacher is no longer the speaker and the student is no longer the listener, both can be the listener and the speaker at the same time. This kind of communication is good because it destroys oppression and injustice and promotes freedom of expression and inquiry. This kind of communication is what I like. It is boring if the teacher is the only one babbling in front of the class. We students also love to express our thoughts and ask things that are not clear to us. Furthermore, through this, we can clear out things and ask the teacher the purpose and relevance of his/her teachings. A good communication would promote a growing community that seeks for development.
True development and growth would not be achieved if people are selfish and prideful. Letting go of an individual’s pride and having a good communication among others would promote a community that is growing and developing together.