As Principle Scarmato- the Hawk- had stared at the class, waiting for the class to answer, he almost formed a hole through each student’s back.. “Can anyone tell me what inelastic demand is,” Mr. Saliski, nervously asked again. “When demand does not increase with a decrease or increase in price,” a student replied. The Hawk smiled, content that the robot could regurgitate perfectly. Such an event is the clear embodiment of Freire’s Banking Concept of Education- as long as students can reiterate the information given, the teachers are perfect; the Problem-Solving Method, or the interaction between teachers and students, is barely visible in the sea of education. Memorization, rather than understanding, is the key. During my academic career,
…show more content…
Understanding lessons is no longer important, because teachers are lauded for the quantity, not quality, of the lessons, which is currently, the main goal in education. As a result, Freire denotes the students as “the oppressed” and teachers as the “Oppressors,” delineating that, analogous to the communist Soviet Union, the students had no right to think for themselves; subsequently, students are bins whose main purpose is to hold the information given until there is a need to withdraw the information, which in most cases, occurs the second that an exam is over. Therefore, the real world is no longer applicable for the students are not permitted to think “outside the box”, making creativity satanic and submissiveness angelic.
Freire’s Problem-Solving Method, on the other hand, implies a humane approach- students are individuals with the capacity to think. The students can offer valuable insight for by providing contrasting opinions, which would influence the teachers to learn more, rather than be dictators. Consequently, the collaboration between teachers and pupils would inspire novel points-of-view therefore helping the learning process and improving cognition. A proper interaction between teachers and students would indicate that “human life [could] hold meaning,” rather than be …show more content…
Young advanced her interaction by incorporating “The Student Teacher Day.” Once a week, she would choose a student who would provide insight on the current topic that was learned and allowed that particular student complete freedom on how to teach the class. Granted, some of the time the moments became circus acts, but these moments were still enjoyable, because every student wanted to pay attention and to show off what he or she learned from the mountain-high homework given. No student felt obligated of the position, due to the chance of becoming the “genius” of the day, yet the title did not usually last long, because often, the impressive words stated were quickly followed by foolish commentary of what that particular student thought the particular topic symbolized; therefore, the input, although extremely biased, established a message that history was, and can be, fun. Sitting and listening to a lecture would never be fun to a bunch of seventeen year olds, as teenagers are notorious for a small attention span and the need to sleep while a teacher is
Understanding lessons is no longer important, because teachers are lauded for the quantity, not quality, of the lessons, which is currently, the main goal in education. As a result, Freire denotes the students as “the oppressed” and teachers as the “Oppressors,” delineating that, analogous to the communist Soviet Union, the students had no right to think for themselves; subsequently, students are bins whose main purpose is to hold the information given until there is a need to withdraw the information, which in most cases, occurs the second that an exam is over. Therefore, the real world is no longer applicable for the students are not permitted to think “outside the box”, making creativity satanic and submissiveness angelic.
Freire’s Problem-Solving Method, on the other hand, implies a humane approach- students are individuals with the capacity to think. The students can offer valuable insight for by providing contrasting opinions, which would influence the teachers to learn more, rather than be dictators. Consequently, the collaboration between teachers and pupils would inspire novel points-of-view therefore helping the learning process and improving cognition. A proper interaction between teachers and students would indicate that “human life [could] hold meaning,” rather than be …show more content…
Young advanced her interaction by incorporating “The Student Teacher Day.” Once a week, she would choose a student who would provide insight on the current topic that was learned and allowed that particular student complete freedom on how to teach the class. Granted, some of the time the moments became circus acts, but these moments were still enjoyable, because every student wanted to pay attention and to show off what he or she learned from the mountain-high homework given. No student felt obligated of the position, due to the chance of becoming the “genius” of the day, yet the title did not usually last long, because often, the impressive words stated were quickly followed by foolish commentary of what that particular student thought the particular topic symbolized; therefore, the input, although extremely biased, established a message that history was, and can be, fun. Sitting and listening to a lecture would never be fun to a bunch of seventeen year olds, as teenagers are notorious for a small attention span and the need to sleep while a teacher is