Oppressed Discussion Questions
Pedagogy of the Oppressed Discussion Questions
English 4 CAS & AP
The banking approach is a one-sided way of teaching where the professor "deposits" knowledge into the students. It's based on the idea that the students are completely ignorant and without anything meaningful to contribute-that the teacher is the only one who can bring insight and knowledge to the subject. Also, it discounts inquiry and mutual discovery as valid ways of learning. I have experienced this in several classes based on the model of lecturing, including a class where definitions for vocabulary words had to learned verbatim as they were given to us, down to the punctuation.
The goals of libertarian education are to make learning a joint venture where both the students and the teacher contribute, take part in a dialogue and think for themselves, with students ultimately becoming "beings for themselves". This differs from a classical approach in that it is based on inquiry and engagement rather that lecturing and dictation …show more content…
I think he's probably right, because if everyone who is supposed to know more than you is giving you the message that you're incapable of making meaningful contributions for yourself, you're probably going to believe them, doubt your own abilities and ideas, etc.
I think elementary and middle schools facilitate indoctrination into "playing the game"-following arbitrary rules, etc. Especially with mandatory schooling beginning so young, kids get in the habit of obedience before they can question it. So by the time they get to be old enough to have those sort of mental processes, they don't question it anyway, because it's ingrained-they're indoctrinated. And the co-occurring atmosphere/ indoctrination of competition keeps students "playing the game" past the point where they might otherwise realize its
English 4 CAS & AP
The banking approach is a one-sided way of teaching where the professor "deposits" knowledge into the students. It's based on the idea that the students are completely ignorant and without anything meaningful to contribute-that the teacher is the only one who can bring insight and knowledge to the subject. Also, it discounts inquiry and mutual discovery as valid ways of learning. I have experienced this in several classes based on the model of lecturing, including a class where definitions for vocabulary words had to learned verbatim as they were given to us, down to the punctuation.
The goals of libertarian education are to make learning a joint venture where both the students and the teacher contribute, take part in a dialogue and think for themselves, with students ultimately becoming "beings for themselves". This differs from a classical approach in that it is based on inquiry and engagement rather that lecturing and dictation …show more content…
I think he's probably right, because if everyone who is supposed to know more than you is giving you the message that you're incapable of making meaningful contributions for yourself, you're probably going to believe them, doubt your own abilities and ideas, etc.
I think elementary and middle schools facilitate indoctrination into "playing the game"-following arbitrary rules, etc. Especially with mandatory schooling beginning so young, kids get in the habit of obedience before they can question it. So by the time they get to be old enough to have those sort of mental processes, they don't question it anyway, because it's ingrained-they're indoctrinated. And the co-occurring atmosphere/ indoctrination of competition keeps students "playing the game" past the point where they might otherwise realize its