Education Methods: Banking vs. Problem-Posing^[1]

Almost every student has had an unpleasant experience with an educator. Many times this happens due to the irrelevant problems posed by educators and arbitrary assignments required of the student. In his chapter from Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Paulo Freire centers his argument on the oppressive and unsuccessful banking

education method in order to show the necessity of a problem-posing method of education.

Freire begins his argument by intervening into the conversation regarding teaching methods and styles of education, specifically responding in opposition to the banking education method, a method that “mirrors the oppressive society as a whole” (73). He describes the banking method as a system of narration and depositing of information into students like “containers” or “receptacles” (72). He constructs his argument by citing examples of domination and mechanical instruction as aspects that create an assumption of dichotomy, stating that “a person is merely in the world, not with the world or with others” (75). Freire draws on the reader’s experiences with this method by providing a list of banking attitudes and practices including “the teacher chooses and enforces his choices, and the students comply” (73), thus allowing the reader to connect the subject with their lived experiences.

In response to the banking method, Freire then advocates for a problem-posing method of education comprised of an educator constantly reforming her reflections in the reflection of the students. He theorizes that education involves a constant unveiling of reality, noting that “they come to see the world not as a static reality but as a reality in process, in transformation” (83). Thus, the problem-posing method draws on discussion and collaborative communication between students and educator. As they work together, they are able to learn from one another and impact the world by looking at applicable problems and assignments, which is in direct opposition of the banking method.

While it appears that Freire’s problem-posing method is more beneficial to both the student and educator, he fails to take into account the varying learning styles of the students, as well as the teaching abilities of the educators. He states that

through the banking method, “the student records, memorizes, and repeats these phrases without perceiving what four times four really means, or realizing the true significance” (71). While this may be true for many students, some have an easier time absorbing information when it is given to them in a more mechanical fashion. The same theory applies to educators as well. Some educators may have a more difficult time communicating through the problem-posing method. Other educators may not be as willing to be a part of a more collaborative education method.

I find it difficult to agree with a universal method of education, due to the fact that a broad method doesn’t take into consideration the varying learning and communication styles of both educator and student. However, I do agree with Freire on the basis that learning and education should be a continuous process that involves the dedication of both student and educator. Students are their own champions and it takes a real effort to be an active participant in one’s own life and education. It’s too easy to sit back and do the bare minimum, or be an “automaton” (74). To constantly be open to learning and new ideas, to be a part of your own education, is harder, but extremely valuable.

As a student pursuing higher education, I find this text extremely reassuring. The current state of the world and education can seem grim at times, but after reading this I feel more confident that there are still people who feel that the current systems set in place are not creating students who can critically think and contribute to the world. Despite being written forty years ago, Freire’s radical approach to education seems to be a more humanistic style, one where students are thinking authentically, for “authentic thinking is concerned with reality” (77). Problem-posing education is one that is concerned with liberation, opposed to oppression. The banking method doesn’t allow for liberation, for “liberation is a praxis: the action and reflection of men and women upon their world in order to transform it” (79). Educational methods should prepare students to be liberators and transformers of the world, not containers to receive and store information.

Works Cited

Freire, Paulo. “Chapter 2.” Pedagogy of the Oppressed, translated by Myra Bergman Ramos, 30th Anniversary Edition, Continuum, 2009, pp. 71-86.

Teacher Takeaways “I love that this student combines multiple forms of information (paraphrases, quotes, and summaries) with their own reactions to the text. By using a combined form of summary, paraphrase, and quote, the student weaves ideas from the text together to give the reader a larger sense of the author’s ideas and claims. The student uses citations and signal phrases to remind us of the source. The student also does a good job of keeping paragraphs focused, setting up topic sentences and transitions, and introducing ideas that become important parts of their thesis. On the other hand, the reader could benefit from more explanation of some complex concepts from the text being analyzed, especially if the author assumes that the reader isn’t familiar with Freire. For example, the banking method of education is never quite clearly explained and the reader is left to derive its meaning from the context clues the student provides. A brief summary or paraphrase of this concept towards the beginning of the essay would give us a better understanding of the contexts the student is working in.”– Professor Dannemiller