“Any situation in which some individuals prevent others from engaging in the process of inquiry is one of violence…to alienate human beings from their own decision-making is to change them into objects.”
I look at this quote and I think of Dewey and his assertions that children’s education should be developed around their interests. A standard curriculum and high stakes testing turn children into objects. There is no room for children to make their own decisions or follow their interests. Here in Virginia the SOL are so voluminous there’s little time for inquiry and discovery. Teachers who dare go against the grain, falling behind in the pacing guide, allowing students more autonomy put their livelihoods at risk, especially if they don’t produce good test scores at the end of the year. The curriculum forces teachers and students into a banking model. The tests and accreditation standards are set up, as David Labaree points out, so that someone has to fail. The system as it exists is perpetuating oppression. (If you don’t pass enough tests, you don’t get a high school diploma. If you don’t get a diploma you’re limited in the type of job you can get….)
When one considers what the system does to the psyches of teachers who are blamed for everything that's wrong with schools, of students who fail to achieve the standards who are required to stay after school, miss elective classes or attend school on Saturdays for remediation, or students taking the Algebra 1 End of Course test for the sixth or seventh time as a high school senior, the standards movement certainly can be seen as a form of violence.
I don't want to short change Dr. West. I was someways through the interview when I realized it wasn't published recently. Like Counts and Dewey it seems like it could have taken place this year. Two particular comments stood out for me as being very applicable to our current issues in society.
1) On p. 218 he talks about commodification generating a gangster mentality- getting over instead of getting better and promoting a war against all. We see too much of this mentality in our youth today. He also talks about political lethargy and a massive redistribution of wealth from the working people to the well-to-do.
2) On p. 22 he addresses Marx's concern with the interlocking relation between corporate, financial and political elites who have access to a disproportionate amount of resources, power, prestige and status in society. "Once we lose sight of the very complex relations between those three sets of elites...and the reasons why the working people, the working poor and the very poor, find themselves with very little access to resources...then we have little or no analytic tools in our freedom fight."
Like Teri, the readings for this week reminded me of the Labaree text we read for Dr. Reich's class. In my opinion, one of the most powerful aspects of Freire's chapter is his description of the "banking concept" and the use of education by oppressors to preserve their power. This reminds me of the "mobility" perspective in the Labaree text, and how rare it is to hear someone make this kind observation about the dangerous aspects of organized education.
I've read this chapter by Freire in the past, and every time I read it, I am struck by how energized and enthusiastic I feel in the first few pages, when he describes the reality of the "banking concept," but how the "problem posing" method never feels like a true solution to me, and the chapter quickly loses steam. However, I have to give Freire credit for offering a solution instead of just complaining!
Sadly, the interview with Cornel West presented many of the challenges to problem-posing education--challenges that exist today just as they did in 1992 when the interview took place. West talks about the damage that commodification of culture and cynicism has had on minorities in the US (p. 217), financial inequality (p. 218), American corporations "carving up" local resources in other countries (p. 222), and the meddling of "elites" in governments in order to support their own interests (p. 225). These are the threats that a true problem-posing educational strategy would face; they are also some of the reasons why a banking model of education remains the standard in the US, I believe.
I see how we are working to build shared meaning and understanding in this class and how we can pick up on a discussion like the one Corredor is having with West to examine how it can help us move forward in thinking about the necessary components for building a change movement for a more democratic education. The following are some of West’s thoughts that resonate with me.
In terms of the problem presented by modernism today West sees a connotation of blindness. “We are talking about the inability of the elite to envision a democratic expansion” (p. 217). I agree with West that the utility of Marxist thought is that any discussion of how to transform today’s society must consider our context of the “interlocking relation between corporate, financial and political elites who ha[ve] access to a disproportionate amount of resources, power, prestige and status in society” (p. 222). He states that “once we lose sight of this we have little or no analytical tools in our freedom fight” (p. 222). I believe something that greatly hinder progressives in moving forward for change is 1) a failure to start from the place West is referencing and 2) the lack of subversive memory as he suggests. He’s right on when he talks about the various ways that commodification and reification have shattered the institutional buffers for an already devalued, despised and oppressed people. That’s exactly what our rural and poor public schools are up against today.
I might be off on this, but it seems to me that West’s regard for new historicists as “preoccupied with thick descriptions… of the relativity of cultural products while thoroughly distrustful of social explanatory accounts of cultural practice” (p. 220) is his way of saying we often shy away from the recognition of how power works in the world and what it will take to hold power accountable. I like his call for “democratic mechanisms for the accountability of power” (p. 220).
I’m interested in his link between the question of freedom with rich spirituality. I love that he talks more in terms of tradition and community than he does of truths and facts. I’d like to explore and talk more about how he sees amelioration and social betterment as regulated more by moral ideas than a social dream. How does that realization change the process and struggle? What does it look like? Maybe it’s his idea that human hope is being able to keep going, to sustain struggle, with ideals (p. 227), as contrasted with a utopian vision. Still, I’m curious how this vision plays out in the process of bringing about change.
West has given me new hooks to add to my schema… insights like how commodification is part of the historical conditioning of the poor. I appreciate his critique of Marxists who remove the ethical dimension of the discourse as ripening the conditions for managerial elites to represent the masses. The key being “we have to talk about the ethical dimension, but also be critical of an ethics that is imposed from on high” (p. 223). He adds to my understanding of the ethical core of Marxism when he links “the values of flourishing individuality… with the expansion of democratic operations and practices (p. 223).
To the various critical lenses that can splinter a liberation movement he writes “I do think we have to talk about alliance and coalition because none of these movements in and of themselves or by themselves has the power to deal with the rule of capital, that is the rule of those interlocking elites” (p. 225). But I appreciated his analysis that these lenses fill a void in Marxist theory, which has no serious conception of culture.
He’s both pragmatic and radical at the same time… Corredor says he is described as a synthesizer. And he is also ok with the notion of totality… (in order to look at the relation between parts). I MUST read more Cornell West!
What I most appreciate about both of these readings is that Freire and West clearly spell out what they consider are the major issues with public education as a mechanism to perpetuate systemic inequality but they both actually work with the people they write about wanting to empower to escape oppressive power. Freire offers “problem posing” as a means to the conscientização of the oppressed and a “quest for mutual humanization” (p. 75). West talks about power and humanity: “But the fact that my starting point is among a relatively powerless people, I have got to be able to talk about power in a positive way, not simply in political terms but also in existential terms. We are dealing with African people whose humanity has been radically called into question. Therefore, you have to talk about empowerment in terms of taking one’s humanity for granted or affirming one’s humanity…” *(p. 220). I think this ties in with Freire’s conscientização very nicely. Reaffirming people’s humanity would break down so many of the barriers held in place by hierarchical and inequitable society. And this hierarchy is held in place by a kind of modernist version of the world that does not allow for a lot of questioning.
West touches on this when he talks about tradition. He says “I am deeply concerned about the dynamic character of tradition, except that for me the tradition that I am talking about comes from below and sometimes beneath modernity. It is a tradition of struggling and resisting, black people’s democratic tradition, whereas the tradition they are talking about tends to come from above…we need more subversive memory.” This kind of subversive memory, rather than the prevailing modernist view (protected by the oppressor classes) that society is set as it is, is crucial to the “quest for mutual humanization” that Freire writes about.
I'm on board with Tami and want to read much more West.
I am late getting this in, and I don't have much to add to the comments of my esteemed colleagues. (It is great to be in class with so many intelligent and like-minded people!) I would, however, like to talk about what a "pedagogy of freedom" would actually look like if implemented (beyond Freire’s sort of vague “problem posing” solution). I agree that the banking model perpetuates oppression. I agree that commodification has, and continues to be, a problem. But Freire wrote Pedagogy of the Oppressed in 1970. And this interview with Cornell West took place in 1992. I am frustrated that nothing has changed, and, in fact, you could argue that things have gotten worse educationally as we move down the standardization rabbit hole. How can we change this trajectory? Can individual teachers make a difference one classroom at a time or does true democratic education require systemic reform?
So, I'm really struggling with West. Maybe because I don't really know much about him, but what little I do know, he seems like a radical when it is appropriate for him. I agree with Tami's reading of him in regards to how he thinks more of a social scientist (traditions, etc.) than a historian (facts). Where does he fit in this philosophical “story”? I’d be interested in talking about that some.
"The oppressed are not 'marginals,' are not people living 'outside' society. They have always been 'inside'--inside the structure which made them 'beings for others.' The solution is not to ‘integrate’ them into the structure of oppression, but to transform that structure so that they can become 'beings for themselves.'" (Freire p. 72) This really resonates with me. Frequently we think of the marginalized people as “outsiders,” but they really aren’t. They are also students, likely in the same classes as the mainstream students. If we continue with the banking model, then the structure will not be transformed.
Freire- Pedagogy of the Oppressed
ReplyDelete“Any situation in which some individuals prevent others from engaging in the process of inquiry is one of violence…to alienate human beings from their own decision-making is to change them into objects.”
I look at this quote and I think of Dewey and his assertions that children’s education should be developed around their interests. A standard curriculum and high stakes testing turn children into objects. There is no room for children to make their own decisions or follow their interests. Here in Virginia the SOL are so voluminous there’s little time for inquiry and discovery. Teachers who dare go against the grain, falling behind in the pacing guide, allowing students more autonomy put their livelihoods at risk, especially if they don’t produce good test scores at the end of the year. The curriculum forces teachers and students into a banking model. The tests and accreditation standards are set up, as David Labaree points out, so that someone has to fail. The system as it exists is perpetuating oppression. (If you don’t pass enough tests, you don’t get a high school diploma. If you don’t get a diploma you’re limited in the type of job you can get….)
When one considers what the system does to the psyches of teachers who are blamed for everything that's wrong with schools, of students who fail to achieve the standards who are required to stay after school, miss elective classes or attend school on Saturdays for remediation, or students taking the Algebra 1 End of Course test for the sixth or seventh time as a high school senior, the standards movement certainly can be seen as a form of violence.
Cornel West-
ReplyDeleteI don't want to short change Dr. West. I was someways through the interview when I realized it wasn't published recently. Like Counts and Dewey it seems like it could have taken place this year. Two particular comments stood out for me as being very applicable to our current issues in society.
1) On p. 218 he talks about commodification generating a gangster mentality- getting over instead of getting better and promoting a war against all. We see too much of this mentality in our youth today. He also talks about political lethargy and a massive redistribution of wealth from the working people to the well-to-do.
2) On p. 22 he addresses Marx's concern with the interlocking relation between corporate, financial and political elites who have access to a disproportionate amount of resources, power, prestige and status in society. "Once we lose sight of the very complex relations between those three sets of elites...and the reasons why the working people, the working poor and the very poor, find themselves with very little access to resources...then we have little or no analytic tools in our freedom fight."
Like Teri, the readings for this week reminded me of the Labaree text we read for Dr. Reich's class. In my opinion, one of the most powerful aspects of Freire's chapter is his description of the "banking concept" and the use of education by oppressors to preserve their power. This reminds me of the "mobility" perspective in the Labaree text, and how rare it is to hear someone make this kind observation about the dangerous aspects of organized education.
ReplyDeleteI've read this chapter by Freire in the past, and every time I read it, I am struck by how energized and enthusiastic I feel in the first few pages, when he describes the reality of the "banking concept," but how the "problem posing" method never feels like a true solution to me, and the chapter quickly loses steam. However, I have to give Freire credit for offering a solution instead of just complaining!
Sadly, the interview with Cornel West presented many of the challenges to problem-posing education--challenges that exist today just as they did in 1992 when the interview took place. West talks about the damage that commodification of culture and cynicism has had on minorities in the US (p. 217), financial inequality (p. 218), American corporations "carving up" local resources in other countries (p. 222), and the meddling of "elites" in governments in order to support their own interests (p. 225). These are the threats that a true problem-posing educational strategy would face; they are also some of the reasons why a banking model of education remains the standard in the US, I believe.
Ginger
I see how we are working to build shared meaning and understanding in this class and how we can pick up on a discussion like the one Corredor is having with West to examine how it can help us move forward in thinking about the necessary components for building a change movement for a more democratic education. The following are some of West’s thoughts that resonate with me.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the problem presented by modernism today West sees a connotation of blindness. “We are talking about the inability of the elite to envision a democratic expansion” (p. 217). I agree with West that the utility of Marxist thought is that any discussion of how to transform today’s society must consider our context of the “interlocking relation between corporate, financial and political elites who ha[ve] access to a disproportionate amount of resources, power, prestige and status in society” (p. 222). He states that “once we lose sight of this we have little or no analytical tools in our freedom fight” (p. 222). I believe something that greatly hinder progressives in moving forward for change is 1) a failure to start from the place West is referencing and 2) the lack of subversive memory as he suggests. He’s right on when he talks about the various ways that commodification and reification have shattered the institutional buffers for an already devalued, despised and oppressed people. That’s exactly what our rural and poor public schools are up against today.
I might be off on this, but it seems to me that West’s regard for new historicists as “preoccupied with thick descriptions… of the relativity of cultural products while thoroughly distrustful of social explanatory accounts of cultural practice” (p. 220) is his way of saying we often shy away from the recognition of how power works in the world and what it will take to hold power accountable. I like his call for “democratic mechanisms for the accountability of power” (p. 220).
I’m interested in his link between the question of freedom with rich spirituality. I love that he talks more in terms of tradition and community than he does of truths and facts. I’d like to explore and talk more about how he sees amelioration and social betterment as regulated more by moral ideas than a social dream. How does that realization change the process and struggle? What does it look like? Maybe it’s his idea that human hope is being able to keep going, to sustain struggle, with ideals (p. 227), as contrasted with a utopian vision. Still, I’m curious how this vision plays out in the process of bringing about change.
West has given me new hooks to add to my schema… insights like how commodification is part of the historical conditioning of the poor. I appreciate his critique of Marxists who remove the ethical dimension of the discourse as ripening the conditions for managerial elites to represent the masses. The key being “we have to talk about the ethical dimension, but also be critical of an ethics that is imposed from on high” (p. 223). He adds to my understanding of the ethical core of Marxism when he links “the values of flourishing individuality… with the expansion of democratic operations and practices (p. 223).
To the various critical lenses that can splinter a liberation movement he writes “I do think we have to talk about alliance and coalition because none of these movements in and of themselves or by themselves has the power to deal with the rule of capital, that is the rule of those interlocking elites” (p. 225). But I appreciated his analysis that these lenses fill a void in Marxist theory, which has no serious conception of culture.
He’s both pragmatic and radical at the same time… Corredor says he is described as a synthesizer. And he is also ok with the notion of totality… (in order to look at the relation between parts). I MUST read more Cornell West!
What I most appreciate about both of these readings is that Freire and West clearly spell out what they consider are the major issues with public education as a mechanism to perpetuate systemic inequality but they both actually work with the people they write about wanting to empower to escape oppressive power. Freire offers “problem posing” as a means to the conscientização of the oppressed and a “quest for mutual humanization” (p. 75). West talks about power and humanity: “But the fact that my starting point is among a relatively powerless people, I have got to be able to talk about power in a positive way, not simply in political terms but also in existential terms. We are dealing with African people whose humanity has been radically called into question. Therefore, you have to talk about empowerment in terms of taking one’s humanity for granted or affirming one’s humanity…” *(p. 220). I think this ties in with Freire’s conscientização very nicely. Reaffirming people’s humanity would break down so many of the barriers held in place by hierarchical and inequitable society. And this hierarchy is held in place by a kind of modernist version of the world that does not allow for a lot of questioning.
ReplyDeleteWest touches on this when he talks about tradition. He says “I am deeply concerned about the dynamic character of tradition, except that for me the tradition that I am talking about comes from below and sometimes beneath modernity. It is a tradition of struggling and resisting, black people’s democratic tradition, whereas the tradition they are talking about tends to come from above…we need more subversive memory.” This kind of subversive memory, rather than the prevailing modernist view (protected by the oppressor classes) that society is set as it is, is crucial to the “quest for mutual humanization” that Freire writes about.
I'm on board with Tami and want to read much more West.
Kate
I am late getting this in, and I don't have much to add to the comments of my esteemed colleagues. (It is great to be in class with so many intelligent and like-minded people!) I would, however, like to talk about what a "pedagogy of freedom" would actually look like if implemented (beyond Freire’s sort of vague “problem posing” solution).
ReplyDeleteI agree that the banking model perpetuates oppression. I agree that commodification has, and continues to be, a problem. But Freire wrote Pedagogy of the Oppressed in 1970. And this interview with Cornell West took place in 1992. I am frustrated that nothing has changed, and, in fact, you could argue that things have gotten worse educationally as we move down the standardization rabbit hole. How can we change this trajectory? Can individual teachers make a difference one classroom at a time or does true democratic education require systemic reform?
So, I'm really struggling with West. Maybe because I don't really know much about him, but what little I do know, he seems like a radical when it is appropriate for him. I agree with Tami's reading of him in regards to how he thinks more of a social scientist (traditions, etc.) than a historian (facts). Where does he fit in this philosophical “story”? I’d be interested in talking about that some.
ReplyDelete"The oppressed are not 'marginals,' are not people living 'outside' society. They have always been 'inside'--inside the structure which made them 'beings for others.' The solution is not to ‘integrate’ them into the structure of oppression, but to transform that structure so that they can become 'beings for themselves.'" (Freire p. 72) This really resonates with me. Frequently we think of the marginalized people as “outsiders,” but they really aren’t. They are also students, likely in the same classes as the mainstream students. If we continue with the banking model, then the structure will not be transformed.
Mike