The Banking Concept Analysis

In Chapter 2 Freire explores the structure of existing education, the banking approach, which consists of a subject (the teacher) transmitting concrete, inflexible knowledge to a number of objects (students). This style of education is reproduced and encouraged by oppressors because it encourages a view of the world as static and people as objective observers of it. Freire posits the problem-solving approach as an antidote to the banking approach. With the problem-solving approach, the lines between teacher and student are blurred. Everyone is encouraged to constantly examine and re-examine themselves, the world around them and the ever-changing relationships between them. Through this type of education, people come to see themselves as developing human beings who

Freire begins Chapter 2 of Pedagogy of the Oppressed by stating his interpretation of the educational system between teacher and student, focusing primarily on the “banking” system, which is exceptionally biased due to oppressive teachers who direct their own misguided inquiries upon their oppressed students. Freire continues on by maintaining “knowledge is a gift bestowed by those

Later on in our education, we realize that our teachers are not at fault for teaching the material that they do, that their job simply requires them to do so. In “The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education” by Paulo Freire, he blames the oppressors, the elites of society, as the reasons why education is the way it is: “Indeed, the interests of the oppressors lie in ‘changing the consciousness of the oppressed, not the situation which oppresses them’; for the more the oppressed can be led to adapt to that situation, the more easily they can be dominated. To achieve this end, the oppressors use the banking concept of education …” (258). The school boards gives educators a set curriculum to go by, and the teachers based the material they teach around it. This is one of the ways that the oppressors change our consciousness, by exposing us slowly and over a long period of time to a set situation until we do not know there exists a different

Philosopher and educator Paulo Freire once said, “Education either functions as an instrument which is used to facilitate integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system and bring about conformity or it becomes the practice of freedom, the means by which men and women deal critically and creatively with reality and discover how to participate in the transformation of their world.” In Freire’s work of “the Banking Concept of Concept”, he describes how the education system is failing to help student find success in the real world as well as it provides a framework for the “teachers” to oppress the “students” through the distribution of power.

Paulo Freire wrote “The Banking Concept of Education”. His article is based on the “banking” concept education and problem posing education. Banking education is the learning method between students and teacher where most of the participation in class is done by the teacher. Learners don’t have any idea what the educator is talking about, this is the reason why Freire opposes banking education. Problem posing education is a learning method where students are taught practically about the subject with real examples. The writer supports problem posing method of education where students can benefit in terms of enhancing their critical thinking skills, remembering the concepts for long term. This education

Freire claims that the assumption of the role of educators as fillers and students as containers, the banking concept changes students into objects, students have no freedom to think outside of the course the educator provides, therefore having no will to rationalize and form a concept on their own. And because of this reasoning, he views the method itself as a system that advocates oppression and control.

Although all four of the authors mentioned previously have valid points, my opinion in relationship to theirs takes quite a leap. Freire’s essay is the one I could relate to the most seeing that the vast majority of my thirteen years of previous education was based upon the banking concept of education. I agree with Freire’s opinion that the depository way of educating students should be eradicated, however I do not agree that it will have such an abominable impact on the world as he describes it

Education is one of the most important aspects of life while growing up. It determines where someone might end up in life, and the type of lifestyle they may have. Education is not for everyone; however, all children to the age of sixteen are required to go to school by law. Education relies on teachers to teach students of the future, and give them the essential knowledge they will need for life. In the article “The Banking Concept of Education” by Paulo Freire who is a influential writer of his time, Freire discusses two problematic concepts of education the banking concept of education and the problem posing method.

In Paulo Freire's essay "The Banking Concept of Education," he discusses the idea of the human mind and thinking. Specifically, he argues that education uses a system which limits the children from using their ability to think. This system is displayed in his idea of “The Banking Concept of Education. Freire’s main argument is that the way schools teach today is purely based on the idea of feeding information to the youth instead of allowing them to interpret it themselves.

Speaking of which, Freire also compares problem posing education and banking education to a human society and an oppressive dictatorship, respectively.

My understanding of Freire's "banking" model is that both teachers and students are distanced as if they were emotionless machines, and that " it [the "banking" education] attempts to control thinking and action" (p.64) . This is against the nature of human

In Paulo Freire’s essay “The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education,” the difference between problem-solving and banking education is distinguished. In problem-solving education, students are able to think critically for themselves and are active in their learning through discussions. Freire believes that the current education system exists through what he calls the banking method of education in which students are no more than “containers” or “receptacles” that are waiting to be filled by the teacher, who knows everything. The information given to those who are learning is not questioned but rather is readily accepted and memorized. The concept of an omniscient power depositing information into the less knowledgeable is evident not just in education but also in media. Whatever the more powerful party decides is important is placed into advertisements which may be accepted without question, just as in the education system.

Freire proposes a method that rids the banking concept from our education system by having education become a conversation amongst equals in which both the teachers and students learn from one another (Freire 62). Thus creating an environment where the teacher-student relationship is more than depositories and depositors, and not as Freire says, “ [i]n which the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits” (Freire

There is room for dialogue in this explanation as to whether or not this type of society is necessary for utilizing this method of learning and teaching, but the essence of such a concept almost disconnects the reader from the essayist. Throughout the whole article, there are examples of what a “banking” classroom may feel like, allowing the reader to relate to some experiences, but the conclusion separates Freire’s idea of how education should evolve and the reader’s involvement in that process. According to writer Neil Patel, it is absolutely required that this “disclaimer” exist in the conclusion as to “[clarify] what [Freire] is saying so [the reader takes] away the right message” (Neil 4). Freire uses this disclaimer to answer the popular question associated with conclusions: so what? To Freire, the main message of his essay is to engage in a “problem-posing” atmosphere, and his “so what?” is that students today are losing a vital opportunity to learn by not actively trying to change the ways of education. In summary, Freire uses his conclusion to summarize and connect his essay, like most writers, but what sets him apart is his demand for change in learning from the reader by dehumanizing the “banking” education style and suggesting an educational revolution.

In Freire’s analysis of the educational system, he lists his concerns about the methods in which students are taught. According to Freire, students are only taught to retain information which stifles one’s education because students are unable to challenge the information being taught. Freire cites that this method is the equivalent of a banking system, since the professor “deposits” information into the students and like depositories the students accept the information. This method of learning is inefficient because students are deemed ignorant and professors are considered all-knowing. Moreover, a student’s creativity could diminish since the method would suppress one’s critical thinking skills and lead students to think passively. However, Freire believes that in order to resolve the mishap a problem-posing education would be more efficient.