The Instigator
JeffSteak
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Rey
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Is the banking concept of education oppressive?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/4/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,218 times Debate No: 32088
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

JeffSteak

Con

I believe that the banking concept of education is not oppressive. While the some forms of education may be seen as oppressive, it is entirely up to the material and the person teaching. If information that may stifle or inhibilitate student's ability to think for themselves and express their feelings is given, then that would be oppressive. No matter how it is taught, misinformation or lack of information will keep people from learning. People without knowledge will be oppressed regardless of how they were taught.
If the student and teacher communicate throughout the class, the teacher has the ultimate say in what the student is told. Therefore the student must interpret the information themself. Whether the student is just acting as a recepticle or the student is allowed to question the subject at hand in the class, the student is responsible for determining what information is useful, truthful, or right in their mind. The student is free to believe what they want and use the information given to them to their benefit, as long as they are motivated to do so.
Rey

Pro

The banking concept is a form of oppression. Freire says the banking concept is "which the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits."(1.8) This means that with the banking concept what you see is what you get, but there is much more to learning the just that. Freire also says "Knowledge emerges only through invention and re-invention, through the restless, impatient, continuing, hopeful inquiry men pursue in the world, with the world, and with each other." Previously you said "No matter how...people from learning." In the United States public schools, are free so not getting an education at that point is not oppression. However if it is it justifiable to be freed from one form of oppression to another? One is not truly learning if they do not get background information, to be able to see things from another point of view, or what Hirsch calls "cultural literacy," also known as world knowledge.
Debate Round No. 1
JeffSteak

Con

While Background information may be important like you said, Friere and Hirsch imply that the teachers know everything while the students know nothing. If a subject is taught in class and the students show no interest, then they will never know the background information. But people who actively seek out information pertaining to the class, whether after school or during, will learn more than people who don't care. Teachers may only provide one side of the information, but students who care will seek out the rest of that knowledge. Thinking of it that way means that only the students motivated enough to learn won't be "oppressed" while the ones that "don't care" will be "oppressed." No matter how a subject is taught, the students must be the ones to accept the information, they have the freedom to accept it, question it, or decline it. So really no matter what the form of education, it's the student's choice as to what knowledge is gained.
Rey

Pro

The banking concept does show that teachers know everything while the students know nothing and it"s for this reason that teachers should try to provoke creative thinking into their students. Freire says "In the banking concept of education, knowledge is a gift bestowed by those who consider themselves knowledgeable upon those whom they consider to know nothing." (1.6) if a teacher is only there to get paid so he just gives basic information they are not really helping. Hirsch says that the world knowledge in the United Sates has been lowering over the years and that this is because of the fact that we do not get background information. If a Teacher tells a student something, but does not give background meaning to it then is the teacher not doing a poor job? The student will assume they are being told everything already so why would they think to look deeper into it themselves if they are not told so?
Debate Round No. 2
JeffSteak

Con

When you said "if the teacher is there... really helping",I don't think that a student learning something is entirely the teacher's job, if the teacher gave background information and told the students, "that's all you need to know" then the students could have been told anything and believed it. The teacher just needs to open the student's minds to new information. The students need to be the ones willing to "learn" and go the extra mile to find out more. Also, if the teachers tell the students all of the background information, how will any of the students think to ask questions in order to verify the information? They will just accept the fact that the teacher is right and that the information shouldn't be investigated any further. Then they will be content with what they know without questioning the validity of the teacher's statements. The teacher should leave some details unspecified to encourge students to do some of their own critical thinking and research on the topic.
Rey

Pro

I agree that learning is not entirely a teacher's job; however I do think that teachers should get students to think. To ask questions to make the students begin to wonder. If a student is not interested in a topic then more the likely they will not look into it, but that is not how the world works. People will now find themselves in situations that they are only interested in. A student will need to know background information at some point of their life on a subject that quite frankly they will not care about. If a teacher themself does not give the background information then I think they should at least ask questions, something as simple as a "what if...," question is enough to get someone thinking. If not that then they should tell their students to read a certain article or use a type of resource to see the depth of what they learned. If a student does not begin to ponder or look for the knowledge after that then yes it is the student's fault, but unless the teacher pushes them in the right direction how can we expect them to move forward in the right directions on their own?
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.