Is the banking concept of education oppressive?
Debate Rounds (3)
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.
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.
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.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.