Teaching Methods
(recieved an A- grade by Mrs. K. Fladenmuller)

by Don Rey

     The definition of education is one that has been pondered by many people. I believe it is a definition that must be formulated by each individual separately. In my definition, education is (either actively or passively) the passing of information and understanding ¾ knowledge, ideas, thoughts, and experiences (no matter how loose the definitions of these)¾ between people. The method in which education is enacted is debated greatly in the essay, "The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education" by Paulo Freire. In this essay, Freire describes two types to teachers. He calls one the "bank clerk teacher" (Freire 350), and the other, the "problem-posing teacher" (Freire 354). In his essay, he writes that the two types of educators can clearly not coexist. He also infers that there is never an advantage to the banking concept of education and that it is never useful. I believe this is untrue, however. The two types of teachers Freire describes are extremes on a continuum. There are those teachers who fall on the bank-clerk extreme, and there are those who fall on the problem-posing extreme. However, those educators are the minority. The majority of teachers fluctuate somewhere between the endpoints on this continuum, as all teachers have their own style and method of passing of information as described earlier. There is a time and place where all of these types of teaching have advantages and usefulness.

     The bank clerk teacher is the basis of Freire’s essay. He or she is the teacher who passes the knowledge, ideas, thoughts, and experiences passively. The teacher informs, and the student listens. Freire describes it as "narration" (Freire 348). In the "banking concept" students have no active participation in education, so the exchange of information is one-way. Freire describes this method of education "oppressive" and even "necrophilic" (Freire 353). There is, however, a time in which this type of teaching is necessary and advantageous.

     In a college atmosphere, with a basic course such as chemistry on a college freshmen level, there is often a great demand for teachers because of a very large number of students. Rarely can the great demand for equally qualified, professional teachers be met. To provide a nearly equal education for all of the very large number of students, they are first broken into a few, still large groups. In these groups, they are taught by a few professional, nearly equally qualified professors. In this case, the professor poses as a bank clerk, and provides the class with necessary information for the course, with very little feedback. If he or she moves too quickly for one student, it is up to that student to catch up. After this, the large groups are split up once again, into much more manageable groups, who are led in active discussion and education by an often less professional teacher. This teacher guides those who had trouble keeping up to the pace of the professor, with help of those students who had less trouble, and found the information provided more understandable. As many of these teachers are in pursuit of more education and higher degrees, it is obvious that they are involved actively in the education process. They are learning from the students at the same time they teach. This type of teacher, as Freire describes, is the problem-posing educator.

     The problem-posing teacher, on the opposite end of the continuum discussed is described by Freire as one who actively participates in the education process. Discussing this he writes, "The teacher is no longer merely the-one-who-teaches, but one who is himself taught in dialogue with the students, who in turn while being taught, also teach" (Freire 354). Education in this manner is two-way. There is passing of information not only from the teacher to the student, but there is exchange of information involved here. The teacher is just as active in learning as the he or she is in teaching, and the students are just as active in teaching as they are in learning. Freire writes in his essay that this is the only beneficial way of teaching. With this, I disagree. There is much benefit to the problem-posing method of teaching, and this maybe most often the most beneficial to both the teachers and students, but this is not always the case.

     In the college level chemistry example, this type of teaching would be impossible, or very costly, but if possible it may be more beneficial. However, a certain level of what Freire describes in saying, "The student records, memorizes, and repeats these phrases…" (Freire 349). He continues to write that the student does not gain a perception of what these facts mean. That is the job of the problem-posing teacher, or the problem-posing side of the teacher. The recording, memorization, and repetition is necessary to gain the basic information necessary (for the course, in the chemistry example). This is the first step in gaining a better understanding of the course, which is another goal of education. This preliminary information is, for the most part unchangeable and something that a teacher cannot learn more about. The only way it can be presented is in its raw form, as facts and constants. Books are often used for this type of teaching. They present and teach information, but do not actively do so, as they are printed.

     Another example of the benefit and necessity of the bank clerk method of teaching is education in foreign languages. For the first few years of learning a foreign language, the only method of teaching this is the memorization and repetition of vocabulary, conjugations, diction, and clichés. Freire writes, "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" (Freire 349). Freire uses the word knowledge in the way I have used the word understanding. He writes this in an almost mocking way towards the bank clerk teachers. However, it is by default that teachers with much experience in a foreign language are needed to teach beginners who, also by default, have little or no understanding of the language. The teacher presents the basics of the language in the manner they need to be presented: as facts and constants. Again, books often accompany this type of teaching. The argument can be made that this type of teacher may change his style of presentation of the information periodically, in response to feedback from the students. Books can be rewritten and re-purchased as well. This leads to my next argument.

     Freire writes that no bank clerk teacher can be a problem-posing teacher and no problem-posing teacher can be a bank clerk teacher. According to his essay, there is no continuum. Regarding this Freire writes,

Those truly committed to the liberation must reject the banking concept in its entirety, adopting instead a concept of women and men as conscious beings, and consciousness as consciousness intent upon the world. They must abandon the educational goal of deposit-making and replace it with the posing of the problems of human beings in their relations with the world (Freire 354).

I disagree with this claim as well. It is true that some teachers teach only from the banking point of view, and some only teach as problem-posing teachers. However, in different situations, most teachers can teach differently, depending on which method will be more advantageous to the students and the teacher. For example, if a teacher needs to get a point of discipline across to a large number of people, speaking with each one individually, or learning from them will be difficult, if even possible. However, when a mother disciplines her child, this is done one on one, and the child teaches the mother while the mother teaches the child. The child better learns "right from wrong" and the mother learns better parenting skills.

     Another, more personal example of this is the way my cross-country team was lead by my coach during my senior year of high school. Every day, after school, the team would gather in the gym before practice. The coach would have some words for us as a whole, and we were expected to remember things he said in that atmosphere. There was little interaction with him at this point. He would tell us different styles of running and different forms, and which are most beneficial, and which can hurt a runner in the end. These teachings were to be applied while we were running. However, he did not leave it at this. While running, he would talk with us individually, and give us individual pointers to better our running style. He would critique our running to help us improve our times. As he did this, he also learned from us. His running days were over, but he was still learning as a teacher and a coach.

     These teachings meant even more to me than I think they meant to the rest of the team. I was one of four seniors on the team, and generally the seniors were dubbed captains. However the coach saw that I was the only one who could lead the group both physically and educationally. I took what I had learned from him and became a teacher myself. I believe I fell somewhere on the continuum between the bank clerk and the problem-posing teacher. I held strong to the pointers and ideas the coach had taught me, but at the same time made my own discoveries from learning from the team. I also became a better leader that way. I learned what kind of leadership works, and what does not. I believe this relationship to my team was beneficial to both. My times decreased rapidly throughout the season, and I met my personal goal by the last race of the season. As a team, we ran more as a pack, which helped us to score higher. At the conference meet, our team defeated most of the long-time rivals that we had lost to in the regular season. The method of educating I employed had its weak points, such as lack of authority, but I believe it was most beneficial to the team and to me.

     Educators and their methods cannot be placed under one category or the other, but fall somewhere on a continuum between the banking concept and the problem-posing concept. As captain of my cross-country team, I tried to find the most beneficial point on that continuum. There is also no definite type of teacher that is the most advantageous all of the time. At different times, different types of teachers are necessary. The chemistry course example displays when each side of the continuum is more beneficial, or at least more convenient. The foreign language example displays when a teacher nearer the bank clerk side of the continuum is necessary.

Reference:

Freire, Paulo. "The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education." Ways of Reading. Ed. David Bartholomae and Anthony Petrosky. 4^th ed. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 1999. 348-59