Latest Read: Pedagogy of the Oppressed

Friere, Paulo.  Pedagogy of the Oppressed.  New York: Continuum Publishing, 1970.

This is a classic in progressive/radical education and I suppose I should feel ashamed that it's taken me this long to read it.  However, it's one of those things, like Das Kapital that I've read so much about, that I always sort of thought I knew what it was about, so I didn't need to read it.  Turns out, this time, I was right - and, I was disappointed.

Which isn't to say that the book isn't worth reading or isn't valid.  Only that after 10 years of practical experience, it made me wonder about the applicability of the theory to my classroom.  I suppose, my dissatisfaction is also a sign of how conservative I've become in my old(er) age.

Friere's thesis is that 1) education for the oppressed should be helpful to their revolution, and 2) the education should be student-centered; students should decide on the curriculum, fitting it to their needs.  As he puts it, "the distinction [is] between systematic education, which can only be changed by political power, and educational projects, which should be carried out with the oppressed in the process of organizing them."  I like this in theory: the pedagogy's focus is on revolutionary praxis on the outside (purpose) and on the inside (practice).  And Friere's really talking about adult education.  In fact, his own experience is with adult literacy programs in rural Latin America in the 1960s.

Does the same theory apply for high school students in 21st century urban America?  Here are the problems, as I see them: 1) teenagers, being teenagers, lack impulse control.  2) American teen-agers, brought up on American media, consumed by American consumer culture, are extraordinarily self-centered.  3) I'm sure this is revolutionary heresy but, I've come to believe that we need some sort of standard education - what you learn cannot just be what you are interested in, there has to be a (heavy) component of - this is what we, as a community, need to learn.  Education is a tool of socialization and I think this is a positive, not a negative, thing.  Or at least, can be.  It's not socialization, so much, that's the problem, it's the society that one is being socialized into that is either good or bad.  So, then, it's not about whether students should be "forced" to learn things, but rather, what things they are learning.