Paulo Freire
(1921 - 1997), the Brazilian educationalist, has left a significant mark on thinking
about progressive practice. His Pedagogy of the Oppressed is currently one of the most
quoted educational texts (especially in Latin America, Africa and Asia). Freire was able to
draw upon, and weave together, a number of strands of thinking about educational practice and
liberation. Sometimes some rather excessive claims are made for his work e.g. 'the most
significant educational thinker of the twentieth century'. He wasn't - John Dewey
would
probably take that honour - but Freire certainly made a number of important theoretical
innovations that have had a considerable impact on the development of educational practice - and
on
informal education
and
popular education
in particular. In this piece we assess these - and
briefly examine some of the critiques that can be made of his work.
Contribution
Five aspects of
Paulo Freire's work have a particular significance for our purposes here. First,
his emphasis on dialogue
has struck a very strong chord with those concerned with popular and
informal education. Given that informal education is a dialogical (or conversational) rather than a
curricula
form this is hardly surprising. However, Paulo Freire was able to take the discussion on
several steps with his insistence that dialogue involves respect. It should not involve one person
acting on another, but rather people
working with
each other. Too much education, Paulo Freire
argues, involves 'banking' - the educator making 'deposits' in the educatee.
Second, Paulo Freire
was concerned with praxis
- action that is informed (and linked to certain
values). Dialogue wasn't just about deepening understanding - but was part of making a
difference in the world. Dialogue in itself is a co-operative activity involving respect. The process
is important and can be seen as enhancing
community
and building
social capital
and to leading
us to act in ways that make for justice and human flourishing. Informal and popular educators
have had a long- standing orientation to action - so the emphasis on change in the world was
welcome. But there was a sting in the tail. Paulo Freire argued for informed action and as such
provided a useful counter-balance to those who want to diminish theory.
Third, Freire's
attention to naming the world has been of great significance to those educators
who have traditionally worked with those who do not have a voice, and who are oppressed.
The idea of building a 'pedagogy of the oppressed' or a 'pedagogy of hope' and how this may
be carried forward has formed a significant impetus to work. An important element of this was
his concern with conscientization
- developing consciousness, but consciousness that is
understood to have the power to transform reality' (Taylor 1993: 52).
Fourth, Paulo Freire's
insistence on situating educational activity in the lived experience
of
participants has opened up a series of possibilities for the way informal educators can approach
practice. His concern to look for words that have the possibility of generating new ways of
naming and acting in the world when working with people around literacies is a good example of
this.
Fifth, a number
of informal educators have connected with Paulo Freire's use of metaphors
drawn from Christian sources. An example of this is the way in which the divide between
teachers and learners can be transcended. In part this is to occur as learners develop their
consciousness, but mainly it comes through the 'class suicide' or 'Easter experience' of the
teacher.
The educator for liberation
has to die as
the unilateral educator of the educatees, in order to be
born again as the educator- educatee of the educatees-educators. An educator is a person who
has to live in the deep significance of Easter. Quoted by Paul Taylor (1993: 53)
Critique
Inevitably, there
are various points of criticism. First, many are put off by Paulo Freire's
language and his appeal to mystical concerns. The former was a concern of Freire himself in
later life - and his work after Pedagogy of the Oppressed was usually written within a more
conversational or accessible framework.
Second, Paulo Freire
tends to argue in an either/or way. We are either with the oppressed or
against them. This may be an interesting starting point for teaching, but taken too literally it can
make for rather simplistic (political) analysis.
Third, there is
an tendency in Freire to overturn everyday situations so that they become
pedagogical. Freire's approach was largely constructed around structured educational
situations. While his initial point of reference might be non-formal
, the educational
encounters
he explores remain formal (Torres 1993: 127) In other words, his approach is still
curriculum-
based
and entail transforming settings into a particular type of pedagogical space. This can
rather work against the notion of dialogue (in that curriculum implies a predefined set of concerns
and activities). Educators need to look for 'teachable moments' - but when we concentrate on this
we can easily overlook simple power of being in conversation with others.
Fourth, what is
claimed as liberatory practice may, on close inspection, be rather closer to
banking than we would wish. In other words, the practice of Freirian education can involve
smuggling in all sorts of ideas and values under the guise of problem-posing. Taylor's analysis of
Freire's literacy programme shows that:
.. the rhetoric which announced
the importance of dialogue, engagement, and equality, and
denounced silence, massification and oppression, did not match in practice the subliminal
messages and modes of a Banking System of education. Albeit benign, Freire's approach
differs only in degree, but not in kind, from the system which he so eloquently criticizes.
(Taylor 1993: 148)
Educators have
to teach. They have to transform transfers of information into a 'real act of
knowing' (op cit: 43).
Fifth, there are
problems regarding Freire's model of literacy. While it may be taken as a
challenge to the political projects of northern states, his analysis remains rooted in assumptions
about cognitive development and the relation of literacy to rationality that are suspect (Street
1983: 14). His work has not 'entirely shrugged off the assumptions of the "autonomous model"'
(ibid.: 14).
Last, there are
questions concerning the originality of Freire's contribution. As Taylor has put it -
to say that as many commentators do that Freire's thinking is 'eclectic', is 'to underestimate
the
degree to which he borrowed directly from other sources' (Taylor 1993: 34). Taylor (1993: 34-
51) brings out a number of these influences and 'absorbtions' - perhaps most interestingly the
extent to which the structure of Pedagogy of the Oppressed parallels Kosik's Dialectic of
the
Concrete (published in Spanish in the mid 1960s). Here we would simply invite you to
compare Freire's interests with those of Martin Buber
. His concern with conversation,
encounter, being and ethical education have strong echoes in Freirian thought. 
1. Fiji
