Go to class. Sit in you chair. Look up. Take notes. Try to stay awake. Answer a question if you’re called upon. Wait for the bell and leave. Repeat.
Sadly, this is the premise of a day at school for most people. However, what else are we to do? Students cannot possibly teach each other the material and most classes simply do not have room for debate. In grade school, high school and most college classes, with the exception of some classes, the material is objective. This means there is no opportunity for a student to have his/her interpretation. It is what it is and you are expected to learn it. The “banking” concept of education may not be enjoyable or “fun” but it is the most efficient way of teaching. Students should adapt and learn to like it (tolerate) because it is not going to change anytime soon.
Fear. That is what keeps students from engaging in class discussion and debate. Their reluctance has encouraged teachers not to ask them questions, but merely present the material for digestion. As Freire shows in "The Banking Concept of Education", students become mere "containers" of information. Too many teachers adopt this method to "protect" students' self-esteem or because they're too narrow-minded or lazy to have someone question what they teach. It's easy for a teacher to jot down notes on a blackboard for students to copy and call it a class. However, This limits student-teacher interaction and doesn't allow students to think for themselves. Freire poses a valid point, especially when considering the nature of classes like English and Philosophy where discussion should be encouraged. However, his problems with the education system and proposals for change simply aren't practical for most classes like Mathematics, Science, and History. So, what we need is balance.
In Mathematics, the teacher presents the material and the students study it. There is no way around this method. There is no philosophical meaning behind x=4 and there is no debating the fact that 8x8=64. There is nothing to discuss or debate. It is simply unnecessary. The most student-teacher interaction possible is when a student is what the answer is to a question. In History, Science, and still others, the situation is very similar. The (objective) facts are presented by the teacher and studied by the students for the test. For someone to question whether or not the Byzantine emperor, Theodosius II, had to pay tribute to Attila the Hun to keep the Huns from invading is simply illogical.
Art. This was my favorite class in high school. The class was structured around in-class assignments and homework assignments. In class our teacher would have us work on our in-class projects, in which we had to follow certain guidelines for techniques, mediums, and styles. For our out-of-class projects we could do whatever we wanted as long as they met the requirements for time spent working on them. When each assignment was turned in we had to present it in front of the class and explain it. The explanation for a piece allows others to understand it and the artist better. The rest of the class and the teacher, therefore, are able to learn about an individual by listening to them and asking questions. For a short period of time, a student became a teacher. Freire calls this method, “problem-posing” education. Freire states, “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. They become jointly responsible for a process in which they all grow” (249). In the class, the motivation for the piece was completely for the student to decide and the particular subject matter could even be explained. There is no “right” or “wrong” way to do art. So, the students were graded on effort. By the nature of Art class itself, students are encouraged to be individuals and express themselves. I was even able to develop a close relationship with my Art teacher. We could talk about anything and even became close friends of sorts. In this instance, we learned from each other. To my dismay, not every class can be like my Art class.
During my senior year I had Calculus after art. Day and night. Oil and water. Right and left. Every day the transition was abrupt and painful. During that class I felt like a sponge trying to absorb a gallon of spilled orange juice. There was too much to learn. It was too difficult. Excuses, excuses. I couldn’t express myself. I couldn’t be myself. I could only be a satellite dish set receive transmissions from the front of that classroom. Broken or tuned in. Smart or failing. Learning or frustrated. This is the type of class that Freire speaks of when he states, “The teacher’s task is to organize a process which already occurs spontaneously, to ‘fill’ the students by making deposits of knowledge which he or she considers to constitute true knowledge” (247). I hated Calculus. However, as much as I detested the course, there really is no other way around how it is taught. There is no change that can improve the style in which Math is presented to the student. The current method is the most effective and efficient way of teaching. As repugnant and nauseating finite subjects like Math, Science and History may be to some, students have to learn to cope. School is not meant to be entertaining, that is an after-thought at most.
In “The Banking System of Education”, Freire does have a good message: students should be encouraged to develop their own opinions and maybe even question the material presented by the teacher. He states, “The teacher cannot think for her students, nor can she impose her thoughts on them” (247). However, I think Freire is overly critical of the current education system. Only in the largest of college level, lecture-style classes is there literally no relationship between the students and teachers. This is the only case where his criticisms seem to apply. Even in early (pre-college) Math, Science and History classes there are debates or discussions, it just may not relate to the course. Students and teachers may discuss current issues. This is what many of my classes did if we had extra time in class.
Though, not every class should use a “banking” method of educating students. In English, students should be encouraged to develop their own writing style and way of interpreting literature. They should be asked what they thought of the author’s diction, plot, characters, etc. English should be a class of discovery where the students lead the expedition. Theology and Philosophy, also, should feature student opinion. The teacher may ask, “What do you believe?”, and the students’ response ignites a debate. The nature of these courses requires student-teacher interaction that pertains to the subject material in order to advance the knowledge of both parties. These are courses where the student can learn from the teacher and vise versa. So, over the course of a school day, a student should have a healthy balance of being educated in two different ways: the “banking” education style and the “problem posing” method. Yet, only in an ideal world would this ever occur.