Paulo Freire and Adriene Rich extensively discuss how the education system on control of power. Freire, a teacher and philosopher who was committed to promoting literacy and political engagement among the poor in South America, suffered in the hands of power struggles, impacting his early education during the Great Depression. Both authors agree that education systems are basically controlled by power, with Freire’s work viewing students as the ones being oppressed while Rich narrows her arguments down to female college students. In his 1970 book Banking Concept of Education , Freire focuses on the oppression of the learners designed by the education system. On the other hand, Rich, an American poet and critic who made significant contributions to the 2nd Wave Feminist Movement, focuses on the oppression of the female students in the learning environment in her 1977 speech Claiming an Education . Both Freire and Rich are concerned with how power control has impacted the education system, especially for the marginalized communities and members of society. For instance, while Freire depicts how teachers oppress their students in learning institutions, both authors show dissatisfaction with how education systems receive little attention on reforms, minimal students` involvement in the curriculum development, and continued oppression by teachers.
The power of the oppressor controls education for the oppressed. In support of this argument, Freire argues that the teachers are the ones holding the capacity to learning since they "know everything" (Freire, 1970 p. 2). He states that “His task is to “fill” the students with his contents of his narration-contents which are detached from reality, disconnected from totality that endangered them and could give them significance” ( Freire, 1970, p. 2). From this quote, Freire tries to show how teachers are the only ones who possess knowledge. He explains that through their power, their only task is to narrate to the students the content that is detached from reality and based on a skewed scale. Rich builds on this idea by arguing that students, especially women, should stand their ground and claim their education. She posits that “ too often, all of us fail to teach the most important thing, which is that clear thinking, active discussion, and excellent writing are all necessary for intellectual freedom and that these require hard work .” (Rich, 1977, p. 5). Rich affirms that the teachers focus more on giving narrations than letting students become critical and active thinkers. In this sense, they are denied their intellectual freedom because they only rely on what the teacher states and not how they think or perceive reality.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Another firm idea in both texts is the oppression of the learners. Rich furthers Freire’s idea of teachers being the "depositors" and students as "depositories" in her text. However, she focuses more on female students and how the patriarchal society leaves these students fewer chances to develop. For instance, she states that one of the things that can be learned in schools is men's organization in experience, i.e., health issues, social interactions, economic activities, and ideologies. The great ideas presented often paint a picture of a male-dominated society in which all systems are fashioned by men and consider men's interests ( Rich, 1977). Freire argues that “it is not surprising that the banking concept regards men as manageable, adaptable beings" (Freire, 1970, p. 2). In these texts, Rich expounds on the idea that men are more organized and have taken roles in the leadership and other positions, and the same is evident in education. The text also shows that as the women are objective, men, especially the white men, flourish in their male subjectivity. Although Rich's presentation of oppression is narrowed down to female students, it matches Freire’s ideology that learners often get oppressed in the learning environment.
Moreover, both Freire and Rich agree on the need for learners to be more responsible for everything they do. Rich presents the teachers as being more powerful and controlling what the students receive. For instance, she mentions that being responsible means refusing to let others do all thinking, talking, and naming for you. It means learning to respect and use your brains and instincts, hence, grappling with hard work. One should not treat his/her body as a treading commodity for purchasing superficial intimacy or economic security. Failure to take care of the body, including the thoughts, puts the mind in mortal danger. Often, people give fewer thoughts to initiating a friendship or any other kind of relationship, which is detrimental to the mind and overall human integrity. These detrimental effects occur when the people in close relationships disrespect one’s ideas and thinking and always prioritize their own thinking. Additionally, Rich states, "I have an inward treasure born with me, which can keep me alive if all the extraneous delights should be withheld or offered only at a price I cannot afford to give” ( Rich, 1977, p 4). In this text, it is clear that Rich calls for students (the female students) to take responsibility for their being, thoughts, and actions. One of the reasons why Rich makes such a bold argument is because the students are not active in their roles. Hence, she agrees with Freire’s idea that students usually take a passive role in learning.
Rich posits that students should step their ground and claim education other than receiving it. While addressing college students, Rich states that it would have been better if the students understood their need for education other than letting the environment shape their education experience. In an attempt to show the distinction between the two phrases, "to claim and to receive,” Rich (1977) notes that claiming is similar to taking as the rightful owner and asserting in the face of possible contradiction. On the other hand, receiving is accepting as authoritative true or acting as a receptacle. She further indicates that the difference between receiving and claiming is in the acting and being acted on. In this context, Rich makes this statement to emphasize that learners should not just come to school to get an education. She agrees with Freire's ideas of the passivity of students and learning. Although she strongly comes out in support of women, the main idea being vigilant and enthusiastic in learning and not merely agreeing with what has been decided on by the career developers. In other words, the outstanding argument in this statement is that the learners must take an active role, think critically, and take responsibility for their thoughts and decisions. Therefore, the statement stands in support of Freire's ideology of active participation of the students.
Although there are many agreement areas between the two texts, some ideologies differ. Freire considers the students being oppressed by the teachers in different aspects such as lack of consultation during curriculum development, expectation that the students know absolutely nothing and must always be "told" and live according to the predetermined environment and abide by such expectations. In support of this argument, he states that “the more students work in storing the deposits entrusted to them, the less they develop the critical consciousness which would develop from their intervention in the world as transformers of that world” (Freire, 1970, p. 2). Also, he adds that the more these learners passively settle with their roles, the more they accept the environment as a fragmented reality presented to them by their teachers ( Freire, 1970). Here, Freire shows the limitation of students' freedom of choosing what they want to learn and how the school environment accustoms them into adapting to whatever they are provided with.
On the other hand, Rich expresses a similar power and oppression by one of the parties, only that it is not excluded by the teachers this time. She factors in the environment, specifically the patriarchal society, and how much it takes control, leaving out women's voice. Rich gives an example of how hard it was to start the first college for women, which took a long time to establish. While the college is meant for women, males dominate their leadership. Also, women have fewer leadership positions in the other institutions; no wonder from the beginning Rich says, "a nd for women, it can literally mean the difference between life and death" (Rich, 1977, p. 1). Therefore, the central focus of Rich’s view of oppression is female students, and the oppressors are presented as the patriarchal environment in the learning institutions.
In conclusion, Freire and Rich present the education system as being controlled by power. This power is evidenced by teachers (presented by Freire as depositors) over students (presented as depositories), and the power of environment over female students as addressed by Rich. Both texts agree on this premise, and Rich significantly borrows and builds Freire's ideas of an education system as a banking concept. Both authors also show dissatisfaction with the education system's state and suggest that the oppressive educational system's solution is far from the banking concept. On the other hand, Rich emphasizes taking responsibility for one's actions to rise above the patriarchal society's oppression. The two texts are important even in today’s education, where power still controls learning. Although the education systems currently try to engage students, there remains a great gap in how the curriculum is developed and the student's role in learning. Rich's ideas perfectly map into Freire's suggested banking model of education, only in a more elaborated manner.
References
Freire, P. (1970). "The “banking” concept of education."
Rich, A. (1977). Claiming an education. On lies, Secrets, and Silence: Selected Prose 1966-1978 ,
