Freire v. Douglass

Henry Robertson

English 121

Mrs. P

Freire v. Douglass

          The two papers, regarding education, discussed below are by authors who have written during differing time periods.  Douglass’ work is from the late 1800’s (a time of slavery) while Freire writes during the late 1900’s (contemporary society).  Does one hundred years of separation between writings make a difference between two authors and their thoughts on education?  Maybe.

          Douglass was a slave during the late 1800’s. According to him a learned slave is a free slave.  In order for him to learn how to read and write he would have to teach himself.  The very beginnings of his schooling was by a teacher, the wife of his owner.   The rest of his education was self-taught.  He worked very hard for very long to gain his education.  He used his friends and turned them into teachers without them knowing it!  He would ask them to teach him one little thing at a time and sooner or later he put it all together and could read and write.

          Freire wrote during the late 1900’s.  His thoughts about the educational process compared it to a bank.  The teachers would put thoughts (the money) into the heads of the learner (the bank).  This type of learning can also be called rote memorization.  In his eyes this is the worst type of learning.  He believed the only way to learn is by doing. However, he did not believe in the “well rounded” sort of learned.  He felt humans should only learn what they need to know for whatever they wanted to do in life and nothing more.  He also believed that a teacher can learn from the student. 

          In comparison, both authors felt the somewhat the same – you must learn on your own.  However, Douglass felt guidance is necessary at first, while Freire did not.  Further, Douglass felt a person should learn as much as possible while Freire felt a person only needed to learn what was needed for that person’s future.

           My thoughts on this subject are very biased due to my career as a teacher.  I have taught on both a personal level as well as a university setting.  My teachings are based on the student learning on their own with guidance.  I agree with Freire on the fact that students must conform to whatever the teacher decides to teach which is not conducive to “user friendly” learning.  Grant it, this type of learning happens in grade school and high school. It is in college that the student is able to “choose” what he or she wishes to study.  One would think that this would help the student learn and provide for a better environment.  However, history will show students have become very lazy and only wish to “get by” the easiest way possible.  Understandable that there are a choice few who work very hard and go the extra mile to learn as much as they can. These narratives are not geared to them.  Both authors have very valid points about how people should learn but they are divided.  It is my feeling that students should learn through both school and on their own but as much as they can, not just what they need for their profession.  They have to go the extra mile and learn outside of school to succeed.  Through my experiences as a teacher students no longer do this. It is a detriment to their future and is only understood after the fact!  The best way to learn a topic is to teach it.  Also, as Freire suggested, the teacher can learn from their students.

Side Note: I do not wish to offend anyone.  I am only speaking through my experiences as a professor at University of North Dakota, MSU Bozeman, and as a flight instructor.  I understand that not everyone is lazy.  My teachings are very similar to how both Freire and Douglass feel about education.  In essence, I combine the two to provide the best possible education to produce the best students.