É importante sabermos o que é que o Freire disse, porque ele tinha umas idéias boas!
I found the discussion on Freire's paper very interesting - especially the 2 minutes of silent awkwardness at the beginning of class. It was very interesting to see how everyone responded to the leaderless situation. For the most part, we partnered up because we cannot work alone in a classroom setting.
This, too, would have upset Freire. Pairing up is closer to his goal than the lecture setting found in normal classes, but wants everyone to be equal. We can all learn things from our peers – and we are all peers. There are some things I know that others may not, and I know that are things that other people can teach me.
I did find it interesting in class how some people were so against this discussion method. I personally found it exciting and new. I can see their point that if this method were followed for a full semester, the amount of knowledge acquired by the students would be drastically less than if they were lectured to… but the usefulness of that knowledge might be far greater.
While knowing about all of the classes needed to take to get a degree in welding at Utah State, the idea is relative. I may be struggling with a problem in some class or even in my life, and someone in a Freire-esque classroom might be able to offer a solution that I would not get from tem anywhere else.
Personally, I think that having discussions like that are great occasionally and in fact should be done more often, but having a teacher who can lead the discussion in a particular class is also very useful. The teacher is there to direct a discussion on a subject in which he/she is an expert.
The good news is that Freire’s ideas changed the way things were to the way they are… which is a good change. Students are more able to talk in class and offer up ideas That is a great middle-ground between the two extremes. While Freire may not agree, this is much closer to the ideal than either end of the spectrum.
This, too, would have upset Freire. Pairing up is closer to his goal than the lecture setting found in normal classes, but wants everyone to be equal. We can all learn things from our peers – and we are all peers. There are some things I know that others may not, and I know that are things that other people can teach me.
I did find it interesting in class how some people were so against this discussion method. I personally found it exciting and new. I can see their point that if this method were followed for a full semester, the amount of knowledge acquired by the students would be drastically less than if they were lectured to… but the usefulness of that knowledge might be far greater.
While knowing about all of the classes needed to take to get a degree in welding at Utah State, the idea is relative. I may be struggling with a problem in some class or even in my life, and someone in a Freire-esque classroom might be able to offer a solution that I would not get from tem anywhere else.
Personally, I think that having discussions like that are great occasionally and in fact should be done more often, but having a teacher who can lead the discussion in a particular class is also very useful. The teacher is there to direct a discussion on a subject in which he/she is an expert.
The good news is that Freire’s ideas changed the way things were to the way they are… which is a good change. Students are more able to talk in class and offer up ideas That is a great middle-ground between the two extremes. While Freire may not agree, this is much closer to the ideal than either end of the spectrum.
posted by EwR at 2:17 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home