Banks 5 Maya Banks Professor Debra Martin EN106DLGU1A2018 June 24, 2018 Unmasking the Prevailing Culprits in The Present-Day Education System In pursuit of a holistic, critically provoking, meaningful, and educational oriented environment where teachers are free to teach, and learners are free to think, and the disappointing reality continues to present itself from every dimension. The faults in the current education system are critically unmasked by Mark Edmundson and Paulo Freire in their two invaluable pieces of articles. A careful analysis of the ideas tabled by the two influential education thinkers illustrates numerous underlying commonalities in their works as well as some overlooked ideas in their arguments. The fact that their central ideas in their respective scholarly works revolve around unmasking the true culprits in the present-day education implies that, if Edmundson and Freire were able to converse with each other, they would both agree on the need to change the current education system and build it around critical thinking. It’s to this end that this paper seeks to synthesize their ideas in an attempt to identify common grounds, differences as well the areas they both overlooked. Looking at the prevailing schooling system in America as well as the ways through which learners are carrying out their studies, the perception of the two education thinkers is of great heed to the whole education system. Deeply entrenched into the Edmundson and Freire respective pieces of literature is the overarching conspiracy and oppression theme where the established, who is this case is the teacher among other the education leaders seek to contain, manipulate, and control the thoughts of the learners. As acknowledged by Freire, “Teachers either work for the liberation of the people- their humanization- or for their domestication, their dominance” (p.243). As a result of this domination and hierarchical relationship, the only knowledge that the learners in the prevailing education system receive are from the teachers, an aspect that dehumanizes the students as they do not get the chance to develop their own knowledge or even challenge the one received from the teachers. The oppression and domination ideology as presented by Freire cast invaluable light on the need for both teachers and students to embrace an “authentic” approach to education which grants them some chance to be aware of their respective incompleteness and eventually strive to be fully human (Freire 244). In a bid to rethink Freire’s oppression implication, as a college student one ought to act as a co-creator of knowledge at the expense of posing as an empty vessel waiting to be filled by the college professor or instructor. Similarly, Edmundson acknowledges the presence of oppression in thinking and learning approaches in the contemporary schools, but from a different angle from the one used by Freire. While Freire profoundly argues that students are highly dehumanized a.

1. Banks 5
Maya Banks
Professor Debra Martin
EN106DLGU1A2018
June 24, 2018
Unmasking the Prevailing Culprits in The Present-Day
Education System
In pursuit of a holistic, critically provoking, meaningful, and
educational oriented environment where teachers are free to
teach, and learners are free to think, and the disappointing
reality continues to present itself from every dimension. The
faults in the current education system are critically unmasked
by Mark Edmundson and Paulo Freire in their two invaluable
pieces of articles. A careful analysis of the ideas tabled by the
two influential education thinkers illustrates numerous
underlying commonalities in their works as well as some
overlooked ideas in their arguments. The fact that their central
ideas in their respective scholarly works revolve around
unmasking the true culprits in the present-day education implies
that, if Edmundson and Freire were able to converse with each
other, they would both agree on the need to change the current
education system and build it around critical thinking. It’s to
this end that this paper seeks to synthesize their ideas in an
attempt to identify common grounds, differences as well the
areas they both overlooked.
Looking at the prevailing schooling system in America as well
as the ways through which learners are carrying out their
studies, the perception of the two education thinkers is of great
heed to the whole education system. Deeply entrenched into the
Edmundson and Freire respective pieces of literature is the
overarching conspiracy and oppression theme where the
established, who is this case is the teacher among other the
education leaders seek to contain, manipulate, and control the

2. thoughts of the learners. As acknowledged by Freire, “Teachers
either work for the liberation of the people- their humanization-
or for their domestication, their dominance” (p.243). As a result
of this domination and hierarchical relationship, the only
knowledge that the learners in the prevailing education system
receive are from the teachers, an aspect that dehumanizes the
students as they do not get the chance to develop their own
knowledge or even challenge the one received from the
teachers. The oppression and domination ideology as presented
by Freire cast invaluable light on the need for both teachers and
students to embrace an “authentic” approach to education which
grants them some chance to be aware of their respective
incompleteness and eventually strive to be fully human (Freire
244). In a bid to rethink Freire’s oppression implication, as a
college student one ought to act as a co-creator of knowledge at
the expense of posing as an empty vessel waiting to be filled by
the college professor or instructor.
Similarly, Edmundson acknowledges the presence of oppression
in thinking and learning approaches in the contemporary
schools, but from a different angle from the one used by Freire.
While Freire profoundly argues that students are highly
dehumanized and oppressed by teachers, Edmundson reveals the
opposite whereby by acknowledges that students through the aid
of western capitalistic society conspire against the teachers’
success in the teaching process. It not astonishing to find that
Edmundson relates colleges and universities as businesses
which are in place to follow basic economics principles
including that of demand and supply (Edmundson 395). By
being treated as customers, the student’s needs must be met for
the teacher to make sales as the students are always at liberty to
change schools and join the ones that meet their needs, which in
most cases are not learning-oriented. “To put it a little
indecorously, the place is looking more and more like a
retirement spread for the young. Our funds go to construction,
into new dorms, into renovating the student union” (Edmundson
395). This case of consumerism is diluting the education quality

3. in the currently embraced education system where the quality of
education, as well as the teachers’ input, is overlooked at the
expense of the student’s input.
This phenomenon described by Edmundson is crystal clear in
the American high institutions whereby schools regularly
showcase their luxurious campuses, stadiums, and
accommodation facilities despite the fact that they do not play
any substantial role in the learning process and the overall
education system. By being treated as consumers, its high time
that the students value their education, an aspect that would
definitely compel the producers, who in this case are the
institutions to fund new laboratories, libraries, and more
effective learning environments and equipment among other
learning supportive conditions. However, if we as education
consumers prioritize entertainment; stadiums and new
dormitories among other extraneous facilities, the prevailing
culprits of the current problem in our education system will
remain to be none other than the individual students.
Despite the fact that both Edmundson and Freire deliberate on
the role of the teachers and students in the current problematic
education system, there is a huge gap in their respective articles
in addressing the influence of the values of individuals. In their
suggestion, apart from pointing out the need for a critical
thinking education approach, the two education thinkers are
reluctant to point out that individual desires are the most
critical determinants of the pedagogical approaches. The
individual will often have the deciding factor on his or her own
educated decision, and it’s on the individual that will attend or
ignore these concerns.
From a personal point of view, in the two invaluable pieces of
literature, I see two rationale education thinkers pleading with
the society as a whole to think of themselves and the future it
wants to create. It’s beyond reasonable doubt that Edmundson
and Freire would agree on the inevitable value of critical
thinking ever to meet and talk about the nature of the prevailing
education system. In addition, expanding on the idea of

4. Edmundson and Freire being able to talk and table the same idea
about the current education system, I believe the two can reach
a consensus on the need for the education system to create room
for the students to think critically. This observation is based on
the fact that the two thinkers directly expresses the need to
implement an open dialogue between students and teachers
where the learners can freely express their thoughts.
Work Cited
Edmundson, Mark. "On the uses of a liberal education."
Harper's Magazine (1997): 39.
Freire, Paulo. “The “Banking” Concept of Education.” Ways of
Reading. 8th ed. Bartholomae, David and Anthony Petrosky.
Boston: Bedford- St. Martin’s, 2008. 242-254. Print.

5. Banks 1
Maya Banks
Prof. Debra Martin
Park University
ENG106
June 17, 2018
The Banking Concept of Education- Paulo Freire
In Paulo Freire work on the Pedagogy of The Oppressed
includes a section that he calls the Banking Concept of
Education. In this section “Banking Concept of Education,” he
critiques the traditional education system, and he passionately
explains the flaws in the system, and he believes that it is a
teaching-learning disorder in most of our schools. In his
writings, he shows his grave concerns, and he has a strong
feeling that the system should be changed.
As he starts his argument, he gives a brief description of the
kind of education systems, and he says that “education is
suffering from narration sickness” (Freire 242.) This is a
“banking” system that he says that the teachers in the schools
narrate concepts to the students without any concern if the
students understand these concepts. Instead, he says that there
should be collaboration between the teachers and the students to
work together and think critically by working closely to
enhance students learning. He symbolically refers to the current
education system as “banking” where the students record what
their teachers are narrating. The “banking concept” according to
Freire is a flawed system that hinders intellectual growth and
instead turns them to be receptors or information collectors that
do not correlate with their lives. Freire says “banking…the
scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as

6. receiving and storing of deposits” (Freire 244). Referring to the
Freire idea above it is clear that he believes that the students are
not gaining any knowledge but instead, they memorize the
teacher concepts. Furthermore, memorizing can be said that the
students the students are only surviving they cannot express or
formulate their ideas and thoughts or critiquing what their
teachers discuss in class. In other words, it can be said that
students are not gaining any knowledge where they are required
utilize the concepts learned in class and then relate them in
their lives and putting them in a form that they have a total
understanding.
He denounces the current “banking” systems in education and
instead, he proposes a revolutionary substitute which he calls it
problem-posing. In this proposal, the teacher and the student
should become one where each party teaches and learns from
the other, and consequently, it allows critical thinking at the
same time gives a chance for each to present their interpretation
of the topic. As quoted Freire (244) he says, “Knowledge
emerges only through invention and re-invention, through the
restless, impatient, continuing, hopeful inquiry human beings
pursue in the world, with the world, and with each other.” The
best way that teaching should be done is where a teacher has to
discuss the material for the day, and later give a chance for the
students to ask questions on the subject matter. The teacher can,
therefore, know whether the students have understood the vital
concept from their observations. Furthermore, when the student
is actively involved in class, they gain adequate knowledge and
better understanding. Freire adds another idea he calls
intentionality where he says that thought cannot exist without
purpose. Therefore, he says that intentionality is a component of
problem-posing because it is a system that will ensure that the
students relate the learning with their lives. Intentionality is in
contrast with the banking that is memorization, but instead, it
allows for liberation that will enable you to form your thinking.

7. Freire also talks of the notion that the students need to be free
and to be granted independence. Freire argues that
independence has its own negative implication s not only in
class but also in the in the world at large. When there is
freedom, students will perceive themselves as part of the real
world, and they tend to believe that they know everything
because they had the autonomy to learn freely. But in reality,
the students are not able to discover what it is true about them
since they never questioned the teacher’s concepts.
Furthermore, under freedom, the students find themselves as the
final authority, and they work according to their convictions. By
making the teachers have authority, it is possible to create
independent people, open-minded and having an enlightened
people in our entire society. Freire says "In problem-posing
education, people develop their power to perceive critically the
way they exist in the world with which and in which they find
themselves; they come to see the world not as a static reality,
but as a reality in process, in transformation” ( Freire, 252). At
the end of the excerpt, Friere ends in a political note urging all
the revolutionist to come out and fight to save the current
generation from the current system of education that has a
significant effect on our society. The new revolutionaries
should also make radical changes to their philosophies, and they
can work together to save the coming generation.
To conclude, education in the contemporary world is the
foundation and the backbone of the society. School is also the
basis or the foundation that the people who will reign the world
need to start and developed their skills. Furthermore, the future
of humanity is based on the elites of the world and education
takes a significant part as it determines the methodological
circumstances that transform individuals. It is therefore
essential to put more attention to the current education make it
genuine as possible, and in the long run, we can have great
intellections in the world. Therefore, there is need to support
Freire ideas and moving away from the current Banking

8. Concept of Education.
Work Cited
Freire, Paulo. “The “Banking” Concept of Education.” Ways of
Reading. 8th ed. Bartholomae, David and Anthony Petrosky.
Boston: Bedford- St. Martin’s, 2008. 242-254. Print.
Banks 5
Maya Banks
Professor Debra Martin
EN106DLGU1A2018
June 24, 2018
Unmasking the Prevailing Culprits in The Present-Day
Education System
In pursuit of a holistic, critically provoking, meaningful, and
educational oriented environment where teachers are free to
teach, and learners are free to think, and the disappointing
reality continues to present itself from every dimension. The
faults in the current education system are critically unmasked
by Mark Edmundson and Paulo Freire in their two invaluable
pieces of articles. A careful analysis of the ideas tabled by the
two influential education thinkers illustrates numerous
underlying commonalities in their works as well as some
overlooked ideas in their arguments. The fact that their central
ideas in their respective scholarly works revolve around
unmasking the true culprits in the present-day education implies
that, if Edmundson and Freire were able to converse with each
other, they would both agree on the need to change the current
education system and build it around critical thinking. It’s to
this end that this paper seeks to synthesize their ideas in an
attempt to identify common grounds, differences as well the
areas they both overlooked.
Looking at the prevailing schooling system in America as well
as the ways through which learners are carrying out their
studies, the perception of the two education thinkers is of great

9. heed to the whole education system. Deeply entrenched into the
Edmundson and Freire respective pieces of literature is the
overarching conspiracy and oppression theme where the
established, who is this case is the teacher among other the
education leaders seek to contain, manipulate, and control the
thoughts of the learners. As acknowledged by Freire, “Teachers
either work for the liberation of the people- their humanization-
or for their domestication, their dominance” (p.243). As a result
of this domination and hierarchical relationship, the only
knowledge that the learners in the prevailing education system
receive are from the teachers, an aspect that dehumanizes the
students as they do not get the chance to develop their own
knowledge or even challenge the one received from the
teachers. The oppression and domination ideology as presented
by Freire cast invaluable light on the need for both teachers and
students to embrace an “authentic” approach to education which
grants them some chance to be aware of their respective
incompleteness and eventually strive to be fully human (Freire
244). In a bid to rethink Freire’s oppression implication, as a
college student one ought to act as a co-creator of knowledge at
the expense of posing as an empty vessel waiting to be filled by
the college professor or instructor.
Similarly, Edmundson acknowledges the presence of oppression
in thinking and learning approaches in the contemporary
schools, but from a different angle from the one used by Freire.
While Freire profoundly argues that students are highly
dehumanized and oppressed by teachers, Edmundson reveals the
opposite whereby by acknowledges that students through the aid
of western capitalistic society conspire against the teachers’
success in the teaching process. It not astonishing to find that
Edmundson relates colleges and universities as businesses
which are in place to follow basic economics principles
including that of demand and supply (Edmundson 395). By
being treated as customers, the student’s needs must be met for
the teacher to make sales as the students are always at liberty to
change schools and join the ones that meet their needs, which in

10. most cases are not learning-oriented. “To put it a little
indecorously, the place is looking more and more like a
retirement spread for the young. Our funds go to construction,
into new dorms, into renovating the student union” (Edmundson
395). This case of consumerism is diluting the education quality
in the currently embraced education system where the quality of
education, as well as the teachers’ input, is overlooked at the
expense of the student’s input.
This phenomenon described by Edmundson is crystal clear in
the American high institutions whereby schools regularly
showcase their luxurious campuses, stadiums, and
accommodation facilities despite the fact that they do not play
any substantial role in the learning process and the overall
education system. By being treated as consumers, its high time
that the students value their education, an aspect that would
definitely compel the producers, who in this case are the
institutions to fund new laboratories, libraries, and more
effective learning environments and equipment among other
learning supportive conditions. However, if we as education
consumers prioritize entertainment; stadiums and new
dormitories among other extraneous facilities, the prevailing
culprits of the current problem in our education system will
remain to be none other than the individual students.
Despite the fact that both Edmundson and Freire deliberate on
the role of the teachers and students in the current problematic
education system, there is a huge gap in their respective articles
in addressing the influence of the values of individuals. In their
suggestion, apart from pointing out the need for a critical
thinking education approach, the two education thinkers are
reluctant to point out that individual desires are the most
critical determinants of the pedagogical approaches. The
individual will often have the deciding factor on his or her own
educated decision, and it’s on the individual that will attend or
ignore these concerns.
From a personal point of view, in the two invaluable pieces of
literature, I see two rationale education thinkers pleading with

11. the society as a whole to think of themselves and the future it
wants to create. It’s beyond reasonable doubt that Edmundson
and Freire would agree on the inevitable value of critical
thinking ever to meet and talk about the nature of the prevailing
education system. In addition, expanding on the idea of
Edmundson and Freire being able to talk and table the same idea
about the current education system, I believe the two can reach
a consensus on the need for the education system to create room
for the students to think critically. This observation is based on
the fact that the two thinkers directly expresses the need to
implement an open dialogue between students and teachers
where the learners can freely express their thoughts.
Work Cited
Edmundson, Mark. "On the uses of a liberal education."
Harper's Magazine (1997): 39.
Freire, Paulo. “The “Banking” Concept of Education.” Ways of
Reading. 8th ed. Bartholomae, David and Anthony Petrosky.
Boston: Bedford- St. Martin’s, 2008. 242-254. Print.