Literacy can be empowering but it can just as equally be used as a tool for oppression; learning to read is not, inherently, empowering Literacy and reading can be tools of hegemony. For literacy to be empowering, the reader must develop a critical consciousness. He/she must be exposed to a variety of points of view and taught to look for the bias behind all ideologies. These slides describe historical fears of literacy and how literacy has been used as a tool of oppression. They then explain the views of Paulo Freire and his approach to literacy as empowerment.

1. Literacy:
Liberation & Oppression
Paulo Freire
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

2. ‘Warm Up’ Question/Issue
It is widely held—at least by academics and intellectuals—that
there is no such thing as an “unbiased” perspective. Being
uniquely human and ontological, all knowledge is based in some
form of bias. As humans, we are all biased in our views and
beliefs about virtually everything we encounter.
This begs the question: If we as teachers are inherently biased, if
the materials we teach are biased, and if the system of education
(the aims of education) are biased, can we and should we
attempt to assume a stance of objectivity in who we are, our
beliefs, and how we present materials?
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

3. ‘Warm Up’ Question/Issue
The Big Questions:
a) Are we being ethical and responsible to our students by
‘pretending’ we are unbiased when in fact we are full of bias? By
attempting to present ourselves and our content as unbiased, are
we perpetuating a dominant ideology that is itself problematic?
c) Might we be more honest—with ourselves and with our
students—about our biases and thus provide them with added
context with which to judge the ideas and materials we teach
them?
d) Would disclosing our own biases promote a more nuanced
understanding of the content, of us as teachers, and of the world
more generally?
e) Would such ‘disclosure’ engender respect, distrust, more candor,
or more silence from our students? What caveats would one need
to address to be more open about one’s bias?
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

4. Power of Literacy (and why those in power
have historically feared it)
Major texts—texts that have guided and shaped history—
have been opened to the public only when there was no
alternative but to do so. Faced with a public able to read
(and possibly interpret texts) those with power often
‘framed’ what those texts said, thereby controlling what
people reading them could learn and know.
When these texts are authorized as “official” versions, they
are given huge credibility. When they are called “the word of
God,” they become sacred (and thus questioning them is
heresy).
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

5. Domination & Fears of Literacy
Printing was completely forbidden in the royal colony of Virginia
until 1730. As one Governor of Virginia, Sir William Berkeley
(1642-1652 and 1660-1677), put it:
"But, I thank God, there are no free schools nor printing...for
learning has brought disobedience, and heresy, and sects into the
world, and printing has divulged them, and libels against the best
government. God keep us from both" (Ford, 2001, p. 6).
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

6. Domination & Fears of Literacy
The advent of the printing press was feared and English
translations of the Bible were initially fought by the Church: “[U]nder
the 1408 Constitutions of Oxford, it was strictly forbidden to
translate the Bible into the native tongue” *
With technology—the printing press—and future translations of the
Bible imminent, King James commissioned scholars to create The
King James Version (1611). This version was ‘authorized’ by the
Church of England and ‘rectified’ problems puritans had with the
two earlier English translations.
The King James Version of the Bible excludes and/or changes
some of the content found in the Vulgate and Apocrypha.
* http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/sacredtexts/kingjames.html
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

7. Domination & Fears of Literacy
King James Bible:
Those holding power in England (and especially the King and his
court) chose who would translate the Bible and what and how they
were to translate it.
The most influential text in the western world is not “the word of
God” so much as it is a third iteration of translations that were
controlled by those with power.
- Those interested in issues of power and domination should ask why
some people still insist that the King James Bible is the “literal” word of
God despite the fact that the version they read evolved from at least two
prior versions?
* http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/sacredtexts/kingjames.html
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

8. Domination & Fears of Literacy
King James Bible:
Those holding power in England chose who would translate the Bible and
how they were to translate it. The most influential text in the western world
is not “the word of God” so much as it is a third iteration of translations that
were controlled by those with power.
Example: The King James Version of the Bible repeatedly makes
uses the term “virgin” in its description of Mary, mother of Jesus.
This is the foundation for “the virgin birth.” However, the Hebrew
word—from which the books of the New Testament were translated
into Greek and Latin and then into English—is Almah, which means
a young woman (married or not, ‘virginal’ or not). Put succinctly, in
the Hebrew text, “The pregnant woman in Isaiah 7:14 is never
called a virgin.”
* http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/sacredtexts/kingjames.html
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

9. Fun Fact
 There have long been significant debates over who should
have a say in ‘official’ documents, literacy, and official
knowledge.
 For example, debates have raged for 400 years about whether
or not Shakespeare (1564-1616) had a role in translating the
King James Bible. Purists have long held that as a ‘bawdy’
purveyor of poplar culture, he would not have had a part in
making the meaning behind this most seminal of texts despite
his command of the English language and his knowledge of
Greek and Latin.
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

10. Psalms 46
See Psalms 46:
If one counts 46 words into
the Psalm, one finds
“shake”; counting 46 words
from the end of the Psalm,
one finds “spear.”
Coincidence or
Shakespeare’s crafty
signature?
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

11. Literacy FOR Oppression
“The rationale for the Iiteracy campaign [Sweden, 1686], one of
the most successful in Western history before the last two
decades, was conservative: piety, civility, orderliness, and
military preparedness were the major goals” (Graff 1981: 22)
 Literacy as Oppression - History and Today
 Literacy as Oppression (academic article)
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

12. Pedagogy of the Oppressed
Paulo Freire
(1921-1997)
Born into lower middle-income family in small town Brazil. Father died when he was
young, leaving him and his family in poverty. His association with poverty affected him
deeply, especially in how he saw lost educational opportunities because of poverty: "I
didn't understand anything because of my hunger. I wasn't dumb. It wasn't lack of
interest. My social condition didn't allow me to have an education. Experience
showed me once again the relationship between social class and knowledge."
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

13. Paulo Freire (1921-1997)
- Trained as a lawyer but never practiced law
- Appointed by the Brazilian Government to direct a state-run education
program; his goal was to help make peasants literate (a requirement
to vote in Brazil)
- Using a radical approach he called “liberation theology,” he taught 300+ sugarcane
workers to read and write in 45 days.
- His program was expanded dramatically
- The program was halted and he was imprisoned after the 1964 military coup
- He was exiled from 1965-1979.
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

14. Fear of Freedom
 What does Freire mean when he states that many people
are afraid of freedom (preface, p. 18)?
 What is the relationship of freedom to the status quo?
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

15. Fear of Freedom
- The oppressed are so rooted in the dominant paradigm (the
oppressors’ paradigm) that they cannot conceive of another
‘reality.’
- The oppressors create ‘reality’—that is the most insidious component of
hegemony
- Changing the paradigm instills fear because it is the only ‘reality’ one has
ever known or considered
- The oppressed (and oppressors) trade security for freedom (the
status quo to change).
- Acceptance of post 9-11 restrictions to personal freedom and increased
surveillance
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

16. Freire
 Deconstruct the following:
“Sectarianism, fed by fanaticism, is always castrating.
Radicalization, nourished by a critical spirit, is always
creative” (p. 19).
“…the more radical the person is, the more fully he or
she enters into reality so that, knowing it better, he or
she can better transform it” (21)
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

17. Freire
 “This, then, is the great humanistic and historical task of the
oppressed: to liberate themselves and their oppressors as well”
 “False Charity”:
 See p 26, 3rd paragraph (oppressors/oppressed and ‘generosity’) –
another form of oppression and hegemony
- The oppressed must not become the oppressors
- They must therefore change ‘reality’ so that both the oppressed and the
oppressors realize the extent of their dehumanization
- Oppression affects both the oppressed and the oppressors equally
(though differently)
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

18. Freire
 Seeking liberation is an act of love (p. 27)
 Lovelessness lies at the heart of oppressors’ violence
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

19. Freire
“The oppressed, at a certain moment of their existential experience,
adopt an attitude of ‘adhesion’ to the oppressor. Under these
circumstances they cannot ‘consider’ him sufficiently clearly to
objectivize him—to discover him ‘outside’ themselves. This does not
necessarily mean that the oppressed are unaware that they are
downtrodden. But their perception of themselves as oppressed is
impaired by their submersion in the reality of the oppression” (27)
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

20. Oppression of Dominant Paradigm
Analogy:
Those stuck in desperate poverty in ‘advanced’ western economies
seldom strive for a change to the system that engenders poverty for
some and wealth for others (wealth often based upon things other than
merit); rather, they strive to join the wealthy classes and—in the unlikely
event that they find wealth—they desperately protect this newfound
capital and protect it from being ‘taken’ or ‘stolen’ by those seeking
greater economic equality (whether the latter be governments or
individuals)—people like themselves just moments before.
Similarly, many of those stuck in poverty consistently vote against
increased income taxes for the wealthy. They do so not because of an
affinity for those holding great wealth or as a result of philosophical
opposition to income taxes but because they fear a hypothetical future in
which their wealth is taxed.
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

21. Oppression of Dominant Paradigm
Analogy:
So rooted in the paradigm are both oppressed and oppressor, that any
change to the system—especially one that eliminates repression and
inequality—seems to the oppressors as oppression (that they are being
oppressed). Freire argues that the formerly oppressed are not oppressed
by changes to the ‘reality’ but rather are stuck within the paradigm itself.
Example: were a society to become more socialist—were the U.S. to
‘redistribute wealth’ more equitably across people, cultures, regions,
etc.—those who formally had great wealth would consider themselves
oppressed when they lose some of the privileges they formerly had.
Absent from their evaluation of the situation would be a) that previously
the “other” never had such privileges, b) individual privileges, though
fewer and less ostentatious, are now more equitably distributed.
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

22. Commodification and Domination
 P. 40, 2nd paragraph: cultural and social reproduction of
privilege and power (and conversely, oppression)
necessitates the ownership and commodification of all
things. The system of domination is perpetuated by an
ideology in which all things can and should be bought, sold,
and consumed.
 This is itself dehumanizing; the oppressed define themselves
(and others) by their possessions rather than by their
‘humanized’ qualities
 The oppressed see those lacking similar possessions as
weak, lazy, or unworthy (thus dehumanization to them)
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

23. Religion
 See p. 44
- Have you ever heard someone state in response to the extreme
hardships someone is facing that “you’ll receive great rewards in
heaven”?
- Have you ever heard someone from an oppressed class (race,
poverty, etc.) say something similar?
Friere posits that this is again part of the dominant ideology that
represses/oppresses. It is the use of myth or superstition—guised
as religion—to perpetuate an unjust social order. One is,
according to the logic inherent in such statements, supposed to
quietly abide injustices here on earth because there will be ‘just
rewards’ in heaven.
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

24. Sectarianism
 Sectarianism, according to one definition, is bigotry,
discrimination, or hatred arising from attaching importance
to perceived differences between subdivisions within a
group, such as between different denominations of a
religion, class, regional, or factions of a political
movement.
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

25. Subjectivism vs. Objectivism
 Subjectivism is the philosophical tenet that "our own
mental activity is the only unquestionable fact of our
experience.”. The success of this position is historically
attributed to Descartes and his methodic
doubt. Subjectivism accords primacy to subjective
experience as fundamental of all measure and law. In
extreme forms like solipsism, it may hold that the nature
and existence of every object depends solely on
someone's subjective awareness of it.
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

26. Subjectivism
 Sectarians from both rightist and leftist camps “as he
revolves around ‘his’ truth, feels threatened if that
truth is questioned” (21).
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

27. Education and Critical
Consciousness
 “To surmount the situation of oppression, people must first
critically recognize its causes, so that through transforming
action they can create a new situation, one which makes
possible the pursuit of a fuller humanity” (29).
 “Yet, although they [the oppressed] desire authentic existence,
they fear it. They are at one and the same time themselves
and the oppressor whose consciousness they have
internalized” (30).
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

28. Education and Consciousness
 “In order for the oppressed to be able to wage the struggle
for their liberation, they must perceive the reality of
oppression not as a closed world from which there is no
exit, but as a limiting situation which they can transform”
(31).
- what does this mean for us as teachers?
- how do we (and our students) not become despondent when
seeing a world of hegemony and domination?
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

29. Oppressor & Changed
Consciousness
 “This is true with respect to the individual oppressor as a
person. Discovering himself to be an oppressor may cause
considerable anguish, but it does not necessarily lead to
solidarity with the oppressed” (31).
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida

30. Oppressive Pedagogy
 What is the “banking” method of teaching and why does
Freire find it so problematic?
 What elements of the “banking” model permeate modern
educational contexts?
 Is it possible—or desirable—to change the model to one
more aligned with a pedagogy of the oppressed?
© 2013, John Wesley White, University of North Florida