Ashley Libben
Dr. Gilliar
TESOL
October 10, 2005
Oppressive or Liberating?
Freire’s View of Today’s ESL Pedagogical Approaches
Introduction
In the world of ESL and EFL education, there have been varying views of what students should be taught and how they should be taught. The movements in the education world are often cyclical and responsive to the problems with the current system of teaching. Perhaps one of the most important considerations a teacher can make in choosing an approach is the effect it will have on the student. Paulo Freire was a revolutionary thinker who expounded on the characteristics of oppressive education; that is education which is used to control and contain people and their knowledge. It is the duty of a responsible educator to prevent this monstrosity from entering his/her classroom. The following are current pedagogical approaches used in today’s ESL and EFL classrooms as well as possible reactions from Freire to these approaches.
Grammar-Translation Approach
Libben 1
The Grammar-Translation Approach, developed by German Karl Ploetz (circa 1870s), strives to analyze the grammar and structure of languages. Based on the approach once used to teach classical languages, the teacher who may or may not speak the target language teaches the course entirely in the students’ native language. Students taught by the Grammar-Translation Approach begin with reading difficult texts early in the process and often translate passages back and forth between the target language and the native language. The result of this teaching approach is students who are unable to use the target language as a means of communication. (Celce-Murcia 4-6)
Paulo Freire, who strove to stop and prevent education from becoming a means of oppression, would not approve of this pedagogical approach; he would, in fact, find the approach oppressive. In this approach, where the teacher lectures to the student and enforces the rules of grammar, “the contents . . . tend in the process of being narrated to become lifeless and petrified” (Freire 71). By merely copying and transcribing texts, “[w]ords are emptied of their concreteness and become hollow, alienated, and alienating verbosity” (Freire 71). The Grammar-Translation Approach is oppressive in both theory and application.
Direct Approach
Developed as a reaction to the Grammar-Translation Approach’s inability to produce learners able to communicate in a target language, the Direct Approach immerses the learner entirely in the target language. The teacher is either a native speaker of the target language or fluent in the target language. Lessons in this approach often begin with dialogues in modern conversational style, introducing the students to practical application of the language. Because the native language is not spoken during instruction, pictures, actions and exaggerated gestures are often used to facilitate comprehension and fill gaps in understanding. Although this method enables students to communicate in the target language, reading skills are not emphasized, creating students who have limited reading ability in the target language. (Celce-Murcia 6)
Libben 1
Freire would have mixed feelings about the Direct Approach. It may be viewed as oppressive that only the target language is used and thus removing the students’ right to their own language and culture (at least in the classroom). Also, it is oppressive to inhibit the students’ access to reading materials; it keeps them from other liberating material. But, Freire would appreciate the extent to which the student is engaged. Being able to communicate orally in the target language creates students who are “no longer docile listeners” (Freire 81) and “are now critical co-investigators in dialogue with the teacher” (Freire 81). Although the practice of this approach is often liberating, the structure of the approach is oppressive.
Reading Approach
Because the education world is cyclical and responsive to former approaches, the Reading Approach developed as a reaction to the Direct Approach’s lack of reading skills development. In the Reading Approach, the teacher does not have to possess good oral skills in the target language, and only grammar that pertains to reading comprehension is taught. Similar to the Grammar-Translation Approach, translation is once again used with controlled vocabulary. As reading comprehension is the only skill emphasized, students are able to communicate orally and aurally in the target language. (Celce-Murcia 6-7)
Because of the controlled grammar and vocabulary, Freire would find this approach oppressive. Like the Grammar-Translation Approach, the Reading Approach does not allow students to create meaning in the target language. Content in this classroom, according to Freire, “are detached from reality, disconnected from the totality that engendered them and could give them significance” (71). The Reading Approach is oppressive in its attempt to control students and content.
Audiolingualism
Libben 1
Because of the Reading Approach’s lack of oral-aural skills, Audiolingualism developed. Audiolingualism focuses on listening and speaking; consequently, teachers who use Audiolingualism must be proficient only in the grammar, structures and vocabulary that they choose to teach. In the course, language skills are ranked as follows: listening, speaking, reading and finally writing. Grammatical structures are also sequenced, and rules are taught inductively. A typical class session begins with dialogues; students mimic and memorize the teacher’s examples. Students manipulate the language without regard to meaning or context, and great effort is made to prevent errors. (Celce-Murcia 7)
Audiolingualism oppresses students and illustrates Freire’s “ ‘banking’ concept of education” (Freire 72). Freire says that in this system, “[n]arration (with the teacher as narrator) leads the students to memorize mechanically the narrated content. Worse yet, it turns them into ‘containers,’ into ‘receptacles’ to be ‘filled’ by the teacher” (72). When students mimic, recite and imitate, they are not engaging in the learning process; they are simply receiving what the teacher deems important. It keeps them from playing with words and ideas, and thereby, it keeps them from growing.
Oral-Situational Approach
The Oral-Situational Approach also merged from the lack of oral-aural skills in the Reading Approach. Only the target language in used in the course. Also, in this classroom, spoken language is primary, and all language is practiced orally before being presented in written form. Like approaches before it, only useful and general vocabulary is used. Grammatical structures are graded from simple to complex, and new items are introduced and practiced situationally. (Celce-Murcia 7)
Libben 1
Freire would not approve of this approach. Although the students are able to communicate orally, the conversations are empty because they are not real conversations but rather imitations of conversations. Freire says that “[d]ialogue cannot occur between those who want to name the world and those who do not wish this naming —between those who deny others the right to speak their word and those whose right to speak has been denied to them” (88). By limiting the vocabulary and abilities of the students, the teacher who uses the Oral-Situational Approach keeps his/her students from their rights as human beings.
Cognitive Approach
The Cognitive Approach is a reaction to the behaviorist features of the Audiolingual Approach. It is also influenced by Chomsky’s theory that language acquisition is innate, meaning that all humans have the ability to use language and construct meaning through language (Freeman and Freeman 10-11). The teacher of the Cognitive Approach must have good, general proficiency in the target language. Language learning is viewed as rule acquisition not habit formation. In order for students to acquire these rules, grammar can be taught either deductively or inductively. Taking the student as a person into consideration, errors are considered inevitable, and perfection is viewed as unattainable. In this approach, reading and writing are just as important as listening and speaking. Instruction is often individualized. (Celce-Murcia 7)
Freire would approve of the Cognitive Approach. Although the teacher is present in the classroom and facilitates much of the learning, learning is individualized. In terms of Freire’s theories, the Cognitive Approach is liberating because “[l]iberating education consists in acts of cognition, not transferrals of information” (Freire 79). Because students are aware of the learning that is taking place, they are able to influence what and how they learn.
Libben 1
Affective-Humanistic Approach
The Affective-Humanistic Approach which is a reaction to the general lack of affective considerations in both Audiolingualism and the Cognitive Approach is characterized by a great respect for the human being learning as well as his/her feelings. The teacher of the Affective-Humanistic classroom is proficient both the native and target languages and emphasizes communication that is meaningful to the student; the teacher considers himself/herself as a counselor or facilitator of learning. Language learning is viewed as a self-realization experience. The classroom atmosphere is more important than materials or methods with peer interaction as paramount to learning. (Celce-Murcia 7-8)
As a proponent of human rights and abilities, Freire would have fully supported the Affective-Humanistic Approach. First of all, this approach is a mirror opposite of the “ ‘banking’ concept of education” (Freire 72) because the content is decided by the student. The information and learning that takes place appeals to what the student hopes to gain and learn. Freire would also appreciate the Affective-Humanistic Approach because it shows “an intense faith in humankind, faith in their power to make and remake, to create and re-create, faith in their vocation to be more fully human (which is not a privilege of an elite, but the birthright of all)” (Freire 90). Because the Affective-Humanistic Approach considers the whole person, it is a liberating, not oppressive teaching method.
Comprehension-Based Approach
Libben 1
As a result of Krashen’s research which postulated that second language acquisition is the same as first language acquisition (Freeman and Freeman 35), the Comprehension-Based Approach was developed. In this approach, listening is viewed as the skill that will lead to the development of all other language skills; learners do not speak until they feel ready to. Before they speak, learners listen to meaningful speech and respond nonverbally in meaningful ways. Learners are also exposed to native speakers in some fashion whether it be audio-visual or through interaction. (Celce-Murcia 8)
This methodology would also appeal to Freire. Freire favors methods in which
“[t]he students — no longer docile listeners — are now critical co-investigators in dialogue with the teacher. The teacher presents the material to the students for their consideration, and re-considers her earlier considerations as the students express their own. The role of the problem-solving educator is to create; together with the students, the conditions under which knowledge at the level of the doxa is superseded by true knowledge, at the level of the logos. (81)
Although the students at first listen to speech, it is meaningful speech, and they weigh this information and can eventually express their own views when they feel comfortable.
Conclusion
There are indeed many views of what content and pedagogical methods should be covered in ESL or EFL classrooms. All of these approaches have their own rich history and advantages. However, an ESL or EFL teacher must evaluate the ineffectiveness and disadvantages of these approaches. The ultimate decision lies with the instructor, but by doing so, a teacher chooses whether they will become a liberator or an oppressor.
Libben 1
Works Cited
Celce-Murcia, Marianne, ed. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. 3rd. ed. Boston: Heinle and Heinle, 2001.
Freeman, David E., and Yvonne S. Freeman. Essential Linguistics. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 2004.
Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum, 2005.