A Brief Analysis of Freire’s Dialogue Term
“Dialogue” is a significant key term for true education.
Paulo Freire (1921–1997), who strongly contributes to the approach of education as “the practice of freedom”, explores many significant key terms for an alternative to the traditional educational model, which he calls as banking education. Among them, dialogue can be considered as the central concept.
In chapter 3 of his most influential work entitled “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” (1970), he explores the term dialogue in a philosophical way. In this piece, I would like to analyze this term with its connection to the idea of curriculum reform.
At the beginning of chapter 3, Freire discovers the essence of dialogue based on its instrument, that is word with two dimensions, reflection and action (para. 1).
From that, he proposes two kinds of word.
The first one is the false word, which “is unable to transform reality” because of being deprived of one of its dimensions; and the second one is the true word, which is “to transform the world” because of the close connection to the praxis, the combination of reflection and action on the world in order to change it.
To Freire, human existence can be nourished only by true words, with which men and women name and transform the world (para. 4).
Freire defines dialogue in these concepts.
Freire (1970) comments that “dialogue is the encounter between men, mediated by the world, in order to name the world” (para. 6), thus “this dialogue cannot be reduced to the act of one person “depositing” ideas in another, nor can it become a simple exchange of ideas to be “consumed” by the discussants” (para. 7).
We can see that Freire does not consider dialogue is simply the interaction between people to explore the world together, it is also a sign of freedom, equality, and responsibility in discovering and transforming the world of every human being.
According to Freire, true dialogue cannot exist unless the partners engage in love, humility, faith, trust, hope, and critical thinking. This view shows that dialogue demonstrates not only the positive connection between people but also the constant drive to transform themselves as well as reality. Therefore, dialogue becomes the sign and the central concept of the true education, “without dialogue there is no communication, and without communication, there can be no true education” (para. 14).
Because “preoccupation with the content of dialogue is really preoccupation with the program content of education” (para. 14), the term dialogue connects to the idea of curriculum reform closely.
For the dialogical, the curriculum can completely change in goals, contents, methods, teacher-student roles and evaluation.
He states:
[The starting point for organizing the program content of education] must be the present, existential, concrete situation, reflecting the aspirations of the people. Utilizing certain basic contradictions, we must pose this existential, concrete, present situation to the people as a problem which challenges them and requires a response — not just at the intellectual level, but at the level of action. (para. 17).
This means that instead of asking ‘what teachers need to teach students?’, the curriculum makers consider ‘what problems teachers need to pose to students?”, from which students can name and transform their world.
This also means that education is no longer a one-way imposition of the “personal views of reality” from teachers to students, it is carried on by a teacher with a student “mediated by the world — a world which impresses and challenges both parties, giving rise to views or opinions about it” (para. 16).
What the teachers do in their milieu must be “dialogic” to achieve freedom instead of the “anti-dialogic” nature of oppression. Teachers must use a friendly language to dialogue with the students about student’s view as well as their own views.
Therefore, it is fair to say that Freire’s views resonate with a definition of curriculum from postmodernists, “Curriculum is the questioning of authority and the searching for complex views of human situations” (Marsh, 2004, p.6).
I strongly agree with Freire approach of dialogue in education. In my milieu of Spiritual Intelligence Development for adults, although I have not known about Freire’s philosophy before, the act of applying Socratic questioning and problem-posing as a dominating instructing method makes me fully resonate with his ideas. This not only strengthens both students and me myself but also make us become proactive learners in our lives. We have gradually improved critical thinking and transform our inner world as well as the outside world in a natural way.
In summary, the term dialogue of Freire is a revolutionary discovery for education because dialogue-based education is truly human-awakening.
If curriculum design is based on true dialogue, the education environment becomes open and democratic.
In the process of dialog, educators support a process in which together the teachers and the learners can learn in love, humility, faith, trust, hope, and critical thinking.
In the process of dialog, teachers and students drive to reflection and action on their true selves as well as their reality.
Such education means sharing between people, who live true to the nature of human beings, for a more harmonious and liberal life.
References
Freire, P. (1970, 1993). Chapter 3 In Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: The Continuum International Publishing Group. Retrieved from http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon2/pedagogy/pedagogychapter3.html
Marsh, C. J. (2004). Key concepts for understanding curriculum. London: Falmer Press.
Behar-Horenstein, L. (2000). Paradigm debates in curriculum and supervision: Modern and postmodern perspectives. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group.
