| dc.description.abstract | Paul Freire's argument is that dialogical pedagogy, in contrast to other modes of teaching like "chalk and talk" or "top-down" teaching can lead to the learner's full independence. The focal question of this mini thesis then is; "What kind of independence ought dialogical pedagogy to develop in learners"? or, put differently, which concept of liberty best underpins dialogical pedagogy? In order to answer this question, chapter 1 gives a background of dialogical pedagogy (that is what dialogical pedagogy is). I intend to discuss this background under the
heading, Freire's "culture of silence" and to relate this to dialogical pedagogy. This chapter will also look at the three dimensions of Dialogical pedagogy namely liberatory learning (liberation of the learner from internal and external constraints); transformatory learning (development of the learner's intellectual capabilities like critical thinking) and participatory learning (participation of the teacher and the learner in developing knowledge). ! note here that these dimensions do not follow a linear line of development but, are parts of one organic whole. This chapter further argues that Freire's open-ended concept of love, as one of the aspects of dialogical pedagogy, is not properly articulated in that not all kinds of love, Eros and storage for instance, can contribute fruitfully to dialogical pedagogy or to the learner in education because they are essentially selfish and in essence, devoid of respect. So they have very little to offer to dialogical pedagogy and to the
learner in education. I argue then, that the only kind of love that seems appropriate in education is pedagogic love or Agape because it entails respect for persons.
Because dialogical pedagogy as liberatory learning appeals to a concept of Liberg, (Freire does not explicitly tell which concept of liberty dialogical pedagogy embraces) I shall attempt an answer to this question: How best can the concept of liberty or freedom in dialogical pedagogy be understood? or, which concept of liberty best underpins dialogical pedagogy? Chapter2 then will give an exposition
of Berlin's notion of Iiberty understood as negative liberty, (i.e. freedom from interference) and positive liberty (freedom to belong to a community, be it moral, intellectual or professional) together with their moral underpinnings. I argue here that what makes negative liberty particularly important, is the space it creates for the individual's free choice and that the significance of positive liberty lies in its creation of space for the essential humanity (higher self) to flourish. ln view that this mini-thesis is about education, chapter 3 looks at features of
education (i.e. features without which meaningful education cannot take place) as set out by Peters, Rorty, Strike and Dunlop.
chapter 4 attempts an answer to the question, "ought dialogical pedagogy to develop in learners a kind of independence based on Negative liberty? ln order to answer this question, I intend to look at dialogical pedagogy as developed in chapter 1, underlined by Negative liberty as developed in chapter 2 and then against the necessary features of education as discussed in chapter 3. My claim in chapter 4 is that dialogical pedagogy based on negative liberty and viewed against the necessary features of education seems to undermine authority because of its belief that knowledge is individually constructed: and so, cannot lead to the learner's full independence understood as critical self-realization. An answer to the focal question, "ought dialogical pedagogy to develop in learners a kind of independence based on Negative liberty" then is, no, if we understand independence to mean non-interference in the learner's development.
Chapter 5 looks at dialogical pedagogy based on Positive liberty against the necessary features of education. This chapter argues that dialogical pedagogy, based on positive liberty seems to encourage full independence of the learner understood as rational self-realization because of the space it creates for the authority of the teacher, received ideas and the acceptance of the notion that knowledge resides in intellectual communities. So, in answer to the focal question, "can dialogical pedagogy, based on positive liberty and viewed against the
necessary features of education, lead to the learner's full independence understood as rational self-realization?" The response is Yes, if we understand independence to mean rational self-realization. | en_US |
