ADI Performance Bad Supplement – Freire Ans.

1

Freire Ans.

Performance Bad Supplement – Freire Ans...............................................................................1 A2 Freire Debate Is Bad................................................................................................................2 A2 Freire Debate Is Bad................................................................................................................3 A2 Freire Debate Is Bad................................................................................................................4

ADI A2 Freire Debate Is Bad
1. No link – The way they frame debate is not the way we do debate or consider doing debate. Our coaches do
not “deposit” information into us for regurgitation, but instead, we explore issues in dialogue WITH our coaches.

2

Freire Ans.

2. Turn – Our case is an example of what happens when the oppressed is not given a voice in the international
context – the result of their advocacy is to silence these voices because OUR advocacy does not fit into their framework. Although they have a different justification for excluding the voices, the result is the same.

3. Permutation – Vote for our advocacy in the 1ac AND adopt a critical understanding of oppression. They
have to prove that OUR advocacy in this round, not “traditional debate” as a whole, excludes their advocacy for a critical understanding of oppression.

4. Permutation is best option – their critical understanding alone is doomed to failure the permutation represents the hope that can stem from the critical understanding Hendricks, 1994. [Sarah, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto, “Review of
Pedagogy of Hope: Pedagogy of the Oppressed,” http://fcis.oise.utoronto.ca/~dschugurensky/freire/freirebooks.html] In a clearer voice than was articulated in Pedagogy of the Oppressed1, Freire reminds us that a critical understanding of oppression will not succeed in and of itself in achieving liberation from oppression. Nevertheless, the comprehension of oppression is “indispensable” (p. 31) to a new vision of the world based on justice and freedom. Hope helps us to “understand human existence, and the struggle needed to improve it..” (p. 8). In other words, hope is imperative, yet in isolation it is insufficient: “Alone, [hope] does not win. But without it, my struggle will be weak and wobbly” (p. 8). Hope then, inspiring and inspired by understanding is, as Freire repeatedly states, an “ontological need” (p. 8), essential to both our being and knowing, integral to both epistemology and ontology.

5.Turn: a.Debate is inroads to the democratic participation in choosing the content of our education and is based upon participatory dialogue that is imperative to the praxis of education.
Hendricks, 1994. [Sarah, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto, “Review of Pedagogy of Hope: Pedagogy of the Oppressed,” http://fcis.oise.utoronto.ca/~dschugurensky/freire/freirebooks.html] Likewise, Freire maintains a progressive vision premised upon the democratic participation of families, social organizations and communities in choosing the content of education. In the same way that language must begin with an understanding of popular discourse, so too should the programmatic content of education be chosen by the people. The simultaneous reading of both context and text, or what Freire terms a “reading of the world and a reading of the word” (p. 105), is integral to the content of problem-posing education. Freire’s vision of “democratizing the power of choosing content” (p. 100) does not imply the complete withdrawal of the educator. Rather, a dialogical relationship between both the educators and the educands will ensure that the content is situated within the people’s “reading of the world” (p. 111), and within an environment in which the educator can also offer his or her own analysis of the world.4 This formulates Freire’s defence of adult literacy education which empowers people to engage in dialectical solidarity through a critical awareness of the world. Moreover, Freire asserts that the acquisition of language developed through the democratization of education is instrumental to the formation of identity: “Dialogue is meaningful precisely because the dialogical subjects, the agents in the dialogue, not only retain their identity, but actively defend it, and thus grow together” (p. 117). Problem-posing education which is based upon participatory dialogue is imperative to the praxis of education and thus directly relates to the people’s assertion of their human rights, or, in Coben’s words, their “battle for citizenship”.5 For Freire, democratic popular education provides the means of empowering people to own their language and thus attain citizenship (p. 39).6 Thus, the importance of a dialogical relationship which merges teacher and student is reaffirmed in Pedagogy of Hope through Freire’s defence of popular discourse and the democratization of content in education.

ADI A2 Freire Debate Is Bad
b. Although we have a topic each year, it is voted for by the community and it can be interpreted by each individual and team differently, then we can have democratic dialogue about which interpretation is best. They especially must admit that their ability to talk about the things they choose to talk about is the best example of how debate is an exemplary of the educational system that Freire advocates. 6. Turn: Their interpretation of Freire’s argument is not true – Freire NEVER says we should remain absolutely bound up in local reality, but should instead become the source for analysis and then integrate global economic structures like the plan does. This is another reason to vote for the permutation. Hendricks, 1994. [Sarah, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto, “Review of
Pedagogy of Hope: Pedagogy of the Oppressed,” http://fcis.oise.utoronto.ca/~dschugurensky/freire/freirebooks.html]

3

Freire Ans.

Freire likewise rejects the suggestion that his focus on popular knowledge limits the educands’ understanding of global structures. In defence of popular knowledge, Freire declares that such knowledge must be the starting point of popular education, with the purpose of going beyond this knowledge to a critical analysis of the world. Rejecting the assumption that his pedagogy was locally bound, Freire asserts himself by stating that “never, however, have I said that these programs . . . ought to remain absolutely bound up with local reality” (p. 86). The existential experience of the people must first become the source of analysis before global economic structures can be integrated.

7. No link and turn: Debate is not an example of “banking education” – it encourages critical thinking and challenging social and political positions through dialogue with coaches during preparation, opponents during the round and critics during post-round discussions
McClafferty, 1993. [Karen, UCLA, “Review of Pedagogy of the Oppressed,” http://fcis.oise.utoronto.ca/~dschugurensky/freire/km.html] Freire’s central argument is that education is always a political act. It can be used to maintain the status quo or it can be used to bring about social change. Through what he calls “banking education,” learners are not encouraged to think critically and consequently do not challenge their social and political position. Instead, they receive knowledge “deposits” which are absorbed without reflection. Their “oppression” is perpetuated by this inability to question. Failing to take into account the notion of agency, Freire assumes that the oppressed blindly follow what they are “taught” and that no resistance to this oppressor identity takes place. Through dialogue, Freire argues, the nature of education is changed. The oppressed are able to actually experience the world, and as a result question it. In turn, “the great humanistic and historical task of the oppressed” can be accomplished: “to liberate themselves and their oppressors as well” (p. 20).

ADI A2 Freire Debate Is Bad
8. The case becomes a disadvantage for voting for the critique alone: Freire excludes any examination of issues of race or ethnicity that the affirmative shows to be so important. Tan, no date. [Sandra, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto, “Review of
Pedagogy of Hope: Pedagogy of the Oppressed,” http://fcis.oise.utoronto.ca/~dschugurensky/freire/st.html]

4

Freire Ans.

Freire’s theory evinces some fundamental shortcomings that cannot be overlooked. The major gap lies in its failure to incorporate and interrogate race and gender relations within the theme of oppression. This is particularly disheartening when we note that class struggles mounted in the name of the “oppressed” have historically and consistently displaced or subsumed the disparate struggles of women and people of colour beneath its homogenizing rhetoric. While I am conscious of Freire’s defense that a text is a reflection of its historical moment and hence its incompleteness (1997:318-9), I am not convinced of his position given that other revolutionary thinkers have demonstrated such a vision. Notwithstanding the contradictions in their revolutionary actions, Mao and
Despite praiseworthy credit and deference given to this “landmark” book, Castro’s political thought, to name a couple, have not only challenged bourgeois ideology, but paved the way to the liberation of women in their respective locations and ruptured dominant practices of racial discrimination as in the case of Cuba.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful