Almost one hundred years later, the thinking of Paulo Freire is still of urgent relevance, because it offers a profound, sophisticated and complex vision of the human and the relationship between self and world, which in turn lays the basis for Freirean pedagogy. The Brazilian educationalist and teacher challenges us, in our contemporary era, by putting forward a possible model of the world and of existence that translates into a possible pedagogical-educational model designed to critically bring to light the contradictions, and at times even the manipulations, inherent in education itself. While it is undeniable that education at all stages of life is aimed at adapting individuals to their social, political and cultural context, it is equally true that it is called to support the drive for emancipation (Biasin. 2009; Castiglioni, 2011; Tramma, 2011). Thus, two key concepts emerge from Freire’s work - the adaptation and the emancipation of educational thinking/approaches. Both need - today more than ever, in my view - to be revisited at both the theoretical level and operational levels, with a view to critically and constructively advancing our understanding of what we - as education specialists and educators - mean in practice by adaptation to… and emancipation from/to…. If they go unquestioned, these two dimensions risk producing what Freire (2011, p.25) referred to as circles of certainty, which confine experience within or outside of the self and constrain the individual. This in turn risks intentionally and paradoxically generating new forms of disadvantage and new hardships - and not only for weaker groups -, needing to be recognized and addressed from an educational perspective of conscientization. And the process of conscientization, I argue - following Freire - inevitably calls into play the self-educational dimension of all processes of educating others, along the learning-growth continuum. An emphasis on self-education and entering more attentively and more closely into contact with the self, from childhood onwards, and in both formal and informal educational contexts, is not in my view in conflict with Freire’s emphasis on the social and community dimensions of education, but on the contrary is closely related to these. Indeed, Freire himself invites us to view and engage in educational practice as a practice of freedom "starting from the awareness that we know too little about ourselves" (Biasin, 2009, p.40). This explains Freire’s call for a critical revisiting of what we might call refer to as "vertical" education, often based on risky assumptions: a) The educator educates, students are educated; b) The educator knows, those being educated do not know; c) The educator thinks, those being educated are thought about; d) The educator speaks, those being educated listen meekly; e) The educator devises discipline, those being educated are disciplined; f) The educator chooses and prescribes his or her choices, those being educated follow these prescriptions; g) The educator acts, those being educated are under the illusion of acting within the action of the educator. h) The educator chooses the educational content, those being educated - whose voices are never heard in the choosing process - adapt; i) The educator confounds the authority conferred by knowledge with his or her functional authority, which is antagonistically opposed to the freedom of those being educated; j) In sum, educators are the subjects in the educational process, while those being educated mere objects (Freire, 2011, pp.59-60).
Il pensiero di Paulo Freire a distanza di quasi cento anni è ancora urgentemente attuale perché la sua prospettiva si connota come un modo profondo, raffinato e complesso di pensare l’umano e il rapporto tra io-mondo diventando, in un secondo momento, proposta pedagogica ed educativa. Il pedagogista ed educatore brasiliano ci mette davanti, proprio nella nostra contemporaneità, a una grossa sfida che coincide con un’opzione di mondo e di esistenza che si traduce in un’altrettanta opzione pedagogica-educativa orientata a svelare criticamente le contraddizioni, se non perfino, le manipolazioni, insite nell’educazione stessa. Se è innegabile che l’educazione in tutte le fasi della vita è finalizzata ad adattare l’individuo al contesto sociale, politico e culturale, è altrettanto vero che essa è chiamata a far leva sull’istanza dell’emancipazione (Biasin. 2009; Castiglioni, 2011; Tramma, 2011). Ci troviamo davanti a due concetti chiave, adattamento ed emancipazione del pensiero pedagogico e dell’orientamento educativo di Freire, che oggi più che mai, necessitano a nostro parere, di essere rimessi in discussione, sia a livello teorico sia a livello pratico operativo, per capire meglio e in modo costruttivamente critico che cosa realisticamente s’intenda, come pedagogisti ed educatori, per adattamento a… ed emancipazione da/per…. Tali dimensioni se non sottoposte a domanda, rischiano di produrre quei circoli di sicurezza, come li chiama Freire (2011, p.25), che imprigionano l’esperienza dentro e fuori di sé e imbrigliano il singolo individuo, creando intenzionalmente e paradossalmente, nuove marginalità e nuovi disagi riferiti non soltanto alle fasce deboli, che richiedono per essere visti e affrontati, un’ottica educativa di coscientizzazione che secondo noi, in continuità con Freire, mette in gioco inevitabilmente la dimensione auto-formativa di ogni processo etero-educativo-formativo, lungo il continuum dell’apprendimento-accrescimento. Il richiamo all’autoformazione e ad una presa di contatto più attenta ed intima con se stessi, fin da piccoli, nei contesti educativi formali e informali, non ci sembra essere in contrasto con la valenza sociale e comunitaria così presente nella proposta pedagogica di Freire, ma anzi, strettamente connessa ad essa. Del resto, è lo stesso Freire che ci invita a considerare e agire la pratica educativa come pratica di libertà “che parte dalla presa di coscienza di sapere troppo poco di sé” (Biasin, 2009, p.40). Di qui, la sollecitazione di Freire, a considerare criticamente quella che possiamo chiamare, pedagogia “verticale” che rischia di poggiarsi su rischiosi assiomi: a) l’educatore educa, gli educandi sono educati; b) l’educatore sa, gli educandi non sanno; c) l’educatore pensa, gli educandi sono pensati; d) l’educatore parla, gli educandi l’ascoltano docilmente; e) l’educatore crea la disciplina, gli educandi sono disciplinati; f) l’educatore sceglie e prescrive la sua scelta, gli educandi seguono la sua prescrizione; g) l’educatore agisce, gli educandi hanno l’illusione di agire nell’azione dell’educatore. h) l’educatore scegli il contenuto programmatico, gli educandi, mai ascoltati in questa scelta, si adattano; i) l’educatore identifica l’autorità del sapere con la sua autorità funzionale, che oppone in forma di antagonismo alla libertà degli educandi; j) gli educatori infine è il soggetto del processo, gli educandi puri oggetti (Freire, 2011, pp.59-60).
Castiglioni, M. (2017). Perché Paulo Freire nell'educazione di oggi?. In P. Ellerani (a cura di), A quasi cento anni dalla nascita di Paulo Freire, Pedagogista di Comunità: Libertà e Democrazia in Divenire (pp. 73-88). Franco Angeli.
Perché Paulo Freire nell'educazione di oggi?
Castiglioni, M
2017
Abstract
Almost one hundred years later, the thinking of Paulo Freire is still of urgent relevance, because it offers a profound, sophisticated and complex vision of the human and the relationship between self and world, which in turn lays the basis for Freirean pedagogy. The Brazilian educationalist and teacher challenges us, in our contemporary era, by putting forward a possible model of the world and of existence that translates into a possible pedagogical-educational model designed to critically bring to light the contradictions, and at times even the manipulations, inherent in education itself. While it is undeniable that education at all stages of life is aimed at adapting individuals to their social, political and cultural context, it is equally true that it is called to support the drive for emancipation (Biasin. 2009; Castiglioni, 2011; Tramma, 2011). Thus, two key concepts emerge from Freire’s work - the adaptation and the emancipation of educational thinking/approaches. Both need - today more than ever, in my view - to be revisited at both the theoretical level and operational levels, with a view to critically and constructively advancing our understanding of what we - as education specialists and educators - mean in practice by adaptation to… and emancipation from/to…. If they go unquestioned, these two dimensions risk producing what Freire (2011, p.25) referred to as circles of certainty, which confine experience within or outside of the self and constrain the individual. This in turn risks intentionally and paradoxically generating new forms of disadvantage and new hardships - and not only for weaker groups -, needing to be recognized and addressed from an educational perspective of conscientization. And the process of conscientization, I argue - following Freire - inevitably calls into play the self-educational dimension of all processes of educating others, along the learning-growth continuum. An emphasis on self-education and entering more attentively and more closely into contact with the self, from childhood onwards, and in both formal and informal educational contexts, is not in my view in conflict with Freire’s emphasis on the social and community dimensions of education, but on the contrary is closely related to these. Indeed, Freire himself invites us to view and engage in educational practice as a practice of freedom "starting from the awareness that we know too little about ourselves" (Biasin, 2009, p.40). This explains Freire’s call for a critical revisiting of what we might call refer to as "vertical" education, often based on risky assumptions: a) The educator educates, students are educated; b) The educator knows, those being educated do not know; c) The educator thinks, those being educated are thought about; d) The educator speaks, those being educated listen meekly; e) The educator devises discipline, those being educated are disciplined; f) The educator chooses and prescribes his or her choices, those being educated follow these prescriptions; g) The educator acts, those being educated are under the illusion of acting within the action of the educator. h) The educator chooses the educational content, those being educated - whose voices are never heard in the choosing process - adapt; i) The educator confounds the authority conferred by knowledge with his or her functional authority, which is antagonistically opposed to the freedom of those being educated; j) In sum, educators are the subjects in the educational process, while those being educated mere objects (Freire, 2011, pp.59-60).File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Contributo Freire (2).pdf
Solo gestori archivio
Tipologia di allegato:
Publisher’s Version (Version of Record, VoR)
Dimensione
428.77 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
428.77 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.