Theme 2: Implications

Based on the theory and concept of banking education by Freire (2000), I propose to explain what studying Shakespearian plays does to learners and what the pedagogical methods used when teaching Shakespeare does to learners. Refer to Chapter 4 pages 130-139 for an in-depth presentation.

1) What studying Shakespeare’s play does to learners:

2) What the pedagogical methods employed when teaching Shakespeare do to learners: a) Causes resistance learning as

learners resist learning about Shakespeare and reading his plays.

a) It forces learners to take notes only when the educator tells them to do so and indicates that certain sections are important.

b) Language barrier between the learner and the language used in the plays.

c) Learners do not pay attention to the lesson. Some of the learners pretend to pay attention however they cannot explain what the educator spoke about or what the audio of the plays has covered.

166

d) Majority of the learners’ attitude towards the lesson and the English subject changes once they are told that the lesson in the class on the particular day will be on

Shakespeare’s play.

Listening to the audio of the Shakespearian plays makes learners quiet and due to the language barrier and the disinterest towards his plays learners lose focus in the lesson and some learners even put their heads down on the desk and fall asleep.

In light of the above table, my analysis of these attitudes from learners towards Shakespeare and the educators’ pedagogical methods employed when Shakespeare is taught is one that is of resistance learning. The learners are resisting the lesson on Shakespeare and reading the texts and in turn Shakespeare’s plays are being portrayed as being rebellious. Meaning Shakespeare’s plays are difficult to understand and thus learners resist reading the play and paying attention to lessons on the play. The distinction between learners’ cognition and the play is that there is a language barrier. Learners cannot relate to Shakespeare’s plays nor are they able to see the link between the themes highlighted in the play and their daily realities. Vygotsky viewed language as a complex semiotic system. Vygotsky states language is essential to cognition because it helps to think about the world and to communicate with others (Vygotsky, 1978, p.86). It also provides the means to reflect on and regulate personal thinking (Eggen and Kauchak, 1997). While learners may resist the language used in

Shakespeare’s plays; educators should educate learners in terms of how to use their ideas by regulating their personal thinking skills to reflect on the literature.

Freire (2007) argues that no real learning can take place if learners are not actively involved in the lesson. Piaget’s cognitive development theory talks about a

comprehensive theory of nature of development of a child. A child develops through aging, personal environment and thus one can deduce that a learner’s childhood has a large role and impact on the learner’s biological maturation. Piaget (1964) believes that children construct knowledge as they mentally organize information from the

environment. In addition to this Piaget also believes that children manipulate and explore the world and by this they develop. Piaget believes that children learn in various ways and what they learn in the classroom depends to a large extent on what they already know (schemata). The schemata of a child could possibly be complete;

167

incomplete or even wrong; however, this is still the child’s ideas which they use to make sense of everyday experiences. Therefore, banking education, as evidenced by some of my findings, is a flawed pedagogy as it does not tap into the schemata of learners. Piaget believes that children do not enter the class with a blank slate and empty head; they come to class with what is known as partial schemata. Piaget believes that it is the educator’s role to enhance, modify, extend and elaborate on the child’s schemata by creating a learner-centred classroom which will serve as a supportive environment. Therefore, learners’ schemata should be tested before a new lesson begins and as shown by my data this never happens. Additionally, the educator should ask learners to identify the themes in the literature texts and state how they can relate to it. This will assist learners in overcoming the language barrier of the texts and they will begin to accept literature instead of resisting it due to the language barrier.

The lessons pertaining to Shakespearian plays and other literature texts are presented in standardised ways by the educators. Below I describe a literature lesson and indicate how the theory of banking education is put into practise in the classroom. A typical lesson for example begins in the following manner. The educators begin the lesson by telling the learners what they will cover in the lesson on that specific day. Learners are then expected to take out their notebooks. The educator does a recap on the previous lesson and very few learners are able to respond the questions posed regarding the recap of the previous lesson. The educator then begins to play the audio of the Shakespeare play as learners do not have physical copies of the play. The audio is placed on pause and then the educator begins to explain the important parts and instructs the learners to make notes of these points mentioned. This method of teaching is boring as indicated by the learners and it does not motivate the learner to participate in the lesson or pay attention to the lesson. Additionally, this demotivates the learner from reading the texts.

Using the audio of Shakespeare’s play to teach the play is viewed as an innovative pedagogy. In the case of using technology to teach Freire (2007: p 12) argues that “more and more, the oppressors are using science and technology as unquestionably powerful instruments for their purpose: the maintenance of the oppressive order through manipulation and repression”. Linking this argument of Freire to the classroom

observations I conducted; technology was used to teach the Shakespearian text

Merchant of Venice. While this may be seen as an innovative teaching method because

168

learners do not have hard copies of the text; it is not by any means empowering to the learners. Instead it is suppressing to them. This suppression is evident in learners

listening and note-taking and not critiquing and discussing the text and its events. While the above stated is based on the finding of my study, these teaching practices are also linked to Freire’s “banking concept” of education, which limits learners abilities in that it only extends as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits (Freire: 2007).In light of this, I believe that the findings of my study has evidenced the key issue in focus here. According to Freire (2007: p 21), the “Narration (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.” Freire argues that as a result of this education becomes an act of depositing whereby learners are the depositories and the educator is the depositor (Freire: 2007). These results in the educator transferring the knowledge and the learners receive this, memorize it and repeat it (parrot fashion learning). Freire (2007) suggest that knowledge emerges only through invention and re-invention. This means that learners should use their ideas which they have of the world and relate this to the knowledge shared by the educator in order to reflect and give this knowledge its own meaning; specific to that of the

learners’ daily environment.

In light of the above, to support the claims that Freire makes, I have noticed

considerable evidence in the classroom observations of my study Chapter 4, section 4.5.3 how educators simply deposit information when they conduct a lesson. Learners absorb the information and make notes of what the educator feeds them. This

information is then stored in the note books of learners to be accessed later on in the term for the purposes of evaluation where learners then repeat the given information which was transferred from the educator. Knowledge indeed does occur when learners are able to challenge what they are told and when they are able to reflect and critique on what they have been taught. In the instance where they are seen as depositories and simply fed information to be regurgitated in tests and examinations, the skills of knowledge and meaning creation as well as reflective learning does not occur. This could all also be seen as contributing factors to why learners resist literature lessons especially that pertaining to Shakespeare’s literature. This is also because learners are not challenged in their thinking instead they are just given information overload which they are expected to internalise and regurgitate during assessments.

169