Running head: CONNECTING THE THEORIES

Four Theories and The Relationship of Teacher and Student to Maker and Viewer

Sarah M. OHeron

Northern Illinois University

Running head: CONNECTING THE THEORIES

It is apparent in the theories of Paulo Freire (1970), Mary Field Belenky (1997), Kerry

Freedman(2003) and Lev Vygotsky that the relationships and interactions of interpreting

information and learning are best developed through communication that puts both teachers and

students and makers and viewers at an equal level. Lets first look at the classroom setting and

the comparison of teaching with a traditional banking model compared to a problem posing

model.

As defined in Chapter Ten of Belenkys (1997) Connected Teaching, a teachers job is to

fill, while students is to store (p. 214). This model of learning does not allow for students to

digest and develop their own ideas or arrive at personal interpretations, but force the teachers

perspective of information delivered. Belenky (1997) reflects that in traditional separate

education, the students tries to look at the material through the teachers eyes. In contrast, the

caring teacher receives and accepts the students feeling toward the subject matter; she looks at

it and listens to it through his eyes and ears (p. 224). What a caring teacher does compared to a

teacher who may use the banking model does not solely rely on the teacher, but the student.

In Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970), Friere observes that

through dialogue, the teacher-of-the-students and the students-of-the-teacher cease to

exist and a new term emerges: teacher-student with students-teachers. The teacher is no

longer merely the-one-who-teaches, but one who is himself taught also teach. They

become jointly responsible for a process in which all grow (p. 80).

This process in which both teacher and student grow relates to Chapter One of Freedmans

(2003) book, Teaching Visual Culture in which Freedman(2003) speaks of the maker and viewer
Running head: CONNECTING THE THEORIES

relationship. Freedman (2003) notes that In the past, art education has focused to a great extent

on objects of art, often fine art, per se. Now, greater attention is being placed on the importance

of relationships between makers and viewers that develop through mediation of objects (p. 20).

This relationship Freedman (2003) speaks of between maker and viewer is the same concept that

Friere (1970) and Belenky (1997) speak of regarding teacher and student. There is a recurring

theme in the three educators work: the struggle to destroy authoritarian institutions contained

the assumption that each person was to be a free actor, implying that individuals could act on all

possibilities (Freedman, 2003, p. 11). Freedman (2003) continues, such discursive relations

may seem hidden, or only implied, by the often distant integration between makers and viewers,

but the visual arts mediate social interactions between people (p. 4). This notion relates to the

idea that the banking method of teaching hides this process of thinking, where ideally both

teacher and students engage in the process of thinking, and they talk out what they are thinking

in a public dialogue. As they think and talk together, their roles merge (Belenky, 1997, p. 219).

This is also true of visual culture and art education.

The relation of student to teacher and viewer to maker, needs to be treated as a dialogue

that emerges where concepts and learning are shared and responded to. For it is the viewer that

completes the workwhat is produced is a social relationship, (Freedman, 2003, p. 4); in

contrast, it is the student that completes the information for the teacher in a communicated

dialogue.

All three of these theories can be supported by psychologist Lev Vygotsky who

investigated social learning theory of cognitive development. Focusing on the relationship of

teacher and student, Vygotskys theory of cognitive development as discussed in The Third
Running head: CONNECTING THE THEORIES

Edition of Child & Adolescent Development for Educators supports the idea of the teacher and

students shared dialogue for development of learning. Vygotsky stated that social interactions

with more knowledgeable peers and adults provide the main vehicle for intellectual

development, and the more of these social origins help individual mental processes, such as

remembering, problem solving, or planning (Meece, 2008, p. 169). Focusing just on teachers

for a moment, Vygotskys theory emphasized the critical role of adults in guiding and

supporting children intellectual development which relates to the dialogue of teacher to student

and student to teacher (Meece, 2008, p. 171). The role of the teacher to promote learning to

development is not to use the banking method, as argued, but to have an instructional

conversation where both teachers and students engage in activity and discussions (Meece, 2008,

p. 173). Vygotsy extends the idea of dialogue with the concept of guided participation where

students engage in collective activities with peers (Meece, 2008, p. 172). Vygotsky stressed that

language is the most important psychological tool influencing children's cognitive

development, but this tool needs to be used effectively to be most beneficial to both teachers

and students (Meece, 2008, p. 167). As far as teaching goes, the banking method is not effective

use of language because it is one sided with just the teachers language of instruction and lecture.

The relationship between student and teacher and peers needs to be an open dialogue where

learning is done through language and the sharing of ideas and thoughts to lead to cognitive

development.

The three theories of Belenky, Freedman, and Friere can be supported by Vygotskys

social theory of cognitive development with language as the tool for learning that leads to

development.
Running head: CONNECTING THE THEORIES

References

Belenky, M. F. (1997). Women's way of knowing: the development of self, voice and mind. NY:

Basic Books.

Freedman, K. (2003). Teaching Visual Culture. NY: Teachers College Press.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. NY: Continuum.

Meece, J. (2008). Third Edition Child & Adolescent Development for Educators. NY: McGraw-

Hill.