# data[].attributes.body
Paulo Freire criticizes the “banking concept” in education, where knowledge is deposited into inactive students who are robbed of their creativity and thinking abilities. The bank concept serves the interests of the oppressors in maintaining a status quo. Education is used by the oppressors to maintain their profitable situation rather than to reveal and transform the world. This keeps its victims forever adapting, making it easier for them to be dominated.

The banking approach, as stated by Freire, denies students their position as thinkers who are critical and creators of knowledge together with teachers. It creates this dichotomy between educators and learners that hinders open dialogue. On the other hand, Freire supports “problem-posing education,” which engages both teachers and students in discussion while learning from each other. It promotes real liberation by encouraging the thoughtfulness of people about things taking place around them so that they move away from the negative impacts of the banking approach on human beings.

# data[].attributes.body
The approaches of classical theory and critical theory are different. In Freire's readings, there is a connection to the classical theory of Marx. Frieire explains the preference of education be taught traditionally with the teacher speaking and the students listening. Bell Hooks explains the preference of critical theory which is opposite of classical. With critical theory, Hooks explains how education should be inclusive and there should be teacher-student dialogue. Hooks explains that all cultures and backgrounds should be included in education. We can use their theatrical paradigms to understand educational inequality by looking at the approach of classical theory and seeing how students opinions and cultures aren't considered when it comes to wanted to maintain a "traditional" education system.

# data[].attributes.body
Applying Marx's theory, Freire explains that traditional schooling makes students feel disconnected from their schooling. This is connected to how we are disconnected from the fruits of our labor when we grow up. We can connect this to intersectionality and see how a black female student can be even more disconnected than her white female counterpart when there are only white faces teaching her. She may begin to feel that she can't amount to the same as her classmates because she doesn't see anyone like her feeding her the information she should be learning.

# data[].attributes.body
How does "power/authority" function within the educational system?

Bell Hooks implies that teaching needs to work by the higher authority respecting the decision of students/knowledge and remain bias of the student knowledge...

When a banking method (Freir for instance) is followed, the child has no way to be identified with in the educational system.

For instance, this can relate to children within the educational system in NYC. Schools that are under-performing usually are dominated by "white" educators that work within their means.

# data[].attributes.body
The Classical theorists expounded on the exclusion of peoples of color, who wear not deemed to be of the human race, queers, women and other social entities, while coming from the perspective of the White middle class "and up". It approached learning as being an institution for which structure was prevalent in achieving one's goals, while on the other hand the critical theorists viewed education and learning from a more humanistic perspective, "giving it a life and form", and how it is put into play to give a conscious, perspective and voice to the receiver of the lessons learned.

# data[].attributes.body
There is a clear connection between capitalism and the education system. Similar to what Marx argued there is the idea that there are two groups; the workers and the people who they work for. In the education system, there is a relationship where lower-class students and schools are run similarly to how they are anticipating for the children to grow up. To lack imagination, follow orders, and maintain below an economic line and status that would allow them to surpass the generations before them. One way of ensuring this is the use of the Banking Method. The lack of voice, conversation, and free expression add to the conditioning of these children to grow up to be employers and never the owners. This is only done with a particular group of students.

# data[].attributes.body
When  it comes to education, Freire wanted society to go beyond the capitalist modernization and towards a revolutionary transformation and to end oppression. Building off of Marx, his goal of all people was to increase humanity and not decrease it and that's what was happening with the Banking method that he introduced. Bell Hook fought for equality  for not only people of color but for women of color. Her purpose was to end sexist oppression. We can use their paradigms to understand educational inequality because it's still happening today. These theorists wanted students to be critical thinkers and to be able to build student and teacher relationships so that their point of views can be taken into account.

# data[].attributes.body
from the article, I look for this as a theoretical approach, critical pedagogy. kids always have a battle in school due to different structure and other critical skills. Freire's ideology made us understand how some students have enrolled in better schools than others, as people look at education from different perspective it seems that other countries have a better education than what we have in united states. as fulling as a parent want more for their kids, their beliefs upon their own kids of having a better education will be better than them in life. there's a huge gap in between kids that want an education and teachers or parents supporting the kids on achieving the education.

# data[].attributes.body
Bell Hooks made important contributions to sociology as she provided society with a new viewpoint to theory.  Bell Hooks had a much different approach from the classical theorist that we often study such as Karl Marx.  Hooks spoke a lot about intersectionality and how the many different aspects of our social identity contributed to a person’s experience thus leading to different types and levels of oppression.  This is different from what Marx would say as he thought much more generally about theory and that everything applies to everyone in the same capacity.  Hook’s work expanded the space of theory and sociology as she looked to include feminism, culture, and other different aspects pertaining to our lives versus looking at the government and economics.

Theoretical paradigms help us explain education inequality by providing us with a framework to analyze the inequalities that exist, to then reach a solution or an attempt to.  For example, Hook’s used intersectionality as a paradigm when studying sociology.  Using intersectionality to explain educational inequality can be explaining how teachers from different cultural and social backgrounds from their students create a space that lacks connection, trust and lessons that relate to the students.  Therefore, this student feels disconnected from class and unable to perform to the best of their abilities.  This kid who is affected by the different aspects of their social identity does not feel as if they have the same ceiling as a kid who sees themselves every day in school through the lessons of the teachers and the leaders of the school.

# data[].attributes.body
Comparing these classical and critical theorists, I would say that their approaches differ from one another. While critical theorist is actually challenging the way things are and how we can change things for the better. In Freire's readings we are introduced to things like the banking method. Teachers teach and students listen. This is no way our educational system to work in. While in classical theory we take a look at how these theorists argue about "individual level factors" and how it contributes to education inequality. In critical theory these theorists give us a look at how these systems are operating and why it's wrong. Bell hooks readings helps us understand why questioning is so important and why it has shaped the way of thinking for many of us. comparing this reading to Freire's, when schools follow a banking method there is no room for individuality or for students to learn. Not every student is at the same level, and each goes at a different pace. Going to school in NYC I have always liked that the schools that I've been to actually do care about students who learn at different levels. Getting to see immigrant students coming in and having resources provided for them and their parents. Unlike other states, many won't do this. Teachers will keep on teaching how they are ordered to even if it's hindering the student's education.

Using their theoretical framework to put things in perspective as to how we can understand why we have educational inequalities even today. Instead of classrooms having one set in place teaching method, it could be multiple. Freire suggest the problem posing education where students are actually communicating and can freely ask questions. Compared to the banking method where the students are just "deposits " to these teachers. In Hooks readings she discusses how students seek "liberatory education" they want a place to show have a conversation Not just in her class but other classes. I found this part of the reading interesting because having the freedom to express yourself and actually having the opportunity to communicate with your teacher and then having to shut yourself out when moving to the next class. I think it's important that in our education system many changes are done, not just some.

# data[].attributes.body
Paulo Freire and bell hooks have different ideas about education compared to older thinkers. The older thinkers focused on teaching facts and individual growth, while Freire and hooks are more concerned with how education affects power and fairness in society. Freire's ideas help us understand why some students have better schools and teachers while others don't, making it possible to make education fair for everyone, regardless of their wealth. When we look at education in different countries, Freire and hooks' ideas remind us to think about power and fairness, allowing us to create plans to give all children in the world a good education, no matter where they live. In simple terms, Freire and hooks give us new ways to understand education and how it can help or hurt people in society, and we can use these ideas to make sure everyone gets a fair shot at a good education, both at home and worldwide.

# data[].attributes.body
For example the critical pedagogy is a way that a person or child is able to use their critical skills and knowledge to understand what is going on around them, making it hard for people to boss them around. Giving the children a right to set structure and contradictions in society or in school. This is very different from what we learned last class with the classical theory approaches. Which is where students are more in a controlled environment, in which the adults an teachers set up the rules. In a domestically aspect using theoretical approaches seems like the best option in order to understand educational inequality because it helps students feel more comfortable and in a safe space. The gas between educational levels could decrease allowing students to be able to speak on what they feel is best for their own education and have motor control on what they learn and what they feel more comfortable learning.  In a global point of view a classical theory would better help create structure for an educational environment. Understanding educational inequality would be much more hard since kids learn at different rates and in different ways, whether that is oral or written or even visual. It’s difficult for a student to feel seen or heard through a classical approach in school, which is a big problem now in days, that students want to act out on teachers for following a structure that they have been tough it the correct way from society. For example building discipline and time - management to set someone up to succeed in college or in the “real-world”. Teaching students how to act and talk proper to sound more educated or proper.

# data[].attributes.body
The theoretical approach to me differ because, for me it focus more on how power functions in society. It was more of a modernity way of teaching.The classical theorists for me dealt with the concept of traditional  form individual levels, like what to learn.
Hooks implores us to consider teaching should be more caring and respectful. Teaching should not be demanded on but taught.
We can use the their theoretical paradigms to understand educational inequality both domestically and globally by fulflling all of society values, needs and functions of education, like the things children need to know in society and them understanding for social change.

# data[].attributes.body
Classical theorists offered an analysis of educational inequality based on the historical context. Du Bois connected the faults within society and education through a racial view. James S. Coleman argued that individual-level factors dictate the quality of education, such as the role of family and the effect of peers. Marx argued that class struggles are embedded in the education system. Bell Hooks dives into the exclusion of Black Women in pivotal social research. Contemporary approaches mirror a collection of these theories to reform the persistent disparities. Freire argues that an efficient form of diminishing intergenerational curses fabricated through schools is to revoke the banking method. It is crucial to comprehend how the themes illuminated by classical theorists remain relevant today. The intersectionality of these concepts can undermine the potential of an individual. For example, a female African-American student in a marginalized community may not be provided the same opportunities as a White male from an affluent neighborhood. Freire pushes for the problem-posing method, which destroys the production of wage laborers. This could also be understood in a global perspective. In third-world countries, these phenomena are more visible. For instance, the Dominican Republic has an academic imbalance. Students from wealthy neighborhoods are enrolled in private institutions and have their futures laid out. While those from impoverished areas are enrolled in local public schools and face countless setbacks.

The theoretical approaches differ from classical theorists as they provide liberal alterations to the educational system. It is a student-autonomous framework. They are essentially directing the essence of the class. However, how realistic is this? Classical theorists solely provided their input on the cause of inequality in the education system.

# data[].attributes.body
Classical Theorists were more concerned with the processes of modernization. Meaning classical was seen as a social problem that was occurring during an era. We can use the teacher narration method known as the banking method and problem-posing method to better understand how educational inequality both are domestically and globally being used.

# data[].attributes.body
There is a term that goes "the greater sums of a part make up a whole". With that being said we live in a world where there should be equal distribution for all men, women and children. But when we think like the theorist Marx we are dealing with "chauvinism", with a non-inclusion of women. Let us be honest even the inclusion of people of color. I would like to quote an R&B theorist "this is a man's world but it don't mean nothing without a woman", James Brown. I would like to say the inclusion of women. Bell Hooks and Freire believed in a more communal way of education, and teaching. Their approach appears to be more hands on for the students and teachers instead of the hands off like their counterparts. Hooks and Freire tended to think about the students individually considering their socioeconomic status unlike our classical theorists. I take it that educators learned about the "banking" way of teaching from these classical theorists. Domestically, I think about our school system in NYC, I looked it up, 140 elementary and middle school had one grade that 90% flunked their exams in the last academic year. We, need to look at not only the educators but the school system itself. The schoolbooks that are being provided some of which are out dated, the support that our educators require to maintain a positive, conducive, exciting and constructive classroom. This goes for any school in any socioeconomic plain. Globally, it is just unfortunate that the lower socioeconomic status does determine where you succeed in this world.

# data[].attributes.body
Classical theorists preferred a more traditional teaching style where the students were passive and order was reoccurring within the classroom setting. Compared to Freire and Hooks preferred more interactive teaching, critical thinking, and using education for empowerment and valued more for social change. Freire and Hooks wanted more creativity in teaching, their methods differing from the more rigid classical approach.  Freire and Hooks rather than having students being, “containers,” wanted them to question the environment and the teaching that was being given to them. This ultimately differs from the classical sociological approach of blaming the students and their circumstances surrounding their difficulties within education, instead questioning the inadequate educational structure already in place. Freire and Hooks sociological approach favor more teacher to student respect, intersectionality, and empowerment for the students. As the two involved more the students’ culture, socioeconomic position, and thinking critically compared to their classical sociological counterparts.

Freire in his work, “Pedagogy of the Oppressed,” had suggested that most structures of education followed a specific method, known as the banking method. The banking method simplified, are teachers are always right and the source of all knowledge, while students have to remain silent, passive, and receptive towards the teaching. Freire had identified most classical sociological theorists’ way of thinking, making the student the problem rather than the educational infrastructure already in place. These correlates to how the theoretical approach shapes students domestically and globally. The Coleman report being a primary example, the conclusive findings of the report suggested that the students’ socioeconomic factors shapes how a student would perform. The Coleman Report not only denied the students the right to think outside of the societal norms and environment, but also held a bias towards socioeconomic circumstance. It follows that if you are of a lower socioeconomic standing, the worst you will do in education based on lower educational income and resources from lower income neighborhoods. Students with these influences will do worst than their economically well-off counterpart. This also provide an educational inequality with the lack of resources, staff bias, and negative societal norms influencing the students.

# data[].attributes.body
For this week, you were tasked with reading about three critical theoretical frameworks. Freire offers critical pedagogy from the lens of Marx’s conflict theory while bell hooks implores us to consider that theory is alive and breathing-it's an action.

How do these theoretical approaches differ from that of the classical theorists we learned about previously? And how can we use their theoretical paradigms to understand educational inequality both domestically and globally?