In other words, he sought to answer the question of how the oppressed in society continues to remain so? If the purpose of education is to enlighten, and in consequence, liberate the individual, then why are human relationships ripe with domination of one party over the other? It is a fair question and the answer lies in the way content, structure and access to education are designed by the dominant class. In this case, Freire’s basic thrust is said to be political economy of education. (Flanagan, 2005, p.22) For this reason his theories were attacked by mainstream institutions whose vested interests it sought to undermine. On the other hand, the emphasis of Brickman’s work was on how culture plays an important role in education. This is especially true with language learning, where social customs and intellectual traditions determine how the language is used. (Silova & Brehm, 2010, p.11)
Although the areas of inquiry are divergent between the two educators, they share a common feature. For example, their works are a product of their childhood and personal experiences. This is not to say that their approach is not systematic or that their inferences are biased. What it shows is that they bring valuable insight from their formative years to their research. In the case of Freire, his father’s sudden loss of wealth due to a financial market crash plunged him into poverty. This immediately affected the quality and content of education that he had no choice but to undertake. (Flanagan, 2005, p.22) In the case of Brickman, the fact of growing up in a multi-cultural environment helped shape the direction of his professional work. As a young man he assimilated different cultures through direct involvement in their milieu. For this reason, Brickman believed that the best method to understand various education systems and methods is to experience them first hand.
Of course, ...Show more