Adult Educators

Adult Educators in Popular Education,

Paulo Freire and Miles Horton

Alexandra Barrett

Ball State University

Adult and Community Education (Spring -- 2017)

Dr. Bo Chang

Table 1. Comments on Course Group Blogs

Name	Commented On
Alexandra Barrett	Group Two
Alexandra Barrett	Group Four
Alexandra Barrett

Background

            When one contemplates Popular Education as a movement, there is one educator in particular that comes to mind, that person being Paulo Freire.  The connection between Freire and Popular Education is so concrete that often this type of education is also known as “Freirian Education.”  For this reason and also in relation to my own alignment with Freire’s educational philosophy and frameworks as an advocate of Popular Education, I chose Freire as my first adult educator to focus upon in context with the Popular Education project.

            For my second adult educator, I chose to focus upon Miles Horton.  Although, Miles Horton is credited with many associations, philosophies or theories not necessarily categorized as “popular education -- with respect to the field of Education -- he is found to have enough alignment with the Popular Education movement to be considered of high relevance to a study of such.  Miles Horton, although functioning in a different time period, and within a different country, proved to have much in common with Paulo Freire, in addition to educational philosophical practices and/or theories.

Paulo Freire

            Freire’s largest body of work that is most widely recognized occurred during the late 1960’s and continued throughout the 1970’s and 1980’s.  That being said, Freire started on his professional track at an early age while still a schoolboy himself.  As stated by Gadotti and Torres, Freire was born and died in Brazil, but travelled and worked throughout the world: “Brazilian philosopher and educator Paulo Reglus Neves Freire was born in Recife, Brazil, on September 19, 1921, and died of heart failure in Sao Paulo, Brazil on May 1997” (Gadotti and Torres, n.d.). 

            Often Freire moved from one country to the next related to political changes as they occurred within Latin American societies experiencing social or economic upheaval.  Freire’s work is highly relevant in the context of social justice and equitable access to resources as pertains to political and cultural regimes that bind and restrict oppressed populations from acts of self-determination and volition towards self-empowerment within these structures.  The before-mentioned detail is largely what drew me to the Popular Education movement and towards Freire himself as a creator and active promoter of social justice and equality for all persons regardless of variations in personal identifiers.

            In the book detailing conversations between Freire and Horton, We Make the Road by Walking: Conversations on Education and Social Change, editors, Bell, Gaventa and Peters (1990) summarize the linkage between Freire and Horton’s respective backgrounds: “[M]ore important than their First World or Third World roots is the fact that both Myles and Paulo came from the poorest regions within their own countries, regions that shared many characteristics in their relationships to the larger political economy. Within that context, they also shared similarities of life history and of involvement in social movements that helped to shape their vision and their practice” (Bell, et al, 1990).

Miles Horton

            Miles Horton’s most prolific period of educational achievements occurred from approximately the late 1930’s through the early 1980’s. Although Horton was born decades earlier than Freire – with the former being born in the United States, and the latter being born in Brazil – the two educators are found to have remarkably similar backgrounds.  The similarities in how both men grew up, shouldering adversity of their family’s economic losses, and waging against political turmoil from within their respective cultures, would prove significant towards somewhat congruous career outcomes.  Both educators credited their upbringing, and social times that they grew up on, towards the creation of the men they became, and the type of educational philosophies that informed their professional decisions.

            Bell, et al (1990) further elaborate on the conditions that both Freire and Horton were exposed to and how the political strongholds maintained by the wealthy dominant class(es) impacted the disenfranchised social sects: “Paulo Freire was born in 1921 in Recife, in northeast Brazil, one of Brazil’s poorest regions. [Horton experienced similar conditions,] as within the Appalachia and the rural South in the United States, the region had been plagued with “poverty, hunger and illiteracy for many years… Both regions were dependent upon powerful economic interests, initially the plantation owners and later the multinationals, and were characterized by sharp dichotomies between rich and poor, powerful and powerless” (Bell, et al, 1990).  The power imbalances and social injustices would later become significant as both educators wove strategy to remedy such conditions within their own social contexts, using the power of educational attainment, and/or mass population knowledge construction.

            Horton, similar to Freire with respect to social-political conditions experienced a socio-economic culture that promoted power imbalances resulting in social injustice.  Clearly divided markers based on class, gender, race, and so forth underpinned Horton’s surroundings as elucidated by Bell, et al (1990): “Myles Horton was born in 1905 in the western Tennessee Delta, an area whose history is was based upon plantation agriculture, a slave-based economy, absentee ownership, and severe rural poverty” (Bell, et al, 1990). 

            Horton would search outside his local home state of Tennessee in order to study educational organizations that were promoting types of education that appeared to have solutions to social problems he had been witnessing.  Both Freire and Horton were well-travelled – with exposure to different cultures – however, each man was prompted to voyage for different reasons.  Although Freire appeared to travel the globe in response to being pushed out of his country of origin during political upheaval; Horton appeared to have been pulled across such boundaries in search of social solutions.  Horton travelled extensively, in addition to the destinations he took to for academic pursuit.  Of these voyages, Horton’s expedition to Denmark to study the Folk high schools, and his travels to Chicago to study Jane Adams’ Hull House are most noteworthy (Bell, et al, 1990; Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

Profile

          Both Freire and Horton had similar upbringings, and as well were both educated citizens on a high academic level.  This is likely in direct relation to both men having parentage that were in support of education as a basic value.  Bell, et al, 1990, offers further insight, “Though Myles’s and Paulo’s parents were constantly on the edge of poverty, struggling to make ends meet, they were strongly supportive of schooling for their children…. Myles and Paulo also experienced rather similar family backgrounds. Both were born of parents who were slightly more educated and well-to-do than many of the poor around them. But in both families, the broader economic changes were to lead to personal adversity” (Bell, et al, 1990).  Despite changes in both Myles and Paulo’s family economic conditions both men did in fact attend university, a pursuit not common amongst their peers: “Unlike many of their friends from similar circumstances, both Myles and Paulo attended college” (Bell, et al, 1990).

Paulo Freire

            As stated previously Freire was born in Brazil during the 1920’s.  Although his family was of middle class means, with a gainfully employed head of household in Freire’s father; Freire would experience poverty early in life as the society at large entered an economic depression.  As a result of the downturn in financial well-being Freire’s family would later relocate to a lower quality but more affordable part of town as a means of mitigating the bleak economic circumstances.  Freire stated in several interviews/articles/etc. that his experience of impoverishment and food scarcity had great impact on his views about the effects of which on educational attainment. “Because Freire lived among poor rural families and laborers, he gained a deep understanding of their lives and of the effects of socio-economics on education” (Bentely, 1999).  Later Freire would make the connection between poverty, education, and individual power to act on one’s behalf for strategic improvement of one’s circumstances (for self or community).

            It is surmised that the combination of exposure to working class men and women and the impact of lack of education and poverty on said – coupled with Freire’s own experience of poverty and food scarcity, as a boy – surely must have infused him with a passion for helping persons in similar circumstances through political, societal and education-based strategic improvement plans.  The following excerpt, as relayed by Bentley, 1999 supports this impact on Freire in Freire’s own words: “He recalls in Moacir Gadotti’s book, Reading Paulo Freire, ‘I didn’t understand anything because of my hunger. I wasn’t dumb. It wasn’t lack of interest. My social condition didn’t allow me to have an education. Experience showed me once again the relationship between social class and knowledge’” (Bentley, 1999).  Freire likely saw similar results associated with poverty within the local community of struggling, ill-educated adults he was exposed to.

            Paulo himself was able to overcome his circumstances of poverty, as his family’s economic matters improved with time.  Freire ultimately was able to achieve a high level of university education including attendance and completion of law school.   Freire passed the lawyer’s bar exam, but his interest in practicing law was short-lived.  Freire would soon after working for a period as a lawyer change fields and enter the world of children’s education, and later would transition into adult literacy education – primarily with literacy programs as foundational pieces: “After Paulo’s short-lived career as a lawyer, he turned to teaching Portuguese in secondary schools (1941-1947).  He later worked in adult education and workers’ training, and became the first Director of the Department of Cultural Extension of the University of Recife (1961-1964)” (Gadotti and Torres, n.d.).

            The entry into literacy training for adult learners would seem to have been Freire’s starting point at discovering the relevance of adult literacy as relates to gaining political and/or social ‘voice’ over one’s liberation.  Gadotti, as well as several other author’s point to Freire’s job postings working with numerous labor and/or working class populations: “Freire’s arsenal of educational thought began to manifest with his appointment in 1946 as director of Education at SESI, an employer’s institution set up to help workers and their families (Gadotti, 6). Here he began to see more disconnections between elitist educational practices and the real lives of the working class. Gadotti says, ‘Thus, a study of the language of the people was the starting point for the development of his work…’” (Bentley, 1999).

            Over time Freire developed methods to provide literacy training to the illiterates of Brazil’s working and lower classes that would ultimately become foundational for Freireian or Popular Education.  Brazilian government and educational associations were very much supportive of Freire’s success with improving Brazil’s literacy rate for the population at large, as widespread literacy for all citizens was a popular societal goal: “The year 1962 saw the first experiments in Freire’s method when 300 farmworkers were taught to read and write in just 45 days (15). As a result, the government approved thousands of cultural circles to be set up all over Brazil. Unfortunately, the military coup of 1964 halted the work, and changed Freire’s life” (Bentley, 1999).  Freire’s educational methods were not immediately successful, but he quickly made modifications to his methods which resulted in very high success rates for even the most illiterate of Brazil’s lower level populations.  Freire would employ practices that encompasses alternative means of knowledge construction within these early days of his career that had not been previously used by other educators of his time.

            Changes in political regimes and/or conditions would prove throughout Freire’s life to be catalyst for not only his work but for his own freedom.  The 1964 regime change would lead to Freire’s imprisonment and ultimate exile: “After the military coup d’etat of 1964, he [Paulo] was considered a dangerous political pedagogue, was put in jail for seventy days and was later forced into a fifteen year exile” (Gadotti and Torres, n.d.).    Freire’s ways of promoting literacy became suspicious under the new regime; likely in relation to the political/societal underpinnings that supported worker equality and liberation – conditions that would undermine any political agenda(s) for mass control of the society at large.

            Following Freire’s exile, the educator initially moved to Bolivia, but shortly after journeyed to Chile: “After a brief stay in Bolivia, he lived in Chile for five years working in the Christian Democratic Agrarian Reform Movement” (Bentley, 1999).  The work Freire did in Chile was some of his most noteworthy, not the least of which was the production of two of his most famous books on education and political/social reform and/or philosophy.

            Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed, is perhaps considered one of his greatest books contributing to the field of adult education.  “In 1967 he published his first book, Education as the Practice of Freedom, bringing him acclaim and a position as visiting professor at Harvard in 1969. In 1968 he wrote his famous Pedagogy of the Oppressed, published in Spanish and English in 1970…” (Bentley, 1999).  We see in Freire’s books the integration of education as a strategic tool to be supported and employed for the greater or larger purpose of gaining individual empowerment and equality – this is especially critical with respect to oppressed or marginalized populations who may otherwise be silenced or pushed out of the more traditional forms or bodies of academic education.

            Literacy reform and popular education movements were occurring around the globe during the 1970’s – during the height of the Popular or Freirian Education movement.  Freire himself would travel extensively promoting and facilitating learning circles with other educators around the globe.  “Freire was invited to Geneva in 1970 where he worked for ten years as a special educational advisor to the World Congress of Churches. During this time, Freire traveled worldwide helping countries to implement popular education and literacy reforms” (Bentley, 1999).  Freire’s work was well-respected and admired throughout the world, with many educators using his methods in countries undergoing political revolutions.

            In 1980 Freire returned to Brazil, a year after his exile was lifted.  Freire was given appointment as Minister of Education for the City of Sao Paulo; and there he would continue his work in the Popular Education philosophy.  Additionally, an institute focused on Freireian philosophy would be created, which still stands today: “In 1979, after 15 years of exile, Freire was allowed to return to Brazil and did so in 1980. He joined the Workers’ Party (PT) in São Paulo and, from 1980 to 1986, supervised its adult literacy project. With the triumph of the PT in 1988, Freire was appointed Minister of Education for the City of São Paulo…. In 1991 the Paulo Freire Institute was created, “congregating scholars and critics of his pedagogy, in a permanent dialogue that would foster the advancement of new educational theories and concrete interventions in reality…. [This work] is carried out by 21 scholarly nuclei located in 18 countries” (Gadotti, “Homage”). The Institute is centered in São Paulo and maintains the Freire archives” (Bentley, 1999).

Miles Horton

            Horton, similar to Freire was highly influenced by his religious upbringing as described herein: “Horton was raised in a Christian family, by a grandfather who taught him a strong biblical sense of the differences between rich and poor, by parents who taught him the value of an education, and by a mother who taught him the importance of love and service, and that education is meant to help you be able to do something for others. Myles took these lessons to heart and sought to use his education to help his neighbors find ways to improve their lives. His focus was on social justice” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  Thayer-Bacon, 2004, expounds upon how Miles’ values system, was likely influenced by lessons found within the Bible, and from Horton’s own family members – every with a tone and focus on helping others.

            Horton followed his parent’s wishes to attend college and attain a university education.  It was with respect to Horton’s first academic experience, that he would note a lack of quality to the teaching methods used; later stating that he found it more effective to teach himself the material on his own (Bell, et al, 1990).  Additionally, Myles chose to test his ability to teach or facilitate Bible-based learning for other fellow students, as expounded upon here: “He attended college at Cumberland University in Lebanon, Tennessee (1924-1928), as a literature major, where he says he learned to educate himself due to the lack of good teachers. While at Cumberland University he began testing out organizing ideas on campus and in the summer with his Bible school classes in Ozone, Tennessee, which he extended into evening adult community meetings about social problems… [He found that t]hey gained a great deal from hearing that others had similar problems and finding out that they could help each other solve some of them” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  This latter point would become a cornerstone piece of Horton’s “helping others to help each other” philosophy for community development and empowerment.

            From the college setting, Horton continued onward to explore other educational settings wherein success was being reported for adult education.  Thayer-Bacon relays a summary of Horton’s first travel expeditions: “The next year, Horton worked as Student YMCA Secretary for Tennessee and he traveled around and visited utopian communities. Horton learned that he did not want an adult learning center that was isolated and separated from society, as utopian communities tend to be. With the advice of his minister friend from Cumberland County, Rev. Abram Nightingale, he went to Union Theological Seminary in New York City in 1929, to, as he put it, ‘try to figure out how to get social justice and love together’” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  The before mentioned passage illustrates a precedence for Myles’ determining what he didn’t want in a prospective adult education center; but was still in need of an example containing elements that he would find desirable in an educational center.

            “In 1930 Horton went to the University of Chicago to study sociology with Robert Parks, where he learned about group problem solving and how to use conflict and contradictions to promote learning. In Chicago he also had the opportunity to become acquainted with Jane Addams and her work at Hull House” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  Horton stated in his talks with Freire that he found what the Hull House was doing educationally when it commenced was quite close to what he had in mind for an educational center of his own making; but that ultimately by the time he made his visit he could tell they had succumbed to outside political/economic influences that had changed their practices towards one’s less desirable (Bell, et al, 1990).  Freedom from government obligation and pressure would become one of Horton’s key requirements when opening his own educational center; and as well would become one of his hallmark traits of not giving in to government pressure or allure regardless of how enticing such might be.

            At this time, the Folk high schools operating in Denmark were getting a tremendous amount of attention as promoting ground-breaking educational philosophy and/or practices.  Although, not defined as “Popular Education” by name, this educational movement was described as meeting the criteria to be equated with Freire’s later coined philosophy.  It is not surprise that Myles Horton would make a visit to the Denmark schools given his interest in similar visions for an ideal educational center.  The absence of political entanglement seemed to be the most lasting and significant concept or practice that Myles extracted from this visit: “Horton spent the fall of 1931 in Denmark studying these schools as another possible model for his adult learning center. From Denmark he gained the ideas of having a school that was free from state legislation and did not have a standard curriculum or examinations. The school needed to be one where students and teachers live together and sing together, where there is much opportunity for peer learning, including through social interaction in informal settings” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  The latter mention of a community of learners living and learning together was carried through in Horton’s own later creation of the Highlander Folk School – the use of the word “Folk” was perhaps also derived from the Denmark school of similar name.

            “In 1932, Myles Horton began Highlander Folk School, and during the next 60 years, until his death in 1990, Highlander became a major catalyst for social change” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  He founded the Highlander Folk School in Grundy County, Tennessee, one of the poorest Appalachian counties and an area dominated by powerful coal interests” (Bell, et al, 1990).  Horton’s school would prove to be quite successful in impacting the social/political scene through several movements, as an integral part of the change process, with many noteworthy educators and activists in attendance.

Perspectives

            Both Freire and Horton developed perspectives based on goals for liberation and participatory action promoted through grass-roots community development and education. Bell, et al, 1990 offer the following summary of how the two educators functioned in their respective times: “[R]eal liberation is achieved through popular participation. Participation in turn is realized through an educational practice that itself is both liberatory and participatory, that simultaneously creates a new society and involves the people themselves in the creation of their own knowledge” (Bell, et al, 1990).  As one can extract from the above passage, self-directed knowledge construction and the ability and power for all society members to participate in such construction tied the two educator’s perspectives together in a grounding fashion.

Paulo Freire

            The draw towards Freire and/or Popular Education, as an adult educator, is with respect to the integration of various philosophical frames used within Freire-based educational philosophy and/or methods for implementation of such.  Freire seemed to have taken the real-life circumstances facing typical human beings and used them to create a practical usable strategy for helping those in need towards individual and group empowerment regardless of or in spite of outer forces and/or political influences, through the use of education.  Gadotti and Torres, as well as other education researchers, offer a summary of Freire’s philosophical influences in the following excerpt: “Paulo, starting from a psychology of oppression influenced by the works of psychotherapists such as Freud, Jung, Adler, Fanon and Fromm, developed [his most widely recognized work] ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’” (Gadotti and Torres, n.d.).  Similar to Freire I aspire to come to know and understand various philosophical works so that I may use such in my profession as an adult educator.

            Although I have only had two courses in the area of philosophy, many of the same philosophers that Freire was drawn to have also informed my own thoughts on the human condition and the need to support others towards self-governed improvement of circumstances.  Again, Gadotti and Torres offer a summary of what could be considered Freire’s overarching thoughts on the human condition and the life of the oppressed if not offered educational, political, and/or social interventions: “Domination, aggression and violence are an intrinsic part of human and social life, Paulo argued that few human encounters are exempt from oppression of one kind or another because by virtue of race, class or gender, people tend to be victims and/or perpetrators of oppression.  He stressed that racism, sexism or class exploitations are the most salient forms of dominance and oppression, but he also recognized that oppression exists on the ground of religious beliefs, political affiliation, national origin, age, size, and physical and intellectual handicaps” (Gadotti and Torres, n.d.).  In my travels throughout North America, and Latin America I have witnessed the societies of the oppressed masses, and feel certain that Freire’s Popular Education philosophy/methods could be used to remedy or at least improve these conditions.

            “Conscientization” is one of the cornerstone points of Freire’s philosophy and as such it is important to understand how this is used in Popular Education programs.  It is believed that the raising of awareness of the learner’s circumstance and how these circumstances impact the learner as an individual, as a family member, and as a society member are critical elements of the social justice and equality goals often associated with Popular Education programs.  By contrast Traditional Education fails to include – much less focus upon the learner’s awareness of his/her circumstances – but instead eliminates or silences any learner whose circumstance doesn’t match the status quo or preferred majority’s circumstances.

            The above-mentioned aspect of Freire’s Popular Education is very interesting to me as an adult educator.  I feel strongly that in these political times, there are many populations who will become less visible – less audible – who may not fit in with a majority-based pre-determined “right” way to function/live/or be.  With this in mind, Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed and his later work Pedagogy of Hope would seem timely in in preparation for working with otherwise marginalized or oppressed populations. 

            The following offers a glimpse into how the two above mentioned books might be applicable to current day educational needs: “Pedagogy of the Oppressed, which has been influenced by a myriad of philosophical currents including Phenomenology, Existentialism, Christian Personalism, Marxism and Hegelianism, calls for dialogue and ultimately conscientization as a way to overcome domination and oppression among and between human beings.  Interestingly enough, one of the last books that Paulo wrote, Pedagogy of Hope, offers an appraisal of the conditions of implementation of his Pedagogy of the Oppressed in our [current] day” (Gadotti and Torres, n.d.).   Although, I have not read the Pedagogy of Hope, from how it is described I feel that this might be a valuable piece of literature for current day adult educators.

Miles Horton

            Horton like Freire incorporated philosophical frames from a variety of perspectives.  As well, Freire and Horton shared a propensity towards some of the same philosophies and/or theories in relation to socio-political and cultural growth through the equalizer of educational attainment: “Horton explored the ideas of pragmatism and progressive education, Marx and Lenin, attended rallies and observed labor strikes in the area, and joined the socialist party” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  Both educators worked extensively in the area of literacy education and civic involvement as foundation pieces for empowering learners.

            That being said, how each man contributed to the field of education, as pathways was somewhat unique to each: “Myles’s and Paulo’s ideas were to develop through two very different forms of praxis: Myles’s from a small, independent residential education center situated outside the formal schooling system or the state, Paulo from within university and state-sponsored programs…. Their ideas were to converge not through a series of theoretical deductions but through their interaction with the social context and their involvement with broader popular struggles for participation and freedom” (Bell, et al, 1990). As stated by Bell, et al, 1990, it becomes apparent that Paulo and Myles arrived with similar childhood backgrounds, and educational objectives to support political societal goals; but with different mechanisms for achieving those goals.  That being said, although the pathways or avenues used for achieving the goals were somewhat different, the educational methods used were quite similar.

Contributions

Paulo Freire

            Freire contributed greatly to the field of Adult Education on the whole.  His work related to Popular Education, Liberation Education, Social Justice Education, and so forth are a few of the areas where his work is seen as most relevant with a timeless quality.  Not only have educators used Freire’s work to inform their “education” activities, but many other professionals in the field of social justice and human rights have also aligned themselves with Freirian philosophy. “Several generations of educators, anthropologists, social scientists and political scientists, and professionals in the sciences and business, felt Freire’s influence and helped to construct a pedagogy based in liberation.  What he wrote became a part of the lives of an entire generation that learned to dream about a world of equality and justice that fought and continues to fight for this world today” (Gadotti and Torres, n.d.).

            Freire’s work has had great impact around the globe as it is applicable to many different settings.  Political and social movements are supported through the use of Freirian approaches to social/political reform – and the increase in free democratic societies wherein all persons have voice to improve circumstances on their own behalf – are made possible through the use of literacy programs and/or Popular Education programs similar to the very one’s Freire himself offered.  “Freire has been recognized worldwide for his profound impact on educational thought and practice. He received numerous awards including honorary doctorates, the King Balduin Prize for International Development, the Prize for Outstanding Christian Educators in 1985 with Elza, and the UNESCO 1986 Prize for Education for Peace (Gadotti 76)” (Bentley, 1999).

            The fact that Freire’s books and papers have been translated into several languages outside of their original Portuguese speaks volumes to the transferability of such to other non-Latin populations.  “Paulo Freire has published a vast collection of books that have been translated into a total of eighteen languages.  More than twenty universities throughout the world have conferred on him the title of Doctor honoris causa” (Gerhardt, 1993).  In addition to Freire’s works being available in numerous languages, many noteworthy universities offer courses in Popular Education and/or Freire-based education practices for adult educators.

Miles Horton

            Miles Horton is credited with a great many achievements not only in the education field but as well to the social and political movements.  Such movements include but are not limited to the following: Democracy Education, Civil Rights Education, Literacy Education, Environmental Education, Worker’s Rights Education, and so forth.  Although this is the case, Miles seemed to have taken a behind the scenes approach to promoting his education goals.  Perhaps it is related to the differences in time periods that the two men were working in, but it seems that Horton intentionally relinquished the academic spotlight, whereas Freire naturally stood directly under the attention of education related media. 

            Thayer-Bacon, 2004, summarizes some key differences between the two educators: “Unlike Paulo Freire, who worked as an academic and wrote many scholarly publications about his ideas for academic audiences, Myles Horton wasn’t worried about trying to reach an academic audience. Horton preferred to spend his time helping people come together and learn how to organize and work toward ‘replacing, transforming, and rebuilding society so as to allow for people to make decisions that affect their lives’” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  Although, Freire was certainly cast as being very much involved with his learners, it would appear that Horton was more akin to “living” directly with his community of learners, and less within the walls of academia.

            Whereas Freire published extensively – with his work translated to several languages – Horton chose to function more as orator of his ideas: “He wrote next to nothing about his ideas, not trusting the written word as a medium for expressing living ideas that are contextual to specific settings and change over time. Horton preferred to rely on oral transmission to share his ideas, so he shared them through the meetings he attended, the stories he and others told and the protest songs they sang” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  Although, Horton himself was not interested in publishing his ideas, many of those around him working and learning at Highlander, did indeed catalog and publish his work throughout the years.  Horton’s contribution to the field of education and to the various social-political movements throughout his life are most easily categorized in relation to the particular movements, as expounded upon below.

            Democracy Education.  “While Horton began with Dewey’s concept of a democratic society, he worked for close to sixty years on further developing this “growing idea,” based on what he learned from his experiences through Highlander during the socialist times of labor union organizing, the anti-racist times of the Civil Rights Movement, and beyond” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  Democratic empowerment and participation towards one’s own well-being seemed to infuse much of what Horton’s life work was all about.  “Myles Horton wanted to find ways to help poor, rural people in the South, and particularly in Tennessee, become empowered to think and act for themselves and Myles Horton’s Democratic Praxis change their lives” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

            Inclusive Education.  The hidden masses, who often shied away from traditional educational settings were a critical part of Horton’s targeted population.  Inclusivity of all persons in Horton’s educational activities was in line with the Civil Rights, Literacy, and Citizenship Education movements, under the category of Inclusive Education.  Thayer-Bacon expresses as much in the following summary: “The staff or former students would personally invite students to attend workshops or residential sessions, for the students they sought were not people who would normally come to a school. They were poor people who had to be persuaded to leave their homes, and they needed sponsoring in order to be able to attend” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

            Civil Rights Education.   Prior to the elimination of segregation practices, and during the civil rights movements, Horton was considered ahead of the political-social curve as he emphasized and encouraged all students, regardless of color, to participate in his educational activities.  Although at first this was a radical move on his part, ultimately Horton would prove to be integral to the success of the movement.  “It was 1944, though, before Horton was able to convince Black students to risk attending Highlander workshops with White students, in defiance of the law and custom, in order to achieve economic advantage. In 1944, Blacks and Whites studied, worked, and played together at Highlander, a new experience for those attending” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  Not only was Horton an activist for the movement, he additionally was quite strong-minded in his convictions towards equality, even to the point of refusing to follow current laws: “In 1940 Highlander informed the unions it served that it would no longer hold workers’ educational programs for unions that discriminated against Blacks” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

            Workers Education.  Similar to Horton’s activities of and support of the civil rights movement, he also was in support of worker’s rights and the education of such persons with regards to those rights.  “Highlander became the main center for worker’s education in the South until the CIO (Congress of Industrial Organizations) began running their own programs in 1947. Mary Lawrence, a Highlander staff person, helped develop the educational programs for the unions in the south” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  Once again, Horton proved to be a very strong and active proponent of a movement that was to support and strengthen individual rights against large businesses and/or government strongholds.  “This was during the Cold War and Red Scare period, after WWII, and the school was opposed to silencing anyone from participating in the unions. During the late 1940s and the early 1950s Highlander tried to help farmers organize co-operatives so they would be given a voice in the market place” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

            Citizenship Education. “Between 1953-1961 Highlander developed 3 major educational programs to encourage and strengthen Black Southerners’ efforts to achieve their full rights as citizens. In 1953, in anticipation of the Supreme Court’s ruling to desegregate schools, Highlander began having workshops on school desegregation” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  Voting rights, and the need for black citizens to learn to read went hand in hand; as at the time of the civil rights movements, the inability to read/write was used to prevent black citizens from exercising their right to vote.  Horton was integral in addressing these barriers with literacy education programs, and also with citizenship education and/or knowledge acquisition.  “In the same year, at the urging of Esau Jenkins and Septima Clark, Highlander applied for and won a three year grant to study the need for night schools on St. Johns Island to help Blacks become voting citizens…. Illiterate Blacks learned how to read and write so they could pass the citizenship tests and qualify to register to vote” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

            The model used for Horton’s citizenship education programs was one of using internal society members to teach other citizens the skills necessary to be allowed to vote.  This method also overcame the barriers related to social awkwardness and/or anxiety of learners towards participation in educational organizations.  “The Citizenship Schools were run by African Americans from the very beginning, at very low cost ($8.00/pupil). The teachers were trained at Highlander. The people who attended Highlander during this time-frame included: Septima Clark, Rosa Parks, Bernice Robinson, Martin Luther King, Jr., Esau Jenkins, and Andrew Young, people who sparked the Civil Rights Movement” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

            The combination of the civil rights movement with the attainment of the right to vote, promoted the educational philosophy and/or methods used by Horton: which were realized with great success.  “In the early days of the civil rights movement, one of Highlander’s most influential programs was the development of Citizenship Schools…. they also developed principles of literacy education that used popular black leaders as teachers and taught reading based on the students’ needs and desires to gain freedom” (Bell, et al, 1990).  The various types of educational movements (democracy, civil rights, citizenship and literacy) all came together as a unified front that successfully challenged the status quo of the time: “By 1965 over 50,000 African Americans successfully registered to vote and in 1970 Clark estimated 100,000 had Myles Horton’s Democratic Praxis learned to read and write through the Citizenship Schools” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

              Environmental Education.  Although, there was not much research data available about this particular educational movement as relates to Miles Horton; there is the following one distinct situation wherein Horton used his educational practices to support a then unheard of movement within the area of environmental education.  At this time, and to this day, often marginalized populations are highly vulnerable to environmental degradation and damage that results in personal harm to humans.  The following excerpt describes briefly a case wherein Horton’s school became involved in challenging such a situation: “Later the school got involved in helping people protest environmental destruction that was occurring in poor areas of Kentucky, Tennessee, and the Carolinas, where large manufacturing companies were dumping toxic wastes into landfills in their mountainous areas and poisoning the water, etc.” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

            LGBTQ Rights Education, Women’s Rights Education, and Migrant Workers Education.  “More recently, under the directorship of its first woman, Suzanne Pharr, Highlander has been involved in gay rights issues and women’s issues, and has worked with Mexican migrant workers to help them organize” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

Impact

Paulo Freire

            Smith (1997, 2002) offers an excellent summary of how Freire’s work has impacted the field of Adult Education: “Five aspects of Paulo Freire’s work have a particular significance…: First, his emphasis on dialogue has struck a very strong chord with those concerned with popular and informal education.  Second, Paulo Freire was concerned with praxis – action that is informed (and linked to certain values).  Third, Freire’s attention to naming the world has been of great significance to those educators who have traditionally worked with those who do not have a voice, and who are oppressed.  Fourth, Paulo Freire’s insistence on situating educational activity in the lived experience of participants has opened up a series of possibilities for the way informal educators can approach practice.  Fifth, a number of informal educators have connected with Paulo Freire’s use of metaphors drawn from Christian sources” (Smith, 1997, 2002).

Miles Horton

            The field of education has been greatly impacted by the work of Miles Horton.  Perhaps, greater than any other educator of his time, Horton’s work was driven by the socio-economic-political climates that he was functioning in.  Horton provides an excellent example of how education functions as a vehicle to support social change.  Such movements as the civil rights movement, the women’s rights movement, the worker’s rights or labor rights movements were not only supported by Horton’s work, but were actually transformed by the presence of Horton’s educational practices.  The unique way that education can function in collaboration with the society of the general population – using methods and activities dictated by the needs/desires of those persons – sits at the heart of what Popular Education is meant to be.  Although, Horton himself may not have referred to himself as a “Popular Educator” surely his work informed Freire’s later work as such.

Applications

Paulo Freire

            Collaborative learning partnerships.  A bit more in line with general tone or approach with respect to teacher-pupil “banking relationships” versus collaborative relationships of facilitator-learner-facilitator interaction is found related to Freire’s Popular Education.  Freire was against viewing the learner as a repository that the teacher deposits information into.  By contrast Freire felt that the learner was facilitated better by a teacher who functioned in collaboration with the learner, while also being a learner him or herself.  Freire’s philosophy of such is highlighted in the following statement with respect to its effect on the learner and his/her human dignity: “… [Freire’s] ‘pedagogy of dialogue’ did not humiliate the student or anyone else.  A conservative pedagogy humiliates students and the pedagogy of Paulo Freire gave students dignity. It placed the teacher at their side, with the task of orienting and directing the educational process but as a being that, like the student, was also in the act of searching.  The teacher was also a learner… this is also the legacy of Paulo Freire” (Gadotti and Torres, n.d.). 

            The destruction of human dignity in what appears to be asymmetrical power relationships are found throughout conservative education frameworks at various levels.  Often the teacher or perhaps the system forces the student learner’s sense of self so far down the power ladder, that even when they are being treated unfairly they will not even consider questioning the perpetrator or contradicting the unfair treatment.  Bentley (1999) offers an additional expression of how a balanced power exchange promotes better learning outcomes for both learner and educator: “For education, Freire implies a dialogic exchange between teachers and students, where both learn, both question, both reflect and both participate in meaning-making” (Bentley, 1999).

            Raising awareness through learner conscientization.  Collaborative partnerships give way to learners who are more open and ready to increase awareness of their own circumstances and how they are situated within those circumstances.  Furthermore awareness of situated context for the learner is the first step towards empowerment and the ability to control or change one’s circumstances.  Gerhardt (1993), offers further explanation of the philosophy or practices related to conscientization: “The fundamentals of his ‘system’ point to an educational process that focuses on the students’ environment.  Freire assumes that the learners must understand their own reality as part of their learning activity.  It is not enough to assume a student can read the phrase: ‘Eve saw a grape.’ The student should learn to understand Eve in her social context, find out who worked to produce the grape and who profited from this type of work” (Gerhardt, 1993).  The summary focused upon by Gerhardt (1993), points to the significance of raising the learner’s awareness of all things in context; and can be further extrapolated to consider social and political context with respect to what and how learner knowledge is being constructed.

            The above-mentioned practice is highly appropriate in all educational circumstances – for all age learners – it is supposed that it would be important for learners to understand situated context for what they are learning in order for the content to gain meaning.  The significance of the learners having their conscience raised to a level of awareness of individual circumstance and how this can be used in social/political context is highlighted by Bentley (1999) as follows: “The formation of critical consciousness allows people to question the nature of their historical and social situation—to read their world—with the goal of acting as subjects in the creation of a democratic society” (Bentley, 1999).  It is believed that even adult educators who are not working specifically in social justice arenas would find the above-mentioned goals or practices to be helpful in many different educational settings.

            Giving voice through alternative art-based learning.  Often learners lack the ability to express themselves within the context of traditional learning structures.  Popular Education, as described by Freire, and as utilized by current day (Popular) adult educators resolve issues related to previously silenced populations through the use of educational modes of communication that are alternative to traditional text-based contexts.  Such communication modes are housed within the arts field and include but are not limited to the following examples: theater/pantomime, dance/movement, painting/mural arts, spoken word/storytelling, hand crafts/textile arts, photography/video dialog, and so on and so forth.  The critical factor when choosing an alternative means of expression is to look towards the learners themselves – what type or mode of expression is most natural to the learners (?) – answering this question based on learner input provides the facilitator with a strategy that best serves the learner’s unique needs.

Miles Horton

            Education for Social Change.  “He knew he did not want a regular, traditional school, and he did not want a vocational school. He did not want to offer therapy for people; he wanted to teach people to be social activists. He wanted to create a place where people could come to think and plan and share knowledge. Horton believed that people gained knowledge through their experiences, especially work-related experiences” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).  “Horton never aimed to have Highlander become a large adult education center. He wanted to work with a small number of people and trust that they would multiply…. Highlander sought students who already showed signs of being grassroots leaders, students who wanted to change society” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

            Student-centered Learning Practices.  “He wanted a school that was kept from getting too organized and too set in its ways. He wanted a school that would continue to adapt and change based on the needs of its students” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

            Community Development Focus.  “The center started with social evenings because that is what the local people wanted. They needed a place where they could sing, dance, share food and stories, talk, and get to know each other. The people needed a place where they could overcome their individualism and the isolation that resulted from it, and begin to work together as a community” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

            “Myles didn’t try to solve their problems, he helped to raise questions, and sharpen them, and get people discussing them. The first classes offered at Highlander were based on requests the local community made: child psychology, cultural geography, and economics. As much as he could, Myles would get the working people themselves to teach the classes students wanted, for he found that his students made the best teachers” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

            “[T]he people were beginning to learn more about how to handle their daily problems and to show their power and strength by organizing….  The staff at Highlander learned with the local people how to put together grant proposals….   [T]he people began to learn how to act as an organization, how to help themselves and co-operate and work together” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

            Facilitator-Learner Collaborative Partnerships.  “They had to unlearn their years of schooling and stop trying to be experts so the people would not turn to them for advice, but would turn to each other. Horton strongly believed that people learn to make decisions by doing it, that people have the capacity to govern themselves but they need to exercise that capacity. He wanted the staff to let the people run the school so they could learn how to make their own decisions and develop leadership skills. He believed the teacher’s role is one of helping empower students to think and act for themselves” (Thayer-Bacon, 2004).

Conclusion

            In conclusion perhaps it is interesting to think of the original work created for the History of Popular Education.  Within that body of work, it was discovered that the history of Popular Education is riddled with confusion in relation to making clear definitions of what constitutes “Popular Education.”  Clearly from the above details given with respect to the two adult educators – Paulo Freire and Miles Horton – one can identify strong congruencies between the two educator’s philosophies, objectives, methods, techniques, applications and so forth.  Although, from time to time Miles Horton’s work is referred to as being Popular Education based, it is just as often referred to as some other type of educational philosophy.  Whereas Freire’s work is most certainly and more often connected to the term Popular Education than any other philosophy; it becomes readily apparent that both of the educators were in fact promoting the use of Popular Education – with respect to the definitions of such as given in the previously mentioned paper, “History of Popular Education.”

            Given the following statement, as extracted from Bell, et al, 1990, based on Freire’s own words, we can see that Freire himself found the works of Miles Horton to be very similar to his own: “One of the reasons that Paulo Freire wanted to ‘talk a book’ with Myles, he often said, was that he was tired of North American audiences telling him that his ideas were only applicable to Third World conditions. ‘No,’ he said, ‘the story of Myles and of Highlander Center show that the ideas apply to the First World, too’” (Bell, et al, 1990).  Freire, although having provided caveats to would-be educators wanting to employ Popular Education methodology and/or practices in settings outside Third World countries, did in fact feel that such efforts were not out of the realm of finding possible successful outcomes.  Going forward, possible questions to pose to educators interested in practicing Popular Education methods are suggested as follows by Freire and Horton, vis a vis, Bell, et al, 1990: “[Possible] questions faced by [or applicable to] educators and activists around the world who are concerned with linking participatory education to liberation and social change:

• ·         What is the role of the teacher? The organizer? The educator?

• ·         How is education linked to mobilization and culture to create a new society?

• ·         Can society be transformed by education, or must education itself first be transformed?

• ·         Is there space for liberatory education within the state-sponsored educational system, as Paulo tried to show, or must change come from somewhere outside, such as Myles’s Highlander?

Table 2. Summary of Adult Educators in Popular Education

Areas	Paulo Freire	Miles Horton
Background	ü  Active Time Period: 1960’s and 1970’s ü  Location: Brazil, Chile, addl. Latin America ü  Social Contexts: Oppressed Cultures, Political Revolutions, Economic Crises ü  Applicable because Freire considered leading founder of ‘Popular Education’	ü  Active Time Period: 1940’s to 1970’s ü  Location: Tennessee, United States ü  Social Contexts: Oppressed Cultures, Cold War, WWII, Civil War, Vietnam War, Civil Rights Movement, Feminist Movement ü  Applicable because Horton philosophy and methods in alignment with ‘Popular Education’ methods, and objectives
Profile	ü  Middle then lower income family of origin ü  Married to another politically minded educator, together had five children; wife died, and later remarried one of his brightest students, after his death his wife continued Freire’s work ü  University educated, later in life was awarded numerous honorary doctorate degrees ü  Philosophically and politically active with social reform movements, promoter of democracy and revolution to achieve such ü  Saw first-hand the effects of poverty on one’s ability to learn and/or achieve success ü  Freire’s own father was an avid learner and teacher of literacy ü  Freire equated rural illiterate workers with the inability for one to advocate for their own rights and/or liberation ü  Freire’s conclusions about the importance of literacy in the political revolutions led to his development of literacy program(s) as action-oriented strategy towards self-governing democracies ü  Literacy programs and exposure to such led Freire to develop other ‘Popular Education’ theories to support the current day versions of such as used throughout Latin America with or without the literacy focus	ü  Lower income family of origin ü  Married to supportive spouse, remarried after wife died ü  University educated, but did not feel academia was adequate, self-taught his own courses ü  Politically active but in a support role towards community development and individual empowerment of others ü  Experienced first-hand impact of oppression and social injustices, poverty, illiteracy, etc. ü  Both parents were more educated than the other families in surrounding area; highly regarded the value of education ü  Literacy programs as vehicle for citizenship rights, right to vote, etc.
Perspectives	ü  The idea of using literacy as a grounding point for helping oppressed cultures towards empowerment through acquisition of ‘voice’ ü  The idea of using non-verbal learning and empowerment support through the use of arts or cultural norms as identified by the learners themselves ü  The idea of education being a primary vehicle for political/social reform in transitioning political settings	ü  Pragmatism ü  Progressive education ü  Socialist party movement ü  Leninism, Marxism ü  Labor unions/rights ü  Literacy leading to voter civil rights attainment ü  Using oral means of promoting learning
Contributions	ü  Concept/theory/practice related to ‘Popular Education’ ü  Education of and for oppressed cultures needing to gain self-empowerment and internal leadership levers ü  De-colonialization as an educational  oriented philosophy/methods/techniques as a cultural movement	ü  Civil rights education ü  Citizenship education ü  Literacy education ü  Democracy education ü  Environmental education ü  LGBTQ rights education ü  Feminist education ü  Inclusive education ü  Workers education
Impact	ü  Adult educators view their roles as more than ‘teachers’ depositing information (“banking” system) ü  Adult educators utilizing education as a means of empowering disenfranchised, marginalized, or oppressed learners ü  Adult educators using more varied means of facilitating knowledge construction through learner identified means/styles/tactics	ü  See ‘Contributions’ ü  Formation of the Highlander School ü  Training of noteworthy civil rights leaders ü  Assisted with Civil Rights Act
Application	ü  Adjusting the teacher/learner roles towards facilitator and learner co-collaboration roles ü  Using art-based knowledge construction and/or non-verbal expressions of knowledge acquisition ü  Promoting social justice and equitable access through ‘Popular Education’ frameworks ü  Studying Freire’ books about philosophy/method/techniques to better understand how and when such should be used in context with learners needing empowerment	ü  Education for social change ü  Student-centered learning practices ü  Community development focus, and leadership focus ü  Facilitator-learner collaborative partnerships ü  Student-led teaching

References

Bell, B., Gaventa, J., and Peters, J. (1990). We Make the Road by Walking: Conversations on        Education and Social Change. Miles Horton and Paulo Freire: Background on the Men,         the Movements, and the Meetings: Editor’s Introduction. Philadelphia: Temple          University Press. Retrieved from: http://www.temple.edu/tempress/titles/804_reg.html

Bentley, L. (1999). A Brief Biography of Paulo Freire. Pedagogy and Theatre of the Oppressed.   Retrieved from: http://ptoweb.org/aboutpto/a-brief-biography-of-paulo-freire/

Gadotti, M. and Torres, C. (n.d.). Paulo Freire: A Homage. Paulo Freire Institute. Retrieved         from: http://nlu.nl.edu/ace/Homage.html

Gerhardt, H. (1993). Paulo Freire. Prospects: the quarterly review of comparative education.         UNESCO: International Bureau of Education, Vol. XXIII, No. ¾.

Margolis, E. (2006). Remembering Paulo Freire: Encountering the Pedagogy of the Oppressed.     Taboo: The Journal of Culture and Education, Vol. 10, No. 2.

Schugurensky, D. (1998). The Legacy of Paulo Freire: A Critical Review of His Contributions.             Convergence, Vol. 31, Issue ½.

Smith, M. K. (1997, 2002). Paulo Freire and informal education. The encyclopedia of informal      education. Retrieved from: http://infed.org/mobi/paulo-freire-dialogue-praxis-and-       education/.

Thayer-Bacon, B. (2004). An Exploration of Myles Horton’s Democratic Praxis: Highlander         Folk School. Educational Foundations. Retrieved from:    http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ739889.pdf