The doors to the upsatirs entrance to the auditorium were initially locked, so I had to walk down to 4 and then into the auditorium and then back to the top back on 5. These things happen!

John Holst, Robert H. Bahruth, and Maria Alicia Vetter (translator)

Felipe de J. Perez Cruz

Maria Luisa de Aquiar Amorim

WHile getting ready for this session, I learned another best practice. Know the route, if possible, between the confernce venue rooms. That will facilitate packing the computer and materials away and then traveling to those other locations to get a seat and, more importantly, a plug. If there are no plugs available, then schedule time during the day to recharge the battery, if there is not a backup battery.

I also just learned that it may be important to have a 3 into 2 adaptor for the electrical plug.

Another best practice is to schedule time to correct the entries (spell check, edit grammar and missed words and the like.

It may be important to have a discllaimer as to how much of the sessions is being recorded as objectively as possible, as well as to what extent there is personal interpretation or opinion. While, as a qualitative researcher, I do not believe any liveblogging can be objective and completely free from the experiences and worldview of the author, I do think that this should be discussed at some point for the purpose of full disclosure to assist in credibility of the research itself.

Another component of full-disclosure will be the intentionality–how possitive and upbeatshould thi sbe

This is the 40th anniversary of Paulo Freire’s text, as well as the 19th Anniversay of his death.

The session overview was given for this panel discussion, with how this will work and with the panelists. Maria

felipe Cruz from Cuba and the

ROlando Punto in Chile

Maria Luisa de Aguiar Amorim - she began speaking in Spanish, with a translator and English slides translations on a PowerPoint projected above the stage where they were sitting. Unfortunetly, the slides were basically fill-text with paragraphs, and the like. It was basically like reading a Word document. My collegue sitting next to me questioned the accuracy of the translation of the presenter’s Spanish into English. I am finding this session challenging, with the two languages (the presenter spoke in Spanish and was translated) as well as with all the information on the slides.

Another best practice — along with creating basic templates for each intended session, make sure the name of the presentation and all the presenters will be listed and corrceted for accuracy.

Best practice also - how much editing should be done? Should it just be for completion, or should new insights be added? I think I will clean up the posts for spelling, grammar, and syntax, and any other insights will be posted in new posts as they arise. This will allow for the accuracy of the experience of learning as it happens.

As this is within an academic community, which is a small, intimate, and somewhat closed system–how can a researcher within this field itself be publically critical of something in a session, knowing that the other colleagues in the room are also the reviewers, program planners, and hiring and tenure committee members? Should criticisms be tempered intentionally, or should they be more poitically stated? I think I will be as polite here as I try to be with others when I speak. I will not hide issues that arise, but I will also express them in a way that is positive in intention–I want to help scholarship progress and advance, not to stifle the research efforts of my colleagues. I am wondering how liveblogging will affect this process.

It is wonderful to be around these people who knew and worked with Paulo Freire.

Another issue–with the editing later, since there is no wifi access here, should links to the people who present, their papers online, and the issues they raise be linked from the posts later? If I were on WiFi, should I do that at the same time? as theere is not Wifi access, I will consider this issue for later, when I do have Internet access back in the Hotel room. One thing I will not do, however, is to change the content of what I record, as that would cloud my live data gathering experience. I do not think this would be ethical as a researcher, since this methodology has me recording the experiences as I experience them as the day progresses.

It appears Maria has gone over time, and the moderator and the panelists and translator and a few audience members discussed it in Spanish, which was like an inside conversation as I could not follow it. Looking a the expressions on many of the people in the audience, it seems others may not have followed it either. Ahh, I just understood her to say “In conclusion . . .”

For the best practices or rather for the data perspective, if I miss something that I later recall, how should this be added? Should it be placed where it is remembered sequinetially, or back in the real location if it has not yet been published?

Felipe from Cuba spoke in Spanish, with the translator translating his speaking sentence by sentence without PowerPoint slides. This seemed more engaging, as I knew what to listen to and when I could not. He had a paper in the Poceedings.

The lighting just went on on the stage, over the panelists.

Felipe spke that Freire was born into the world as an educator in the same kind of world that is like Cuba. For him, Castro and Che Guevara are the pedagogues of the revoluion, calling himself a revolutionary pedagogue. In the begininnning of the 60’s his relationshio

What should the blog titles be? The subject, name of the session, or the name of the author? Should it include the conference title or abbreviation, also? I think I will use the title of the session, as that will help time stamp it for consisency. It will also shoow how my recording is occurring as it occurs.

The practice of the revolution in Cuba and the revolutions in Africa, relationship with, and there were thousands of revolutionaries in Africa fighting for revolutions there.

Perhaps readers can comment as to what I captured, verses how others in the audience who may read this can comment on this. Additionally, should the authors be contacted once the blog post has been done, so they can comment on it if they wish?

Do the presenter’s need to give permoission for this? I do not think so, since I am recording my perspective as a researcher who is experiencing this from my own perspective.

The speaker feels more comfortable with the Marxist ideals , but Marxism . . .  Im missed

Rolando - he spoke next, and was translated at the same time. I believe this was his name, and will confirm it later. This followed the same format with his speaking and the translator

Speaking about 40 years after Freire and Education as a Process for (missed the title, will grab later)

Looking around at the audience while I adjusted my laptop, I see some people sleeping. I suppose this may happen at times, but I never noticed.

in Latin America, ciritcal pedagogy is having a rebith. The Latin Amreicam conferece of social sciences, 5 years ago there was a group that was convened to discuss the social scuecned trying to restate the team of critical theory in an effort to re-found the relfection on the role of social science in the development of a revolutionary group in the social science. They are meeting once a year to discuss these subjects as we are here to discuss today. 2 aspects of Freire are essential–1. The subject of subjectivity and intersubjectivity, and then is the theme of critical reason. Why these two themes or sujects? After 40 years, there are the same problems.

1. 1. Increase of poverty
2. 2. polarization in terms of saleries
3. 3.  LIttle effort put into science and technology
4. diversity and multiculturalism to difne public measures and policies.

With the exception of Cuba, the governments in Latin America think of these qualities in terms of others, and not of themselves. Interesting, as he appears to be supportive of Castro and Cuba as it is now.

Those who speak for the public are elite groups who speak about what they think people need. Thus, when they speak of subkjectivity and intersubjectivity, this is a theme that is valid today and must continue to be discussed today. Many of us who work today, he said, we speak about the transformation and a revolutionaery role. To summarize his proposal in his conclusion, he said in pedagogy of the oppressed, Paulo Freire defined, for the first time in his work, what the role of education with 5 aspects of education that are essecntial

1. Subjective relation or intersubjectivity as an adult educator and adult students are what he calls a dialogue
2. this situation must have speace in educational time to constrct. In other words, we construct knowledge that allows the transformation of the subject and the transformation of the world in which the subject lives
3. the educational content which mediates the tranlation of mediocracy to epistemologically … but what he means is to use the historiacal dialectical method
4. Ethical construction of values and knoweldge and emancipating elements
5. enoraous tranformality of the subject, then in Marxist terms would mean the revolutionary transformation.

The curriculum is a social construction, so, a transformative currilum is the essence of a curriulum of adults. If it is good for adults, then it is good for children. As educators, we have to change our perception of students and accept that person as a legitimate person as that age as entities that are constructed in their own ways. Finally, This analigy has to start valuing other accees. We are essentially body, and we are eseentially emotional beings, and it is practically impossible that we do not have music and art in out curriculum, and only gives importaance of other things, and this is a result of a capitalist effort, that has not made us happy.

Robert BAhruth - spoke in English to try to give how some of this can be seen in the United States. We have all read and interpreted Freire in our own contexts. Like the analigy of the 6 blind men and the elephant. They all held different parts and insist that the way they see it is the correct way. This is similiar to Freire and how we see his work. He wanted to contextuallize it in a variety of differnet ways. With critical pedagogy, once we get away from the banking model. In the US we have a lot of monolingual experts in bilingual education. The first goal in education is children. If we have a democratization in the schools, and students become a part of this, then they will learn about this in their own lives. For adult education, how do we undo the effects of schooling where they were the subjects of the banking model. From his perspective, if there is a ruthless cutthroat basteard who can speak more than one language, then he can skrew up 2 cultures instead of just one.

Philosophy of compensatory of education, with a view that some people are better than others. Thus, some things are funded based on the pivilege of the class that runs the institution. Class and the assumed lack of intelligence start to believe that they are less than or not worthy. Freire always started that he showed that people have a lot of rigor in their daily lives, to dmeonstrate to them that they are capable of learning and thus worthy of learning in the everyday. This was to bring the students from object to subject. LIstens to their daliy routines and then marvel at how much they know in their own ways who have their own interlligances of other people who are closer to the earth. Freire did this to help undo the work that was done to make these people believe they were less and thus could not learn.No Child Left Behind hurts those and keep people from being creative as cultural workers, rather by having them follow a standadized curriculum that forces a single cultural persoective on everybody–this repeats the process and inequality. Femiinism is important since this affects the culture of not being worthy and and accept .80 on the 1.00 as do men. Taking this continues the patriarchal.

When Castro took over, there was an 11% literacy rate. Poverty in Cuba now is because of the embargo of the US. UNESCO relased literacy rates–97% literacy rate there now, which is the number 1 in the world as of last year. He brought in books, some critical of MArxism and some not–there was no censorship of the books he brought in and there did not seem to be any censorship in their discussions. He said the US did not have UNESCO do this, and self-reported a 98%

There is a sense that Freire is for the 3rd world, but many parts of the US are the same way. The compensatroy movement which looks at people as lacking rather than as needing education. To colonize them in the same way is to continue the oppressors status quo

The ideal is for all of us to become critical educators where the curriculums we are given reproduce hegemonic oppressors and continues the oppression.

Little time for questions. One question suggested a theory of action that includes a critical role in criticism of organiazations. He stated that we need theories of education of organizations, since that will then bring those people back out into the world.

We have to think abot subjects in terms of groups. They then discussed groups and at the base of organizations.

It seems that the US perspective as Cuba being the Communisy place with the rest of Latin America being working fordemocracy. This does not seem to be the case as I am listening to it now.

Technorati Tags: AERC2007, liveblogging, live blogging, live-blogging, Freire