By

Dakota Trondle
 Writing is the not the best medium for relaying thoughts and ideas. It does not
allow for an immediate response, unlike verbal communication.
Jack Mezirow states that learning though communication requires people to
become reflective of what they assume. Students can learn more when they try to
understand each other better. The methods to invoke reflection on a critical level
include life histories, metaphor analysis, and much more.
 Through dialogue one can relay thoughts and emotions in a manner that equates to the
logging business; loggers when felling trees would look for the easiest way to transport
said trees just as I look for the easiest way to deliver information.
Paulo Freire in Pedagogy of the Oppressed says Through dialogue, the teacher-of-the-
students and students-of-the-teacher cease to exist and a new term emerges: teacher-
student and student-teachers (80).
Through dialogue, teachers and students become on the same level and the criticized teaches the
criticizer and vice versa. Peer review deals directly with this idea.

This idea is crucial to effective verbal communication, and Mezirow would coincide
perfectly with Freires idea of leveling the playing field; and in turn Mezirow is supported by
Freire.
 Some people prefer writing over speaking and the logic for these students is that
the student finds it difficult to write and so to solve the problem (when they are
critiqued by the teacher) is to write more or in excess so when they write for an
assignment later on, it is not as difficult as before.
Peter Elbow, writer of Writing for Teachers states But the most powerful thing you can
do to increase what you get from teachers is to write more (285). Elbow is stating that you
learn most from teachers when the pieces your writing are not a supplement to other
writing you are doing (285).
Mezirow and Freire would agree to a this to a certain extent. Mezirow would say how
writing can be used in communicative learning and can help in understanding another's
beliefs. Freire would state that writing in this sense is a form of dialogue.
 During my English class one day we had a class discussion and talked about this
very matter and whether it is better, individually, for each student to relay,
interpret, and learn from criticism in a written or verbal format. Many agreed with
me (of the ones who spoke) and said it also seemed more heartfelt. It allowed for
concentration.
There were of course drawbacks; the one doing critiquing has (usually) only limited time
to respond and deliver criticism, while in writing they can take their time. Some people
when talking become nervous, whereas in writing they do not. Thirdly is how well one
comprehends what the other is saying.
Freire would say to all this that it (these problems) would be part of the learning
experience while Mezirow would declare that it would lead to greater
understandings of the other persons failings.
 For Freire, communication is key so that teachers and students become level in
learning something or discussing something; for Mezirow, in communicative
learning, students or communicators need to become critically reflective; and
Elbow states that communication is important more so in writing.
Verbal communication is necessary for a better learning experience even if only
done part of the time though it does have its problems. Nevertheless, verbal
communication is the greatest chance in regard to a better education and all
students must at least be familiar with the action of communicating even if they do
not excel at such a method.
 Works Cited
Elbow, Peter. Writing for Teachers. Conversations in Context: Identity,
Knowledge,
and College Writing Ed. K. Fitzgerald et al. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace
College
Publishers, 1998, pp. 275-286.
Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 30th anniversary Ed. New York:
Continuum, 2000
Mezirow, Jack. Transformative Learning: Theory to Practice. Exploring
Connections: Learning in the 21st Century. Pearson Education Inc. 2016