Hi everyone,
Great class today! I am really impressed and excited by how well you interacted with Paulo Frerie's chapter. I know it was tough reading, but his writing is SO crucial to our course. I appreciate your hard work!
I asked you in class to reflect on the chapter. What shocked or surprised you? What connections did you make? What did you wonder about while reading? Explain what you were thinking as you read this piece.
Think specifics. Think succinct. Cut the fluff and get straight to the point. I look forward to reading and commenting on your responses. Feel free to comment back and forth (respectfully) with each other. Let's see how far we can take this discussion! Be sure to make your post by Monday morning!
-Mr. Burns :-)
Braeden D
ReplyDeleteI agree with main of the main ideas of this article. I especially agreed with Frerie's point about how teachers are apt to act as if they know everything and their students know nothing. I won't lie, I've had teachers who I could tell had no idea what they were teaching. I distinctly remeber correcting my fifth grade teacher contantly when we learned about the American Revolution. If teachers really cared about their students' education they would be willing to admit that they can be wrong. I also couldn't help but be reminded of Pink Floyd while reading the article.
Lydia Hopkins
ReplyDeleteWhat surprised me about this article was that there really are two different types of learning. I never realized it but there are those teachers that stick to the text books, give you notes and then test you on it. Then there are those teachers that actually have class discussions and try to create their own way of having the students learn. When reading this article, I kept making connections with what Paolo Friere was saying and what teachers I have had in the past that related to his comments. Last year, a lot of my teachers created fun activities to make the learning more fun, and created a better relationship with us as their students which reminded me of the problem-posing method. But then again, I had a lot of teachers where every class we would come in, take notes, and read the text book which is more like the banking-method which Freire was talking about. What I wondered while reading this was what made Freire want to write and article on this. Did he have bad teachers, or is he a teacher himself?
Mark-
ReplyDeleteWhen I was reading Pedagogy of the Oppressed what really jumped out at me and surprised me, truthfully, was how the author managed to stretch out his argument about which of the two ways of teaching is better for everyone for eleven pages straight. The second thing that shocked me was how the author wrote many wise sentences. I love when someone writes things like that, it reminded me of when I was reading the Alchemist and the Old King was sharing his wise advice with Santiago. When I read “The student records, memorizes, and repeats these phrases without perceiving what four times four really means.”(Freire, p.440) I remembered what it was like listening to one of my old teachers from eighth grade just standing at the front of the class and giving long lectures every single day. I hardly remember anything that I stored in my head from that class. While I was reading I came up to a part where the author used a quote from a book named The Heart of Man by Erich Fromm. I didn’t understand why he compared the banking method of teaching to a necrophilous person. It says, “the necrophilous person loves all that does not grow.”(p.444) but even though the student’s don’t learn as much as they could from the other method of teaching don’t they still learn and grow from the banking method also? While I read this piece of writing I was remembering different teachers that I had and by what method they taught me in class.
Taylor F.
ReplyDeleteThoughout this artical I was very confused at the main idea that the author was trying to make. But somewhere towards the end things started making sence. I don't know if that was the authors plan (to confused people then unconfuse them at the end) but i really liked that because it was such a tough reading. While reading I had a similar question Lydia had already said. Was he a teacher himself or a student that has experienced both methods. Either could be a possable answer.
While reading I was most shocked about how the authors reacation to the different methods changed durring the reading. Frerie while was discussing the banking method you could tell that it was not his favorite. You could also tell when his mood changed when he started talking about the problem solving method.
I have a question for Braden:
Why did this aritical remind you of Pink Floyd.
Moira N.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading Tradition and Upheaval I was surprised at how well Freire was able to relate to so many of my teachers. When I was reading His descriptions of different classrooms I was able to pick out which teachers used the Banking method, and which used the problem posing method. Freire really did a good job of explaining his point and getting the reader to understand. He explained things in elaborate ways, once I figured out what he was saying it really added to the main idea. I wonder how Freire came up with the two different methods of teaching. He was able to categorize teachers into two different types. I wonder how he came about this idea.
While i read Pedagogy of the Oppressed, what really surprised me was the difference between the two types of methods of learning. I saw how much more efficient and productive one method was versus the other. As i was reading, i could relate/connect to the article because i had a a teacher in 6th grade who thought similarly to the banking concept. The teacher really looked at the students (us) as if we never heard of anything that he was trying to teach us. But really, there were some things that we knew that he assumed we did not know about. On the other hand, i have had teachers who tried their hardest to occasionally have us do fun activities that had us learning, but with moderation; not so boring, but not partying and not learning. While i was reading, i wondered how these two concepts came about. The author was speaking about the two concepts, but i was unclear about how they came about. I also agree with Mark when he mentioned the 8th grade teacher standing in front of the class and lecturing everyday. We both had the same teachers, and i remember that happening.
ReplyDeleteHenry Sales
ReplyDeleteWhile this article seemed to hit upon the same basic arguement for most of its entirety, there were several key elements that managed to stick out for me, and I also enjoyed how the text prompted many natural connections to past experiences in school. Like Moira said, I was instantly able to connect teachers in my past to the two different methods. It was almost like a fond look down memory lane at the good, and unfortunately, the bad. As Mark did, I can also point out the same eigth grade teacher, who was the near-perfect personification of the banking method. The normal class involved sitting down, quickly rifling to the most up to date page in our notebooks, taking notes and listening to a lecture for about 50 minutes, then spending the last seconds of class burning a hole in our planners, struggling to scrawl down the night's homework. While I did learn some information that I still take with me today, most of it was simply forgotten moments after the chapter test was taken. While reading this piece, I could also make a connection to the Alchemist. Santiago's entire journey essentially symbolizes the problem posing system. Instead of being told that the treasure was nearby (next to the tiny Spanish church), he was sent on a journey through north Africa. Whlie both methods would have gotten him to the treasure, and of course the banking method would have been much faster, Santiago found love, and himself, on his inspiring journey. People always seem to forget that education should be a journey, where useful knoweledge is picked up at its various rest stops. I thought it was very true how Freire stated that the banking teachers simply treat the students as cups that must be filled as quickly as possible. Once those cups leave that grade, the teachers inherit a new group of empty cups to refill yet again in the same, tedious process, and the reason why the students enter a class almost completely blank, is because the knowledge acquired is not sustainable, useful knowledge of true understanding, but rather, long lists of memorized facts that, in the end, can be thrown in the nearest trash can.
Alexis Ariza
ReplyDeleteReading “The Pedagogy of the Oppressed” was really tough for me. However, I could understand what the author was trying to say (although I think that his article would have been more effective if he had made it shorter and more to the point). When Paolo Freire described the banking method, I knew what he was talking about because I have had teachers in the past who have used the banking method to teach the class. Like Mark, I don’t remember anything that I memorized when I had those types of teachers. However, whenever I have a teacher who used the problem-posing method, I’ve remembered most of what he or she taught me. This is because, thinking about the subject that we talked about in class by answering critical thinking type of questions makes me really understand and actually learn about the subject. Moreover, before reading this article, I could always tell the difference in learning and remembering material between these two types of teachers and teaching methods – although I never actually named the different types of teaching methods, nor did I clearly define their differences like Paolo Freire did. In addition, I really do believe, like the author, that the problem-posing education is a better way to teach students because it can be used outside of school. The problem-posing method can help people learn how to come up with solutions to difficult problems. Lastly, like Lydia and Tailor, I too wonder why Paolo Freire decided to write this article (besides writing it to convince others to use the problem-posing teaching method instead of the banking method).
Ashley M
ReplyDeletePaolo Freire is an excellent writer, and his book Pedagogy of the Oppressed is very empowering. The point he makes are valid and realistic, and he always backs up the points he makes with real life situations, which is nice. In this reading, Freire takes a look into the different styles of teaching, one being the 'banking method,' and the 'problem posing' educational system. As Moira stated above, with every example he gave I was shocked at closely they descried some of the teachers I've had in the past. And with my experience, there is only one or two teachers that I could think of with the 'problem posing' style. This reading definitely got me thinking, prior to reading this I had never really thought about the oppression that teacher have on us. I wonder what would of inspired the author to write about such a topic, like did he have a bad experience as child being taught under the 'banking method'? I completely agree when he says " we have a system (banking) which achieves neither true knowledge nor true culture." I feel like the people we classify as 'smart' in our schools really only are the students who can memorize the most, and take in the facts fastest. We've gone away with having any common sense, and knowledge that is realistic to the world. Freire definitely brings up good points, and hopefully inspires people who read this, like myself, to want to bring change to our education systems today.
I had a hard time getting all the way through "Pedagogy of the Oppressed," Paolo Freire made many great points, but failed to fully capture my attention and seemed to repeat himself quite a lot. I seemed to get the entire point of the article from just the first two and the last two pages.
ReplyDeleteBesides that, Paolo made great points on the two different teaching styles, especially the banking method. He made it a point to explain his distaste for the method. Many, many times.
According to Paolo, the best teachers are the ones who captivate their students and make them a part of the lesson. I found this interesting because I've always hated sitting in a class and being spoken at instead of spoken to. I completely agree with Paolo and was surprised to connect so well to a text. I have always found that I learn and understand better when my teacher involves me and takes into account my likes and dislikes, as well as how I and my fellow classmates learn. I highly enjoyed reading parts of this article, but think it could have been much, much.....much, much shorter.
Connor-
ReplyDeleteThe "Pedagogy of the Oppressed" was hard for me to understand. As Freire started describing the banking system and how the student teacher relationship is, it instantly brought back memories of past teachers i have had. Some teachers in the past just stood in the front of the classroom and lectured, I really felt a connection when freire was talking about how the students are trash cans. When the teachers would make the class boring and all about memorizing I would feel like I am cramming information in for a short period of time then all of a sudden its empty and gone. When freire was talking about the problem-posing method it also reminded me of some teachers i've had in the past. This method of teaching really was a fun way of learning that made me remember what I was being taught. When it was clear to me that freire was against the banking method and for the problem-posing one, I would have to agree with him. That is because this method really makes information stick and treat students better. Freire could have written the article in fewer pages.
Nicole L.
ReplyDeleteThe most surprising part of this article for me was that I understood it, though I suppose the issue is not the content so much as the quantity of information, which could have been much more succinct. That aside, I completely agree with what Freire was saying. This article made me think of some of my former teachers, and, like others have said, I have been exposed to both methods of education. The problem with the banking method is it makes learning boring for the students; having to take notes and read from textbooks gets quite tedious. There is also the issue of opression - basically, the teacher acting superior, like they know everything. But really, when you think about it, if they have to teach strictly from the textbook, how much do they really know? The banking method is mostly focused on test scores in the end. Students are taught information, take a test on it, (theoretically) get a decent grade, and then forget everything they learn. How is that effective? With problem-posing, students not only learn information, but learn how to apply it to daily life. This makes it more useful and important to the student.
Kyle Ratte
ReplyDeleteThis article actually really interested me. This is because as soon as I started reading I realized that his opinion on education was spot on with my opinion. Though I have always thought that the system of education is terrible, I never really thought about what exactly made it bad. It really did shock me when i read about the "banking" system because I have been experiencing it all of my school life and never thought of it that way. One connection i have is that when i am taught in school, i am tought usually to memorize things. Teachers deposit information in me for an upcoming quiz or test. And after that test, the knowledge expires and i forget, because i dont need it anymore. For example, if i was asked a question about seventh grade history. I am positive that i would not know the answer. Now, in a problem posing system, we would be taught not to memorize, but to discuss and find answers. It would teach us to be "conscious" of our problems. This form of education will not only stick with us in later years but also will povide the skill for us to solve our worlds problems, which our generation lacks right now. As i was reading the article i realized that the banking system of education with not work forever. We live in a world of many issues and a problem posing education will greatly benefit and very possibly save our world.
Alyssa Soforenko-
ReplyDeleteWhile reading "Pedagogy of the Oppressed", i was a bit confused at times, but at the say time, i understood what was happening. Trying to get all the way through the reading was difficult because Paolo Freire restates things over and over again. But, he is a great writer, and he had a lot of good points in his book. I understood what the Banking system was, and i agree that it is not a good option. All you would do is just sit there listening to your teacher, not being able to say anything. Then you have the Problem-Posing method, which he liked. I agree with Paolo Freire because it is more helps children learn more when they can actually have a say. When reading this article, i kept thinking of my old teachers and classes, and how they were similar to what Freire was stating. Old teachers in the past would just talk and talk, and the students would just sit and listen. But, then the problem posing method made me think of the classes, were we would have discussions, and actually have fun during class, and learn better. In the end, i really liked the article, as confusing it was at times, because it is easy to connect to and has a lot of valid points.
Briana Ruggiero-
ReplyDeleteAs I read "Predagogy of the Oppressed", I was shocked to think that someone would actually write an article on the concepts in the article. I knew myself, have at times, thought of the different teaching styles I have encountered throught school. However, I've never actually come across a reading about such a thing. I made a connection to the "banking system." There have been teachers throught my school career who have practiced that method. I agree, it is not the best way to learn. As I read through the article, I wondered what would it would be like to be taught through the "problem posing" method. There are teachers who "pose problems" all the time to make a point. However, I've never had a teacher base lessons off of them. Finally, as I read this article, I was thinking about how much I agree with the author. It doesn't make sense to just throw facts out to students and expect them to apply those facts to everyday life.
Andrew Lemos:
ReplyDeleteAlthough "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed" was long and rambled, (this eleven page article could have made the same points just as well in three pages) I agree with the main premises of it. The fact is Frerie is right. The method of education that too many teachers use, referred to as the banking method, doesn't work. This method not only treats students as ignorant, but also disrespects their intelligence and views them as empty glasses that need to be filled with information from the all knowing and wise teacher. This method involves the teacher having complete control over the students, and giving them information to memorize, almost like they are robots. The flaws in this system are pointed out time and time again in the article, and in my opinion the most fatal flaw observed, and one that is maybe a little overlooked, is the point that Frerie makes in saying the banking system doesn't teacher real world problem solving skills and doesn't prepare students for reality. While the fact that this system enforces a negative and almost adversarial student teacher relationship, where the teacher views the student as an object to be acted upon is quite an important point, the idea that this system doesn't prepare students for the real world is a more serious issue. At the end of the day having a negative relationship with a teacher is bad but being unprepared for the world is worse. The banking method doesn't encourage critical thinking, or dialogue among the students and with the teachers, which is how we think and behave in the real world. If we are to succeed in the world we need to be able to do more than memorize information. It is this issue, the lack of real life skills that the banking method teaches that is the reason I believe that this article was written. The fact that real life skills aren't being taught to many students is a crucial issue and I think it inspired him to write this article.
While I was reading this article I was surprised with the language the Paolo Freire used. In a way I feel as though he was actually connecting the banking method to an actual bank. I feel this way because he would say phrases like “receiving, filing, and storing the deposits.”( Also I was surprised because after reading the whole article because the educations that Freire used actually apply to my every day lives. There are teacher that make me take notes all class and read from a textbook. Whereas, there are the other ones that engage the whole class in a discussion and make sure that everyone puts something in. personally I agree with Freire completely, the classes where I just have to take notes in are the worst, I actually like having discussions because it makes the class more interesting. Also, having a discussion with the class helps me understand the topic that we are talking about better because I get other peoples input.
ReplyDeleteThere was one major connection that I made in while reading this piece. This connection that I make was that the oppressors in the banking method related to a section in the article "The Willingness to be Disturbed" by Margaret Wheatley. In the banking education the oppressors are afraid of change because they want everything there way and everyone to think and retain the same information. Margaret Wheatley’s article was all about how being afraid of change wont help to understand anything. That is how the oppressors are in "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed. "
Donovan-
ReplyDeleteAs many others have already said, I too think that although the chapter we read from Tradition and Upheaval was long and repetitive, many interesting points and ideas were presented about education and systems of teaching. Prior to reading this, I had not really thought about the different methods of teaching and how they are classified. I knew when I had a bad teacher or a good teacher but never really thought of the common theme in all of my bad teachers had as well as my good teachers. When reading this article, I instantly thought about my past teacher and connected their teaching methods to the ones Freire explained in his article. I've had teachers that I would say used the "banking method", and now thinking about, I realized that I didn't necessarily learn a whole lot from those teachers. This doesn't mean that I didn't learn anything at all, but when I compare it to what I've learned from a teacher that I would consider to use a "problem posing" method, the amount of knowledge I obtained was less. Also when reading, I was thinking about my classes this year and how they are taught. I realized that they can all fall into one of the categories Freire explained, which I found interesting. I consider our English class to use the problem posing method, which is why I think this year's English class is going to be great.
Cortney Roque
ReplyDeleteThere were many things that suprised me while reading "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed," however one of the most suprising would have to be how strongly the author felt that the banking concept of education takes nothing but a negative toll on us in reguards to human development. Another thing in relation to this was how he was able to support this theory so well with his overwhelming pages of evidence. Although at some points overwhelming, his ability to prove his point is one thing that kept me interested in the passage. Even though I was confused sometimes, his main points were always clear, like how he believed that the liberations method of education is by far the best way for students as well as teachers to learn and develop. I would also have to agree with the author when he says this. I, as well as many others, am one who likes to speak my mind (respectively) on topics of interest or even topics of discussion similarly to our humanities class. If we didn't have the freedom to speak our minds (to a certain reasonable extent), class would be a bore. It WOULD turn into the banking concept where the students sit while the teachers pound as much knowledge as possible into our heads and we try to memorize as much of it as we can. If this were to happen to us, school would become much less enjoyable for myself. Those were some of the many things that went through my mind as I read this passage. Lastly, one of the connections that I made would have to be one from our discussion in class. It was great to hear my classmates thoughts and it was even better to know that the majority of us, if not all of us, agreed that being able to express yourself in school is great. Having the chance to be creative and have your own thoughts on one subject or the other makes for a learning experience for everyone, including the teachers. Overall, I would have to strongly agree with the author that the liberation method of education is the greatest of ways to help both teachers and students to develop and expressing oneself is necessary for a successful future.
Great ideas, folks. You're spot on with the author's central argument and the examples he uses. I agree when many of you question his purpose in writing this piece. So think...
ReplyDeleteWHY THIS ARGUMENT? WHY THIS TOPIC? WHY ABOUT EDUCATION?
Keep up the great conversation! Talk back to each other. Ask questions. Answer questions. We will talk more about this during the next class.
Also, I appreciate your comments on the length of the article, but keep your discussion limited to the content and the concepts.
ReplyDeleteJeanette Zompa-
ReplyDeleteIn the article "Pedagogy of the Oppressed," by Paolo Freire, I found myself reading this article in a series of emotion. I started off reading the first two pages feeling confident with what the author was talking about, but as the article went on, I became more and more confused on which was the topic was on, and what this could have to do with me. After annotating and re-reading, I did however get a lot out of this article and see the significance of the "student teacher relationship". I made many connections while reading this as well, thinking much about my classes this year previous classes I have had beore. When Paolo Freire stated, "The teacher knows everything and the student knows nothing... The teacher talks and the students listen.." Those two quotes made me dissagree with those statements. In our english class we do not sit there and just listen to Mr. Burns, we interact in the conversation and answer his questions he asks of us. Class is held as a dictatorship, the teacher is the boss, but the teacher does not know everything, and to every story there is always more then one side therefore we talk about each side we know. This article gave me a lot to think about, as much as I enjoyed the first few pages, the rest was very repetative and re-stated his statements and he almost quoted himself.
-Joey F.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed," I found many different surprising things. One thing that really surprised me was that although the reading was very long, it was easy to read and to understand. One connection that I made was that the "problem-posing" method was like learning common sense. No one can really teach you what common sense is, or how to use it. It is just one of the many things that you must figure out yourself. This is how the "problem-posing" mehtod works. The teacher poses a question and instead of telling you the correct answer they allow you to figure it olut for yourself. I also agree with others when they say they found it interesting how passionate Paolo was about the article. I too, found that interesting. I think the reason Paolo is so passionate is because he knows how the education system works, and I think that he is sick of seeing students as objects. These were a few of the major things I was thinking of when I was reading.
I really enjoy your observations. I wonder, though: If you take the context away (education systems), what is "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed" really about? Think through this. Write it here. I will ask this question again tomorrow. Get those thinking caps on! I want to hear what you think!
ReplyDeleteCameron G.
ReplyDeleteSoory for the late post, but I have to say, this article as everyone else said was long, repetitive, complicated, and almost meaningless due to the nature of content which is universally known. But his arguements are none the less on target. He establishes how the "banking" system is like an empty cup (student) and a pitcher of water (teacher) and how one must fill the other in order to have purpose. This I can see through many oppresive governments as his is trying to get across. Countries such as China, Iran, or Egypt who supress outside information or influence in order to maintain power and social stability. Also the fact that he express the joy of the "problem-posing" method which is the forefront of creativity due to its acceptance of questions to beliefs. I can make a personal connection to this through Mr. Yip who challenged us indirectly to look at ourselves and question the things around us. This article is very poignant about how the student must be free in order for man to survive as individuals instead of subjects, which I see to be very true.
Nicole L.
ReplyDeleteA lightbulb just went off (say it with me: "DING!"). Well, first of all, before I forget to mention this, Cam, I agree with you about Mr. Yip; he immediately came to mind for me as a "problem posing" teacher as well. Back to the lightbulb, with our discussion in class about what the article is really saying if you take away the context of education, I began to think of how this idea relates to Miligram's experiment (for those of you who might not know, it's basically a psychology experiment about complying with authority. Google it, or Bing, or what have you). The idea of this experiment is that people obey authority with very little question, even if what they are told to do is immoral. In this particular experiment, the reason people were so willing to obey the authoritative figure was their belief in his expertise. I think this is what gives oppessors - like the teachers in the banking system, or really, any authoritative figure in any situation - their power; that the oppressed know nothing, so when the oppressor steps up and says, "Hey! I know everything! Listen to me!", the oppressed are willing to believe it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteUmar H-
ReplyDeleteWith such a vivid description of what he believes to be the root of our society’s problems, Paolo Freire truly is a brilliant writer and the “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” does not disappoint in stimulating everyone’s thoughts. In this piece Freire examines the educational methods modern students have been exposed to and how it affects their way of thinking. Specifically, he looks at the “banking concept” and the “problem posing” method. I was shocked to read that rather than making a comparison of the two methods, Freire was writing with a biased hand and only exposing the good of the “problem posing” method. As many stated above me, I was surprised that throughout my reading of this chapter I could actually see in my mind in which category each of my previous teachers belonged. It made me think, in what cases was I just a bank deposit? In which cases was I both a student and a teacher? One class that came to mind was my science class, last year. Throughout the course, students were encouraged to pose questions and take a “hands on” approach to learning. I find this method to be more successful in implanting the knowledge it teaches into my brain because, as Henry said, knowledge gained with the banking method was utterly lost as soon as I said “I’m done.” and handed in my test. I believe that the banking method of education is eating away at our humanity. Inquiring and questioning was the divine right given solely to humans. With this model of education we are taught not to question, but take something as it is and adapt ourselves. How do we exercise our right of curiosity when our society, itself, is oppressing it? “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” is easily connectible to Life of Pi. In the book while on his perilous journey, Pi remains humane by questioning why everything has happened to him. He wonders, explores, and inquires. Essentially, questioning keeps him attached to his humanity since he is not divine and all knowing and he has the ability to question, which animals do not. Throughout this chapter, I wondered: Is there such thing as a perfect education model? I mean, as affective as the problem-posing model is, wouldn’t asking to many questions lead us to question humanity itself? Although problem posing tells us that we, as humans, are imperfect and must always seek to better ourselves, what if one day we decide we have been bettered enough and we think of ourselves as divine? While reading about the banking model, I also wondered what caused Paolo Freire to write this piece and take such an anti-banking model stance. However, if I was to choose between the two methods of learning I would definitely choose the problem posing model. When Freire states, “Problem-posing education affirms men as beings in the process of becoming...” I believe he implies that mankind is and never can be perfect. I agree with him completely because if we were perfect we wouldn’t have problems. And according to Freire, these problems keep coming as a result of the banking model of learning; another point on which Mr. Freire and I agree. I also agree with Paolo Freire when he says that with the rise of the banking model of education, comes the decline of culture. Culture, in my opinion, is mankind’s expression of their humanity. And since the banking model represses the advancement of culture, it in turn also leads to the decline of our humanity towards savagery. All in all, I think Paolo Freire chapter, the “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” is a great piece and brings up important points that really make me think. Just like Ashley, I was inspired by this piece to change our methods of education today in order to insure and secure a better tomorrow for mankind.
Umar, you do good work synthesizing and questioning the material. You offer a very interesting conversation with the writer.
ReplyDelete