U knew Dogme before u knew Dogme

Brilliant post, Brad! And thanks for the mentions…
BTW, I’m a bit daft but what’s SPIR?
Is this some mind trick?

Oops! I think I swept over that point too quickly, and merci for your question, as it will allow me to go DEEPER into the etymology of a word i love.

inSPIRation can be broken down into in + spir +ation…. or the “act of bringing spirit into” someone.  Spirit comes from latin “spirare” which means to breathe, so literally when we say to inspire someone, it means to “breathe life into them”.  This gives rise to other interesting cogantes:

conspire- to breathe together, or Co-llaborate secretly 

perspire-  to breathe through your skin 

transpire- to breathe across/over — to happen

Thanks for breathing life into us all, Chia  !   BTW, which characters are Chia Suan Chong ?

Wow! I never knew that! Hey, you learn something new every day, eh! Thanks!

Ever since I first heard of Dogme, I have thought to myself–yes, I’ve done that all along without having named it.  What I’d done in fact was teach lazily, not really Dogmetically (?).  What I always am concerned with by proponents of Dogme is that the general idea of being planless and dealing with emergent language creates an easy excuse for lazy teachers not to be prepared, then call it Dogme.

Hmm…

I wish I had more “umph” right now to explore the issue of ‘lazy teachers = dogme’.  I’ll leave it up to any other commentators West of here to take hold of the relay until I rise manana AM.

I’m not saying lazy teachers = Dogme.  lol  What I’ve always been concerned about is that ‘lazy’ teachers or even newer teachers who don’t read enough into what Dogme is or watch others do it successfully might feel justified in teaching without a plan or responsibility for using emergent language effectively as a teaching tool. 

It seems like those of us with anything about us are already dogmetizing our classrooms as a result of experience: is the spreading of a dogme philosophy, as I suspect, just a case of experienced teachers sharing good practices among their peers?

It seems such a strange paradox to me that dogme, in its attempt to make the classroom a more egalitarian environment, is helping us to perpetuate the idea that learning must be done within the confines of a physical location.  I’m working on a blog post that suggests that dogme is merely the act of making the most of a bad learning environment and that the way forward, for language education and dogme as a principle, lies in the use of technology. If nothing else, this will probably upset Scott Thornbury and Luke Meddings.

Hey Adam. Merci 4 stopping by again.

As someone who left the university world a bit unsatisfied, and happily
entered the university of life, I know what you mean about the “confines
of a physical location of a classroom— and its potential to be a “bad
learning environment”. Again, I think it’s a culture that defines its
limitations as much as the drive to “artificially” repeat language.

I think Dogme aims at moving towards what feels more natural, though
there’s no doubt living in Beijing would give you lightning speed growth
compared to sitting in a classroom in Paris or Istanbul. And again,
that’s the nature of learning in a non-immserive environment— SO, yes,
I think that as virtual environments improve, they might very well be
more tempting that traditional classrooms— and feasibly more economical.

Plus, autonomous learning on computers will certainly continue to
improve as well.

As educators, we can follow the the positive and negative trends and
decide which might be the best waves to push our students towrards.
Cheers, b

Hey Adam. Merci 4 stopping by again.

As someone who left the university world a bit unsatisfied, and happily
entered the university of life, I know what you mean about the “confines
of a physical location of a classroom— and its potential to be a “bad
learning environment”. Again, I think it’s a culture that defines its
limitations as much as the drive to “artificially” repeat language.

I think Dogme aims at moving towards what feels more natural, though
there’s no doubt living in Beijing would give you lightning speed growth
compared to sitting in a classroom in Paris or Istanbul. And again,
that’s the nature of learning in a non-immserive environment— SO, yes,
I think that as virtual environments improve, they might very well be
more tempting that traditional classrooms— and feasibly more economical.

Plus, autonomous learning on computers will certainly continue to
improve as well.

As educators, we can follow the the positive and negative trends and
decide which might be the best waves to push our students towrards.
Cheers, b

The good thing about the dogme / unplugged debate is that it makes question my use of technology, both in and out of the classroom. I’m increasingly finding that the tech route is at least as effective in enabling my students to reach their – admittedly pre-defined – objectives as any other route.

Exactly.  That’s the most important issue at hand— re-questioning what is the best path for our personal classroom context.

I have never given technology much more than a small side role in the classroom— a springboard of sorts for conversation, a little bit for videos, and students have used PPT for presentations.

I’m excited to see how all of this develops, and yet as a student of the university of life, I highly promote “active”, non-artificial practice of language, and at times, the abstraction/passive nature of computers make me wonder how to best use these tools in class.

Cheers, b

Hi Brad, great post.

I think you hit the nail on the head,

“why do traditional approaches fail for so many?” 

A learner with high motivation will learn a language from a plank of wood. No matter what approach the plank is using. It’s the other 90% (at a generously low guesstimate) that need their language activating.  With so much English buzzing around the world, on the internet, the TV, newspapers etc, everyone is at least a false beginner, learners come to classrooms with a massive store of unused, inactive language. Is it up to the teacher to nurture conversation in the classroom, make it personalised, interesting and immersed to activate this? Will the classroom be a more engaging place as a result? 

It’s not like every non-dogme classroom is not engaging and disempowers the learner, just as every dogme teacher is not ‘winging it’. I think these labels need to be put to bed. Whatever way you use, it needs to bring that spirit into the language classroom. 

Thanks for your thoughts.

Dale

Thanks for stopping by, Dale !

Etymologically speaking (as I replied to Chia), “bring spirit into the
classroom” means to “bring breath into the classroom”. Activate has
ALWAYS been my keyword when discussing how I teach, and it’s mostly
activating students, so the “breath” should be theirs !

Now, it’s easy to say “activate”, but it’s less easy to organize your
effort as a teacher to make that happen for students who

1) might care less about english

2) are self-conscious of their accent/level

3) are self-conscious in general and don’t want to co-mmunicate

4) are tired

5) have done your activity before, or require MORE somehow

6) are 1 of 50 students in a huge classroom with one native or non-nest
teacher…

But, that’s our job, and that’s the challenge. Honestly, that’s what I
love. How to get them excited ! Cheers, b

In an attempt to attract your friendly attention again, I love the painting you chose here and the etymology about INSPIRATION in the comment below.  /bashful/

I accept the olive branch with a gentile smile (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=gentile)

Alas, any idea is subject to its master.  Honestly, I feel, and I’ll say it again, I feel the truth in Dogme.  The direction is right— focusing more on students and seeking a way to allow them to “own” language.  Afterwards, it’s all a matter of situation.

When I was in China I couldn’t have been dogmetique as I think i could in Europe— the bottom line is awareness and I feel those “sharing” dogme are sharing it because they see value in the “here and now” transfer.

Might be too “Eckhart Tolle” of me, and I might be reading too much into it, but alas… how can we not read into it.  In any case, the etymology of bashful is cool too… in old french it was esbair, esbahir (F ébahir), to astound: formed either of es, from L ex, out (of)+bah! (astonishment)+inf suffix -ir, hence lit ‘to get a bah out of someone’ COPIED directly from my fav etymo dictionary

Interesting point about promoting “active, non-artificial practice of language…” – that is a traditional reason Ts argue against the use of technology in the classroom.  However, on a breakfast TV show this morning, they referenced a study that indicates Canadians spend 5+ hours a day engaged with one sort of electronic media device (mobile, computer, TV) a day.  Given that, would using computers in class really be that passive, or artificial for that matter?  Things that make you go hmm…

Awesome RE bashful.  I wonder, when you read, do you see imaginary menus and lists of possible roots and things pop up beside words?  Reminds me of some scene in a movie!  =)

Things that make ya go….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF2ayWcJfxoC & C music factory, anyone ?

My passive/artificial/abstract has a flavor to it, and it is one Dogme proponents like to cite:  Neal Postman.  I’ll quote briefly for flavor:

Physical reality seems to recede in proportion as man’s symbolic activity advances.  Instead of dealing with the things themselves man is in a sense constantly conversing with himself.  He has so enveloped himself in linguistic forms, in artisitic forms, in mythical symbols or religious rites that he
cannot see or know anything except by the interposition of an an artificial medium.   

NOW… this is all up a bit in the philosophical tree-hugging clouds, but they are thoughts that define my way of looking at the world, and how I share with students. So… i share ‘em here too.

Olive branch ?

movies are ok… the worst is in conversation… after every 10th word… in my head, I go:  ”you know where that word comes from” and feel like the Dad in a horrible after school movie…

Hi Brad,

I’ve been pondering/drafting a post about dogme in reaction to all the debate and buzz that’s been going around since the IATEFL symposium (wish I could have been there) and the TDSIG open space event in Barcelona. I may sit on it a while longer as the bar has been set even higher by this well-considered post and I think mine needs more polish…

Interesting that you have centred your writing around a wortk of art. That was the approach dogme-meister Luke Meddings took at the ISTEK conference in Istanbul earlier this year in his ’6 Sketches for ISTEK’ talk. He also commented on ‘leaving space’ and using different perspectives to alter our view of learning and the classroom environment.

Is dogme the new impressionism?

I’m with you on this one, Dave. I still think that dogme is good teaching practice talked up into some kind of special framework and I still think that many newbie teachers convinced to adopt this approach will crash and burn and never discover a true love of teaching. I also hope that I’m wrong on this.

Hey David

Merci 4 stopping by and thanks for your kind words.  I look forward to reading your post as we all bring something new and different to the table.

Interesting that Luke used art to explain Dogme, and cool that he would call it “6 sketches”.  The Toulouse Lautrec painting has a sketch feel to it, and it’s that sketchy incompletion that “leaves space” for others’ interpretation and imagination.

Funny… i almost called this post “Dogme: the new impressionism” and I think the parallels are many and worth investigating… though, I’d fear making it a ‘contrived’ effort.  Wanna take a stab at it, Dave…  :) ?

Hmm…  Adam.

Both you and Tyson see this failure part of potential dogme adopters— be it failure towards the students (lazy teacher) or failure of the teacher to enjoy their new profession.

Honestly, I wonder to what extent a new teacher would adopt a dogme approach right from the get-go.  I might be wrong, but I’m not sure it’s among the first line of methodologies a teacher bumps into.  I certainly didn’t hear about it for a few years.

Is it that well-known outside of the more veteran circle ?   

I think many dogme-friendly and possibly dogme non-friendly teachers would agree with you— that it’s good teaching practices with a specific label/framework.  That being said, those that gravitate towards it in class would probably do so in a piecemeal way, experimenting a bit here and there and finally adopting a more or less dogme approach.

What say you ?   (knowing fully well that you’re in preparation for a big conference )  

Reading the comments on your post is as enlightening as the post itself – subscribing to your blog is like attending a series of workshops on education, flavored with beautiful use of visuals and etymology!
Always a pleasure!

interesting post.  my idea is the classroom being a blank canvass at the beginning and which tells a story at the end.  we paint the canvass.  of course these are still early days for me and i need text book stabilizers (or maybe that’s a lie, but it can’t hurt to learn the rules I want to then break, like many classic artists do/did?)

i’m reading a a book called “Being Creative” by Chaz Pugliese which mentions inspiration.  funny little coincidences…

Great blog! I’m doing some experimenting with this kind of thing at the moment, so a timely read
What is a NEST? Is it Native English Speaking Teacher? I’m still kind of new so still getting my head around all the many, many acronyms!! 

You’re a sweetheart, Naomi.

I’m really happy about the direction of the blog. I’m kind of a
top-down thinker. I like going really general and then bouncing back
down to earth. Comparing dogme too art isn’t really a stretch to me.
THEN, the wonderful PLN comes in and makes it real and great
conversations ensue. Pretty awesome, right !

Hi there and merci 4 stopping by.  Just checked out your blog, and enjoy what’s going on.

Are you enjoying “Being Creative” ?  Recommend it ?I know what you mean about a blank canvas, and at the same time, many of my teacher experiences show that the canvas already has lines all over it… another great book about creativity/sociology/anthropology—- “If they give you lined paper, write sideways”.My biggest challenge while teaching for 3 years in China was seeking ways to create “exploration” and “owning of language” when my students came to class with a deposit-oriented view of education (à la Freire).In the end, I think we’re saying pretty much the same thing in a different way, as we know it’s that activated story, that journey that is important.   Oui ?  ;)

Don’t get me started on acronyms…. i’m still lost in there too and had I not had the chance to see Ken Wilson on stage and here him entertain us… I wouldn’t know what a NEST or NNEST is.  You’re right, btw, “native english speaking teacher”

Thanks 4 stopping by and retweeting, Lizzie !

Yes I’m enjoying it but I’m reading it ever so slowly – stolen snippets on the beach.  There isn’t much time to read and I’m trying not to do teachery things outside work as I think I must be a bit burnt out.  If you’ve seen my recent blog posts, you’ll have an idea of the state my head is in.  However, I see this book as something that appeals to my creative side rather than my teacher side.  I don’t have much time to marry the two, but in the summer, I’m taking a two and a half month break to hopefully look through all my ideas and make a sort of usable list of ideas and activities.

My Spanish students all sort of gawp at me as if to say “What are we gonna do?  Teach us” whereas I’ve been creeping in things to make them do some work.  They are used to memorising lists in their education system.  From time to time, I must seem crazy to them getting them to stick things on walls when they could more easily read from the page, but that wouldn’t be as fun, would it?

I think the most important thing I’m learning is that we should make room in wahtever kind of lesson (I have to use a text book most of the time) for them to get off their chest whatever is on their mind, like for my kids, it’s exams/school/ the pressures of having to come to English academy when they would rather be with their friends.  It’s not been a perfect year for me at all, but i’ll take everything I’ve learnt to make next year more student-friendly.  I won’t go for dogme 100%,, but use dogme with many things inc. the text book.

Brad,

Some interesting observations. 

I’m really not a fan of “ideology” of any sort – Dogme is part of that. I really think it is all just “good teaching” , meaning teachers creating a class culture where they authentically communicate with students. As that other American exiled in Paris , Lionel Trilling would say – it is about sincerity (important book of essays, his “Sincerity and authenticity”).

Another thing I’ll add about “knowing”. We should be careful attaching labels onto things – like saying that “x” is the reason I’m “y”.   Our search and need for a “causa sui” knows no ends. Mostly it is false and we start believing in the label and not the multi causal nature that is existence.  When someone says, “Dogme allowed me …….” , I think there is a bit of false idolitry. 

But you know me, “no teacher, no guru, no method”…. I’m sure Bach listened to a lot of Morrison too…. Great picture by the way! But I don’t see dogme there…… to me, Dogme might be more Kadinsky and especially his more symbolist early work… but it’s all in the eye of the beholder. 

David 

Thanks for elaborating.  Keep getting those kids 2 stick things on the wall… doing odd things and getting ‘em up and moving around keeps the creativity and mind juices flowing.

Cheers, b

Boy, do I love a David comment on the blog.  Keeps me “honest” and makes me dig a bit further.

The “no teacher, no guru, no method” is in-line with my first quote, which I hold to be very true too.  From there on, we have classrooms and we have students.  Now what?  Our approach doesn’t need to be ideological, but it can be inspired or guided by a “method”, which in the end is the experience of another teacher or teachers who have “been down that road before”.  

That being said, like you, I’ve never been one to follow a method in class, a recipe in the kitchen.  I like to crash and burn and feel along the way.  That’s how I teach and that’s how I learn.  That’s me, and it sounds like it’s you.  However, as you say “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder” and I believe hat there are certain teachers whose professional development could only deepen by walking down the “ideology” path.  And if not… crash and burn… and THEN phoenix into the next lesson.

In the end, the important question is how do we get teachers to see greater value in communicating “authentically and sincerely”?  And are students comfortable with that ?  I know you have great thoughts on this.  Shoot me a link/email and let’s keep it rollling.   Lastly, sincere might have a fascinating etymology… sine cera— “without wax” though it’s not “solidified”. http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/etymology/f/Sincere.htm

Ya, Dogme’s not something to you learn about in a standard training course, at least around here.  For new teachers, I think it just won’t work out well, either because they misinterpret what it is (ie. my earlier point) or they aren’t experienced enough to draw ideas from at a moment’s notice (ie. Adam’s point, maybe).

I do love branches.

Sounds about right… I think it is an approach that comes with time and certainly confidence in how to INTERact in the classroom.  

Merci 4 ze comment, dude !

Hi Brad,

Just posted a link to this on the TeachingEnglish facebook page if you’d like to check for comments.

Best,

Ann

Thanks for being such a great “connector”, Ann, and for sharing this with your community.  :)

Hi Brad,

Loved your blog post. Love the way you give me, the reader, SPACE to read your text slowly and reflect as I read it. 

Thinking of the painting and teaching similie, the teaching /learning experience is not about giving children dot-to-dot black and white pictures, but it’s about giving them colourful paints and seeing what emerges (even if they do mix up all the colours and create a mud-brown painting!).

So, hope the following video inspires all creative teachers (Holton Rower and Tall Paintings) and it’s a way of saying thanks for your very thought-provoking blog post:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6egUsZvWu4&feature=player_embedded

Valéria

Hey Valeria !

Thanks for stopping by and commenting, AND for the cool video. Art in motion and art in result. Very cool.

“A mud-brown painting”— i like this image. We can just ALLOW the learning process and there will always be something valuable discovered… even if the discovery is the “absence of value” and the actions that led there.

Cheers, Brad

That’s exactly the issue with Dogme – not enough is known by it by the ‘general TEFL public’ and it is sometimes equated with ‘can’t be arsed’ vibe. Yes, it is very much in the discussion cloud for passionate, progressive teachers that are very active on twitter.
But I’ve heard some teachers (who shall remain nameless) saying “Oh, I can’t be bothered to plan, I’m going to go Dogme”. If they knew more about it and dealt with it in a passionate way and really went for it in terms of learner outcomes, I wouldn’t mind. But I’d already observed that teacher a few times and seen how little they put into lessons. If a normal lesson was low on ‘stuff learnt’ then I hate to think what it was like for the students when the teacher was “going dogme” and really putting in zero effort.
However, as there is a constant stream of Dogme blogs/discussion on twitter/conferences/publications, maybe more teachers (other than just the twitterati) are becoming much more aware of the principles.

I suppose you’ve seen the big work done by phil3wade et al recently, haven’t you (link below)?

http://eflthoughtsandreflections.wordpress.com/

Hey Bren.

Thanks for the comment and yes, I think you and Tyson have a good point.  Tools or philosophies are always misused, and that’s a part of the game of life.  I think the fact that the discussion has really been taken up a notch this past year goes to show that the tools and philoshopy of dogme are being considered seriously, and yet, there will always be a lazy prof who uses it as an excuse to just let class happen and not do much before or after to “scaffold” learning.

Cheers for stopping by, and yes, Phil is a blogging genius!