Last of good stuff in this post.

I think the conversation that started with the last post ending up going in a very fruitful direction. I’m glad to see it being incorporated into the blog and continued here. For me, the most important characteristic of a blog is its ability to foster dialogue and allow the sharing of information within a community or communities.

I also like the addition of referring to dogme as a lens. Oftentimes, we get to caught up in a theory or a methodology and then we start taking sides, building defenses, and attacking others. If we recognize that empirical research regarding many an approach is hard to come by, and that intuition can play a big part in teaching, I think it becomes clear that any particular theory, methodology, or approach, is best used as a lens. Each lens can be used to critically examine different aspects of an issue and different approaches. Lenses are ways to better help us look at ourselves, our teaching, and our learners. We need many lenses to help us find what works best for the learners. I agree with you Luke that dogme does provide an important lens through which to view technology and the abundance of materials used in today’s classroom.

You raise an interesting point with the increase of materials. I’m not sure it necessarily has to be considered as overload though. Perhaps they could be seen as different tools for each student to use as he or she sees fit. We never have just one type of learner in the classroom and exposing them to a number of different tools allows them the ability to choose for themselves what works best. A song one day, a video the next, a class wiki after that, these are all things that appeal to different people and, as long as they are spaced out, I think they are useful in the classroom. Each tool can provide the spark that makes the student want to speak and helps language emerge. As you get to know a class, you learn what works and what doesn’t and you can modify your lessons accordingly.

I often like to think of materials as speaking prompts or preparation rather than the core of a lesson. These materials can come from the learners, from topics that arose in class, from their interests. Just because it’s pre-prepared doesn’t mean it’s not meaningful to them I think.

Finding the identity through which the learner can speak. I think this is an excellent point. What position does the student want to speak from? How can we incorporate that into our lessons? How do we deal with multiple identities in a single student, not to mention a single class? These are things I’m still struggling with and trying to develop in my classes.

A point of disagreement I brought up on Karenne’s blog though is that not all language will emerge from the learner. I think it’s important to introduce outside material at times. My students in Turkey are often uncomfortable talking about politics or religion. In fact, as they often tell me, they can’t even do it in Turkish. Yet, many of them are learning English so they can work for an international company. My wife is often surprised by the topics that can come up when she’s talking to foreigners at work. While this discussion may not be customary in Turkey, in many other countries it is. There is a need to introduce elements of language that would not come up otherwise.

I did disagree with the last post about slowing down and copying something from the board, but I do agree with the need to slow down the pace in general. One of the things I try to do with my classes is to engage a topic from multiple sides, using different skills and activities over the course of 3 or 4 hours (the length of my classes). We don’t rush through everything and we take the time to really work around a topic, to activate different language skills, and to recycle relevant vocabulary, grammar, and language points. I find it helpful and my students really like it as well.

Again, great post, I look forward to the continuation of this discussion.

Great postings! I couldn’t agree more!

I, myself, had a similar experience to the Chinese student that Scott mentioned.

I was learning Japanese as a third language as a secondary school student and after 3 years of studying it, I was sent on an immersion programme to Japan. To my horrors of horrors, I could not even order a simple ice-cream on my first day in the country and quickly realised how useless my 3 years of language learning had been.

However, whilst in Japan, I fell in love with a Japanese boy band (Ok! I was 15!) and when I came back to Singapore (my home country), I started trying to figure out what they were singing in their songs, buying vast numbers of pop magazines with interviews in them, trying to get my hands on any recorded TV programme with them in it, and basically fuelling my obsession by surrounding myself with everything to do with them. In the process, I was able to re-define myself and took on the identity of a Japanese teenager. Fellow fans from Japan whom I corresponded with (they were called penpals in those days) hardly saw me as a foreigner trying to fit in and learn their language, but spoke to me like I belonged to their ‘in-group’. My concern was not the language, but being able to understand and speak the language brought me closer to the pop band.

As pathetic (or embarrassing) as that might sound, my Japanese improved at such an extraordinary rate that when I went for another immersion interview 6 months after the first, the Japanese department head could not believe I was the same person who was in her office 6 months before. She actually said to me, ‘How could it be possible to go from beginner to advanced within half a year?’

At a very young age, I quickly learnt that language learning should never be for its own sake for language is not dead. It is a tool used to get closer to our ambitions and the things we love, and that motivation is what will propel us to try and successfully communicate a part of ourselves.

Nick, I teach in multi-national and multi-cultural classes in London and although publications, materials and even some teachers constantly avoid the sensitive topics such as religion, culture and politics (and I fully understand why they choose to do so), I find myself often deep in discussion with my learners (even at elementary level!)about such things. So far, no one has left the class offended because I strongly believe it is up to the sensitivity of the teacher (or mediator, in this case) to encourage an open-minded and respectful discussion that will only serve to trigger thoughts, opinions, and unavoidably, a lot of language. I often explicitly tell my learners how fascinating their views are and how there are no right or wrong opinions, only the ability to question and logicalise our beliefs. Nevertheless, I don’t hesitate to challenge them, albeit gently (the sentence heads ‘Just to play devil’s advocate,…’ and ‘If you don’t mind me asking,…’ frequently ends up on the lexis column of my board).
These topics, as Nick said, are the ones that come up in conversations in real life, especially if the learners are using English to socialise in a business context, and do not deserved to be skated over.

Only through the lens of Dogme could we begin to really explore and milk these topics for the rich discussions and incidental language they could throw up.

Hello from Russia!
Can I quote a post in your blog with the link to you?

Hello Luke – I just came across this posting.

It’s a very nicely crafted piece and I have enjoyed reading.

But I am wondering why, in the single short paragraph in which you tackle ‘materials’, you refer to the “student’s book, workbook, teacher’s book, class cassette/CD and self-study cassette/CD … teacher’s website, student’s website and pre-prepared interactive (eh?) content in the shape of iPacks or iTools.”

To many creative teachers, course books and course book accessories are not synonymous with the term materials. I myself try to bring my classroom and students alive through materials whether that refers to songs, poetry, video, literature, art, personal photographs, realia, or whatever.

I do my best to select good materials that will engage my learners and importantly, myself (after all, if I am engaged, then there is a better chance of my own enthusiasm rubbing off on my students). I am always considering how good materials can give rise to emergent language. Personally speaking, good materials can unlock the language within my students better than I can.

In fact, I would hate to teach without materials. And the times I have enjoyed teaching the most were when I was not bound to using course books. In my mind, materials and course books = chalk and cheese.

This probably seems like a small point. But if Dogme sets out to promote creativity in teaching, then surely it should make a clearer distinction between these two things.

Anyway, thanks for an interesting read.

Jamie