Section One: The Dogme Approach

Introduction

There are many teaching methods and approaches in TEFL context, namely grammar

translation method, the direct method, the competency-based approach, and many other

approaches. Some have been adopted because they proved their efficiency in the classroom, and

some other have been neglected due to gaps and deficiencies that were found in them[ CITATION

Ric01 \l 1036 ]. Dogme ELT, known also as Teaching Unplugged, it is an approach of teaching

which saw light in the beginnings of the 21 st century. It was pioneered by Scott Thornbury and

Luck Meddings (Meddings & Thornbury, 2009). Hence, the first section is dedicated for giving a

background of Dogme and exploring the meaning of the Dogme approach and its fundamental

principles, as well as exploring the Dogme classroom. It seeks also to compare the Dogme ELT

with other learning theories and remarking the criticism that was forwarded to it.

1.1 Overview of the Dogme approach

Dogme ELT is both an approach and a philosophy of teaching that saw light at the

beginning of the 21st century. It is a teaching movement initiated by a group of English

educators and pioneered by Thornbury and Meddings who antagonized the overuse of materials,

such as documentation and technological utilities, when realizing that it was preventing learners

from what is valuable for them and they generated a fence between learners and the actual

learning (Meddings & Thornbury, 2009).

According to Thornbury, the word Dogme was inspired from a filmmaking movement

that took place in Denmark which depended on what is available in the scenes where the films

were to be produced without the dependency on any special effects or technical materials; this
movement was called Dogma 95, and its principles were to be applied to the EFL or ESL

classroom (Thornbury, 2000).

1.2 Definition of The Dogme Approach:

The Dogme Approach is defined as a teaching approach that challenges what is

considered to be "an over-reliance on materials and technical wizardry in current language

teaching"(Meddings & Thornbury, 2009), this approach emphasises the crucial role of

communication in promoting language learning. It sheds light on the current needs of the

students rather than focusing on the predetermined syllabus (Meddings &Thornbury, 2009). The

Dogme approach has focused on changing the conventional way of teaching, in other words, the

over-dependency on material : handouts, technology aids. Most importantly to get rid of the

coursebook dependency.

In line with that, Chappell (2014) declares that teaching materials are made to burden teachers

and hamper their concentration on the learner's needs . To reinforce that, Thornbury (2009)

argues that the process of teaching and learning is supported enough by what teacher and

students bring to the classroom, which means themselves. Daniel stated that The philosophy

behind it is that learning occurs when students feel involved and interested in what they are

learning (2017).

1.3 Principles of the Dogme Approach:

From its inception on March 2000, the Dogme approach encompassed a bunch of principles

that altogether made up the approach, from which, interactivity between the teacher and his

students was the main principle of enhancing learning ,Another principle is the content provided

that can motivate and trigger students' engagement and learning. Besides, Thornbury and
Meddings define learning as a "social and dialogic process"(p.8) where knowledge is not merely

transferred to the learners from the teacher or the coursebook, but instead, it is the process of

constructing this knowledge inside the classroom. Thornbury and Meddings (2009) also insisted

on that language appears in the classroom in the right conditions provided instead of being

acquired by another input.

Out of these general principles, three core ones are distinguished: the Dogme approach is

conversation-driven, materials-light and focuses on emergent language (Meddings & Thornbury,

2009).

1.3.1 Conversation Driven:

According to Thornbury and Meddings (2009), conversation in language teaching should

occupy a giant role due, firstly, to its standing as "language at work"(p.8) This signifies that

conversation is the process and the product of language learning .In other words, as stated by

Tolba (2014) ,learners are to master the language forms (structures and vocabulary) in order to

use them in fluency activities. Furthermore, conversation is interactive, dialogic and

communicative as Hedge declares “interaction pushes learners to produce more accurate and

appropriate language” (2000,p.14) as stated by Thornbury and Meddings (2009) in that it gives

students opportunities for input and output (Tolba,2014), and it is intended to allow students to

communicate about somethings that concern them and things that they are interested in. Also,

Thornbury and Meddings mentioned that conversation scaffolds learning, Coşkun (2017)

declares that “in the Dogme classroom, the teacher takes advantage of conversation as it occurs

incidentally and scaffolds information for the learners in the process of reformulation, repair or

refinement of the emerging language” ( as cited in Akça, 2012,p.6).In that, the teacher or the

classmates provide support in the interaction to make everyone feel safe to engage and improve
their competences (Thornbury & Meddings,2009). It can be contended that classroom talk that

has the features of natural talk is likely to be more efficient than the traditional speech which is

directed by the teacher question-answered routine as Neil Mercer declares “conversation in

which people are self-consciously trying to teach and to learn will have special characteristics"

(as cited in Thornbury and Meddings, 2009,p.10).

Accordingly , Thornbury and Meddings (2009) claimed that conversation is also a mean of

socialisation; thus, Thornbury and Meddings view conversation as transactional, , in other words,

we chat not for exchanging information but instead for establishing good relationships' vibes.

Even when the aim is transactional, conversation always ends by what is called "phatic

communication"(Thornbury&Meddings,2009,p.10) ,communication which is purely social.

Nevertheless, classroom's conversation plays a significant role in creating phatic communication

which would result in creating discourse community between the teacher and his students, in

that, every student would claim the right to speak as being a member of this community, and that

is why the Dogme approach stands up for conversation as a vehicle for language learning not

only as an end (Thornbury& Meddings,2009).

1.3.2 Emergent Language

When we take a look at the different teaching methods and approaches, we reckon that

they consider language learning as a continuous acquisition or learning process [ CITATION

Med09 \l 1036 ]. The Dogme teaching approach has a different view of language learning; it is

fundamentally dependent on what’s available in the classroom; that is the teacher, learners and

the classroom (chairs, whiteboard, tables,etc.). Thornbury and Meddings see language learning

as an emergent process. To say so in different words, it means to “that is less to do with covering

items on a syllabus than ‘uncovering the syllabus’ within” (Thornbury and Meddings, 2009,
p.16). According to Thornbury in his book, when the teacher forms the right conditions for

learners to express themselves and use language effectively, their learning capacities will thrive

and will be activated. Therefore, language will emerge and not be acquired [ CITATION Med09 \l

1036 ]. Many approaches, namely process syllabus, task-based learning, and also Dogme share

the view that when given the right incentive and conditions to the learners, language will emerge [

CITATION Med09 \l 1033 ].

Thornbury and Meddings believe that language emerges on two levels: interpersonal and

intrapersonal[CITATION Hol98 \l 1036 ]. Firstly, language emerges on the level of interpersonal

level when learners’ engagement in the classroom is set to produce language output collectively.

That is, when the learners work together in the classroom on producing language when they are

given the ultimate conditions to engage, language emerges.

Secondly, when the learners engage in the classroom processes, “their internal language

system (or interlanguage) responds and develops in a mysterious way” [CITATION Med09 \p 16 \l

1033 ]. Many scholars, remarkably Larson-Freeman, Cameron, and Ellis, studied how language

grows both in society through time. They believe that language is a dynamic system that shows

the characteristics of an emergent system[ CITATION Dia06 \l 1036 ].

1.3.3 Material Light

Since the beginning of the 21st century, Dogme has been seen as an approach which

proscribes the use of the textbook in the classroom and additionally the utilization of any visual

aids. Its pioneers and supporters were called, as Thornbury named them in his book, luddites,

iconoclasts, and ELT ‘Amish folk’ because mainly this approach did not give teachers enough

materials and equipments to use in the classroom[ CITATION Med09 \l 1036 ]. The typical Dogme
classroom consists of chairs, the whiteboard, the teachers and the learners. In this classroom,

learning emerges from the conversation between the teacher and the learners themselves.

Actually, Dogme does not ban the use of technological aids totally. Instead, it supports their use

as long as it does not go against the Dogme ELT principles. Sadly, most ELT materials do not tie

the line with the Dogme philosophy which promotes interaction and conversation and frees the

classroom from the overuse of materials (Ashton-Warner S op. cit.).

Kulmaravadivelu believes that textbooks are now manipulated by Globalization

[CITATION kum03 \n \t \l 1036 ] , therefore they are empty of the values that the learners actually

need, and that is why the Dogme ELT ban the use of textbooks in the classroom owing to the odd

values it carries as he contends in his book[ CITATION Tho05 \l 1036 ].

That is, the teacher and learners construct knowledge collaboratively without the

dependency on materials which are not totally banned. According to Thornbury and Meddings,

using little or no materials such as textbooks empowers both of the teacher and the learners.

(Thornbury, 2000)

1.4 The Dogme Approach and Other Educational Theories

As stated by Bouchene (2013), the Dogme approach often shares many traits and

characteristics with different methods and approaches to language teaching.

1.4.1 Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)

Richards (1992) argues that CLT is an approach that emphasises on enhancing learners'

communicative abilities; this method was found due to the criticism directed to the Audiolingual

method which promoted producing well-written academic forms of writing only. Nunan (1991)

emphasized that CLT focuses on interaction using the target language in the classroom and
focused on the learning process rather then the language. He also claimed that achieving fluency

and accuracy is fundemental to achieve communicative competences. Tolba (2014) stated that

Dogme has a direct relationship with CLT as many of its principles are implemented in the

corpus of Dogme, and both approaches aim at achiving the communicative abilities of the

learners.

1.4.2Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT)

TBLT, according to Skehan (2003), is an extended form of CLT, and it asserted the use

of the target language in the classroom and doing tasks in order to engage the learners in

communication (Harmer, 2007). According to Prahbu, learners' actual learning happens when

they are engaged in tasks and focus on them rather then the language (1987). Nunan (2007)

considers that tasks in the classroom should be interconnected that is they should relate to each

other. He also believes that language should be facilitated for the learners and reproduced by

them in order to be able to use different language items more creatively. Thornbury believes that

"TBLT differs with Dogme in the methodology not the philosophy"( 2009, p.17). That is to say,

CLT recognize communicative competences through communicative activities, while Dogme

recognize them through conversation and interaction (Thornbury and Meddings, 2009).

1.4.3Paulo Freire theory:

Paulo Freire theory or the dialogic education is defined as "a form of interaction between

educator and participants in which both are co-speakers, co-learners, and co- actors" (2005, p.

263), hence, the Dialogic education shifts the interests from what the teacher says to what the

learner does, from having learners as passive elements to active ones. Vella (2007) sees that

conversation is the most important element in this theory; learners are seen as decision makers
and active elements in the learning process. Based on this, Dogme and Paulo Feiere's theory

shares the same principles of dialogue and conversation in the classroom because both

emphasizes on the role of conversing in the target language; Freire demonstrate that “education

is communication and dialogue" (1970, as cited in Meddings & Thornbury, 2009).

1.5 The Dogme Classroom:

Conventionally, the learners in an ELT classroom is teacher-centered, that is the teacher

prepares previously the lesson and bring it to the class and give it to learners without any real

conversation between the learners and the teacher; however; in the Dogme approach, things go

the differently; students bring the lesson with them to the classroom. In other words, they bring

their interests, thoughts and stories to the classroom and the teacher’s role is to transfer these

interests and “rough form” of their language and lives”, as Thornbury said, into learning

experiences that suits that learners needs[ CITATION Med09 \l 1036 ].

Thornbury introduced four key concepts in his book that allow the teacher to unplug

his/her teaching and create the righteous conditions for the learners to get the most out of the

lesson[ CITATION Med09 \l 1036 ]. They key concepts are:

Learners: The learners are the most important part of the Dogme classroom. The teachers should

give them the chance to express themselves and encourage them to prompt their ideas and beliefs

and therefore leads the language to emerge and learning to happen.

Language: Next to the need for the learners to express themselves, Thornbury and Meddings

believe that the teacher should understand why his/her learners want to learn or improve their

English. A good understanding of this will be a good guide to understand their will to learn

English what they expect.

Paper: The needs of the teacher in a Dogme classroom that should be present to unplug his/her

teaching is a marker/chalk and a whiteboard/blackboard. Thornbury does not deny completely

the use of technology in a Dogme-led classroom, but he encourages its use as long as it helps the

learners to converse actively with each other. Also, he insists on using papers of all sizes in the

classroom especially small sheets of paper that can be stuck to the whiteboard or the wall.

Place: The Dogme classroom does not emphasize solely on the school particulars, but also the

outside work which helps to create conversation and meet the learners’ needs of what is real.

1.5.1The Role of the Teacher

The teacher in Dogme ELT is not considered the core of the classroom anymore [CITATION

Sco00 \l 1036 ], and the role that the teacher should take is the facilitator of conversation to

happen and ensuring learning occurs. Scott Thornbury [ CITATION Med09 \l 1036 ] summarizes

what the teacher should do in a Dogme-led classroom with six key terms:

Encourage: The teacher should always be benevolent, cheerful, and optimistic with the students

and he/she should praise and admire what the students do.

Explain: The teacher should focus on the How’s and Why’s of the things. In other words,

learners need to know what is happening in the classroom and the reason why it is happening.

Help: The teacher is a facilitator; conversation should be made easy and he/she should help the

learners with the activities.

Highlight: The teacher should make some important things clear which are worth emphasis.

Adjust: The teacher should make the necessary changes in the language when necessary.
Extend: The teacher should help his/her learners to extend and build up their knowledge about

the language as they proceed.

1.6 Importance of Dogme approach:

According to Luck Meddings and Scott Thornbury ,teachers often complained about the

load of materials they had to use every day in their sessions. Dogme provided a great opportunity

for teachers to get rid of the material stuff they had to use in their classes. According to

Thornburry, Dogme offered teachers some great ways to get the students to engage, work on the

four skills, and also spending less time preparing the lesson plan as a casual Dogme class does

not necessarily require the teacher a lot of preparation[ CITATION Tho09 \l 1033 ].

1.7 Criticisms directed to the Dogme Approach

Many criticisms have been levelled to the Dogme approach as mentioned by Sarani

(2019), it was doubted by Harmer (2012) claiming that it doesn't have theoretical backgrounds,

in response proponents of the Dogme approach contended that it has roots in many approaches

from which there is the CLT (Thornburry&Meddings,2009). The sharpest criticism was directed

to the rejection of the materials and the preplanned syllabus(Christensen,2004), considering the

absence of material will burden the teacher by being the responsible of scaffolding conversation

with interesting topics (smith, 2004), thus, eliciting the topic and getting all the students involved

is a challenging task for the teacher. Moreover, even when the learners cooperate with their tutor

by providing items for conversation, not all the learners will favor it, regarding that the class

contains different experiences, minds, and backgrounds (Smith,2004). However, as stated by

Tolba (2014), Thornbury and Meddings defend that the Dogme approach doesn't exclude

materials totally.
 Another criticism was about the lack of structure in a Dogme classroom. Besides, it was

suspected to be used with non-native classes where materials would be a good server

(Christensen,2004); Another point is that it is seen as a challenge with beginners and with

learners who are preparing for specific exams (Tolba,2014).

Conclusion:

In Spite on the fact that Dogme ELT received great attention and was welcomed by many

teachers who spurn the over use of materials, it was rejected by some other teachers who refused

to disallow the use of materials and technology in their classrooms, therefore Dogme is still

under investigation. However, it could in many cases improve the learners’ ability to speak,

express themselves, and engage in the classroom as its main principle is to enable the leaners to

generate conversation (Meddings & Thornbury, 2009).