Go With The Flow (Part 3— The Dogme Experiments: My Best/Worst Teacher)
By Scott Donald
In the first article from this series, I defined Dogme and presented the idea that the approach could be put on a scale. In my second article, I recounted an old experiment I’d done with a hardcore version of the approach, in which the students ended up planning a beach party. In this article, I bring us up-to-date with a recent experiment, and give some final thoughts on the Dogme approach.
Experiment 2: My Best/Worst Teacher
So here we are, six years after my first experiment with Hardcore Dogme and I decided it might be time to revisit it. I swapped my 8 Hungarians teenagers for 5 Spanish ones, but kept everything else more or less the same as my previous experiment.
- the students were sat in a circle
- they were a similar group in terms of level, age (and precociousness!)
- they lead the topic of conversation
As with the previous experiment, I had ideas about the direction the lesson might take. If you’ve taught teens for a while, you know the topics that are likely to come up, so I’d considered a few of those beforehand. I’d also swotted up using the Dogme book, Teaching Unplugged, which meant I had ideas for different activities I could use to focus the lesson once a topic arose.
As this experimental practice was for my own interests, I didn’t bother writing a formal retrospective lesson plan (like I had with the previous experiment). I also decided not to video it either. Instead, I made notes during the lesson which I’ll now recount and expand upon.
19:30 — the students (Elena, Ignacio, Santiago, Ada, and Pablo) arrive. Elena is, not for the first time, complaining about her school homework/workload.
19:35 — as I ask questions about the volume of homework they have, they agree that it’s too much. They explain that this is also their exam period.
19:45 — conversation develops into a criticism of the Spanish education system and the fact that each newly-elected government tries to implement something different from the previous one. The discussion so far has been democratic and student-led and I have been recording and correcting typical errors (e.g. missing auxiliaries), and upgrading language (e.g. by teaching the word coalition).
19:55 — discussion turns back to their own school experiences and it’s clear that they have some very strong opinions about their teachers/classes. There seems to be a clear consensus on what constitutes good or bad teaching practice.
20.05 — I knew there was a distinct possibility that they’d want to talk about school, but the irony of trying out an experimental teaching method that becomes a lesson about teaching has not escaped me. It’s all feeling very meta. However, I can’t deny that this is clearly a relative and emotive topic for them; it seems unwise and not particularly in the Dogme spirit to try and change the subject. I turn around and, to my horror, realise that I only have twenty minutes of class left and I haven’t done anything other than a bit of error-correcting. Luckily, an idea has been forming.
20:10 — I give out scraps of paper and have them copy the following:
I provide some scaffolding language (In my opinion, I feel that, etc.) and instruct them to write three points for each one.
Before starting, they make a couple of jokes about leaving a blank space for the best teacher column and one student even changes it from best to better. I obviously included the best teacher column for a bit of balance and to prevent a slagfest against my fellow professionals. However, I wanted them to be able to express themselves honestly and I have no problem with them criticising objectively bad teaching practices.
20:20 — Despite their joking about the best teacher column, the students produce some excellent points for both. As we go through some of the negative points, I try to provide alternative explanations for why teachers may be doing things in a certain way to encourage a bit of empathy among the students for their teachers, but in all fairness, several points are indefensible, e.g. a primary school teacher who consistently used inappropriate language in class. While many of these points seem fair, a few of them are spiked with personal jibes at the teachers for being old or having black and yellow teeth. It’s not all bad though, in the best teacher column, Ada writes about one of her teachers, In my opinion you’ve chosen the right job for you.
20:30 — I do some content and language feedback and then collect in their papers. When I get home to mark them more thoroughly, I find some examples of really good language, some errors, and some ideas for future language points, e.g. Not only… (inversion).
Conclusions on the lesson
I should have started the writing task sooner. This would have allowed me to work more with the language they produced. Running out of time made it feel like quite a top-heavy lesson. I had to remedy this by giving the students feedback at the start of the next lesson. In terms of content, I haven’t quite decided, but reading their comments about their old teachers with horrible teeth made me think of things I said and did as a teenager, which I now regret. Regret can be a hard topic for teens because they simply don’t have as many as adults, so I might incorporate this into a future lesson somehow.
Overall, I was happy enough with how the lesson went, despite the issue of timing. The students never seemed to be struggling for things to say and asking questions to promote discussions felt natural. The students also seemed to enjoy the lesson and were able to give some interesting insights into what they considered good and bad teaching practice. Several of them talked about the importance of giving clear explanations (something I’’ll be redoubling my efforts on!) and the importance of a teacher being passionate about their subject. But, passion alone was not enough:
I definitely remember having some of those teachers at school — and they were maths teachers too, but maybe I’m biased because I detested the subject!
However, the comment that particularly stuck out was this one about Elena’s worst teacher:
Well, there you have it. Dogme in a nutshell.
You might immediately jump to the teacher’s defence: but the poor teacher probably has a syllabus to cover! Fine, but are you really going to ignore Elena’s suggestion? I think most students, like Elena, are smart enough to know the difference between a teacher who uses the book as a tool, and one who uses it as their entire lesson plan.
Conclusions on (Hardcore) Dogme/Teaching Unplugged
It should be clear from my articles that I think there’s something in Dogme/Teaching Unplugged.
Is this something enough to qualify it as an approach? Perhaps not at the lower end of the Dogme scale, where teachers are being encouraged to ask their students real questions about their lives/opinions and then taking time to listen to them. I think this is simply just good practice.
At the middle of the scale is the idea of taking an activity and using it in class without a prescribed language point, creating opportunities for emergent language and then working to correct and upgrade that. We’re definitely in the bona fide teaching approach area now, as there are similarities here with Task-based Learning and other more holistic approaches.
It is, therefore, hard to dispute that Deep-end Dogme/Hardcore Dogme also qualifies as a genuine approach. So, is it a good one?
For the students, my experience suggests that it has value. I’m still skeptical about the benefits and efficacy of giving over a whole syllabus to Dogme, but could you not afford to give over one lesson a month, a even a term, to trying it?
As for teachers, I’ll admit, it can be intense way to teach — especially for newer teachers. But I think this don’t-tell-the-newbies-about-Dogme fear is sometimes overstated.
After speaking on the topic at a recent conference in Malaga, I was approached by a teacher who had just finished his CELTA and who had come to my talk after being asked to cover a colleague’s class last minute. He had gone in with nothing prepared and basically had to wing it. At the end of the class, he ‘d asked for feedback and the students were full of praise, saying it was the first time they had properly spoke like this in class.
Of course, we should consider the poor regular teacher, whose teaching is being brought into question, but wouldn’t you want to do everything in your power to make sure that you don’t get upstaged by the next teacher who covers your lessons? Maybe a little Dogme is the way forward…
For my part, I’ll make sure I don’t leave it six years before doing my next Hardcore Dogme experiment. Going forward, I’d like to try the approach with weaker, or more immature groups and see what happens there, or perhaps with an adult group.
And as for the name, Dogme? Well, Luke Meddings and Scott Thornbury may be trying to distance themselves from it, but I’m going to keep using it — partly because I’m not convinced by the Teaching Unplugged rebrand, but more because I like rude sounding words.
What about you? Would you like to try Dogme in your class? Maybe you’ve already experimented with Dogme and want to share your experience. Get in touch via Medium or on the ALMAR Facebook group.
