Just a quick thought I’ve had while thinking about Karenne Sylvester’s Dogme Blog Challenge #2, in particular about very low level students (perhaps who don’t even know how to read or write in their own language).
Sometimes you get students with what you might call ‘spikey profiles’ – that is, ace at speaking and understanding speech, but pants at reading and writing, or vice versa. Is a dogme-emergent-language classroom the best context for these learners to make progress? Yes and no. It strikes me that a conversation driven approach may be useful, but then you might also end up creating a walking talking student who can’t even spell their own name, let alone write it. I have almost an archetype version of this kind of student in my class at the moment – pretty confident (but not always accurate or comprehensible) when speaking, but whose writing is atrocious.
A big question is – this is emergent, right, because the problem has been identified through the learner’s work. But how do you get handwriting practice into a dogme lesson??
Read about the dogme blog challenge at these places:
Round 1 Is this dogme? by Candy Von Ost, Inteactivity and Co-construction by Cecilia Coelho, What really matters! by Sabrina De Vita, interactivity and co-construction by Willy Cardoso, Dogme Days by Diarmuid Fogarty, The importance of pair work by Nick Jaworski, No Dogma for EFL By Jeremy Harmer, A response by Andrew Pickles, Dogme for all? by Richard Whiteside
Round 2 Fear of the unknown! by Sabrina De Vita, Nature emerges naturally … does learning? by Cecilia Coelho, Emergence by Willy Cardoso, Does language emerge? by Henrick Oprea, An emergent curriculum by Nick Jaworski, What does it mean to say language emerges? by Candy Von Ost, Dogme schmogme by Anne Hodgson, Unanswered questions that continue to dogme by Sue Lyon Jones, Activate all Inherent Learning Capacities! by Diarmuid Fogarty