Dogme has its roots in [[communicative language teaching]] (in fact Dogme sees itself as an attempt to restore the communicative aspect to communicative approaches).<ref name="DeltaBlog2009">{{cite web |url=http://www.deltapublishing.co.uk/author/scott-thornbury |title=Scott Thornbury |accessdate=2009-06-23 |last=Thornbury |first=Scott |year=2009 |publisher=Delta Publishing Blog |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090621074321/http://www.deltapublishing.co.uk/author/scott-thornbury |archive-date=2009-06-21 |dead-url=yes }}</ref> Dogme has been noted for its compatibility with reflective teaching and for its intention to "humanize the classroom through a radical pedagogy of dialogue".<ref name="Templer2004" /> It also shares many qualities with task-based language learning<ref name="Thornbury2009Evidence">{{cite web |url=http://www.deltapublishing.co.uk/development/wheres-your-evidence |title=Where's your evidence? |accessdate=2009-06-23 |last=Thornbury |first=Scott |date=2009-05-11 |publisher=Delta Publishing Blog |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090514093754/http://www.deltapublishing.co.uk/development/wheres-your-evidence |archive-date=2009-05-14 |dead-url=yes }}</ref> and only differs with task-based learning in terms of methodology rather than philosophy.<ref>{{Harvnb|Meddings|Thornbury|2009|p=17}}</ref> Research evidence for Dogme is limited but Thornbury argues that the similarities with task-based learning suggest that Dogme likely leads to similar results. An example is the findings that learners tend to interact, produce language and collaboratively co-construct their learning when engaged in communicative tasks.<ref name="Thornbury2009Evidence" />
==As a critical pedagogy==
Line 34:
==Technology and web 2.0==
Although Dogme teaching has been seen to be anti-technology,<ref name="Gill2000" /> Thornbury maintains that he does not see Dogme as being opposed to technology as such,<ref>{{Harvnb|Meddings|Thornbury|2009|p=12}}</ref> rather that the approach is critical of using technology that does not enable teaching that is both learner centered and is based upon authentic communication. Indeed, more recent attempts to map Dogme principles on to language learning with web 2.0 tools (under the term "Dogme 2.0") are considered evidence of Dogme being in transition<ref name="Thornbury2009Transition">{{cite web |url=http://www.deltapublishing.co.uk/development/dogme-in-transition |title=Dogme in Transition? |accessdate=2009-06-23 |last=Thornbury |first=Scott |date=2009-05-01 |publisher=Delta Publishing Blog |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090516063616/http://www.deltapublishing.co.uk/development/dogme-in-transition |archive-date=2009-05-16 |dead-url=yes }}</ref> and therefore of being compatible with new technology. However, although there is not a clear consensus among Dogme teachers on this issue (see discussions on the [https://groups.yahoo.com/group/dogme/ ELT Dogme Yahoo Group]), there is a dominant view that the physical classroom will be preferable to attempts to substitute physical presence with communication via digital technology.<ref name="Thornbury2009Critical" />
==Criticism==
Dogme has come under criticism from a wide range of teachers and educators for its perceived rejection of both published textbooks and modern technology in language lessons. Furthermore the initial call for a 'vow of chastity' is seen as unnecessarily purist and that a weaker adoption of Dogme principles would allow teachers the freedom to choose resources according to the needs of a particular lesson.<ref name="Gill2000" /> Maley also presents Dogme as an approach that "[increases] the constraints on teachers".<ref>{{Harvnb|Maley|2003|p=190}}</ref> Christensen notes that adoption of Dogme practices may face greater cultural challenges in countries outside of Europe, such as Japan.<ref name="Christensen2005">{{cite journal|url=http://www.jalt-publications.org/archive/tlt/2005/01_2005TLT.pdf|title=Dogme in language teaching in Japan|last=Christensen|first=T|year=2005|journal=The Language Teacher|volume=29|issue=1|pages=15–18|access-date=2009-06-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090711055158/http://www.jalt-publications.org/archive/tlt/2005/01_2005TLT.pdf|archive-date=2009-07-11|dead-url=yes}}</ref> Questions have also been raised about the appropriateness of Dogme in low resource contexts and where students are preparing for examinations that have specific syllabi.<ref name="ELTJournal2005">{{cite web |url=http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/pdf_extract/59/4/333 |title=Online Forum Report: Dogme |accessdate=2009-06-23 |last= |first= |year=2005 |publisher=ELT Journal, 59/4: 333-335 }}</ref>
