Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [dogme] Re: Dogme 2.0 vows [was "Dogme lost its bite?"]

Expand Messages
  • Dennis Newson
    Thanks Graham, Tom and Scott for a new agenda or the re-formulation of issues that people interested in dogme and technology might like to focus on. Dennis
    Message 1 of 29 , Oct 1, 2009
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks Graham, Tom and Scott for a new agenda or the re-formulation of
      issues that people interested in dogme and technology might like to focus
      on.


      Dennis


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Karenne Sylvester
      Dennis, Graham, Tom, Scott - DDCC. Scott has already given us something to work with -via the SEETA - you can still enter and read it. If you prefer the
      Message 2 of 29 , Oct 1, 2009
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Dennis, Graham, Tom, Scott -

        DDCC.

        Scott has already given us something to work with -via the SEETA - you can still enter and read it.

        If you prefer the reformatted (Moodle defies Scott -his words) and thus paragraphed version, then scroll down to the end of my "Any Given Dogma" blog posting:

        http://kalinago.blogspot.com/2009/09/any-given-dogma.html

        Karenne

        --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Dennis Newson <djn@...> wrote:
        >
        > Thanks Graham, Tom and Scott for a new agenda or the re-formulation of
        > issues that people interested in dogme and technology might like to focus
        > on.
        >
        >
        > Dennis
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • mrarabin
        Dear Diarmuid, Thank you for attempting to get the list onto another subject than the evils or benefits of technology. As reading is a topic in which I am
        Message 3 of 29 , Oct 1, 2009
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Diarmuid,

          Thank you for attempting to get the list onto another subject than the evils or benefits of technology. As reading is a topic in which I am particularly interested in, I'm even more grateful.

          Your question was how to get EAP students to start reading extensively so that they were then able to do their course more effectively. I have a similar situation in as much as my students need to be able to read extensive amounts of business material. The problem is that many academic or business texts (and Sue Murray explained very nicely why) are pretty dull, unless written by a Neil Postman or a Malcolm Gladwell. In order to read them you need to have stamina and also positive, enjoyable experiences of reading extensively in your past. However, extensive reading as a skill and main leisure activity has become increasingly marginalized over the last 60 years, resulting in a lot of people going to college or into business unable to read and analyse large amounts of material.

          Although I think that it makes sense to teach some reading skills in class (skimming and scanning for example), the main challenge is to develop the student's willingness to read a lot outside of class. For this reason I encourage (ok, bully) my students from the very start to take home graded fictional readers. I must declare an interest here because I write some of them too, but aside from my mercenary motives, there are several reasons why graded readers (as opposed to ungraded reading material) are important in kick-starting a reading habit.

          1) Students need to feel they are achieving something. If they constantly have to look up words they don't understand, they give up. So, when advising them on what to read I normally go for LL-1 rather than LL+1
          2) Well-written stories (and increasingly graded readers are original works of fiction, not just "Jane Eyre-lite") are intrinsically motivating and can carry your students forwards. This helps to develop the stamina they need for extensive reading in other fields.
          3) Fiction - unlike academic / business books, magazines, blogs, tweets, email discussion lists – provides both prose and dialogue. The contrast in styles is enormously helpful in showing students the range of possibilities with language. Getting the correct tone and register are critical skills that my students need to have if they are to be successful business communicators. Good graded readers provide examples in a safe context for them to observe and then, hopefully, apply.

          So, that's the `why'. As regards the `how', I make sure I have a range of readers available for students to borrow (I thought of getting class sets of my own books but decided that was unethical – damn that conscience!), I follow up, ask questions, get them to discuss together and am generally pestiferous about the topic.

          I am hoping, Diarmuid, that you will have some other suggestions that I can use in future. I look forward to hearing them from you and other readers.

          And last of all – just to tease the Technopolists out there – an interesting article about Kindle vs. text-books at Princeton.

          http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/09/30/princeton_amazon/

          Best wishes

          James Schofield
          --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, "diarmuid_fogarty" <zpd.english@...> wrote:
          >
          > --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, "fiotf" <fiolima@> wrote:
          > > Anyway, technology apart, there has to be more to dogme than the technology debate to be able to say that dogme lives? surely?
          > >
          > I've recently been searching through the archives to see what I can find on a dogme approach to reading. Essentially, it can be summarised as either a) let the students decide what to read; b) get the students to read each other's writing; c) do a) and b).
          >
          > Which is all very well and good, but I am supposed to be teaching reading on an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) course. This (possibly) complicates things because:
          >
          > a) most students in my class don't like reading. They don't "read" for enjoyment (despite their preferred pastimes being internet based chat!). They don't like reading and they find it boring. And yet they are supposed to be inducted into the skills and strategems that we use when we are reading academic texts;
          > b) as a result of not reading very much(?), they do not have a particularly extensive vocabulary;
          > c) both teacher and students have a relatively limited access to academic texts;
          > d) the teacher is hopelessly undecided about whether or not teaching can be taught;
          > e) the teacher is hopelessly undecided about whether it is helpful to break reading into a range of subskills and more undecided about whether we can say that increasing a person's ability to decode unknown words (or, in a more socioconstructive vein, to encode unknown words) will mean that they will be a better reader;
          > f) the teacher is hopelessly undecided about whether or not reading skills/subskills need to be taught or whether they are transferable and what is missing is experience;
          > g) many other things that may come out in the wash - assuming that dogme still serves to discuss such things.
          >
          > Primarily, I am interested to hear how fellow dogmetics would approach the "teaching" of reading within these constraints; I have some ill thought out ideas, but allow me to kick the conversation off before I offer them up for excoriation.
          >
        • Tom
          Hi everyone: DDCC...? Ah, I hadn t seen that: Scott had suggested that a technological tool (...) needs to be evaluated in accordance with its potential to
          Message 4 of 29 , Oct 1, 2009
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi everyone:

            DDCC...?

            Ah, I hadn't seen that: Scott had suggested that "a technological tool (...) needs to be evaluated in accordance with its potential to meet at least one, if not all, of the (...) criteria", ie. "Delivery, Dialogue, Creativity and Community" (see the link Karenne provided for the rest):

            http://kalinago.blogspot.com/2009/09/any-given-dogma.html

            I'm 100% in agreement with what Scott is saying. Thanks for pointing it out...

            Tom

            --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, "Karenne Sylvester" <kalinagoenglish@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            > Dennis, Graham, Tom, Scott -
            >
            > DDCC.
            >
            > Scott has already given us something to work with -via the SEETA - you can still enter and read it.
            >
            > If you prefer the reformatted (Moodle defies Scott -his words) and thus paragraphed version, then scroll down to the end of my "Any Given Dogma" blog posting:
            >
            > http://kalinago.blogspot.com/2009/09/any-given-dogma.html
            >
            > Karenne
            >
            > --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Dennis Newson <djn@> wrote:
            > >
            > > Thanks Graham, Tom and Scott for a new agenda or the re-formulation of
            > > issues that people interested in dogme and technology might like to focus
            > > on.
            > >
            > >
            > > Dennis
            > >
            > >
            > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > >
            >
          • Howard
            Hi Scott and all I greatly sympathize with your comments, Scott, on technology and learning as presented in Karenne s blog post:
            Message 5 of 29 , Oct 1, 2009
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Scott and all



              I greatly sympathize with your comments, Scott, on technology and
              learning as presented in Karenne's blog post:
              http://kalinago.blogspot.com/2009/09/any-given-dogma.html
              <http://kalinago.blogspot.com/2009/09/any-given-dogma.html> .



              However, I am not entirely comfortable with the term"content
              delivery". I see two ways to interpret the bullet point paragraph:
              firstly that the content is delivered by the teacher for the
              students' consumption; secondly that the students themselves
              introduce or "deliver" the content into their conversation (ie
              class). The former strikes me as heading down an instructivist (rather
              than constructivist) path and the latter falls short of what is possible
              when combining web 2.0 technologies with a Dogme approach.



              It is true that technology is often (perhaps always) simply doing the
              same (as we always could) but more immediately and efficiently than
              before; yet we are also passing thresholds that lead to a more
              fundamental change. For example, it has always been possible for
              several people to write simultaneously on the same piece of paper; so
              nothing new with wikis or Google Docs. Yet we now are able to do this
              without playing twister with our arms!



              Content delivery seems increasingly dated to me and I am often
              disappointed to see it incorporated into mobile learning projects. It
              jars especially when used with iPhones or similarly sophisticated
              learning tools that have enormous potential to enable more
              constructivist and connectivist learning
              (http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
              <http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm> [thanks to
              Graham for pointing me in the direction of this site]).



              The mobile-content-delivery concept, as I understand it, is that the
              content can now be anywhere (where the learner is). Yet what iPhones
              really offer is that the anywhere itself (including the associated
              experiences and activities) can now become the very content. Augmented
              reality is one type of opportunity (see this 3 minute YouTube for an
              example of augmented reality post-its:
              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1De9YCeKz_A
              <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1De9YCeKz_A> ),but photographing,
              audio-recording, videoing and writing in location are all possible on
              many simpler mobile devices.



              If technology is to enable constructivist and connectivist learning,
              then I think that we should demand of it that it enables (the
              co-creation of) content rather than that it just delivers it.



              I think there is also the implication that the content is inseparable
              from the learning or the conversation, through which learning takes
              place. This is less easy to see in a pen-and-paper based context
              (although certainly feasible), but is clearer when thinking of a
              wiki-based project and especially using an integrated platform like
              Google Wave (see 7 minute overview video:
              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6pgxLaDdQw
              <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6pgxLaDdQw> ). Indeed the Google Wave
              concept deserves far more attention from educators as it facilitates
              (through combining wikis and IM) the integration of the conversational
              learning processes with the output-focused (yet constructivist) crafting
              of shared knowledge; essentially it integrates content and conversation.



              I have made a few changes to the paragraph to take the above into
              account. How does this sound?

              * Delivery Content Co-creation: technology should be capable of
              delivering enabling content creation in ways that are more efficient
              collaborative, more immediate communicative, more impactful,
              more customised and more connectivist than many traditional means
              such as print materials, physically based conversation and
              physical actions (such as gestures);



              Best wishes

              Howard




              --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, "Karenne Sylvester" <kalinagoenglish@...>
              wrote:
              >
              >
              > Dennis, Graham, Tom, Scott -
              >
              > DDCC.
              >
              > Scott has already given us something to work with -via the SEETA - you
              can still enter and read it.
              >
              > If you prefer the reformatted (Moodle defies Scott -his words) and
              thus paragraphed version, then scroll down to the end of my "Any Given
              Dogma" blog posting:
              >
              > http://kalinago.blogspot.com/2009/09/any-given-dogma.html
              >
              > Karenne
              >
              > --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Dennis Newson djn@ wrote:
              > >
              > > Thanks Graham, Tom and Scott for a new agenda or the re-formulation
              of
              > > issues that people interested in dogme and technology might like to
              focus
              > > on.
              > >
              > >
              > > Dennis
              > >
              > >
              > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              > >
              >



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Howard
              The formatting didn t show as I had intended it, so here is the original paragraph... * Delivery: technology should be capable of delivering content in ways
              Message 6 of 29 , Oct 1, 2009
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                The formatting didn't show as I had intended it, so here is the original paragraph...

                * Delivery: technology should be capable of delivering content in ways that are more efficient, more immediate, more impactful, more customised than many traditional means such as print materials;

                and here it is with my suggested changes...

                * Content Co-creation: technology should be capable of enabling content creation in ways that are more collaborative, more communicative and more connectivist than many traditional means such as print materials, physically based conversation and physical actions (such as gestures);




                --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, "Howard" <howard@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                > Hi Scott and all
                >
                >
                >
                > I greatly sympathize with your comments, Scott, on technology and
                > learning as presented in Karenne's blog post:
                > http://kalinago.blogspot.com/2009/09/any-given-dogma.html
                > <http://kalinago.blogspot.com/2009/09/any-given-dogma.html> .
                >
                >
                >
                > However, I am not entirely comfortable with the term"content
                > delivery". I see two ways to interpret the bullet point paragraph:
                > firstly that the content is delivered by the teacher for the
                > students' consumption; secondly that the students themselves
                > introduce or "deliver" the content into their conversation (ie
                > class). The former strikes me as heading down an instructivist (rather
                > than constructivist) path and the latter falls short of what is possible
                > when combining web 2.0 technologies with a Dogme approach.
                >
                >
                >
                > It is true that technology is often (perhaps always) simply doing the
                > same (as we always could) but more immediately and efficiently than
                > before; yet we are also passing thresholds that lead to a more
                > fundamental change. For example, it has always been possible for
                > several people to write simultaneously on the same piece of paper; so
                > nothing new with wikis or Google Docs. Yet we now are able to do this
                > without playing twister with our arms!
                >
                >
                >
                > Content delivery seems increasingly dated to me and I am often
                > disappointed to see it incorporated into mobile learning projects. It
                > jars especially when used with iPhones or similarly sophisticated
                > learning tools that have enormous potential to enable more
                > constructivist and connectivist learning
                > (http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
                > <http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm> [thanks to
                > Graham for pointing me in the direction of this site]).
                >
                >
                >
                > The mobile-content-delivery concept, as I understand it, is that the
                > content can now be anywhere (where the learner is). Yet what iPhones
                > really offer is that the anywhere itself (including the associated
                > experiences and activities) can now become the very content. Augmented
                > reality is one type of opportunity (see this 3 minute YouTube for an
                > example of augmented reality post-its:
                > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1De9YCeKz_A
                > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1De9YCeKz_A> ),but photographing,
                > audio-recording, videoing and writing in location are all possible on
                > many simpler mobile devices.
                >
                >
                >
                > If technology is to enable constructivist and connectivist learning,
                > then I think that we should demand of it that it enables (the
                > co-creation of) content rather than that it just delivers it.
                >
                >
                >
                > I think there is also the implication that the content is inseparable
                > from the learning or the conversation, through which learning takes
                > place. This is less easy to see in a pen-and-paper based context
                > (although certainly feasible), but is clearer when thinking of a
                > wiki-based project and especially using an integrated platform like
                > Google Wave (see 7 minute overview video:
                > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6pgxLaDdQw
                > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6pgxLaDdQw> ). Indeed the Google Wave
                > concept deserves far more attention from educators as it facilitates
                > (through combining wikis and IM) the integration of the conversational
                > learning processes with the output-focused (yet constructivist) crafting
                > of shared knowledge; essentially it integrates content and conversation.
                >
                >
                >
                > I have made a few changes to the paragraph to take the above into
                > account. How does this sound?
                >
                > * Delivery Content Co-creation: technology should be capable of
                > delivering enabling content creation in ways that are more efficient
                > collaborative, more immediate communicative, more impactful,
                > more customised and more connectivist than many traditional means
                > such as print materials, physically based conversation and
                > physical actions (such as gestures);
                >
                >
                >
                > Best wishes
                >
                > Howard
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, "Karenne Sylvester" <kalinagoenglish@>
                > wrote:
                > >
                > >
                > > Dennis, Graham, Tom, Scott -
                > >
                > > DDCC.
                > >
                > > Scott has already given us something to work with -via the SEETA - you
                > can still enter and read it.
                > >
                > > If you prefer the reformatted (Moodle defies Scott -his words) and
                > thus paragraphed version, then scroll down to the end of my "Any Given
                > Dogma" blog posting:
                > >
                > > http://kalinago.blogspot.com/2009/09/any-given-dogma.html
                > >
                > > Karenne
                > >
                > > --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Dennis Newson djn@ wrote:
                > > >
                > > > Thanks Graham, Tom and Scott for a new agenda or the re-formulation
                > of
                > > > issues that people interested in dogme and technology might like to
                > focus
                > > > on.
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > Dennis
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > > >
                > >
                >
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
              • Scott
                HI Howard, Thanks for your posts. I totally agree with your point about delivery. Just to explain: the DDCC acronym (delivery, dialogue,community,
                Message 7 of 29 , Oct 1, 2009
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  HI Howard,

                  Thanks for your posts.

                  I totally agree with your point about delivery. Just to explain: the DDCC acronym (delivery, dialogue,community, creativity)emerged out of a talk I did this summer in New York on online learning, and it was a sort of mnemonic for my own trajectory in this domain.

                  Ten years ago I worked on a project whose main motivation was the delivery of content - a bit like putting a coursebook on-line. (Ironically the material we put online has now been re-packaged as a coursebook!) I was not entirely enchanted by this use of the medium, not least because I did not (and do not) subscribe to a delivery model of instruction. However, for people who DO need coursebooks, things like IWBs seem a more efficient way of delivering them than through the traditioanl publishing means. And, if you're teaching EAP (as Diarmuid on this list is) you may well need a ready source of texts (and concordance software etc with which to process these texts), for which the internet is unquestionably the best source. So there does seem a place for delivery, but for me it is at the very bottom rung of the digital ladder.

                  To put it briefly, I see the DDCC functions as organised both chronologically and hierarchically, although I'm not sure of the order of the two C's. (Or if an order matters). Your advice would be gratefully received!


                  Scott
                • zpd.english@virgin.net
                  Thanks James for taking the time to give such a good response. I am interested in your view that it makes sense to teach skimming and scanning (over which I
                  Message 8 of 29 , Oct 1, 2009
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Thanks James for taking the time to give such a good response. I am interested in your view that it makes sense to teach skimming and scanning (over which I stumble every time, so deeply has the malapropism skinning and scamming become engrained). Is it really necessary to teach these? Do they not happen anyway?

                    That's what I would have written this morning, but having read Grabe and Stoller's summary of research (actually empirical research!) I am now informed that it is misguided t think that skills transfer takes place. But on reflection, maybe that's what I would have gone on to say anyway. Grabe and Stoller say that research has demonstrated to the point of clarity that skills transfer doesn't take place until the language threshold has been crossed. I would have said that skimming and scanning are really lexis dependent and if the students don't have the lexis, they won't be able to skim and scan. If they do have the lexis, they probably won't need to be taught how to skim and scan. It'll happen naturally.

                    I wholly subscribe to the idea of extended reading and have done so even when I didn't know it was called extensive reading. I am a great believer in the power of graded readers, but unlike you I despair of the titles on offer (with some notable exceptions, I hasten to add!). I tried to write my own for my class once upon a time. I had visions of myself as some sort of Dickens, publishing on the basis of weekly installments. We didn't get far. I wnated a story about a language learner who comes to the UK, arrives at his host family's house to find the door unlocked and nobody there. The idea was to explore the feelings that these learners must have when they arrive in the UK. Perhaps if you give me some writing tips, I could revisit it? One writing tip I am told is to keep writing and permit yourself the luxury of knowing that what you are writing is not up to much (I've deleted the expletive that was there a minute ago!)

                    What I have taken from your post is the need to bully students into extensive reading. I have been perfecting my pout/frown and tone of shock and horror for next Thursday when Student X tells me they haven't even read a page. Before, I would have half frowned, half smiled and made some feeble exhortation. NO MORE! I AM THE READING TEACHER!

                    Incidentally, as a weblist that subscribes (whisper it) to the theory of socially mediated language learning, would anyone advocate having a quiet time when students just read and ask for help/explanations etc?

                    Thanks again James. Reading is an area that fascinates me, so I hope that this will be the beginning of a beautifully long conversation between us (and others too!).

                    A pleasure.
                    Diarmuid
                  • Tom
                    Hi everyone: I understood what Scott originally meant by delivery , like the chronologically and hierarchically arranged mnemonic (like Howard s content
                    Message 9 of 29 , Oct 1, 2009
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi everyone:

                      I understood what Scott originally meant by "delivery", like the chronologically and hierarchically arranged mnemonic (like Howard's "content co-creation" too...) but don't really like the word "delivery" that much.

                      It smacks of sage-on-the-stage, 'this' is the content, let me dump it on you from a great height...

                      Would "presentation" (or something else?) be more er... Dogme? Doesn't it suggest, "ok, we'll look at it together and then see how we respond"...?

                      Tom



                      --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" <scott.thornbury@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > HI Howard,
                      >
                      > Thanks for your posts.
                      >
                      > I totally agree with your point about delivery. Just to explain: the DDCC acronym (delivery, dialogue,community, creativity)emerged out of a talk I did this summer in New York on online learning, and it was a sort of mnemonic for my own trajectory in this domain.
                      >
                      > Ten years ago I worked on a project whose main motivation was the delivery of content - a bit like putting a coursebook on-line. (Ironically the material we put online has now been re-packaged as a coursebook!) I was not entirely enchanted by this use of the medium, not least because I did not (and do not) subscribe to a delivery model of instruction. However, for people who DO need coursebooks, things like IWBs seem a more efficient way of delivering them than through the traditioanl publishing means. And, if you're teaching EAP (as Diarmuid on this list is) you may well need a ready source of texts (and concordance software etc with which to process these texts), for which the internet is unquestionably the best source. So there does seem a place for delivery, but for me it is at the very bottom rung of the digital ladder.
                      >
                      > To put it briefly, I see the DDCC functions as organised both chronologically and hierarchically, although I'm not sure of the order of the two C's. (Or if an order matters). Your advice would be gratefully received!
                      >
                      >
                      > Scott
                      >
                    • Karenne Sylvester
                      Howard, Scott, list Would anyone have objections to my copying and pasting some of this particular discussion regarding delivery/co-creation into the comments
                      Message 10 of 29 , Oct 2, 2009
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Howard, Scott, list

                        Would anyone have objections to my copying and pasting some of this particular discussion regarding delivery/co-creation into the comments section of my blog post: Any Given Dogma?

                        Basically, I think what you are talking about is thrilling and am keeping well out of it while it's coming together but am reading and as I would like to keep my readers updated (especially those who are not attracted to dogme's ismness, but are attracted to using technology appropriately)...

                        If anyone objects I won't but do let me know.

                        If, Howard, you would prefer to formulate your own thoughts on your own blog, if you provide a link I will link from that to such a post instead.

                        Thanks,
                        Karenne

                        --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" <scott.thornbury@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > HI Howard,
                        >
                        > Thanks for your posts.
                        >
                        > I totally agree with your point about delivery. Just to explain: the DDCC acronym (delivery, dialogue,community, creativity)emerged out of a talk I did this summer in New York on online learning, and it was a sort of mnemonic for my own trajectory in this domain.
                        >
                        > Ten years ago I worked on a project whose main motivation was the delivery of content - a bit like putting a coursebook on-line. (Ironically the material we put online has now been re-packaged as a coursebook!) I was not entirely enchanted by this use of the medium, not least because I did not (and do not) subscribe to a delivery model of instruction. However, for people who DO need coursebooks, things like IWBs seem a more efficient way of delivering them than through the traditioanl publishing means. And, if you're teaching EAP (as Diarmuid on this list is) you may well need a ready source of texts (and concordance software etc with which to process these texts), for which the internet is unquestionably the best source. So there does seem a place for delivery, but for me it is at the very bottom rung of the digital ladder.
                        >
                        > To put it briefly, I see the DDCC functions as organised both chronologically and hierarchically, although I'm not sure of the order of the two C's. (Or if an order matters). Your advice would be gratefully received!
                        >
                        >
                        > Scott
                        >
                      • Howard
                        Hi Karenne Kind of you to ask, however (perhaps as a rather technical response...) I always assume that anything can be copied from this open resource. I
                        Message 11 of 29 , Oct 2, 2009
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Hi Karenne

                          Kind of you to ask, however (perhaps as a rather technical response...) I always assume that anything can be copied from this open resource.

                          I really think it would be great if you would blog some more on this or add this discussion to another arena.

                          I guess I should blog about this - I always find that writing about something helps my ideas come together. Realistically, that isn't going to happen soon.

                          Best wishes
                          Howard

                          --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, "Karenne Sylvester" <kalinagoenglish@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Howard, Scott, list
                          >
                          > Would anyone have objections to my copying and pasting some of this particular discussion regarding delivery/co-creation into the comments section of my blog post: Any Given Dogma?
                          >
                          > Basically, I think what you are talking about is thrilling and am keeping well out of it while it's coming together but am reading and as I would like to keep my readers updated (especially those who are not attracted to dogme's ismness, but are attracted to using technology appropriately)...
                          >
                          > If anyone objects I won't but do let me know.
                          >
                          > If, Howard, you would prefer to formulate your own thoughts on your own blog, if you provide a link I will link from that to such a post instead.
                          >
                          > Thanks,
                          > Karenne
                          >
                          > --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" <scott.thornbury@> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > HI Howard,
                          > >
                          > > Thanks for your posts.
                          > >
                          > > I totally agree with your point about delivery. Just to explain: the DDCC acronym (delivery, dialogue,community, creativity)emerged out of a talk I did this summer in New York on online learning, and it was a sort of mnemonic for my own trajectory in this domain.
                          > >
                          > > Ten years ago I worked on a project whose main motivation was the delivery of content - a bit like putting a coursebook on-line. (Ironically the material we put online has now been re-packaged as a coursebook!) I was not entirely enchanted by this use of the medium, not least because I did not (and do not) subscribe to a delivery model of instruction. However, for people who DO need coursebooks, things like IWBs seem a more efficient way of delivering them than through the traditioanl publishing means. And, if you're teaching EAP (as Diarmuid on this list is) you may well need a ready source of texts (and concordance software etc with which to process these texts), for which the internet is unquestionably the best source. So there does seem a place for delivery, but for me it is at the very bottom rung of the digital ladder.
                          > >
                          > > To put it briefly, I see the DDCC functions as organised both chronologically and hierarchically, although I'm not sure of the order of the two C's. (Or if an order matters). Your advice would be gratefully received!
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > Scott
                          > >
                          >
                        • mrarabin
                          Dear Diarmuid, Grabe and Stoller sound like schoolmasters from the pages of Molesworth. They also sound like people I should read and haven t, yet. Could you
                          Message 12 of 29 , Oct 2, 2009
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Dear Diarmuid,

                            "Grabe and Stoller" sound like schoolmasters from the pages of Molesworth. They also sound like people I should read and haven't, yet. Could you post their title for me?
                            As regards skimming and scanning my emphasis on that is due to what I find a useful skill in reading the foreign languages I have. For reading I would say I'm C2 in German, B1 in French and Italian and A2 in Spanish. But particularly for the weaker languages this is where I find these skills most helpful. They enable me to develop a theory of the content which I can then check, revise, check, revise and so on, until I have a pretty fair idea of the content. Or at least I think I have.
                            Moving onto the merit or otherwise of the titles available; you have to be careful not to allow your own literary preferences and taste stand in the way of something your students could enjoy. For students, managing to read a book (even if it is a graded reader) is what US extensive reader enthusiasts call a 'home-run experience'. Students are much less fussy than an educated native speaker in the literary value of something, but they love the feeling of achievement they can get from reading a whole book in English. Having said that, I also believe that writers should do their very best to write something that is not only pedagogically sound but also entertaining and well-written. I do my best.
                            But what about your writing ambitions? I like the idea of a student arriving in England and the host family not being there, especially in serial form. Make the student come from South America or China and you can throw in all those visa problems and it becomes a nightmare experience. Or turn it into a comedy by having the student going to the wrong house. Anyway, removing the legitimate authority figure (the host family in this case) from the picture is what many successful stories are based around e.g. Hucklebarry Finn, Oliver Twist, Harry Potter etc so I would say it has great potential. Why not continue? I've read enough of your posts. You can turn an elegant line or two.

                            Another discussion site I follow is the extensive reading site moderated by Rob Waring. It has some interesting background articles which teachers in reading might find useful. You have to join it of course.
                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ExtensiveReading/

                            Best wishes,

                            James




                            --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, zpd.english@... wrote:
                            >
                            >
                            > Thanks James for taking the time to give such a good response. I am interested in your view that it makes sense to teach skimming and scanning (over which I stumble every time, so deeply has the malapropism skinning and scamming become engrained). Is it really necessary to teach these? Do they not happen anyway?
                            >
                            > That's what I would have written this morning, but having read Grabe and Stoller's summary of research (actually empirical research!) I am now informed that it is misguided t think that skills transfer takes place. But on reflection, maybe that's what I would have gone on to say anyway. Grabe and Stoller say that research has demonstrated to the point of clarity that skills transfer doesn't take place until the language threshold has been crossed. I would have said that skimming and scanning are really lexis dependent and if the students don't have the lexis, they won't be able to skim and scan. If they do have the lexis, they probably won't need to be taught how to skim and scan. It'll happen naturally.
                            >
                            > I wholly subscribe to the idea of extended reading and have done so even when I didn't know it was called extensive reading. I am a great believer in the power of graded readers, but unlike you I despair of the titles on offer (with some notable exceptions, I hasten to add!). I tried to write my own for my class once upon a time. I had visions of myself as some sort of Dickens, publishing on the basis of weekly installments. We didn't get far. I wnated a story about a language learner who comes to the UK, arrives at his host family's house to find the door unlocked and nobody there. The idea was to explore the feelings that these learners must have when they arrive in the UK. Perhaps if you give me some writing tips, I could revisit it? One writing tip I am told is to keep writing and permit yourself the luxury of knowing that what you are writing is not up to much (I've deleted the expletive that was there a minute ago!)
                            >
                            > What I have taken from your post is the need to bully students into extensive reading. I have been perfecting my pout/frown and tone of shock and horror for next Thursday when Student X tells me they haven't even read a page. Before, I would have half frowned, half smiled and made some feeble exhortation. NO MORE! I AM THE READING TEACHER!
                            >
                            > Incidentally, as a weblist that subscribes (whisper it) to the theory of socially mediated language learning, would anyone advocate having a quiet time when students just read and ask for help/explanations etc?
                            >
                            > Thanks again James. Reading is an area that fascinates me, so I hope that this will be the beginning of a beautifully long conversation between us (and others too!).
                            >
                            > A pleasure.
                            > Diarmuid
                            >
                          • zpd.english@virgin.net
                            Hi James Grabe and Stoller can be found here
                            Message 13 of 29 , Oct 2, 2009
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Hi James
                              Grabe and Stoller can be found here http://www.amazon.co.uk/Teaching-Researching-Reading-Applied-Linguistics/dp/0582369959/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1254548395&sr=8-1.

                              I agree with what you say about skimming and scanning, but still wonder whether they need to be taught. Perhaps this is where empirical research is of value? Regrettably, I have already submitted my MA's research proposal. But it seems to (uninformed) me that skimming and scanning must be the lowest level reading skill because it's essentially (sez uninformed me) a basic human approach to anything new. We move our eyes over it in an attempt to uncover what we have in front of us. It seems that skimming and scanning are dependent upon having a big enough mental lexicon and possibly some basic knowledge about text structures.

                              I take your point about readers. Believe me, I have frogmarched whole classes into the library at work, sometimes on a weekly basis, and stood over them until books had been selected - don't think my personal taste stands in the way! But I am possibly projecting a bit - I look at some (maybe about 40%) of the titles available and wonder how these are going to entice a reader - and, of course, students who don't read at all might appear to be the kind who would just tear Black Beauty to bits. Then again, when I started reading in Spanish, I'd devour anything that I could get and positively enjoy it. I remember quoting Forrest Gump to people (his "I've got to go pee" is how I really learnt the Spanish "Tengo que...")

                              Thanks for the extensive reading link. I'm off to join now.
                              Diarmuid
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.