The Plausibility of Applying Dogme Language Teaching Approach in Iranian EFL Classes from Teachers’ Perspective

The Plausibility of Applying Dogme Language Teaching Approach in Iranian EFL Classes from Teachers’ Perspective


  • Kamran Janfeshan Department of English Language Teaching, Kermanshah Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kermanshah, Iran
  • Asmaa Nader Sharhan An English Teacher, Wasite, Kut, Iraq
  • Mohammad Mahdi Janfeshan English Language Teaching Department, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran



Dogme ELT approach, Unplugged teaching, Iranian EFL teachers, Teachers' perspective


Over-dependency on manufactured materials and fixed syllabuses in language classrooms hamper both teachers and students from achieving communicative ability. In the Dogme language teaching approach or unplugged teaching, teachers do not rely on these predetermined procedures and they have the freedom to choose the class activities based on the situation of the classroom. This study was an attempt to investigate Iranian English language teachers’ perspectives on the possibility of the application of the Dogme approach as an unplugged teaching methodology in Iranian high school English classes. 100 Iranian EFL teachers took part in the study. The teachers were given a questionnaire aiming to reveal their opinions about the general principles of the Dogme language teaching approach. Then, a semi-structured oral interview was conducted. The analysis of their responses led to the conclusion that the Dogme approach was generally unknown by many Iranian teachers. Only a few teachers applied this approach in their classes. Therefore, it is suggested that the Dogme approach should be introduced and integrated into mainstream English as a foreign language program in Iranian contexts through workshops and in-service classes.


Download data is not yet available.


[1] Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. Approaches and methods in language teaching (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (2014).

[2] Meddings, L. Throw away your textbooks. Retrieved from education/2004/mar/26/tefl.lukemeddings. (2004).

[3] Thornbury, S. A Dogma for EFL. IATEFL Issues, (2000). 153(2), 59–67.

[4] Thornbury, S. Dogme: Dancing in the dark? Folio, (2005). 9(2), 3–5.

[5] Thornbury, S. Against dogma: a reply to Michael Swan. ELT Journal, (2006). 39(3), 158-161.

[6] Thornbury, S. A is for approach: An A-Z of ELT. Oxford: UK.: Macmillan Education. (2006).

[7] Thornbury, S. Methods, post-method, and métodos. Teaching English. Available at: (2009).

[8] Thornbury, S. Dogme: Nothing if not critical. (2009). Retrived March 2019 from http://scott

[9] Thornbury, S. Dogme: Hype, evolution, or intelligent design? The Language Teacher, (2013). 37(4), 100–123.

[10] Thornbury, S., & Meddings, L. Course books: The roaring in the chimney. Modern English Teacher, (2001a). 10(3), 11−13.

[11] Thornbury, S., & Meddings, L. Using the raw materials: A “dogme” approach to teaching language. Modern English Teacher, (2001b). 10(4), 40-43.

[12] Parahoo, K. Nursing research: principles, process and issues. Macmillan International Higher Education.‏ (2014).

[13] Meddings, L., & Thornbury, S. Dogme still able to divide ELT. Guardian News and Media Limited.‏ (2003).

[14] Meddings, L., & Thornbury, S. Teaching unplugged. Dogme in English Language Teaching.‏ Surrey, England: Delta. (2009).

[15] Hall, C. M. Policy learning and policy failure in sustainable tourism governance: From first-and second-order to third-order change? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, (2011). 19(4-5), 649-671.‏

[16] Harmer, J. The practice of English language teaching. London.‏ Longman. (2001).

[17] Griffin, E. M. A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied linguistics, (2006). 17(1), 38-62.‏

[18] Savignon. S. J. Beyond communicative language teaching: What's ahead?. Journal of pragmatics, (2001). 39(1), 207-220.

[19] Smith, M. An insight into Dogme. ETJ-Journal, (2004). 4(3), 1–5.

[20] Tomlinson, B. Materials development for language learning and teaching. Language Teaching, (2012). 45(2), 143–179.

[21] Riazi, A. The invisible in translation: The role of text structure. The Translation Journal, (2003). 7(2).

[22] Christensen, T. Dogme in language teaching in Japan. The Language Teacher, (2005).29(1), 15¬18.

[23] Gill, S. Against dogma: A plea for moderation. IATEFL Issues, 154. Retrieved form (2000).

[24] McIver, N. Review of teaching unplugged: Dogme in English language teaching. ELT Journal, (2009). 63(4), 419–421.

[25] Jin-Guo, M. O. On the Model of Multimedia College English Teaching [J]. Media in Foreign Language Instruction, (2002). 5(8), 6-9.‏

[26] Sarani,A. & Malmir, A. The Effect of Dogme Language Teaching (Dogme ELT) on L2 Speaking and Willingness to Communicate (WTC). Journal of English language Teaching and Learning University of Tabriz (2019). Volume 11, Issue 24

[27] Sketchley, M. (2011). An investigation into teacher and student attitudes of the key tenets of Dogme ELT (Doctoral dissertation, MA dissertation]. Retrieved 12th March, 2012 from http://www. scribd. com/doc/83684117/Dogme-ELT-Dissertation-Final-Version).‏

[28] Worth, G. The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, (2012). 17(2), 89-100.‏

[29] Xerri, D. Experimenting with Dogme in a Mainstream ESL Context. English Language Teaching, (2012.)Volume 5(9), 59-65. doi: 10.5539/elt.v5n9p59

[30] Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (Second language research: Methodology and design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 2005).

[31] Banegas, D.L. Teaching Unplugged: Is Dogme an innovation or a remake? Paper presented at the 2012 SHARE CONVENTION, Buenos Aires. (2012)

[32] Creswell, J. W. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (2007).

[33] Patton, M.Q. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. third edition. Thousand Oaks, CA Sage(2002).

[34] Dold, L. Dogme: A Teacher’s View by Lisa Dold .IH Journal. [online] Available at: [Accessed 19 Jul. 2015].

[35] Paulston, C. B., & Tucker, G. R. Reading Essentials: The Specifics You Need To Teach Reading Well. Heinemann, 361 Hanover Street, Portsmouth, NH 03801-3912.‏ (2003).

[36] Cho, M., & Larke, M. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied linguistics, (2010). 1(1), 1-47.‏




How to Cite

Janfeshan, K., Sharhan, A. N., & Janfeshan, M. M. (2023). The Plausibility of Applying Dogme Language Teaching Approach in Iranian EFL Classes from Teachers’ Perspective. Cultural Arts Research and Development, 3(2), 39–48.