Teaching to mean, writing to mean: SFL, L2 literacy, and teacher education

Abstract This study analyzes how ten linguistically and culturally diverse candidates in a TESOL master's degree program used systemic functional linguistics and genre-based pedagogy to design curriculum and instruction. Using case study methods, the findings indicate that participants’ conceptualizations of grammar shifted from a traditional sentence-level, form-focused perspective to a more functional understanding operating in interconnected ways across lexicogrammatical and discourse semantic features of texts. However, participants’ constructions of what SFL is and how they might use genre-based pedagogy in the future were highly influenced by their previous schooling experiences and the contexts in which they taught or envisioned teaching. The implications of this study relate to reconceptualizing grammar in the knowledge base of language education.

[1]  Karen E. Johnson,et al.  Reconceptualizing the Knowledge-Base of Language Teacher Education , 1998 .

[2]  James R. Martin,et al.  Genre and language learning: A social semiotic perspective , 2009 .

[3]  M. Halliday,et al.  1. The notion of “context” in language education , 1999 .

[4]  Pauline Gibbons,et al.  Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning , 2002 .

[5]  Pauline Gibbons,et al.  Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning : teaching second language learners in the mainstream classroom , 2002 .

[6]  Andreeva Na.  A Step From Heaven , 2001 .

[7]  S. Michaels,et al.  A pedagogy of Multiliteracies Designing Social Futures , 1996 .

[8]  S. Borg.  Teacher Cognition and Language Education: Research and Practice , 2007 .

[9]  M. Halliday.  Towards a Language-Based Theory of Learning , 1993 .

[10]  L. Unsworth,et al.  A grammatics ‘good enough’ for school English in the 21st century: Four challenges in realising the potential , 2011, The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy.

[11]  Zenaida Aguirre-Muñoz,et al.  Developing Teacher Capacity for Serving ELLs' Writing Instructional Needs: A Case for Systemic Functional Linguistics , 2009 .

[12]  Beverly Derewianka,et al.  Exploring How Texts Work , 1991 .

[13]  The Tell-Tale Heart and Other Writings , 1843 .

[14]  C. Hancock,et al.  The Story of English Grammar in United States Schools. , 2005 .

[15]  Jeannett Martin,et al.  Genre Relations: Mapping Culture , 2008 .

[16]  J. Cummins.  BICS and CALP: Empirical and Theoretical Status of the Distinction , 2015 .

[17]  Mary J. Schleppegrell.  The Language of Schooling: A Functional Linguistics Perspective , 2004 .

[18]  M. Halliday.  14. Grammar and Daily Life: Concurrence and Complementarity , 2000 .

[19]  Mary J. Schleppegrell,et al.  Engaging teachers in language analysis: A functional linguistics approach to reflective literacy , 2007 .

[20]  Gary Soto,et al.  Too Many Tamales , 1992 .

[21]  James Mannes Bourke,et al.  The grammar we teach , 2005 .

[22]  S. Andrews.  Teacher Language Awareness: Acknowledgements , 2007 .

[23]  B. Lord.  In the Year of the Boar and Jackie Robinson , 1984 .

[24]  Heidi Byrnes,et al.  Realizing Advanced Foreign Language Writing Development in Collegiate Education: Curricular Design, Pedagogy, Assessment. , 2010 .

[25]  John S. Knox,et al.  Realisation(s): Systemic-Functional Linguistics and the Language Classroom , 2005 .

[26]  B. Johnston,et al.  In Search of the Knowledge Base of Language Teaching: Explanations by Experienced Teachers , 2000 .

[27]  E. Levine,et al.  I Hate English , 1989 .

[28]  Jane Yolen,et al.  Letting Swift River Go , 1992 .

[29]  Linda Harklau.  Tracking and linguistic minority students: Consequences of ability grouping for second language learners , 1994 .