Lessons learnt applying a systemic functional model to teaching and learning in school contexts over the last thirty years

References

1. Ashton, Rose
   1999 Last night, Mrs Shepherd ate worms: Teaching circumstances with fun. English as a Second Language Educators’ Journal15 (2). 10–12.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Athanasopoulos, Vicki & Debbie Sandford
   1997 Teaching the argument genre in a Year 6–7 class. English as a Second Language Educators’ Journal13 (1). 10–12.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Baker, Graeme & Rosemary McLoughlin
   1994 Writing in the subject areas: A professional development programme for secondary subject teachers. Melbourne: Literacy and Learning Program, Catholic Education Office, Melbourne and Directorate of School Education, Victoria.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Bernstein, Basil
   1999 Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique. London: Continuum.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Braddock, Richard, Richard Lloyd-Jones & Lowell Schoer
   1963 Research in written composition. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Bruner, Jerome
   1985 Vygotsky: A historical and conceptual perspective. InJames V. Wertsch (ed.), Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives, 112–114. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Christie, Frances & James R. Martin
   (eds.) 1997 Genres and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school. London: Cassell.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Clayton, Jean & Graham Taylor
   1994 Evaluation of ESL in the Mainstream: NLLIA-South Australian Teaching and Curriculum Centre (NLLIA-SATC). Adelaide: NLLIA-SATAC.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Comber, Barbara
   (ed.) 1998 A project designed to examine the work of the South Australian community of teacher-researchers. Practitioner Research Communication and Mentoring Program Grant, Spencer Foundation, USA. Adelaide: University of South Australia.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Comber, Barbara
    (ed.) 2000 Doing teacher research: Documenting, disseminating and connecting. Practitioner Research Communication and Mentoring Program Grant, Spencer Foundation, USA. Adelaide: University of South Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Cope, Bill & Mary Kalantzis
    (eds.) 1993 The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing. London: The Falmer Press.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Custance, Bronwyn, Brian Dare & John Polias
    2006 Teaching ESL students in mainstream classrooms: Language in learning across the curriculum. South Australia: Department of Education and Children’s Services.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Custance, Bronwyn, Brian Dare & John Polias
    2011 How language works: Success in literacy and learning. Melbourne: Lexis Education.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Dare, Brian & John Polias
    1998 Language and literacy: Classroom applications of functional grammar. South Australia: Department of Education and Children’s Services.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Dare, Brian & John Polias
    2001 Learning about language: Scaffolding in ESL classrooms. InJenny Hammond (ed.), Scaffolding: Teaching and learning in language and literacy education, 91–109. Newtown, NSW: Primary English Teaching Association.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Dare, Brian & John Polias
    2013 Literacy for learning. South Australia: Department for Education and Child Development.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Dare, Brian & John Polias
    2015 Teaching young children in English in multilingual contexts. South Australia: Department for Education and Child Development.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Dare, Brian & John Polias
    2020a 3L: Language and literacy for learning. Melbourne: Lexis Education.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Dare, Brian & John Polias
    2020b Teaching English in multilingual classrooms. Melbourne: Lexis Education.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Dare, Brian & John Polias
    . In press. Our own double helix: The power of teachers and students understanding how language works in schooling contexts. InDavid Caldwell, John S. Knox & James R. Martin eds. Appliable linguistics and social semiotics: Developing theory from practice numbers. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Deacon, Terrence
    2010 Language and complexity: Evolution inside out. Plenary presentation, International Systemic Functional Congress: University of British Columbia. Available athttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OT-zZ0PMqgI
    [Google Scholar]
22. Doidge, Norman
    2007 The brain that changes itself: Stories of personal triumph from the frontiers of brain science. New York: Penguin Books.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Doidge, Norman
    2010 Interview. The Sydney Writers’ Festival, July 2010.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Forey, Gail
    2020 A whole school approach to SFL metalanguage and the explicit teaching of language for curriculum learning. Journal of English for Academic Purposes44. 1–17. 10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100822
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100822 [Google Scholar]
25. Forey, Gail & Eric L. M. Cheung
    2019 The benefits of explicit teaching of language for curriculum learning in the physical education classroom. English for Specific Purposes54. 91–109. 10.1016/j.esp.2019.01.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2019.01.001 [Google Scholar]
26. Forey, Gail & John Polias
    2017 Multi-semiotic resources providing maximal input in teaching science through English. InAna Llinares & Tom Morton (eds.), Applied linguistics perspectives on CLIL, 109–131. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.47.09for
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.47.09for [Google Scholar]
27. French, Ruth
    2010 Primary school children learning grammar: Rethinking the possibilities. InTerry Locke (ed.), Beyond the grammar wars: A resource for teachers and students on developing language knowledge in the English / literacy classroom, 206–229. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
28. French, Ruth
    2012 Learning the grammatics of quoted speech: Benefits for punctuation and expressive reading. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy35 (2). 206–222.
    [Google Scholar]
29. French, Ruth
    2013 Teaching and learning functional grammar in junior primary classrooms. PhD dissertation. University of New England, Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Halliday, Michael A. K.
    1975 Learning how to mean: Explorations in the development of language. London: Edward Arnold. 10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑443701‑2.50025‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-443701-2.50025-1 [Google Scholar]
31. Halliday, Michael A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
    2014 Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th edition). London & New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203783771
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203783771 [Google Scholar]
32. Hasan, Ruqaiya & Geoff Williams
    (eds.) 1996 Literacy in society. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Hillocks, George
    1984 What works in teaching composition: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. American Journal of Education93. 133–170. 10.1086/443789
    https://doi.org/10.1086/443789 [Google Scholar]
34. Humphrey, Sally
    2017 Academic literacies in the middle years: A framework for enhancing teacher knowledge and student achievement. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Kress, Gunther, Carey Jewitt, Jon Ogborn & Charalampos Tsatsarelis
    2001 Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Mariani, Luciano
    1997 Teacher support and teacher challenge in promoting learner autonomy. Perspectives, a Journal of TESOL-Italy22. 5–19.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Martin, James R.
    1997 Analysing genre: Functional parameters. InFrances Christie & James R. Martin (eds.), Genres and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school, 3–39. London: Cassell.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Martin, James R.
    1999 Mentoring semogenesis: ‘Genre-based’ literacy pedagogy. InFrances Christie (ed.), Pedagogy and the shaping of consciousness: Linguistic and social processes, 123–155. London & New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Martin, James R.
    2006 Metadiscourse: Designing interaction in genre-based literacy programmes. InRachel Whittaker, Mick O’Donnell & Anne McCabe (eds.), Language and literacy: Functional approaches, 95–122. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Martin, James R. & David Rose
    2008 Genre relations: Mapping culture. London: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Mincham, Lexie
    1992 Assessing the English language needs of ESL students. InChrystine Bouffler (ed.), Literacy evaluation: Issues and practicalities, 46–57. Newtown, Australia: Primary English Teaching Association.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Painter, Clare
    1996 The development of language as a resource for thinking: A linguistic view of learning. InRuqaiya Hasan & Geoff Williams (eds.), Literacy in society, 50–85. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Perry, Bruce & Maia Szalavitz
    2006 The boy who was raised as a dog and other stories from a child psychiatrist’s notebook: What traumatized children can teach us about loss, love and healing. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Polias, John
    2003 ESL Scope and Scales. Adelaide, South Australia: DECS Publishing. Available atlexised.com
    [Google Scholar]
45. Polias, John
    2010 Pedagogical resonance: Improving teaching and learning. InCaroline Coffin (ed.), Grammar and the curriculum, 42–48. London: National Association for Language Development in the Curriculum (NALDIC).
    [Google Scholar]
46. Polias, John
    2016 Apprenticing students into science: Doing, talking, and writing scientifically. Melbourne: Lexis Education.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Polias, John
    2017 Language across the curriculum professional development. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. www.lacpd.net
    [Google Scholar]
48. Polias, John
    2021 Language and learning development continuum. Melbourne: Lexis Education. Available atlexised.com
    [Google Scholar]
49. Polias, John & Brian Dare
    2006 Towards a pedagogical grammar. InRachel Whittaker, Mick O’Donnell & Anne McCabe (eds.), Language and literacy: Functional approaches, 123–143. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Polias, John & Gail Forey
    2016 Teaching through English: Maximal input in meaning making. InDonna R. Miller & Paul Bayley (eds.), Hybridity in systemic functional linguistics: Grammar, text and discursive context, 42–49. London: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Pomagalska, Dorota
    2019 Evaluation of the whole-school implementation of a language-based pedagogy at Southern Secondary College. Melbourne: Lexis Education. Available atlexised.com
    [Google Scholar]
52. Pomagalska, Dorota
    2020 Outcomes of a functional grammar-based pedagogy in an intensive English language school. Melbourne: Lexis Education. Available atlexised.com
    [Google Scholar]
53. Pryor, Ginny
    1999 Introducing functional grammar in a New Arrivals classroom. English as a Second Language Educators’ Journal15 (3). 4–9
    [Google Scholar]
54. Rose, David & James R. Martin
    2012 Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy in the Sydney School. Sheffield: Equinox Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Rothery, Joan
    1996 Making changes: Developing an educational linguistics. InRuqaiya Hasan & Geoff Williams (eds.), Literacy in society, 86–123. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Russo, Lina
    2002 Recipe for success: Using functional grammar in English and Italian. Melbourne: Lexis Education. Available atlexised.com
    [Google Scholar]
57. Vygotsky, Lev S.
    1978 Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Walsh, Paddy
    2006 The impact of genre theory and pedagogy and systemic functional linguistics on National Literacy Strategies in the UK. InRachel Whittaker, Mick O’Donnell & Anne McCabe (eds.), Language and literacy: Functional approaches, 159–176. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
59. White, Peter R. R., Giuseppe Mammone & David Caldwell
    2015 Linguistically based inequality, multilingual education and a genre-based literacy development pedagogy: Insights from the Australian experience. Language and Education29 (3). 256–271. 10.1080/09500782.2014.994527
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2014.994527 [Google Scholar]
60. Williams, Geoff
    2000 Children’s literature, children and uses of language description. InLen Unsworth (ed.), Researching language in schools and communities, 111–129. London: Cassell.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Williams, Geoff
    2004 Ontogenesis and grammatics: Functions of metalanguage in pedagogical discourse. InGeoff Williams & Annabelle Lukin (eds.), The development of language: Functional perspectives on species and individuals, 241–267. London and New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
62. Williams, Geoff
    2005 Grammatics in schools. InJonathan J. Webster, Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen & Ruqaiya Hasan (eds.), Continuing discourse on language (Volume1), 281–310. London: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
63. Williams, Geoff, Joan Rothery & Ruth French
    1994 Children’s development of knowledge about language. Paper presented at theAustralian Systemic Functional Linguistics Association Conference, University of Queensland, Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
64. Williams, Geoff & Ruth French
    1995 The Haberfield Grammar Club. Paper presented at theAustralian Systemic Functional Linguistics Association Conference, University of Melbourne, Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
65. Williams, Monica
    1999 Does the teaching of Systemic Functional Linguistics make narrative writing more spine chilling?English as a Second Language Educators’ Journal15 (1). 23–27.
    [Google Scholar]