1887
Volume 4, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2589-7233
  • E-ISSN: 2589-7241
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In this paper we look back at our work over the last thirty years as education consultants in a range of educational contexts in which we sought to promote an explicit, language-based approach to teaching and learning. We trace our pathway from the earliest days of meeting systemic functional theory and its potential application in education to recent times where we now are able to offer a suite of professional development programmes designed to build the capacity of teachers and students to understand how language works to make meaning. We reflect on the many challenges of re-contextualising such an elaborate model of language in educational contexts: challenges that embrace the pedagogical, the political and the logistical among others. The intent is to highlight the affordances we have seen while working closely with teachers over the years in the hope that others will be inspired to continue the work.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/langct.21013.dar
2022-04-06
2022-05-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

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
    1994Writing 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
    1999Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Braddock, Richard, Richard Lloyd-Jones & Lowell Schoer
    1963Research 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.) 1997Genres and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school. London: Cassell.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Clayton, Jean & Graham Taylor
    1994Evaluation 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. (ed.) 2000Doing 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.) 1993The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing. London: The Falmer Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Custance, Bronwyn, Brian Dare & John Polias
    2006Teaching ESL students in mainstream classrooms: Language in learning across the curriculum. South Australia: Department of Education and Children’s Services.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 2011How language works: Success in literacy and learning. Melbourne: Lexis Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Dare, Brian & John Polias
    1998Language and literacy: Classroom applications of functional grammar. South Australia: Department of Education and Children’s Services.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 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. 2013Literacy for learning. South Australia: Department for Education and Child Development.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 2015Teaching young children in English in multilingual contexts. South Australia: Department for Education and Child Development.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 2020a3L: Language and literacy for learning. Melbourne: Lexis Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 2020bTeaching English in multilingual classrooms. Melbourne: Lexis Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. . 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
    2007The brain that changes itself: Stories of personal triumph from the frontiers of brain science. New York: Penguin Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 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. 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. 2013Teaching and learning functional grammar in junior primary classrooms. PhD dissertation. University of New England, Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Halliday, Michael A. K.
    1975Learning 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
    2014Halliday’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.) 1996Literacy 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
    2017Academic 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
    2001Multimodal 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. 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. 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
    2008Genre 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
    2006The 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
    2003ESL Scope and Scales. Adelaide, South Australia: DECS Publishing. Available atlexised.com
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 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. 2016Apprenticing students into science: Doing, talking, and writing scientifically. Melbourne: Lexis Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 2017Language across the curriculum professional development. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. www.lacpd.net
    [Google Scholar]
  48. 2021Language 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
    2019Evaluation of the whole-school implementation of a language-based pedagogy at Southern Secondary College. Melbourne: Lexis Education. Available atlexised.com
    [Google Scholar]
  52. 2020Outcomes 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
    2012Learning 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
    2002Recipe for success: Using functional grammar in English and Italian. Melbourne: Lexis Education. Available atlexised.com
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Vygotsky, Lev S.
    1978Mind 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. 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. 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]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/langct.21013.dar
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error