Redefining Conceptions Of Grammar In English Education In Asia: SFL In .

4 Redefining conceptions of grammarprocesses include such activities asreading literary narratives in English,describing a classification system inscience, arguing a perspective regardinghistorical events in social studies, orexplaining a statistical analysis inmathematics. Following Halliday andMartin, we maintain that as L2 learnersparticipate in these expanding socialnetworks in and out of school, they usedifferent genres in both their first andsecond languages and are socialized intonew ways of knowing and being thatexpand the semiotic resources available tothem.IndescribingMartin’sunderstanding of genres, our goal is tocapture how learning English as a secondor foreign language reflects and constructscultural linguistic practices (Gebhard,Shin, & Seger, 2011; Martin & Rose,2008). For the purposes of this study, wefocus on two fundamental genres thatstudents encounter in learning a secondlanguage and developing advancedacademic literacies (Byrnes, 2009; Brisk,2014; Schleppegrell, 2004): the genre ofnarratives and the genre of responses toliterature.Each genre has a set of organizational andstructural features that are specific to thatgenre. Narratives in English, for example,typically have an “orientation” in whichthe writer attempts to situate the reader ina particular time, place, or social context,and to introduce the main characters. Theyalso have a “sequence of events” or seriesof “complications” in which the writer setsup a series of problems the charactersconfront. Through these events, the readerdevelops a deeper sense of who thecharacters are and how they have beenshaped by their experiences, or not.Moreover, narratives typically have a“resolution” stage in which the characterscome to terms (or not) with the problemsat hand. This stage often shows how thecharacters have been changed (or not) bytheir experiences and may contain anevaluation or comment that signals theoverall meaning of the narrative as awhole.In contrast, responses to literature inschool are structured more like arguments.They typically begin with an introductionthat identifies the guiding thesis of theargument and provides a preview of thesupporting points the student will make.The subsequent sections each consist of anelaboration of these points that draws onevidence from the literary text in the formof quotes, which are then explicated. Last,responses to literature typically concludewith a reiteration phase in which theauthor restates the main thesis andsummarizes the key points made in thepaper (Christie, 2012).In addition to typical structural features,any instance of a genre, includingnarrative and literature response, isconstructed with a set of identifiablelexical and grammatical features that arefunctional for that specific genre. Indescribing these linguistic features, Martindraws on Halliday’s concept of register,which consists of field, tenor, and modechoices (see Martin & Rose, 2008, p. 11).The field of a text refers to how a writeruses the ideational grammatical resourcesat his or her disposal to realize the contentof the text. These resources include the useof verbal groups to realize different typesof “processes.” Unlike the traditional term“verb,” the concept of a “process” capturesfunctionally the semiotic differencebetween types of verbs such as material,mental, verbal, and relational verbs thatconstrue different types of actions, ways ofsensing, ways of saying, and ways ofbeing. Likewise, the functional term“participant” captures more precisely thelexico-grammatical relationships that existbetween nominal groups and types ofprocesses within a text. Last, the term“circumstance” captures how specificgrammatical resources support writers inconstructing meanings related to the time,place, and manner in which events in the

Applied Research on English Language, 3(2) 5text unfold (see Schleppegrell, 2004, p. 47,for a detailed discussion of processes,participants, and circumstances).Second, the tenor of a text refers to how awriter uses interpersonal grammaticalresources within his or her repertoire toconstruct social relationships with readers.For example, writers consciously andunconsciously make “mood” choices byusing interrogatives, imperatives, ordeclaratives to construct social distanceand power dynamics in texts (e.g., Whydon’t you close the window? versus Closethe window or You’ve left the windowopen). Likewise, writers make “modality”choices to express the degree of truth,probability, or obligation of a proposition(e.g., Would you mind closing thewindow? compared to You must close thewindow). Last, writers exploit “appraisal”resources to construct attitudinal orevaluative meanings (e.g., Would you beso kind as to close the window versus Shutthe damn window!; see Schleppegrell,2004, p. 47, for a detailed discussion ofmood, modality, and appraisal).Last, the mode of a text refers to how awriter uses different textual resources tomanage the flow of ideas and make a textcohesive. These resources include howwriters grammatically weave togethergiven and new information to move a textforward. In SFL terms, the giveninformation in a clause is referred to as thetheme and the new information is referredto as the rheme. In addition, moderesources include the use of cohesivedevises to construct logical relationshipsbetween clauses (e.g., and, moreover,because, as a result; see Schleppegrell,2004, p. 48, for a detailed discussion oftheme/rheme patterns and cohesivedevices).As a way of supporting teachers in makingthe workings of different genres andregister features transparent to students,Martin and his colleagues begancollaborating with teachers in the 1980s todevelop an SFL/genre based approach todesigning curriculum and instruction(Martin, 2009; Rose & Martin, 2012). Thisapproach, known as the “teaching/learningcycle,” was developed to apprenticestudents to reading and writing the genresthey are likely to encounter in learningspecific subject-disciplinary knowledgeacross grade levels in schools (Martin,2009, p. 6). The goal of this cycle is toexpandstudents’meaning-makingrepertoires by providing them with modeltexts, explicit instruction in genre andregister features of model texts, and timefor critical analyses of author’sgrammatical choices. The steps of thiscycleinclude:buildingstudents’background knowledge through hands-on,dialogic experiences to prepare for deltextsusingfunctional metalanguage to name genrestages and register features; jointlyconstructing texts with students to makelinguistic know-how visible and the rangeof linguistic choices available to students;and gradually apprenticing students toproduce texts more independently byproviding less scaffolding as studentsbecome more knowledgeable users of aparticular genre over time (Gebhard, Chen,& Britton, 2014, p. 108; Gibbons, 2002;Rose & Martin, 2012).In sum, SFL/genre based pedagogyprovides a principled way for EFLteachers to support language learners incritically analyzing authentic texts as away of developing academic literacies andexploring cultural issues simultaneously(see Byrnes, Maxim, & Norris, 2010,regarding learning German as a foreignlanguage at the university level in theUnited States). However, despite literarynarratives being one of the most powerfulmediums for language learning anddiscussing multicultural issues, many EFLteachers have difficulty in engagingstudents in critically reading literary

6 Redefining conceptions of grammarnarratives and in writing literaryresponses. These teachers lack an explicitawareness of how language works inconstructing these two fundamental genresand how to teach EFL students toexplicitly and critically identify thelinguistic features of these types of texts sostudents might be better able tocomprehend culturally relevant texts aswell as develop the ability to constructtheir own texts in English more expertlyover time.To contribute to understanding how EFLteachers make sense of SFL basedpedagogy and how their understandinginforms their approach to designingliteracy instruction, this case studyexplores how a Taiwanese EFL teacher’sconception of grammar took shape overthe course of her experiences in aMATESOL program informed by SFL andgenre theory (Gebhard, Chen, Graham, &Gunawan, 2013).A case study: Chenling’s conceptions ofgrammar and her teaching practicesThe context of this study is a MATESOLprogram in the United States that offers a33-credit Master’s Degree in Education.This program draws upon a socioculturalperspective of language and literacydevelopment. It is also unique in that itincorporates analysis of children’sliterature as a way of apprenticing xtstoteachinglanguage, literacy, and multiculturalismsimultaneously (see Gebhard, Willett,Jimenez, & Piedra, 2011, for a descriptionof the program; Botelho & Rudman, 2009,for a description of a critical approach tochildren’s literature). In this context, weattempted to make a critical and functionalperspective of language and academicliteracy development accessible and usableto EFL teachers from Asia. These teachers,many of whom were from China andTaiwan, were enrolled in this programwith the goal of improving their Englishand returning to their home countries toteach EFL in a variety of contexts (e.g.,elementary, secondary, and college levels).In attempting to understand how Asianteachers make sense of SFL and genrebased pedagogy we conducted alongitudinal case study of how Chenling’sconception of grammar changed (or not)over the course of her participation in anSFL informed graduate degree program. Inaddition, we analyzed how her teachingpractices reflected an ability to implementSFL based pedagogy (or not) once shereturned to teaching in Taiwan (Gunawan,2014).The methods used in this case study werequalitative in nature, relied on multiplesources of data, and were divided intothree distinct phases of data collection andanalysis between 2009 and 2011 (Gebhard,Chen, Graham, & Gunawan, 2013;Gunawan, 2014). Phase One focused ondocumenting Chenling’s participation in a14-week introductory course in SFL andgenre based pedagogy. Data collection andanalysis included observational fieldnotesfrom seminar meetings, transcribedseminar discussions, formal and informalinterviews and email exchanges withChenling, and an analysis of Chenling’smidterm and final course papers. Themidterm required Chenling to conduct agenre and register analysis of a section of aliterary text and design instruction thatwould teach EFL learners to deconstructthis text to support them in learninglanguage, exploring culturally relevanttopics, and improving their readingcomprehension. The final course projectrequired Chenling to conduct a genre andregister analysis of an L2 student writingsample and design instruction to supportthis student’s literacy development withspecific reference to the genre of responseto literature.Phase Two consisted of documenting andanalyzing Chenling’s experience in allother courses in her MATESOL program.

Applied Research on English Language, 3(2) 7These courses included: Theory of SecondLanguage Acquisition; L2 Reading andWriting Development; L2 CurriculumDevelopment; ESL/EFL Methods; CriticalPerspectives on Children’s Literature;Multicultural Education; Assessment of L2Language and Literacy Practices; StudentTeaching Practicum; and a course onleadership in the profession. In reviewingChenling’s experiences in other courses inher MATESOL program, we collectedfinal course papers and interviewedChenling about her use of SFL conceptsand SFL based pedagogy (if at all) throughformal and informal interviews as well asemail exchanges.Phase Three consisted of collecting andanalyzing data regarding Chenling’steaching practices during her first year as afull time teacher in a middle school inrural Taiwan. Data collection and analysisfocused on samples of curriculummaterials and formal and informal emailexchanges with Chenling.As reported in Gebhard, Chen, Graham,and Gunawan (2013), there are severallimitations to this methodology. First,during Phase Three, we were unable toobserve Chenling’s classroom practices.Rather, we relied on an analysis of thecurricular materials she used and herresponses to formal and informalinterviewsconductedoveremail.Therefore, we have no first-hand accountsof her actual classroom practices duringher first year of teaching in Taiwan. Thesecond limitation, as well as possiblestrength, of our methodology relates to thedifferent roles we played over the courseof the study. For example, Wawan, anIndonesian man, drew on his past work asa teacher educator in his home country; IAn, a Taiwanese woman, drew on herexperiences as an EFL teacher in Taiwan;and Meg, a white American woman, whowas the instructor of the 14-week coursefocusing on SFL and genre basedpedagogy, drew on her experiences as aresearcher of L2 academic literacydevelopment and teacher educator in theUnited States. These roles, as participantobservers, shaped our interactions withChenling and therefore data collection andanalysis in ways that are typical ofqualitative case study methods (Dyson &Genishi, 2005). And finally, qualitativecase study methods do not lend themselvesto researchers making causal claims orclaims that are generalizable to othercontexts. Rather, these methods allow usto gain insider and outsider insights intohow Chenling made sense of SFL as a wayof adding to the growing empirical workregarding the knowledge base of L2teacher education (Andrews, 2007; Borg,2006; Freeman & Johnson, 2005; Johnston& Goettsch, 2000).A portrait of Chenling learning to useSFL and genre based pedagogyTo present the findings from thisqualitative case study, we provide aportrait of Chenling’s attempts to makesense of SFL and genre based pedagogyover the course of her participation in aMATESOL teacher education programand in her first year as a full time EFLteacher in Taiwan. In providing thisportrait, we begin by describing how sheinitially re-inscribed SFL metalanguagewith traditional conceptions of grammarwhen she was first introduced toHalliday’s theory of language andMartin’s conception of genre theory andthe teaching and learning cycle. We thendetail how Chenling’s ability to use SFLmetalanguagemorefunctionallydeveloped as she used SFL tools toanalyze children’s literature and L2writing samples in ways that provided herwith insights into how to support theacademic literacy practices of L2 learners.Last, we describe how Chenling wasultimately unable to implement SFL basedpedagogy in Taiwan due to a number ofinstitutionalconstraintsincludingrequirements that she adhere closely to atraditional, form-focused textbook and

8 Redefining conceptions of grammarform-focused assessment practices used toevaluate students and, ultimately, theirteachers.Shifting toward a functional conception ofgrammar through an analysis of children’sliterature and L2 writingChenling, like many international students,entered her MATESOL program with avery strong understanding of traditionalgrammar and an ability to analyze thestructure of a sentence using formalmetalanguage. She also held a tacit, butvery firm belief in drill and practiceapproaches to language teaching based onher previous experiences as an L2 learnerand EFL teacher (Gunawan, 2014; see alsoBorg, 2006). Therefore, analyzing how anSFL conception of grammar might work toconstruct meaning in longer stretches ofdiscourse, especially in literature, was newto her. For example, early in her firstsemester in the program when she enrolledin the Introduction to SFL course,Gebhard, Chen, Graham, and Gunawan(2013) report that Chenling felt stronglythat “[Traditional] grammar is consideredthe easiest way to teach English language.When teaching, I usually follow atextbook.” She further added, “It’s hard toconnect—I always think that grammar isverb, noun—I think it is hard to think [of]genre as part of grammar” (p. 116). As aconsequence, during the first couple ofweeks in the SFL course, her assignmentsand participation in class discussionsreflected a pattern in which she translatedfunctional metalanguage into traditionalform-focused terms in ways that limitedher ability to develop a meaning-makingperspective of grammar. In analyzingPhase I data, we coded this stage of hertrajectory in the program as “pouring oldwine into a new bottle.” We used thismetaphor to capture how Chenling, as wellas other students, used new SFLvocabulary in ways that re-inscribed thesefunctional concepts with a formal andstructural understanding. For example, shetranslated “process types” as “verbs thatcomeafterthesubject”and“circumstances” as “adverbs that modifysubjects’ action” (Gebhard, Chen,Graham, & Gunawan, 2013, p. 116).In addition, Gebhard, Chen, Graham, andGunawan (2013) write that Chenling’sability to think of “genre” as well asaspects of field, tenor, and mode “as partof grammar” developed through her abilityto use SFL metalanguage as a tool toanalyzeaward-winningchildren’sliterature for her midterm project and awriting sample produced by anintermediate L2 learner for her final exam.For her midterm she analyzed In the Yearof the Boar and Jackie Robinson (1984) byBette Bao Lord. Based on this analysis,she then developed a plan for how shewould support L2 students in learning tocritically discuss, read, and write aboutthis potentially high interest and culturallyrelevant children’s book. This novelrelates the experiences of a young Chinesegirl named Shirley who immigrated to SanFrancisco in the 1950s. In her analysis,Chenling identified the genre stages andkey register choices the author employed.At the genre level, Chenling noticed thatthe novel exhibited the genre stagestypically found in narratives, including an“orientation, complication, and resolution”(Gebhard, Chen, Graham, & Gunawan,2013, p. 116).Next, she selected a short, but importantpassage from the novel on which sheconducted a register analysis. At this levelof analysis, Chenling elected to focus onthe interactions between the field andmode choices in the text. Specifically, shenoted how the author used pronominalreferencing systems to create a lexicalchain that built up information aboutShirley’s feelings across the passage. Forexample, Chenling used a highlighter tomark personal pronouns and other lexicalitems referring to Shirley in the followingexcerpt:

Applied Research on English Language, 3(2) 9It is so unfair. She thought, must Idrool like Chow Chow, eyeingeach mouthful until someone isgood and ready to toss a scrap myway? If Father was here, he’d tell.He would never treat me like achild, like a girl, like a nobody.In other words, by literally highlightingpronouns and nominal groups in thislexical chain, Chenling was able toidentify and track participants related toShirley and show how Shirley refers to thepronouns she, I, and me; the family’s dogChow Chow; and the nouns a child, a girl,a nobody. This “tracking of participants,”according to Chenling, could be a keyteaching practice used to support L2reading comprehension but is one that isnot used by EFL teachers who only focuson traditional grammar. Chenling used thisinsight to develop a plan for how shewould design future instruction, reportingthat she would use this passage to teachpronouns and new vocabulary so studentscould comprehend the passage, but alsoshe would teach students how to uselexical chaining to support them ininterpreting the meaning of what they readmore critically.For her final project, Chenling analyzed astudent writing sample produced by“Adam,” a seventh-grade ESL studentfrom Malaysia who had been in the UnitedStates for five years. Chenling observedAdam in an American middle schoolclassroom, collected curricular materialsand samples of his writing, andinterviewed him as well as his teacher.Chenling’s analysis focused on a unit ofstudy that required Adam to read a y

narratives and the genre of responses to literature. Each genre has a set of organizational and structural features that are specific to that genre. Narratives in English, for example, typically have an "orientation" in which the writer attempts to situate the reader in a particular time, place, or social context,