The Efficacy of an SFL-Oriented Register Instruction in Improving Iranian EFL Learners’ Writing Performance and Perception: Language Proficiency in Focus
محورهای موضوعی : English Language Teaching (ELT)محمد یوسفی اسگویی 1 , نادر اسدی آیدینلو 2 , مسعود ذوقی 3
1 - Department of English Language Teaching, Ahar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ahar, Iran
2 - Department of English Language Teaching, Ahar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ahar, Iran
3 - Department of English Language Teaching, Ahar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ahar, Iran
کلید واژه: EFL learners, writing performance, register, SFL, teaching/learning cycle,
چکیده مقاله :
The current study sought to explore the impact of SFL-oriented register instruction on Iranian EFL learner’ writing performance with a central focus on their English proficiency level. As its secondary aim, the study delved deeply into the learners’ perception of the register-based instruction. To these ends, 50 intermediate and 50 advanced Iranian EFL learners were selected randomly and assigned to four groups: two experimental and two control groups. Employing an experimental pretest/posttest design, the learners of the two experimental groups received instruction on the three components of register; that is, field, tenor, and mode along with the implementation of a three-phase teaching/learning cycle, whereas the learners in the control groups were exposed to a conventional writing instruction. Quantitative analysis of the learners’ writing performance on the pre- and posttest measures revealed the contributory role of register instruction in improving Iranian EFL learners’ writing performance, regardless of their English proficiency level. Furthermore, having been surveyed through a researcher-made questionnaire, the advanced and intermediate learners expressed their positive attitude towards the instruction. The findings highlighted the necessity of superseding the traditional linguistic-based writing instruction by a contextual and situational teaching methodology similar to what has been implemented in the current study.
این تحقیق با هدف بررسی تاثیر SFL-oriented register بر روی عملکرد نوشتاری زبان آموزان ایرانی با تاکید بر مهارت زبانی آنها انچام گردید. هدف دوم نیز بررسی ادراک و احساس آنها در مورد این نوع تدریس بود. بدین منظورپنجاه زبان آموز سطح متوسط و پنجاه زبان آموز سطح پیشرفته به شکل تصادفی انتخاب شده و در چهار گروه قرار گرفتند.دو گروه آزمایش و دو گروه کنترل. زبان آموزان در هر دو گروه آزمایش بر اساس مولفه های register و اجرای چرخه تدریس و یادگیری مورد تدریس قرار گرفتند ،در حالیکه زبان آموزان در گروههای کنترل با استفاده از روشهای متداول و مرسوم مورد آموزش قرار گرفتند. آنالیز کمی عملکرد نوشتاری در پیش آزمون و پس آزمون بیانگرنقش مثبت تدریس register بود. مهارت زبانی زبان آموزان تاثیری در این اثر مثبت نداشت. علاوه بر این تحلیل پرسشنامه ای که توسط محققین آماده شده بود، نگرش مثبت زبان آموزان نسبت به این نوع تدریس را آشکار ساخت. نتایج اهمیت جایگزینی روشهای سنتی با روشهای زمینه و بافت –محور را نشان داد.
Assadi Aidinlou, N. (2011). A discourse-based teaching of writing for Iranian EFL students: A systemic perspective. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 8, 53-70.
Beare, S. (2000). Differences in content generating and planning processes of adult L1 and L2 proficient writers. (Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of Ottawa.
Brisk, M. (2014). Engaging students in academic literacies: Genre-based pedagogies for K-5 classrooms. New York, NY: Routledge.
Brisk, M., & Zisselsberger, M. (2010). We’ve let them in on a secret: Using SFL theory to improve the teaching of writing to bilingual learners. In T. Lucas (Ed.), Preparing all teachers to teach English language learners (pp. 111–126). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum/Taylor & Francis.
Byrnes, H. (2009). Emergent L2 German writing ability in a curricular context: A longitudinal study of grammatical metaphor. Linguistics and Education, 20(1), 50-66.
Cahyono, S. P. (2018). Teaching L2 writing through the use of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 13(1), 53-72.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Olshtain, E. (2000). Discourse and context in language teaching: A guide for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chiang, F. H., (2013). Writing pedagogy from a systemic functional perspective. (Unpublished MA thesis). the University of Texas, Austin, Texas, USA.
Christie, F. (2004). Systemic Functional Linguistics and a theory of language in education. Ilha do desterro, 46, 13-40.
Colombi, M. C., & Schleppegrell, M. J. (2002). Theory and practice in the development of advanced literacy. In M. J. Schleppegrell & M. C. Colombi (Eds.), Developing advanced literacy in first and second language: Meaning with power (pp. 1-19). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Corneille, T. S. (2017). Evaluating the teaching of writing in advanced EFL classes in the context of competency-based approach: Case of some secondary schools of Benin republic.International Journal of English Research. 3(2), 68-75.
Couture, B. (1986). Effective ideation in written text: A functional approach to clarity and exigency. In B. Couture (Ed.), Functional approaches to writing: Research perspectives ( pp. 69-92). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Dornyei, Z. (2005).The psychology of the language learners: Mahwah. New Jerzy Laurence Erlbaum Associates.
Fang, Z., & Schleppegrell, M. J. (2008). Reading in secondary content areas: A language-based pedagogy. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
Figueiredo, D. (2010). Context, register and genre: Implications for language education. Revista Signos. 43(1), 119-141.
Firth, J. R. (1950). Personality and language in society. In J. R. Firth, Papers in linguistics (pp. 1934‒1951). London: Oxford University Press.
Gee, J. P., & Handford, M. (2012). The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis. New York: Routledge.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and reassessing reading. Harlow: Longman.
Gregg, L. W., & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.). Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale, N.J.:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978) Language as social semiotic: the social interpretation of language and meaning. Baltimore: University ParkPress.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). Spoken and written language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar, (2nd. ed). London: Edward Arnold.
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Hasan, K.,& Akhand, M., (2010). Approaches to writing in EFL/ESL context: Balancing product and process in writing class at Tertiary Level. Journal of NELTA, 15(1-2), 77-88.
Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Writing: An Interdisciplinary Approach (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hedge, T.(2005). Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Huy, N. T. (2015). Problems affecting learning writing skill of grade 11 at Thong Linh high school. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 3(2), 53-69.
Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 148-164.
Iddings, J. G. (2008). A functional analysis of English humanities and biochemistry writing with respect to teaching university composition. Novitas ROYAL, 2(1), 60-87.
Leckie-Tarry, H. (1993). Language and context: A functional linguistic theory of register. London: Pinter.
Lee, I. (2013). Research into practice: written corrective feedback. Language Teaching, 46, 108-119.
Liaghat, F., & Biria, R. (2018). A comparative study on mentor text modelling and common approaches to teaching writing in Iranian EFL context. International Journal of
Instruction,11(3), 701-720.
Lirola, M.M. (2010). How to apply SFL in classroom practice: An example in bilingual education programs in The USA. The Buckingham Journal of Language and Linguistics,3, 205-219.
Loewen, S. (2004). Uptake in incidental focus on form in meaning-focused ESL lessons. Language Learning, 54, 153-188.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th Ed.). London: Longman. California: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Martin, J. R. (2001). Language, register and genre. In A. Burns & C. Coffin (Eds.), Analysing English in a global context: A reader (pp. 149-166). London: Routlege.
Martin, J. R. (2009). Genre and language learning: A social semiotic perspective. Linguistics and Education, 20, 10–21.
Martin, J., Christie, F., & Rothery, J (1987). Social processes in education: A reply to Sawyer and Watson (and others). In I. Reid (Ed.), The place of genre in learning: Current debates (pp.35–45). Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.
Mosayebnazhad, F., & Assadi Aidinlou, N. (2015). The effect of the systemic genre instruction on the writing performance of Iranian EFL high school students. MAGNT Research Report, 3(1), 377-388.
Nunan, D., (1991). Language teaching methodology: A textbook for teachers. New York: Prentice Hall.
Paltridge, B. (2001). Genre and the language learning classroom. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Raimes, A. (1994). Techniques in teaching writing. (3rd ed.). Oxford: O.U.P.
Richards, J. and Renandya, W. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Salma, U. (2015). Problems and practical needs of writing skill in EFL context: An analysis of Iranian students of Aligarh Muslim University.Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 20(11), 74-76.
Schleppegrell, M. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schulze, J. (2011). Writing to persuade: A systemic functional view. GIST Educational Research and Teaching Journal, 5, 127-157.
Setyono, B. (2014). Approaches in teaching writing designed by high school English teachers in Indonesia. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research, 14(1), 477-494.
Silva, T. (1990). Second language composition instruction: Developments, issues and directions in ESL. In Kroll, B. (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 11-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Steiner, E. (1997). An extended register analysis as a form of text analysis for translation, In G. Wotjak, and H. Schmidt (Eds.), Models of translation (pp. 235-256). Frankfurt: Vervuert.
Tribble, C.(1997). Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Trong, T. (2011). Teaching writing through genre-based approach. BELT Journal, 2(1), 121 136.
Vandamme, F., & Lowenthal, F. (1986). Pragmatic and language. New York: Plenum Press.
Vanderpyl. G.D., (2012). The process approach as writing instruction in EFL (English as a Foreign Language) classrooms. MA TESOL Collection SIT Graduate Institute.
Yang, W. H. (2012). A study of students’ perceptions and attitudes towards genre-based ESP writing instruction. Asian ESP Journal, 8(3), 50-73.
Yasuda, S. (2011). Genre-based tasks in foreign language writing: Developing writer’s genre awareness, linguistic knowledge, and writing competence. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20, 111-133.
