Systemic Functional Linguistics and Teachers' Professional Development: A Praxis Framework for Collaborative Action

• In Event: Supporting the Disciplinary Literacy Development of Multilinguals Through School/University Collaboratives: Systemic Functional Linguistics Praxis in Action

Abstract

This paper describes SFL for the purposes of teaching and researching the literacy development of multilinguals attending U.S. schools. Using examples from classrooms, it explains Halliday’s theory regarding how children develop the semiotic resources available to them as they grow up and expand the functions they perform with language(s) and other meaning making systems such as gestures, images, graphs and equations in the contexts in which they interact – first as children in their homes, then in different disciplines in K-12 schools, and later as adults in the workforce.

SFL scholars associated with the New London Group (1996) argue that as a learner’s linguistic repertoire expands, explicit language awareness can act as a social, cognitive, and political tool to construct new ideas, enact a greater variety of social roles, and manage the flow of communication in the different types of oral, written, and multimodal texts learners are required to read, write, and critique in a rapidly changing social, economic, and political world.

Central to this ability is Halliday’s understanding that language and other semiotic systems perform three interrelated functions, the ideational, interpersonal, and textual. The ideational constructs ideas and experiences through the field resources. These linguistic resources enable learners to make sense of who did what, to whom, and under what conditions through an examination of different types of verbs or processes, noun groups or participants, and circumstances of time, manner, and place.

Second, the interpersonal function constructs social identities, power dynamics, and attitudes. Interpersonal meanings are constructed through tenor resources. These linguistic resources include choosing to command someone using a strongly worded imperative; indirectly making a suggestion using a neutral declarative statement; or politely making a request using a deferential interrogative. In addition, tenor resources support learners in constructing degrees of possibility and certainty, as well as levels of emotion. Recognizing how these tenor resources are used can support students in learning to read between the lines and shift from literal, inferential, and then more analytical critiques of the texts they encounter in and out of school.

Third, the textual function manages the flow of ideas in discourse. Textual meanings are realized through mode resources, which include ways of weaving given and new information and using specific cohesive devices suited to the purpose and audience of a text (e.g., in addition, however, moreover). Mode resources also include the repetition of a key idea through the use of pronouns and synonyms to keep the focus of a text on a specific topic while also building new ideas and attitudes related to this topic.

This paper concludes with a summary of how SFL has been translated into pedagogical practices that support teachers in: drawing on students’ multilingual resources; building students’ field resources as they prepare for challenging disciplinary tasks; deconstructing and constructing dense texts with students; creating opportunities for students to produce disciplinary texts independently for authentic purposes and audience; and critically reflecting on students’ literacy development over time as a form of sustained professional development.

Author

• Meg Gebhard, University of Massachusetts - Amherst