Upper secondary students’ discursive writing in two languages
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.36367Keywords:
discursive writing, SFL, LOGICAL TEXT STRUCTURE, L1 AND L2, upper secondary students, longitudinal studyAbstract
This longitudinal study examines one central dimension of discursive essay writing, viz. text structure. It presents results from 40 upper secondary school students’ argumentative and expository texts, four essays in Swedish and four in English (N=320) written during the students’ three years upper-secondary schooling. In addition, three students’ writing progression in eight tasks is presented as cases. The study contributes to the knowledge about upper-secondary school students’ written discursive development in two languages, Swedish (L1) and English (L2). The research is informed by Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) and the texts were analyzed for logical structure, defined as the cultural norms for clear organization of texts in more academic or formal contexts. The analysis comprised three levels: (1) the global level (text structure in steps and general organization), (2) the paragraph level (paragraphing supporting the global structure), and (3) the linguistic level (language related discursive markers). Based on the analyses of different levels, an overall assessment of logical structure was made. The results show that the progression in terms of text structure largely failed to occur and neither the choice of language or different text types (argumentative and expository texts) shaped students’ ability to structure their text.
References
Apelgren, B. M. (2018). Höga betyg in – höga betyg ut. En studie om CLIL-elevers betygsutveckling. Rapport. Skolverket. (Report commissioned by The Swedish National Agency for Education.)
Apelgren, B. M. (2019). The CLISS Student: Some Background Factors of the Participating Students in the CLISS Project. (Ed. L. K. Sylvén) Investigating Content and Language Integrated Learning. Insights from Swedish High Schools. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Apelgren, B. M. and Holmberg, P. (2018). På spaning efter progression. En studie av textstruktur i ESU-elevers uppsatser. Rapport. Skolverket. (Report commissioned by The Swedish National Agency for Education.)
Andersson Varga, P. (2014). Skrivundervisning i gymnasieskolan: Svenska?mnets roll i den sociala reproduktionen. Diss. Go?teborg: Go?teborgs universitet.
Archibald, O. Y. (2009). Representation, ideology, and the form of the essay. Writing and Pedagogy 1(1): 11–36. https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.v1i1.11
Behrens, S. J., Johnson, A., Allard, M., and Caroli, A. (2016). I know it when I see it: Uncovering student and educator expectations about academic writing in higher education. Writing and Pedagogy 8(2): 309–333. https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.24108
Benesch, S. (2001). Critical English for Academic Purposes. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410601803
Cenoz, J. and Gorter, D. (2011). Focus on multilingualism: A study of trilingual writing. The Modern Language Journal 95(3): 356–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01206.x
Coffin, C. (2004). Learning to write history: The role of causality. Written Communication 21(3): 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088304265476
Christie, F. (2013). Genres and Genre Theory: A Response to Michael Rosen, Changing English, 20(1), 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2012.757056
Cushing Weigle, C. S. (2002). Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511732997
Derewianka, B. M. and Frances, C. (2008). School Discourse: Learning to Write across the Years of Schooling. London: Continuum. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.236.11der
Derewianka, B. (2003). Grammatical metaphor in the transition to adolescence. In: A-M. Simon-Vandenbergen, M. Taverniers, and L. Ravelli (Eds) Grammatical Metaphor: Views from Systemic Functional Linguistics, 185–220. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Dixon, R. M. W. (1997). The Rise and Fall of Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612060
Gené-Gil, M., Juan-Garau, M., and Salazar-Noguera, J. (2015). Development of EFL writing over three years in secondary education: CLIL and non-CLIL settings. The Language Learning Journal 43(3): 286–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2015.1053278
Gentil, G. (2011). A biliteracy agenda for genre research. Journal of Second Language Writing 20, 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.12.006
Hall, J. K., Cheng, A., and Carlson, M. T. (2006). Reconceptualizing multicompetence as a theory of language knowledge. Applied Linguistics 27(2): 220–240. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml013
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2013). Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203431269
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Routledge.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as a Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. Butterworths, Baltimore: University Park Press.
Hasan, R. (1995). The conception of context in text. In P. H. Fries and M. Gregory (Eds) Discourse in Society: Systemic Functional Perspectives, 183–296. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Holmberg, P. (2012). Skolskrivande, genre och register. En jämförelse mellan två systemisk-funktionella modeller. In M. Boeriis and T. H. Andersen (Eds), Nordisk socialsemiotik. Pædagogiske, multimodale og sprogvidenskapelige landvinninger. Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag. 221–245.
Hood, S. (2010). Appraising Research: Evaluation in Academic Writing. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230274662
Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing 16: 148–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.005
Jexenflicker, S. and Dalton-Puffer, C. (2010). The CLIL differential: comparing the writing of CLIL and non-CLIL students in higher colleges of technology. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, and U. Smit (Eds) Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classrooms, 169–189. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.7.09jex
Kabayashi, H. and Rinnert, C. (2013). L1/L2/L3 writing development: Longitudinal case study of a Japanese multicompetent writer. Journal of Second Language Writing 22: 4–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.11.001
Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203299234
Kuyumcu, E. (2011). Utva?rdering av Knutbyprojektet. Genrebaserad undervisning i en F–6-skola. Stockholm: Utbildningsförvaltningen. https://knutbyskolan.stockholm.se/sites/default/files/utvardering_av_knutbyprojektetmindre.pdf.
Llinares, A. and Whittaker, R. (2010). Writing and speaking in the history class: Data from CLIL and first language contexts. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, and U. Smit (Eds) Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classrooms, 125–144. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Llinares, A. and Pascual Peña, I. (2015). A genre approach to the effect of academic questions on CLIL students’ language production. Language and Education 29(1): 15–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2014.924964
Lorenzo, F. and Moore, P. (2010). On the natural emergence of language structures in CLIL: Towards a theory of European educational bilingualism. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, and U. Smit (Eds) Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classrooms, 125–144. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.7.02lor
Lorenzo, F. (2013). Genre-based curricula: Multilingual academic literacy in content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 16(3): 375–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2013.777391
Luke, A. (1997). Genres of power: literacy education and the production of capital. In R. Hasan and G. Williams (Eds) Literacy in Society, 308–338. London: Longman.
Martin, J. R. and Rose, D. (2008). Genre Relations: Mapping Culture. London: Equinox.
Martin, J. R. (2009). Genre and language learning: a social semiotic perspective. Linguistics and Education 20. 1: 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2009.01.003
Maxwell-Reid, C. (2010). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): The influence of studying through English on Spanish students’ first-language written discourse. Text and Talk 30 (6), 679–699. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2010.033
McCabe and Whittaker (2017. Genre and appraisal in CLIL History texts. Developing the voice of the historian. In A. Llinares and T. Morton (Eds.) Applied Linguistics Perspectives on CLIL. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Paltridge, B., Starfield, S., Ravelli, L., Tuckwell, K., and Nicholson, S. (2014). Genre in the creative-practice doctoral thesis: Diversity and unity. In G. Garzone and C. Ilie (Eds) Genres and Genre Theory in Transition: Specialised Discourses across Media and Modes, 89–105. Irvine, CA: BrownWalker.
Plakans, L. (2008). Comparing composing processes in writing-only and reading-to-write test tasks. Assessing Writing 13: 79–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2008.07.001
Rose, D. (2009). Writing as linguistic mastery: the development of genre-based literacy pedagogy. In R. Beard, D. Myhill, M. Nystrand & J. Riley (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Writing Development 151–166. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857021069.n11
Rose, D. (2015). New developments in genre-based literacy pedagogy. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, and J. Fitzgerald (Eds) Handbook of Writing Research, 2nd edition, 227–242. New York: Guilford.
Sandberg, Y. (2018). Bilingual Subject-specific Literacies. Teachers’ and learners’ views and experiences of two school languages in biology, civics, history and mathematics: Case studies from CLIL programmes in the Swedish upper secondary school. Licentiate Thesis in Language Education. Stockholm University.
Sylvén, L. K. (Ed.) (2019). Investigating Content and Language Integrated learning. Insights from Swedish High Schools. London: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/SYLVEN2418
Tardy, C. (2006). Researching first and second language genre learning: a comparative review and a look ahead. Journal of Second Language Writing 15: 79–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.04.003
The Swedish National Agency for Education. (2013). Curriculum for Upper Secondary School. Stockholm: Fritzes.
Veel, R. (2005). Learning how to mean – scientifically speaking: apprenticeship into scientific discourse in the secondary school. In F. Christie and J. R. Martin (Eds) Genre and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and School, 161–195. London: Continuum.
Whittaker, R., Llinares, A., and McCabe, A. (2011). Written discourse development in CLIL at secondary school. Language Teaching Research 15(3): 343–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811401154
Yasuda, S. (2011). Genre-based tasks in foreign language writing: Developing writers’ genre awareness, linguistic knowledge, and writing competence. Journal of Second Language Writing 20: 111–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.03.001
