Files
Abstract
Performing systemic functional linguistics (SFL) analysis with students instead of just on students or at students empowers students to not only use language, but also critique it so as to become more critically aware citizens. However, conceptualizing grammar as a way to support critical literacy and expose ideology and hegemony has not been fully explored as a way of teaching language in American classrooms (Love, 2006). With this in mind, this study investigated how instructional use of SFL analytic resources in subject English supported secondary-level students in recognizing how language positions people to think and behave in particular ways as they read various texts and used the linguistic tools. The study explored how students responded to using linguistic tools such as the appraisal system (Martin & Rose, 2003) as well as modality and identification analyses (Halliday, 1994) that made visible the ways in which language positioned people to think and behave in a particular ways, empowering some while leading others to accept their own disempowerment. The study investigated students differing experiences and levels of confidence in performing SFL with various genres, looked for evidence of critical growth and language awareness in student dialogue, as well as examined if critical growth and writing development was reflected in student writing. This investigation provided meaningful data as to how SFL analysis tools aided secondary students in recognizing ways in which language positions people to think and behave, discussing authors manipulation of language and linguistic choices, and supporting or refuting claims when discussing critical issues present in each text. Furthermore, students reactions to the instructional use of SFL when analyzing fantasy, canonical, and non-fiction texts may assist researchers and educators in developing a curriculum that utilizes SFL to help broaden students ability to use language more expertly across a variety of social and academic contexts (Gebhard, Harman, & Seger, 2007, p. 421).