Text Discourse: Teaching practices

Teachers who enacted Text Discourse in their writing communities embraced pedagogical practices advocated by genre approaches. The teaching practices typical of Text Discourse are discussed in relation to: developing a metalanguage for talking about texts; exemplars as models

65

of genres; co-construction of text; teacher modelling and templates to scaffold independence.

Developing a metalanguage

A key difference between writer-centred and text-oriented approaches was the emphasis the latter placed on developing a language to talk about writing. Text Discourse recognised that texts were different because they do different things. How teachers related a specific metalanguage to a context and associated register was dependent on the teacher’s perspective on genre theory and practice. Derewianka (1990) explained:

How language allows us to do things –to share information, to enquire, to express attitudes, to entertain, to argue, to get our needs met, to reflect, to construct ideas, to order our experience and make sense of the world. It is concerned with how people use real language for real purposes. (pp. 3-4)

The genre approach supported explicit knowledge for writing in the different subjects areas, that is, learning through language, but also about language. Derewianka (1990) pointed out “as we use language, we develop a relatively unconscious, implicit understanding of how it works. A functional approach to language attempts to make these common sense understandings explicit” (p. 3). Students were viewed as requiring a metalanguage or grammar in order to talk about texts (Cope & Kalantzis, 1993; Knapp & Watkins, 1994). The genre concept of grammar differs from traditional grammar, which formalised the English language system at sentence level and labelled elements as word classes. Genre-based grammar encompasses multiple levels: text-level, sentence- level and word-level explanations of language-in-use. Text level grammar encompasses the formal arrangement of the genre’s schematic structure, layout, paragraphing and cohesion of the text. Sentence-level grammar explores the organisation of sentence structures, clauses, and the work word groups perform for that particular function of writing.

66

Word-level grammar looks at the structure or morphology of words. Genre theorists argued that readers and writers required a language to talk about writing and the function it fulfils. In doing so the writer is more knowledgeable and empowered to talk about texts. For example, the social function of instructing was written as a procedural text and organised at the macro level to include the goal, materials required and the procedure or ordered steps of actions to be taken. Further analysis of the language features or grammatical aspects for instruction was noted. This might include use of present tense, action verbs or commands, temporal or linking words to do with time and detailed information to explain how each instruction is carried out. Knapp and Watkins (1994) described grammar as:

a resource for understanding the different codings, or arrangements, that are used to construct a complete text, rather than as a set of rules for correct sentence construction. In its broadest sense, a knowledge of the grammar of a text provides a way of gaining a detailed and critical understanding of the forms and meanings of a culture. (p. 31)

Knapp and Watkins (1994) explained that, “a genre-based grammar … assists students in making conscious choices in ways to organise and write texts” (p. 30).

Exemplars as models of genre

Text Discourse proponents enacted a common practice whereby students were introduced to a genre through various practices. Reading a range of text examples enabled teachers and students to analyse the text. “If children are to write in a particular genre, they first need to become familiar with its purpose and features through immersion in the genre and by exploring sample texts” (Derewianka, 1990, p. 7). Australian Genre proponents also unpacked the text structure. Derewianka (1990) maintained: “Each genre has a distinctive set of stages which help to achieve its purpose. These stages make up its schematic structure” (p. 7).

67

Using exemplars was an important step for knowledge building, viewed as a whole class activity, this information was employed when students and teacher later co-constructed a genre. Furthermore, the schematic framework and related features of the language used, scaffolded independent writers and provided a reference for further writing. Teachers displayed charts of different genres analysed according to the organisational features of the text grammar, labelled alongside linguistic features thus providing future reference points for students.

Several texts have been written for teachers outlining a genre pedagogy, such as First Steps writing (Education Department of Western Australia, 1994a), Write ways, (Wing-Jan, 2001a) and Exploring how texts work (Derewianka, 1990). These Australian texts provided annotated examples of text-types demonstrating the structural aspects of the genres, such as in an argument. The title established the topic, followed by an opening general statement that set the scene and presented the argument. The paragraphs that followed constituted a series of points or arguments, supported by factual information. The argument is summarised with a concluding statement either restating the opinion or making recommendations for action. The argument exemplar was also annotated with grammatical features particular to that genre or writing function. There were expectations of specialised vocabulary, emotive language, use of conjunctions to connect cause and effect, use of present tense, and use of personal pronouns.

Co-construction of text

Genre theorists apprenticed students by introducing genre types through shared reading or reading experiences so that students became familiar with the function and linguistic patterns of genres. By talking about the genre students’ built their knowledge before co-construction of a new text in that genre was attempted. Derewianka (1990) explained that students contribute to the construction of the text using content

68

(ideational meanings) and understandings of the schematic structure of texts. Joint construction was viewed as a collaborative activity where students and teacher could pool information. The teacher’s role was one of guidance, asking questions, making suggestions and scribing so that children could focus on creating meanings in particular ways. Students were encouraged to participate and negotiate understandings of genres during whole class, or small group situations. While participatory collaboration was desirable in genre pedagogy, Watkins (1999) stated that in reality it often didn’t eventuate.

Teacher modelling

From a text perspective modelling is about explicitly teaching. Wing- Jan’s (2001) explanation of modelling employed strategies of writing to, with and by the children. From her point of view, “modelling refers to the planned and incidental opportunities to implicitly and explicitly demonstrate to children aspects about texts types and the reading and writing of these” (Wing-Jan, 2001a, p. 10). She maintained that through modelling the teacher could focus students’ attention on the structure and features of different text-types as well as demonstrate how to employ linguistic knowledge when reading and writing these texts. This differs from Writer Discourse perspectives, which demonstrated cognitive writing decisions rather than applying linguistic knowledge to construct a text type.

Knapp and Watkins (2005) proposed that teachers “demonstrate correct textual grammar by transcribing students’ oral contributions, reworking students’ verbal responses explicitly to reproduce a particular type of text (p. 80). Wray and Lewis (1997), English authors, maintained that teacher modelling was vital for it “not only models the generic form and teaches the words that signal connections and transitions but it also provides opportunities for developing students oral language and their thinking” (p. 137).

69

Templates to scaffold independence

Text Discourses supported independent construction of text functions by providing frameworks or schematic headings to guide students in their writing (Derewianka, 1990; Education Department of Western Australia, 1994a; Wing-Jan, 2001a). These may have been co-constructed with the class from exemplars or developed as criteria-based checklists. Wray and Lewis’ (1997) research had noted that students’ writing was mostly fiction and thus they developed writing frames for teachers to trial, to widen students’ non-fiction writing skills. As most students wrote recounts their intention was to provide students with the “language of power”, recognising that most writing to get things done in society, uses non-fiction written genres. Wray and Lewis (1997) argued that the genre model required a fourth step, a scaffolded activity using writing frames. They explained:

A writing frame consists of a skeleton outline… [It] consists of different key words or phrases, according to the particular genre. The template of starters, connectives and sentence modifiers … gives students a structure within which they can concentrate on communicating what they want to say while scaffolding them in the use of a particular genre. (pp. 134-135) These researchers proposed that writing frames be related to real writing contexts and charts of the writing frames could be employed during shared writing and co-construction of text, encouraging students to cross out or substitute words. Most often, individual students used the frames to help plan their text. Wray and Lewis (1997) claimed that they did “not advocate using frames for the direct teaching of generic structures in skills-centered lessons” (p. 137). This view was also evident in Dancing with the pen (MOE, 1992), which stated:

Giving learners a framework should not be done so rigidly that it hampers them from developing their voice and meaning. In clarifying their own material for an audience, learner writers will move naturally towards appropriate forms. In the best writing, there is unity between content and form. (p. 52)

70

New Zealand primary teachers, however, largely ignored the issue previously discussed. They gave their students templates of the genres asking them to fill in the gaps under sub-headings (Ward, 1998). Teaching writing became prescriptive, whereby students followed recipes (Watkins, 1999).