133-

TRENDS AND ISSUES IN GENRE-BASED APPROACHES

Beverly Derewianka
[email protected]

ABSTRACT
The increasing influence of genre-based approaches in English language
teaching is now well-attested by the growing literature on the subject. The
author in this article first sets out to clarify what is meant by ’Genre Theory’
with its focus on text, purpose, meaning and choice. In the second part of
the article she addresses the specific area of genres in the classroom and the
importance of contextual analysis, planning and implementation. Finally in
the conclusion issues are raised with regard to the need for effective imple-
mentation in syllabus design, materials development and the professional
development of teachers.

Introduction
Genre-based approaches are becoming increasingly influential in the
field of English language teaching. Rodgers {2001) identifies genre-based
approaches as one of the major trends in the new millennium, with dis-
course and genre analysis, schema theory, pragmatics and systemic func-

tional linguistics ’rekindling an interest in functionally based approaches

to language teaching’. Similarly, Hyland (2002) sees genre approaches as
having a considerable impact on the way we see language use and on
literacy education around the world. And Johns (2002) refers to a major
paradigm shift over the past 15 years or so towards a more social,
contextual approach based on genre theory.
Such approaches have been adopted in primary, secondary, tertiary, pro-
fessional and community teaching contexts in programs for native speakers
of English as well as ESL and EFL learners. Educators in countries as
diverse as Singapore, South Africa, USA, Italy, Hong Kong, Australia,
134

UK, China, Canada, Sweden and Thailand are employing genre-based

approaches in developing their syllabuses, materials and curricula.
It would appear to be an opportune time, therefore, to review the prin-
ciples underlying such approaches and to address misconceptions and
critiques that have arisen in the last few years.
Different groups working in the field of genre theory have differing
points of focus. They could be ordered along a continuum ranging from
those whose main interest is in the social, cultural and historical contexts
in which genres operate through to those who are more interested in the
nature of the genres themselves. (See Flowerdew 2002, Hammond and
Derewianka 2001, Hyland 2002, Hyon 1996 and Johns 2002 for a more
detailed overview.) In the former group (many of whom locate themselves
within the New Rhetoric school), we find studies that explore how genres
evolve in different sociocultural settings to achieve particular purposes,
how genres cluster together in sets, and how genres form systems and net-
works (e.g. Miller 1984; Freedman and Medway 1994a, 1994b; Bazerman
1994; Berkenkotter and Huckin 1995). In the latter group (often working
within the area of discourse analysis) detailed attention is paid to the
communicative purpose, structure and language features of particular
genres, primarily with a view to helping students achieve control over the
genres that they will encounter in professional and academic contexts.
This emphasis is often found in English for Specific Purposes, where
researchers analyse and describe such genres as the literature review,
business letters, science reports, formal meetings, sales promotion letters,
job applications, legal documents, and so on (e.g. Swales 1990; Bhatia
1993; Dudley-Evans and St John 1998).
Towards the middle of such a continuum lie those who have an interest
both in the context in which genres are produced and the linguistic features
of the genres themselves-as well as the relationship between the context
and language. The most influential are those working within the tradition
of Halliday’s Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). Because of this
group’s impact on syllabus and curriculum in school contexts and because
of the writer’s familiarity with their work, this paper will tend to focus on
this particular approach.

What Do We Mean By ‘Genre’?

The term ‘genre’ has in recent times been extended beyond its traditional
use in literary contexts to include all purposeful uses of language: telling
 135

someone how to make a toy boat, buying fruit in the market, sharing what
happened on the weekend, reviewing the literature in a particular field,
persuading someone to your point of view, and so on.
One of the first issues to arise in any discussion of genre is how to
define the term. Those working within different genre approaches will em-
phasize different aspects depending on their particular interest. Most,
however, would agree that genres are social practices that have evolved to
enable us achieve our goals (Martin 1985; Painter 2001). As we go about
our daily lives, we engage in numerous situations that involve predictable

and recurring patterns of language use, without which our interactions

would be random and chaotic. As members of particular social groups and
cultures, we recognize the generic expectations of various situations and
are able to respond by deploying the appropriate genre.
A further issue is the use of the terms ’genre’ and ’text type’. Some
writers use these terms interchangeably. In some cases, the term ’text type’
has been adopted because it is more transparent and immediately accessible
to teachers and students. There are also instances in educational institutions
where ’text type’ has been favoured because it is seen as less threatening
politically, ’genre’ being associated with left-wing ideologies and subver-
sive activity. But among academics, the two terms often have quite distinct
meanings (though there is not always agreement on what they mean). Here
we will be using the term &dquo;genre’. For those wanting to pursue the distinc-

tion further, see Lee (2001) and Paltridge (2002a).

The following paper is divided into two main sections: trends and issues
in the development of genre theory, and trends and issues in the applica-
tion of theory in genre-based pedagogy.

Genre Theory: Trends and Issues

In considering trends in genre theory, we will focus on certain principles
that are relevant in educational contexts and some of the issues surround-
ing these principles.
Focus on Text
While the emphasis in language learning is often placed on the acquisition
of syntax at the sentence level, in genre-based approaches the emphasis is
on the creation of meaning at the level of the whole text. Rather than deal-

ing with discrete instances of language, there is a recognition that meaning

accumulates and evolves over a stretch of text.
136

Having focused initially on the analysis of short, prototypical texts (or

in the case of EAP, on specific sections of texts), attention is now being
paid to longer, more complex texts (e.g. Baxter 2002; Bunton 1999).
While it could be argued that, for modelling purposes, it is preferable to
use texts that clearly demonstrate the key features of the genre, ultimately

students need to be able to deal with texts that are blends of different
genres or that contain embedded genres.
One of the issues posed by an emphasis on meaning at the text level,
particularly in EFL contexts, is the perception that students have difficulty
with whole texts (even short ones) and that it is first necessary to master
’the basics’. While not denying the value of exercises that provide practice
in specific points, most theories today suggest that it is the engagement
with creating and comprehending meaning within the context of a text that
promotes effective language learning.

Focus on Purpose
Genre theory starts from the premise that language use is goal-oriented.
Genres evolve within a culture to enable members of that culture achieve
their social purposes. Certain purposes might involve satisfying basic needs
such as shopping for food or telling the doctor about an illness. Some,
such as casual conversation or gossip, might have a more interpersonal
purpose in terms of establishing and maintaining social relationships.
Others, such as poems and songs, might be of a more aesthetic nature.
The following table outlines the social purpose of a number of genres
identified as critical to success in educational contexts through an exami-
nation of syllabuses, textbooks, student texts and assignments, and the
language challenges posed by the school curriculum.
For further details on the genres of schooling, see Butt et al. (2001),
Derewianka (1991) and Feez and Joyce (1998).
137
138

In order to
accomplish their purpose, genres generally move through a
number of stages (Martin 1985).

These stages are relatively predictable because they are functional, that is,
each stage (or ’move’) plays a particular role in the developing text. In the
above text, for example, the function of the first stage is to provide some
background information for the reader and outline the issue.
There are a number of pedagogical issues surrounding the teaching of
genres as purposeful and staged activities. First, in many cases, they have
come to be taught as ‘items’ in a syllabus or textbook. Rather than asking
’what is my purpose in this situation?’, students are often simply taught
 139

the name and stages of the genre, detracting from students’ ability to relate
their writing and speaking purposes to an appropriate generic choice. By
focusing first on a text’s social purpose, students are able to understand
why the text unfolds in a particular way, instead of simply ’following the
recipe’ .
Secondly, it is often the case that only a small handful of genres are
taught across the years of schooling, as if these were the only ones that
students would encounter. In addition, the various subtypes are often not
recognized, so it might be assumed, for example, that just because a stu-
dent has leamt to write a recount of personal experience, they are therefore
capable of writing a historical recount, which calls for the ability to stand
back from individual events and synthesize great stretches of time.
Thirdly, the stages of a genre are often taught prescriptively as if they
were ‘given’-structures imposed upon a text rather than moves arising

naturally because of their functionality. Students are not always encouraged

to identify the stages and reflect on what job they are performing in the
text or how effectively they perform that job. The stages are presented
rigidly, with little allowance for the possibility of optional stages or re-
ordering of stages.
According to Melrose (1995), contemporary notions of genre emphasize
the flexible and rhetorical nature of genres rather than formulaic and static
rules or conventions, but when recontextualized into the classroom, genre
theory is rendered more digestible by diluting its descriptive richness.
While it is understandable that individual teachers do not have a full grasp
of the intricacies of the various genres, syllabus designers and textbook
writers are in a position to give guidance on how to move from the more
predictable towards the more complex.
Focus on Meaning and Choice
While the overall development of the genre in terms of its stages is of im-
portance, equally significant are the meanings being created in each stage
(and how they differ from stage to stage). These meanings are realized
through the lexical and grammatical choices being made. Halliday (1994)
sees language as a resource for making meaning and proposes that the

language system has evolved to express two main kinds of meaning:

experiential meaning (how we use language to represent our understanding
of the world around us) and interpersonal meaning (how we use language
to create relationships with others). These two key functions of language
140

are supported by a third function-the textual resources necessary to create

cohesive and coherent texts.
While identifying the stages of a text is a useful starting point, we can
only deal fully with meaning by delving into the grammar of the text. The
term ’grammar’ is not used here to refer to those rules and conventions
that allow us to distinguish correct sentences from incorrect (though it is
recognized that this perspective is also important, particularly in ESL and
EFL contexts). Rather, language is seen as a dynamic, open network of
interrelated systems. Each system contains a set of options from which the
speaker/writer selects according to the meaning he or she wants to make
(Lock 1996).
The role of the teacher is seen as extending the learners’ repertoire of
grammatical choices, both in their construction of meaning in texts and
their comprehension of meaning in texts. And in many cases, genres are
seen as opportunities for teaching grammatical structures in context (e.g.

the present tense in information reports). A further step, however, would

be to help students to become aware of how the grammar is creating par-
ticular meanings relevant to the genre in question. The ’timeless’ present
tense is used in an information report, for example, because in information
reports we are concerned with representing generalized states and happen-
ings rather than specific events (as we might in a recount).

Language in Context
While genre theory stresses the notion of language as a system of choices,
it recognizes that such choice is constrained by the cultural and situational
context in which the genre is used. We have seen that the social purpose,
for example, influences the choice of genre and the stages it passes through.
Our grammatical choices are also influenced by the context of the imme-
diate situation-in particular, ’what the text is about’ (the field), ’who is
interacting with whom’ (the tenor), and ’what role language is playing’
(the mode). Together these variables form the register of the text. This
does not mean, however, that the register determines the choices that
can be made, as sometimes heard in (misinformed) criticism of the model.

Rather, it is a starting point that indicates that certain choices are more
probable than others. As the text is in the process of being constructed
(orally or in writing), the choices made at any particular point form the
context for subsequent choices, moving the text in a particular direction.
At any point, however, the choice can be made to change the direction.
Melrose (1995), for example, states that the situation is always fluid and
 141

up for negotiation. The creation of a text is an ever-shifting, interactional

process and the text and its context are mutually determining.
While the variable of ‘field’ is generally taken into consideration in lan-
guage teaching (e.g. the various topics that students are asked to deal with
and the language needed for developing them),’ the notion of ’tenor’ is
often neglected. Tenor refers to the roles and relationships being estab-
lished through interaction. Hyland (2002) notes how casual conversations
are used to negotiate social identity and personal relationships and that
academic texts also involve the construction of an appropriate authorial
self and the negotiation of accepted participant relationships.
Using Halliday’s model, we are able to predict the linguistic resources
students need in order to respond to the ’tenor’ demandS2 of the situation
(e.g. the language used in participating effectively in interactions, in
positioning oneself and others, in evaluating and critiquing, in negotiating
increasingly subtle interpersonal stances, in making judgments, in sound-
ing confident, in persuading others to your view, in varying the degree of
commitment to a proposition, in acknowledging authority, and so on).
Similarly, the variable of ’mode’ is not taken sufficiently into account.
The teaching of genres generally privileges the written mode. It is im-
portant that students have the opportunity to develop the genre orally (e.g.
an oral recount of personal experience, an oral retelling of an experiment,

an oral explanation of a phenomenon) as a bridge towards the written text.

Teachers need to keep in mind, however, that the language features of the
oral mode will differ from those of the written mode. The language will
generally be embedded in the ’here and now’ and more exploratory, with-
out the considered attention to the stages and to grammatical structures of
the written mode. This oral ’rehearsal’ is a very important phase in the
learning process, as students come to grips not only with the concepts
involved but with the language for expressing those concepts.
In addition to the oral counterparts of the various written genres, stu-
dents need to learn genres not encountered in the written mode, such as the
language of playground interaction, of groupwork and of classroom dis-
course. If, as current theory suggests, language is leamt through engage-
ment in problem-solving, interactive tasks, then students need access to
the language needed to participate in such interactions and teachers need
to be aware of the kinds of linguistic resources required by these oral
genres.3
Apart from written and oral modes, students increasingly need to be
able to comprehend and create texts involving a variety of modalities: dia-
142

grams, icons, maps, video, charts, and the like. They also need to be able
to perceive the relationship between a text and its
graphic elements. Work
has started on the grammar of images (Kress and van Leeuwen 1996;
Lemke 1998; Stenglin and Iedema 2001; Unsworth 2001), but little has
made its way as yet into genre-based pedagogy.

Culture and Ideology

Genres are not uniform across cultures-they pertain to a particular com-
munity and its social institutions. In learning the genres of a culture, we
are learning how to participate in the new culture, to make new meanings

in new cultural contexts (Painter 1996; Lock 1996).

Genres are not neutral, but are ’ideologically driven’:
A central principle of genre theory is that genres are ideological. This is
true in both the sense that no texts are free of the values and beliefs of their
users and the sense that some genres are more dominant and hegemonic
within a community. Genres are systems of meaning which help construct
the social realities within which we live, and so this advantages those who
have access and control of valued genres and disadvantages others who do
not (Hyland 2002: 124).

Genre-based pedagogy recognizes that certain genres are more powerful

than others and is concerned with helping students from non-mainstream
backgrounds to acquire and critique the genres required for success in
schooling. It proposes that students at risk of failure benefit from a visible
curriculum-explicit induction into the genres of power-if they are to
participate in the mainstream textual and social processes within and beyond
the school (Macken-Horarik 2002). It further proposes that, because genres
are socially constructed cultural artefacts, they can be deconstructed to
reveal their inherent ideological positioning.
The approach has become, however, institutionalized. A more instru-
mentalist, structuralist stance is often adopted, where ’text types’ are
taught unproblematically as ’forms’ in a culture-free zone. Hyland (2002)
advocates the development of cross-cultural understandings through in-
vestigating the socially situated nature of genres.

Genres in the Classroom: Trends and Issues

There is no single teaching/learning approach associated with genre theory.
Practices vary depending on such factors as the nature of the student group
(e.g. EFL/ESL, beginner/proficient, tertiary/adult migrant/secondary/pri-
 143

mary) and the emphasis placed on particular aspects of pedagogy (e.g. the
degree of explicitness). Here we will concentrate on how genre theory has
been applied in Australian educational contexts (e.g. Christie and Martin
1997; Feez 1998; Paltridge 2002) and some of the issues surrounding these
practices.
Genres and Learning
The learning of genres (and the role of genres in learning) has primarily
been theorized in terms of learning a first language. According to Bakhtin
(translation 1986), learning genres is a fundamental part of language de-
velopment-it is our ability to predict the compositional structure and
length of genres that enables us to communicate. Little work has been
done, however, on developing a genre-based theory of second language
learning, though functional linguists such as Lock (1996) and Melrose
(1995) have sought to lay the groundwork. Lock contends that learning a
second language means gaining progressive control over the systems of
options in the new language, learning which options to select to make
which meanings in which contexts. Beginning learners have very limited
options (a few structures, some lexical items, some unanalysed chunks).
More advanced learners have developed a greater range of options and are
able to make more delicate distinctions of meanings appropriate for differ-
ent contexts. Learning new genres is seen as extending the learner’s
meaning-making potential.
Genre pedagogy in countries such as Australia is based on Vygotskian
learning theory. Language is learned through guidance and interaction in
the context of shared experience. The teacher inducts learners into the
linguistic demands of those genres that are important to participation in
the school and wider community. Gradually responsibility is shifted to the
learners as they gain increasing control of the genre.
While many of the principles apply equally well to learning both the
mother tongue and a second language, further research is needed into the
learning of genres from a second and foreign language perspective. Recent
work by Hammond (2002) and Gibbons (2002) has investigated the micro-
processes of scaffolding in ESL contexts, but little has been done in the
area of EFL in terms of genre-based learning theory. More vigorous en-

gagement with recent advances in sociocultural interactionist approaches

to second language acquisition (e.g. Lantolf 2000) could be mutually
profitable.
144

Contextual Analysis
As with any other pedagogical innovation, genre-based approaches should
not be wholeheartedly embraced without reflection on whether they are
sensitive to the prevailing views and practices regarding language teaching
and learning (Holliday 1994). Before developing a genre-based program
of study, the teacher or institution will need to conduct an analysis of the
teaching/learning context. At its broadest level, this should take into account
the culture, history and traditions of the educational setting as well as con-
straints posed by access to materials, teachers’ confidence and English
proficiency, learners’ expectations, assessment requirements, and so on. A
period might be needed in which the principles of genre pedagogy are
adapted to the local context and trialled, evaluated and modified by groups
of educators.
A further level of contextual analysis might involve the identification of
the specific language demands encountered by the students in a particular
educational context (e.g. writing explanations in science, reading narra-
tives in English, participating in groupwork) or in a target situation (e.g.
tertiary studies, business meetings). It is now a common practice to under-
take a ’language audit’ of a school, university department or business in
terms of the genres regularly encountered. This information can be used
to develop objectives and outcomes in planning the teaching/learning pro-
gram. The Disadvantaged Schools Program in Australia, for example,
undertook a massive survey of the genres over which students needed to
gain control in order to participate successfully in the different curriculum
areas in primary and secondary schools (e.g. explanations, reports, re-

counts, procedures, discussions, narratives, reviews).

An English-medium school in Indonesia with which the author worked
released groups of staff members (executive, lower primary, upper
primary, teachers of English) throughout a whole week to examine the
language expectations of the entire school curriculum, which was being
developed in terms of major thematic strands (e.g. ’Understanding the
natural world’, ’Ourselves and society’) rather than the traditional sub-
jects. Within each of the themes, they looked at the kinds of language
resources the students would need in order to successfully participate in

class discussions, complete projects, write assignments, read their text-

books, and so on. They identified key functions such as describing,
explaining, analysing, recording and evaluating and then decided on rele-
vant genres to include in each theme that would help develop these
functions. For students extending their understanding of the natural world,
 145

for example, the teachers of Grade 4 planned a project on the impact of

humans on Antarctica. This would involve the students in describing the
Antarctic region (using a multimedia information report), explaining how
different human activities affected the ecology (using an oral explanation),
and making recommendations about future activity (using a written
argument). Having decided on which genres to include in each thematic
strand, the teachers in each grade checked across the themes to make sure
that a wide range of genres were being covered, with no major gaps or
overlaps. Then the teachers from different grades looked at the genres in
the themes from a developmental perspective to ensure that the students’
control over each of the genres was extended as they progressed through
the grades. By the end of the week, the teachers had developed a compre-
hensive curriculum framework that included a variety of relevant genres
recycled from Grade 1 to Grade 6, sketched as shown in Table 2:
Table 2. Example of curriculum framework showing how genres treated in
a basic way in Grade 7 are recycled with increasing complexity

through each of the graders

Planning
In the planning phase, the teacher needs to select an appropriate genre (or
genres) to investigate over a period of several lessons. In a first aid course,
for example, the teacher will want to make sure that students can read
instructions, so it would be appropriate to spend some time on procedural
genres. Or if the learners are doing projects on natural disasters, the
teacher might familiarize them with the genre of explanation. In such
146

cases, the choice of genre is determined by the nature of the topic or theme
of the unit of work.
In other circumstances, the teacher might decide to make the genre itself
the point of departure. If, for example, the learners need to know how to
write an argumentative essay, the teacher might spend a few lessons look-
ing specifically at that genre as a topic in its own right. Or in an English
lesson, the teacher might choose to look specifically at the genre of quest
narratives. In this case, the starting point is the genre rather than the sub-
ject matter.
It is generally agreed that, as far as possible, students’ knowledge of
genres should be developed by participating in tasks which would natur-
ally require the use of a particular genre. It is the role of the teacher to
create contexts in which students can engage purposefully with the ‘genre
as process’. Johns (1993), for example, recounts how her students leamt to
write argumentative texts in response to the raising of tertiary fees, enabl-
ing them to experience the genre as a socially embedded, goal-driven
process.

Implementation
The practical application of genre theory has taken a variety of forms. In
Australia, however, perhaps the most influential model has been the cur-
riculum cycle developed by Rothery and Macken for the Disadvantaged
Schools Program. (See Macken-Horarik for an example of the curriculum
cycle in action, describing a ten-week unit of work on human reproduction
focusing on the explanation genre with a Year 10 class.)
Based on the notion of scaffolding (Bruner 1978) the curriculum cycle
provides opportunities for both teacher and learners to take responsibility
at different phases in the teaching/learning process. In the early phases, the
teacher takes a more direct role in developing the necessary knowledge
and skills, with the learners in an ’apprentice’ role. As the learners develop
greater control of the genre, the teacher gradually withdraws support
and encourages learner independence. The cycle consists of a number of
phases:
.
developing an understanding of the field;
.
familiarization with the genre;
.
developing control over the genre;
.
independent construction;
.
extending and critiquing;
.
creative exploitation of the genre.
 147

Developing an understanding of the field. If students are expected to read

and write effectively, then they need a good grasp of what they will be
reading and writing about. Developing an understanding of the field and
the language needed to express this knowledge is particularly important
for students of non-English-speaking background. During this phase, the
teacher would include activities for developing the knowledge base, ex-
tending students’ research skills, introducing relevant vocabulary and prob-
ing any cross-cultural differences in how the field in question is construed.
Familiarization with the genre. In familiarizing the learners with the genre
in question, the teacher might begin by introducing them briefly to the
genre and then immersing them in sample texts, perhaps as part of an
extensive reading program. When students have experienced a sampling of
the genre, the teacher could then focus in more explicitly on a selected text
which illustrates the main features of the genre. This is referred to as
modelling the genre. At this point the teacher would display the model text
(using an overhead transparency or on the whiteboard or as a large poster)
and encourage the students to reflect on such questions as:
1. For what purpose do we use texts such as these? What job does

such a text do?

2. Where would we find such texts?
3. Who do you think would write a text like this? For whom?
4. Have you read or written texts like this before? Why?
After the students have considered the nature and purpose of the genre,
the teacher could discuss with them the way in which it is structured and
why it is structured in this way. Later on, the class might explore some of
the language features of the genre, either as another modelling session or
in the context of activities such as guided reading or writing conferences:
1. What words give us details of ’where’, ’when’, ’how’, etc. in this
procedure? What would happen if we omitted those groups of
words?
2. Where are the time markers in this recount? How do they help
you to follow the sequence of events?
3. What tense is this narrative written in? What would be the effect
if we changed it to the present tense?
4. What words indicate the writer’s personal judgment in this argu-
ment ? Are they convincing? Or perhaps too emotive and emphatic?
5. How is language being used to develop a vivid image in this
description?
148

Developing control over the genre. For those students needing additional
support before writing independently, it is useful to do a joint construction
of a text so that they can experience what is involved in writing this type
of text. In a joint construction, the students actively participate by pro-
viding the ’subject matter’ for the text. The role of the teacher is to demon-
strate how that subject matter can be organized into a coherent text.
Using an overhead projector or the board, the teacher might start by
brainstorming j otting down in fairly random order ideas on the topic
suggested by the students. The teacher might then ask the students to start
grouping these ideas, perhaps drawing their attention to one of the model
texts examined previously. Having thought about the content of the text
and how it might be organised in broad terms, the students collaboratively
write a text with the guidance of the teacher.

Independent construction. Having been provided with guidance and support

in coming to a familiarity with the genre they are working with, students
are encouraged to draw on their understandings as they work through the

processes of composing their own independent texts. This will involve

further researching if necessary; jotting down ideas and notes; thinking
about how to organize these effectively; writing drafts; revising drafts in
the light of comments from peers or teacher; preparing a final draft and
editing it for surface features.

Extending and critiquing. When students feel comfortable with using the
genre in question at a basic level, provision should be made to extend into
more complex areas and to critically analyse texts. Beyond looking at the
core stage/s and the more typical optional stages, students might examine

model texts in order to identify:

1. optional stages which are less typical (e.g. in a procedure, stu-
dents might identify cautions, alternative steps, or a prediction of
the outcome);
2. other ways of ordering stages (e.g. instead of stating his or her
position at the beginning of an argumentative text, the writer
might choose to wait till the end to present the thesis statement as
a culminating point);

3. instances of embeddings, where one genre functions as a stage

within another genre (e.g. a travelogue might include directions
for how to reach the destination);
4. mixed genres, where a text has dual purposes (e.g. television
 149

’docudramas’ where documentary programs are dramatized to

add interest).
A critical approach to the study of genres should be encouraged. If
genres are social practices reflecting the values of the culture, then they are
open to critique and even subversion.
Creative exploitation of the genre. An awareness of what is typical and
what is possible provides the basis for being able to ’play’ with the genre,
to manipulate it in various ways, to act creatively upon it. Through activi-
ties such as the above, students can be led to recognize the potential avail-
able to them and to exploit it in appropriate ways. Painter (2001 ) reminds
us that generic patterns are unconsciously expected by native speakers and

hearers, making it possible to play with these patterns in various ways, to

be ironic or outrageous. Such effects are possible only against a back-
ground of what is expected.
The curriculum cycle has been developed within a specific educational
context involving primarily speakers of English as a first and second lan-
guage. Little has been done as yet to investigate appropriate pedagogical
strategies for teaching genres in different EFL contexts.4 One such example
is provided by Flowerdew (2002), who worked with content teachers
in the Middle East, using both ’top-down’ strategies (problem-solving, hy-
pothesizing) and ’bottom-up’ exercises (presentation, practice, production):
I. Presentation of complete text or range of texts with similar schematic
structure as models for writing (modelling).
2. Identification of text structure of model texts by means of infonnation
transfer activities such as completing tables, or by colour-coding different
information slots.
3. Exercises in metacommunicating-glossing model texts in terms of
their structural moves and examining the linguistic realizations of the
various moves.
4. Reassembling jumbled model texts into the correct sequence in order to
create awareness of schematic structure.
5. Examing relations of form and meaning for individual moves.
6. Cloze exercises focusing on key signalling items of moves of model
texts.
7. Intensive lexico-grammatical language work. Discrete items, as per the
generic description, are singled out for intensive presentation and prac-
tice, for example, formation and use of the passive, postmodification,
subtechnical lexis.
8. Completion of model texts with move or sentences deleted.
150

9. Exercises in paraphrasing. Students provide alternative possible encod-

ings for the moves.
10. Eliciting information to be included in the writing task, based on the
schematic structure.
11. Creating tables or charts based on the schematic structure.
12. Creating the text from the schematic structure table or chart.
13. Group/pair work assessing the effectiveness of the finished text.
14. Comparing text types across different genres (Flowedew 2002: 1 O l ).
Paltridge (2002) and Johns (2002) also offer practical, accessible and
theoretically grounded approaches to genre pedagogy and include many
useful suggestions for classroom practice.

Conclusion

Genre-based pedagogy is not without its critics. Even within the ‘genre
community’, concerns are expressed about whether it is feasible or desir-
able to teach genres. The assumption that students will benefit from the
explicit, supported initiation into academic genres is questioned by North
American genre researchers (Freedman and Medway 1994b), who argue
that genres are too ineffable to be subject to instruction, by social practice
theorists who believe genres are too complex and varied to be removed
from their original contexts and taught in classrooms (Lave and Wenger
1991 ), and by Australian critical theorists (Luke 1996) who question whether
genre pedagogy genuinely empowers students or simply reinforces the
status quo.
As genre-based approaches become more firmly established in sylla-
buses and curricula in a variety of international contexts, it is salutary to
recall their pedagogical and theoretical origins. Will they reinvigorate and
perhaps radicalize the curriculum, providing a focus for the coherent inte-
gration of grammar, vocabulary, discourse and culture within the context
of socially embedded, text-level activity?’ Or will genres become just
another discrete component of the syllabus, a list of text types to be covered?
Critical to the effective implementation of such approaches will be factors
such as well-informed syllabus developers and materials designers, the
professional development of teachers, continuing research into the learn-
ing of genres by second and foreign language learners, further analysis of
genres and sub-genres in a variety of social environments, and culturally
sensitive adaptation of genre approaches in local contexts.

Received in March 2003

 151

REFERENCES

Bakhtin, M.
1986 ’The Problem of Speech Genres’ (trans. V. McGee), in C. Emerson and M.
Holquist (eds.), Speech Genres and Other Late Essays (Austin, TX: Uni-
versity of Texas Press): 60-102.
Baxter, S.
2002 ’A Genre-Based Approach to Teaching the MA Thesis’ (online article at
http.//web.ics.purdue.edu/~baxters/)
Bazerman, C.
1994 ’Systems of Genres and the Enactment of Social Intentions’, in Freedman and
Medway, 1994a: 79-101.
Berkenkotter, C., and T. Huckin
1995 Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum).
Bhatia, V.
1993 Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings (Essex: Longman).
Bruner, J.
1978 ’The Role of Dialogue in Language Acquisition’, in A. Sinclair, R. Jarvella
and W.J.M. Levelt (eds.), The Child’s Conception of Language (New York:
Springer-Verlag): 241-56.
Bunton, D.
1999 ’The Use of Higher Level Metatext in PhD Theses’, English for Specific
Purposes 18: s41-s56.
Bums, A.
2001 ’Analysing Spoken Discourse: Implications for TESOL’, in A. Bums and C.
Coffin (eds.), Analysing English in a Global Context (London: Routledge):
123-48.
Bums, A., and H. Joyce (eds.)
1999 See What You Mean: Using Spoken Discourse in the Classroom (Macquarie
University: NCELTR).
Butt, D., et al.
2001 Using Functional Grammar: An Explorer’s Guide (Macquarie University:
NCELTR, 2nd edn).
Christie, F.
2002 Classroom Discourse Analysis: A Functional Perspective (London: Continuum).
Christie, F., and J. Martin (eds.)
1997 Genre and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and School (Lon-
don : Cassell).
Dudley-Evans, T., and M. St John
1998 Developments in English for Specific Purposes: A Multi-Disciplinary
Approach (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Eggins, S., and D. Slade
1997 Analysing Casual Conversation (London: Cassell).
Feez, S.
1998 Text-based Syllabus Design (Sydney: AMES; Macquarie University: NCELTR).
152

Feez, S., and H. Joyce

1998 Writing Skills: Narrative and Non-Fiction Text-Types (Melbourne: Phoenix
Education).
Flowerdew, J.
2002 ’Genre in the Classroom: A Linguistic Process’, in Johns 2002: 91-102.
Freedman, A., and P. Medway (eds.)
1994a Genre and the New Rhetoric (London: Taylor & Francis).
1994b Learning and Teaching Genre (Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook).
Fuller, G.
1998 ’Cultivating Science: Negotiating Discourse in the Popular Texts of Stephen
Jay Gould’, in J.R. Martin and R. Veel (eds.), Reading Science: Critical and
Functional Perspectives on Discourses of Science (London: Routledge): 35-62.
Gibbons, P.
2002 Scaffolding Language, Scaffolding Learning: Teaching Second Language
Learners in the Mainstream Classroom (Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann).
Halliday, M.A.K.
1994 An Introduction to Functional Grammar (London: Arnold, 2nd edn).
Halliday, M.A.K., and J.R. Martin,
1993a ’On the Language of Physical Science’, in M.A.K. Halliday and J.R. Martin,
Writing Science (London: Falmer Press): 54-68.
1993b ’The Discourse of Geography: Ordering and Explaining the Experiential
World’, in M.A.K. Halliday and J.R. Martin, Writing Science (London:
Falmer Press): 136-65.
Hammond, J.
2002 ’Scaffolding: Teaching and Learning in Language and Literacy Education’,
Hammond 2002 (Sydney: PETA).
Hammond, J., and B. Derewianka
2001 ’Genre’, in R. Carter and D. Nunan, The Cambridge Guide to Teaching En-
glish to Speakers of Other Languages (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2001): 186-93.
Holliday, A.
1994 Appropriate Methodology and Social Context (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press).
Hyland, K.
2002 ’Genre: Language, Context and Literacy’, Annual Review of Applied Lin-
guistics 22: 113-35.
Hyon, S.
1996 ’Genre in Three Traditions: Implications for ESL’, TESOL Quarterly 30.4:
693-722.
Johns, A.
1993 ’Written Argumentation for Real Audiences: Suggestions for Teacher Re-
search and Classroom Practice’, TESOL Quarterly 27: 76-91.
Johns, A. (ed.)
2002 Genre in the Classroom (New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum).
Kress, G., and T. van Leeuwen

1996 Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design (London: Routledge).

Lantolf, J.P.
2000 Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning (Oxford: Oxford
University Press).
 153

Lave, J., and E. Wenger

1991 Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation (Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press).
Lee, D.
2001 ’Genres, Registers, Text Types, Domains, and Styles: Clarifying the Concepts
and Navigating a Path Through the BNC Jungle’, Language Learning and
Technology 5.3 (September): 37-72.
Leeuwen, T. van, and S. Humphrey
1996 ’On Learning to Look Through a Geographer’s Eyes’, in R. Hasan and G.
Williams (eds.), Literacy in Society (London: Longman): 29-49.
Lemke, J.
1998 ’Multiplying Meaning: Visual and Verbal Semiotics in Scientific Text’, in
J.R. Martin and R. Veel (eds.), Reading Science: Critical and Functional
Perspectives on Discourses of Science (London: Routledge) : 87-113.
Lewin, B., J. Fine and L. Young
2001 Expository Discourse: A Genre-based Approach to Social Science Texts
(London; New York: Continuum).
Lock, G.
1996 Functional English Grammar: An Introduction for Second Language Teachers
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Luke, A.
1996 ’Genres of Power? Literacy Education and the Production of Capital’, in R.
Hasan and G. Williams (eds.), Literacy in Society (London: Longman): 308-
338.
Ma Ling
2001 ’How Can Genre via Process Approaches Support the Teaching of EFL
Writing?’, ThaiTESOL Bulletin 14.2 (August): 53-58.
Macken-Horarik, M.
2002 ’Something to Shoot For: A Systemic Functional Approach to Teaching Genre
in Secondary School Science’, in Johns 2002: 14-42.
Martin, J.R.
1985 ’Process and Text: Two Aspects of Human Semiosis’ in J.D. Benson and W.S.
Greaves (eds.), Systemic Perspectives on Discourse (Norwood, NJ: Ablex), I:
248-74.
Melrose, R.
1995 The Communicative Syllabus: A Systemic-Functional Approach to Language
Teaching (London: Pinter).
Miller, C.
1984 ’Genre as Social Action’, Quarterly Journal of Speech 70: 151-67.
Painter, C.
1996 ’The Development of Language as a Resource for Thinking: A Linguistic
View of Learning’, in R. Hasan and G. Williams (eds.), Literacy in Society
(London: Longman): 50-85.
2001 ’Understanding Genre and Register: Implications for LanguageTeaching’, in
A. Bums and C. Coffin (eds.), Analysing English in a Global Context
(London: Routledge): 167-80.
Paltridge, B.
2002 ’Genre, Text Type and the EAP Classroom’, in Johns 2002: 73-90.
154

Reppen, R.
2002 ’A Genre-Based Approach to Content Writing Instruction’, in J. Richards and
W. Renandya (eds.), Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of
Current Practice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 321-27.
Rodgers, T.
2001 ’Language Teaching Methodology’ (http://www.cal.org/ericcll/digest/rodgers.
html, ERIC Digest, September 2001).
Rose, D.
1997 ’Science Discourse and Technical Literacies’, in Christie and Martin 1997:
40-72.
1998 ’Science Discourse and Industrial Hierarchy’, in J.R. Martin and R. Veel
(eds.), Reading Science: Critical and Functional Perspectives on Discourses
of Science (London: Routledge): 194-210.
Swales, J.
1990 Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press).
Stenglin, M., and R. Iedema
2001 ’How to Analyse Visual Images: A Guide for TESOL Teachers’, in A. Bums
and C. Coffin (eds.), Analysing English in a Global Context (London:
Routledge).
Unsworth, L.
2001 Teaching Multiliteracies Across the Curriculum: Changing Contexts of Text
and Image in Classroom Practice (Buckingham: Open University Press).
Veel, R., and C. Coffin
1996 ’Learning to Think Like an Historian: The Language of Secondary School
History’, in R. Hasan and G. Williams (eds.), Literacy in Society (London:
Longman): 191-231.

NOTES

1. Studies investigating the language of a variety of disciplines: the physical

sciences (e.g. Halliday and Martin 1993a; Rose 1997, 1998; Fuller 1998); geography
(e.g. Halliday and Martin 1993b; van Leeuwen and Humphrey 1996); the social
sciences (Veel and Coffin 1996; Lewin, Fine and Young 2001), and so on.
2. I.e. the ’interpersonal’ grammatical resources.
3. See Gibbons (2002) and Christie (2002) for recent work on the genres of
classroom interaction and Bums (2001), Bums and Joyce (1999) and Eggins and Slade
(1997) for spoken discourse.
4. But some first steps in this direction are now evident (e.g. Ma Ling 2001;
Reppen).
5. For an example of such a syllabus, see English K-6 (NSW Board of Studies)
(Hhttp://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/k6/k6english.htmlH).