Skip to main content
Log in

A multi-level language toolkit for the Australian Curriculum: English

  • Published:
The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In its Language Strand, the Australian Curriculum: English (ACARA, 2012) refers to the importance of students learning to describe language as a system, paying attention to both structure (syntax) and meaning (semantics) at word, sentence and text levels. Yet English teachers in Australia remain uncertain about how to make principled connections between language as system and language as text. It is clear that the role of a linguistically informed knowledge must be addressed if teachers are to support their students to develop the ‘dynamic and evolving’ body of knowledge about language (KAL) required by the new Australian Curriculum. Focusing on persuasive texts, this paper uses the lenses provided by the Australian Curriculum: English to explore how language construes meaning at group, sentence and text level. The analysis contributes towards a multi-level language framework to help teachers to help students construct and appreciate the valued forms of argumentation required in the new Curriculum, as these draw variously on logical reasoning and emotional impact.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2012). Australian Curriculum: English. Version 3.0. Sydney: Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority. Retrieved from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/English/Curriculum/F-10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2011). National Assessment Program (NAP). Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu.au/

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakhtin, M.M. (1953 (1986). The problem of speech genres. Translated by Vern W. McGee. In Speech Genres and other Late Essays, C. Emerson and M. Holquist (eds) (pp. 60–102). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christie, F. (1990). The changing the face of literacy. In F. Christie (Ed.), Literacy for a Changing World (pp. 1–25). Melbourne: ACER.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christie, F. (2005) Using the functional grammar to understand children’s written texts Australian Review of Applied Linguistics S19, 9–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derewianka, B. (2012). Knowledge about Language in the Australian Curriculum: English. This Issue.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST) (2005). Teaching Reading: Report and Recommendations. National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy. Canberra: Australian Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, B. (2009). English, Rhetoric, Democracy; or renewing English in Australia. English in Australia, 43 (3), pp. 35–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar, London: Edward Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond J. & Macken-Horarik, M., (2001). Teachers’ voices, teachers’ practices: Insider perspectives on literacy education. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 24 (2), 112–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harper, H. & Rennie, J. (2009). ‘I had to go out and get myself a book on grammar’: A study of pre-service teachers’ knowledge about language. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy. 33 (1), 22–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, C (2008). The New Cicero in The Guardian, Wednesday 26 November.

  • Humphrey, S. (1996). Exploring literacy in school geography (Write it Right Resources for Literacy and Learning). Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphrey, S., Love, K. & Droga, L. (2011). Working grammar: An introduction for secondary teachers. Melbourne: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kress, G. (1985). Linguistic processes in sociocultural practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louden, W., Rohl, M., Gore, J., Greaves, D., McIntosh, A., Wright, R., Siemon, D. & House, H., (2005). Prepared to teach: An investigation into the preparation of teachers to teach literacy and numeracy. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Love, K. & Macken-Horarik (2009). Obama, Rudd and a grammar for rhetoric in the National English Curriculum. In the Proceedings of the National conference for Teachers of English and literacy, Hobart, Tasmania, July 2009. www.englishliteracyconference.com.au

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J.R. (1985) Factual Writing: Exploring and challenging social reality. Victoria: Deakin University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin & White (2005) Language of Evaluation. London: Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rudd, K. (2008). Apology to the Stolen Generations of Australia. Retrieved from http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/02/13/1202760379056.html

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, W. (2009). The National Curriculum and Enabling Creativity. English in Australia, 43 (3), 57–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schleppegrell, M., (2004). The Language of Schooling: A functional Linguistics Perspective Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. Retrieved from TakingITGlobal web site Australia.tigweb.org

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Love, K., Humphrey, S. A multi-level language toolkit for the Australian Curriculum: English. AJLL 35, 173–191 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03651881

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03651881

Navigation