The Efficacy of an SFL-Oriented Register Instruction in Improving Iranian EFL Learners’ Writing Performance and Perception: Language Proficiency in Focus

Document Type : Research Paper


Department of English Language Teaching, Ahar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ahar, Iran


The current study sought to explore the impact of SFL-oriented register instruction on Iranian EFL learner’ writing performance with a central focus on their English proficiency level. As its secondary aim, the study delved deeply into the learners’ perception of the register-based instruction. To these ends, 50 intermediate and 50 advanced Iranian EFL learners were selected randomly and assigned to four groups: two experimental and two control groups. Employing an experimental pretest/posttest design, the learners of the two experimental groups received instruction on the three components of register; that is, field, tenor, and mode along with the implementation of a three-phase teaching/learning cycle, whereas the learners in the control groups were exposed to a conventional writing instruction. Quantitative analysis of the learners’ writing performance on the pre- and posttest measures revealed the contributory role of register instruction in improving Iranian EFL learners’ writing performance, regardless of their English
proficiency level. Furthermore, having been surveyed through a researcher-made questionnaire, the advanced and intermediate learners expressed their positive attitude towards the instruction. The findings highlighted the necessity of superseding the traditional linguistic-based writing instruction by a contextual and situational teaching methodology similar to what has been implemented in the current study.


Assadi Aidinlou, N. (2011). A discourse-based teaching of writing for Iranian EFL students: A    systemic perspective. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 8, 53-70.
Beare, S. (2000). Differences in content generating and planning processes of adult L1 and L2     proficient writers. (Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of Ottawa.
Brisk, M. (2014). Engaging students in academic literacies: Genre-based pedagogies for K-5         classrooms. New York, NY: Routledge.
Brisk, M., & Zisselsberger, M. (2010). We’ve let them in on a secret: Using SFL theory to improve         the teaching of writing to bilingual learners. In T. Lucas (Ed.), Preparing all teachers to teach English language learners (pp. 111–126). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum/Taylor & Francis.
Byrnes, H. (2009). Emergent L2 German writing ability in a curricular context: A longitudinal     study of grammatical metaphor. Linguistics and Education, 20(1), 50-66.
Cahyono, S. P. (2018). Teaching L2 writing through the use of Systemic Functional          Linguistics (SFL). Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 13(1), 53-72.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Olshtain, E. (2000). Discourse and context in language teaching: A guide    for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chiang, F. H., (2013). Writing pedagogy from a systemic functional perspective. (Unpublished     MA thesis). the University of Texas, Austin, Texas, USA.
Christie, F. (2004). Systemic Functional Linguistics and a theory of language in education. Ilha do desterro, 46, 13-40.
Colombi, M. C., & Schleppegrell, M. J. (2002). Theory and practice in the development of           advanced literacy. In M. J. Schleppegrell & M. C. Colombi (Eds.), Developing advanced   literacy in first and second language: Meaning with power (pp. 1-19). Mahwah, NJ:  Lawrence Erlbaum.
Corneille, T. S. (2017). Evaluating the teaching of writing in advanced EFL classes in the context            of competency-based approach: Case of some secondary schools of Benin republic.International Journal of English Research. 3(2), 68-75.
Couture, B. (1986). Effective ideation in written text: A functional approach to clarity and            exigency. In B. Couture (Ed.), Functional approaches to writing: Research perspectives (  pp. 69-92). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Dornyei, Z. (2005).The psychology of the language learners: Mahwah. New Jerzy Laurence         Erlbaum Associates.
Fang, Z., & Schleppegrell, M. J. (2008). Reading in secondary content areas: A language-based  pedagogy. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
Figueiredo, D. (2010). Context, register and genre: Implications for language education. Revista  Signos. 43(1), 119-141.
Firth, J. R. (1950). Personality and language in society. In J. R. Firth, Papers in linguistics (pp.    1934‒1951). London: Oxford University Press.
Gee, J. P., & Handford, M. (2012). The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis. New York:     Routledge.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and reassessing reading. Harlow: Longman.
Gregg, L. W., & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.). Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale, N.J.:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978) Language as social semiotic: the social interpretation of language       and meaning. Baltimore: University ParkPress.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). Spoken and written language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar.   London: Arnold. 
Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar, (2nd. ed). London: Edward      Arnold.
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. Harlow: Pearson Education            Limited.
Hasan, K.,& Akhand, M., (2010). Approaches to writing in EFL/ESL context: Balancing product and process in writing class at Tertiary Level. Journal of NELTA, 15(1-2), 77-88.
Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Writing: An Interdisciplinary Approach (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hedge, T.(2005). Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Huy, N. T. (2015). Problems affecting learning writing skill of grade 11 at Thong Linh high school.         Asian Journal of Educational Research, 3(2), 53-69.
Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of     Second Language Writing, 16, 148-164.
Iddings, J. G. (2008). A functional analysis of English humanities and biochemistry writing with  respect to teaching university composition. Novitas ROYAL, 2(1), 60-87.
Leckie-Tarry, H. (1993). Language and context: A functional linguistic theory of register. London:         Pinter.
Lee, I. (2013). Research into practice: written corrective feedback. Language Teaching, 46,          108-119.
Liaghat, F., & Biria, R. (2018). A comparative study on mentor text modelling and common         approaches to teaching writing in Iranian EFL context. International Journal of
            Instruction,11(3), 701-720.
Lirola, M.M. (2010). How to apply SFL in classroom practice: An example in bilingual    education programs in The USA. The Buckingham Journal of Language and Linguistics,3, 205-219.
Loewen, S. (2004). Uptake in incidental focus on form in meaning-focused ESL lessons. Language Learning, 54, 153-188.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th Ed.). London:  Longman. California: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Martin, J. R. (2001). Language, register and genre. In A. Burns & C. Coffin (Eds.), Analysing      English in a global context: A reader (pp. 149-166). London: Routlege.
Martin, J. R. (2009). Genre and language learning: A social semiotic perspective. Linguistics and Education, 20, 10–21.
Martin, J., Christie, F., & Rothery, J (1987). Social processes in education: A reply to Sawyer and Watson (and others). In I. Reid (Ed.), The place of genre in learning: Current debates (pp.35–45). Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.
Mosayebnazhad, F., & Assadi Aidinlou, N. (2015). The effect of the systemic genre instruction    on the writing performance of Iranian EFL high school students. MAGNT Research      Report, 3(1), 377-388. 
Nunan, D., (1991). Language teaching methodology: A textbook for teachers. New York: Prentice Hall.
Paltridge, B. (2001). Genre and the language learning classroom. Ann Arbor: University of         Michigan Press.
Raimes, A. (1994). Techniques in teaching writing. (3rd ed.). Oxford: O.U.P.
Richards, J. and Renandya, W. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of         current practice. Cambridge. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Salma, U. (2015). Problems and practical needs of writing skill in EFL context: An analysis of     Iranian students of Aligarh Muslim University.Journal of Humanities and Social           Science, 20(11), 74-76.
Schleppegrell, M. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective.            Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schulze, J. (2011). Writing to persuade: A systemic functional view. GIST Educational Research and Teaching Journal, 5, 127-157.
Setyono, B. (2014). Approaches in teaching writing designed by high school English        teachers in Indonesia. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research,          14(1), 477-494.
Silva, T. (1990). Second language composition instruction: Developments, issues and directions   in ESL. In Kroll, B. (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom     (pp. 11-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Steiner, E. (1997). An extended register analysis as a form of text analysis for translation, In G.   Wotjak, and H. Schmidt (Eds.), Models of translation (pp. 235-256). Frankfurt: Vervuert.
Tribble, C.(1997). Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Trong, T. (2011). Teaching writing through genre-based approach. BELT Journal, 2(1), 121         136.
Vandamme, F., & Lowenthal, F. (1986). Pragmatic and language. New York: Plenum Press.
Vanderpyl. G.D., (2012). The process approach as writing instruction in EFL (English as a         Foreign Language) classrooms. MA TESOL Collection SIT Graduate Institute.
Yang, W. H. (2012). A study of students’ perceptions and attitudes towards genre-based ESP       writing instruction. Asian ESP Journal, 8(3), 50-73.
Yasuda, S. (2011). Genre-based tasks in foreign language writing: Developing writer’s genre       awareness, linguistic knowledge, and writing competence. Journal of Second Language       Writing, 20, 111-133.