A Genre-Based Approach to Writing Instruction in EFL Classroom Contexts
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored how 14 foreign-language writers at a university in Japan changed their genre awareness of discussion genre texts (particularly argumentative essays) during a 15-week systemic functional linguistics course consisting of text-based writing lessons assigned as part of a teaching and learning cycle. To obtain in-depth quantitative and qualitative insights into changes in the students’ awareness of genre and writing skills, pre- and post-surveys and self-reflection written texts were administered and analyzed. Twelve previously proposed criteria (covering generic structure, lexicogrammar, and multidimensional analyses of attitudes and performance) were used to analyze the self-reflection texts. The preliminary results showed that the students’ understanding of generic structure and lexicogrammar improved, especially their comprehension of the second and third paragraphs of the target genre text. The preliminary results of the correlation analysis illustrated that the increased understanding of lexicogrammatical features, such as textual meaning, interpersonal meaning, and experiential meaning, was related to their self-efficacy and confidence in their writing skills. The preliminary analysis results indicated that that applying a teaching and learning cycle and a genre-based approach to writing instruction has the potential to enhance EFL students’ awareness of generic structure and interpersonal meaning in writing argumentative essays.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it