Improving EFL Students' Stance-Taking in Academic Writing with SFL-Based Instruction: A Qualitative Inquiry
Saved in:
| Title: | Improving EFL Students' Stance-Taking in Academic Writing with SFL-Based Instruction: A Qualitative Inquiry |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Lu Zhang (ORCID |
| Source: | Language Teaching Research. 2026 30(4):1984-2005. |
| Availability: | SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 22 |
| Publication Date: | 2026 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | English (Second Language), Second Language Learning, Academic Language, Persuasive Discourse, Foreign Countries, Undergraduate Students, Direct Instruction, Intervention, Writing Instruction, Majors (Students), Second Language Instruction, Writing Improvement |
| Geographic Terms: | China |
| DOI: | 10.1177/13621688231164758 |
| ISSN: | 1362-1688 1477-0954 |
| Abstract: | Students of English as a foreign language (EFL) are often found to have weak control over authorial stance for constructing persuasive argumentation in academic writing. However, little interventional research has been reported on improving students' stance-taking, particularly the patterning of stance resources. To fill the gap, we conducted this quasi-experimental study to explore the effects of the systemic functional linguistics (SFL) Engagement system as a pedagogical affordance on improving EFL students' stance-taking with a pre- and post-test design. Forty-six Chinese EFL undergraduate students were randomly assigned either to a treatment group or a comparison group. The treatment group was provided with a seven-week intervention which included explicit instruction in stance-taking, while the comparison group received regular writing instruction that did not involve the teacher teaching stance-taking explicitly to students. Upon completion of the intervention, we conducted qualitative analysis of stance patterns and found across-group differences. Students in the treatment group were more capable of establishing argumentation through an alternation of contractive and expansive stances. The stance patterns for introducing external sources further indicate their enhanced undertaking of authorial responsibility and better incorporation of sources. However, both groups kept using unspecified sources in stance attributions. We conclude our study with a discussion of pedagogical implications. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2026 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1502807 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Students of English as a foreign language (EFL) are often found to have weak control over authorial stance for constructing persuasive argumentation in academic writing. However, little interventional research has been reported on improving students' stance-taking, particularly the patterning of stance resources. To fill the gap, we conducted this quasi-experimental study to explore the effects of the systemic functional linguistics (SFL) Engagement system as a pedagogical affordance on improving EFL students' stance-taking with a pre- and post-test design. Forty-six Chinese EFL undergraduate students were randomly assigned either to a treatment group or a comparison group. The treatment group was provided with a seven-week intervention which included explicit instruction in stance-taking, while the comparison group received regular writing instruction that did not involve the teacher teaching stance-taking explicitly to students. Upon completion of the intervention, we conducted qualitative analysis of stance patterns and found across-group differences. Students in the treatment group were more capable of establishing argumentation through an alternation of contractive and expansive stances. The stance patterns for introducing external sources further indicate their enhanced undertaking of authorial responsibility and better incorporation of sources. However, both groups kept using unspecified sources in stance attributions. We conclude our study with a discussion of pedagogical implications. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1362-1688 1477-0954 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/13621688231164758 |
