Post for March 10 class

         I found this week's reading on Schleppegrell and Oliveira's "An integrated language and content approach for history teachers" to be very interesting and thought provoking. For a few weeks now, we have been discussing as a class the notion that integrating language and content has pedagogic value, as the use of meaningful language will motivate students and enable content learning along with language learning. Before reading this week's article, however, I understood this concept merely on the surface level, but was not quite sure how the idea would actually function in a classroom context or how teachers would incorporate the relevant techniques. I found that Schleppegrell and Oliveira did an excellent job answering and explaining all of the questions a teacher new to this concept may have through their discussion of language and content approach in the secondary history classroom.
         The authors state that systematic functional linguistics is a theory that does not separately address language and content, but instead sees language as the realization of meaning in context. Prior to this reading, I think I was primarily focusing on the concept of addressing language in the classroom prior to or after addressing context, but not the two as one process together. The author's statement here, however, helped me realize that the the theory of systematic functional linguistics does not keep language and context separate, but uses the study of language to more thoroughly understand context. My mental approach to any additional readings or discussions related to this topic will be much different from now on.
         Finally, I found Schleppegrell and Oliveira's discussion of history specific techniques to be extremely relevant and similar in nature to legal analysis. The authors point out that teachers have remarked on the insights they gain into their students' understanding when they ask them to unpack complex nominal elements by trying to specify precisely, and in more "everyday language," the information presented. I ask my students to do this all the time, particularly with rigid statutory language, the Constitution itself, or even hundreds of years old case law. I find myself frequently saying, "Now how would you explain that in your own words?" or "How would you describe that to someone if you were speaking with them at a cocktail party?" This forces the students to actually break down and unpack the language, giving them a greater understanding of the meanings embedded in the text, rather than just assuming that reading the actual words is enough. 
         I also enjoyed the authors' discussion of the benefits here for both struggling and proficient readers. It is very important for all of my students to participate in the class' discussion of legal writing and analysis, so the fact that systematic functional linguistics can greatly benefit both types of readers is definitely a plus!

Whitney Kouvaris