Reading to Learn: Powerful pedagogy for disciplinary teaching in a high-stakes examination curriculum

: The qualitative study presented here shows how a secondary school history teacher in the United Kingdom transformed her lesson planning and classroom interactions with students following professional development in the genre-based Reading to Learn pedagogy grounded in Systemic Functional Linguistics. The teacher undertook Reading to Learn while teaching a history class preparing for the General Certificate of Secondary Education. The professional development enabled her to analyse the genres and linguistic features of history texts in order to support the development of subject knowledge via the implementation of the teaching strategies designed to support student reading and writing of the texts required by the examination curriculum. The study reporting on the teacher planning and classroom practices includes examples of teacher-student interaction that demonstrate how the teacher was able to approach her disciplinary texts through the lens of genre, thus identifying the existing gap between the reading of informative genres in textbooks and the requirement to write in less familiar evaluative genres in exams. Moreover, the careful planning of strategies to support reading and the annotation of texts, had a positive impact on the joint construction of the less familiar argumentative genre required.


LEER PARA APRENDER: UN MODELO DIDÁCTICO PODEROSO PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DE LENGUA Y CONTENIDO EN CURRÍCULOS CON EXÁMENES ESTANDARIZADOS
Resumen: La finalidad de este trabajo de naturaleza cualitativa es presentar los cambios producidos en la forma de planificación e interacción en aula de una profesora de historia de educación secundaria en el Reino Unido, tras recibir una formación en la didáctica de la escritura basada en géneros, específicamente en el modelo Reading to Learn (Leer para Aprender), con base en la Lingüística Sistémico Funcional.En el marco del curso preparatorio para obtener el Certificado General de Educación Secundaria, la formación incluyó el análisis del lenguaje y de los géneros textuales específicos de la materia, y el conocimiento de estrategias de apoyo a la lectura y a la escritura para abordar la planificación docente.El estudio de las prácticas y de la interacción en aula muestran que la profesora fue capaz de abordar los textos de su disciplina a través de la lente del género discursivo, identificando así la brecha existente entre los géneros de los libros de texto (informativos) y los géneros escritos requeridos en los exámenes (valorativos).Además, la planificación de estrategias de apoyo a la lectura y a las anotaciones sobre el texto incidieron de manera positiva en la construcción conjunta en aula del género textual requerido.

Introduction
Effective literacy pedagogy is far from straightforward.In their synthesis of claims from research concerning the nature of successful pedagogy, Husbands and Pearce (2012) conclude that: Classrooms are complex, multi-faceted and demanding places in which to work and successful pedagogies are correspondingly sophisticated.Highly successful pedagogies develop when teachers make outstanding use of their understanding of the research and knowledgebase for teaching in order to support high-quality planning and practice.The most effective successful classroom practices work these ideas together in systematic and sophisticated ways, and the best teachers are active in building relationships between them.Understanding the ways in which these relationships are built -what Leahy et al. (2005) have called 'minute-by-minute classroom practices' -is itself a fruitful area for both further research and improving practice.(Husbands & Pearce, 2012, p. 16) Such claims resonate with the work of educators who draw on Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) to develop effective literacy pedagogies for teachers and students at different stages of schooling in various contexts around the world.Nonetheless, the focus of this paper is the Reading to Learn (R2L) genre-based literacy pedagogy that distinguishes itself from other SFL based approaches by using principles from SFL to teach both how to read and how to learn from reading as the basis for teaching writing (Rose & Martin, 2012).The recontextualization of robust and well researched concepts from SLF in R2L has led to the development of an integrated system for teaching reading and writing that can be used in all curriculum areas with students of all ages, at any stage of schooling in both national and additional languages (Acevedo et al., 2023).Teachers can learn to implement the pedagogy to improve student outcomes even when only minimal opportunities for professional development are available.The focus on reading as the point of departure for learning in R2L means that teachers and students are guided to focus on the patterns in reading texts at the level of the whole text, the paragraph and the sentence which become the resources for writing high quality texts.This alleviates the need to focus on the explicit teaching of grammar (knowledge about language) and its associated metalanguage in the name of literacy teaching and learning which is commonplace in many genre-based approaches to writing.This qualitative research (Denzin & Lincon, 2000;Freebody, 2003) shows evidence from classroom research into R2L teacher professional learning undertaken in secondary schools in England (Acevedo, 2020) to demonstrate the power of R2L to transform the teaching of a discipline-based teacher after only five days of professional learning (PL).
After describing the context and the content of the PL, the case study demonstrates the transformational power of the teacher learning even in less-than-ideal circumstances in a high-stakes examination driven curriculum context where notions of SFL and genre-based pedagogy were previously unknown and not supported by the educational context at either the school or the national level.

Bringing language to consciousness: A case of R2L professional learning
Reading to Learn distinguishes itself from many genre-based approaches that focus predominantly on teaching writing as it uses principles from SFL to teach both how to read and how to learn from reading as the essential preparation stage for teaching writing.It provides an integrated system for teaching reading and writing that can be used in all curriculum areas with students of all ages, at any stage of schooling in both national and additional languages (see: Acevedo et al., 2023;Blanco Fernández & Moyano, 2021;Navarro, 2019;Rose, 2011).
What follows here is a compelling case of teacher learning that illustrates how a discipline-based teacher with no background in literacy professional learning (PL) was able to bring knowledge about language (KAL) to consciousness over the course of a school year after participating in just five days of R2L workshops and some supplementary mentoring sessions.The teacher was a participant in a classroom research project into R2L professional learning undertaken in secondary schools in London, United Kingdom (Acevedo, 2020).The case uses excerpts from four key learning 'episodes' in the research to highlight how the PL enabled the teacher to move from enacting a typical 'repair' model of teaching to the R2L 'prepare' model of pedagogy.The teacher learning journey explores the initial preparation undertaken to use reading to teach knowledge about language and history via curriculum texts.Then, it demonstrates how the teacher used the R2L strategy of detailed reading to make notes from history texts and to read a model of an argument essay to prepare for the final stages in the pedagogy, joint construction and independent writing.The teacher's learning about preparing for reading and using reading as a preparation for writing demonstrates how bringing knowledge about language to consciousness can enable a teacher to make visible a 'linguistically informed pedagogic pathway' (Coffin, 2006, p. 92) for discipline-based literacy teaching.These findings are particularly relevant to the language teaching context in England where the call for the past century for all teachers to become teachers of English has not yet been translated into practice.

Background to the teacher case
During the 2015-2016 school year, the focus teacher who will be known as 'Carolyn' was teaching a class of 27 Year 10 girls undertaking their first year of the two-year General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE)1 history course which was an elective subject in her school.The class was allocated just three 60-minute lessons per week on the timetable.This meant that teaching time was a scarce resource and this constraint impacted on Carolyn's teaching and also on her implementation of the R2L PL.
Carolyn had more than 20 years of teaching experience and her motivation for participating in the research was to improve the learning of her students at this vital stage of schooling in a subject that relied heavily on reading and writing academic texts.The school was classed as 'disadvantaged' by the Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted) due to above average numbers of students who were categorised as socio-economically disadvantaged and were also learning English as an Additional Language (EAL).
The GCSE (Key Stage 4) history curriculum document, History GCSE subject content (2014), emphasised the 'historical content' of the course and the development of 'knowledge and understanding' of the historical periods and events selected for study.It provided the expectations of what would constitute an appropriately 'historical' way of expressing the content, but without making any specific reference to literacy skills.So, the key role of literacy in historical discourse was not visible, it was a 'hidden' curriculum.Thus, it reflected an essentially 'traditional' objectivist view of history focusing on the teaching of content, while eliding the specific role of language and literacy in enabling the types of communication required.Literacy was taken for granted.As such, the document did little to support the notion of discipline-based teachers like Carolyn taking responsibility for literacy.
Nonetheless, it is the 'specification' documents created by the different GCSE examination boards2 that teachers follow.The history course at Carolyn's school was based on the Welsh Joint Education Committee (WJEC) examination board course.The area being studied when data was collected during the Summer term 2016 was Germany in Transition, c.1919Transition, c. -1947, Topic area 2: Changing life for the German people, 1933-1939(WJEC, 2013, p. 52).
The course went on to specify that students are required to understand, analyse and interpret material from complex texts, and to write appropriate responses to projects and examination questions requiring the evaluation and synthesis of material in order to produce texts that develop an evidence-based point of view.However, the specific 'communication' criteria only acknowledged vocabulary, spelling, punctuation and grammar which alone cannot be expected to account for the development of the advanced literacy skills required in the specification documents.The important role that language and literacy play in the teaching and learning of history was also invisible in the guiding curriculum documents.
Consequently, while the curriculum guidelines required Carolyn to enact a traditional history curriculum that viewed language as 'conduit' to transmit knowledge like a commodity, her participation in the R2L PL challenged her to implement a new and explicit pedagogy that integrated knowledge about language with curriculum knowledge.
Carolyn's learning journey is exemplified here as it was particularly insightful in a number of ways.Firstly, she had no previous background in language focused pedagogy, so her realisations about the role of language in learning and her resulting uptake of new knowledge from the PL provide cogent evidence of how the R2L pedagogy of inclusion, access, authority and autonomy can rapidly make the role of language in learning a visible tool that is capable of transforming teaching in the discipline areas.Secondly, her uptake of the integrated approach to teaching knowledge about language and curriculum in history demonstrates that the long-standing wish of educators in England for all teachers to become teachers of English (Bullock, 1975;Cox, 1989;DfE, 2012;Kingman, 1988;Newbolt, 1921;Ofsted, 2013;Sampson, 1922) can be realised via R2L professional learning.Thirdly, in spite of a range of contextual constraints, such as minimal time for PL and classroom teaching in the fast-paced, highstakes GCSE curriculum, the R2L pedagogy worked synergistically with the exam focused curriculum to optimise teaching and learning in this demanding, time-poor environment.Ultimately, the emphasis that R2L PL places on bringing language to consciousness through repeated encounters with instances of texts and classroom pedagogy, rather than through language exercises, accelerates learning and provides enough knowledge about language for a teacher to integrate language in classroom learning and transform practice for the benefit of all learners.

Context and data
The research project began with a professional learning program consisting of five days of workshops with a group of seven teachers from five secondary schools in inner-London.While a typical R2L professional learning program would consist of eight days of workshops spaced over the course of a school year as well as some school-based mentoring support, budgetary restraints and a tradition of 'one-shot' workshops for teachers in England meant that only fivedays of PL was allowed3 .So, to compensate for the truncated workshop program, the schoolbased mentoring sessions took on additional importance and teachers were offered up to four sessions each with the project leader to scaffold their learning between workshops.Data on the teacher learning process was collected throughout the year.The main sources of data were classroom texts, teacher devised planning documents, films of classroom implementation, teacher interviews and notes from mentoring sessions.

The professional learning workshops
The research process followed the PL sequence as shown in the diagram below (Figure 1).It began with the shortened five-day version of the Reading to Learn workshops and continued with the year-long scaffolding of the teacher learning via the school-based mentoring sessions.The final stage of the PL process, independent classroom implementation, was the focus of the films.The 'bespoke' London PL workshops were developed using the R2L professional learning materials (www.readingtolearn.com.au).A summary of the sequence and content of the London workshops is shown below: The professional learning workshops began by foregrounding the classroom pedagogy, initially drawing on teachers' tacit knowledge about language which is developed during cycles of workshops, classroom implementation and school visits over the course of a year.
To prepare for implementation of the pedagogy, teachers were provided with sample curriculum texts in the PL workshops which they used in the context of the functional model of language to progressively develop skills in text analysis and lesson planning.This experience is designed to build confidence and skills to repeat the process at school with their own texts.Skills in classroom pedagogy are developed by using the R2L pedagogy cycle (Figure 2, below) to guide teachers' choice of strategies.Different possible teaching sequences are modelled using films and classroom simulation during the workshops.The key event that gave rise to the first teacher learning episode was Carolyn's request for support with genre identification on the first school mentoring visit shortly after her participation in the first 2-day R2L workshop.The request initiated a joint text analysis exercise to clarify her understandings about the purposes and genres of the texts she would use for her R2L classroom implementation.
At this early stage in her learning, she found it challenging to use her new knowledge about language from the first PL workshop to identify the genres of texts embedded in her history course books for her GCSE research class.Using the classifications from the map (Figure 3 below) and the table of the genres of schooling (Rose & Martin, 2012, p. 130) provided in the PL materials, she was guided through the approach to genre identification used in the first PL workshop.This begins with what is known as a typological approach4 of classifying genres in a taxonomy (Figure 3) using differential criteria of the main purpose of a text which, offers three categories of choice, or 'family groupings', texts that have the overall social purpose of engaging, informing or evaluating.
This exercise relates the taxonomy to teachers' common, yet often unconscious, knowledge about texts and typically they have little trouble in successfully categorising sample texts into the three main family groupings.In the workshop, Carolyn articulated that the predominate purpose of the texts her students were reading in their textbooks was to inform.However, the texts her students were frequently required to write for their GCSE examinations had the purpose of evaluating.The GCSE examinations required students to write arguments and the implication of this issue for teaching was discussed.Once texts have been sorted according to the typological method, of 'in' or 'out' based on oppositional characteristics of purpose, the next stage is to further categorise them according to their genre by determining their specific purposes and naming them using the table of the genres of schooling for guidance (Rose & Martin, 2012, p. 130).This is where the process becomes more challenging for teachers however, as genres within the same family groupings share similar or overlapping purposes, stages and functional features.So, a more nuanced or topological5 approach is adopted by providing teachers with a set of more specific functional features (Martin & Rose, 2008) to further categorise texts by genre according to varying degrees of similarity between the related genres.
This activity requires teachers to read and think through each sample text, focusing specifically on what it is doing rather than just what it is about which is an important step in developing teacher knowledge about language from an SFL perspective.By using the functional labels given to the different genres, teachers also take the first step towards building a pedagogic metalanguage, to later share with students as part of the genre-based classroom pedagogy.

Genre Knowledge: achievements and challenges
In Carolyn's case, the workshop identification exercise enabled her to postulate that many of her informing texts were organised by time and would thus be clustered in the chronicling group.She also thought that her students would be reading and writing explanations and arguments, but she would need to examine the texts in her course books at school carefully to decide on the range of texts she might encounter.While teachers working in groups may quickly identify different genres in the workshop setting, often more practice is required before they can confidently identify genres such as those that Carolyn was faced with in her GCSE textbook.The purpose of the school visits was to address issues such as these so that teachers feel confident enough to begin implementation of the pedagogy in the classroom as soon as possible.So, Carolyn's request for support with genre identification is one that might routinely be taken up on a school visit.
The task of genre identification had additional challenges for Carolyn.A common layout in the textbooks she was using was a single or double page spread on a topic with a collage style presentation of short written texts usually comprised of both primary and secondary sources in different genres, as well as material in other modes such as images, tables and diagrams.This is exemplified below (Figure 4) on two pages from Carolyn's GCSE history textbook: The USA 1910-1929& Germany 1929-1947(Wright, et al., 2010, pp.170-171).
This type of layout meant that identifying the purpose of each short text was often challenging as it was not always possible to read the texts discretely.The written texts not only needed to be read in conjunction with the co-texts on the page, often in different genres and modalities, but they were frequently linked in different ways to texts from preceding and subsequent pages and sections of the textbook.They formed part of a larger overall text spanning an entire section or a complete chapter of the textbook.
A history textbook in this style, made up of many short texts of differing genres, can be considered as a macrogenre7 (Martin & Rose, 2008) in that it has the overall purpose of chronologically ordering past events and their historical, social and political significance to form what might be called an overall 'narrative' or in genre terms an historical account.
The overall purpose of the textbook is achieved via sections and chapters focused on specific periods of time and events of significance that are made up by shorter texts of differing genres in different modalities.Accordingly, the textbook is made up of smaller texts woven together or 'nested' within larger texts with a similar but not always identical overall purpose.
Texts that were part of a macrogenre were not used in the genre identification exercises in the PL workshop so, although the notion was referred to, Carolyn had difficulties when faced with identifying such texts alone at school.All of the texts we examined during the first school visit were short texts that were part of textbook macrogenres.
The examination of the genres of her coursebook texts led her to realise that, while they were usually quite short, the way in which they were embedded in the overall macro-structure of the textbook meant that their meanings were not as easily accessible as their brevity suggested.
A further key realisation that came to light during discussion was that the GCSE examination board essay questions which were also used for classroom writing tasks required answers in evaluative genres that were not frequent in the textbooks.Therefore, her students were rarely reading argument texts which is a key, yet challenging, genre required for GCSE essay writing.So, by working through her own texts, Carolyn became conscious that her texts had different purposes and were structured differently to achieve those purposes.While she initially struggled with this previously 'invisible' concept of genre, once it had become 'visible' it became an impetus for further learning and she planned to share the new knowledge with her students via the R2L teaching sequence.

The R2L professional learning research process, 'Episode 2': Planning the R2L teaching sequence
The motivation for the development of what is being described here as her second 'learning episode' was a comment recorded by Carolyn during the reflective group discussion session at the commencement of the second PL workshop (Day 3) in January 2016.She recorded the following reflection that brought up an issue regarding pedagogy: I'm not sure what to do when the writing task is a different genre to the text they are reading.(January 6, 2016) While this comment attests to the fact that Carolyn's knowledge about language (KAL) from the first PL workshop and school visit had enabled her to identify the difference in the genres her students were required to read in the history textbooks and those that they are required to write in essays, it simultaneously raised a new issue for her concerning the pedagogy.It revealed that she had not yet understood how the pedagogy sequence from the PL could be used as an effective tool to mediate the difference between reading in one genre and writing in another.In Carolyn's initial stages of classroom implementation, she had been reading, taking notes and then writing new texts with her students in the same genre (see: left-hand side of Figure 5 above).So, the reading texts modelled the genre that the class was required to write, and she and her class had been developing fluency in the pedagogy: ... the beauty of it, actually, [was that] I didn't have to do 'death by PowerPoint' or produce a worksheet or anything.It was simply -What text am I using?Let's copy it, give them all a highlighter, boom....They were very enthusiastic'.(Carolyn, July 13, 2016) However, when the genres for reading and writing are different, an additional layer of pedagogy is required to include the reading of another text that models the target genre for writing.Although this issue had been discussed briefly in the first workshop, it had now become a real issue for Carolyn, and she needed bring another layer of the new knowledge about pedagogy to consciousness.
The sequence necessary to scaffold reading in one genre and writing in another is illustrated in the annotated and numbered boxes in Figure 5 above.The sequence would begin with preparing for reading followed by detailed reading which includes notetaking of key information from the first reading text(s).This information is then 'set aside'.Then, a text that models the target genre for writing is selected for preparing for reading, detailed reading and annotation, the focus is on structure and linguistic features, rather than content (a text on a familiar topic is good choice for this step).Finally, the content from the first text, in note form, and the genre structure of the second text are used in combination during a teacher led joint construction of a new text in the target genre.This builds students' skills and experience thereby enabling them to repeat the process in groups or individually with diminishing support to ultimately produce independent texts for assessment.
Following the second PL workshop, Carolyn attempted to implement the pedagogy sequence discussed.She planned another lesson where she intended to read a recount from the textbook paragraph-by paragraph, take notes and lead the class in a joint construction of an argument essay (see Table 2, Lesson 1, below).
However, on a mentoring visit after the lesson, she recounted how she had not achieved her goal of joint writing with her students because she had planned too much for just one lesson.Carolyn had not fully appreciated the extent of the explicit support required from the teacher to enable students to write in a challenging, unfamiliar genre.She had always thought that as long as her students understood the content through reading, "that it would be enough" (Carolyn, May 2016) to enable the writing to flow easily from the notes as it had done when they were writing together in the same genre as they were reading.Nonetheless, the experience of Lesson 1 (Table 2) had made her conscious of the need to also read and highlight the features of a model of writing in the target argument genre in order to adequately prepare students for the joint construction of the new text.
The planning for two additional, linked lessons in Table 3 (below) demonstrates the additional support that Carolyn came to realise that her students would require to write successful argument texts.As shown above, Lesson 2 would focus on reading a series of short historical accounts in the textbook on the topic of youth opposition to the Nazis.She would begin by leading the class to read one of the texts using detailed reading to highlight information from each sentence.The information would then be scribed as notes on the board in a grid rather than in the chronological order in which it appeared in the textbook.The grid was organised in categories of opposition and Nazi reaction for each group as shown in Table 3 above.This modelled for the students how information from a chronologically organised reading text can be reorganised to allow for evaluation in preparation for the writing of a rhetorically structured argument text.Students would then work in groups for the remainder of the lesson, reading the other texts and taking notes in their grids to use in Lesson 3. The innovative step of reorganising the chronologically ordered information from the historical accounts demonstrates Carolyn's understanding of some important differences between reading about events that happened in real time in the past, to writing issues expressed as abstractions (identified linguistically as nominalisations) which are organised rhetorically in 'text time' in an argument.
Lesson 3 was to include the step that was missing from the previously planned Lesson  2).This demonstrates her understanding of modelling the target genre by choosing a text with different, yet familiar, field information.As students would already be familiar with the content of the argument from Lesson 1 -employment restrictions placed on Jews -Carolyn could focus their attention on the structure and language features of an argument during reading, without needing to focus on the comprehension of any new content.
The joint construction of the new argument would then be guided by the structure of the model argument text but would use the content about opposition from youth groups recorded on the note-taking grid in Lesson 2. Students would then continue to write the text in groups in class and finish it for homework.
The impact of the PL on Carolyn's preparation for classroom teaching is evident from her planning of the three-lesson R2L lesson sequence above.It demonstrates her ability to apply her new knowledge about language (KAL) to the tasks of identify the genres of her history texts, and to plan to use the pedagogy as an explicit tool to build a bridge between the different genres and overcome the challenge she identified for her students when they are required to read in one genre but use the information to write in another.

The teacher learning journey, 'Episode 3': Preparing for reading and Detailed reading
Learning episode 3 is based on the filming of Carolyn's enactment of her planned Lesson 3. It focuses on the reading stage of the lesson where she enacts the R2L pedagogy stages of preparing for reading and detailed reading of the model argument essay on the topic from Lesson 1 to prepare students for the subsequent joint construction stage of the lesson.
The discourse from the filming of her lesson was transcribed for analysis using a synoptic approach to view the transcript as the text of a curriculum genre, unfolding through constituent stages and phases.Shifts in the discourse and pedagogic activity were identified and the lesson has been mapped8 as shown below in Table 4 9 .
The enactment of the stages and phases of Carolyn's Lesson 3 is displayed in Table 4 above.Carolyn's uptake of new knowledge about pedagogy from the PL is evident from the close alignment of her enacted teaching with her planning (in Tables 2 & 3).In the classroom she specifically focused on reading the argument genre, focusing on the structure, to prepare for the joint construction.According to international meta-research on successful PL initiatives, she demonstrates that she has developed a conscious understanding of the pedagogy as she can be seen to be 'actively engaging with, owning, and applying new theory and practice to change practice substantively' (Timperley et al., 2007, p. 14).
According to Carolyn's lesson plan for Detailed reading her focus would be on the structural and the linguistic features of the argument genre as the class would later write an argument in a new field on the topic of youth opposition to the Nazis, using notes taken from the textbook in Lesson 2.
Table 5 (below) provides an example of a Detailed reading interaction cycle from Lesson 3. The table shows each of the moves as exchanges of information between primary and secondary 'knowers' (K1 and K2), in the first right-hand column.The second right-hand column identifies the R2L cycle phases and the final column shows what the interaction is about.
The R2L interaction pattern enables all learners to participate by repeatedly using the R2L cycle phases (Figure 7 below) of prepare -focus -identify -affirm -elaborate.The prepare and focus phases tell the students what the wording is about so they can expect what comes next.In the excerpt above, in the focus phase, Carolyn oriented her students to the role of the wording using the term analysis from their shared GCSE metalanguage -a phrase or set of words that tells us we're going to make an analysis comment -so that all students could then identify the wording.The student in the excerpt above did not initially provide the word -because -which was key to explaining why, so Carolyn had to provide an additional preparation cue for the student to identify one more word.The student was then affirmed by the repetition of -because -, which is the important link in reasoning that connects the everyday word -because -to its key role in introducing an analysis comment in the argument.Carolyn then elaborated, linking because to its role in providing a reason.Carolyn and the students then highlighted the wording together as she gave the command as shown in the image below.
As the lesson progressed, Carolyn had no further need to direct the students to highlight with a verbal command, instead she merely used her body language to highlight and the students did the same.Her careful reading and preparation of the lesson had enabled her to lead all students to successfully participate in the learning via the repetition of the R2L discourse pattern which set up an important expectancy relationship in the interaction that allowed the cycle to drive the lesson forward.
The student 'engagement' she experienced gave Carolyn a sense of freedom from the burden of trying to explain to students in a one-way fashion as she had done in her previous 'repair' style of teaching: Doing the detailed reading was really very, very effective, I think, because, you know, getting them to identify the words in the text kept them engaged in it.Whereas, before, when you've been explaining what a text means, those difficult words or concepts, it tends to be very one-way.(July 2016)  She commented on the impact that the focus on reading in the PL had on her own reading of curriculum texts in preparation for classroom teaching: It also forced me to be more familiar with a text before I used it with them.You know, sometimes when you're a bit late… Oh, you just pick it up, and you don't really engage with it in enough detail to make the most of it in the classroom.(Carolyn, July 13, 2016) Carolyn perceived that she was able to make better use of curriculum texts in the classroom if she read them thoroughly as part of lesson preparation, compared to her previous practice of a more cursory, content focused, reading of the texts.She also commented that she had acquired KAL that enabled her not only to -identify genres -but also -to structure models and responses -and -to use the labels and the patterns in the text.The filmed lesson demonstrated how she was able to identify the purpose, genres and structure of her classroom texts and successfully use that knowledge as part of her classroom the pedagogy.
A further point made by Carolyn concerns a significant difference between her old and new practices with regard to the use of reading as a resource for learning: [the PL] had a big effect, because, as I say, choosing the text, it made me less afraid of using complex texts, because what I used to do was I'd dumb it down or, you know, I'd simplify it, or just use little sections of a textbook.But, actually, it made me much more confident in using, you know, the text as it stood on the page.(Carolyn, July 13, 2016) The focus on reading for learning in the R2L teacher PL impacted cumulatively on Carolyn's practice in a number of significant ways.The classroom implementation illustrated in this learning episode was the culmination of the prior learning about genre from the PL which she applied to her own reading and preparation of curriculum texts in episode one.This knowledge was then built on to plan a pedagogical sequence in episode two, for the eventual classroom teaching of reading demonstrated in this episode.

The teacher learning journey, 'Episode 4': argument writing in the history classroom
The possibility of improvement in student writing was a key factor that motivated Carolyn's participation in R2L PL and this final learning episode demonstrates how she prepared and enacted the teacher-led, whole-class writing strategy, joint construction.This stage of Lesson 3 is the culmination of the three-lesson R2L teaching sequence she designed specifically to model writing in the unfamiliar argument genre which is highly valued in GCSE course work and examinations.
As R2L is an integrated pedagogy that teaches knowledge about curriculum and language, it develops reading for both comprehension and as a key resource for writing.So, the distinctive feature of R2L joint construction is that the reading texts are the focus and the source for the joint writing which, in turn, models the process for students' final goal of individual construction of successful texts.
The term joint construction is typically associated with the well-known three-stage genre writing cycle -deconstruction -joint construction -independent construction - (Rothery, 1994).More recently, this joint construction stage of the writing cycle has been further analysed as consisting of three stages: bridging, the transition from deconstruction to joint construction; text negotiation, where the joint construction takes place; and, review, where the jointly constructed text is edited (Dreyfus et al., 2011).
Carolyn's enactment of R2L joint construction shows similarities and differences with genre writing pedagogy.While it begins in a similar fashion to the genre writing strategy with a bridging stage from reading to writing, in R2L called preparing for writing, the key difference is that this is followed by only one more stage, text negotiation/joint construction, as the review stage from the genre writing pedagogy is redundant in R2L.The careful preparation undertaken prior to the joint construction allowed the teacher to actively engage the students in the joint construction by delegating the processes of dictating and scribing the new text on the board to her students.This created a cycle of participation that drove the lesson forward, the students proposed wordings that were discussed before being dictated to the scribes who took turns in writing sections of the new text on the board on behalf of the whole class.
The excerpt of classroom discourse in Table 6 illustrates how the notes taken from the curriculum text, read in a preceding lesson, as well as the annotated model of an argument text, read earlier in the lesson negate the need for the review stage that characterises the genre writing pedagogy.As all students had equal access to the notes and were thus well prepared to participate in the joint construction a 'repair' stage is superfluous in R2L joint construction.Not having to generate new ideas or retrieve historical information from memory during the writing stage lightens the cognitive for both the students and the teacher.Thus, Carolyn was able to focus on guiding the class to transform the information from the time-organised historical accounts into evidence to support a point of view in a rhetorically organised argument.

Conclusion
The elements of Carolyn's learning journey that were selected for exemplification here are particularly insightful in a number of ways.Firstly, she had no previous background in language focused pedagogy, so her realisations about the role of language in learning and her resulting uptake of new knowledge from the PL provide cogent evidence of how the R2L pedagogy of inclusion, access, authority and autonomy can rapidly make the role of language in learning a visible tool that is capable of transforming teaching in the discipline areas.
Secondly, her uptake of the integrated approach to teaching knowledge about language and curriculum in history demonstrates that the long-standing wish of educators in England all teachers to become teachers of English for the past century (Bullock, 1975;Cox, 1989;DfE, 2012;Kingman, 1988;Newbolt, 1921;Ofsted, 2013;Sampson, 1922) can be realised via R2L professional learning.
Thirdly, in spite of a range of contextual constraints, such as minimal time for PL and classroom teaching in the fast-paced, high-stakes GCSE curriculum, the R2L pedagogy worked synergistically with the exam focused curriculum to optimise teaching and learning in this demanding, time-poor environment.Ultimately, the emphasis that R2L PL places on bringing language to consciousness through repeated encounters with instances of texts and classroom pedagogy, rather than through language exercises, accelerates learning and provides enough knowledge about language for a teacher to integrate language in classroom learning and transform practice for the benefit of all learners.

Figure 5 .
Figure 5. R2L pedagogy sequence for reading in one genre and writing in another (adapted from Rose, 2014).
1.It was based around reading a model of an argument text before writing a new joint class text.Carolyn planned to use a model of an argument text based on the content of Lesson 1 (Table

Figure 6 .
Figure 6.Notes with field information for joint construction.

Table 1 .
Summary of the Reading to Learn workshop content.

Table 5 .
Detailed reading interaction pattern.

Table 6 .
Text negotiation/Joint construction, including create, reflect and edit phases earning episode 3 is based on the filming of Carolyn's enactment.