Authors : Eliasanti Agustina; Ahmad Munir; Slamet Setiawan

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 10 - October

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/wp8kjn58

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26Oct125

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : Digital communication has changed what counts as writing in higher education. Students compose across word processors, collaborative platforms, websites, presentations, infographics, video, and generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) environments, yet writing pedagogy often remains organized around monomodal print genres and sentence-level correctness. This conceptual article develops an integrated framework that connects Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), the Genre-Based Approach (GBA), and digital multimodal composing (DMC). Using an integrative, theorybuilding design (Jabareen, 2009; Torraco, 2016) and a transparent literature procedure reported with reference to PRISMA 2020 principles (Page et al., 2021), the article synthesizes foundational works and 2021–2026 research in L2 writing, English for Academic Purposes, multimodality, and GenAI-mediated composition. Five research gaps are identified: limited integration of SFL genre pedagogy and DMC, weak alignment between multimodal tasks and assessment, an under-specified linguistic dimension of digital composing, limited transfer evidence, and misalignment between GenAI-supported composing and conventional assessment. In response, the article proposes an eight-phase SFLInformed Digital Genre Pedagogy framework and a six-dimension assessment architecture. Its novelty lies in aligning field–tenor–mode analysis, genre staging, and multimodal orchestration within one teaching–learning cycle; deriving assessment dimensions from the same phases; treating GenAI output as an object of functional-genre evaluation and verification; and adding a functional-sufficiency principle for metalanguage. Theoretical validity is argued through a traceability matrix and internal-consistency checks, and a staged protocol for empirical validation (expert review with content validity indices, rubric reliability, and argument-based validation) is specified. The framework is offered as a testable design architecture rather than an empirically validated model.

Keywords : Digital Writing; Systemic Functional Linguistics; Genre-Based Pedagogy; Multimodality; Digital Multimodal Composing; Higher Education; L2 Writing; Assessment.

References :

1. Asadi, M., Ebadi, S., & Mohammadi, L. (2025). The impact of integrating ChatGPT with teachers’ feedback on EFL writing skills. Thinking Skills and Creativity, Article 101766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101766
2. Baig, M. I., & Yadegaridehkordi, E. (2024). ChatGPT in higher education: A systematic literature review and research challenges. International Journal of Educational Research, 127, Article 102411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102411
3. Barrot, J. S. (2023). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Pitfalls and potentials. Assessing Writing, 57, Article 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100745
4. Bearman, M., & Ajjawi, R. (2023). Learning to work with the black box: Pedagogy for a world with artificial intelligence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54(5), 1160–1173. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13337
5. Bearman, M., Tai, J., Dawson, P., Boud, D., & Ajjawi, R. (2024). Developing evaluative judgement for a time of generative artificial intelligence. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(6), 893–905. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2335321
6. Belcher, D. (2017). On becoming facilitators of multimodal composing and digital design. Journal of Second Language Writing, 38, 80–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.10.004
7. Bezemer, J., & Kress, G. (2008). Writing in multimodal texts: A social semiotic account of designs for learning. Written Communication, 25(2), 166–195.
8. Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871
9. Brisk, M. E., Tian, Z., & Ballard, E. (2021). Autobiography writing instruction: The journey of a teacher participating in a systemic functional linguistics genre pedagogy professional development. System, 97, Article 102429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102429
10. Burnett, R. E., Frazee, A., Hanggi, K., & Madden, A. (2014). A programmatic ecology of assessment: Using a common rubric to evaluate multimodal processes and artifacts. Computers and Composition, 31, 53–66.
11. Chan, C. K. Y. (2023). A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00408-3
12. Cimasko, T., & Shin, D. (2017). Multimodal resemiotization and authorial agency in an L2 writing classroom. Written Communication, 34(4), 387–413.
13. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (Eds.). (2015). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Learning by design. Palgrave Macmillan.
14. Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
15. de Oliveira, L. C., & dos Santos, A. E. (2025). Using AI text generated mentor texts for genre based pedagogy in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, Article 101184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2025.101184
16. Emilia, E., & Hamied, F. A. (2015). Systemic functional linguistic genre pedagogy (SFL GP) in a tertiary EFL writing context in Indonesia. TEFLIN Journal, 26(2), 155–182.
17. Gebhard, M., Chen, I.-A., Graham, H., & Gunawan, W. (2013). Teaching to mean, writing to mean: SFL, L2 literacy, and teacher education. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(2), 107–124.
18. Godwin-Jones, R. (2022). Partnering with AI: Intelligent writing assistance and instructed language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 26(2), 5–24.
19. Guo, K., & Wang, D. (2024). To resist it or to embrace it? Examining ChatGPT’s potential to support teacher feedback in EFL writing. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 8435–8463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12146-0
20. Hafner, C. A., & Ho, W. Y. J. (2020). Assessing digital multimodal composing in second language writing: Towards a process-based model. Journal of Second Language Writing, 47, Article 100710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100710
21. Hafner, C. A. (2014). Embedding digital literacies in English language teaching: Students’ digital video projects as multimodal ensembles. TESOL Quarterly, 48(4), 655–685.
22. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). Routledge.
23. Horverak, M. O. (2016). An experimental study on the effect of systemic functional linguistics applied through a genre-pedagogy approach to teaching writing. Yearbook of the Poznań Linguistic Meeting, 2, 67–89.
24. Hsu, C.-C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 12(10), 1–8.
25. Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(3), 148–164.
26. Ibrahim, K., & Kirkpatrick, R. (2024). Potentials and implications of ChatGPT for ESL writing instruction. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 25(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v25i3.7820
27. Jaakkola, E. (2020). Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches. AMS Review, 10(1–2), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0
28. Jabareen, Y. (2009). Building a conceptual framework: Philosophy, definitions, and procedure. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(4), 49–62.
29. Jewitt, C., Bezemer, J., & O’Halloran, K. (2016). Introducing multimodality. Routledge.
30. Jiang, J. (2024). When generative artificial intelligence meets multimodal composition: Rethinking the composition process through an AI-assisted design project. Computers and Composition, 74, Article 102883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102883
31. Jiang, L. (2017). The affordances of digital multimodal composing for EFL learning. ELT Journal, 71(4), 413–422. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw098
32. Jiang, L. (2018). Digital multimodal composing and investment change in learners’ writing in English as a foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 40, 60–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2018.03.002
33. Jiang, L., Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2022). Developing a genre-based model for assessing digital multimodal composing in second language writing: Integrating theory with practice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 57, Article 100869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2022.100869
34. Kane, M. T. (2013). Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50(1), 1–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12000
35. Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., … Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, Article 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
36. Kim, Y., & Belcher, D. (2020). Multimodal composing and traditional essays: Linguistic performance and learner perceptions. RELC Journal, 51(1), 86–100.
37. Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2023). ChatGPT for language teaching and learning. RELC Journal, 54(2), 537–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231162868
38. Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
39. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd ed.). Routledge.
40. Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge.
41. Li, M., & Akoto, M. (2021). Review of recent research on L2 digital multimodal composing. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 11(3), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.2021070101
42. Liardet, C., Webre, A.-C., Nagao, A., Kartika-Ningsih, H., & Xuan, W. W. (2026). SFL genre-based writing research in the university EAP classroom: A systematic review from 1995 to 2024. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, Article 101707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2026.101707
43. Lim, J., & Polio, C. (2020). Multimodal assignments in higher education: Implications for multimodal writing tasks for L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 47, Article 100713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100713
44. Liu, H., Ismail, L., & Ahmad, N. K. (2024). Genre-based approaches and ESL/EFL writing: A review of the literature. World Journal of English Language, 14(2), 25. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v14n2p25
45. Lo, C. K., Yu, P. L. H., Xu, S., Ng, D. T. K., & Jong, M. S. Y. (2024). Exploring the application of ChatGPT in ESL/EFL education and related research issues: A systematic review of empirical studies. Smart Learning Environments, 11, Article 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00342-5
46. Lodge, J. M., Howard, S., Bearman, M., Dawson, P., & Associates. (2023). Assessment reform for the age of artificial intelligence. Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency.
47. Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35(6), 382–386.
48. Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2008). Genre relations: Mapping culture. Equinox.
49. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741
50. Mills, K. A. (2010). A review of the ‘digital turn’ in the new literacy studies. Review of Educational Research, 80(2), 246–271.
51. Mizumoto, A., & Eguchi, M. (2023). Exploring the potential of using an AI language model for automated essay scoring. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 2(2), Article 100050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100050
52. Nagao, A. (2018). A genre-based approach to writing instruction in EFL classroom contexts. English Language Teaching, 11(5), 130–147.
53. Nagao, A. (2019). The SFL genre-based approach to writing in EFL contexts. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 4(1), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-019-0069-3
54. Nagao, A. (2022). A genre-based approach to teaching descriptive report writing to Japanese EFL university students. TESL-EJ. https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.26103a13
55. New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92.
56. Okoli, C., & Pawlowski, S. D. (2004). The Delphi method as a research tool: An example, design considerations and applications. Information & Management, 42(1), 15–29.
57. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, Article n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
58. Perkins, M. (2023). Academic integrity considerations of AI large language models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 20(2), Article 07. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.02.07
59. Peungcharoenkun, T., & Waluyo, B. (2023). Implementing process genre approach, feedback, and technology in L2 writing in higher education. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-023-00211-7
60. Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29(5), 489–497.
61. Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T., & Owen, S. V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 30(4), 459–467.
62. Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy in the Sydney School. Equinox.
63. Shin, D. S., & Cimasko, T. (2008). Multimodal composition in a college ESL class: New tools, traditional norms. Computers and Composition, 25(4), 376–395.
64. Smith, B. E., Shimizu, A., Burriss, S. K., Hundley, M., & Pendergrass, E. (2025). Multimodal composing with generative AI: Examining preservice teachers’ processes and perspectives. Computers and Composition, 75.
65. Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
66. Steiss, J., Tate, T., Graham, S., Cruz, J., Hebert, M., Wang, J., Moon, Y., Tseng, W., Warschauer, M., & Olson, C. B. (2024). Comparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback of students’ writing. Learning and Instruction, 91, Article 101894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101894
67. Stewart, N., & Zheng, Y. (2024). Generative AI’s recolonization of EFL classrooms: The case of continuation writing. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.24091.ste
68. Su, Y., Lin, Y., & Lai, C. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing classrooms. Assessing Writing, 57, Article 100752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100752
69. Sukhera, J. (2022). Narrative reviews: Flexible, rigorous, and practical. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 14(4), 414–417. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-22-00480.1
70. Tai, H. Y., Lin, M. F., & Chen, Y. S. (2025). Incorporating ChatGPT into genre-based instruction for argumentative writing among EFL college students. International Journal of Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12777
71. Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing integrative literature reviews: Using the past and present to explore the future. Human Resource Development Review, 15(4), 404–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484316671606
72. Triastuti, A., Madya, S., & Chappell, P. (2022). Genre-based teaching cycle and instructional design for teaching texts and mandated curriculum contents. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v12i1.46563
73. Unsworth, L., & Mills, K. A. (2020). English language teaching of attitude and emotion in digital multimodal composition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 47, Article 100712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100712
74. Uzun, K., & Topkaya, E. Z. (2020). The effects of genre-based instruction and genre-focused feedback on L2 writing performance. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 36(5), 438–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2019.1661317
75. Whetten, D. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 490–495.
76. Xu, W., Tan, X., Wang, C., & Fu, D. (2025). Does digital multimodal composing help improve EFL students’ metacognitive knowledge? Language Learning & Technology, 29(3).
77. Xu, Y.-Q. (2021). Investigating the effects of digital multimodal composing on Chinese EFL learners’ writing performance: A quasi-experimental study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36(4), 785–805. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1945635
78. Yan, D. (2023). Impact of ChatGPT on learners in a L2 writing practicum: An exploratory investigation. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 13943–13967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11742-4
79. Yasuda, S. (2011). Genre-based tasks in foreign language writing: Developing writers’ genre awareness, linguistic knowledge, and writing competence. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(2), 111–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2011.03.001
80. Yasuda, S. (2017). Toward a framework for linking linguistic knowledge and writing expertise: Interplay between SFL-based genre pedagogy and task-based language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 51(3), 576–606. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.383
81. Yusuf, F. N., & Rofiawati, O. (2024). Does systemic functional linguistics genre pedagogy facilitate Islamic school students’ writing? Indonesian EFL Journal, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.25134/ieflj.v10i1.9304
82. Zainurrahman, Z., Emilia, E., & Rodliyah, R. S. (2026). A genre-based approach with GenAI feedback to teaching written exposition in a tertiary EFL context in Indonesia. TESL-EJ. https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.30117a8
83. Zhang, E. D., & Yu, S. (2023a). Conceptualizing digital multimodal composing competence in L2 classroom: A qualitative inquiry. Computer Assisted Language Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2023.2177310
84. Zhang, E. D., & Yu, S. (2023b). The development and validation of an L2 student digital multimodal composing competence scale. Computer Assisted Language Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2023.2201342
85. Zhang, E. D., & Yu, S. (2025). Assessing L2 digital multimodal composing competence. Routledge.
86. Zhang, M., Akoto, M., & Li, M. (2021). Digital multimodal composing in post-secondary L2 settings: A review of the empirical landscape. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36(4), 694–721. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1942068
87. Zhang, Y., & Liu, Y. (2025). Designing ChatGPT-mediated feedback activities in EFL writing: A design-based study of the dialogic feedback triangle. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2025.2571846
88. Zhang, Y., & Pramoolsook, I. (2022). Integrating genre with ethnography as methodology in understanding L2 writing instruction in a Chinese university. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 7, Article 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-00131-y