Pub Date : 2023-05-02DOI: 10.1017/S0261444823000095
Marianne Nikolov, Jelena Mihaljević Djigunović
Abstract This article offers insights into trends found in 74 empirical studies on teaching and learning a foreign language (FL) in pre-primary schools in 25 countries. The emerging picture is like that of primary-school programs: most are implemented in English, mostly owing to parents’ enthusiasm rather than evidence on long term FL benefits. Researchers focus on measurable outcomes in the FL rather than embedding studies in what early childhood education and language policies aim for: developing children not only in a FL, but also in their first language and emotional, cognitive, and social domains. A short literature review on how children learn languages and what necessary conditions include, is followed by the evidence empirical studies offer along themes found in them. Research has revealed encouraging results as well as weaknesses, whereas most authors frame their findings in positive terms. Overall, the younger the children the slower their rate of FL development. The field is dominated by FL experts; it would benefit from early childhood expertise to shift it towards the whole child. Although the increase in research is significant, more is necessary to build a model of pre-primary FL programs. A table available online complements the text.
{"title":"Studies on pre-primary learners of foreign languages, their teachers, and parents: A critical overview of publications between 2000 and 2022","authors":"Marianne Nikolov, Jelena Mihaljević Djigunović","doi":"10.1017/S0261444823000095","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444823000095","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article offers insights into trends found in 74 empirical studies on teaching and learning a foreign language (FL) in pre-primary schools in 25 countries. The emerging picture is like that of primary-school programs: most are implemented in English, mostly owing to parents’ enthusiasm rather than evidence on long term FL benefits. Researchers focus on measurable outcomes in the FL rather than embedding studies in what early childhood education and language policies aim for: developing children not only in a FL, but also in their first language and emotional, cognitive, and social domains. A short literature review on how children learn languages and what necessary conditions include, is followed by the evidence empirical studies offer along themes found in them. Research has revealed encouraging results as well as weaknesses, whereas most authors frame their findings in positive terms. Overall, the younger the children the slower their rate of FL development. The field is dominated by FL experts; it would benefit from early childhood expertise to shift it towards the whole child. Although the increase in research is significant, more is necessary to build a model of pre-primary FL programs. A table available online complements the text.","PeriodicalId":47770,"journal":{"name":"Language Teaching","volume":"56 1","pages":"451 - 477"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41554892","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-20DOI: 10.1017/S0261444823000046
A. Cohen, P. Gu, M. Nyikos, Luke Plonsky, Vee Harris, Pamela Gunning, Isobel Kai-Hui Wang, M. Pawlak, Zoe Gavriilidou, Lydia Mitits, J. Sykes, X. Gao
Abstract This article presents reflections from 12 experts on language learners strategy (LLS) research. They were asked to offer their reflections in one of their domains of expertise, linking research into LLS with successful language learning and use practices. In essence, they were called upon to provide a review of recent scholarship by identifying areas where results of research had already led to the enhancement of learner strategy use, as well as to describe ongoing and future research efforts intended to enhance the strategy domain. The LLS areas dealt with include theory building, the dynamics of delivering strategy instruction (SI), meta-analyses of SI, learner diversity, SI for young language learners, SI for fine-tuning the comprehension and production of academic-level, grammar strategies at the macro and micro levels, lessons learned from many years of LLS research in Greece, the past and future roles of technology aimed at enhancing language learning, and applications of LLS in content instruction. This review is intended to provide the field with an updated statement as to where we have been, where we are now, and where we need to go. Ideally, it will provide ideas for future studies.
{"title":"Tangible insights on the strategizing of language learners and users","authors":"A. Cohen, P. Gu, M. Nyikos, Luke Plonsky, Vee Harris, Pamela Gunning, Isobel Kai-Hui Wang, M. Pawlak, Zoe Gavriilidou, Lydia Mitits, J. Sykes, X. Gao","doi":"10.1017/S0261444823000046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444823000046","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article presents reflections from 12 experts on language learners strategy (LLS) research. They were asked to offer their reflections in one of their domains of expertise, linking research into LLS with successful language learning and use practices. In essence, they were called upon to provide a review of recent scholarship by identifying areas where results of research had already led to the enhancement of learner strategy use, as well as to describe ongoing and future research efforts intended to enhance the strategy domain. The LLS areas dealt with include theory building, the dynamics of delivering strategy instruction (SI), meta-analyses of SI, learner diversity, SI for young language learners, SI for fine-tuning the comprehension and production of academic-level, grammar strategies at the macro and micro levels, lessons learned from many years of LLS research in Greece, the past and future roles of technology aimed at enhancing language learning, and applications of LLS in content instruction. This review is intended to provide the field with an updated statement as to where we have been, where we are now, and where we need to go. Ideally, it will provide ideas for future studies.","PeriodicalId":47770,"journal":{"name":"Language Teaching","volume":"56 1","pages":"313 - 332"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43647551","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-19DOI: 10.1017/s0261444823000071
J. Flowerdew
John Flowerdew is a Visiting Chair at the University of Lancaster and a Visiting Research Fellow at Birkbeck, University of London. He was previously a Professor at City University of Hong Kong and at the University of Leeds, UK. His research is in the fields of Applied Linguistics and Discourse Analysis. His books include Academic listening: Research perspectives (CUP); Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (with M. Peacock) (CUP); Second language listening: Theory and practice (with L. Miller) (CUP); Academic discourse (Longman); Discourse in English language education (Routledge); Signalling nouns in discourse: A corpus-based discourse approach (with R. W. Forest) (CUP); Discourse in context (Bloomsbury); The Routledge handbook of critical discourse studies (with J. Richardson); Discipline-specific writing: Theory into practice (with T. Costley) (Routledge), and Introducing English for research publication purposes (with P. Habibie (Routledge).
John Flowerdew，兰开斯特大学客座教授，伦敦大学伯克贝克分校客座研究员。他曾在香港城市大学和英国利兹大学担任教授。主要研究领域为应用语言学和语篇分析。著有《学术倾听:研究视角》(CUP);学术英语研究视角(与M. Peacock) (CUP)第二语言听力:理论与实践(with L. Miller) (CUP)学术话语(朗文);英语语言教育中的语篇(Routledge)语篇中的信号名词:基于语料库的语篇研究(与R. W. Forest)语境中的话语(布卢姆茨伯里派);《劳特利奇批评话语研究手册》(与J. Richardson合著);特定学科写作:理论到实践(与T. Costley一起)(Routledge)，以及为研究出版目的介绍英语(与P. Habibie一起)(Routledge)。
{"title":"John Flowerdew's essential bookshelf: English for research publication purposes (ERPP)","authors":"J. Flowerdew","doi":"10.1017/s0261444823000071","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444823000071","url":null,"abstract":"John Flowerdew is a Visiting Chair at the University of Lancaster and a Visiting Research Fellow at Birkbeck, University of London. He was previously a Professor at City University of Hong Kong and at the University of Leeds, UK. His research is in the fields of Applied Linguistics and Discourse Analysis. His books include Academic listening: Research perspectives (CUP); Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (with M. Peacock) (CUP); Second language listening: Theory and practice (with L. Miller) (CUP); Academic discourse (Longman); Discourse in English language education (Routledge); Signalling nouns in discourse: A corpus-based discourse approach (with R. W. Forest) (CUP); Discourse in context (Bloomsbury); The Routledge handbook of critical discourse studies (with J. Richardson); Discipline-specific writing: Theory into practice (with T. Costley) (Routledge), and Introducing English for research publication purposes (with P. Habibie (Routledge).","PeriodicalId":47770,"journal":{"name":"Language Teaching","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45925579","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-12DOI: 10.1017/s0261444823000083
C. Nagle, Phil Hiver
An important shift in language learning research is the understanding that pronunciation instruction is necessary to ensure learners’ balanced development in pronunciation and second language (L2) speech. Research focusing on understanding what types of pronunciation instruction are effective and what makes them most effective has grown dramatically over the past decade. Given the methodological heterogeneity apparent in this body of literature, however, many questions remain to understand the specific effects of pronunciation training paradigms on learners’ L2 development. In this article, we make the case that replication is a productive means of validating findings and assessing the strength of existing evidence in L2 pronunciation research. As prime targets for replication, we review three studies that offer different perspectives on how L2 pronunciation instruction can be optimized. We have chosen each of these studies because they significantly advance the field conceptually, have broken new ground empirically, and point to areas in which replication studies can have a large impact. We describe a series of close and/or approximate replications of each initial study that would add detail to existing knowledge and provide a more comprehensive understanding of how and why L2 pronunciation instruction is effective, for whom, and under what conditions.
{"title":"Optimizing second language pronunciation instruction: Replications of Martin and Sippel (2021), Olson and Offerman (2021), and Thomson (2012)","authors":"C. Nagle, Phil Hiver","doi":"10.1017/s0261444823000083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444823000083","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 An important shift in language learning research is the understanding that pronunciation instruction is necessary to ensure learners’ balanced development in pronunciation and second language (L2) speech. Research focusing on understanding what types of pronunciation instruction are effective and what makes them most effective has grown dramatically over the past decade. Given the methodological heterogeneity apparent in this body of literature, however, many questions remain to understand the specific effects of pronunciation training paradigms on learners’ L2 development. In this article, we make the case that replication is a productive means of validating findings and assessing the strength of existing evidence in L2 pronunciation research. As prime targets for replication, we review three studies that offer different perspectives on how L2 pronunciation instruction can be optimized. We have chosen each of these studies because they significantly advance the field conceptually, have broken new ground empirically, and point to areas in which replication studies can have a large impact. We describe a series of close and/or approximate replications of each initial study that would add detail to existing knowledge and provide a more comprehensive understanding of how and why L2 pronunciation instruction is effective, for whom, and under what conditions.","PeriodicalId":47770,"journal":{"name":"Language Teaching","volume":"12 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41301002","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-29DOI: 10.1017/s0261444822000544
Hitoshi Mikami
This study is a conceptual replication of Teimouri et al.'s (2022) investigation into the validity of the second language (L2) grit scale (the L2-Grit scale). There are several concerns about the generalizability of the findings of Teimouri et al. (2022), especially regarding the discriminant validity of the scale and the relation of L2 grit with language achievements. A conceptual replication study was conducted because these concerns could be addressed by using a different methodology. The main findings include: (a) the factor structure of L2 grit was supported in the replication sample (106 English majors at a Japanese university), (b) the results support the discriminant validity of L2 grit, but in a different way from the initial study, and (c) L2 grit was a consistent predictor of L2-specific Grade Point Average and standardized test score. The results obtained lend further support for the validity of the L2-Grit scale.
{"title":"Revalidation of the L2-Grit scale: A conceptual replication of Teimouri, Y., Plonsky, L., & Tabandeh, F. (2022). L2 grit: Passion and perseverance for second-language learning","authors":"Hitoshi Mikami","doi":"10.1017/s0261444822000544","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444822000544","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This study is a conceptual replication of Teimouri et al.'s (2022) investigation into the validity of the second language (L2) grit scale (the L2-Grit scale). There are several concerns about the generalizability of the findings of Teimouri et al. (2022), especially regarding the discriminant validity of the scale and the relation of L2 grit with language achievements. A conceptual replication study was conducted because these concerns could be addressed by using a different methodology. The main findings include: (a) the factor structure of L2 grit was supported in the replication sample (106 English majors at a Japanese university), (b) the results support the discriminant validity of L2 grit, but in a different way from the initial study, and (c) L2 grit was a consistent predictor of L2-specific Grade Point Average and standardized test score. The results obtained lend further support for the validity of the L2-Grit scale.","PeriodicalId":47770,"journal":{"name":"Language Teaching","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43794274","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-21DOI: 10.1017/S0261444823000022
C. Bardel, Henrik Gyllstad, J. Tholin
Abstract This review provides an account of salient research topics in current Swedish research in the field of foreign language (FL) education, with the aim of making locally published work available outside Sweden. A corpus of work on English and other FLs published between 2012 and 2021 has been scrutinized. Focus has been placed on research conducted and disseminated in Sweden, in some cases adding international publications, in order to portray the work in a wider context. Research on FL learning, teaching, and assessment is reviewed in light of recent policy changes as well as a changing linguistic situation characterized by a plethora of languages spoken in society, among which Swedish as majority language and English as lingua franca share indisputable sovereignty, but where a newly-born interest in the role of other background languages than Swedish can be discerned. The study ends with a discussion of trends observed in the reviewed material and considerations in view of future research.
{"title":"Research on foreign language learning, teaching, and assessment in Sweden 2012–2021","authors":"C. Bardel, Henrik Gyllstad, J. Tholin","doi":"10.1017/S0261444823000022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444823000022","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This review provides an account of salient research topics in current Swedish research in the field of foreign language (FL) education, with the aim of making locally published work available outside Sweden. A corpus of work on English and other FLs published between 2012 and 2021 has been scrutinized. Focus has been placed on research conducted and disseminated in Sweden, in some cases adding international publications, in order to portray the work in a wider context. Research on FL learning, teaching, and assessment is reviewed in light of recent policy changes as well as a changing linguistic situation characterized by a plethora of languages spoken in society, among which Swedish as majority language and English as lingua franca share indisputable sovereignty, but where a newly-born interest in the role of other background languages than Swedish can be discerned. The study ends with a discussion of trends observed in the reviewed material and considerations in view of future research.","PeriodicalId":47770,"journal":{"name":"Language Teaching","volume":"56 1","pages":"223 - 260"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42649378","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-27DOI: 10.1017/S0261444823000010
Katherine Yaw, Luke Plonsky, Tove Larsson, Scott Sterling, Merja Kytö
For many researchers in the social sciences, including those in applied linguistics, the term ethics evokes the bureaucratic process of fulfilling the requirements of an ethics review board (e.g., in the US, an Institutional Review Board, or IRB) as a preliminary step in conducting human subjects research. The expansion of ethics review boards into the social sciences in the early 2000s has led applied linguistics as a field to experience what Haggerty (2004) termed ethics creep, a simultaneous expansion and intensification of external regulation of research activities. The aims of these ethical review boards are: (a) to evaluate the types and risk of harm to participants as a result of research activities, (b) ensure that participants can give informed consent to be part of the research activities, and (c) provide oversight on researcher procedures to maintain participant anonymity/confidentiality (Haggerty, 2004).
{"title":"Research ethics in applied linguistics","authors":"Katherine Yaw, Luke Plonsky, Tove Larsson, Scott Sterling, Merja Kytö","doi":"10.1017/S0261444823000010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444823000010","url":null,"abstract":"For many researchers in the social sciences, including those in applied linguistics, the term ethics evokes the bureaucratic process of fulfilling the requirements of an ethics review board (e.g., in the US, an Institutional Review Board, or IRB) as a preliminary step in conducting human subjects research. The expansion of ethics review boards into the social sciences in the early 2000s has led applied linguistics as a field to experience what Haggerty (2004) termed ethics creep, a simultaneous expansion and intensification of external regulation of research activities. The aims of these ethical review boards are: (a) to evaluate the types and risk of harm to participants as a result of research activities, (b) ensure that participants can give informed consent to be part of the research activities, and (c) provide oversight on researcher procedures to maintain participant anonymity/confidentiality (Haggerty, 2004).","PeriodicalId":47770,"journal":{"name":"Language Teaching","volume":"56 1","pages":"478 - 494"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43236928","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-23DOI: 10.1017/s0261444823000034
Martin East, David Slomp
Both of us were drawn into the writing assessment field initially through our lived experiences as schoolteachers. We worked in radically different contexts – Martin was head of a languages department and teacher of French and German in the late 1990s in the UK, and David was a Grade 12 teacher of Academic English in Alberta, Canada, at the turn of the twenty-first century. In both these contexts, the traditional direct test of writing – referred to, for example, as the ‘timed impromptu writing test’ (Weigle, 2002, p. 59) or the ‘snapshot approach’ (Hamp-Lyons & Kroll, 1997, p. 18) – featured significantly in our practices, albeit in very different ways. This form of writing assessment still holds considerable sway across the globe. For us, however, it provoked early questions and concerns around the consequential and ethical aspects of writing assessment.
{"title":"The ethical turn in writing assessment: How far have we come, and where do we still need to go?","authors":"Martin East, David Slomp","doi":"10.1017/s0261444823000034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444823000034","url":null,"abstract":"Both of us were drawn into the writing assessment field initially through our lived experiences as schoolteachers. We worked in radically different contexts – Martin was head of a languages department and teacher of French and German in the late 1990s in the UK, and David was a Grade 12 teacher of Academic English in Alberta, Canada, at the turn of the twenty-first century. In both these contexts, the traditional direct test of writing – referred to, for example, as the ‘timed impromptu writing test’ (Weigle, 2002, p. 59) or the ‘snapshot approach’ (Hamp-Lyons & Kroll, 1997, p. 18) – featured significantly in our practices, albeit in very different ways. This form of writing assessment still holds considerable sway across the globe. For us, however, it provoked early questions and concerns around the consequential and ethical aspects of writing assessment.","PeriodicalId":47770,"journal":{"name":"Language Teaching","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44297315","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：