Kubota, Ryuko

Sociolinguistics has grown in importance in recent years, and we have become aware of the role of language not just as a means of communication, but also as a creator of social identity. Additionally, in our current globalized world, contact between users of different languages has increased, especially in countries with large immigrant populations. This interview with Dr. Patricia Duff explores the major issues in Language Socialization. Dr. Duff is currently Co-director of the Centre for Research in Chinese Language and Literacy Education at the University of British Columbia, Canada, where she is Professor of Language and Literacy Education. Her primary research activities concern the processes and outcomes of (second) language learning and language socialization in secondary school and university classroom contexts (foreign/second language, bilingual/immersion, mainstream content courses), as well as in workplaces and communities more generally.

While the main focus of national policy and research has continued to be on foreign language teaching, in the past two decades increasing attention has been given to heritage language learners and to the development of pedagogies which address their particular needs as well as the opportunities available to them. This chapter will chart general developments in language pedagogy beyond communicative language teaching noting both the degree to which they might be considered to apply to both foreign language and heritage language learning and where there are important distinctions to be made. Reference will be made here to groundbreaking work by Claire Kramsch and to the distinction she draws between communicative and subjective/symbolic competence in both language learning and use. It will then go on to set out a number of developments which are proving to have particular significance in the heritage language context, including interdisciplinary perspective (Content-Based Instruction –/Content and Language Integrated Learning –/Project-Based Language Learning ); intercultural/transcultural language learning perspective; multilingual, translanguaging perspective; learner agency and identity investment perspective; multisemiotic and intertextual perspective; digital technology perspective; arts perspective; decolonising, activist citizenship perspective. Finally, it will be argued that, taken as a whole, these developments provide a robust foundation for (a) a much more unified and democratic/ pluralist view of language and literacy education, (b) the development of dialogue between specialists across the spectrum of language education and indeed across the curriculum and (c) fostering closer collaboration between mainstream and community-based sectors.

Identity has emerged as an important construct in applied linguistics research, including investigations of additional language learning and teaching, multilingualism, migration and globalization, and several other areas of study examining the role of language in investigating and solving real‐world problems. Two complementary theorizations of identity—Norton's poststructuralist framework and Bucholtz and Hall's sociocultural framework—have continued to inform investigations of the ways in which language practices shape and are shaped by identity construction in language educational settings. This entry elaborates on poststructuralist and social constructionist theorizations of identity and presents examples of recent empirical studies in language teaching and learning contexts that reflect the mutually constitutive nature of language and identity. The chapter ends with a brief discussion of future directions for researching identity in language education.

Contents: Introduction. Part I: Important Social Contexts in Research on Second Language Teaching and Learning. Introduction. M.E. Brisk, Bilingual Education. M.R. Hawkins, ESL in Elementary Education. P.A. Duff, ESL in Secondary Schools: Programs, Problematics, and Possibilities. D.E. Murray, ESL in Adult Education. S. Carkin, English for Academic Purposes. P. Master, English for Specific Purposes. C. Roberts, English in the Workplace. B. Tomlinson, English as a Foreign Language: Matching Procedures to the Context of Learning. Y. Kachru, Teaching and Learning of World Englishes. Part II: Methods in Second Language Research. Introduction. L. Harklau, Ethnography and Ethnographic Research on Second Language Teaching and Learning. L. van Lier, Case Study. A. Lazaraton, Quantitative Research Methods. D. Nunan, Classroom Research. A. Burns, Action Research. Part III: Applied Linguistics and Second Language Research. Introduction. T. Pica, Second Language Acquisition Research and Applied Linguistics. S.L. McKay, Sociolinguistics and Second Language Learning. J. Zuengler, K.M. Cole, Language Socialization and Second Language Learning. G. Kasper, C. Roever, Pragmatics in Second Language Learning. J.P. Lantolf, Sociocultural and Second Language Learning Research: An Exegesis. N. Markee, Conversation Analysis for Second Language Acquisition. R.B. Kaplan, Contrastive Rhetoric. S. Conrad, Corpus Linguistics and L2 Teaching. Part IV: Second Language Processes and Development. Introduction. G. Ioup, Age in Second Language Development. R. DeKeyser, A. Juffs, Cognitive Considerations in L2 Learning. Z. Han, L. Selinker, Fossilization in L2 Learners. M. Swain, The Output Hypothesis: Theory and Research. E. Tarone, Speaking in a Second Language. M. Rost, L2 Listening. T.G. Wiley, Second Language Literacy and Biliteracy. P. Byrd, Instructed Grammar. D.E. Eskey, Reading in a Second Language. I.S.P. Nation, Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. J.S. Hedgcock, Taking Stock of Research and Pedagogy in L2 Writing. E. Hinkel, Analyses of Second Language Text and What Can Be Learned From Them. Part V: Methods and Curricula in Second Language Teaching. Introduction. S.J. Savignon, Communicative Language Teaching: Strategies and Goals. S. Fotos, Traditional and Grammar Translation Methods for Second Language Teaching. J. Williams, Form-Focused Instruction. M.A. Snow, A Model of Academic Literacy for Integrated Language and Content Instruction. R. Ellis, Instructed Language Learning and Task-Based Teaching. M. Celce-Murcia, E. Olshtain, Discourse-Based Approaches: A New Framework for Second Language Teaching and Learning. C.A. Chapelle, Computer-Assisted Language Learning. N.J. Anderson, L2 Learning Strategies. Part VI: Second Language Testing and Assessment. T. McNamara, Introduction. A.J. Kunnan, Language Assessment From a Wider Context. A. Davies, C. Elder, Validity and Validation in Language Testing. M. Chalhoub-Deville, C. Deville, A Look Back at and Forward to What Language Testers Measure. T. Lumley, A. Brown, Research Methods in Language Testing. D. Douglas, Testing Languages for Specific Purposes. C. Leung, Classroom Teacher Assessment of Second Language Development: Construct as Practice. Part VII: Identity, Culture, and Critical Pedagogy in Second Language Teaching and Learning. Introduction. T. Ricento, Considerations of Identity in L2 Learning. M. Byram, A. Feng, Teaching and Researching Intercultural Competence. S. Canagarajah, Critical Pedagogy in L2 Learning and Teaching. Part VIII: Language Planning and Policy and Language Rights. R.B. Baldauf, Jr., Introduction. R.B. Baldauf, Jr., Language Planning and Policy Research: An Overview. T. van Els, Status Planning for Learning and Teaching. A.J. Liddicoat, Corpus Planning: Syllabus and Materials Development. R.B. Baldauf, Jr., R.B. Kaplan, Language-in-Education Planning. D.E. Ager, Prestige and Image Planning. S. May, Language Planning and Minority Language Rights.

The purpose of this article is to review current empirical research on language teacher professional development in higher education from Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect and ERIC adopting the PRISMA methodology. This revision led to 10 articles demonstrating that language professors opt for a more student-centered approach and highly communicative lessons demonstrating their openness to new educational paradigms. Second, when institutions offer professional development training programs, their content should be designed considering language educators’ experience, expectations, and necessities. Not following this will favor resistance and dissatisfaction among educators. Third, even though modern e-learning tools are beneficial, language educators do not use them actively due to insufficient IT support and training; they often rely on self-learning. Finally, it is also argued that continuous training, peer observation, senior mentoring, and teacher autonomy are necessary for language teacher professional development.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is changing many aspects of education and is gradually being introduced to language education. This article reviews the literature to examine main trends and common findings in relation to AI technologies and applications for second and foreign language learning and teaching. With special reference to computer-assisted language learning (CALL), the article explores natural language processing (NLP), data-driven learning (DDL), automated writing evaluation (AWE), computerized dynamic assessment (CDA), intelligent tutoring systems (ITSs), automatic speech recognition (ASR), and chatbots. It contributes to discussions on understanding and using AI-supported language learning and teaching. It suggests that AI will be continuously integrated into language education, and AI technologies and applications will have a profound impact on language learning and teaching. Language educators need to ensure that AI is effectively used to support language learning and teaching in AI-powered contexts. More rigorous research on AI-supported language learning and teaching is recommended to maximise second and foreign language learning and teaching with AI.

BackgroundChinese/Mandarin language instruction to undergraduate students from non-Chinese speaking countries has become a topic of increasing interest, driven by China’s influential role in global political and economic dynamics. With Mandarin being the language spoken by approximately 70% of Chinese speakers, it is not only taught within China but also in institutions around the world. While teaching any second or foreign language presents unique challenges, the specific challenges faced in Mandarin language education have not received comprehensive scrutiny, prompting the need for further investigation.ObjectivesThe primary objective of this study was to explore the challenges associated with teaching and learning Mandarin from the perspectives of non-native Mandarin language teachers. By adopting a qualitative (phenomenological) research approach, we aimed to uncover the multifaceted challenges that confront both educators and learners in the context of Mandarin language instruction.MethodologyThe research methodology employed for this study involved the use of semi-structured interviews conducted with 15 Mandarin language teachers, who were chosen through theoretical sampling. These interviews were transcribed into text files and subsequently subjected to qualitative data analysis, which was facilitated by the use of MAQDA software. This approach allowed us to identify and categorize the various challenges and problems encountered in the teaching and learning of Mandarin.FindingsThe research findings revealed a range of challenges and problems experienced in Mandarin language education. These challenges were grouped into two primary thematic categories: psycho-linguistic and educational challenges. The linguistic challenges are deeply rooted in the distinctive features of the Mandarin language, presenting obstacles that necessitate innovative teaching strategies and materials. Educational challenges extend beyond native speaker proficiency, emphasizing the requirement for a comprehensive pedagogical skill set among instructors.Implications: The implications of this research extend to various stakeholders in the field of Chinese/Mandarin language education, including policymakers, educators, curriculum designers, and learners. Understanding the linguistic, educational, and psychological challenges can inform the development of more effective teaching methods, curriculum design, and motivation-enhancing strategies, ultimately promoting a more successful and engaging Mandarin language learning experience for non-native speakers.

We are pleased to announce the launch of Individual Differences in Language Education: An International Journal (hereafter referred to as IDLE). This multidisciplinary journal aims to advance research and understanding of the role of individual differences (IDs) in language learning and teaching and to serve as a platform for researchers, educators, and practitioners to share their insights and perspectives on the complex and dynamic interplay between IDs, language learning, and language teaching.

Learners of English as a new language and the teachers who find these young people in their classrooms face many challenges. For secondary science educators, this is often rooted in a general lack of professional development models for the design and implementation of science/language integrated instruction. To address this issue, the present study examines how participation in a paired professional development initiative with focus on multimodalities impacts teachers’ pedagogical expertise in both language and science learning. We specifically examine the expert understandings and pedagogical skills developed by two teachers, one chemistry, one English to Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL), who co-designed and co-taught science/language integrated lessons. Analysis of the pair’s collaborative processes, resulting lessons, and their reflections on these reveals expertise gained in three main areas: attending to both content and language, seamless integration of multimodal technology, and formative assessment. Implications for the pairing of language and science educators along with roles and impacts of multimodal teaching strategies are discussed. Lastly, a language/content pairing model with emphasis on multimodal teaching strategies is recommended as an effective means for meeting the challenges of linguistically diverse science classrooms.

Aim/Purpose: This paper investigates three key aspects of metaverse-based platforms in English language teaching: (1) their effectiveness in enhancing language learning outcomes, (2) their impact on digital literacy development in higher education, and (3) their accessibility and inclusivity implications for diverse student populations. Background: Despite growing interest in digital language learning, research gaps exist in understanding the long-term effectiveness of immersive technologies, particularly in resource-constrained settings. The metaverse – an integrated platform combining augmented reality (AR) for real-world digital overlays and virtual reality (VR) for immersive experiences – remains little studied in language education. While existing research examines AR or VR separately, this study investigates their combined impact through metaverse technology, addressing the unexplored intersection of language proficiency, digital literacy, and learning sustainability in higher education. Methodology: A mixed-methods study was conducted with 60 undergraduate students divided equally between experimental (metaverse-based) and control (traditional online) groups for an 8-week English course. The experimental group used an integrated metaverse platform combining AR and VR technologies for one hour daily. Quantitative assessment included pre-test, post-test, and six-month retention measurements of language proficiency (reading, writing, speaking; 10-point scale each) and digital literacy (36-item standardized scale). Semi-structured interviews with 15 participants from resource-limited environments explored accessibility and inclusivity challenges. Contribution: This research contributes to understanding technology-enhanced language learning in immersive environments, challenging assumptions about digital literacy’s impact on academic performance and providing insights into the long-term effects of metaverse-based learning on language skills. Findings: The results revealed significant improvements in reading, writing, and speaking skills among the experimental group, with reading and writing gains maintained over six months. While participants showed substantial improvement in digital literacy, no significant relationship was found between digital literacy and academic performance. Qualitative analysis uncovered two key themes: inclusive social interaction opportunities and technical barriers in the learning process. Recommendations for Practitioners: To maximize the effectiveness of metaverse-based language learning, three key recommendations emerge: institutions should prioritize robust technological infrastructure alongside comprehensive training for both educators and students, educational platforms should be developed with greater inclusivity and customization options, and regular practice sessions or hybrid learning models should be implemented to maintain speaking skills over time. Recommendation for Researchers: Future research directions should focus on three critical areas: conducting longer-term studies to better understand how metaverse-based learning affects academic performance and language proficiency, exploring the complex relationship between digital literacy and academic achievement through alternative success measures, and investigating how adaptive learning systems within metaverse environments can effectively address diverse learner needs. Impact on Society: The findings suggest that metaverse technology has the potential to revolutionize language education, making it more engaging and effective. However, they also highlight the need to address technical challenges and ensure inclusivity to prevent new forms of educational inequality. Future Research: Future investigation should address three key areas: examining how digital skills gained in metaverse environments transfer to real-world contexts and other academic disciplines, developing standardized assessment tools for evaluating language proficiency and digital literacy in immersive virtual settings, and studying the long-term impact of metaverse-based learning across different age groups and educational levels.

The topic of this paper is literacy education and reading engagement in multilingual classes. What facilitates reading engagement in the language of instruction in multilingual classes? In this paper, we analyze reading engagement in a literature-based literacy program in Norway (2007–2011). The design was a research and development project in which teachers, researchers, and librarians collaborated within literacy education. We present pedagogical interventions within the project and analyze subsequent reading engagement among the students, based on a survey. The survey documented that the overwhelming majority of students were engaged readers two years into the project, measured by the students’ amount and frequency of voluntary reading, their attitudes towards reading and library use. The findings indicate that reading engagement in the language of instruction among both first- and second-language learners was facilitated by literature-based literacy education, nonsegregated educational provisions and use of library resources. The study shows that literature-based literacy education may reduce possible negative effects of low socioeconomic status and linguistic minority background on reading engagement in the language of instruction. This requires literacy education, which gives students extensive access to books, voluntary reading of fiction and facts and sharing of literacy events and library use.

This comprehensive gem of a book is designed as a “textbook… intended for courses for prospective and in-service KFL teachers” (p. x). The book consistently combines theory and research with elements of practical application in each of its eight well-planned, thoughtfully discussed chapters that center on the following “key issues”: SLA (Second Language Acquisition), pedagogy, language in use, culture, heritage language learners, literacy and multiliteracies, assessment, and program building. These eight chapters collectively constitute Part I of the volume. Each chapter provides a basic overview of the topic, cites selected prior literature and research central to that topic, specifies with concrete illustrations how such issues emerge in the Korean as a Second Language classroom, and concludes with between five and 12 discussion questions, designed to encourage readers to: synthesize the contents and importance of each chapter, imagine themselves in the topic-specific contexts of learning and teaching, and expand their critical understanding of the chapter beyond the specific details provided therein. Part II is a robust assemblage and review of 524 research pieces (495 peer-reviewed journal articles and 29 doctoral dissertations), organized according to the focus areas of each of the eight chapters in Part I. The full volume showcases the academic expertise and practical experience of 18 contributors, all of whom are deeply involved in and committed to Korean language pedagogy, theory, and research, from such fields as linguistics, applied linguistics, literature, culture, civilization, and intercultural communication.Chapter 1 (Kim) provides a historical overview of the field of SLA, in general terms, but more specifically in relation to theories, approaches, and factors related to the teaching and learning of Korean as a Second Language (e.g., L1 influences in developmental sequence of grammatical forms and phonological (dis)similarities, implicit vs. explicit instruction, etc.). The chapter sets the groundwork by appealing to the classic SLA literature, including Kellerman (1979) and Krashen (1982), and building toward more current theories (e.g., Ortega, 2007; Spada & Tomita, 2010; White, 2007), and offers a wide range of application to multiple areas of Korean SLA (e.g., Ahn, 2015; Jeon, 2004; Kim H-Y, 2012; Lee, 2012).Chapter 2 (Park, Choi, and Ko) provides a view into the theoretical backgrounds and implementation of various Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) methodologies, focusing the discussion on where and how each approach is currently being applied in Korean language education programs. In this review of task-based language teaching, content-based instruction, and technology-enhanced language instruction methodologies, the reader finds an overview of current approaches in the field of Korean language education (e.g., Cheon, 2007; Kim, Choi, Yun, Kim, & Choi, 2020; Kong, 2012; Lim & Lee, 2015; Noji, Yuen, & Yuen, 2012; Roh & Kim, 2019).Chapter 3 (Kim and Yoon) reviews how “linguistic, pragmatic and interactional” features of Korean are used in “managing topic and reference” for coherent communication (e.g., Kim, 1999; Kim H-Y, 2012; Oh, 2007), “organizing discourse” according to interactional goals (e.g., Hwang, 2015), and “performing social actions” in terms of both speech act and stance expression (e.g., Kim, 2020; Lee, 1999; Park, 1999; Yoon, 2019). These patterns of usage are linked to a speaker's interactive competence (Young, 2008; Hall & Pekarek Doehler, 2011), and activity ideas for Korean language classes are included.Chapter 4 (Brown and Yoon) complexifies issues of culture in relation to language teaching, by first underscoring the assumed primacy of grammar in both SLA and language pedagogy. The authors propose multiple perspectives on “culture” and the multivariate ways in which culture is defined and discussed (Byram, 2008; Herron, Cole, Corrie, & Dubreil, 1999; Walker, 2000). Supplementing the more traditional, pragmatically grounded explanations of Korean society and culture, the authors also address issues of identity (“Korean adoptee returnees,” Higgins & Stoker, 2011) and note the use of media-based materials (advertisements) and pop culture, as resources for language-culture content, while also pointing out drawbacks of how culture is introduced and taught in Korean textbooks (Choo, 1999; Ree, 2000).Chapter 5 (Kim) reviews the characteristics of Korean heritage learners in terms of error types and cognition of language processing as compared to those found in L2 learners and bilingual Korean-English speakers (e.g., Kim, 2008; Kim H, 2012). Through this discussion, heritage learners' unique learner profiles are explained by their tendencies of attending to (Zyzik, 2016) and noticing (Schmidt, 1990) language patterns, which are informed by their background knowledge (Gass, 1988, p. 201) and history of Korean language input. Implications of these findings on Korean Heritage Language education are suggested in terms of concrete teaching approaches, feedback methods, and subject matter.Chapter 6 (Suh and Jung) centers on literacy and multiliteracies as conceptualized in the Korean L2 classroom. The authors underscore the fact that literacy extends far beyond reading, writing, and orthography in all L2 education. Rather, literacy and multiliteracies are grounded in the various layers of meaning within texts (explicit, implicit, and cultural). Literacy practices are also related to critical thinking, in the sense that texts are imbued with multiple voices and perspectives that are then decoded and subsequently appropriated by language learners. Crucially, the chapter underscores the robust ways in which literacy is social action (Kim, 2018), as enacted in TV dramas (Lee-Smith & Roh, 2016), Public Service Announcements (PSAs) (Lee-Smith, 2016), peer review in composition assignments (Byon, 2005), and overall writing skill development.Chapter 7 (Shin and Lee) considers timely issues in both standardized and classroom-based assessments of Korean language. An overview of standardized assessments particularly focuses on the contexts and limitations of prominent Korean language exams. The discussion of classroom assessments points out essential considerations such as the distinct needs of heritage versus nonheritage learners (Brinton, Kagan, & Bauckus, 2008; Cho & Chun, 2015; Kondo-Brown, 2005; Lee & Kim, 2008; Sohn & Shin, 2007; 손성옥, 2005) and the alignment of assessments with classroom instruction content (Norris, 2016). The creation of criterion-referenced tests for achievement assessments is suggested, and a framework for such assessments is described in detail (Davidson & Lynch, 2002). Finally, helpful guidelines are put forth for the creation of achievement assessments that mirror actual language usage as closely as possible, and alternative forms of assessment are also described.Chapter 8 (Yu Cho, Lee, and Wang) lays out the history and development of Korean language programs in higher education and at K-12 levels, underscoring such factors as the National Standards for Korean Language Education and the invaluable support by the Korea Foundation. The authors provide an overview of the various Korean language programs in North America, while illustrating the current Korean as a foreign language (KFL) faculty profiles and discussing the various types of professional development opportunities for preservice and in-service KFL teachers and their importance to continued growth and success (Im, Suh, Jung, Shin, & Choi, 2013; Kim, 2017). At the heart of successful Korean language programs are the KFL instructors.Part II of this volume is an extensive and detailed annotated bibliography consisting of 524 research pieces, of which 495 are peer-reviewed journal articles and 29 are doctoral dissertations. The journal articles were culled from 35 major journals that specialize in foreign language pedagogy, each of which has published at least one article on Korean foreign language education in English. Of these, 21 were published in North America and 14 in South Korea. Part II opens with a quantitative summary of relevant KFL-related research topics from the past 2.5 decades, a qualitative compilation of topic-based research trends, a brief discussion on the evolution of scholarship in Korean as a Heritage Language, and a summary of more recent research trends in KFL scholarship more generally. Following this introduction, the actual annotations to relevant research articles and dissertation appear in the same order and under the same headings as the chapter headings for the eight chapters in Part I. The annotated bibliography is designed as a “useful and ready-to-use resource” (p. 206).One drawback to the annotated bibliography is that the authors have designedly excluded such academic publications as “book chapters” (and thus also full book-length publications) because they are “not easily downloadable from online databases.” This focus may skew both the overall findings as well as the summaries of research trends, since much seminal research on Korean, Korean applied linguistics, Korean pragmatics, Korean language pedagogy, socialization, and so forth (written in English) also appears as chapters in important edited volumes, including the full series of Japanese-Korean Linguistics and the full series of conference proceedings from International Circle of Korean Linguistics (ICKL).Overall, this book is a welcome addition to the growing body of publications on Korean language pedagogy and professional development that serves multiple purposes: It is an invaluable resource for classic and more recent theoretical trends in linguistics, applied linguistics, sociolinguistics, pragmatics, literacy, multiliteracies, and language socialization.It provides insights into critical topics related to KFL issues and how such issues have been investigated and analyzed.It provides practical, concrete examples for potential application in the KFL classroom.It is user-friendly and includes discussion questions for readers to develop their own understandings of the eight key issues beyond the content and limitations of each individual chapter.

This article explores the impacts of economic and cultural globalization on language and language education. It acknowledges the spread of English and the negative impacts of this upon other languages and language communities. The case is made that new conditions of economic dominance by multinational corporations raise the stakes for schooling and language education. These conditions have established a “new Latin” of technocratic English that services and obscures the corporate order. It argues for the continuing importance of the state and state schooling and the expansion of the definitions and practices of critical language and literacy education.

This article explores the impacts of economic and cultural globalization on language and language education. It acknowledges the spread of English and the negative impacts of this upon other languages and language communities. The case is made that new conditions of economic dominance by multinational corporations raise the stakes for schooling and language education. These conditions have established a "new Latin" of technocratic English that services and obscures the corporate order. It argues for the continuing importance of the state and state schooling and the expansion of the definitions and practices of critical language and literacy education.

Teodora Popescu’s Research in Applied Linguistics and Language Education: Design, Methods, and Analysis offers a comprehensive account of research design and methodology in applied linguistics and language education, addressing the needs of postgraduate students, early-career researchers, and practitioner-researchers. It covers the research process from conceptualisation and research-question formulation to data collection, analysis, ethical practice, and dissemination. Across its chapters, the volume consistently emphasises the importance of coherence between research purposes, methodological choices, and the claims that can be supported by empirical evidence. Overall, the book represents a substantial and carefully constructed contribution to the literature on research methods in applied linguistics and language education. It can be recommended for postgraduate teaching, research training, and supervision, particularly in contexts where the aim is to foster methodologically informed, transparent, and context-sensitive empirical research.