Teaching and the MLA International Bibliography

This chapter addresses how critical reflexivity and the pedagogical practices of foreign language (FL) teachers work simultaneously to construct and reflect their language teacher identity in online classrooms. It also discusses how Korean as a foreign language (KFL) teachers utilized their sub-identities to overcome challenges that online language teachers face in their classes.

Reviewed by: La comprensión lectora en la enseñanza del español LE/L2: De la teoría a la práctica by Victoria Rodrigo Pete Swanson Rodrigo, Victoria. La comprensión lectora en la enseñanza del español LE/L2: De la teoría a la práctica. Routledge. 2019. Pp. 304. ISBN 978-1-13865-177-7. In La comprensión lectora en la enseñanza del español LE/L2: de la teoría a la práctica Rodrigo advances state-of-the-art theory and teaching practices for integrating reading skills into the teaching of Spanish. Serving as part of a cogent line of research on the effects of integrating reading into the Spanish as a foreign language curriculum, this timely publication bridges a much needed gap between research supporting reading as an integral part of second language acquisition (SLA) and classroom practice. Throughout the book, the author explains her goal of motivating students to read in the target language as well as to read a variety of genres and texts. Following a brief introduction and an explanation of a few preliminary concepts related to reading and SLA, the book is divided into 12 chapters. Afterward, Rodrigo offers some notes, a bibliography, a helpful glossary of bilingual terms, and answers to the activities presented in the book. In each chapter, she provides a consistent format that includes the chapter’s objectives, questions for reflection as readers enjoy the chapter, an overview of ideas, concepts, and studies related to the chapter, activities, pedagogical considerations, critical question appropriate for discussion, and readings that may be of interest to readers in order to gain a deeper understanding of the theme presented in the chapter. The author makes a special effort to relate her ideas to the proficiency levels for reading as set forth by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Language (ACTFL) and by the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). In chapter 1, “El proceso de lectura: fundamentos teóricos,” Rodrigo begins by presenting some general principles related to reading such as top-down and bottom-up processing while paying special attention to cognitive schema theory. She includes 13 activities in which readers can engage before providing several Consideraciones pedagógicas and further readings related to theoretical foundations of teaching reading, which are found at the end of each of the chapters. In chapter 2, “La mecánica de la lectura: características del lector eficaz,” she begins by posing six questions related to the mechanics of reading. In the chapter she discusses the research on various topics such as how eye movement, visual field, and the brain interacts and impacts one’s ability to read. Near the end of the chapter she presents characteristics of effective readers, the importance of readers acquiring reading fluency, and offers some suggestions on how to become a better reader. Chapter 3, “El poder de la lectura: la lectura en L2,” focuses on reading in the second language. Specifically, Rodrigo makes reference to Cummin’s (1979) notion of linguistic interdependence where certain first language knowledge can be positively transferred during the process of second language acquisition. Afterward, she presents the linguistic and cognitive benefits of reading in the second language. Next, in chapter 4, “Estrategias de lectura: los buenos lectores,” she lays out pre-reading, during the reading, and post-reading strategies. Among other parts of this book, I found this section to be of the utmost importance as many language teachers tend to underestimate the efficacy of pre-reading and post-reading strategies and activities. Near the end of the chapter, Rodrigo includes a brief Likert-scale survey that language teachers [End Page 139] can use with their students to reflect on certain strategies. In the following two chapters, “La comprensión lectora: la importancia del léxico” (chapter 5) and “Tipos de texto y formas de leer: criterios para su selección” (chapter 6), she discusses the role that vocabulary plays in reading by focusing on incidental acquisition and direct instruction as well as types of text and the criteria that should be used when selecting texts for second language learners. In my experience...

This article is about language development of a foreign language (FL) teacher and is centred around the concept of teacher professional competence. Although the definition seems clear and indisputable, no publication has been traced that would clarify what a FL teacher language competence is. It immediately leads to diverse and sometimes contradictory views of content and language skills a FL teacher is supposed to demonstrate. I use this fact as a starting point and make an attempt to provide my view of a FL teacher language competence and essential elements that comprise it. My contention is that besides ‘general language’ and language awareness, a FL teacher should demonstrate skills in classroom and out-of-classroom communication. I support my view by coming out with a tentative and, at the moment, rather schematic description of FL teacher language competence. I consider this as the first step toward the definition of language teacher language competence to be followed by substantial empirical research which, hopefully, will contribute to a valid and more detailed description of the concept in question.

Since the turn of the century, the increasing internationalisation of French higher education has been felt in research and teaching across a broad range of disciplines. The challenges and opportunities affect different sectors of foreign language (FL) education, including modern foreign language (MFL) studies, languages for specific purposes (LSP) and FL certification. This paper offers a review of recent developments in these three areas in France and other European countries, before examining a key difference in French higher education (HE), that is, the schism between second language acquisition (SLA) and language didactics (didactique des langues, DDL). A historical overview of developments in applied linguistics is followed by a panorama of the French language education research community today. The last section of the paper presents three new research networks taking an interdisciplinary perspective on SLA and FL education offering ways to bring together different interests within an expanded understanding of applied linguistics and opening up promising avenues for future collaboration.

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.

The implementation of the Department of Education’s Special Program in Foreign Language (SPFL) marked the beginnings of the nationwide institutionalization of a range of foreign languages (FL) in the Philippines, stimulating new sites of inquiry for the field of critical language studies. Many of the languages offered under the SPFL do not share the historical and social grounding of the country’s official languages. However, they find common ground with English in the extant colonial framings of language teaching and learning, which have often impeded local agency in structuring or reimagining encounters with the “foreign.” As such, this paper aims to explore decolonial approaches to issues that have emerged alongside the promotion and teaching of foreign language classes across all levels of education in the Philippines by drawing inspiration from the decoloniality movement in Latin America and related efforts to de-center knowledge and digress from extant canons. First, it problematizes the implicit reinforcement of the one-nation one-language habitus, paying particular attention to assumptions that guide foreign language policies, materials, and teaching methods that reinforce global linguistic hierarchies and assumptions in favor of “competitiveness.” Second, considerations for alternative foreign language teaching approaches and materials are put forward, factoring in the Philippines’ sociolinguistic and historical features that have guided its framing of the “foreign,” as well as extant challenges in promoting intercultural reflection in an increasingly neoliberal educational setting. Challenges in integrating a decolonial perspective in institutional conceptualizations and policies on foreign language teaching in the Philippines conclude this paper to stimulate reflection on how language teaching may offer opportunities to rethink our relationship to language and interlingual/intercultural encounters.

In AI in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching: Theory and Practice, Marcel Danesi underscores the ramifications of Artificial Intelligence (AI), including the use of tools like ChatGPT, on Foreign Language Teaching (FLT) and its critical components: language acquisition and teaching. Danesi covers several aspects of FLT to speak, write and assess, voicing their greatest concerns on the impact of AI. Danesi provides a balanced view, considering both the advantages and challenges of dependence on AI in language education. He articulates important ethical arguments on the impact of AI in education, particularly its failure to address students’ emotional and contextual concerns, while highlighting the gap human instructors fill. In addition, the book provides synthesis of the frameworks on the use AI technologies and pedagogical tools to improve FLT while maintaining the human dimension of teaching.

In the last decade renewed interest has been focused on modern foreign language programs in American schools.' Statistics show a phenomenal growth in the teaching of foreign languages at the elementary level. In 1952 only eighty-nine communities had some foreign language teaching in the public elementary schools as compared with 2,443 in 1959-1960.2 Texas has strong ties with the Spanishspeaking world, both culturally and geographically. In many areas of the state large segments of the population are Spanish-speaking. Breunig's survey in 19591960 showed that Spanish is the only language taught to any appreciable extent in the public elementary schools of Texas.: Yet this same survey lists Spanish programs in only 136 schools, kindergarten through grade six.4 In view of the continuing emphasis being placed on the teaching of foreign languages at the elementary level, there seems to be a need for reevaluation of the foreign language programs in Texas elementary schools. The purpose of this study was to determine the status of the teaching of modern foreign languages in selected public elementary schools of Texas during the school year, 1962-1963. The sampling consisted of the 282 public school systems whose high school or high schools are members of the Southern Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. It was on the assumption that the systems accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools represent quality of program at all levels, that these systems were chosen to comprise the sampling of this study. Post cards with attached reply cards were sent to the superintendents of these systems to determine if a modern foreign language is taught in their elementary and secondary schools. A return of 254, or 90.1 per cent, was received. Questionnaires were sent to the sixtythree systems which reported FLES programs. The questionnaire was composed of thirty-two closed-end and three open-end items and dealt with the following topics: (1) the scope of the FLES program; (2) the qualifications of persons presenting instruction; (3) methods, techniques, aids, testing procedures, and special features of the program; and (4) evaluation of the program by the reporter. Useable replies were received from fifty-four, or 85.7 per cent, of the systems. The data were analyzed primarily according to the total number of responses. Where size of school system was found to be a significant factor, the data were cate-

Much of the recent research in second language acquisition has focused on the learner rather than on the teacher and has been undertaken not in foreign language teaching but rather in bilingual education context, in which second language acquisition takes place through functional use rather than through formal instruction. However, research findings suggest that primary school children exposed to bilingual immersion‐type programs which lack a second language speaking peer group tend to develop pidginized version of the second language. Therefore, formal foreign language teaching may be needed even in bilingual immersion programs for primary school children. Even in exposure to a peer group, second language teaching can make at least a short run difference in improving grammatical use and correctness. Data from a study recently undertaken at Stanford University show that certain types of language teaching behaviors (e.g., modeling, using visual aids, etc.) relate significantly to pupil achievement as measured by comprehension and production tests. A plea is made for (1) foreign language teaching research undertaken by foreign language specialists using behavioral categories related directly to the foreign language curriculum, (2) a combination of functional and formal approaches (e.g., bilingual education and second language teaching) to achieve second or foreign language proficiency.

Following on from Foundations of Foreign Language Teaching, this set charts the progress of the 19th century movement, which was instrumental in establishing international guidelines for the teaching of modern languages. It was during this period that for the first time, co-operation between phoneticians and teachers culminated in the publication of works that were instrumental in establishing the applied linguistic approach to language teaching in the 20th century. For the first time, too, the new science of psychology influenced a scientific theory of second language acquisition. The Reform Movement attracted support across Europe, spurring the development of new professional associations and journals. In turn, the publication in these journals of reports of innovative practice contributed to a greater sense of autonomy and professionalism among modern language teachers, who had hitherto tended to live under the shadow of classical language teaching. The practical innovations and theoretical suggestions for the foreign language teaching, although rooted in the 19th century, still have relevance today.

THERE have been times when one has heard the question asked in all seriousness: Should Americans teach modern foreign languages? To regard the question with the same seriousness with which it is asked, one must agree that it sounds like a challenging question and it is undoubtedly intended to be one. But just what does it mean? Does it mean that we should give up the teaching of modern foreign languages in American schools? I do not think so, for the demand for such instruction is fairly constant. Does the question grow out of a condition of scarcity of teachers available for this work? I do not think so, for the demand for modern foreign language teachers is being met, whether satisfactorily or not. Does it then suggest that we can secure teachers of modern foreign languages at lower salaries if we employ foreign-born teachers, and that for this reason we should give up the work to them? I do not so understand the question, although it may well be true that we could save money in this way. In my judgment the question refers rather to our ability to prepare American students to become efficient teachers of modern foreign languages. It implies that, since Americans with English as their mother-tongue are not supposed to speak a modern foreign language as perfectly as a foreign-born person, they cannot, therefore, be prepared to teach the language as expertly or as efficiently as the foreign-born teacher. It implies, in other words, that the native French teacher is more capable of teaching French in American schools than the American teacher can be prepared to do it, and that the same is true of teachers of other modern foreign languages. It suggests that if we are to continue to teach modern foreign languages, we should secure foreign-born persons as teachers, since teachers who are native Americans cannot be expected to do it as well. If I have fairly stated the meaning of the question, I feel obliged to say, in answer to it, that I cannot agree with its implications. I am unwilling to accept the idea that American teachers should not teach modern foreign languages. On the contrary it is my conviction that American teachers are superior in American schools. My entire experience with modern foreign languages compels this conclusion: as a student, as a teacher, and in the training of teachers of French, in this country and in France, working under both American teachers and foreign-born teachers. My conviction on this point is a strong one and my reasons for arriving at such a conclusion are made clear in the following discussion. It is to be admitted that successful teaching of a modern foreign language, such for example as French, demands a mastery of the language. It requires also a marked facility in the oral use of the language. These two

The study aimed to understand English teachers’ perceptions on the objectives of English as a foreign language (EFL) teaching and their support for cultural objectives, including promoting intercultural competence. A combination of quantitative and qualitative research approach was used, with 79 teachers from three different provinces participating. The results showed varied perceptions among the teachers towards the objectives of EFL teaching and its implementation. This highlights the need for improvement in the teacher professional development system to address these differences. The variation is attributed to individual differences in opportunities and experiences during the development process.

This study investigated foreign language (FL) teachers’ experiences of the virtual classroom during COVID-19 lockdown. The sample consisted of 405 FL teachers who participated in the survey which aimed to measure FL teachers’ perceptions of TPACK, virtual classroom activities, online self-efficacy, student engagement and encountered obstacles. The findings indicate that teachers working in remote areas practice fewer virtual classroom activities and thus perceive low student online engagement. The article discusses the differences between FL teachers regarding the FL they teach, i.e., differences in student online engagement exist between the FL taught, and differences in virtual classroom activities depend on the FL taught. In addition, school stage predicts FL teachers’ online self-efficacy and the relationship between teachers’ perceptions of TPACK and school size exists.

In this paper we want to focus on the so called vehicular use of second languages - i.e. the use of a second language in teaching knowledge in different fields -, in order to evaluate its effectiveness as an educational approach in early foreign language teaching. We will analyse the advantages of the vehicular use of languages in the perspective of teaching languages in the kindergarten school, considering in particular the parallelism between first and second language acquisition. Then, we will suggest some practical considerations to follow and implement this approach, also illustrating a concrete experience.

A major source of concern across a number of English-speaking countries is the loss of language teachers from the profession. In a global era where the ability to engage across languages and cultures is seen as vital for international engagement, this poses a significant problem as teacher shortages continue to challenge the efficacy of language education programs. And yet, there are very few large-scale studies which investigate the career attrition of foreign language teachers. The Australian mixed methods study reported here investigated the relationship between social capital and the career retention of 227 foreign language teachers. The findings expand our understanding of language teacher attrition, by showing that teachers who felt professionally valued and who had strong relationships with their colleagues and administrative leaders were less likely to leave language teaching. It was also found that social bonds with other foreign language teachers were an important form of social capital proactively sought by many language teachers, to help them overcome their professional isolation and thus maintain their professional standards. However, these strong social bonds were found to play a role in promoting language teacher attrition, as they provide teachers with a ladder to other career opportunities. This study concludes that some language teachers are lacking in social capital, and that this lack of social capital is a key driver in career attrition. Therefore, there is a need to develop policies, and engage in practices, which facilitate and encourage the further development of language teachers' social capital. The conclusion of this paper explores ways to move forward to improve the retention of language teachers.