The National Standards for Foreign Language Education offer goals for student learning. During the past decade, they have been used increasingly as objectives for foreign language teaching. In the Standards document, the five Standards are presented in a hierarchical order: 1. Communication, 2. Cultures, 3. Connections, 4. Comparisons, and 5. Communities. Looking to Dell Hymes's portrayal of communicative competence and building on notions from sociocultural theory and the concept communities of practice, this paper questions this hierarchical ordering especially in terms of the primacy of Communication over Cultures and Communities. It is suggested that, of the five Cs, Communities should be considered the most fundamental.

Today many second language (L2) teachers work with school-aged learners who need to be supported in their language development at the same time they learn school subjects. Applied linguists and researchers in second language acquisition (SLA) have much to contribute to those teachers, but to do so in more powerful ways calls for an orientation toward the goals of the content classroom. This plenary describes a project in which the theory of systemic functional linguistics is providing useful metalanguage for exploring language and meaning in curricular activities that also support disciplinary learning. It illustrates how language-based content teaching can provide the support children need.

How to correct learner errors has long been of interest to both language teachers and second language acquisition (SLA) researchers. One way of doing so is through interactional feedback, which refers to feedback provided on learners' erroneous utterances during conversational interaction. Various theoretical claims have been made regarding the beneficial effects of interactional feedback, and over the years a considerable body of research has examined its effectiveness. In this context, a central and challenging question has always been how to determine whether such feedback is effective for language learning. Studies investigating the role of feedback have used various measures to assess its usefulness. In this paper, I will begin with a brief overview of the recent studies examining interactional feedback, with a focus on how its effectiveness has been assessed. I will then examine the various measures used in both descriptive and experimental research and discuss the issues associated with such measures. I will conclude with what continues to pose us a challenge in assessing the role of feedback and offer some recommendations to inform future research in this area.

A widely accepted orthodoxy is that it is impossible to do replication studies within qualitative research paradigms. Ontologically and epistemologically speaking, such a view is largely correct. However, in this paper, I propose that what I call comparative re-production research—that is, the empirical study of qualitative phenomena that occur in one context, which are then shown also to obtain in another—is a well-attested practice in ethnomethodological conversation analysis (CA). By extension, I further argue that researchers who do research on second and foreign language (L2) classrooms inspired by the conversation analysis-for-second-language acquisition movement should engage in comparative re-production research in order to make broad statements about the generality or prototypicality of the qualitative organization of particular practices across languages, cultures and institutional contexts.

This paper is a revised version of a plenary prompted by the upsurge of interest in the role of pragmatics in teaching, learning, and assessment, and has as its purpose to take a fresh look at recent developments in the assessment of target-language (TL) pragmatics in spoken language. The first issue considered is the question of whether to attempt to assess pragmatics as it unfolds naturally in interactions, and if so, how to do it. Next, micro-level and macro-level factors in the assessment of TL pragmatics are considered. Third, a close look is given to the specific elements of TL pragmatics to assess. Fourth, there is attention to the matter of which instruments are most appropriate for collecting the desired data in the given context. Fifth, issues relating to data analysis are discussed. Finally, matters pertaining to the assessment of classroom instruction are looked at. Recommendations are given as to potentially viable directions for dealing with these issues both in terms of research studies and for assessment of classroom instruction.

This article reviews recent studies on English language teaching (ELT) in South Korea, where a great deal of research has been produced in recent years in local journals. In this article we review 95 studies from a pool of some 1,200 published between 2009 and 2014 on English language teaching and learning, focusing on research within the public school context. Using themes from the national curriculum as an organizing principle, the review covers selected studies in the following areas: (1) second language teacher education, (2) communicative language teaching, (3) language use and interaction in classrooms, (4) co-teaching with native-speaking English teachers, (5) curriculum and materials analysis, (6) treatments of teaching methods, and (7) assessment, testing and washback. We include commentary on the research undertaken in each area and conclude by discussing the limitations of the review and summarizing ideas for future research directions, perhaps the most important of which is questioning whether or not there is enough research of reasonable quality being produced to sustain roughly 60 journals publishing articles on English education in South Korea.

Language learning can be very emotional, as anyone who has ever tried to learn or use another language (L2) will attest. The range of emotions varies widely in both type and intensity, from the thrill of successfully articulating yourself, for example, to the anxiety of navigating a high-stakes encounter in an L2. It is not surprising, therefore, that there is a longstanding tradition of research on emotion in the context of L2 learning (e.g., Horwitz et al., 1986). In fact, more than 40 years ago, Scovel (1978) reviewed the accumulated evidence on the role of just one emotion: Anxiety.

Language Teaching Review Panel

Research into pronunciation has often disregarded its potential to inform pedagogy. This is due partly to the historical development of pronunciation teaching and research, but its effect is that there is often a mismatch between research and teaching. This paper looks at four areas in which the (mis)match is imperfect but in which a greater recognition of research can lead to better teaching materials (high variability phonetic training, intonation, information structure, and setting priorities). Furthermore, two areas in which teaching materials are desperate for research to be carried out (connected speech and the primacy of suprasegmentals) will be discussed.

The Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st Century (SFLL) (National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project [NSFLEP]), originally published in 1996, were envisioned by many as the panacea for providing a new and exciting direction for foreign language education in the United States. The perceived impact of these National K-16 Student Standards has been witnessed throughout more than a decade by scholarly works that have acknowledged their role as ‘a veritable change agent’ (Sharpley-Whiting 1999: 84), ‘a vision for foreign language education in the new century’ (Allen 2002: 518), and, more recently, as ‘a blueprint and framework for change’ (Terry 2009: 17). The research that has been done on the Standards since their inception has attempted to provide concrete ways for the field to embrace this new framework and thereby realize a Standards-based curriculum and perhaps even revolutionize language education. This work has consisted largely of (1) implementational research (both with and without experimental design) that proposes specific strategies for addressing the Standards in planning, teaching, and assessment (Schwartz & Kavanaugh 1997; Abbott & Lear 2010); (2) survey research that analyzes self-reported information regarding teachers' pedagogical beliefs about the Standards and ways in which they claim to be addressing Standards in their classrooms (Allen 2002; ACTFL 2011), and (3) White papers that disseminate opinions and insights by leaders in the field regarding the impact that the Standards are having in areas such as language instruction, curriculum and course design, and educational policy (Sharpley-Whiting 1999; Donato 2009; Glisan 2010).

This paper discusses three relationships between content and language integrated learning (CLIL) research and practice in the context of South America. The first relationship focuses on research with successful results in the areas of language learning motivation and intercultural communicative competence and citizenship. The second relationship discusses research which has yielded mixed results to support language learning and cognitive development. The last relationship suggests what areas deserve special attention to offer further support to teachers involved in CLIL provision. The following areas are addressed: teacher-made CLIL materials, language and content gains, L1-L2 (first language, second language) curriculum design, and inclusion. In conclusion, I assert that CLIL in South America can be invigorated if researchers and educators carry out research, preferably in collaboration, that recognises, maximises and improves CLIL in practice. I also suggest that the CLIL community in South America may engage in creating CLIL models and conceptual frameworks that respond to the particularities of their settings with the aim of making CLIL context-responsive and sustainable.

This article explores three current, influential English language teaching (ELT) curriculum approaches to the teaching of English in public-sector schools at the primary and secondary level and how the theory of each approach translates into curriculum practice. These approaches are communicative language teaching (CLT), genre-based pedagogy, and content and language integrated learning (CLIL). For consistency across approaches, the theoretical underpinnings of each will be briefly described according to a matrix of curriculum factors including:

• • the view of language and language acquisition underlying the approach

• • how learners’ needs are construed

• • the nature of the content and materials

• • the teacher's role

• • the context

• • how language is assessed

This is followed by a discussion of research on how each approach is implemented in primary and secondary contexts, the extent to which the theory is put into practice and factors that influence its success in the classroom. Implications for the future of curriculum development in ELT will be discussed. These implications address the viability of CLT in primary and secondary schools, the role of knowledge about language in curriculum implementation, and teacher roles and identity.

Language is not just a tool for communication. It is also a resource for creative thought, a framework for understanding the world, a key to new knowledge and human history, and a source of pleasure and inspiration. The Connections Standard is about linking language and literature study to other disciplines (for example, art, music, film, history, among others) and about getting students to experience unique viewpoints available only through a particular language and its cultures. This presentation will argue for the importance of analyzing texts (written, oral, visual, audio-visual) in language teaching. The goal is to give students the chance to position themselves in relation to distinct viewpoints and distinct cultures and to make connections between language and other symbolic ways of making meaning, connections between language and other disciplines, and connections between language and culture. These connections are not easy to make, but they are essential if we are to prepare our students for the broadest range of language use and allow them to achieve their full communicative potential.

Individual differences that have an impact on the processes and outcomes of second language (L2) learning have been thoroughly investigated; but, until recently, the study of language learners with additional needs was at the periphery of both second language acquisition (SLA) and language teaching pedagogy (e.g. Nijakowska, 2010; Kormos & Smith, 2012; Kormos, 2017). Specific learning difficulties (SLDs), which affect between 5 and 15% of the population (Drabble, 2013), often have an impact on how additional languages are acquired. Therefore, in order to create an inclusive language learning context and set up effective instructional programmes, it is essential to understand how children with SLDs develop their competence in additional languages.