This introduction contains three parts: First, a presentation of the timeline, including the selection of target languages. Second, an overview of trends of development in the international research field from the 1960s up until today. Third, a list of categories used in the subsequent table of annotated works.

The year 2020 marked the 25th year since Bonny Norton published her influential TESOL Quarterly article, ‘Social identity, investment, and language learning’ (Norton Peirce, 1995) and the fifth year since we, Darvin and Norton (2015), co-authored ‘Identity and a model of investment in applied linguistics’ in the Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. From the time Norton's 1995 piece was published, investment and motivation have been conceptually imbricated and often collocated, as they hold up two different lenses to investigate the same reality: why learners choose to learn an additional language (L2). In our 2015 article, we made the case that while it is important to ask the question, ‘Are students motivated to learn a language?’ it is equally productive to ask, ‘Are students invested in the language practices of the classroom or community?’ (Darvin & Norton, 2015, p. 37). We recognize that the relationship between language teachers and learners is unequal, and that teachers hold the power to shape these practices in diverse ways. Teachers bring to the classroom not only their personal histories and knowledge, but also their own worldviews and assumptions (Darvin, 2015), which may or may not align with those of learners. Relations of power between learners can also be unequal. As Norton and Toohey (2011, p. 421) note:

The language teaching landscape in Ireland has changed considerably over the last 30 years as a result of substantial and sustained inward migration into the country during this period. These social and demographic developments have added to the country's already bilingual context and created a much more varied multilingual landscape than had existed in previous decades. They have also impacted various aspects of language teaching policy, provision and methods for both indigenous and foreign languages. This article reviews research on language teaching and learning in Ireland published during the period 2012–2021. We discuss relevant work disseminated primarily in peer-reviewed journals (national and international), as well as in books, commissioned reports and chapters in edited volumes. The research and policy documents presented concern the teaching and learning of Irish, English and Modern Foreign Languages as second and/or additional languages across all levels of education. They address language teacher training contexts as well. We believe that this review of research demonstrates the extent to which recent inquiries in these domains have advanced knowledge and practice in the Irish context, and have also informed the international research community more generally.

Instructed foreign language knowledge – that is, language skills acquired exclusively in the classroom without the benefit of any significant immersion experience – remains a vastly neglected area of studies on language learning in general and language attrition in particular. There is also little consideration of foreign language attrition and maintenance as a problem for policy or pedagogy.

The present talk will give an overview of what is and what is not known about second language (L2) attrition at the present time. It will then present the results from a pilot project that will hopefully serve as the foundation for larger studies of instructed L2 attrition in future years.

Research on second language (L2) collaborative writing (CW) has proliferated over the recent decade and will continue to bloom due to the changing landscape of writing and learning in the digital age. This article provides a research agenda on CW in L2 classrooms. We illustrate six research themes for future research inquiry by pointing out the research gap, following a brief review of theoretical frameworks and existing empirical efforts on CW. We then expound on six specific research tasks that we deem to be pressing for this domain to progress, including more attention to multimodal CW, expanded frameworks for analyzing peer interaction and writing products, deployment of underused research techniques and improved research practice, development of CW assessment practice, as well as the inquiry of practitioners’ input on CW. We hope to provide guidance for future research endeavors by identifying avenues of investigations on CW and meanwhile contribute to the trajectory of vibrant research on L2 writing and language learning.

This replication study seeks to extend the generalizability of an exploratory study (McDonough et al., 2019) that identified holds (i.e., temporary cessation of dynamic movement by the listener) as a reliable visual cue of non-understanding. Conversations between second language (L2) English speakers in the Corpus of English as a Lingua Franca Interaction (CELFI; McDonough & Trofimovich, 2019) with non-understanding episodes (e.g., pardon?, what?, sorry?) were sampled and compared with understanding episodes (i.e., follow-up questions). External raters (N = 90) assessed the listener's comprehension under three rating conditions: +face/+voice, −face/+voice, and +face/−voice. The association between non-understanding and holds in McDonough et al. (2019) was confirmed. Although raters distinguished reliably between understanding and non-understanding episodes, they were not sensitive to facial expressions when judging listener comprehension. The initial and replication findings suggest that holds remain a promising visual signature of non-understanding that can be explored in future theoretically- and pedagogically-oriented contexts.

Accurate description of language use is central to English for academic purposes (EAP) practice. Thanks to the development of corpus tools, it has been possible to undertake systematic studies of language in academic contexts. This line of research aims to provide detailed and accurate characterization of academic communication and to ultimately inform EAP practice. Very few studies, however, have attempted to ascertain whether, and to what the extent, corpus-based findings have achieved such goals. The diverse nature of EAP, and the unique methodological challenges involved in compiling and using corpora, provide sufficient incentive for replication research in this area. The present article makes a case for replication of corpus-based studies in the field of EAP. It argues that replication research not only enhances the credibility of corpus linguistics for EAP pedagogy and research but also provides practical advice for EAP teachers and materials designers. It then looks at how two key corpus-based studies on the topic, Cortes (2013) and Biber and Gray (2010), can be replicated with respect to replication approaches described in Porte (2012).