research questions about language learning

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 19 June 2020

The social brain of language: grounding second language learning in social interaction

• Ping Li   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3314-943X 1 &
• Hyeonjeong Jeong   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5094-5390 2  

npj Science of Learning volume  5 , Article number:  8 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

38k Accesses

41 Citations

38 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Human behaviour

For centuries, adults may have relied on pedagogies that promote rote memory for the learning of foreign languages through word associations and grammar rules. This contrasts sharply with child language learning which unfolds in socially interactive contexts. In this paper, we advocate an approach to study the social brain of language by grounding second language learning in social interaction. Evidence has accumulated from research in child language, education, and cognitive science pointing to the efficacy and significance of social learning. Work from several recent L2 studies also suggests positive brain changes along with enhanced behavioral outcomes as a result of social learning. Here we provide a blueprint for the brain network underlying social L2 learning, enabling the integration of neurocognitive bases with social cognition of second language while combining theories of language and memory with practical implications for the learning and teaching of a new language in adulthood.

Similar content being viewed by others

The language network as a natural kind within the broader landscape of the human brain

People are surprisingly hesitant to reach out to old friends

Cortical gene expression architecture links healthy neurodevelopment to the imaging, transcriptomics and genetics of autism and schizophrenia

The study of the neuroscience of cognition has made great strides in the last two decades, thanks to the rapid developments in non-invasive neuroimaging techniques and the corresponding data analytics. At the same time, the study of language acquisition, including second language (L2) learning by children and adults, has also progressed significantly from behavioral research toward neurocognitive understanding, thanks also to new methods including neuroimaging. These two domains of study (i.e., cognitive neuroscience and language learning) have seen increasingly happy marriages of approaches, theories, and methodologies in the last two decades, driven largely by the New Science of Learning 1 , a framework for studying learning at the intersection of psychology, neuroscience, education, and machine learning. Specifically, this framework argues that learning should be studied along three important dimensions: a computational process, a social process, and a process supported by brain circuits linking perception and action. Meltzoff and colleagues 1 further suggested that human language acquisition provides a bona fide example for connecting computational learning, social learning, and brain circuits for perception and action. Despite the call from this multi-disciplinary perspective, researchers in cognitive neuroscience and language acquisition have remained to focus on the individual learner, especially in the study of adult L2 learning. This tradition has seriously limited our understanding of a key aspect of what it means to learn: learning in the social context, interactively.

The study of language learning focused on the individual might have had its origin in the tradition of generative linguistics 2 , 3 , according to which linguistics as a science should study the language competence of the idealized speaker and the corresponding innate mechanisms that enable humans to learn language. Although the neuroscience of language has largely avoided accepting the generative tradition, the focus on the individual, and consequently, the brain structure and function of the individual (i.e., the “single-brain” approach 4 ), has not changed as a field (see Fig. 1 for illustration ) . This is unfortunate, since language serves a social communicative purpose and is fundamentally a social behavior. Note that there are some exceptions to this focus, especially in (a) the study of child language learning (see discussion next), and (b) social neuroscience, which has begun to focus on how brains respond to social interactions using methodologies such as hyper-scanning 4 , 5 . In addition, although leading models of the neurobiology of language do not incorporate a social component 6 , there have been recent efforts to extend the landscape to include pragmatic reasoning 7 , theory of mind 8 , and social interaction 9 .

Left: Traditional approaches for “single-brain” study of language learning; Right: “Social-interactive brain” research and emerging methods.

In this paper, we advocate an approach focused on grounding L2 learning in social interaction; we call this approach “Social L2 Learning” (SL2). Specifically, we define “social interaction” here as “learning through real-life or simulated real-life environments where learners can interact with objects and people, perform actions, receive, use, and integrate perceptual, visuospatial, and other sensorimotor information, which enables learning and communication to become embodied.” Notwithstanding generative linguistics and individual-brain study approaches, the field of first language (L1) acquisition has clearly demonstrated that children, from the earliest stages, depend on social interactions to learn 1 . This dependence may be initially coordinated through “joint attention” and shared intentionality between the infant and the parent/caregiver 10 . Computational models that incorporate social-interactive cues from mother–child interactions perform significantly better than models with no such cues included 11 , 12 . Kuhl et al. 13 further indicated that social learning is crucial even when children learn an L2: American babies exposed to Mandarin Chinese through a “DVD condition” (pre-recorded audiovisual or audio-only material) did not demonstrate learning of Mandarin phonetic categories as did babies who were exposed to the same material through a “live condition” (experimenter interacting with the infant during learning). For adults, however, folk wisdom suggests that they can learn an L2 rapidly without social cues (e.g., through intensive training in a classroom) and may be less dependent on the presence of peer learners. Limited evidence, however, suggests that social cues such as joint attention may also enhance L2 learning success through orienting the learner’s attention to the correct meaning among competing alternatives 14 .

Theoretical frameworks for understanding the social brain of language Learning

The proposed SL2 model is focused on grounding L2 learning in social interaction based on both behavioral and brain data. A number of important theoretical framworks have already paved the way for the SL2 model, some of which are separately known in the domains of psycholinguistics, memory, and cognition, respectively.

First, while the classic Critical Period Hypothesis 15 suggests a biology-based account of effects of age of acquisition (AoA) on learning, the Competition Model, in its various formulations 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , provides a social-based and interactive-emergentist account of the differences between L1 and L2 learning. Upon this account, the principles of learning are not fundamentally different between the child learning an L1 and the adult learning an L2 (e.g., contra the “less is more” hypothesis 21 ), but the processes and contexts within which learning takes place may be significantly different. For children, language learning is a natural event that unfolds in the environment where they grow up. They can naturally integrate the rich perceptual and sensorimotor experiences from this environment, interacting with the objects and people and performing actions in it. Picking up and using a spoon while hearing the sound “spoon” is part of the learning process, which differs from the process where adults sitting in the classroom look at a picture of spoon and associate it to an existing label in their native language. According to MacWhinney 17 , adult L2 learning is susceptible to several major “risk factors”, factors that prevent adults from acquiring a foreign language to native competence. These include thinking in L1 only (which implies the need to translate from L2 to L1 rather than directly using L2 as a medium), social isolation (learning as an individual or through in-group communities only), and lack of perception-action resonance (lack of direct contact with the target objects or actions in the environment while learning L2). These risk factors, particularly social isolation and lack of perception-action-based contexts, may explain why adult learners display the strong parasitic L2-on-L1 representations 22 : on the one hand, adults typically start to learn L2 when they have already established a solid L1 (“entrenchment” in L1), which lends easily to L2-to-L1 translation and association; on the other hand, they lack a dynamic and variable environment to build direct relations between L2 words and the objects/concepts to which the words refer 23 . With regard to the risk factors of thinking in L1 and social isolation, empirical evidence has shown that study-abroad experience may provide some environmental support, particularly in attenuating L1 to L2 interference for late adult learners 24 .

These theoretical perspectives are consistent with a larger trend in psycholinguistics to examine language learning and bilingualism not as an individualized but a general communicative experience. Adults show significant differences in how they learn two (or more) languages, the frequency and contexts with which they use the languages, and the communicative purposes for which each language is needed, therefore showing that bilingualism is a highly dynamic developmental process 19 , 25 , 26 , 27 . The SL2 approach advocated here also echoes a movement in the broader language science, from sociocultural theory 28 to usage-based language learning 29 and conversational analysis 30 , all of which view language learning as a socially grounded process. Ellis 31 summarizes this movement with regard to its focus on “how language is learned from the participatory experience of processing language during embodied interaction in social and cultural contexts where individually desired outcomes are goals to be achieved by communicating intentions, concepts, and meaning with others.”

Second and independently, human memory research suggests that item-based learning (encoding) and use (retrieval) are highly interdependent. This is due to the associative nature of memory, in which the cognitive operations used for encoding stimulus items directly impact their subsequent retrieval. A well-established hypothesis in this regard is the “encoding-specificity” principle 32 , according to which semantic memories are more successfully retrieved if they are recalled in the same context as when they were originally encoded (e.g., if word lists were encoded underwater they would be recalled better underwater than on dry land 33 ). Related to this hypothesis is the “levels of processing” theory 34 that suggests deeper, more elaborative, or richer semantic processing during encoding would lead to more successful retrieval than shallow or surface-level processing of the same material. If encoding involves more elaborative semantic processing, e.g., using multimodal information, it will have a positive impact on memory retention and retrieval. Both the “dual encoding” theory 35 and the multimedia learning theories 36 suggest that elaborative processing with multimodal sensory information could enhance the quality of semantic memory, hence leading to better recall. One of the predictions here is a “multimodal advantage” such that, for example, people learn better with words and pictures together than with words alone 37 .

There have been several studies that build on the encoding-specificity principle to account for bilingual language processing. Marian and Kaushanskaya 38 proposed a language-dependent memory hypothesis to explain bilingual semantic/conceptual representation, according to which language is encoded in the episodic memory of an event and therefore forms part of one’s autobiographical memory. It is this episodic encoding that influences the accessibility of semantic memories. They observed that memories were more accessible when retrieved in the same language in which they were originally encoded or learned. Furthermore, this language specificity in bilingual memory is influenced by variables such as AoA, proficiency in the L2, and history of usage in the two languages 39 , 40 ; for example, richer memories were associated with an earlier age of L2 learning.

The richness of memory with regard to AoA may be explained by the rich episodic experiences/events associated with specific perceptual-sensory features in the environments, perhaps because early L1 learning includes these experiences but late L2 learning typically does not. This leads us to the embodied cognition theory 41 , 42 , according to which body-specific (e.g., head, hand, foot) and modality-specific (e.g., auditory, visual, tactile) experiences form an integral part of the learner’s mental representation of concepts, objects, and actions. This contrasts with classic cognitive theories of symbolic representation that argue that cognition and cognitive operations are modular, and that language is unrelated to the rest of cognition including perception and action 43 , 44 . The embodied cognition theory highlights the whole-body interaction with the context, that is, “interaction between perception, action, the body and the environment” 45 , and when engaged, will also activate the brain’s perceptual and sensorimotor cortex 46 , 47 . Although the embodied cognition hypotheses have been examined in many studies of brain and behavior, so far, the focus has been on native L1 speakers; whether and how body-specific and modality-specific experiences play the same role in L2 learning has not received much attention 48 , 49 . Our SL2 model argues for the important role of social interaction for L2 learning and draws on the link between learning and perception and action, as suggested by the New Science of Learning framework 1 .

Social interaction for second language learning: neuroimaging evidence

How do the theoretical frameworks above shed light on our SL2 approach in understanding the social brain of L2 learning? Although many recent neuroimaging studies have examined brain changes resulting from L2 learning 50 , most of this literature has focused on traditional L2 learning methods such as rote memorization or translation-based learning, in either classroom settings or lab-based intensive training 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 . Their findings suggest largely the engagement of language-related neural networks (e.g., the classic frontal-parietal network) and memory-related brain regions (e.g., the medial temporal region for the learning and consolidation of linguistic information; see Fig. 1 for illustration). So far, only a handful of studies have provided initial evidence on the neural networks implicated in social-based L2 learning, pointing to the following key patterns.

First, the supramarginal gyrus (SMG) and the angular gyrus (AG) could play a significant role. In one of the first studies in this domain, Jeong et al. 56 trained Japanese speakers to learn Korean words under two conditions, either through L1 translation or simulated social interaction in which the participants watched videos that showed joint activities in real-life situations (e.g., the L2 target word “Dowajo”, meaning help me in English, is shown in the video with an actor trying to move a heavy bag and asking another actor for help). The authors then asked participants to retrieve the target L2 words in a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) session. The results indicated that the words learned through videos with social interactions produced more activation in the right SMG whereas the words learned from translation produced more activity in the left middle frontal gyrus (MFG). Interestingly, retrieval of L1 words (acquired by these participants in childhood through daily life) also produced greater activation in the right SMG. These findings can be interpreted to suggest that L2 words learned via social interaction (as simulated in videos through short-term training) are processed in a similar fashion as L1 words.

Second, the right inferior parietal cortex (IPL, including both SMG and AG) has been implicated more strongly in virtual reality-based (VR) interactive learning as compared with non-virtual, word-to-picture association, learning 57 . Legault and colleagues found that cortical thickness, a structural brain measure of gray-matter thickness from the surface of the cortex to the white matter, is associated with different contexts of learning: after 2–3 weeks of intensive L2 vocabulary training across seven sessions, the VR learners showed a positive correlation in the right IPL with performance across all training sessions, while the non-VR learners showed a positive correlation at the final stages only in the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), a region associated with effective explicit language training 58 (though there is counter evidence 59 ). Furthermore, cortical thickness in the right SMG was correlated with higher accuracy scores of the delayed retention test, but only for the VR learning group. The VR group was engaged in 3D virtual environments in which the learners could dynamically view or play with the objects in an interactive manner.

Third, the right SMG is shown to be more activated in simulated partner-based learning than individual-based learning of word meanings, indicating that the mere presence of a social partner would facilitate L2 word learning 59 , like in child language learning. Verga and Kotz 59 further found that participants with higher learning outcomes showed higher activity in the right IFG during an interactive learning condition but not during an individualized non-interactive learning condition. Levels of activity in the right lingual gyrus (LG) and right caudate nucleus (CN), previously implicated in visual search process and visuospatial learning, were also found to correlate with temporal coordination between a learner and a partner during simulated interactive learning.

These brain imaging data suggest that social-based L2 learning versus classroom-based individual learning conditions can lead to distinct neural correlates; for example, social learning of L2 may engage more strongly the brain regions for visual and spatial processing 57 , 59 , which may have consequences on both encoding (learning) and retrieval of information (memory). In contrast to the idea that only the child brain may respond to social learning, these findings suggest that the adult brain displays significant neuroplasticity in response to social interaction. Jeong et al. 56 showed that if an L2 word was initially encoded in a more socially interactive condition (through video simulations), it engaged the relevant brain areas as in L1, areas that would not become activated if learning had occurred through word association or translation as in a typical L2 classroom.

Figure 2 illustrates the proposed neural correlates of social interaction in the frontal, parietal, and subcortical regions for L2 learning. The strong engagement of the SMG, AG, IFG, along with the visual (LG) and subcortical regions (CN), may form an important neural network for understanding how SL2 is instantiated in the human brain. Importantly, this network highlights the stronger role of the right-hemisphere brain regions as compared with the typical left-lateralized language networks. The IFG has long been implicated in lexical-semantic processing and its integration with memory 60 , which is shown bilaterally in both hemispheres in Fig. 2 . The other regions, the SMG, AG, LG, CN, are illustrated in Fig. 2 on the right hemisphere. The role of this “right-heavy” network is evidence of the significant neurocognitive impacts of social L2 learning as opposed to traditional methods (Fig. 1 ).

The left hemisphere regions (blue) handle lexical-semantic processing, while the right hemisphere cortical plus the subcortical regions (green) participate in social learning. IFG inferior frontal gyrus, SMG supramarginal gyrus, AG angular gyrus, LG lingual gyrus, CN caudate nucleus, MTG/ITG middle temporal gyrus/inferior temporal gyrus (Note: the right hemisphere is depicted on the left side and left hemisphere on the right side).

There are a number of important issues for further consideration with regard to the SL2 network charted in Fig. 2 . First, it is important to understand how the various areas collaborate and communicate with each other during learning and memory. A true brain network is one that involves modules, communities, and pathways that are dynamically connected and organized. An important research direction in neuroscience today is the network science approach towards the analysis of functional/structural brain patterns underlying cognition, and significant advances have been made in applying this approach to the understanding of neural circuits of learning and memory, including L2 learning 61 , 62 , 63 . It remains to be understood how the left frontal IFG and right parietal IPL areas (including SMG and AG) form a dynamic network in support of SL2 learning, alongside the visual and subcortical regions (LG and CN). It is possible that the LG and CN regions play an important early role in visuospatial analysis and learning in social settings, which feeds into action-based lexico-semantic and conceptual integration that heavily involves the SMG and AG regions, as evidenced in studies by Verga and Kotz 59 , Jeong et al. 56 , and Legault et al. 48 . The IFG then coordinates this network with significant participation of semantic memory and cognitive control as well as lexical retrieval 64 . In this regard, the IFG also plays a significant role in modulating competition between L1 and L2 in a language control network 19 , 65 .

Second, a related issue for further study is how such neural networks evolve during development, which would allow us to understand the degree to which time of learning (e.g., AoA), extent of learning, and increased proficiency may impact the dynamic changes in the neural network 50 . Elsewhere significant progress has been made in this domain 20 , 66 , 67 , but the focus there has been on the relationship between cognitive control and bilingualism and the related debate on bilingual cognitive advantage (see a recent discussion 25 ). Methodologically, to study the developmental process we will also need to pursue longitudinal neuroimaging work 51 as well as short-term intensive training paradigms. Finally, much work is needed for understanding how the SL2 network may overlap with neural networks implicated in other types of social interaction 68 , 69 . Hagoort and Indefrey 7 , 70 suggested that pragmatic inference in language processing involves the “theory of mind” (ToM) or the mentalizing network 71 , 72 , in which the medial prefrontal (mPFC), along with the temporoparietal junction (TPJ) regions, play an important role in social reasoning such as thinking about other people’s beliefs, emotions, and intentions. Not surprisingly, the extended language network (ELN) hypothesis for narrative text comprehension 73 significantly overlaps with the ToM network, involving mPFC and the TPJ in building story coherence, drawing inference, and interpreting pragmatic meaning in the narrative story being read. The ELN network allows the reader to follow the plots, empathize with the characters, and take the protagonist’s perspectives 74 , 75 . We hypothesize that the SL2 network in Fig. 2 dynamically connects to mPFC and TPJ implicated in ToM and social reasoning, although this hypothesis needs to be examined carefully by comparing learning with social interaction versus without.

New approaches toward SL2 as a theoretical hypothesis and a practical model

Embodied semantic representation in l1 and l2.

In a typical adult L2 learning setting, students rely on translation/association of two languages and rote memory, unlike the child who acquires the L1 with sensorimotor experiences in an enriched perceptual environment. For example, in an L2 classroom, the teacher introduces a new L2 word (e.g., Japanese “inu”) by its translation equivalent in the L1 (e.g., English “dog”) and the learner’s task is to form paired associations between L1 and L2 when learning the L2 vocabulary. Although this method is efficient early on, it leads to what is called a parasitic lexical representation: the L2 word is conveniently linked to a conceptual system already established through the L1 19 , 22 . Because the task of word association or translation does not encourage direct L2-to-concept relations, the link from the L2 word to the concept is weak, and has to be indirectly mediated via the L1-to-concept link 23 . More significantly from the SL2 perspective is the “collateral damage” of this parasitism: the new L2 representation lacks the relevant perceptual-spatial-sensorimotor features (e.g., shape, size, motion and location of “inu” or dog), features that are an integral part of the lexical-semantic representation in the L1.

Why can’t the adult L2 learner take the newly acquired L2 representation and map it to the rich embodied features in the L1 representational system, given that would be the most efficient way? Several computational models 22 , 76 , 77 have systematically manipulated the timing of adding new L2 items to L1 lexical structure during simultaneous or sequential learning of the two languages and showed that the L2 lexical organization is sensitive to AoA: the later L2 is learned, the less well organized and more fragmented the L2 representations are. Thus, parasitism is characteristic of L2 semantic learning in late adulthood. Hernandez et al. 19 and Li 78 attributed this to the mechanism of “entrenchment”, in which the lexical structure established by the L1 early on is entrenched to resist radical changes during later L2 learning. The entrenchment may have led to late adult L2 learner’s inability to map L2 forms directly to the rich L1 lexico-semantic representations. In a recent neuroimaging study comparing L1 vs. L2 embodied semantic representations, Zhang et al. 79 showed that L1 speakers engage a more integrated brain network connecting key areas for language and sensorimotor integration during lexico-semantic processing, whereas L2 speakers fail to activate the necessary sensorimotor information, recruiting a less integrated embodied brain system for the same task.

The persistent parasitism could also be attributed to the different contexts in which the two languages have been learned. Recent evidence from affective processing indicates that affective-specific experiences are more strongly evoked in L1 than in L2 words due to the different contexts of social learning (e.g., family vs. workplace interactions) and the co-evolution of emotional regulation systems with early language systems 80 , 81 , 82 . Consistent with embodied semantic differences 79 , such emotionality differences between L1 and L2 have been found most reliable when the L2 is a later-learned or less proficient language 80 , showing evidence that the L2 representation, if acquired late, cannot easily incorporate the rich social and affective features of the L1 representation.

How can the L2 learner break away from this parasitism so as to establish the L2 representation on a par with the L1 representation? SL2 provides a theoretical framework for addressing this question from an embodied cognition perspective. Recent work suggests that embodied actions, even when no direct social interaction is involved, can impact learning outcomes simply by engaging the body, for example, through gestures. Mayer et al. 49 showed neurocognitive differences between (a) L2 vocabulary learning with gestures that activated the superior temporal sulcus, STS, and the premotor areas, versus (b) learning without gestures that activated the right lateral occipital cortex only. Critically, learners in the gesture condition showed significantly better memory for L2 words, hence more sustained retention, than the non-gesture learners, even after 2–6 months. Such findings point to the significance of embodied “body-specific” (hands in this case) activities for learning, and are consistent with the sensorimotor-based neural accounts of semantic representation 20 . According to the “hub-and-spoke model” 83 , 84 , “modality-specific” versus “modality-independent” (or “amodal”) representations are realized in different neural circuits, in visual/auditory/motor areas versus anterior temporal lobe, respectively. However, the outcome conceptual system must encode knowledge through integrating higher-order relationships among sensory, motor, affect, and language experiences. In this regard, one of the outstanding questions raised by Pulvermüller 84 was whether semantic learning from embodied experience and context could lead to different semantic representations in the mind and the brain. This question becomes particularly relevant when we examine the contexts of SL2 learning.

Simulated social interaction, technology, and the brain

In addition to the cognitive and neuroscience models that support SL2 theoretically, recent advances in technology have enabled us to study SL2 as a practical model toward building embodied representations in the L2 through technology-based learning. Because of the L1 vs. L2 embodied representation differences 79 , the L2 learner should aim at integrating modality-specific information with the newly acquired L2 amodal representations, in order to fully approach native-like conceptual-semantic representations. Technology-based learning could aid in this process from the earliest stages of learning, given the ample evidence from (a) technology-enhanced child language learning 85 , 86 , (b) prevalence of technology-based multimedia learning for both children and adults 36 , and (c) evidence of multimedia learning effects on the brain 37 . For example, in child language, despite a clear advantage of live learning compared to screen-based DVD learning 13 , it is now shown that direct face-to-face human interaction is not a necessary condition for infant foreign language learning. Children can benefit from technology such as Skype and other screen media platforms, provided that these technologies can deliver simulated social interactions, for example, through video chats 85 . Lytle et al. 86 showed that when the same learning materials from Kuhl et al. 13 were delivered to children through play sessions with an interactive touchscreen video, children can indeed learn from the videos. This study clearly points to both the role of interactive social play (simulated through touchscreen videos) and the impact of technology, breaking the simple dichotomy between live human learning (as effective) vs. screen-based learning (as ineffective).

In real-life learning situations, students observe and integrate multiple sources of information including actions and intentions of the speaker for using specific words in specific contexts. In a follow-up study of Jeong et al. 56 , Jeong et al. 87 examined fMRI evidence during learning (i.e., encoding), under both traditional translation and simulated social interaction conditions. The authors controlled for the amount of visual information in the two conditions by using L1 text and L1 videos as baseline comparisons. In the simulated video condition, participants had to infer the meaning of L2 target words by observing social interactions of others. Learning of L2 words in this condition resulted in additional activation in the bilateral posterior STS and right IPL. Compared with learning through L1 translation, this condition also resulted in significant positive correlations between performance scores at delayed post-test and neural activities in the right TPJ, hippocampus, and motor areas.

Jeong et al.’s new findings showed that simulated social interaction methods, compared with traditional translation/association methods, may result in stronger neural activities in key brain regions implicated for memory, perception and action, which can boost both recall and sustained long-term retention. These results are consistent with the semantic memory encoding and retrieval theories reviewed earlier. They are also consistent with recent multimedia learning effects on the brain, reflected in the bimodal encoding advantage that materials learned in multimodal conditions (e.g., learned from videos that engage both auditory and visual channels 37 ) may lead to sustained neural activities in AG, mPFC, hippocampus, posterior cingulate, and subcortical areas. These brain areas, including mPFC, TPJ, and hippocampus, significantly overlapped with the SL2 brain network and the ToM network that relies on social learning and reasoning (Fig. 2 ).

Videos or other multimedia platforms, although very effective as discussed, nevertheless have their limits with regard to social interaction and “whole-body” embodiment/engagement as in real life. Recent technological advances in immersive technologies (e.g., virtual reality, VR and augmented reality, AR) enable social interaction to a greater extent, by simulating real-world contexts and promoting student learning through active and self-exploratory discovery processes 88 . VR also provides a new platform to connect cognition, language learning, and social interaction, as it allows researchers to simulate the process of learning in its natural ecology without sacrificing experimental rigor 89 , 90 . In the current consideration, and in light of Competition Model and Embodied Cognition theories discussed, VR provides a tool for students to learn L2 in a new way. Specifically, it enables the adult learner, like the child L1 learner, to directly map (“perceptually ground”) the L2 material during learning onto objects, actions, and episodic memory to form embodied semantic representations in the L2.

Although VR has been applied to L2 teaching and learning, systematic and experimental research is still scarce in understanding the effects of VR as a function of both features of the technology and characteristics of the learner 90 . Lan et al. 91 and Hsiao et al. 92 provided early evidence in this regard. The authors trained American students to learn Mandarin Chinese vocabulary through Second Life , a popular desktop virtual platform of gaming and social networking, and demonstrated that (a) the virtual learners needed only about half of the number of exposures to gain the same level of performance as learners through traditional associative learning, and (b) virtual learners showed faster acceleration of later-stage learning. More importantly, clear individual differences in learning were observed: the low-achieving learners tended to follow a fixed route in the virtual space (using the “nearest neighbor” strategy to learn), whereas the high-achieving learners were more exploratory, grouping together similarly sounding words or similarly looking objects for learning. Interestingly, such individual difference patterns could be captured by statistical methods such as “roaming entropy” to quantify the degree or variability of movement trajectories in self-directed exploration of space, a measure previously shown to correlate with neural development during spatial navigation 93 : better learners showed higher roaming entropy, indicating more exploratory analyses of the virtual environment. Thus, navigation patterns in the VR may reflect how learners conceptually organize the environment and their abilities to explore it interactively.

Most L2 virtual learning studies, like Lan et al. 91 , have relied on desktop virtual platforms like Second Life rather than more interactive and immersive VR (iVR). Limited evidence suggests that iVR, with its more realistic simulation of the visuospatial environment and more bodily activity and interaction, leads to higher accuracy in memory recall tasks 94 . It is likely that iVR, compared to desktop VR, more strongly engages the perceptual-motor systems and maximizes the integration of modality-specific experience, and therefore generates better embodied representation 90 . In Legault et al. 48 , participants wore head-mounted displays to view and interact with objects/animals in an iVR kitchen or zoo, and showed significantly better performance of L2 vocabulary attainment than learning through the L2-to-L1 word-to-word association method. Further, the kitchen words were learned better than the animal words, presumably because the learner could more directly manipulate the virtual objects in the kitchen (e.g., squatting and picking up a broom and moving it around; see Fig. 3 for an illustration) than they could with the virtual animals in the zoo. The iVR kitchen environment thus conferred more “whole-body” interactive experience to the learner, especially with respect to the engagement of the sensorimotor system 95 .

a In the iVR kitchen, the learner used her handset to point to any item and hear the corresponding word (e.g., “dao”, Chinese knife in the example). b The learner could pick up and move objects (broom in the example) by pressing a trigger button with index finger; ( c ) position of the learner picking up the item (broom)—the learner consented to the use of her photo here. d Left panel: Effect of learning context (iVR vs. word-word association); Right panel: effect of category of learning (iVR kitchen vs. iVR zoo). Error bars indicate 95% confidence intervals (CIs). * indicates significant effect (from Legault et al. 48 ; copyright permission from MDPI).

In terms of the SL2 framework, VR has the promise of providing a context of learning for children and adults on equal footing, and in particular, it simulates “situated learning”, a condition whereby learning takes place through real-world experiences and visuospatial analyses of the learning environment, experiences and analyses that are often absent in a typical classroom 88 . Therefore, the positive benefits of SL2 learning based on either real or simulated social interactions are clear, including at least the aforementioned aspects of (a) embodied, native-like, neural representation 56 , (b) more sustained long-term memory 49 , and (c) less susceptibility to L1 interference 24 . These benefits not only apply to foreign language learning, but also other educational contents such as spatial learning and memory 90 and learning of subjects in STEM (i.e., science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) 88 .

VR is an excellent example of the power of today’s technology-based learning, and it urges us to study how students can take advantage of rapidly developing technologies for better learning outcomes. We need to pay attention to the specific key features that support VR learning (e.g., immersive experience, spatial navigation, and user interactivity), the individual differences therein (e.g., cognitive characteristics of the learner including memory and motivation), and the underlying neurocognitive mechanisms (e.g., sensorimotor integration) that enable VR as an effective tool 90 . In this regard, the SL2 approach we advocate here will have the potential of not only benefitting students in terms of reaching native-like linguistic representation and communicative competence, but also providing specific recommendations to teachers in the classroom, especially for those struggling students who may need help in integrating multiple sources of information through contextualized learning. For example, as indicated by Legault et al. 48 , it is the struggling students (“the less successful learners”) who benefitted more from VR learning than from non-VR learning, whereas for the successful learners, VR versus non-VR learning did not make a significant difference. Consistent with the larger trend in education to promote personalized learning and active learning in STEM 96 , there is a movement for today’s classroom instructions to be structured differently from the traditional “teacher-centered” instructional methods, to encourage more “student-centered” interactions and in-depth discussions (e.g., the “flipped classroom” model). E-learning technologies including VR play a significant role in this movement.

Future directions

New exciting research in the neurocognitive mechanisms of SL2 has just begun. To understand different aspects of L2 learning from a multi-level language systems and multiple networks perspective 7 , neuroimaging studies should extend their focus from the lexico-semantic level to phonological, morphological, syntactic, and discourse levels with the SL2 approach. For example, if, as in infant L1 learning, L2 phonology can be learned through socially enriched linguistic exposure (e.g., multi-talker variability, visible articulation), then even late L2 adult learners may advance to native competence 97 . It is also important to examine how social interaction impacts the acquisition of different types of syntactic rules (e.g., cross-linguistically different syntactic features), as demonstrated in a recent fMRI study of the acquisition of possessive constructions in Japanese Sign Language 98 . The relationship between lexical versus syntactic acquisition is also a topic of significant research interest. While lexical learning typically elicits stronger involvement of the declarative system, morphosyntactic learning likely involves to a greater extent the procedural memory system 99 , 100 . How L2 lexical learning may also engage the procedural memory system in light of the SL2 brain network (Fig. 2 ) needs to be seriously considered and carefully examined in future studies.

Despite the significant effects of social L2 learning, individual differences have been observed as discussed 48 , 92 . It is therefore important to examine in greater detail both the contexts of learning and the characteristics of the learner 90 . Specifically, the magnitude of the effects might depend on the interaction between features of social learning and the learner’s cognitive and linguistic abilities. It is possible that highly interactive, embodied experiences are more helpful to some than to others 48 : learners who are poor at abstract associative learning may benefit more from social-interactive learning. A challenge to future research will be to identify the nature of the interaction between the individual learner’s inherent abilities and the richness of the social learning context.

Finally, a number of new directions present further research opportunities. For example, systematic investigation is needed for understanding the role of various types of non-verbal information that may contribute to positive L2 learning outcomes. Previous cognitive neuroscience studies have provided empirical evidence that non-verbal information (e.g. gesture, communicative intention) facilitates speech comprehension and production, as well as language learning in children and adults 49 , 101 , 102 . Furthermore, it is important to study how SL2 facilitates affective processing such as emotion and motivation 81 , 103 and consequently how it engages the brain’s limbic and subcortical reward systems. As discussed earlier, there is evidence that emotional responses are more strongly associated with L1 than L2 and social contexts may be a significant contributor to this association 80 , 81 . Indeed, social interaction has been studied as one of the most crucial contributors to the development of learning motivation in L2 acquisition 104 , 105 . The SL2 approach provides a framework for integrating previous findings and hypotheses with new insights from affective and cognitive neuroscience to fully understand the social brain of language learning.

Meltzoff, A., Kuhl, P., Movellan, J. & Sejnowski, T. Foundations for a new science of learning. Science 325 , 284–288 (2009).

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Chomsky, N. Syntactic structures . Janua Linguarum 4 (The Hague, Mouton, 1957).

Chomsky, N. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (MIT, Cambridge, MA, 1965).

Redcay, E. & Schilbach, L. Using second-person neuroscience to elucidate the mechanisms of social interaction. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 20 , 495–505 (2019).

Babiloni, F. & Astolfi, L. Social neuroscience and hyperscanning techniques: past, present and future. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 44 , 76–93 (2014).

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hickok, G. & Poeppel, D. The cortical organization of speech processing. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 8 , 393–402 (2007).

CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hagoort, P. The neurobiology of language beyond single-word processing. Science 366 , 55–58 (2019).

Ferstl, E. C. Neuroimaging of text comprehension: Where are we now? Ital. j. linguist. 22 , 61–88 (2010).

Google Scholar  

Verga, L. & Kotz, S. A. How relevant is social interaction in second language learning? Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7 , 550 (2013).

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Tomasello, M. The social-pragmatic theory of word learning. Pragmatics 10 (4), 401–413 (2000).

Yu, C. & Ballard, D. A unified model of early word learning: Integrating statistical and social cues. Neurocomputing 70 (13-15), 2149–2165 (2007).

Li, P., & Zhao, X. In Research Methods in Psycholinguistics and the Neurobiology of Language: A Practical Guide (eds. de Groot, A. & Hagoort, P.) 208–229 (Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2017).

Kuhl, P., Tsao, F. M. & Liu, H. M. Foreign-language experience in infancy: effects of short-term exposure and social interaction on phonetic learning. PNAS 100 (15), 9096–9101 (2003).

Verga, L. & Kotz, S. A. Help me if I can’t: Social interaction effects in adult contextual word learning. Cognition 168 , 76–90 (2017).

Lenneberg, E. H. Biological Foundations of Language (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1967).

Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. In Mechanisms of Language Acquisition (ed. MacWhinney, B.) 157–194 (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987).

MacWhinney, B. The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (eds. Gass, S. & Mackey, A.) 211–227 (New York: Routledge, 2012).

Li, P., & MacWhinney, B. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (ed. Chapelle, C. A.) 1–5 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Malden, MA, 2013).

Hernandez, A., Li, P. & MacWhinney, B. The emergence of competing modules in bilingualism. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9 , 220–5 (2005).

Hernandez, A. & Li, P. Age of acquisition: its neural and computational mechanisms. Psychol. Bull. 133 (4), 638–650 (2007).

Johnson, J. S. & Newport, E. L. Critical period effects in second language learning: the influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cogn. Psychol. 21 , 60–99 (1989).

Zhao, X. & Li, P. Bilingual lexical interactions in an unsupervised neural network model. IJB 13 , 505–524 (2010).

Kroll, J. F. & Stewart, E. Category interference in translation and picture naming: evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. J. Mem. Lang. 33 , 149–174 (1994).

Linck, J., Kroll, J. & Sunderman, G. Losing access to the native language while immersed in a second language: Evidence for the role of inhibition in second-language learning. Psychol. Sci. 20 (12), 1507–1515 (2009).

DeLuca, V., Rothman, J., Bialystok, E. & Pliatsikas, C. Redefining bilingualism as a spectrum of experiences that differentially affects brain structure and function. PNAS 116 (15), 7565–7574 (2019).

Grosjean, F. In The Psycholinguistics of Bilingualism (eds. Grosjean, F. & Li, P.) 5–25 (Wiley & Sons, Inc., Malden, MA, 2013).

Li, P. In The Handbook of Language Emergence (eds. MacWhinney, B., & O’Grady, W.) 511–536 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Maiden, MA, 2015).

Lantolf, J. Sociocultural theory and L2: State of the art. Stud. Second Lang. Acquis. 28 , 67–109 (2006).

Tomasello, M. Constructing a Language: A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2003).

Hall, J. K. The contributions of conversation analysis and interactional linguistics to a usagebased understanding of language: expanding the transdisciplinary framework. Mod. Lang. J. 103 , 80–94 (2019).

Ellis, N. C. Essentials of a theory of language cognition. Mod. Lang. J. 103 , 39–60 (2019).

Tulving, E. & Thomson, D. M. Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychol. Rev. 80 (5), 352–373 (1973).

Godden, G. & Baddeley, A. Context-dependent memory in two natural environments: on land and underwater. Br. J. Psychol. 6 , 355–369 (1975).

Craik, F. I. & Lockhart, R. S. Levels of processing: a framework for memory research. J. Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. 11 (6), 671–684 (1972).

Paivio, A. Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach . (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1990).

Mayer, R. E., Moreno, R., Boire, M. & Vagge, S. Maximizing constructivist learning from multimedia communications by minimizing cognitive load. J. Educ. Psychol. 91 (4), 638–643 (1999).

Liu, C., Wang, R., Li, L., Ding, G., Yang, J. & Li, P. Effects of encoding modes on memory of naturalistic events. J. Neurolinguist. 53 , 100863 (2020).

Marian, V. & Kaushanskaya, M. in Relations Between Language and Memory : Sabest Saarbrucker Beitrage zur Sprach- und Transl (ed. Zelinsky-Wibbelt, C.) 95–120 (Frankfrut, Peter Lang, 2011).

Marian, V. & Neisser, U. Language-dependent recall of autobiographical memories. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 129 (3), 361–368 (2000).

Marian, V. & Kaushanskaya, M. Language context guides memory content. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 14 (5), 925–933 (2007).

Barsalou, L. W., Niedenthal, P. M., Barbey, A. K. & Ruppert, J. A. In The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory (ed. Ross, B. H.) 43–92 (Elsevier Science, 2003).

Glenberg, A. M., Sato, M. & Cattaneo, L. Use-induced motor plasticity affects the processing of abstract and concrete language. Curr. Biol. 18 , R290–R291 (2008).

Chomsky, N. Lectures on Government and Binding (Foris Publications, Dordrecht, Holland, & Cinnaminson, NJ, 1981).

Fodor, J. A. The Modularity of Mind (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1983).

Barsalou, L. W. In Embodied Grounding: Social, Cognitive, Affective, and Neuroscientific Approaches (eds. Semin, G. R. & Smith, E. R.) 9–42 (Cambridge University Press, 2008).

Aziz-Zadeh, L. & Damasio, A. Embodied semantics for actions: findings from functional brain imaging. J. Physiol. Paris 102 (1-3), 35–9 (2008).

Willems, R. M. & Casasanto, D. Flexibility in embodied language understanding. Front. Psychol. 2 , 116 (2011).

Legault, J. et al. Immersive virtual reality as an effective tool for second language vocabulary learning. Languages 4 (1), 13 (2019).

Mayer, K. M., Yildiz, I. B., Macedonia, M. & von Kriegstein, K. Visual and motor cortices differentially support the translation of foreign language words. Curr. Biol. 25 (4), 530–535 (2015).

Li, P., Legault, J. & Litcofsky, K. A. Neuroplasticity as a function of second language learning: anatomical changes in the human brain. Cortex 58 , 301–24 (2014).

Grant, A. M., Fang, S.-Y. Y. & Li, P. Second language lexical development and cognitive control: a longitudinal fMRI study. Brain Lang. 144 , 35–47 (2015).

Qi, Z., Han, M., Garel, K., Chen, E. & Gabrieli, J. White-matter structure in the right hemisphere predicts Mandarin Chinese learning success. J. Neurolinguist. 33 , 14–28 (2015).

Yang, J., Gates, K., Molenaar, P. & Li, P. Neural changes underlying successful second language word learning: An fMRI study. J. Neurolinguist. 33 , 29–49 (2015).

Breitenstein, C. et al. Hippocampus activity differentiates good from poor learners of a novel lexicon. NeuroImage 25 (3), 958–968 (2005).

Tagarelli, K., Shattuck, K., Turkeltaub, P. & Ullman, M. Language learning in the adult brain: a neuroanatomical meta-analysis of lexical and grammatical learning. NeuroImage 193 , 178–200 (2019).

Jeong, H. et al. Learning second language vocabulary: neural dissociation of situation-based learning and text-based learning. NeuroImage 50 (2), 802–9 (2010).

Legault, J., Fang, S., Lan, Y. & Li, P. Structural brain changes as a function of second language vocabulary training: Effects of learning context. Brain Cogn. 134 , 90–102 (2019).

Stein, M., Winkler, C., Kaiser, A. & Dierks, T. Structural brain changes related to bilingualism: does immersion make a difference? Front. Psychol. 5 , 1116 (2014).

Verga, L. & Kotz, S. A. Spatial attention underpins social word learning in the right fronto-parietal network. NeuroImage 195 , 165–173 (2019).

Thompson-Schill, S. Neuroimaging studies of semantic memory: inferring “how” from “where”. Neuropsychologia 41 (3), 280–292 (2003).

Bressler, S. & Menon, V. Large-scale brain networks in cognition: emerging methods and principles. Trends Cogn. Sci. 14 (6), 277–290 (2010).

Bassett, D. & Sporns, O. Network neuroscience. Nat. Neurosci. 20 (3), 353–364 (2017).

Li, P. & Grant, A. Second language learning success revealed by brain networks. Biling. Lang. Cogn. 19 , 657–664 (2016).

Hagoort, P. On Broca, brain, and binding: a new framework. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9 (9), 416–423 (2005).

Abutalebi, J. & Green, D. Bilingual language production: the neurocognition of language representation and control. J. Neurolinguist. 20 (3), 242–275 (2007).

Nichols, E. S. & Joanisse, M. F. Functional activity and white matter microstructure reveal the independent effects of age of acquisition and proficiency on second-language learning. NeuroImage 143 , 15–25 (2016).

Sun, X., Li, L., Ding, G., Wang, R. & Li, P. Effects of language proficiency on cognitive control: Evidence from resting-state functional connectivity. Neuropsychologia 129 , 263–275 (2019).

Noordzij, M. L. et al. Brain mechanisms underlying human communication. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 3 , 14 (2009).

Redcay, E. et al. Live face-to-face interaction during fMRI: a new tool for social cognitive neuroscience. NeuroImage 50 (4), 1639–47 (2010).

Hagoort, P. & Indefrey, P. The neurobiology of language beyond single words. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 37 (1), 347–362 (2014).

Frith, C. & Frith, U. Social cognition in humans. Curr. Biol. 17 (16), R724–R732 (2007).

Adolphs, R. The social brain: neural basis of social knowledge. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 60 , 693–716 (2009).

Ferstl, E. C., Neumann, J., Bogler, C. & von Cramon, D. Y. The extended language network: a meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on text comprehension. Hum. Brain. Mapp. 29 (5), 581–93 (2008).

Mason, R. & Just, M. The role of the theory-of-mind cortical network in the comprehension of narratives. Lang. Linguist. Compass 3 , 157–174 (2009).

Li, P. & Clariana, R. B. Reading comprehension in L1 and L2: An integrative approach. J. Neurolinguist. 50 , 94–105 (2019).

Peñaloza, C., Grasemann, U., Dekhtyar, M., Miikkulainen, R. & Kiran, S. BiLex: a computational approach to the effects of age of acquisition and language exposure on bilingual lexical access. Brain Lang ., in press, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2019.104643 (2020).

Zhao, X. & Li, P. Simulating cross-language priming with a dynamic computational model of the lexicon. Biling.: Lang. Cogn. 16 , 288–303 (2013).

Li, P. Lexical organization and competition in first and second languages: computational and neural mechanisms. Cogn. Sci. 33 , 629–664 (2009).

Zhang, X., Yang, J., Wang, R. & Li, P. A neuroimaging study of semantic representation in first and second languages. Lang. Cogn. Neurosci . In press, https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2020.1738509 (2020).

Caldwell-Harris, C. L. Emotionality differences between a native and foreign language: implications for everyday life. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 24 , 214–219 (2015).

Pavlenko, A. Affective processing in bilingual speakers: disembodied cognition? Int. J. Psychol. 47 , 405–428 (2012).

Ivaz, L., Costa, A. & Dunabeitia, J. The emotional impact of being myself: emotions and foreign-language processing. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 42 , 489–496 (2016).

Lambon Ralph, M. A., Jefferies, E., Patterson, K. & Rogers, T. The neural and computational bases of semantic cognition. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 18 (1), 42–55 (2017).

Pulvermüller, F. How neurons make meaning: brain mechanisms for embodied and abstract-symbolic semantics. Trends Cogn. Sci. 17 (9), 458–470 (2013).

Myers, L., LeWitt, R., Gallo, R. & Maselli, N. Baby FaceTime: Can toddlers learn from online video chat? Dev. Sci. 20 , e12430 (2017).

Lytle, S., Garcia-Sierra, A. & Kuhl, P. Two are better than one: Infant language learning from video improves in the presence of peers. PNAS 115 (40), 9859–9866 (2018).

Jeong, H., Li, P., Suzuki, W., Sugiura, M. & Kawashima, R. Neural mechanisms of language learning from social contexts, Manuscript under review (2020).

Dede, C. Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning. Science 323 (5910), 66–69 (2009).

Peeters, D. Virtual reality: a game-changing method for the language sciences. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 26 (3), 894–900 (2019).

Li, P., Legault, J., Klippel, A. & Zhao, J. Virtual reality for student learning: understanding individual differences. Hum. Behav. Brain 1 , 28–36 (2020).

Lan, Y. J., Fang, S. Y., Legault, J. & Li, P. Second language acquisition of Mandarin Chinese vocabulary: context of learning effects. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 63 (5), 671–690 (2015).

Hsiao, I. Y. T., Lan, Y. J., Kao, C. L. & Li, P. Visualization analytics for second language vocabulary learning in virtual worlds. J. Educ. Techno. Soc. 20 (2), 161–175 (2017).

Freund, J. et al. Emergence of individuality in genetically identical mice. Science 340 , 756–759 (2013).

Krokos, E., Catherine, P. & Amitabh, V. Virtual memory palaces: immersion aids recall. Virtual Real. 23 , 1–15 (2019).

Johnson-Glenberg, M. C., Birchfield, D. A., Tolentino, L. & Koziupa, T. Collaborative embodied learning in mixed reality motion-capture environments: two science studies. J. Educ. Psychol. 106 (1), 86–104 (2014).

Nature Editorial. STEM education: to build a scientist. Nature 523 (7560), 371–373 (2015).

Zhang, Y. et al. Neural signatures of phonetic learning in adulthood: a magnetoencephalography study. Neuroimage 46 , 226–240 (2009).

Yusa, N., Kim, J., Koizumi, M., Sugiura, M. & Kawashima, R. Social interaction affects neural outcomes of sign language learning as a foreign language in adults. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 11 , 115, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00115 (2017).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Ullman, M. T. The neuronal basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model. Biling. Lang. Cogn. 4 (1), 105–122 (2001).

Ullman, M. T. & Lovelett, J. T. Implications of the declarative/procedural model for improving second language learning: The role of memory enhancement techniques. Second Lang. Res. 34 (1), 39–65 (2018).

Goldin-Meadow, S. & Alibali, M. W. Gesture’s role in speaking, learning, and creating language. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 64 , 257–283 (2013).

Ozyurek, A. In Oxford Handbook of Psycholinguistics (eds. Rueschemeyer, S.A. & Gaskell, M.G.) 592–607 (Oxford University Press, 2018).

Ripollés, P. et al. The role of reward in word learning and its implications for language acquisition. Curr. Biol. CB 24 (21), 2606–11 (2014).

Dörnyei, Z. In Individual Differences and Instructed Language Learning (ed. Robinson, P.) 137–158 (John Benjamins, 2002).

MacIntyre, P. D. & Legatto, J. J. A dynamic system approach to willingness to communicate: Developing an idiodynamic method to capture rapidly changing affect. Appl. Linguist. 32 (2), 149–171 (2011).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the generous support to the research reported in this article by the US National Science Foundation’s Integrative Neural and Cognitive Systems (NCS) program (NCS-1533625; BCS-1633817) and by a Faculty Startup Fund from the Hong Kong Polytechnic University to PL and the MEXT KAKENHI Grant of Japan (#18K00776) to HJ. We thank Peter Hagoort for his helpful comments on an earlier version of this article.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Chinese and Bilingual Studies, Faculty of Humanities, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China

Graduate School of International Cultural Studies & Department of Human Brain Science, Institute of Development, Aging, and Cancer, Tohoku University, Aoba-ku, Sendai, Japan

Hyeonjeong Jeong

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

P.L. and H.J. conceptualized the article. P.L. provided the overall framework of the article, and P.L. and H.J. both reviewed the literature and wrote the article.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ping Li .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Li, P., Jeong, H. The social brain of language: grounding second language learning in social interaction. npj Sci. Learn. 5 , 8 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-020-0068-7

Download citation

Received : 17 December 2019

Accepted : 29 May 2020

Published : 19 June 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-020-0068-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Brain gray matter morphometry relates to onset age of bilingualism and theory of mind in young and older adults.

• Xiaoqian Li
• Kwun Kei Ng
• W. Quin Yow

Scientific Reports (2024)

Knee flexion of saxophone players anticipates tonal context of music

• Nádia Moura

npj Science of Learning (2023)

Psychological Impact of Languages on the Human Mind: Research on the Contribution of Psycholinguistics Approach to Teaching and Learning English

Journal of Psycholinguistic Research (2023)

RETRACTED ARTICLE: IoT Based Multimodal Social Interaction Activity Framework for the Physical Education System

• Liang Zhuang
• Ching-Hsien Hsu
• Priyan Malarvizhi Kumar

Wireless Personal Communications (2022)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Center for Applied Second Language Studies

Burning Questions: Second Language Research

Language teaching is as much an art as it is a science. Effective teachers excel at the art of language teaching, and we at CASLS understand the science behind second language research. With help from practicing teachers, we identified and answered teachers’ top burning questions about language learning.

Show All Answers

What proficiency level do high school students achieve?

The majority of students studying a world language in a traditional high school program reach benchmark level 3 in reading by the fourth year of study, regardless of the target language.

Students typically reach benchmark level 4 in writing and speaking by the fourth year of study. Interestingly, the data suggest that students progress faster in speaking and writing than in reading. Download the full report. Hide

Does block or traditional scheduling affect success in language programs?

Since the 1980s, teachers have debated the benefits of organizing class time according to different types of schedules.

Many schools have replaced the traditional schedule, in which classes meet forty to fifty-five minutes each school day, with a block schedule, in which classes meet for twice as long every other school day. Our data shows that students do equally well in either scheduling format after two years of instruction. Download the full report. Hide

Do early language programs improve high school proficiency?

Teachers often hear that beginning language study early will help students become more proficient, and many schools now offer early language programs.

Does it matter whether students start language study in elementary or middle school? Our data shows that students who begin in elementary school are about 70% more likely to reach basic communication levels by high school. Students who begin in middle school are about 50% more likely. Download the full report. Hide

How many hours of instruction do students need to reach Intermediate-high proficiency?

Teachers, administrators, and parents often underestimate the amount of time students need to reach Intermediate proficiency and can be disappointed in learning outcomes later.

How many hours of instruction do students need? Our data shows that only 15% of students reach Intermediate-mid proficiency after approximately 720 hours of study, which is about four years in a typical high school program. Download the full report. Hide

What motivates students to study world languages?

We know it’s important for students to take extended sequences of world language classes to become proficient, but many students just want to get the requirements over with as soon as possible.

How can we inspire students to continue studying world languages? Motivating students is a challenge for teachers of all subjects, and a complete answer would take a book (or two). Our study shows that one factor, high levels of language proficiency, correlates strongly with students’ desire to continue studying language. Successful learners were eleven times more likely to want to continue, which would lead to even greater mastery. Download the the full report. Hide

How do proficiency levels compare between K-12 and university students?

High school students with three years of study have approximately the same proficiency levels as university students with one year of study.

Eighth grade students with 540 hours of instruction have had about as much class time as third-year high school students. Students’ productive skills are often slightly higher than their reading scores. Most students in U.S. programs do not reach proficiency levels that allow them to effectively communicate in the language. Download the the full report. Hide

How do heritage students perform on proficiency tests?

Heritage students show higher levels of language proficiency in all skills, but the difference is strongest in productive skills.

Heritage students have markedly higher speaking and writing scores than those of non-heritage students, particularly in the early years of high school language programs. By the fourth year, non-heritage students are catching up. The progress of heritage students is slower overall, probably because most high school programs do not challenge these students to reach high levels of proficiency. Download the full report. Hide

What factors are important for an effective K-8 program?

Teachers understand that it’s better to start teaching world languages in elementary school, and many parents are beginning to ask for elementary language programs. But what kind of program would be best?

In terms of bang for the buck, immersion programs lead to the highest proficiency levels. For non-immersion programs, such as FLES, the two key factors for effective programs are time and intensity. Language programs that meet several times each week during the whole school year and continue for multiple years are generally the most effective. Download the full report. Hide

What levels of proficiency do immersion students achieve?

Virtually all students enrolled at a young age in immersion programs succeed in reaching the ACTFL Intermediate proficiency levels by the end of high school.

At these levels, students successfully handle everyday communicative tasks in the target language. In traditional four-year high school language programs, less than half the students completing the program reach these proficiency levels. Download the full report. Hide

• Even more »

Account Options

• Try the new Google Books
• Advanced Book Search

Get this book in print

• Springer Shop
• Barnes&Noble.com
• Books-A-Million
• Find in a library
• All sellers  »

Selected pages

Other editions - View all

Common terms and phrases, about the author  (2022).

Dr Christine Coombe is an Associate Professor of General Studies at Dubai Men’s College, Higher Colleges of Technology in the UAE. She served as President of the TESOL International Association from 2011 to 2012. Christine has authored/edited over 50 books on different aspects of English language teaching, learning and assessment. Throughout her career she has received several awards including the 2018 James E Alatis Award for exemplary service to TESOL. In 2017 she was named to TESOL’s 50@50 list which honored 50 top professionals who have made an impact on ELT in the past 50 years.

Bibliographic information

Language Learning Strategies

• First Online: 13 January 2022

Cite this chapter

• Mirosław Pawlak 3 , 4  

Part of the book series: Springer Texts in Education ((SPTE))

403 Accesses

1 Citations

Language learning strategies (LLS), or “actions chosen by learners for the purpose of language learning” ( Griffiths, 2018 ) have been the object of empirical inquiry for over four decades since specialists identified their adept use as one of the characteristics of good language learners (e.g., Rubin, 1975 ).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Cohen, A. D. (2011). Strategies in learning and using a second language. Routledge.

Google Scholar  

Cohen, A. D., & Griffiths, C. (2015). Revisiting LLS research 40 years later. TESOL Quarterly, 53 , 414–429.

Article   Google Scholar  

Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual factors in second language acquisition . Lawrence Erlbaum.

Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). The psychology of the language learner revisited . Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Ehrman, M., Leaver, B., & Oxford, R. L. (2003). A brief overview of individual differences in second language learning. System, 31 , 313–330.

Grenfell, M., & Macaro, E. (2007). Claims and critiques. In A. D. Cohen & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies: Thirty years of research and practice (pp. 9–28). Oxford University Press.

Griffiths, C. (2018). The strategy factor in successful language learning: The tornado effect . Multilingual Matters.

Griffiths, C., & Oxford, R. L. (2014). The twenty-first century landscape of language learning strategies: Introduction to this special issue. System, 43 , 1–10.

Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex dynamic systems and applied linguistics . Oxford University Press.

McDonough, S. (1999). Learner strategies. Language Teaching, 32 , 1–18.

Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know . Heinle & Heinle.

Oxford, R. L. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Pearson Education.

Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Self-regulation in context . Routledge.

Pawlak, M. (2011). Research into language learning strategies: Taking stock and looking ahead’. In J. Arabski & A. Wojtaszek (Eds.), Individual differences in SLA (pp. 17–37). Multilingual Matters.

Pawlak, M. (2021). Investigating language learning strategies: Prospects pitfalls and challenges. Language Teaching Research 25 (5), 817–835.

Pawlak, M., & Oxford, R. L. (2018). Conclusion: The future of research into language learning strategies. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8 , 523–532.

Plonsky, L. (2011). Systematic review article: The effectiveness of second language strategy instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 61 , 993–1038.

Rubin, J. (1975). What the “good language learner” can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9 , 41–51.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Pedagogy and Fine Arts, Adam Mickiewicz University, Kalisz, Poland

Mirosław Pawlak

State University of Applied Sciences in Konin, Konin, Poland

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mirosław Pawlak .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

European Knowledge Development Institute, Ankara, Türkiye

Hassan Mohebbi

Higher Colleges of Technology (HCT), Dubai Men’s College, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Christine Coombe

The Research Questions

What are patterns of LLS use in less studied domains (e.g., grammar, pronunciation, culture)?

How do learners use LLS in technology-enhanced environments?

How do learners use LLS in content-based language instruction (e.g. study abroad)?

How do senior learners employ LLS when learning different skills and subsystems?

How is the use of LLS for learning skills and subsystems mediated by other variables and clusters of such variables (e.g., beliefs, boredom, willingness to communicate)?

How do learners use LLS in different kinds of learning tasks (e.g., meaning and form-oriented)?

How does LLS use change over time (e.g., over a longer period, in a given lesson)?

How is the use of LLS related to attainment in terms of explicit and implicit knowledge?

What are the best ways to teach LLS in different contexts?

What are the best tools to tap into LLS use, both in general and in specific tasks?

Suggested Resources

Cohen, A. D. (2014) . Strategies in learning and using a second language. London and New York: Routledge .

The book is a substantially revised version of a previous publication. It comprises eight chapters in which the author attempts to disentangle the definitional and terminological confusion which surrounds the concept of strategies for learning and using a second language, and overviews methods used in LLS research, issues involved in strategies-based instruction as well as the empirical evidence for such pedagogic intervention. Importantly, Andrew Cohen also considers the use of strategies for choosing the language of thought and for dealing with assessment. The volume is invaluable reading not only for researchers and teacher educators, but also for teachers who are interested in fostering strategic learning, and undergraduate and graduate students working on their theses.

Cohen, A. D., & Macaro, E. (Eds.). (2007). Language learner strategies: Thirty years of research and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press .

This edited collection constitutes an early attempt to confront theoretical issues in the study of LLS and to synthesize existing empirical evidence based on thirty years of research. It brings together 12 chapters by leading scholars in the field which are divided into two parts. Part One, Issues, theories, and frameworks , addresses claims and critiques aimed at LLS, surveys opinions of experts in this domain, and zooms in on such issues as the psychological and sociolinguistic perspectives on LLS, factors influencing strategy use, the research methods that can be applied in the study of strategies, grammar as a neglected facet of LLS research, and the question of strategies-based instruction. Part Two, Reviewing thirty years of empirical LLS research , summarizes the main results of studies that have focused on strategies related to listening, reading, vocabulary, writing and communication. The book closes with a chapter by the editors who consider key issues in light of the book contents and provide a research agenda for the field.

Griffiths, C. (2018). The strategy factor in successful language learning: The tornado effect. Bristol: Multilingual Matters .

This is a revised and expanded version of the book published in 2013. Carol Griffiths offers a comprehensive, state-of-the-art overview of the field, approaching many key themes from a new perspective. In the first part, she touches on a number of conceptual issues, such as the definition, characteristics, classification, theoretical bases, and effectiveness of strategies but particularly valuable are her ruminations on the research methods that can be used in strategy research. The following two parts offer insights into how LLS can be explored from a quantitative and qualitative perspective as well as pointing to areas in need of empirical investigation in both cases. The final part zooms in on critical issues related to how strategies can be of relevance to classroom pedagogy, focusing in particular on teachability of LLS, relevant training programs, the findings of previous research, the main principles of successful SBI, and the myriad of variables that can affect its effectiveness. The book is full of useful information and fresh ideas and it is a must-read for anyone interested in the field, whether they are researchers, teacher trainers or practitioners.

Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Self-regulation in context. New York and London: Routledge .

The volume is a substantial expansion on an earlier book published in 2011. Rebecca Oxford undertakes the ambitious task of confronting many of the existing controversies regarding LLS and makes a successful attempt to portray strategies as complex dynamic systems that need to be investigated in context. In the ten chapters the book is comprised of, the author offers a content-based definition of strategies, links their use to agency, autonomy, self-regulation, motivation and emotions, underscores the need to investigate them in context, shows how her view of LLS can be applied to specific skills and subsystems, and illustrates some vital innovations related to how LLS can be taught, assessed and investigated. This landmark volume is a true treasure for anyone interested in language learning strategies. It represents a major step forward in the field and it is bound to shape research in the years to come.

Oxford, R. L., & Pawlak, M. (2018). Language learning strategies: Linking with the past, shaping the future. Special issue of Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8(2) .

Just like Cohen and Macaro (2007), this special issue of Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching offers a state-of-the-art overview of the field, but ten years later. The 14 papers by scholars from all over the world address different domains of LLS research, including those that have so far received little attention, such as strategies employed for learning and using grammar, pronunciation and pragmatics or culture. Importantly, the papers go beyond what is currently known and seek to expand the field by showing, for example, how speaking strategies can be approached more broadly than communication strategies, investigating the application of LLS in L2 and L3, tying strategy use to self-direction, self-regulation and autonomy, as well as demonstrating the importance of strategic learning in technology-enhanced situations. The final paper by Mirosław Pawlak and Rebecca Oxford considers the future of the field with respect to research foci, methodological issues and the connection between empirical investigations and classroom practice.

Oxford, R. L., & Amerstorfer, C. M. (Eds). (2018). Language Learning Strategies: Situating strategy use in diverse contexts. London: Bloomsbury .

This edited collection comprises 12 papers which illustrate the importance of individual as well as contextual characteristics in shaping the use of LLS. Part One, titled Theoretical foundations of individuals’ situated, self-regulated language learning strategies in authentic contexts , focuses on the application of complex dynamic systems theories, the link between theoretical issues and classroom practice, and the extent to which successful strategy use is moderated by individual differences. Part Two, Research methodologies for exploring learning strategies and individual differences , stresses the contribution of innovative techniques in strategy research (i.e., narratives, decision tree models) and the need for a mixed-methods approach. Part Three, Studies of learning strategies emphasizing diverse contexts and individual difference factors , focuses on LLS use in different national contexts (i.e., China and Greece) and with respect to less studied domains (i.e., pronunciation). Part Four, Preparing teachers for presenting strategy instruction to learners , considers key issues in strategy-based instruction but also reports results of studies focusing on affective strategies and the development of assessment tools for assessing LLS use among young learners. The volume closes with a summary chapter by the editors in which they summarize the lessons from investigating LLS in a situated manner and consider the future directions of this line of inquiry.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Pawlak, M. (2021). Language Learning Strategies. In: Mohebbi, H., Coombe, C. (eds) Research Questions in Language Education and Applied Linguistics. Springer Texts in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79143-8_38

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79143-8_38

Published : 13 January 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-79142-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-79143-8

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Available today at 9 a.m.

Additional Options

• smartphone Call / Text
• voice_chat Consultation Appointment
• place Visit
• email Email

Chat with a Specific library

• Business Library Offline
• College Library (Undergraduate) Offline
• Ebling Library (Health Sciences) Offline
• Gender and Women's Studies Librarian Offline
• Information School Library (Information Studies) Offline
• Law Library (Law) Offline
• Memorial Library (Humanities & Social Sciences) Offline
• MERIT Library (Education) Offline
• Steenbock Library (Agricultural & Life Sciences, Engineering) Offline
• Ask a Librarian Hours & Policy
• Library Research Tutorials

Search the for Website expand_more Articles Find articles in journals, magazines, newspapers, and more Catalog Explore books, music, movies, and more Databases Locate databases by title and description Journals Find journal titles UWDC Discover digital collections, images, sound recordings, and more Website Find information on spaces, staff, services, and more

Language website search.

Find information on spaces, staff, and services.

• ASK a Librarian
• Library by Appointment
• Locations & Hours
• Resources by Subject

book Catalog Search

Search the physical and online collections at UW-Madison, UW System libraries, and the Wisconsin Historical Society.

• Available Online
• Print/Physical Items
• Limit to UW-Madison
• Advanced Search
• Browse by...

collections_bookmark Database Search

Find databases subscribed to by UW-Madison Libraries, searchable by title and description.

• Browse by Subject/Type
• Introductory Databases
• Top 10 Databases

article Journal Search

Find journal titles available online and in print.

• Browse by Subject / Title
• Citation Search

description Article Search

Find articles in journals, magazines, newspapers, and more.

• Scholarly (peer-reviewed)
• Open Access
• Library Databases

collections UW Digital Collections Search

Discover digital objects and collections curated by the UW Digital Collections Center .

• Browse Collections
• Browse UWDC Items
• University of Wisconsin–Madison
• Email/Calendar
• Google Apps
• Loans & Requests
• Poster Printing
• Account Details
• Archives and Special Collections Requests
• Library Room Reservations

Search the UW-Madison Libraries

Catalog search.

Research Questions in Language Education and Applied Linguistics A Reference Guide

An important skill in reviewing the research literature is following a study’s “plan of attack.” Broadly, this means that before accepting and acting upon the findings, one considers a) the researc...

An important skill in reviewing the research literature is following a study’s “plan of attack.” Broadly, this means that before accepting and acting upon the findings, one considers a) the research question (Is it clear and focused? Measurable?), b) the subjects examined, the methods deployed, and the measures chosen (Do they fit the study’s goal and have the potential to yield useful results?), and c) the analysis of the data (Do the data lead to the discussion presented? Has the author reasonably interpreted results to reach the conclusion?). Mohebbi and Coombe’s book, Research Questions in Language Education and Applied Linguistics: A Reference Guide, helps budding researchers take the first step and develop a solid research question. As the field of language education evolves, we need continual research to improve our instructional and assessment practices and our understanding of the learners’ language learning processes. This book with its remarkable 150 topics and 10 times the number of potential research questions provides a wealth of ideas that will help early career researchers conduct studies that move our field forward and grow our knowledge base. Deborah J. Short, Ph.D., Director, Academic Language Research & Training, Past President, TESOL International Association (2021-22) As a teacher in graduate programs in TESOL I frequently come across the frustration of students at centering their research interests on a particular topic and developing research questions which are worth pursuing so as to make a contribution to the field. This frustration stems from the fact that our field is so vast and interrelated, that it is often impossible to properly address all that interests them. Hence, I wholeheartedly welcome this most relevant and innovative addition to the research literature in the field of TESOL and Applied Linguistics. Coombe and Mohebbi have created a real tour de force that stands to inform budding researchers in the field for many years to come. Additionally, the cutting-edge depiction of the field and all it has to offer will no doubt update the research agendas of many seasoned researchers around the world. The 150 chapters are organized in a most powerful, yet, deceptively simple way offering a positioning within the topic, suggesting questions that might direct inquiry and offering a basic set of bibliographic tools to start the reader in the path towards research. What is more, the nine sections in which the chapters are organized leave no area of the field unexplored. Dr. Gabriel Díaz Maggioli, Academic Advisor, Institute of Education, Universidad ORT del Uruguay, President, IATEFL.

• language View Online
• format_quote Citation

Publication Details

• Mohebbi, Hassan. editor
• Coombe, Christine. editor
• SpringerLink (Online service)
• 1st ed. 2021
• Cham : Springer International Publishing : Imprint: Springer, 2021
• Springer texts in education
• XXVII, 889 p. 3 illus., 2 illus. in color. online resource
• text file PDF
• Introduction -- Part I: Teaching and teaching-related topics -- 1 Attending to Form in the Communicative Classroom; Martin East -- 2 Blended Learning; Lana Hiasat -- 3 Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL); Zohreh R. Eslami and Zihan Geng -- 4 Content-Based Language Teaching; Zubeyde Sinem GENC -- 5 Creativity and Language Teaching; Tamas Kiss -- 6 Discourse Analysis; Brian Paltridge -- 7 English Academic Vocabulary Teaching and Learning; Sophia Skoufaki -- 8 English for Academic Purposes; Helen Basturkmen -- 9 English for Specific Purposes; Helen Basturkmen -- 10 English-Medium Instruction; Keith M. Graham and Zohreh R. Eslami -- 11 Focus on Form in Second Language Instruction; Alessandro Benati -- 12 A Genre-Based Approach to Writing Instruction in the Content Areas; Luciana C. de Oliveira & Sharon L. Smith -- 13 Global Englishes and Teaching English as an International Language; Heath Rose and Mona Syrbe -- 14 Identity in language learning and teaching; Bonny Norton -- 15 Inclusive Language Teaching; David Gerlach -- 16 Increasing Reading Fluency; Neil J Anderson -- 17 Instructional Pragmatics; Zohreh R. Eslami and Shaun Weihong Ko -- 18 Interactionist Approach to Corrective Feedback; Rebekha Abbuhl -- 19 Issues in Teaching and Assessing Language as Communication; Barbara Hoekje -- 20 Language Teaching in Difficult Circumstances; Jason Anderson, Amol Padwad and Richard Smith -- 20 Language Teaching in Difficult Circumstances; Jason Anderson, Amol Padwad and Richard Smith -- 21 Materials in the Language Classroom; Kathleen Graves -- 22 Motivation in Practice; Julie Waddington -- 23 Second Language Writing Instruction; Ken Hyland -- 24 Task-based Language Teaching; Rod Ellis -- 25 Teacher & Learner Perspectives on Vocabulary Learning and Teaching (VLT); Jonathan Newton -- 26 Teachers’ Relational Practices and Students’ Motivation; Alastair Henry -- 27 Teaching English as an International Language; Aya Matsuda -- 28 Teaching for Transfer of Second Language Learning; Mark A. James -- 29 Teaching Speakers of Marginalized Varieties: Creoles and Unstandardized Dialects; Jeff Siegel -- 30 Teaching Suprasegmentals in English as a Lingua Franca Contexts; Christine Lewis and David Deterding -- 31 Translanguaging in Teaching/learning Languages; Leslie Barratt -- 32 Translanguaging with SLIFE Students for More Inclusive Teaching; Eileen Ariza -- 33 World Englishes, English as a Lingua Franca and ELT; Paola Vettorel -- Part II: Learners and learning-related topics -- 34 Child Task-based Language Learning in Foreign Language Contexts; María del Pilar García Mayo -- 35 Emergent Bilingualism in Foreign Language Education; Pat Moore and Blake Turnbull -- 36 Extramural English in Language Education; Pia Sundqvist -- 37 Language Learning Strategies; Mirosław Pawlak -- 38 Language Proficiency and Academic Performance; Saleh Al-Busaidi -- 39 Learner Strategies; Li-Shih Huang -- 40 Learning Beyond the Classroom; Hayo Reinders and Phil Benson -- 41 Long-term English Learners; Maneka Deanna Brooks and Peter Smagorinsky -- 42 Materials Development for Language Learning; Brian Tomlinson -- 43 Metacognition in Academic Writing: Learning Dimensions; Raffaella Negretti -- 44 Second-language Strategy Instruction; Luke Plonsky and Ekaterina Sudina -- 45 Second Language Linguistic Competence and Literacy of Adult Migrants with Little or No Home Language Literacy; Martha Young-Scholten -- 46 Task Engagement in Language Learning; Joy Egbert -- 47 Vocabulary Knowledge and Educational Attainment; James Milton -- 48 Vocabulary Learning Strategies; Peter Yongqi Gu -- 49 Working Memory; Zhisheng (Edward) Wen -- Part III: Assessment and assessment-related topics -- 50 Aligning Language Assessments to Standards and Frameworks; Spiros Papageorgiou -- 51 Assessing L2 Signed Language Ability in Deaf Children of Hearing Parents; Wolfgang Mann, Joanna Hoskin and Hilary Dumbrill -- 52 Assessing Second Language Listening; Elvis Wagner -- 53 Assessing Second Language Pronunciation; Johnathan Jones and Talia Isaacs -- 54 (The) Assessment of Target-Language Pragmatics; Andrew D. Cohen -- 55 Classroom Assessment & Assessment as Learning; Jonathan Trace -- 56 English Language Proficiency: What is it? And where do learners fit into it? James Dean Brown -- 57 Integrated Skills Assessment; Lia Plakans -- 58 Language Assessment in EMI; Slobodanka Dimova -- 59 Language Assessment for Professional Purposes; Ute Knoch -- 60 Language Assessment Literacy; Christine Coombe and Peter Davidson -- 61 Language Testing; Glenn Fulcher -- 62 Needs Analysis; Li-Shih Huang -- 62B Oral Corrective Feedback; Shaofeng Li -- 63 Peer Interaction Assessment; Noriko Iwashita -- 64 Portfolio Assessment; Pauline Mak -- 65 (The) Provision of Feedback on EAP Writing; Rachael Ruegg -- 66 (The) Role of the Rater in Writing Assessment; Sara T. Cushing -- 67 Second Language Vocabulary Assessment; John Read -- 68 Self-assessment; Yuko Goto Butler -- 69 Strategic Competence: The Concept and Its Role in Language Assessment; Mehdi Riazi -- 70 Translation Assessment; Renee Jourdenais -- 71 Validation of Assessment Scores and Uses; Mehdi Riazi -- 72 Vocabulary: Its Development over Time and Writing Quality in L2 Contexts; Lee McCallum -- 73 Washback; Rubina Khan -- 74 Written Corrective Feedback; Icy Lee -- 75 Writing Assessment Literacy; Deborah Crusan -- Part IV: Language skills and subskills -- 76 Aural Vocabulary Knowledge; Joshua Matthews -- 77 Collaborative Writing in the Second/Foreign Language (L2) Classroom; Ali Shehadeh -- 78 Developing L2 Listening Fluency; Anna C-S Chang -- 79 Extensive Reading; Willy A Renandya and Yuseva Iswandari -- 80 Foreign Accent Strength in English; Berna Hendriks and Frank van Meurs -- 81 Foreign Language Reading Fluency and Reading Fluency Methodologies; Greta Gorsuch and Etsuo Taguchi -- 82 Learner Corpora for Disciplinary Writing; Lynne Flowerdew -- 83 Lexical Inferencing and Vocabulary Development; Hossein Vafadar and Hassan Mohebbi -- 84 Oral Academic Genres and Features of Student Academic Presentations; Alla Zareva -- 85 Speech Fluency; Xun Yan, Yuyun Lei, and Hyunji (Hayley) Park -- 86 Teaching and Learning Vocabulary; Suhad Sonbul and Anna Siyanova-Chanturia -- Part V: Teachers and teacher education -- 87 Corpora in the Classroom -- Eric Friginal and Justin Taylor; 88 EAP Teacher Education; Mahmood Reza Atai -- 89 Emotionality in TESOL and Teacher Education; Juan de Dios Martínez Agudo -- 90 English Language Teacher Motivation; Krishna K Dixit and Amol Padwad -- 91 Foreign Language Teacher Education; Friederike Klippel -- 92 Identity in SLA and Second Language Teacher Education; Peter De Costa and Curtis Green-Eneix -- 93 Language Teacher Burnout; Akram Nayernia -- 94 Language Teacher Identity; Gary Barkhuizen -- 95 Language Teacher Professional Development; Victoria Tuzlukova -- 96 Language Teacher Professionalism; Britta Viebrock and Carina Kaufmann -- 97 Language Teacher Well-being; Kyle R. Talbot and Sarah Mercer -- 98 Language Teachers’ Self-efficacy Beliefs; Mark Wyatt -- 99 Online Language Teacher Education (OLTE); Mary Ann Christison and Denise E. Murray -- 100 Reflective Practice in Language Education; Thomas S.C. Farrell -- 101 Second Language Teacher Education Curricula; Nikki Ashcraft -- 102 Teacher Knowledge Development; Phil Quirke -- 103 Teacher Research; Anne Burns -- 104 The Native/nonnative Conundrum; Péter Medgyes -- Part VI: Technology and technology-enhanced instruction -- 105 Computer-based Second Language Listening; Mónica S. Cárdenas-Claros -- 106 Digital Game-Based Learning; Zohreh R. Eslami and Mahjabin Chowdhury -- 107 Digital Genres and Teaching English for Academic Purposes; María José Luzón -- 108 Digital Literacies; Nicky Hockly -- 109 Exploring the Potential of Social Media in SLA: Issues, Affordances and Incentives; Liam Murray and Marta Giralt -- 110 Genre-based Automated Writing Evaluation; Elena Cotos -- 111 Impact of Perception on Readiness for Online Teaching; Jacqueline S. Stephen -- 112 Intelligent Computer Assisted Language Learning; Trude Heift -- 113 Online Continuing Professional Development; Flora Debora Floris -- 114 Online Informal Language Learning; Ruth Trinder -- 115 Social Networking for Language Teaching and Learning; Phuong Tran -- Part VII: Politics, policies and practices in language education -- 116 Bilingualism; Gillian Wigglesworth and Carmel O’Shannessy -- 117 ELT and International Development; C. J. Denman -- 118 ELT Textbook Ideology; Esmat Babaii -- 119 Embedding Academic Literacy in Degree Curricula; Neil Murray -- 120 English Language Education Policy; Robert Kirkpatrick and M. Obaidul Hamid -- 121 Englishization of Higher Education; Nicola Galloway and Jim McKinley -- 122 Linguistic Barriers in Foreign Language Education; Heiko Motschenbacher -- 123 Policy Enactment for Effective Leadership in English Language Program Management; Kashif Raza -- 124 Unequal Englishes; Ruanni Tupas -- 125 Values in the Language Classroom; Graham Hall -- Part VIII: Research and research-related topics -- 126 Eye-tracking as a Research Method in Language Testing; Tineke Brunfaut -- 127 History of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics; Richard Smith -- 128 Quantitative Research Methods and the Reform Movement in Applied Linguistics; Luke Plonsky -- 129 Research Methods in Unconscious Motivation; Ali H. Al-Hoorie -- 130 Research Paradigms in TESOL and Language Education; Salah Troudi -- 131 Teacher Research; Daniel Xerri -- Part IX: Applied linguistics and second language acquisition -- 132 Bilingual Code-mixing and Code-switching; Tej K. Bhatia -- 133 Cognitive Task Complexity and Second Language Writing; Mark D. Johnson -- 134 Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency (CAF); Alex Housen -- 135 (A) Complex Dynamic Systems Perspective to Researching Language Classroom Dynamics; Diane Larsen-Freeman -- 136 Complex Dynamic Systems Theory and Second Language Development; Marjolijn Ve
• Language and languages—Study and teaching.
• Language acquisition.

Items Related By Call Number

Additional information, library staff details, keyboard shortcuts, available anywhere, available in search results.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Research Questions in Language Education and Applied Linguistics A Reference Guide

2021, Springer

This volume encompasses the range of research questions on language-related problems that arise in language teaching, learning and assessment. The [152] chapters are written by experts in the field who each offer their insights into current and future directions of research, and who suggest several highly relevant research questions.

Related Papers

Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching

Thomas Tinnefeld

JLLT Volume 14 (2023) Issue 1 https://www.journaloflinguisticsandlanguageteaching.com/published-issues/volume-14-2023-issue-1 edited by Thomas Tinnefeld I. Articles Gerald Delahunty (Fort Collins (CO), USA): Words, Pictures, and Arguments: A Relevance-Theoretic Synthesis Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching 14 (1), 11-22 Abstract: Whether visual representation can function in arguments is a controversial issue. Those who claim they cannot, claim that only propositions may function thus and that as visuals cannot represent propositions, they cannot function in arguments. The current paper, invoking recent developments in Relevance Theory, demonstrates that visuals, specifically photographs, can represent propositions and can therefore function as and in arguments. The paper demonstrates that visuals also communicate more than propositions in that they provide evidence for a range of ‘impressions’ that support a ‘credal attitude’ toward the document in which they occur. Liam D. Wilson (Hong Kong S.A.R.): Key Stage 3 ELT Coursebook Speech Acts Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching 14 (1), 35-57 Abstract: The area of pragmatics is an important aspect of the languages that we use in our everyday lives. Speech acts are central to this, and they are often initially presented to language learners in the coursebooks (or textbooks) they read and use during their schooling. This investigation analysed which speech acts were targeted for instruction in junior secondary 3 English language coursebooks used in Hong Kong as learners complete Key Stage 3. The pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic information presented in these coursebooks was also examined. It was found that certain speech acts (such as advice) were featured far more frequently than others (such as requests). There is also potential for improvement for future coursebooks when it comes to the pragmalinguistic (such as presenting speech acts as part of model dialogues) and sociopragmatic information (such as presenting speech acts being used in situations involving power distance or level of imposition). Therefore, this research contributes valuable findings regarding the speech acts in ELT coursebooks to the field of second language pragmatics. Esa M. Penttinen (Helsinki, Finland) & Heiner Böttger (Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, Germany): Cross-Linguistic Influences of Learning German in Finnish and German Upper Secondary Schools Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching 14 (1), 59-77 Abstract: The aim of this study is to find out what importance upper secondary school learners of German attach to the cross-linguistic influence (CLI) regarding specific aspects of German language learning in Finland and Germany. Cross-linguistic learning gives learners additional skills to learn and understand structures and words in their mother tongue, a second language or a foreign language. The Finnish students (n=100) participating in our survey spoke Finnish as their mother tongue and studied German as a foreign language. German students spoke German either as their mother tongue (n=40) or as a second language (n=60), but they studied German as a native language. The survey data consisted of students' answers to one identical question that they were asked in the school years 2017-2020: 'How does the knowledge of the languages studied at school (Swedish, English, French, Spanish, Latin – cross-linguistic learning) affect their learning of German?' Our research methods were both quantitative and qualitative. The main results showed that the positive transfer on learning German was based on the perceived (objective) similarity of languages while the negative transfer was based on assumed (subjective) similarities which were in conflict with actual (objective) differences in German language learning processes and experiences of language learning. Skills in other languages contributed to learning German, but they also interacted positively and negatively with each other's learning. Learning to learn was found to be a unifying factor in language learning. Christine Ericsdotter Nordgren & Jorunn Nilsson (Stockholm, Sweden): Meeting each other or Meeting Learning Goals –Student and Teacher Values in an Intercultural Tandem Exchange Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching 14 (1), 79-105 Abstract: In this paper, the findings from a qualitative analysis of student and teacher interviews following an online Japanese-Swedish tandem exchange in 2020 will be discussed. The main aim was to explore what students and teachers had valued in the exchange and to connect these values to the theoretical principles of reciprocity and autonomy in the tandem learning model (Little & Brammerts 1996). The results show that students valued reciprocal aspects, focusing on personal peer-to-peer experiences and the opportunity for natural language use, while teachers valued linguistic development, and seemed to implicitly assume a high degree of autonomy to be in place from the start, rather than it being developed or expanded underway. The findings are viewed in the light of the students’ rather different cultural-educational frames and add to building a more global perspective on tandem exchange, which has hitherto been dominated by data from European and American contexts (Lewis & O’Dowd 2016). Philip Oghenesuowho Ekiugbo (Aba, Nigeria) & Cecilia Amaoge Eme (Awka, Nigeria): Urhobo-English Loanwords Coda Adaptation: A Constraint-Based Account Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching 14 (1), 107-120 (PDF) Abstract: This study examines how codas of Urhobo-English loanwords are adapted and shows that the strategies adopted in repairing loanword coda in Urhobo are driven by syllabification constraints and universal conventions. Syllabification conditions in languages that forbid filled coda will require that all the consonant sounds in a phonological word that are to be found in the phonetic string are parsed as onsets. Assuming this is true, it has implications for loanword adaptation. Urhobo exclusively permits the open syllable type. Implicitly, all the coda elements of loanwords are likely to be licensed as onsets, which may result in a possible ‘illicit’ onset cluster given the onset condition requirement of the language. Accordingly, this study examines the attested patterns of adaptation of English coda in Urhobo loanwords and their motivations as well as implications. The discussion is built around the theory of constraints and repair strategies. II. Book Review Bernd Klewitz (Osnabrück, Germany): Inez De Florio: From Assessment to Feedback. Applications in the Second / Foreign Language Classroom. New York et al.: Cambridge University Press, 2023 (X + 267 pages) (ISBN 978-1-109-21893-1) Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching 14 (1), 123-128

Kimberly White

The goal of Working papers in Educational Linguistics (WPEL) is to present works in progress by students and professors on topics ranging from speech act analysis and classroom discourse to language planning and second language acquisition. Papers offered are generally based on research carried out for courses offered in the language in education division of the graduate school of education. WPEL is intended to be a forum for the exchange of ideas among scholars of linguistics at the University of Pennsylvania and at universities with similar programs in educational and applied linguistics around the world. Articles in this issue include the following: "Teacher and Peer Responses as a Source of Negative Evidence to L2 Learners in Content-Based and Grammar-Based Classroom Activities" (Teresa Pica, Bruce Evans, Victoria Jo, and Gay Washburn); "EFL Teaching and EFL Teachers in the Global Expansion of English" (Oleg Tarnapolsky); "Standards, Exit Exams, and the ...

The European Educational Researcher

Jean-Marc Dewaele

Overview of recent developments in Language Education and Applied Linguistics

Nancy Hornberger

Nelleke Van Deusen-Scholl , Stephen May , Nancy Hornberger

Johanna Ennser-Kananen

Working Papers in Educational Linguistics

Rita Elaine Silver

Ahmar Mahboob , Caroline Lipovsky

Studies in Applied Linguistics and Language Learning brings together new and original studies in the area of critical applied linguistics, language policy and planning, and language learning and teaching. The book, divided into three sections, first offers critical views on various aspects of language in society, ranging from the construction of national identity, language and justice, racial and identity issues in the ELT industry, to language in business discourse. It then reports on language policy in the school curriculum, language learning in tertiary education, and Aboriginal languages policy. In the third section, it addresses issues in language learning and teaching, such as the role of parents in literacy learning, multiple script literacy, and language learning and maintenance strategies.

RELATED PAPERS

Etudes Litteraires Africaines

Corinne BLANCHAUD

Anthropologie et Sociétés

Pierre Beaucage

Journal of Food and Drug Analysis

Fatemeh Atyabi

Mustafa Emre Gürlek

Mariana Ciorap

Review of Innovation and Competitiveness

Edamisan Ikuemonisan

Strategies for improving miners' training

Charles Vaught

Canadian Journal of Plant Science

Muhammad Imran Ghani

Journal of Oncology Practice

Nikhil Khandelwal

Siti Aminah Putri

Luiz Fernando Medeiros de Carvalho

Indonesian Journal of Physiotherapy

ADITYA MIZU PRATAMA

European Journal of Medical Genetics

Pietro D'Addabbo

Adaptive Agents and Multi-Agents Systems

amin karamlou

Aharon deGrassi

Women and Birth

maryam bazargan

European Journal of Information Systems

David Gefen

Clemens Reimann

Journal of Luminescence

Hossein Alizadeh

luis fernando gasca bazurto

Revista Lugares de Educação

Jesús Vilar Martín

arXiv (Cornell University)

Jaime Rocha

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy

Kamran Ghasemzadeh

Sylvère Guiriec

Athenea Digital. Revista de pensamiento e investigación social

Lourdes Guardia

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Utility Menu

Our research in the U.S. and abroad seeks to understand why so many adolescents struggle with literacy and how to design contexts that offer meaningful learning experiences to advance equity and excellence in literacy and learning for all. Our research reveals that language development varies across contexts and individuals and continues throughout adolescence.

Our results make visible to educators and researchers the ubiquitous, yet often invisible, language demands of the particular sociocultural practices of school literacy and learning.

Research Categories

Young children’s discourse development: sociocultural & individual differences, the language for school reading: core academic language skills (cals), the language for school writing: monolingual and efl writers, multilingual and multicultural learners: development in more than one language, educational practices & interventions: promoting learners’ voices , language for learning: towards a language learning theory relevant for education.

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

Reflections on research questions in mobile assisted language learning

Agnes Kukulska-Hulme is Professor of Learning Technology and Communication in the Institute of Educational Technology at The Open University, UK, where she leads the Future Learning Research and Innovation Programme. Her work encompasses online distance education, mobile learning and language learning. Professor Kukulska-Hulme is on the Editorial Boards of ReCALL, RPTEL, International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, and Waikato Journal of Education. Her publications include over 200 articles, papers and books, and she has also authored policy and practice reports for UNESCO, British Council, the Commonwealth of Learning, the International Research Foundation for English Language Education and Cambridge University Press. She has been an invited speaker at over 100 international conferences and events.

Research questions are central to mobile assisted language learning (MALL) projects and studies, yet they have received little attention to date. Taking research questions as its central focus, this paper offers some reflections on the complexity of the broader field of mobile learning, on different kinds of research, on salient themes and challenges in mobile learning and MALL, and it suggests some research directions for the future. Since MALL research is interdisciplinary, and since research questions are an object of study in other fields of knowledge, the paper refers to sources from multiple disciplines to support a more comprehensive consideration of current and future research questions in MALL. The paper is fundamentally an invitation to a global conversation about research questions in MALL.

1 Introduction

In this paper I draw on my experience of research, evaluation, project development, as well as supervision and examining of doctoral students’ theses over the past two decades, in mobile assisted language learning (MALL) and in mobile learning more broadly. During that time, there have been many opportunities to think about what is worth researching, how the research should be carried out, and what useful knowledge it may produce. Many research projects and studies in MALL are driven by one or more research questions, and that is the aspect I have chosen to focus on in this paper. It seems valuable to reflect on research questions because they underpin the development of any field of research, they may evolve as the field advances, and they set a course for future studies.

There is a growing body of publications reviewing the state-of-the-art in mobile learning and mobile assisted language learning, but none of these works looks specifically at what research questions are being addressed overall. This stands in contrast to other fields of knowledge where research questions are frequently debated and priority questions are proposed ( Antwis et al., 2017 ; Freudenberg & Sharp, 2010 ; Oldekop et al., 2016 ; Seddon et al., 2014 ). In the field of e-learning, Cronje (2020 : 13) has recognized “a lack of clarity in terms of what is being researched, as well as in how it is being researched” and has proposed a model for developing research questions that are aligned to research aims, using design research as an illustrative example. In language education and applied linguistics, a reference book due to be published in late 2021 ( Mohebbi & Coombe, forthcoming ) promises a wealth of suggestions for research questions organized by topic, including some questions for MALL. As yet there appears to be no dedicated published work on existing or future research questions in the field of MALL.

This paper offers some reflections on the nature and focus of research in language learning with mobile technologies and suggests directions for the future. The paper is simultaneously an invitation to a global conversation about research questions in MALL. The conversation might include topics such as: What do researchers, teachers, and others, think about the questions that have guided MALL research to date? Would it be valuable to create a database of research questions that could be analyzed in various ways, and if so, how might they be analyzed? What new research questions, or types of questions, could be suggested for future studies? I hope that readers of this paper will be stimulated to continue this conversation around the world, approaching the issue of research questions from global and local perspectives alike.

2 The complexity of mobile learning

Since we shall be considering research questions in MALL, which may be seen as a subfield of mobile learning, a necessary first step is to acknowledge that conceptions of mobile learning are not universal, its definitions have evolved over the years and it has a relationship with the fields of e-learning as well as computer assisted language learning (CALL). Mobile learning may be understood as “an extension of e-learning” ( Nami, 2020 ), or the exact opposite, “not an extension of e-learning” ( Hewagamage, Wickramasinghe, & Jayatilaka, 2012 ), and “not a new variant of e-learning” ( Kukulska-Hulme & Traxler, 2013 ). MALL may be considered an extension of CALL ( Chang, Warden, Liang, & Chou, 2018 ), or the distinction between MALL and CALL may be emphasized ( Kukulska-Hulme & Shield, 2008 ). These different viewpoints exist because mobile devices may be seen as a way to access or interact with materials, resources and communities on digital platforms; or alternatively, the focus may be on what learners can do with personal devices when they are mobile and immersed in diverse physical environments. E-learning is mainly associated with formal education and training, but mobile learning is conducted in both formal and informal settings. Any research questions may thus be influenced by the researcher’s choice of perspective and setting.

Different conceptions of mobile learning are likely to have an influence on research questions that guide projects and studies. An explanation of mobile learning offered by the Higher Education association EDUCAUSE (2021) has the traditional classroom as its central reference point:

“Using portable computing devices (such as iPads, laptops, tablet PCs, PDAs, and smart phones) with wireless networks enables mobility and mobile learning, allowing teaching and learning to extend to spaces beyond the traditional classroom. Within the classroom, mobile learning gives instructors and learners increased flexibility and new opportunities for interaction.”

The research literature offers many other definitions of mobile learning developed over the last two decades. Crompton (2013) reviewed several definitions and concluded that there were four central constructs: pedagogy, technological devices, context, and social interactions. Together with the editors of the handbook for which she was writing, Crompton added the idea of “content interaction” and suggested that mobile learning should be defined as “learning across multiple contexts, through social and content interactions, using personal electronic devices” ( Crompton, 2013 , p. 4). While learning ‘across multiple contexts’ can include the classroom, this definition is more inclusive of diverse scenarios such as informal learning and on-the-job learning where no classrooms are involved. In line with this more inclusive perspective, MALL may be defined as “the use of smartphones and other mobile technologies in language learning, especially in situations where portability and situated learning offer specific advantages” ( Kukulska-Hulme, 2018 ). It is important to note that definitions are frequently surrounded by further elaboration and exemplification that may also be relevant to consider; for example the definition in Kukulska-Hulme (2018) is accompanied by some important remarks: “Increasingly, MALL applications relate language learning to a person’s physical context when mobile, primarily to provide access to location-specific language material or to enable learners to capture aspects of language use in situ and share it with others … Mobile learning is proving its potential to address authentic learner needs at the point at which they arise, and to deliver more flexible models of language learning” (para. 1).

Definitions of mobile learning partly reflect real-world practices in terms of how researchers or practitioners are using mobile technologies in their projects, but perhaps they also describe what their authors would like mobile learning to be (ideally, or in the future) in terms of where the learning takes place or how it is supported. Some believe there is great value in situated mobile learning at home, at work, outdoors, or across a variety of contexts. Others wish to draw attention to how people may learn by interacting with different types of content (learning materials, artifacts, the natural world) and with other human and artificial beings (teachers, learners, support staff, parents, friends, volunteers, artificial agents) with whom they are in physical contact or connected remotely.

Another distinction worth making is that although pedagogy is identified as one of the central constructs in definitions ( Crompton, 2013 ), mobile learning research is primarily concerned with learners and learning . An alternative term, ‘mobile pedagogy’ ( Kukulska-Hulme, Donohue & Norris, 2015 ) was devised to make explicit the teacher’s role in the design and promotion of mobile activities that encourage students to engage in language learning as a form of mobile inquiry. For example, students can investigate how language is used in different settings, find ways to practice it in a variety of contexts, and record their experiences for subsequent reflection and discussion. Mobile pedagogy can be viewed as a subset of the broader field of mobile learning which also includes informal learning without teacher involvement.

As pedagogy evolves towards more consideration of how and where learning takes place and how it can be developed beyond the classroom, definitions of mobile learning emphasizing pedagogy or learning design can be enriched by the broader context of learning within a society. Traxler (2009) gave a personal account of the evolution of mobile learning, highlighting numerous definitions and theories, and concluded by suggesting mobile learning is learning that is “most aligned to progressively more mobile societies” (p. 11). At that time, in 2009, it was not a common way of conceptualizing mobile learning and still seems not to have become widespread. What constitutes a ‘mobile society’ may be understood in various ways, but according to Traxler, Read, Kukulska-Hulme, and Barcena (2019) in the context of mobile learning what matters is that such societies are permeated by personal digital technologies. In mobile societies, there are likely to be evolving conceptions of learning and of how learning can be encouraged and supported through use of personal technologies such as smartphones, tablets, and wearables.

Opinions also differ as to whether the field of mobile learning is young or already in a state of maturity. Kukulska-Hulme, Sharples, Milrad, Arnedillo-Sánchez, and Vavoula (2011) describe the origins of mobile learning in Europe as dating back to small trials and projects in the 1980 and 1990s, with larger projects emerging in the early 2000s. A review of MALL-related literature published between the years 2000 and 2012 ( Duman, Orhon, & Gedik, 2015 ) noted an increase in publications in the year 2008 and a peak in 2012. According to a subsequent literature review by Aguayo, Cochrane, and Narayan (2017) “mobile learning as a research field has matured since the first attempts at large scale exploratory projects in the early 2000s” (p. 34). Yet some researchers are claiming that the use of mobile wireless technologies is a “recently developed approach to learning in educational environments” ( Sarrab, Elbasir, & Alnaeli, 2016 ). Others are noting that in their specific contexts or countries mobile learning is new. For example, “Within the Greek formal educational context, mobile learning is in its infancy” ( Nikolopoulou, 2018 , p. 500); “learning through mobile devices is still in its infancy in Pakistan” ( Uppal, Ali, Zahid, & Basir, 2020 , p. 105); and “the field of mobile learning in Tanzania is still in its infancy ( Ndume, Songoro, & Kisanga, 2020 ). Consequently, research questions that are posed in different contexts may, to some extent, reflect the perceived maturity of mobile learning in those contexts.

Furthermore, since most fields of research are made up of different strands in which new topics and challenges are constantly emerging, it is possible for a field to be mature in some respects and immature in others. Within the field of mobile learning, Buabeng-Andoh (2021) argues that research into the determinants of mobile learning acceptance is in its infancy phase, even though the issue of technology acceptance in education has been studied for a long time. Within MALL, Nami (2020) observes that “there have been relatively few published studies on the use of particular smartphone applications designed for language learning” and suggests that “app-based language learning research is still in its infancy” (p. 85). Therefore, the focus of research questions may be determined by perceptions of aspects of mobile learning that are under-researched, globally or in a particular setting.

The fields of mobile learning and MALL are capacious, ready to embrace a wide range of themes and stages of development. Studies devised by experienced researchers may differ in scope, focus, and methods from those that are devised by researchers who are less experienced, and they may also differ from studies devised by teachers, some of whom have only just begun to research mobile learning as part of their classroom practice. Even if education practitioners are aware that there is an extensive literature on mobile learning, they may be constrained in the extent to which they can access or engage with it, which may mean that they have fewer opportunities to learn from the research questions that others in the field have already explored.

Research into how people learn with the aid of mobile technologies has changed in some important respects over the past two decades ( Crompton & Traxler, 2019 ). In early studies, research participants were usually given smartphones and other devices they had never used before and they were asked to try out new applications and sometimes completely new activities. In later studies, a broader range of learners of all ages and in diverse settings have more often used their own technologies and increasingly familiar applications to extend their learning and to focus on specific personal requirements. In the past, research participants may have been largely passive “subjects” who undertook activities requested by researchers (for example, completing a questionnaire, carrying out a task), while more recently, some of them participate more actively, sometimes as co-researchers who may even be involved in the design of the study and learning tasks. In the early days, the bulk of mobile learning research was conducted, published and shared in English; now there are growing numbers of studies available in other languages too. Increasingly, studies investigate real-world contexts; they use a range of research designs and methods; some studies have compared mobile learning with other learning methods or they have compared different designs of mobile learning, but the majority have not been comparative and instead they have focused on mobile learning implementations, investigations, or design improvements ( Lai, 2020 ).

Mobile learning research is shaped by many factors, including, but not limited to: research traditions, competences and beliefs of researchers, available technologies and applications, software development capabilities, resources for data collection and analysis, and expectations regarding the outcomes as well as the impact of the research. These factors are rarely mentioned in overviews of mobile learning research. Burston (2021) has drawn attention to the fact that mobile learning studies are published in a broad range of journals across different disciplines and several domains of professional practice. This suggests that the nature of the research and the methods used are likely to be drawn from, or influenced by, those disciplinary and professional practice values, conventions, and traditions.

3 The nature of research in mobile learning

The OECD’s Frascati Manual ( OECD, 2015 ) states that research, along with experimental development (collectively known as Research and Development, or R&D) comprises “creative and systematic work undertaken in order to increase the stock of knowledge – including knowledge of humankind, culture and society – and to devise new applications of available knowledge” (p. 44). The Frascati Manual goes on to identify two types of research, basic and applied: “Basic research is experimental or theoretical work undertaken primarily to acquire new knowledge of the underlying foundation of phenomena and observable facts, without any particular application or use in view.” Applied research is also undertaken to acquire new knowledge, however it is “directed primarily towards a specific practical aim or objective” (p. 45).

Research in MALL is mainly “applied”. Data on aspects such as teachers’ or learners’ perceptions, attitudes, and practices may be collected, interpreted, and used to inform learning designs and pedagogical interventions that make use of mobile technologies. Empirical studies based in classroom practices are widely used to generate data that supports or refutes an explicit or implicit hypothesis about whether a proposed approach brings about a desired improvement in language learning and associated aspects such as learner motivation. Experimental development of systems and software is also common, especially in projects originating in software engineering and intelligent systems design. Researchers may be steeped in either quantitative or qualitative research traditions and may be unwilling or unable to adopt an alternative approach.

In his commentary on research in educational technology, Selwyn (2010) argued that “academic researchers and writers should give greater acknowledgement to the influences on educational technology above and beyond the context of the individual learner and their immediate learning environment” and that “the use of technology in education needs to be understood in societal terms” (p. 68). If certain technologies are commonly used in daily life, then perceptions of their adoption in education may be influenced by those daily life experiences. Global and local societal challenges may be reflected in mobile learning research projects, for example recent concerns about sustainability ( Ng & Cumming, 2016 ), and if a technology is widely available, it might be a means to satisfy increased demands for education in contemporary times (e.g., Ally & Tsinakos, 2014 ; Almarwani, 2011 ).

In Canada, Pulla (2017) draws attention to the relevance of mobile learning to Indigenous cultures. In contrast to researchers who have been calling for more work on theory in mobile learning (e.g., Traxler & Koole, 2014 ), Pulla (2017) argues that “Canadian education researchers need to be re-focusing their efforts away from the theoretical frameworks of education technology and toward the practical application of the lessons learned from the international learning community in the design and delivery of scalable, accessible and inexpensive MLT [mobile learning technology] education applications” (p. 45).

We may ask what is mobile learning research trying to achieve and who will assess whether it is generating useful knowledge. Hulley, Newman, and Cummings (1988) observed that “a good research question should pass the “so what” test – getting the answer should contribute usefully to our state of knowledge” (p. 58). For example, answering the research questions makes a positive difference by providing evidence that could lead to an improvement in how something is taught or learned, or who benefits from such an improvement. However, the phrase “our state of knowledge” presupposes that there is a shared pool of knowledge that has been harnessed into an inspectable state or perhaps it is taken on trust. In a world where publications are growing exponentially, researchers may rely on a subset of knowledge within their sphere of interest or they may refer to published, peer-reviewed state-of-the-art reviews. Such reviews, while valuable, are selective in the literature they include and exclude. They may focus on papers published in certain journals only, usually in English (for further discussion of where mobile assisted learning literature is published, see Burston, 2021 ). While “we” may not all agree on the state of knowledge in MALL or what is important for our context, the “so what” test is still worth applying.

4 Research topics in mobile learning and MALL

– How to enhance the learning experience without interfering with it

– Affective factors in learning with mobile devices

– Addressing conflicts between personal informal learning and traditional classroom education

– Appropriate methods for evaluating learning in mobile environments

– How learning activities using mobile technologies should be designed to support innovative educational practices

– How mobile devices could be integrated with broader educational scenarios

While these were identified ‘issues’ rather than specific research questions, they highlighted several areas of challenge, such as disruption, conflict, integration, informal learning, personalization, and learning design. Each of them seemed to matter. Mobile learning researchers have subsequently worked to some degree on these areas of challenge (e.g., Pollara & Broussard, 2011 ; Qing, 2017 ; Sharples, 2009 ). As mobile learning has become more widespread over the years, challenges have evolved and other research agendas have been developed (for example, Aguayo et al., 2017 ; Looi et al., 2010 ).

Most recently, researchers have been concerned with adoption of mobile learning ( Moya & Camacho, 2021 ); implementation ( Al-Siyabi & Dimitriadi, 2020 ); sustainability ( Okai-Ugbaje, Ardzejewska, & Imran, 2020 ; Viberg, Andersson, & Wiklund, 2021 ); as well as safety, security and privacy ( Elaish, Shuib, Ghani, Yadegaridehkordi, & Alaa, 2017 ). There have been ongoing attempts to develop an understanding of the processes and products of mobile learning ( Bernacki, Greene, & Crompton, 2020 ), teaching practices ( Romero-Rodríguez, Aznar-Díaz, Hinojo-Lucena, & Cáceres-Reche, 2020 ), learning practices ( Viberg & Grönlund, 2017 ), perceptions ( Nikolopoulou, 2020 ) and challenges in relation to specific subjects or learner groups (e.g., STEM – Hwang, Li, & Lai, 2020 ; mobile journalists – Lee, 2021 ).

Within MALL, alongside abundant research focusing on specific individual language skills or proficiency, recent prominent themes include learner autonomy ( Nasr & Abbas, 2018 ; Sato, Murase, & Burden, 2020 ), use of online sources and apps ( Loewen et al., 2019 ; Zou, Yan, & Li, 2020 ) and learning in authentic environments ( Shadiev, Hwang, Huang, & Liu, 2018 ; Yeung & Sun, 2021 ). Hwang and Fu’s (2019) review of mobile assisted language learning studies from the period 2007–16 confirms that early studies mainly focused on fostering learners’ individual language skills, while later studies have looked at multiple skills in authentic learning environments. Based on a meta-analysis of MALL research and design, Chwo, Marek, and Wu (2018) highlighted “discrepancies between how teachers and instructional designers expected MALL devices to be used and how the students actually used them” (p. 66), which suggests that this could be a topic for further research. They also found that issues of access, motivation, and curriculum often have negative impacts on learning outcomes, which reminds us that research studies that are narrowly focused on mobile technology may overlook the influence of other factors. Commonly investigated topics in MALL studies and gaps in research are also discussed by authors such as Duman et al. (2015) and Burston (2021) .

5 Research questions in mobile assisted language learning

Many years ago, Dillon (1984) observed that in general “little is known about the kinds of questions that may be posed for research” (p. 361). His review of classifications of question types showed them to be inadequate. Subsequently, White (2013 , 2017 has inquired into research questions and has sought to guide researchers in the process of research question development. White (2013 : 213) explains that the process of formulating, developing, and refining research questions “allows researchers to make connections with existing theories and previous empirical findings and helps avoid unnecessary repetition of, or overlap with, previous work”.

Research questions chosen for a study may also reveal something about what researchers consider important to investigate. As noted by Farrow, Iniesto, Weller, and Pitt (2020) , “almost all research projects are grounded in trying to answer a question that matters or has consequences” (p. 12) and the starting point for a research project “will usually be a research question framed within a particular paradigm” (p. 13) such as positivism or interpretivism. Cronje (2020) refers to the pursuits of knowledge, virtue, value, and power as four underpinning drivers for research. Yet what matters to a research project may also be related to a local context or issue. At times, what researchers have chosen to investigate may be influenced by what their organization, research funding agency, or Ministry of Education considers to be important. Furthermore, discussions with colleagues around the world suggest that our cultures and education systems play a role in shaping conceptions of MALL and what kinds of research studies and questions are valued. Such considerations are rarely articulated in published work.

– Does the use of this mobile system lead to improvement in the acquisition of a specific language skill?

– What evidence is there that the proposed mobile learning design supports learner collaboration, negotiation, critical thinking, etc.?

– Does a mobile learning approach have beneficial effects on motivation or affective aspects of learning?

– How do learners engage in self-organized language learning and what benefits do they derive from it?

Here the learners are using some mobile applications or resources that they found for themselves or that other people have recommended to them. So, the learning is self-motivated and self-organized. The researchers might be interested in the learners’ motivation, but also what benefits they derive from the activity. With this type of research question, we are getting closer to the learners’ experiences, engaging with the learners, trying to find out what they do and perhaps how it complements their classroom learning.

These “generic” questions could perhaps be mapped on to the four broad question types identified by Cronje (2020) in the context of e-learning research, where the research aims or intent (expressed in research questions) would be to “explain”, “develop”, “describe”, or “explore”. However, in the generic questions outlined here, question types have been combined with discipline-specific areas of common interest and concern, namely language skills, interpersonal skills, personal experience, and learner agency. Sunderland’s (2018) introduction to research questions in linguistics categorizes questions as descriptive, explanatory, and evaluative.

RQ1-7: Did the students using the bi-directional peer-assessment approach have … [ better science learning achievement/ better concept mapping scores/ better learning motivation/ better self-efficacy/ better environmental identity/ better critical thinking tendency/ better feedback quality/ lower cognitive load ] … than those learning with the conventional peer-assessment approach?

These questions enable the researchers to provide answers showing whether the proposed approach resulted in improvements with respect to the aspects they chose to investigate. “Did the students have … ” is a straightforward question type that could also prove useful if other researchers wanted to run studies in a similar area and compare results. It can be used not only in science learning but in language learning too.

RQ1. What are the different dimensions of learners’ self-initiated, self-directed out-of-class language learning with mobile devices?

RQ2. How do language learners utilize different technological tools to construct self-directed out-of-class mobile learning experiences?

Factor analysis enabled the researchers to explain some of the variance in learners’ out-of-class mobile learning experience, in particular their activity in terms of personalization, engagement in authentic learning, and using mobile devices to connect with native speakers of the target language and other learners. “What” and “How” in the research questions indicate that the researchers set out to discover more about self-directed mobile language learning and the learners’ choice of tools.

There is room for many different types of studies within mobile assisted language learning, guided by different questions, and more thought should be put into how such studies could complement and build upon each other. In the field of medicine, Perillat and Baigrie (2021) argue that a lack of prioritization among research questions and therapeutics related to the present pandemic was responsible for the duplication of clinical trials and the dispersion of precious resources. Thus sharing research questions could sometimes be a good strategy. It may, however, be constrained by the fact that in some contexts originality of questions may be an implicit requirement, for example in dissertations and theses at doctoral level. It might also be a factor in research that will be judged on its originality for the purposes of quality assessments that evaluate the extent to which an output makes an important and innovative contribution to understanding and knowledge (e.g. REF, 2021 ).

6 Conclusions

This paper has been a means to reflect on challenges and developments in mobile learning and MALL, with special reference to research questions. It brings into focus some of the research questions and question types that are guiding research in mobile assisted language learning, within the broader field of mobile learning. There is scope for a great deal of further investigation of the types of questions that have been pursued to date and what they may reveal about what different stakeholders consider important to investigate in MALL projects and studies in different contexts across the globe.

The field of MALL continues to grow and diversify, which means that an analysis of research questions will need to consider the field in all its complexity. MALL research and development has expanded to include more diverse learners and communities, such as refugees and migrants ( Abou-Khalil, Helou, Flanagan, Pinkwart, & Ogata, 2019 ; Kukulska-Hulme, 2019 ), learners with disabilities ( Alonso, Read, & Astrain, 2020 ), and indigenous youth in cities ( Shilling, 2020 ). In a recent chapter ( Kukulska-Hulme, 2021 ) I highlighted some of the opportunities and issues associated with mobile assisted language learning, based on case studies representing innovative MALL across different sectors of education. Five notable themes running through the case studies were uncovered, suggesting that MALL supports breaking down barriers; unfettered flow of information; frequent interaction and reflection; enjoyment and personal gains; and that it involves a multiplicity of technologies, modalities, and methods. These themes represent key strengths of mobile approaches to teaching and learning that may be developed in environments where teachers and researchers have the ability to try out something new. Good research questions could help take these themes forward so that they grow into more substantial bodies of research.

As mobile learning expands beyond smartphones and tablets to other ubiquitous, wearable, and companion-like technologies that are entering our lives, MALL research will continue to thrive. These thoughts are echoed by Shadiev, Hwang, and Huang (2017) when they declare that future studies should investigate the “application of newly learned knowledge to solve daily real-life problems in authentic language learning environments with technology, how to ensure that students are engaged in learning activities, and long-term continuation of such activities.” (p. 290). For future studies, they suggest considering more advanced intelligent technologies for supporting language learning in authentic environments: “For example, wearable devices, such as clothing and accessories, incorporating computer and advanced electronic technologies. Some recent popular examples are optical head-mounted displays, smartwatches or smart bracelets” (p. 292). New research questions will need to accompany these developments, some based on previous questions and others that we have not thought of yet.

About the author

Abou-Khalil, V., Helou, S., Flanagan, B., Pinkwart, N., & Ogata, H. (2019). Language learning tool for refugees: Identifying the language learning needs of Syrian refugees through participatory design. Languages , 4(3), 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages4030071 . Search in Google Scholar

Aguayo, C., Cochrane, T., & Narayan, V. (2017). Key themes in mobile learning: Prospects for learner-generated learning through AR and VR. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 33(6), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3671 . Search in Google Scholar

Al-Siyabi, M. A., & Dimitriadi, Y. (2020). Opportunities and challenges of mobile learning implementation in schools in Oman. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning , 12(3), 32–48. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijmbl.2020070103 . Search in Google Scholar

Ally, M., & Tsinakos, A. (2014). Increasing access through mobile learning . Vancouver: Commonwealth of Learning and Athabasca University. 10.56059/11599/558 Search in Google Scholar

Almarwani, M. (2011). ML for EFL: Rationale for mobile learning. The 4th edition “ICT for Language Learning” Conference . ICT4LL, Pixel. Retrieved from https://conference.pixel-online.net/conferences/ICT4LL2011/common/download/Paper_pdf/IBL52-365-FP-Almarwani-ICT4LL2011.pdf . Search in Google Scholar

Alonso, C., Read, T., & Astrain, J. J. (2020). Helping people with language learning disabilities using native mobile voice recognition—Exploring its limits and advantages. International Journal of Information and Education Technology , 10(8), 590–596. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2020.10.8.1429 . Search in Google Scholar

Antwis, R. E., Griffiths, S. M., Harrison, X. A., Aranega-Bou, P., Arce, A., Bettridge, A. S., & Sutherland, W. J. (2017). Fifty important research questions in microbial ecology. FEMS Microbiology Ecology , 93(5), fix044. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fix044 . Search in Google Scholar

Bernacki, M. L., Greene, J. A., & Crompton, H. (2020). Mobile technology, learning, and achievement: Advances in understanding and measuring the role of mobile technology in education. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 60, 101827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101827 . Search in Google Scholar

Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2021). Exploring University students’ intention to use mobile learning: A research model approach. Education and Information Technologies , 26(1), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10267-4 . Search in Google Scholar

Burston, J. (2021). Unreported MALL studies: What difference do they make to published experimental MALL research results? In V. Morgana, & A. Kukulska-Hulme (Eds.), Mobile assisted language learning across educational contexts . Routledge Focus on Applied Linguistics. Abingdon: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003087984-2 Search in Google Scholar

Chang, C. C., Warden, C. A., Liang, C., & Chou, P. N. (2018). Performance, cognitive load, and behaviour of technolog-assisted English listening learning: From CALL to MALL. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , 34(2), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12218 . Search in Google Scholar

Chwo, G. S. M., Marek, M. W., & Wu, W. C. V. (2018). Meta-analysis of MALL research and design. System , 74, 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.02.009 . Search in Google Scholar

Crompton, H. (2013). A historical overview of m-learning: Toward learner-centered education. In Z. L. Berge, & L. Y. Muilenburg (Eds.), Handbook of mobile learning (pp. 3–14). London: Routledge. Search in Google Scholar

Crompton, H., & Traxler, J. (2019). Learning with mobile devices. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Eds.), Advanced methodologies and technologies in modern education delivery (pp. 793–808). IGI Global. 10.4018/978-1-5225-7365-4.ch062 Search in Google Scholar

Cronje, J. C. (2020). Designing questions for research design and design research in e learning. Electronic Journal of e-Learning , 18(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.20.18.1.002 . Search in Google Scholar

Dillon, J. T. (1984). The classification of research questions. Review of Educational Research , 54(3), 327–361. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543054003327 . Search in Google Scholar

Duman, G., Orhon, G., & Gedik, N. (2015). Research trends in mobile assisted language learning from 2000 to 2012. ReCALL: The Journal of EUROCALL , 27(2), 197. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344014000287 . Search in Google Scholar

EDUCAUSE . (2021). Mobile learning . Retrieved from https://library.educause.edu/topics/teaching-and-learning/mobile-learning . Search in Google Scholar

Elaish, M. M., Shuib, L., Ghani, N. A., Yadegaridehkordi, E., & Alaa, M. (2017). Mobile learning for English language acquisition: Taxonomy, challenges, and recommendations. IEEE Access , 5, 19033–19047. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2017.2749541 . Search in Google Scholar

Farrow, R., Iniesto, F., Weller, M., & Pitt, R. (2020). GO-GN research methods handbook . Milton Keynes: Global OER Gradate Network. Search in Google Scholar

Freudenberg, S., & Sharp, H. (2010). The top 10 burning research questions from practitioners. Ieee Software , 27(5), 8–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/ms.2010.129 . Search in Google Scholar

Hewagamage, K. P., Wickramasinghe, W. M. A. S. B., & Jayatilaka, A. D. S. (2012). “M-Learning not an extension of e-learning”: Based on a case study of Moodle VLE. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning , 4(4), 21–33. https://doi.org/10.4018/jmbl.2012100102 . Search in Google Scholar

Hulley, S. B., Cummings, S. R., & Browner, W. (1988). Getting started: The anatomy and physiology of research. In S. B. Hulley, & S. R. Cummings (Eds.), Designing clinical research . Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins. Search in Google Scholar

Hwang, G. J., & Chang, S. C. (2021). Facilitating knowledge construction in mobile learning contexts: A bi‐directional peer‐assessment approach. British Journal of Educational Technology , 52(1), 337–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13001 . Search in Google Scholar

Hwang, G. J., & Fu, Q. K. (2019). Trends in the research design and application of mobile language learning: A review of 2007–2016 publications in selected SSCI journals. Interactive Learning Environments , 27(4), 567–581. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1486861 . Search in Google Scholar

Hwang, G. J., Li, K. C., & Lai, C. L. (2020). Trends and strategies for conducting effective STEM research and applications: A mobile and ubiquitous learning perspective. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation , 14(2), 161–183. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijmlo.2020.106166 . Search in Google Scholar

Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2018). Mobile-assisted language learning [Revised and updated version]. In C. A. Chapelle (Eds.), The concise encyclopedia of applied linguistics . New York: Wiley. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/57023/ . Search in Google Scholar

Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2019). Mobile language learning innovation inspired by migrants. Journal of Learning for Development , 6(2), 116–129. 10.56059/jl4d.v6i2.349 Search in Google Scholar

Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2021). Conclusions: A lifelong perspective on mobile language learning. In V. Morgana, & A. Kukulska-Hulme (Eds.), Mobile assisted language learning across educational contexts. Routledge focus on applied linguistics (pp. 122–133). Abingdon: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003087984-7 Search in Google Scholar

Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Shield, L. (2008). An overview of mobile assisted language learning: From content delivery to supported collaboration and interaction. ReCALL , 20(3), 271–289. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344008000335 . Search in Google Scholar

Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2013). Design principles for mobile learning. In H. Beetham, & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning (2nd ed., pp. 244–257). Abingdon: Routledge. Search in Google Scholar

Kukulska-Hulme, A., Sharples, M., Milrad, M., Arnedillo-Sánchez, I., & Vavoula, G. (2011). The genesis and development of mobile learning in Europe. In D. Parsons (Eds.), Combining e-learning and m-learning: New applications of blended educational resources (pp. 151–177). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global). 10.4018/978-1-60960-481-3.ch010 Search in Google Scholar

Kukulska-Hulme, A., Norris, L., & Donohue, J. (2015). Mobile pedagogy for English language teaching: A guide for teachers . The British Council. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/43605/ . Search in Google Scholar

Lai, C. L. (2020). Trends of mobile learning: A review of the top 100 highly cited papers. British Journal of Educational Technology , 51(3), 721–742. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12884 . Search in Google Scholar

Lai, C., & Zheng, D. (2018). Self-directed use of mobile devices for language learning beyond the classroom. ReCALL , 30(3), 299–318. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344017000258 . Search in Google Scholar

Lee, Y. M. (2021). Digital skills of mobile journalists: Exploring learning needs and learner experiences of just-in-time learning with smartphones. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator . Online First. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776958211001692 . Search in Google Scholar

Loewen, S., Crowther, D., Isbell, D. R., Kim, K. M., Maloney, J., Miller, Z. F., & Rawal, H. (2019). Mobile-assisted language learning: A Duolingo case study. ReCALL: The Journal of EUROCALL , 31(3), 293–311. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344019000065 . Search in Google Scholar

Looi, C. K., Seow, P., Zhang, B., So, H. J., Chen, W., & Wong, L. H. (2010). Leveraging mobile technology for sustainable seamless learning: A research agenda. British Journal of Educational Technology , 41(2), 154–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00912.x . Search in Google Scholar

Mohebbi, H., & Coombe, C. (Eds.) (forthcoming). Research questions in language education and applied linguistics: A reference guide . Berlin: Springer. Search in Google Scholar

Moya, S., & Camacho, M. (2021). Identifying the key success factors for the adoption of mobile learning. Education and Information Technologies , 26, 3917–3945. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10447-w . Search in Google Scholar

Nami, F. (2020). Educational smartphone apps for language learning in higher education: Students’ choices and perceptions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 36(4), 82–95. 10.14742/ajet.5350 Search in Google Scholar

Nasr, H. A., & Abbas, A. A. (2018). Impact of mobile assisted language learning on learner autonomy in EFL reading context. Journal of Language and Education , 4(2), 48–58. 10.17323/2411-7390-2018-4-2-48-58 Search in Google Scholar

Ndume, V. A., Songoro, M., & Kisanga, D. H. (2020). Enriching performance of mathematics in Secondary Schools Using Mobile Learning. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology , 16(2), 223–241. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1bvndvz.20 . Search in Google Scholar

Ng, W., & Cumming, T. M. (Eds.) (2015). Sustaining mobile learning: Theory, research and practice . Abingdon: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315766553-5 Search in Google Scholar

Nikolopoulou, K. (2018). Mobile learning usage and acceptance: Perceptions of secondary school students. Journal of Computers in Education , 5(4), 499–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-018-0127-8 . Search in Google Scholar

Nikolopoulou, K. (2020). Secondary education teachers’ perceptions of mobile phone and tablet use in classrooms: Benefits, constraints and concerns. Journal of Computers in Education , 7(2), 257–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00156-7 . Search in Google Scholar

OECD . (2015). Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for collecting and reporting data on research and experimental development . Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/sti/frascati-manual-2015-9789264239012-en.htm . 10.1787/9789264239012-en Search in Google Scholar

Okai-Ugbaje, S., Ardzejewska, K., & Imran, A. (2020). Readiness, roles, and responsibilities of stakeholders for sustainable mobile learning adoption in higher education. Education Sciences , 10(3), 49. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10030049 . Search in Google Scholar

Oldekop, J. A., Fontana, L. B., Grugel, J., Roughton, N., Adu‐Ampong, E. A., Bird, G. K., & Sutherland, W. J. (2016). 100 key research questions for the post‐2015 development agenda. Development Policy Review , 34(1), 55–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12147 . Search in Google Scholar

Perillat, L., & Baigrie, B. S. (2021). COVID‐19 and the generation of novel scientific knowledge: Research questions and study designs. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice , 27(3), 694–707. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13550 . Search in Google Scholar

Pollara, P., & Broussard, K. K. (2011). Student perceptions of mobile learning: A review of current research. Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher education international conference 2011 (pp. 1643–1650). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Search in Google Scholar

Pulla, S. (2017). Mobile learning and indigenous education in Canada: A synthesis of new ways of learning. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning , 9(2), 39–60. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijmbl.2017040103 . Search in Google Scholar

Qing, M. (2017). A multi-case study of university students’ language-learning experience mediated by mobile technologies: A socio-cultural perspective. Computer Assisted Language Learning , 30(3–4), 183–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1356086 . Search in Google Scholar

REF . (2021). Research excellence framework . UK Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.ref.ac.uk/ . Search in Google Scholar

Romero-Rodríguez, J. M., Aznar-Díaz, I., Hinojo-Lucena, F. J., & Cáceres-Reche, M. P. (2020). Models of good teaching practices for mobile learning in higher education. Palgrave Communications , 6(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-0468-6 . Search in Google Scholar

Sarrab, M., Elbasir, M., & Alnaeli, S. (2016). Towards a quality model of technical aspects for mobile learning services: An empirical investigation. Computers in Human Behavior , 55, 100–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.003 . Search in Google Scholar

Sato, T., Murase, F., & Burden, T. (2020). An empirical study on vocabulary recall and learner autonomy through mobile-assisted language learning in blended learning settings. Calico Journal , 37(3), 254–276. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.40436 . Search in Google Scholar

Seddon, A. W. R., Mackay, A. W., Baker, A. G., Birks, H. J. B., Breman, E., Buck, C. E, … McGlone, M. (2014). Looking forward through the past: Identification of 50 priority research questions in palaeoecology. Journal of Ecology , 102(1), 256–267. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12195 . Search in Google Scholar

Selwyn, N. (2010). Looking beyond learning: Notes towards the critical study of educational technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , 26(1), 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00338.x . Search in Google Scholar

Shadiev, R., Hwang, W. Y., & Huang, Y. M. (2017). Review of research on mobile language learning in authentic environments. Computer Assisted Language Learning , 30(3–4), 284–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1308383 . Search in Google Scholar

Shadiev, R., Hwang, W. Y., Huang, Y. M., & Liu, T. Y. (2018). Facilitating application of language skills in authentic environments with a mobile learning system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , 34(1), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12212 . Search in Google Scholar

Sharples, M. (Ed.) (2006). Big issues in mobile learning . Report of a workshop by the Kaleidoscope Network of Excellence Mobile Learning Initiative. University of Nottingham. Search in Google Scholar

Sharples, M. (2009). Methods for evaluating mobile learning. In G. N. Vavoula, N. Pachler, & A. Kukulska-Hulme (Eds.), Researching mobile learning: Frameworks, tools and research designs (pp. 17–39). Oxford: Peter Lang Publishing Group. Search in Google Scholar

Shilling, A. J. (2020). Exploring the use of mobile language learning technology as a means for urban Indigenous youth to connect to identity and culture [Doctoral dissertation]. Vancouver: University of British Columbia. Retrieved from https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/24/items/1.0391007 . Search in Google Scholar

Sunderland, J. (2018). Research questions in linguistics. In L. Litosseliti (Eds.), Research methods in linguistics (2nd ed., pp. 9–28). London: Bloomsbury Publishing. 10.5040/9781350043466.ch-002 Search in Google Scholar

Traxler, J. (2009). The evolution of mobile learning. In R. Guy (Eds.), The evolution of mobile teaching and learning (pp. 1–14). Santa Rosa, California: Informing Science Press. 10.4018/jmbl.2009010101 Search in Google Scholar

Traxler, J., & Koole, M. (2014). The theory paper: What is the future of mobile learning? International Association for the Development of the Information Society . Search in Google Scholar

Traxler, J., Read, T., Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Barcena, E. (2019). Paradoxical paradigm proposals - Learning languages in mobile societies. Argentinian Journal of Applied Linguistics , 7(2), 89–109. Search in Google Scholar

Uppal, M. A., Ali, S., Zahid, Z., & Basir, M. (2020). Factors determining student’s perception towards mobile learning: An empirical study of Pakistan’s higher education. Pakistan Journal of Distance and Online Learning , 5(2), 101–121. Search in Google Scholar

Viberg, O., Andersson, A., & Wiklund, M. (2021). Designing for sustainable mobile learning – Re-evaluating the concepts “formal” and “informal”. Interactive Learning Environments , 29(1), 130–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1548488 . Search in Google Scholar

Viberg, O., & Grönlund, Å. (2017). Understanding students’ learning practices: Challenges for design and integration of mobile technology into distance education. Learning, Media and Technology , 42(3), 357–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2016.1088869 . Search in Google Scholar

White, P. (2013). Who’s afraid of research questions? The neglect of research questions in the methods literature and a call for question-led methods teaching. International Journal of Research and Method in Education , 36(3), 213–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727x.2013.809413 . Search in Google Scholar

White, P. (2017). Developing research questions . London: Macmillan International Higher Education. 10.1057/978-1-137-49048-3 Search in Google Scholar

Yeung, W. K., & Sun, D. (2021). An exploration of inquiry-based authentic learning enabled by mobile technology for primary science. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation , 15(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijmlo.2021.111594 . Search in Google Scholar

Zou, B., Yan, X., & Li, H. (2020). Students’ perspectives on using online sources and apps for EFL learning in the mobile-assisted language learning context. Language learning and literacy: Breakthroughs in research and practice (pp. 515–531). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. 10.4018/978-1-5225-9618-9.ch027 Search in Google Scholar

© 2021 Agnes Kukulska-Hulme, published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

• X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

Observation

The littlest linguists: new research on language development.

• Bilingualism
• Developmental Psychology
• Language Development

How do children learn language, and how is language related to other cognitive and social skills? For decades, the specialized field of developmental psycholinguistics has studied how children acquire language—or multiple languages—taking into account biological, neurological, and social factors that influence linguistic developments and, in turn, can play a role in how children learn and socialize. Here’s a look at recent research (2020–2021) on language development published in Psychological Science . 

Preverbal Infants Discover Statistical Word Patterns at Similar Rates as Adults: Evidence From Neural Entrainment

Dawoon Choi, Laura J. Batterink, Alexis K. Black, Ken A. Paller, and Janet F. Werker (2020)

One of the first challenges faced by infants during language acquisition is identifying word boundaries in continuous speech. This neurological research suggests that even preverbal infants can learn statistical patterns in language, indicating that they may have the ability to segment words within continuous speech.

Using electroencephalogram measures to track infants’ ability to segment words, Choi and colleagues found that 6-month-olds’ neural processing increasingly synchronized with the newly learned words embedded in speech over the learning period in one session in the laboratory. Specifically, patterns of electrical activity in their brains increasingly aligned with sensory regularities associated with word boundaries. This synchronization was comparable to that seen among adults and predicted future ability to discriminate words.

These findings indicate that infants and adults may follow similar learning trajectories when tracking probabilities in speech, with both groups showing a logarithmic (rather than linear) increase in the synchronization of neural processing with frequent words. Moreover, speech segmentation appears to use neural mechanisms that emerge early in life and are maintained throughout adulthood.

Parents Fine-Tune Their Speech to Children’s Vocabulary Knowledge

Ashley Leung, Alexandra Tunkel, and Daniel Yurovsky (2021)

Children can acquire language rapidly, possibly because their caregivers use language in ways that support such development. Specifically, caregivers’ language is often fine-tuned to children’s current linguistic knowledge and vocabulary, providing an optimal level of complexity to support language learning. In their new research, Leung and colleagues add to the body of knowledge involving how caregivers foster children’s language acquisition.

The researchers asked individual parents to play a game with their child (age 2–2.5 years) in which they guided their child to select a target animal from a set. Without prompting, the parents provided more informative references for animals they thought their children did not know. For example, if a parent thought their child did not know the word “leopard,” they might use adjectives (“the spotted, yellow leopard”) or comparisons (“the one like a cat”). This indicates that parents adjust their references to account for their children’s language knowledge and vocabulary—not in a simplifying way but in a way that could increase the children’s vocabulary. Parents also appeared to learn about their children’s knowledge throughout the game and to adjust their references accordingly.

Infant and Adult Brains Are Coupled to the Dynamics of Natural Communication

Elise A. Piazza, Liat Hasenfratz, Uri Hasson, and Casey Lew-Williams (2020)

This research tracked real-time brain activation during infant–adult interactions, providing an innovative measure of social interaction at an early age. When communicating with infants, adults appear to be sensitive to subtle cues that can modify their brain responses and behaviors to improve alignment with, and maximize information transfer to, the infants.

Piazza and colleagues used functional near-infrared spectroscopy—a noninvasive measure of blood oxygenation resulting from neural activity that is minimally affected by movements and thus allows participants to freely interact and move—to measure the brain activation of infants (9–15 months old) and adults while they communicated and played with each other. An adult experimenter either engaged directly with an infant by playing with toys, singing nursery rhymes, and reading a story or performed those same tasks while turned away from the child and toward another adult in the room.

Results indicated that when the adult interacted with the child (but not with the other adult), the activations of many prefrontal cortex (PFC) channels and some parietal channels were intercorrelated, indicating neural coupling of the adult’s and child’s brains. Both infant and adult PFC activation preceded moments of mutual gaze and increased before the infant smiled, with the infant’s PFC response preceding the adult’s. Infant PFC activity also preceded an increase in the pitch variability of the adult’s speech, although no changes occurred in the adult’s PFC, indicating that the adult’s speech influenced the infant but probably did not influence neural coupling between the child and the adult.

Theory-of-Mind Development in Young Deaf Children With Early Hearing Provisions

Chi-Lin Yu, Christopher M. Stanzione, Henry M. Wellman, and Amy R. Lederberg (2020)

Language and communication are important for social and cognitive development. Although deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children born to deaf parents can communicate with their caregivers using sign language, most DHH children are born to hearing parents who do not have experience with sign language. These children may have difficulty with early communication and experience developmental delays. For instance, the development of theory of mind—the understanding of others’ mental states—is usually delayed in DHH children born to hearing parents.

Yu and colleagues studied how providing DHH children with hearing devices early in life (before 2 years of age) might enrich their early communication experiences and benefit their language development, supporting the typical development of other capabilities—in particular, theory of mind. The researchers show that 3- to 6-year-old DHH children who began using cochlear implants or hearing aids earlier had more advanced language abilities, leading to better theory-of-mind growth, than children who started using hearing provisions later. These findings highlight the relationships among hearing, language, and theory of mind.

The Bilingual Advantage in Children’s Executive Functioning Is Not Related to Language Status: A Meta-Analytic Review

Cassandra J. Lowe, Isu Cho, Samantha F. Goldsmith, and J. Bruce Morton (2021)

Acommon idea is that bilingual children, who grow up speaking two languages fluently, perform better than monolingual children in diverse executive-functioning domains (e.g., attention, working memory, decision making). This meta-analysis calls that idea into question.

Lowe and colleagues synthesized data from studies that compared the performance of monolingual and bilingual participants between the ages of 3 and 17 years in executive-functioning domains (1,194 effect sizes). They found only a small effect of bilingualism on participants’ executive functioning, which was largely explained by factors such as publication bias. After accounting for these factors, bilingualism had no distinguishable effect. The results of this large meta-analysis thus suggest that bilingual and monolingual children tend to perform at the same level in executive-functioning tasks. Bilingualism does not appear to boost performance in executive functions that serve learning, thinking, reasoning, or problem solving.

APS regularly opens certain online articles for discussion on our website. Effective February 2021, you must be a logged-in APS member to post comments. By posting a comment, you agree to our Community Guidelines and the display of your profile information, including your name and affiliation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations present in article comments are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of APS or the article’s author. For more information, please see our Community Guidelines .

Please login with your APS account to comment.

Teaching: Ethical Research to Help Romania’s Abandoned Children 

An early intervention experiment in Bucharest can introduce students to the importance of responsive caregiving during human development.

Silver Linings in the Demographic Revolution 

Podcast: In her final column as APS President, Alison Gopnik makes the case for more effectively and creatively caring for vulnerable humans at either end of life.

Communicating Psychological Science: The Lifelong Consequences of Early Language Skills

“When families are informed about the importance of conversational interaction and are provided training, they become active communicators and directly contribute to reducing the word gap (Leung et al., 2020).”

Privacy Overview

Popular Searches

Research map.

• Network Graph Visualization
• Topics Home
• Cognition & Memory
• Computational Thinking
• Family Engagement
• Instruction & Teacher Learning

Language Learning

• Math Learning
• Technology & Learning
• Project-Based Learning
• Social-Emotional Learning
• Special Education
• STEM Learning
• Student Motivation
• Supporting Teachers of Color
• Whole Child Supports & Interventions
• Curated Resources
• Introduction to the Learning Sciences
• Ask a Researcher

How do people learn second languages, and which teaching methods are effective?

Introduction

In today’s globalized world, communication often requires knowing more than one language. Language learning is thus an increasingly important focus in education, whether it’s English as a Second Language (ESL) for students who are not native English speakers, or Foreign Language courses to prepare students for future opportunities.

There are three major theories of how humans acquire language. Behaviorism (B.F. Skinner) focuses on how language is learned through imitation, practice, and reinforcement. In contrast, nativism (Noam Chomsky) suggests that humans are born with an innate understanding of grammar and frameworks for language. Sociocultural or social interactionist theory (Lev Vygotsky) sees learning as a social process that takes place in interactions with other people. While scholars continue to debate these theories, researchers have used them as a starting point to identify and study effective techniques for teaching languages.

The section below highlights key findings from the research on language learning and language teaching .

Key Findings

Learning a second language does not unfold in the same way for all learners..

Absorbing language from one’s surroundings as a young child is a different process than learning language intentionally in a classroom. [i] Age, education level, affective factors (such as motivation and self­-confidence), and other characteristics also affect language learning. [ii] Instructional approaches that are effective for one type of student and learning context may not work as well with another learner.

Students need different language skills for different purposes.

While the language skills required for social activities and informal conversation can emerge in one to two years, it may take from four to seven years to reach the level needed to participate in academic activities like analyzing complicated texts or writing persuasive essays. [iii] Educators must incorporate a range of vocabulary and activities if they want students to be able to use language in the classroom as well as in social interactions.

Language Teaching

Instruction in both language forms and functions is important. [iv].

Language forms are the grammatical elements of language, such as vocabulary, subject­-verb agreement, and prepositional phrases. [v] Language functions are the ways language is used to communicate and create meaning, such as describing people or asking questions. [vi] Both should be included in language instruction. [vii] For example, students learning about colors need to know words for different colors and how to use adjectives (forms), as well as how to ask questions and share information about the color of objects they see (functions).

Feedback is critical, and may need to be more or less explicit depending on the learner.

Technology presents both opportunities and challenges for language teaching and learning.

Traditionally, students learned languages using face­-to­-face conversation and printed texts, but today students need to be digitally literate and able to communicate using a wide range of media, each of which has its own style, vocabulary, and approach to language use. [x] New technologies can be powerful teaching tools; however, instructional methods may need to be adapted because language learning occurs differently in computer-­mediated interactions than in­-person conversations. [xi]

Explore Language Learning on the Visualization.

[i] Krashen, Stephen. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition . Vol. 2. Pergamon: Oxford. Ellis, Rod. (2003). Task-­based language learning and teaching . Oxford University Press. Doughty, Catherine and Jessica Williams. (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition . Cambridge University Press. [ii] Judie Haynes. (2007). “ Key Concepts of Second-­Language Acquisition ,” in Getting Started with English Language Learners . [iii] Collier, Virginia P. (1987). “ Age and rate of acquisition of second language for academic purposes .” TESOL quarterly 21.4: 617­641. Cummins, Jim. (1999). “ BICS and CALP: Clarifying the Distinction .” Hakuta, K., Butler, Y. G., & Witt, D. (2000). “ How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? ” The University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute. Policy report 2000­1. [iv] A simple overview of the difference between language forms and functions can be found in: Oregon Department of Education. (2009–2010). “ English Language Proficiency .” Oregon Standards Newspaper . [v] Doughty, Catherine and Jessica Williams. (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition . Cambridge University Press. [vi] Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective . Routledge. Schleppegrell, M. J. (2012). “Systemic functional linguistics: Exploring meaning in language.” The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis , 21­34. [vii] Spada, N, Lightbown, PM. (2008). “ Form-­focused instruction: Isolated or integrated? ” TESOL QUART . Toth, PD. (2008). “ Teacher­ and learner­-led discourse in task­based grammar instruction: Providing procedural assistance for L2… ” LANG LEARN . Dekeyser, RM. (2005). “ What makes learning second-­language grammar difficult? A review of issues ” LANG LEARN . Aski, JM. (2005). “ Alternatives to mechanical drills for the early stages of language practice in foreign language textbooks ” FOREIGN LANG ANN . De La fuente, MJ. (2006). “ Classroom L2 vocabulary acquisition: investigating the role of pedagogical tasks and form­ focused instruction .” LANG TEACH RES . Ellis, R. (2006). “ Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective ” TESOL QUART [viii] Li, SF. (2010). The Effectiveness of Corrective Feedback in SLA: A Meta­Analysis. LANG LEARN . [ix] Sheen Y. (2006). “ Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner uptak e” LANG TEACH RES . Nassaji H. (2009). “ Effects of Recasts and Elicitations in Dyadic Interaction and the Role of Feedback Explicitness ”. LANG LEARN . [x] Kern, R. (2006). “ Perspectives on technology in learning and teaching languages ” TESOL QUART . [xi] Lai C, Zhao Y. (2006). “ Noticing and text-­based chat ” LANG LEARN TECHNOL . Yamada M. (2009). “ The role of social presence in learner­-centered communicative language learning using synchronous computer-­mediated… ” COMPUT EDUC. Jepson, K. (2005). “ Conversations ­- and negotiated interaction -­ in text and voice chat rooms. ” LANG LEARN TECHNOL .

Sign up for updates!

WIDA Assistant Director of Standards

• Madison, Wisconsin
• SCHOOL OF EDUCATION/WIS CENTER FOR EDUCATION RESCH-GEN
• Staff-Full Time
• Opening at: Apr 30 2024 at 14:20 CDT
• Closing at: May 22 2024 at 23:55 CDT

Job Summary:

The WIDA Assistant Director of Standards position is located within the Educator Learning, Research, and Practice (ELRP) team and will report to the Director of Professional Learning Curriculum. This position will be responsible for managing the roadmap for WIDA's English Language Development (ELD) and Spanish Language Development (SLD) standards frameworks, including professional learning content and implementation resources to support educators. The Assistant Director of Standards will manage a team of content developers and work cross-functionally to support research-based updates to the standards frameworks and their associated resources. For more detailed job expectations, please visit our website: https://wida.wisc.edu/about/careers .  Working fully remote is an option for this position within the United States (working remotely internationally is not an option). Requests to work remotely would need to be reviewed based on the UW and School of Education (SoE) remote work policies and go through the SoE implementation process. To learn more about these policies, visit https://businessoffice.education.wisc.edu/human-resources/remote-work/ .  WIDA values linguistic and cultural diversity both as an end and a means for success in the field of education. As such, we strongly encourage applications from a diverse pool of candidates. For more information on WIDA's Mission and Values, please visit https://wida.wisc.edu/about/mission-history  

Responsibilities:

• 30% Plans and directs the day-to-day operational activities of one or multiple research programs or units according to established research objectives in alignment with strategic plans and initiatives
• 20% Assists in the development, coordination, and facilitation of trainings and workshops for internal and external audiences to disseminate research program developments and information
• 10% Plans, develops, and implements processes and protocols to support research aims
• 10% Exercises supervisory authority, including hiring, transferring, suspending, promoting, managing conduct and performance, discharging, assigning, rewarding, disciplining, and/or approving hours worked of at least 2.0 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees
• 20% Serves as a unit liaison and subject matter expert among internal and external stakeholder groups, collaborates across disciplines and functional areas, provides program information, and promotes the accomplishments and developments of scholars and research initiatives
• 5% Monitors program budget(s) and approves unit expenditures
• 5% Develops policies, procedures, and institutional agreements on behalf of the program

Institutional Statement on Diversity:

Diversity is a source of strength, creativity, and innovation for UW-Madison. We value the contributions of each person and respect the profound ways their identity, culture, background, experience, status, abilities, and opinion enrich the university community. We commit ourselves to the pursuit of excellence in teaching, research, outreach, and diversity as inextricably linked goals. The University of Wisconsin-Madison fulfills its public mission by creating a welcoming and inclusive community for people from every background - people who as students, faculty, and staff serve Wisconsin and the world. For more information on diversity and inclusion on campus, please visit: Diversity and Inclusion

Required Master's Degree in education or a related field.

Qualifications:

Required * Minimum 3 years of experience in K-12 curriculum development and/or the development and alignment of K-12 standards. * Demonstrated knowledge of the field of second language acquisition, including the use of English language development (ELD) and Spanish language development (SLD) standards, the role of academic language in content learning, and research-based instructional practices. * Experience in the development of organizational systems, ongoing strategic planning, administration, and management of projects, deadlines, and budgets. * Experience with the development of professional learning content for educators across various mediums. * Superior writing, communication, and organizational skills. * Proficiency in using digital tools for coordinating workflow and documenting plans and outcomes. * Experience supervising and coaching a team and contributing to strategic planning. * Multilingual or bilingual/biliterate in Spanish. Preferred * Familiarity with the WIDA English Language Development (ELD) and Spanish Language Development (SLD) standards. * Familiarity with Universal Design for Learning and andragogy/adult learning. * Direct K-12 classroom experience supporting multilingual learners.

Full Time: 100% It is anticipated this position will be remote and requires work be performed at an offsite, non-campus work location.

Appointment Type, Duration:

Ongoing/Renewable

Minimum $90,000 ANNUAL (12 months) Depending on Qualifications This position offers a comprehensive benefits package, including generous paid time off, competitively priced health/dental/vision/life insurance, tax-advantaged savings accounts, and participation in the nationally recognized Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) pension fund. For a summary of benefits, please see: https://hr.wisc.edu/benefits/    https://www.wisconsin.edu/ohrwd/benefits/download/fasl.pdf . 

Additional Information:

What is WIDA? For nearly 20 years, WIDA has provided a trusted, comprehensive approach to supporting, teaching, and assessing multilingual learners. We are an educational services organization that advances language development and academic achievement for multilingual children in early childhood and grades K-12. In short, we provide educators around the world with high-quality language standards, assessments, professional learning, and research. We are proud to be a part of the Wisconsin Center for Education Research (WCER) within UW-Madison's nationally ranked School of Education. Visit https://wida.wisc.edu/about/careers   and watch our Introduction to WIDA video to see why WIDA is an incredible place to work! The Wisconsin Center for Education Research (WCER), established in 1964, is one of the first, most productive, and largest university-based education research and development centers in the world. WCER's researchers and staff work to make teaching and learning as effective as possible for all ages and all people. WCER's mission is to improve educational outcomes for diverse student populations, impact education practice positively and foster collaborations among academic disciplines and practitioners. To this end, our center helps scholars and practitioners develop, submit, conduct, and share grant-funded education research. WCER's Commitment to Diversity, Equity & Inclusion: Diversity is a source of strength, creativity, and innovation for UW-Madison and The Wisconsin Center for Education Research (WCER). Individual differences and group diversity inspire creative and equitable outcomes. WCER actively affirms values and seeks to increase diversity in our everyday interactions, practices, and policies. For more information and news about our center, please go to https://wcer.wisc.edu/ . 

How to Apply:

Please click on the "Apply Now" button to start the application process. As part of the application process, you will be required to submit: - A cover letter describing how your experience and qualifications meet the requirements of this position. - A current resume or CV. - A list of at least three professional references, including contact information. A successful applicant will be responsible for ensuring eligibility for employment in the United States on or before the effective date of the appointment.

Kelly Krahenbuhl [email protected] 608-263-4776 Relay Access (WTRS): 7-1-1. See RELAY_SERVICE for further information.

Official Title:

Research Program Manager(RE046)

Department(s):

A17-SCHOOL OF EDUCATION/WCER

Employment Class:

Academic Staff-Renewable

Job Number:

The university of wisconsin-madison is an equal opportunity and affirmative action employer..

You will be redirected to the application to launch your career momentarily. Thank you!

Frequently Asked Questions

Applicant Tutorial

Disability Accommodations

Pay Transparency Policy Statement

Refer a Friend

You've sent this job to a friend!

Website feedback, questions or accessibility issues: [email protected] .

Learn more about accessibility at UW–Madison .

© 2016–2024 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System • Privacy Statement