Perspectives on Second and Foreign Language Learning,Teaching, and Research: What Are the Foci?

The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Correspondence should be addressed to Professor Lawrence Jun Zhang, School of Curriculum and Pedagogy, Faculty of Education, University of Aukland, Private Bag 92601, Symonds Street, Auckland 1150, New Zealand. Email: lj.zhang@auckland.ac.nz

In this globalized world in which we live, the rapidity at which the enterprise of second and foreign language learning and teaching, and of course, by extension, research on second language acquisition (SLA) or foreign language or second language (hereafter refereed to as L2) learning and teaching in general, is an amazing phenomenon. It is particularly the case in China, where exponential numbers of students learn English as a foreign language (EFL) at various levels. The sheer numbers of such learners deserve a prominent place in the journalContemporaryForeignLanguagesStudies, let alone the intrinsic complexity that cuts across the learning, teaching, and researching process with regard to these learners. Evidently, the great strides in research on L2 teaching and learning are so extant that any attempt to present current developments in this field in a single volume will probably prove to be too ambitious. With some degree of moderation, I have taken the liberty of doing so in this issue, albeit not being able to cover all areas of focal concerns. Whether or not my effort will be regarded as a success awaits the scrutiny of scholars and readers interested in reading these articles.

The process of soliciting submissions was a long one. An initial call for papers was distributed on the journal’s homepage and by email. The response was overwhelmingly positive. The selection process allowed the guest-editor to sift submissions of abstracts from potential authors, who expressed interest in contributing to this issue. In the end, nine abstracts have been selected for being developed into full manuscripts. Despite the eminence of many of the contributors to this issue, these scholars’ submitted manuscripts were sent out to colleagues for a blind or masked peer review. I am grateful to all the authors who, despite their excellent publication records, were so willing in seriously taking up the recommendations from the reviewers and graciously revised their work on time. As the guest-editor, I think this issue is a collection of fine scholarly work representing a good range of research areas and interests that will have a wider appeal to theCFLSreadership, particularly those readers who are mainly based in China. The reason why I have made such a bold statement is that these articles, in one way or another, capture some important aspects of the development in our field, and therefore represent the various foci.

Typical themes of this issue span challenging age as a barrier to language learning and investigating it using a case study approach; theorizing language production in SLA; finding out the relationship of listening comprehension skill to the modality of presentation (e.g., visual vs. aural); examining vocabulary size and question type; making a commitment to strategic-reader training; appraising language learning strategies (LLS) used by Asian students in English-medium universities; surveying teachers’ views on code-switching in Asian EFL classrooms; and examining the role of talk in second and foreign language classrooms; conceptualizing metacognition and its relationship to listening and reading; and attempting to offer different views on metacognition in foreign and second language learning, teaching and research.

Cohen and Li have presented findings of their case study of a native English speaker learning Mandarin as a 13th language starting at the age of 67. Their article titled “Learning Mandarin in Later Life: Can Old Dogs Learn New Tricks?” is illuminating in itself. Despite a plethora of studies on child and adult second language acquisition, little has been documented about how older learners cope with language learning and the degree of success in learning a new language. This study is particularly interesting in that no study so far has examined a learner learning a 13th language at such a late age. Cohen and Li have indeed considered the impact of age, hyperpolyglot status, and a sophisticated language strategy repertoire on Mandarin learning by successfully addressing their research questions. Murphy and Castillo stress the significance of studying the relationship between lexical knowledge and listening performance in their article “Modality, Vocabulary Size and Question Type as Mediators of Listening Comprehension Skill.” They argue that only visually measured lexical knowledge cannot be taken as a predictor of listening performance. They therefore invited 51 Hong Kong ESL learners to be participants in their study. They recommend that the modality in which lexical knowledge is assessed when estimating its power as a predictor of other skills needs to be considered. In his article “Toward a Theoretical Framework for Researching Second Language Production”, Hu points out that most of the theories on second language production are able to offer only partial explanations because they often fail to handle mixed empirical findings about factors that affect second language output and underlie systematic variation. He therefore proposes a new theoretical framework for posing and addressing research questions about second language production in general and systematic variation in particular.

Stoller and Kamiyama’s “Making a Commitment to Strategic-Reader Training” is a clear attempt at revising strategies-based instruction in L2 teaching and learning (see e.g., Anderson, 2014; Cohen & Ernesto, 2007; Grabe & Stoller, 2011; Zhang, 2008). Stoller and Kamiyama state that skilled readers are strategic and able to use a repertoire of reading strategies flexibly and in meaningful combinations for the purpose of reading comprehension. They examine the reading strategies used by skilled readers, contrastteachingstrategieswithtrainingstrategicreaders(i.e., strategic-reader training), and examine five strategic-reader training approaches from first language contexts that can be adapted by L2 professionals to enhance the reading instruction offered in their L2 classes. Gao explored language learning strategies (LLS) used by Asian students in English medium universities, which is another laudable attempt at reinvigorating language learning strategy research (Rose, 2012) in the wake of unfair criticisms leveled against it. Because of an increasing number of Asian students studying in English medium institutions, Gao argues that it is necessary to understand how these students face daunting linguistic challenges in their effort for academic survival and success. Gao’s critical review of LLS research undertaken in two theoretical and methodological orientations (psychometric survey studies and sociocultural, largely qualitative research) covers different research contexts (e.g., Britain, Canada, Hong Kong, India, New Zealand, and the United States). Given the widely accepted importance of deployment of strategies in language learning and use, he concludes that research on Asian tertiary students’ strategy use in English medium universities remains to be significant when effort needs to be made for supporting students to achieve higher levels of linguistic competence.

Barnard’s “Codeswitching in East Asian university EFL classrooms: Reflecting teachers’ voices” challenges a commonly assumed notion popular in the 20th century: the best way to teach English as a foreign language was through the exclusive use of English as the medium of instruction. He argues that recent research findings (e.g., Braine, 2010; Macaro, 2009) do not support “English only” as a pedagogical solution in second and foreign language classrooms. Educational policy-makers promote “English-only” in schools and universities without any strong empirical evidence for it. Based on findings from a recent volume of case studies (Barnard & McLellan, 2014), he illustrates that codeswitching is a common practice in many EFL classrooms in Asia and it is both normal and can be pedagogically justifiable. Box, Creider and Waring present the readers with a systematic review of talk in the classroom in their paper “Talk in the Second and Foreign Language Classroom.” They review three frameworks, focusing on qualitatively analyzing turn-by-turn talk between teachers and students and among students themselves. These frameworks obviously have larger implications for classroom pedagogy.

In their paper “Metacognition Theory and Research in Second Language Listening and Reading”, Goh and L. Zhang review how listening and reading share a number of cognitive processes. They focus on analyzing the role of metacognition in self-regulated learning (SRL) and comprehension performance. They systematically selected and reviewed studies conducted in two important dimensions of metacognition, namely metacognitive knowledge and strategy use, and the impact of metacognitive instruction on comprehension. Understandably, the authors also offer significant suggestions for improving L2 pedagogy and enhancing students’ L2 listening and reading comprehension. The last paper by L. J. Zhang and D. Zhang, also focusing on metacognition, examines metacognition within a larger framework for better understanding and promoting effective foreign and second language teaching and learning. As the tittle indicates, “Thinking Metacognitively about Metacognition in Second and Foreign Language Learning, Teaching, and Research: Toward a Dynamic Metacognitive Systems Perspective” has attempted to present dual or even plural perspectives on metacognition. The authors have argued that LLS research has an important component, metacognition, which is usually regarded as essential to understanding how second or foreign language learners make decisions in, and proceed with, language learning. Such decision-making processes for completing learning tasks in various skill areas are significant to learners’ ultimate attainment in language proficiency and competence. In spite of scholars’ effort to have brought in metacognition in second and foreign language learning, teaching and research, whether implicitly or explicitly (e.g., Chamot & O’Malley, 1994; Wenden & Rubin, 1987; Zhang, 2002; Zhang & Zhang, 2008) criticisms are still levelled against language learner strategy (LLS) research (Tseng, D?rnyei, & Schmitt, 2006; for responses to such criticisms, see Gao, 2007; Rose, 2012; Zhang, 2010). Zhang and Zhang argue that such criticisms are not based on a fair understanding of what metacognition entails, especially when a construct such as metacognition is related to both the cognitive and sociocultural domains of learning. They conclude that thinking metacognitively about metacognition with dual or multiple perspectives is necessary for a more buoyant disciplinary development.

I would like to record my thanks to a number of people. Much encouragement for developing an issue on Perspectives on Second and Foreign Language Learning, Teaching, and Research has come from my conversations over the past few years with (in alphabetical order) Dwight Atkinson (Purdue University), Neil J. Anderson (Brigham Young University), George Braine (Chinese University of Hong Kong), Andrew Cohen (University of Minnesota), Suresh Canagrajah (Pennsylvania State University), Ana Uhl Chamot (George Washington University), Rod Ellis (University of Auckland), Maggie Hawkins (University of Wisconsin-Madison), Jun Liu (Georgia State University), Ernesto Macaro (University of Oxford), Martha Nykios (Indiana University), Rebecca Oxford (formerly University of Maryland), John Read (University of Auckland), Catherine Walter (University of Oxford), Li Wei (University of London), and many others. I am indebted to them for their intellectual stimulation on various occasions, particularly at the annual international convention of the Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) Association, the annual international meeting of the American Applied Linguistics Association (AAAL), and the World Congress of Applied Linguistics (popularly known as AILA in French—the Association Internationale de Linguistique Appliquée). I am particularly grateful to Malcolm Shiyu Wu at the Editorial Office of the journalContemporaryForeignLanguagesStudiesfor his trust and confidence in commissioning me to guest-edit this issue, which otherwise would have been impossible. It was a serendipity indeed that we met at the AAAL Meeting 2013 in Dallas, TX, USA, for the first time, and immediately we embarked on the idea of making my dream a reality because of our reciprocal concern for the large readership base ofCFLSin China. When his invitation was formalized through his email while he was a visiting scholar at The University of Maryland, College Park, I immediately accepted it and started working on it. It was such a wonderful experience working with him. I am obliged to his patience in waiting for my final submission of articles that were overdue.

I also thank Judy Parr, Sue Gray, Margaret Kitchen, Rebecca Jesson, Donglan Zhang, Maree Jeurissen, Xiaolan Curdt-Christiansen, Rita Elaine Silver, Kenneth Ong, Chengsong Yang, Sophie Teng, Chungong Bao, Paul Sun, and Baker Sun for offering their timely feedback after they received my invitations for reviewing the submitted manuscripts or when my ideas were shared with them for further professional and intellectual inputs. I hope that theCFLSreadership will enjoy reading this fine collection of articles, as I have.

REFERENCES

Anderson, N. J. (2014). Developing engaged second language readers. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton, & M. A. Snow (Eds.),TeachingEnglishasasecondorforeignlanguage(4th ed., pp. 170-188). Boston: Cengage Learning.

Barnard, R. & McLellan, J. (Eds.) (2014).CodeswitchinginuniversityEnglish-mediumclasses:Asianperspectives. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Braine, G. (2010).NonnativespeakerEnglishteachers:Research,pedagogy,andprofessionalgrowth. New York: Routledge.

Chamot, A. U. & O’Malley, J. M. (1994). Language learner and learning strategies. In N. Ellis (Ed.),Implicitandexplicitlearningoflanguages(pp. 371-392). New York: Academic.

Cohen, A. D. & Macaro, E. (2007).Languagelearnerstrategies:Thirtyyearsofresearchandpractice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Farrell, T. S. C. (2007).Reflectivelanguageteaching:Fromresearchtopractice. London: Continuum.

Gao, X. (2007). Has language learning strategy research come to an end? A response to Tseng, Dornyei and Schmitt.AppliedLinguistics, 28, 615-620.

Grabe, W. & Stoller, F. L. (2011).Teachingandresearchingreading(2nd ed.). New York: Pearson Longman.

Macaro, E. (2009). Teacher use of code switching in the L2 classroom: Exploring ‘optimal’ use. In M. Turnbull & J. Dailey-O’Cain (Eds.),Firstlanguageuseinsecondandforeignlanguagelearning(pp. 35-49). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Rose, H. (2012). Reconceptualizing strategic learning in the face of self-regulation: Throwing language learning strategies out with the bathwater.AppliedLinguistics, 33, 92-98.

Tseng, W. T., D?rnyei, Z., & Schmitt, N. (2012). A new approach to assessing strategic learning: The case of self-regulation in vocabulary acquisition.AppliedLinguistics, 27, 78-102.

Wenden, A. L. & Rubin, J. (Eds.). (1987).Learnerstrategiesinlanguagelearning. New York: Prentice Hall.

Zhang, L. J. (2002). Metamorphological awareness and EFL students’ memory, retention, and retrieval of English adjectival lexicons.PerceptualandMotorSkills, 95, 934-944.

Zhang, L. J. (2008). Constructivist pedagogy in strategic reading instruction: Exploring pathways to learner development in the English as a second language (ESL) classroom.InstructionalScience, 36, 89-116.

Zhang, L. J. (2010). A dynamic metacognitive systems account of Chinese university students’ knowledge about EFL reading.TESOLQuarterly, 44, 320-353.

Zhang, L. J. & Zhang, D.(張軍、張東蘭)(2008).元認(rèn)知、元語言意識(shí)、自我調(diào)控與外語教學(xué)(Metacognition, metalinguistic knowledge, self-regulation and foreign Language teaching and learning).《中國外語教育季刊》(ForeignLanguageEducationinChinaQuarterly),創(chuàng)刊號(hào),第一期,56-65頁.(1, 56-65.)