Language Teaching invites submissions of previously unpublished articles based on literal, approximate or constructive replication of a previous study or studies of an aspect of L2 education. In keeping with the survey characteristics of this journal, we also encourage submissions of meta-analyses which attempt to combine or synthesise a series of comparable research replications.

My research review of 2007 is somewhat shorter than in earlier years in order to allow space for the journal's impressively increased number of other articles. This naturally adds to my problems of selection, especially as 2007 witnessed the welcome appearance of new international journals in the form of Innovation in Language Learning & Teaching and a considerably re-vamped Language Learning Journal. Accordingly, my selection of articles is not intended as a representative sample of the Applied Linguistics field but should be taken as a personal judgement based on attempting an appropriate range of the following: journals, languages, topics, countries, institutional settings, levels of proficiency, learner age, theory, practice, and personal interest. My selection is organised under a number of headings, but these offer only a general clue as to what a particular article is about, since most articles reviewed have reverberations across a number of headings rather than one alone. In addition, what I say about a particular article is not meant to be a summary. Those wishing to see a summary should go to the article itself and read its abstract. My account of a particular article may in fact reflect only one theme within the article which I have chosen to highlight.

The Editor and Board of Language Teaching are pleased to announce that the recipient of the 2008 Christopher Brumfit Thesis Award is Dr Andrea Borbély Hellman.

As Stephen Stoynoff points out in his state-of-the-art review of four major international ESOL examinations, more than 500,000 examinees take each of these tests annually, making them among the most widely used ESOL examinations in the world. The inferences and decisions made with the scores from these tests have significant consequences for examinees, score users, and society. Thus, his review will contribute to the professional discourse in several ways: by providing a context for discussing some of the fundamental considerations and persistent issues in language assessment, by demonstrating how language testing research and concerns for test consequences are affecting the test design and validation activities related to these four extremely influential assessments of L2 ability, and above all by encouraging a thorough consideration of important aspects of these high-stakes assessments. The paper is accompanied by a comparative review of books by Christine Coombe.

This paper reviews developments in qualitative research in language teaching since the year 2000, focusing on its contributions to the field and identifying issues that emerge. Its aims are to identify those areas in language teaching where qualitative research has the greatest potential and indicate what needs to be done to further improve the quality of its contribution. The paper begins by highlighting current trends and debates in the general area of qualitative research and offering a working definition of the term. At its core is an overview of developments in the new millennium based on the analysis of papers published in 15 journals related to the field of language teaching and a more detailed description, drawn from a range of sources, of exemplary contributions during that period. Issues of quality are also considered, using illustrative cases to point to aspects of published research that deserve closer attention in future work, and key publications on qualitative research practice are reviewed.

This review article surveys recent developments and validation activities related to four large-scale tests of L2 English ability: the iBT TOEFL, the IELTS, the FCE, and the TOEIC. In addition to describing recent changes to these tests, the paper reports on validation activities that were conducted on the measures. The results of this research constitute some of the evidence available to support claims that these tests are suitable for their intended purposes. The discussion is organized on the basis of a framework that considers test purpose, selected test method characteristics, and important aspects of test usefulness.

In this review of research in applied linguistics and language teaching and learning in Singapore, more than one hundred national publications for the period 2000–2007 will be reviewed. Since this period encompasses certain changes that were introduced in Singapore schools at the start of the new millennium, it would be appropriate to take stock of the studies that showcase these changes. These studies fall under five main areas of local research: norms, standards and models; English language curriculum and policy; reading and writing instruction and research; mother tongue teaching and learning; and the teaching of English to international students. In this review, representative work under each research area will be discussed, and this will be done within the broad historical and sociopolitical context of research in Singapore. The results of the review suggest that practical concerns assume priority over theoretical issues, which are relegated to secondary importance. This can be explained in terms of the role of the state in education reform and governance and its top–down decision-making processes, the impact of globalization on education, and the role of education in the management of race relations in the country.

Second language acquisition (SLA) as a discipline has not had a long history and, as any new discipline, has seen growing pains over the years. This research timeline traces the development of the increased and more sophisticated use of statistics in SLA research and the increasing demands for rigor in their use. Use of statistical procedures has been increasing in the SLA literature, but the tools themselves have not developed from within the field; rather the increased use stems from greater statistical sophistication on the part of users. In other words, SLA is not an innovator but an increasingly knowledgeable borrower and adapter of statistical procedures.

Interest in L2 vocabulary learning and teaching started long before the nineteen-eighties (for references to earlier studies, see Rob Waring's database http://www1.harenet.ne.jp/~waring/vocab/vocrefs/vocref.html) but it declined with the advent of generative linguistics to the point of discrimination and neglect (Meara 1980). In 1986, I argued that vocabulary was about to acquire a legitimate and prominent place within applied linguistics (Laufer 1986), but I did not envisage the vast quantities of lexical research that would have been produced in the following two decades. One of the central concerns of vocabulary researchers is the source of L2 vocabulary learning. Is it L2 input, enhanced input, interaction, communicative tasks, non-communicative ‘artificial’ exercises, list learning, or repetition? A similar question is addressed by SLA researchers in general. This similarity of interests, which demonstrates the integration of vocabulary into mainstream SLA, prompted me to define the topic of this timeline as I did. And since the field of SLA developed in the 1980s, this timeline starts in the nineteen-eighties. I focus here on the external sources of learning, i.e. language input and instructional techniques, and not on learner-related variables, like motivation, L1, age, or strategies of learning. Nor do I focus on any other areas of lexical research, important as they may be, such as the construct of vocabulary knowledge, lexical development, testing, bilingual mental lexicon, or corpora analyses.

Innovation in English language education (ELE) has become a major ‘growth area’ in recent years. At the same time, an ELE innovation management literature has also developed, based on insights from innovation theory and their application, both from outside and within ELE, and concerned with attempting to critically evaluate and inform ELE innovation practice. Thus, using a well-established three-part framework for distinguishing the main stages involved in innovation project management, this review describes and discusses the main features of this body of work. After defining terms and clarifying its scope, it considers what is said about the innovation ‘initiation’ phase, in terms of innovation causes, characteristics and contexts. It then examines conceptualisations of the innovation ‘implementation’ stage, by distinguishing main overall approaches, frameworks for identifying and configuring roles, underlying psychological processes, and the use of evaluation techniques. Lastly, the literature relating to innovation ‘institutionalisation’ stage is analysed. The article concludes by identifying overall trends and areas for further development. In particular, it is argued that ELE innovation work needs to become more informed by many of the concepts and procedures which the ELE innovation management literature contains.

Angesichts gegenwärtiger Entwicklungen innerhalb des Lehr- und Forschungsgebietes Deutsch als Fremdsprache (DaF)/German as a Foreign Language (GFL) als auch im Lichte politischer Entwicklungen, die weiterhin einen deutlichen Einfluss darauf ausüben, wie DaF verbreitet, gelehrt, gelernt und evaluiert wird, scheint eine kritische Bewertung von im Zeitraum 2002–2008 veröffentlichter DaF-Forschungsbeiträge zeitgemäβ und angebracht. Empirische Forschung zu Deutsch als Fremdsprache versteht sich nicht als isoliertes Forschungsfeld das primär oder gar ausschlieβlich mit seinen kulturell, strukturell und politisch bedingten Besonderheiten beschäftigt ist, sondern vielmehr als ein substantieller Beitrag zur internationalen Zweitsprachenerwerbsforschung, Fremdsprachenunterrichtsforschung und Angewandten Linguistik. Der erste Teil unseres Forschungsüberblicks behandelt den Erwerb grammatischer und pragmatischer Aspekte des Deutschen als Fremdsprache als auch individuelle Unterschiede und Präferenzen wie Alter, Motivation und Lernerstrategien. Im Mittelpunkt des zweiten Teils stehen Forschungsbeiträge die den Einfluss kontextueller Faktoren und methodisch-didaktischer Entscheidungen auf die Bedingungen, den Prozess und das Resultat fremdsprachlichen Lernens untersuchen. Überlegungen zu alternativen, widersprüchlichen oder gar unvereinbaren epistomologischen Grundannahmen sowie einen Ausblick auf die gegenwärtige wie zukünftige Sprachenpolitik beschlieβt den zweiten Teil unseres Forschungsüberblicks.

This review of research on the learning, teaching, and assessment of L2 German published or completed between 2002 and 2008 may be particularly timely due to developments from within the profession as well as recent political changes which continue to have a strong bearing on the way L2 German is promoted, learned, taught and assessed. Far from representing an isolated field of research concerned only with the requirements and policies of its own subject matter, empirical research into L2 German now contributes greatly to the wider field of research in L2 acquisition, applied linguistics, and foreign language teaching. Part one of this article covers studies on the acquisition of grammatical and pragmatic aspects as well as individual differences and choices such as age, motivation, and learner strategies. Part two will cover research concerned with the impact of contextual factors and pedagogical choices on learning conditions, learning processes, and learning outcomes. A consideration of competing, conflicting, or even incommensurable epistemological frameworks as well as an outlook on current and future language policy will conclude part two.

Second language acquisition (SLA) research informed by sociocultural theory (henceforth, SCT) began in earnest with the publication of Frawley & Lantolf's (1985) article on L2 (second language) discourse (described in the timeline proper). Since then, well over 300 journal articles, book chapters and doctoral dissertations have appeared in the research literature. Although the term ‘sociocultural’ is often applied to a wide array of approaches to research that seeks to understand what it means to be a human being, in the present timeline, we restrict its interpretation to refer to the specific theory of psychological development proposed by Vygotsky (1986). Other approaches that have appropriated the term, such as those emanating from the writings of Bakhtin (1981), while compatible in many respects with Vygotskian theory, have a different focus and are not strictly speaking psychological or psycholinguistic theories. To be sure, Vygotsky rarely used the term ‘sociocultural’, preferring instead ‘cultural psychology’ or ‘cultural-historical psychology’ to refer to his theory. Wertsch (1985) is generally credited with having coined the term ‘sociocultural’ as a way of capturing the notion that human mental functioning results from participation in, and appropriation of, the forms of cultural mediation integrated into social activities.

Although multilingualism and multilingual education have existed for centuries, our 21st-century entrance into the new millennium has brought renewed interest and contestation around this educational alternative. Ethnolinguistic diversity and inequality, intercultural communication and contact, and global political and economic interdependence are more than ever acknowledged realities of today's world, and all of them put pressures on our educational systems. Now, as throughout history, multilingual education offers the best possibilities for preparing coming generations to participate in constructing more just and democratic societies in our globalized and intercultural world; however, it is not unproblematically achieved. There are many unanswered questions and doubts as to policy and implementation, program and curricular design, classroom instruction practices, pedagogy, and teacher professional development, but there is also much that we understand and know very well, based on empirical research in many corners of the world. Here I highlight Bolivian and other Indigenous educational experiences with which I am most familiar, and which capture certainties that hold beyond the particular instances I describe. My emphasis is on what we know and are sure of, and my goal is to convey my deep conviction that multilingual education constitutes a wide and welcoming educational doorway toward peaceful coexistence of peoples and especially restoration and empowerment of those who have been historically oppressed.

Teachers of languages, as well as educators in general and employers, increasingly recognise the importance of developing intercultural capability. This recognition, however, brings the question of how this is evidenced as an outcome of learning. The assessment of this capability poses a range of theoretical and practical challenges. I begin with a description of languages learning within an intercultural orientation and a model for understanding assessment. I then discuss issues of conceptualising and defining the construct, as integral to the process of assessment. Next, I consider issues in eliciting intercultural capability in a proposed framework that includes assessment as both communicative performance (elicited in ‘critical moments’) and meta-awareness (elicited in commentaries). To conclude, I discuss issues related to identifying and judging evidence of the development of the intercultural capability and warranting the inferences made about students' developing understanding. The discussion is based on the experience of ongoing studies investigating the assessment of the intercultural capability in learning languages and in international education.

This presentation is situated within the general framework of Vygotsky's educational theory, which argues that development in formal educational activity is a fundamentally different process from development that occurs in the everyday world. A cornerstone of Vygotsky's theory is that to be successful education must be sensitive to learners' zone of proximal development. This requires the dialectical integration of instruction and assessment into a seamless and dynamic activity. The presentation includes a discussion of how the integration is systematically achieved in the process known as dynamic assessment and illustrates through analysis of data from advanced learners of French how this functions in second language education.

This article begins with an overview and problematization of the term community through a brief assessment of its history, diverse uses, core attributes, heterogeneous elements, and collocational companions. Following this, I describe demographics and processes associated with collective engagement in digitally mediated environments. Utilizing select alternatives to the term ‘community’ and incorporating the cultural-historical notions of mediation and activity, I then present research describing exogenous influences affecting educational uses of technology in L2 settings, the use of instant messaging and blogging for out-of-class FL interaction at the secondary school level, and a pedagogically focused example of a remixing text posted to an online fan fiction website. I conclude by proposing bridging activities as an approach for connecting the emergent logics of digital vernaculars with the analytics of formal schooling.

One of the most salient aspects of speech is accent – either dialectal differences attributable to region or class, or phonological variations resulting from L1 influence on the L2. Our primary concern is with the latter, because of the strong social, psychological, and communicative consequences of speaking with an L2 accent. The decline of audiolingualism led to a concomitant marginalization of pronunciation research and teaching. It was believed that pronunciation instruction could not be effective, in part because of the unrealistic goal of native-like speech in L2 learners, and also because of research findings that suggested that instruction had a negligible impact on oral production. The recent revival of interest in pronunciation research has brought a change of focus away from native-like models toward easy intelligibility. The effects of this change have yet to be fully realized in L2 classrooms. However, many L2 students themselves are keenly interested in pronunciation instruction, a fact not lost on individuals who have recognized a lucrative marketing niche in ‘accent reduction/elimination’ programs that may do more harm than good. Our presentation will relate the core issues of intelligibility, identity, social evaluation, and discrimination to appropriate pronunciation pedagogy for L2 learners.

This lecture discusses the concept of lifestyle, which emerged in the field of marketing in the 1970s, as a new, and increasingly pervasive, discourse of identity cutting through older ‘demographic’ discourses. Distributed by mediated experts and role models, and realized through the semiotics of ‘composites of connotation’, it redraws the opposition between the social and the individual, by expressing individuality in terms of socially mediated resources and reconfiguring social categories as individual lifestyle choices.

Using the British ‘Index to Theses’, we found forty-seven Ph.D.s relating to second and foreign language learning and/or teaching defended in English universities in 2006. Objective criteria led us to fourteen theses which had investigated both teaching and learning. Over half of these adopted a process–product research design with the aim of finding causal relationships between teaching and learning. Six theses focused on individual differences (motivation, strategies, attitudes), with three adopting an ‘effectiveness-of-intervention’ approach and three following more descriptive, exploratory designs. The designs of the ‘effectiveness-of-intervention’ studies varied greatly, ranging from naturalistic evaluations to highly controlled randomised control experiments. They covered a range of pedagogical concerns, including the use of computers, error correction, language portfolios, learner strategies and communicative-style activities. In addition to our own comments on the quality of the studies and reports, we present considerable methodological detail to enable the reader to evaluate the validity of the findings and claims made in each study. We argue that Ph.D. theses need to demonstrate fully that the implications drawn from the study are supported by the data collection and analyses described, which was not always the case in the theses reviewed. Finally, we make suggestions for future areas of investigation by postgraduate researchers.