Rod Ellis is a Distinguished Research Professor at Curtin University (Perth, Australia) and also, an Emeritus Distinguished Professor at the University of Auckland (New Zealand). He has also worked in universities in UK, Japan, and the USA and is a fellow of the Royal Society of New Zealand. He has published widely in the related fields of second language acquisition research and task-based language teaching. He has won the British Association of Applied Linguists prize (1985), the Mildenberger prize (1987), The Duke of Edinburgh prize (1994), and the International Association of Task-based Teaching prize (2021). His current H-index on Google Scholar is 109.

Interest in second language (L2) speech comprehensibility, or listeners’ perceived ease or difficulty of understanding a given utterance, has seen continual growth since Munro and Derwing's (1995) seminal publication in Language Learning. While recognizing the body of knowledge that has developed in the 25 plus years since Munro and Derwing's study, in the present paper we look to the future as we consider what an active and informative research agenda might look like for the next 10–15 years. In this regard, we propose four primary areas of future research, including a need to: (1) extend inquiry beyond a primary focus on L2 English speech, (2) explore comprehensibility more thoroughly as a social construct, (3) investigate the effects of more targeted task manipulations, and (4) delve deeper into the effects of comprehensibility-oriented instruction. We additionally discuss the need for more replication in L2 comprehensibility research while also promoting several scholarly disciplines we feel can greatly inform future research, such as task-based literature.

Martin East is Professor of Language Education in the School of Cultures, Languages and Linguistics, the University of Auckland, New Zealand. Prior to this, he spent ten years as a language teacher educator in the University's Faculty of Education and Social Work. He has also taught languages at a broad range of proficiency levels and in a variety of contexts, including leading a school languages department in the UK. His numerous publications in the field of language education include two books dedicated to the phenomenon of TBLT: Task-based language teaching from the teachers’ perspective (John Benjamins, 2012) and Foundational principles of task-based language teaching (Routledge, 2021).

This reflective piece tells the story of how I started out doing Conversation Analysis (CA) and have been transitioning into doing mixed methods for some years now. My basic argument is that language learning talk is too complex a phenomenon to analyse using a single methodology. Specifically, it is extremely difficult to isolate from the interaction concrete evidence of the learning of specific individual items in terms of change of cognitive state. This is owing to the singular complexity of language learning, which adds an extra level of complexity to language learning talk, hence supercomplexity. Of course, the counter-argument to this would be that CA as a methodology is designed to reveal the complexity and fluidity of spoken interaction. The complex organisation of ordinary conversation (Sacks et al., 1974) and of varieties of institutional interaction (Drew & Heritage, 1992) have been very well established for a very long time. CA has been extremely successful and popular as a methodology for the analysis of spoken interaction in a huge range of settings. There have been many CA studies of language learning talk over the last few decades, including my own. So why do I now feel that it cannot portray the full complexity of language learning talk on its own? There is an idiosyncratic problem with language learning talk, namely that it has an additional level of complexity superimposed on top of the regular problems of analysing spoken interaction. This is because language is the object as well as the vehicle of language learning talk.

Knowledge about curriculum development in collegiate foreign language (FL) departments tends to be limited, especially when it is defined as the long-term development of the FL over the course of an entire instructional program as contrasted with individual courses. That assessment, along with the belief that curriculum development is a highly situated enterprise, has shaped my essential bookshelf. It privileges influences in my personal-professional time and place within prevailing disciplinary and language education policy interests in the United States (U.S.).

Both of us were drawn into the writing assessment field initially through our lived experiences as schoolteachers. We worked in radically different contexts – Martin was head of a languages department and teacher of French and German in the late 1990s in the UK, and David was a Grade 12 teacher of Academic English in Alberta, Canada, at the turn of the twenty-first century. In both these contexts, the traditional direct test of writing – referred to, for example, as the ‘timed impromptu writing test’ (Weigle, 2002, p. 59) or the ‘snapshot approach’ (Hamp-Lyons & Kroll, 1997, p. 18) – featured significantly in our practices, albeit in very different ways. This form of writing assessment still holds considerable sway across the globe. For us, however, it provoked early questions and concerns around the consequential and ethical aspects of writing assessment.

An important shift in language learning research is the understanding that pronunciation instruction is necessary to ensure learners’ balanced development in pronunciation and second language (L2) speech. Research focusing on understanding what types of pronunciation instruction are effective and what makes them most effective has grown dramatically over the past decade. Given the methodological heterogeneity apparent in this body of literature, however, many questions remain to understand the specific effects of pronunciation training paradigms on learners’ L2 development. In this article, we make the case that replication is a productive means of validating findings and assessing the strength of existing evidence in L2 pronunciation research. As prime targets for replication, we review three studies that offer different perspectives on how L2 pronunciation instruction can be optimized. We have chosen each of these studies because they significantly advance the field conceptually, have broken new ground empirically, and point to areas in which replication studies can have a large impact. We describe a series of close and/or approximate replications of each initial study that would add detail to existing knowledge and provide a more comprehensive understanding of how and why L2 pronunciation instruction is effective, for whom, and under what conditions.

There has been a great deal of interest in second language vocabulary studies regarding the potential of reading as a source of incidental vocabulary learning. More recently, several studies have also focused on comparing reading with other input modes, such as listening, or reading-while-listening. Among these studies there are two – Brown et al. (2008) and Vidal (2011) – that have been extensively cited because of the evidence they provided regarding the differential effects of reading versus listening in promoting incidental vocabulary gains. The present study presents different arguments for replication of these two original studies as well as specific ideas on how such replications could be conducted.

This study is a conceptual replication of Teimouri et al.'s (2022) investigation into the validity of the second language (L2) grit scale (the L2-Grit scale). There are several concerns about the generalizability of the findings of Teimouri et al. (2022), especially regarding the discriminant validity of the scale and the relation of L2 grit with language achievements. A conceptual replication study was conducted because these concerns could be addressed by using a different methodology. The main findings include: (a) the factor structure of L2 grit was supported in the replication sample (106 English majors at a Japanese university), (b) the results support the discriminant validity of L2 grit, but in a different way from the initial study, and (c) L2 grit was a consistent predictor of L2-specific Grade Point Average and standardized test score. The results obtained lend further support for the validity of the L2-Grit scale.

James Dean Brown (“JD”) is Professor Emeritus of Second Language Studies at the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa. He has spoken and taught in places ranging from Albuquerque to Zagreb and published hundreds of articles and 27 books on language testing, curriculum design, research methods, and connected speech. His books on reduced forms and connected speech are: Perspectives on teaching connected speech to second language learners, edited with K. Kondo-Brown (University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa NFLRC, 2006); New ways of teaching connected speech, Editor (TESOL, 2012a); and Shaping students’ pronunciation: Teaching the connected speech of North American English, co-authored with D. Crowther (Routledge, 2022).

This article puts forward several proposals for replicating two well-known First Exposure studies dealing with the earliest stages of adult second language acquisition. Both of them enquire into the word-level knowledge that complete beginners are able to extract from minimal input when exposed to a new language for the first time. They also focus on several input variables that may enhance learning from minimal input. However, the first, by Gullberg et al. (2012), uses audiovisual input in Dutch learners of Chinese to assess word recognition and word meaning after watching a short video; while the second, by Shoemaker and Rast (2013), uses oral input with French learners of Polish to measure word recognition before and after 6.5 hours of intensive classroom exposure. Close and approximate replications of these studies can help to re-evaluate and generalise the findings, as well as contributing additional relevant data to the field.

In recent years, interest in using captioned videos for second language learning has grown immensely, partly owing to the explosion of available materials and the rapid increase in viewing platforms. The captioning affords many learners access to authentic videos ordinarily out of their reach, and teachers often employ the videos to help improve their learners’ listening. However, there is the view that learners mainly just read the captions, and that the viewing largely enhances their reading skills, instead. There is an increasing amount of research investigating this issue, much of which needs to be further verified through replication. This article outlines how three key relevant studies may be replicated, with an emphasis on examining the impact of the captioned viewing on the learners’ listening. Two of the studies, by Taylor (2005) and Winke et al. (2013), examine viewers’ processing strategies, which can include the use of the audio, caption and visual modalities. The other study, by Rodgers and Webb (2017), examines how viewing over the long term impacts learners’ comprehension.

I read Carol Griffiths' article with great interest. This is due in part to being in what I feel is a privileged position as book reviewer for a UK journal, the EL Gazette,1 for whom I have read several titles by authors she references on teacher wellbeing, such as Mercer and Gregersen (2020). I wondered, however, why Brierton and Gkonou (2022) was not listed there as it also deals with issues raised by Griffiths such as how academic managers can help create an environment that reduces stress and mental health problems. It was also interesting to note that Griffiths, like myself, has spent most of her working life involved in English language teaching, almost all of which has taken place in Turkey. Her article also resonated with my own experience as a teacher-educator as it draws upon research carried out in a Turkish context (Griffiths & Sönmez, 2020).