This paper provides an agenda for replication studies focusing on second language (L2) writing and the use of natural language processing (NLP) tools and machine learning algorithms. Specifically, it introduces a range of the available NLP tools and machine learning algorithms and demonstrates how these could be used to replicate seminal studies in L2 writing that concentrate on longitudinal writing development, predicting essay quality, examining differences between L1 and L2 writers, the effects of writing topics, and the effects of writing tasks. The paper concludes with implications for the recommended replication studies in the field of L2 writing and the advantages of using NLP tools and machine learning algorithms.

The field of second language (L2) writing has moved beyond the false dichotomies between process- and genre-based pedagogies perpetuated in the 1980s and 1990s, but there has still been little research on how the two are actually reconciled in the classroom. Consequently, L2 writing instructors are left with an incomplete picture, unsure how to incorporate such research into their own classrooms. This paper describes how one teacher, Juval, encountered the research on process- and genre-based pedagogies and negotiated his understanding of this research into his practice. Alongside Juval's voice is the voice of a teacher educator, Paul, setting these frameworks in the context of larger developments in the field of L2 writing. Their discussion takes Juval from his initial view of writing as a grammar-elicitation task to his resort to research for answers to the complex needs of his students. With further support from colleagues, Juval reaches a place where the two pedagogies are not only reconciled but work together to prepare his students for their writing tasks. His narrative chimes with the experience of many L2 writing teachers and should inspire novice and experienced teachers to reflect on their relationship with theory and research.

This paper reviews a selected sample of 24 doctoral dissertations in language assessment (broadly defined), completed between 2006 and 2011 in Canadian universities. These dissertations fall into five thematic categories: 1) reliability, validity and factors affecting test performance; 2) washback (impact) and ethics; 3) raters, rating and rating scales; 4) classroom-based research: teaching, learning and assessment; and 5) vocabulary learning, lexical proficiency and lexical richness. The themes were categorized according to the International Language Testing Association (ILTA) bibliographical categorization index. We identify trends such as the methodological strength of complex mixed methods research design, which enhances the validity of the research findings: 16 (67%) took a pragmatic (rather than paradigmatic) approach in their use of mixed methods, with four (17%) opting for multi-method quantitative approaches and four (17%) for qualitative. We also discuss the depth and breadth of these dissertations and situate their scholarly contributions within Canadian and international research on language assessment.

Since its inception seven years ago, Michigan State University's vibrant Second Language Studies (SLS) Program has grown quickly under the direction of Dr. Susan Gass. Thus far, twelve students have graduated from the program and now hold academic positions in various universities in the United States and elsewhere. In 2011, the department welcomed two new faculty members, Dr. Aline Godfroid and Dr. Bill VanPatten, making a total of eleven core faculty members, and in Spring 2012, Dr. Rod Ellis joined the department as affiliated faculty. The program currently includes 30 doctoral students working on a wide range of research topics.

While Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) has received a considerable amount of research interest lately, its increasing popularity as an approach to teaching content subjects in a foreign language requires concerted investigation that reflects and recognises its fundamentally contextualised nature. In this contribution, we sketch various tasks that require localised, often action research, covering a range of areas highly relevant to CLIL realities, but so far underrepresented in the literature. These are, firstly, policy issues, comprising policy statements as well as stakeholders’ perceptions of CLIL and its success; secondly, classroom discourse as the prime site for the investigation of CLIL practices and their implications for the learning process; and, thirdly, classroom pedagogy, with the focus on potential differences between CLIL and non-CLIL settings.

South African National Language Education policy (South Africa, DoE 2002) enshrines multilingualism (ML) as one of its major goals. The implementation of such a policy is a slow process, however, particularly in the educational domain, where parents, teachers and students favour the dominant, ex-colonial language (English) for both historic and instrumental reasons (Dalvit & de Klerk 2005). However, results of the National Benchmarking Test (NBMT Report 2009) conducted at selected South African universities show that most non-English speaking students in higher education have underdeveloped language and numeracy skills for study at this level, one of the main barriers to access being that of language (Council on Higher Education 2007: 2). Efforts have thus intensified in South African institutions to introduce the home languages of learners into the educational domain, either as learning support alongside the main medium of instruction or as alternative languages of instruction, working towards the development of a bilingual education model. This report documents developments in research in the promotion and use of the African languages in education in South Africa in recent years, particularly since the publication of the previous report (Wildsmith-Cromarty 2009), which discussed various initiatives in the teaching, development and use of the African languages in South African education during the period 2005–2008. This report considers further developments in the use of the African languages for academic purposes in the following areas: the learning and teaching of these languages as additional languages and for professional purposes in selected disciplines for specialist programmes, and their intellectualization, which includes their use as languages of instruction, in the translation of materials and other learning resources, and development of terminology.

After more than 40 years as the Modern Language Centre, members of the Centre decided to rename ourselves as the Centre for Educational Research on Languages and Literacies (CERLL), to better reflect our current activities and interests. We officially launched the new name for the Centre at a reception on 22 October 2010, and produced a compilation of recent publications by members of the Centre to mark the event. Our interests in research and graduate studies remain fundamentally as they have been for decades, focused on theories and practices in teaching, learning, curriculum, assessment, and policies related to English and French as second or international languages as well as other international, minority, heritage, or indigenous languages. The name change does signal a broadening of perspectives to include research on various forms and types of literacies, though we do not claim to be ‘post-modern’ in doing so.

As this issue was in preparation, the journal learned with great regret of the passing of John Trim. John was a long-serving member of the Language Teaching Board and his insight and advice proved invaluable for this and previous editors. An expert in the field of phonetics, linguistics, language didactics and policy, John worked tirelessly to improve the state of language teaching throughout his life. Among his key posts, he was director of the Council of Europe's Modern Languages Projects from 1971 to 1997 and supervised significant developments in language learning and teaching, including the Threshold Level and the Common European Framework of Reference.

As a tribute to the man and his work, we are publishing in this and a subsequent issue one of the last interviews John gave, where he looks back with his customary perspicacity at one of the most exciting periods of change in the teaching and learning of foreign languages.

The aim of this seminar was to promote dialogue between two research areas addressing educational multilingualism: Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) and community languages. In bringing together these two strands of research, the seminar explored and fostered potential methodological and theoretical synergies. As organisers we invited abstracts which addressed innovative research in areas related to the conference theme, especially contributions which explored ways of linking school and community-based language learning. We aimed to create an atmosphere of stimulating discussion and debate in a convivial, intellectual environment. The programme included a variety of formats that would encourage discussion.

With the advent of globalization and the increasingly multilingual and multicultural nature of nations, institutions and classrooms, the fundamental nature of foreign language instruction is changing. Such traditional notions as: ‘native speaker’, ‘target culture’, ‘standard L2’ are becoming problematic with the influx of immigrants to industrialized nation-states, the diversification of accents, and the stratification of language varieties. Foreign language classrooms, too, are becoming less and less homogenous: lacking common points of reference in a common L1, students have to learn the L2 without any common prior cultural or historical context. Caught between the need to impart a skill that will be ‘usable’ in a variety of global settings and the desire to develop an L2 academic literacy that is specific to a given national culture, foreign language study is challenged to reconcile the local and the global, its national premise and its transnational entailments. This colloquium explored the changing nature of the challenges facing the teaching and learning of foreign languages in an age of global information technologies, global job market, and global migrations. In particular it focused on the notion of the ‘foreign’ in foreign language education and how globalization has affected this foreignness.

Language learning is inextricably linked to a social context, and this implies that context-related social variables, such as ethnicity or attitudes, can influence how language learning unfolds. Among the many group-engendered social factors, ethnic identity appears to have interesting consequences for language teaching and learning (Pavlenko & Blackledge 2004). Indeed, issues of personal and group identity often become important when individuals or groups come in contact with one another to learn a language. Briefly, ethnic identity refers to a person's subjective experience of being a part of an ethnic group (Ashmore, Deaux & McLaughlin-Volpe 2004). For second language (L2) learners, the two relevant groups are usually their primary (home) ethnic group and the L2 community. We report here on the research that we have been conducting at Concordia University in Montreal, as part of the Centre for the Study of Learning and Performance, with the goal of investigating the role of ethnic group identity in L2 learning.

Two panel discussions presented at the Second Language Acquisition Graduate Student Symposium on 29 and 30 April 2011 at the University of Iowa.