First, we trace the history of second language acquisition (SLA) from early stages in the mid-twentieth century to today. We next consider the status of the field in today's research world with a particular focus on all aspects of methodology and, finally, we take a look at the future and discuss issues related to scientific rigor in light of Open Science.

This commentary includes consideration of theory, opinion, empirical work, evaluative work and practice in a subset of papers that appeared in ARAL (2016) on task-based language teaching. Addressing the wider logic, theoretical underpinnings and instructional implications of TBLT is a serious applied linguistics challenge and one that the TBLT area is increasingly in a position to engage with in the search for evidence-based solutions to problems in designing, implementing and assessing the effects of TBLT. The contributors take a sometimes approving, occasionally critical and always forward looking perspective on the contributions of ARAL 2016 and the directions and challenges facing the field.

A professional journey is always part personal and mine is no exception. How does an individual from the Midwest of the United States get involved with language? It is something I have pondered for a long time along with the additional question of how that involvement translated into a profession. I hardly see it as a profession; rather, it was a life-long love of language that took me down a professional path.

The Center for Language Teaching Advancement (CeLTA) at Michigan State University (MSU) was awarded a U.S. federally funded two-year grant in 2014 to investigate the status of proficiency, and the promotion of proficiency, in foreign language programs. The grant was awarded to Paula Winke and Susan Gass, as principal investigators. The purpose of this initiative was to assess language proficiency development and to show the impact that introducing assessment practices into established language programs has on pedagogical practices and, ultimately, on proficiency outcomes. In total, three grants were awarded, one to MSU, one to the University of Utah, and one to the University of Minnesota. The overall goals were the same, although each institution approached the task in slightly different ways and with slightly different emphases.

Grammaticality judgment tests (GJTs) have been used to elicit data reflecting second language (L2) speakers’ knowledge of L2 grammar. However, the exact constructs measured by GJTs, whether primarily implicit or explicit knowledge, are disputed and have been argued to differ depending on test-related variables (i.e., time pressure and item grammaticality).

Using eye-tracking, this study replicates the GJT results in R. Ellis (2005). Twenty native and 40 nonnative English speakers judged sentences with and without time pressure. Analyses revealed that time pressure suppressed regressions (right-to-left eye movements) in nonnative speakers only. Conversely, both groups regressed more on untimed, grammatical items. These findings suggest that timed and untimed GJTs measure different constructs, which could correspond to implicit and explicit knowledge, respectively. In particular, they point to a difference in the levels of automatic and controlled processing involved in responding to the timed and untimed tests. Furthermore, untimed grammatical items may induce GJT-specific task effects.

This paper argues for the replication of two studies, both of which consider feedback and working memory. In the first part of this paper, we discuss the role of interaction-based research and working memory research in second language acquisition research. We then describe two studies that have unified these two areas in recent published articles and discuss ways that replication can further our knowledge in how working memory capacity can impact the benefits of feedback. We emphasize the importance of replication in a number of different areas, including grammatical complexity of the target structure and the nature of working memory tests, in scoring, actual tests, and modes of delivery. Additionally, we discuss the possibilities for replication in the area of population differences, in particular, age groups and more lasting effects as would be found in delayed post-tests. Finally, we point out another means of gathering information about thought processes and suggest the value of adding stimulated recalls to the existing data.

Eye-trackers are becoming increasingly widespread as a tool to investigate second language (L2) acquisition. Unfortunately, clear standards for methodology—including font size, font type, and placement of interest areas—are not yet available. Although many researchers stress the need for ecological validity—that is, the simulation of natural reading conditions—it may not be prudent to use such a design to investigate new directions in eye-tracking research, and particularly in research involving small lexical items such as articles. In this study, we examine whether two different screen layouts can lead to different results in an eye-tracking study on the L2 acquisition of Italian gender. The results of an experiment with an ecologically valid design are strikingly different than the results of an experiment with a design tailored to track eye movements to articles. We conclude that differences in screen layout can have significant effects on results and that it is crucial that researchers report screen layout information.