Affirming the context of instructed SLA: The potential of curricular thinking

Abstract

Offered as a conceptual and programmatic piece, this article suggests that, due to its explicit educational orientation, the domain of instructed second language acquisition (ISLA) is challenged to align theoretical choices, research preferences, and educational practices in the interest of improving instructed L2 learning. It addresses the current disjuncture by proposing the constructs of ‘development’ along with ‘curricular thinking’, particularly when they are informed by complexity theory, in order to accomplish three interrelated goals: first, to specify a given educational context in a manner that allows for principled inquiry into how instructed L2 learning evolves in that setting; second, to affirm and operationalize its longitudinal trajectory in a traceable and actionable manner; and, third, to embed the situated and contingent forms of ‘doing teaching’ and ‘doing learning’ within a framework that gives them meaning, value, and significance for long-term development. The article discusses core issues arising from such an approach and briefly exemplifies it with curriculum development in a collegiate foreign language (FL) department. It concludes with a consideration of benefits for ISLA.

Tracking the dynamic nature of learner individual differences: Initial results from a longitudinal study

“…In other words, if certain profiles of L2 learners (for example, highly analytical, motivated learners) consistently outperform other groups of learners, or if only a certain subset of learners (e.g., integratively motivated leaners with high levels of extraversion) go on to advanced language classes as majors or minors while learners with other IDs do not, identifying these IDs may provide language programs with concrete ways to deliver more well-rounded instruction and with crucial information for creating better recruitment and retention strategies. This focus is also consistent with recent proposals to consider L2 development at the curriculum level, rather than at the level of task, treatment, or lesson plan (Byrnes, 2018).…”

The relation of second language acquisition, instructed second language acquisition, and language teaching from the lens of second language tense-aspect

“…We could not help but notice that ISLA research has not served as a catalyst for language teaching in the domain of tense and aspect. In Byrnes's words (2019, p. 517), ISLA-oriented research has lost its ‘instructional soul’ and needs to recover the ‘instructed context.’ We may be able to offer a slightly different perspective to this. The instructional effect studies might instead be building their relation to instruction incrementally (rather than losing ground), as shown by the inclusion of instructional materials at rates equal to those of the pedagogical proposals (i.e., 63%).…”

“…1. Link the results of ISLA studies to curricular matters and focus on the learners' language development rather than on their final acquisition of the L2 (Bardovi-Harlig, 2000;Byrnes, 2019). 2.…”

“…ISLA includes—but is not limited to—studies of the effect of instruction on acquisition. Although there are a range of definitions of ISLA in the literature (Byrnes, 2019; Leow, 2019a, 2019b; Loewen, 2015, 2020; Loewen & Sato, 2017a, 2017b, 2019; Long, 2017; Sok et al, 2019), all the definitions would include instructional effect studies as ISLA. Instructional effect studies have the goal of implementing specific instruction and measuring the learning outcomes.…”

“…The relationship between SLA research and language teaching has been extensively problematized (e.g., Byrnes, 2019;Gass, 2019). There is also growing interest in the multilateral connections between practice, research, and evidence-based pedagogy (DeKeyser & Prieto Botana, 2019;Ellis, 2015;Gass, 2019;Loewen & Sato, 2017a, 2017bSato & Loewen, 2019;Tomlinson & Masuhara, 2021).…”