MonISLA
Montreal Institute for Second Language Acquisition
Plenaries
Luke Plonsky
Northern Arizona University
Meta-science in L2 research: From ethics to impact and beyond
As the name implies, metascience is the study of science itself. It is an inherently transdisciplinary field of inquiry that investigates research methods, publication policies and practices, peer review, funding, incentive structures, ethics, and mentoring as they pertain to one or more substantive domains (Ioannidis et al., 2015). And whether you’re aware of it or not, metascience is thriving in L2 research. Though sometimes disparate, metascience has provided us with many insights into the nature of what we do as authors, reviewers, researcher trainers, grant-writers, mentors, and so forth. Indeed, such findings can shed light on an otherwise inaccessible understanding of how the field generates new knowledge; metascience can also help uncover injustices and inefficiencies, leading to improvements in our operational, institutional, scholarly, and public-facing practices. In this talk, I will formally introduce the notion and practice of metascience. Recognizing that a concern for quality at the individual study and field-wide level lies at the heart of metascience, I will also frame and discuss metascientific studies in light of their relevance to quality in applied linguistics (Plonsky, 2024). Along the way, I will highlight key findings from metascience in L2 research on topics ranging from open science and transparency to ethics and our (lack of) real-world impact (e.g., Al-Hoorie & Hiver, 2024). I will also chart a path forward that seeks to stretch the boundaries of metascience in L2 research.
References
Al-Hoorie, A. H., & Hiver, P. (2024). Open science in applied linguistics: An introduction to metascience. In L. Plonsky (Ed.), Open science in applied linguistics (pp. 17-43). Applied Linguistics Press.
Ioannidis, J. P., Fanelli, D., Dunne, D. D., & Goodman, S. N. (2015). Meta-research: Evaluation and improvement of research methods and practices. PLoS biology, 13(10), e1002264.
Plonsky, L. (2024). Study quality as an intellectual and ethical imperative: A proposed framework. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 44, 4-18.
Sunny Man Chu Lau,
Bishop's University
Disrupting Institutional, Language, and Curricular Boundaries: Reimagining Practice through Participatory Action Research
Increasingly, language is viewed through a trans/plurilingual lens that unsettles monolithic boundaries between languages, varieties, and the wider semiotic communicative resources (Lau & Van Viegen, 2020; Li Wei & García, 2022). Complex Dynamic Systems Theory has also been taken up by trans/plurilingual scholars to illuminate the dynamism, complexity, and non-linearity of language learning (Larsen-Freeman & Todeva, 2022; Piccardo, 2019). These changing views compels us to re-examine the onto-epistemologies of language and to account for the intricate processes involved in language teaching and learning (Larsen-Freeman & Hiver, 2025). It also reminds researchers that variability is not a problem to be controlled or minimized (van Geert & van Dijk, 2021) but rather to be embraced to avoid oversimplification and fragmentation of knowledge (Hiver et al., 2022).
In classroom research in particular, we are engaging with whole human beings with minds and bodies inseparable from the socio- cultural, economic, political and ecological environments in which we live. Participatory action research (PAR) methodology fosters situated learning, responding to the need for contextual embeddedness and sustainability. It repositions teachers as co-researchers, engaging in a rigorous dialogic construction of “living” theories and knowledge from the ground up and intensive reflective practice fundamental to teacher development (Lau & Stille, 2014). PAR is more than a research methodology; it is a philosophy of life that places all research actors as “thinkingfeeling persons” (Fals Border, 2006) who relate to one another with care and reciprocity, actively co‑constructing knowledge and taking collective responsibility for meaningful change.
In this presentation, I elaborate on two university-school PAR partnerships (one over a decade long) in Québec, exploring trans/plurilingual pedagogies to support diverse learners’ studies in/of French and English. I focus particularly on the knowledge and practices (including our missteps) that we co-learned through cycles of reflexive planning, teaching, and evaluation. Our joint inquiry has allowed us to develop and refine contextualized trans/plurilingual teaching strategies that can promote reciprocal language learning, development of meta-/cross-linguistic awareness, as well as learners’ sense of critical intercultural responsibility (Guilherme, 2021). These long-standing collaborations challenge institutional, disciplinary, and linguistic hierarchies, and importantly prompt us to critically reconsider what counts as research validity and quality.
References:
Fals Border, O. (2006). Participatory (action) research in social theory: Origins and challenges. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), The handbook of action research (pp. 27-37). SAGE.
Guilherme, M. (2021). Intercultural responsibility: Critical inter-epistemic dialog and equity for sustainable development. In W. L. Filho, A. M. Azul, L. Brandli, A. L. Salvia, & T. Wall (Eds.), Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (pp. 599-610). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95963-4_75
Hiver, P., Al-Hoorie, A. H., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2022). Toward a transdisciplinary integration of research purposes and methods for complex dynamic systems theory: beyond the quantitative–qualitative divide. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 60(1), 7-22. https://doi.org/doi:10.1515/iral-2021-0022
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Hiver, P. (2025). Complex Dynamic Systems Theory. In B. VanPatten, Keating, G.D., & Wulff, S. (Ed.), Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction (4th ed., pp. 217-245). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003491118
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Todeva, E. (2022). A sociocognitive theory for plurilingualism: Complex dynamic systems theory. In E. Piccardo, A. Germain-Rutherford, & G. Lawrence (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of plurilingual language education (pp. 209-224). London: Routledge.
Lau, S. M. C., & Stille, S. (2014). Participatory research with teachers: Toward a pragmatic and dynamic view of equity and parity in research relationships. European Journal of Teacher Education, 37(2), 156-170. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2014.882313
Lau, S. M. C., & Van Viegen, s. (Eds.). (2020). Plurilingual Pedagogies : Critical and Creative Endeavors for Equitable Language in Education [Book]. Springer. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=2435308&site=ehost-live.
Li Wei, & García, O. (2022). Not a first language but one repertoire: Translanguaging as a decolonizing project. RELC Journal, 53(2), 313-324. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882221092841
Piccardo, E. (2019). Rethinking plurality on our liquid societies. In F. Bangou, D.Fleming, & M. Waterhouse (Eds.), Deterritorializing language, teaching, and learning: Deleuzo-Guattarian perspectives on second language education (pp. 58– 86). University of Ottawa Press.
van Geert, P., & van Dijk, M. (2021). Thirty years of focus on individual variability and the dynamics of processes. Theory & Psychology, 31(3), 405-410. https://doi.org/10.1177/09593543211011663
Yuichi Suzuki
​Université Waseda
“Timing” Matters When “Time” Is Fixed: Optimizing L2 Learning in and Beyond the Foreign Language Classroom
Foreign language (FL) learners worldwide face a fundamental constraint: limited class hours. Typical FL courses offer only a few hours of classroom instruction per week, and increasing this time requires large-scale institutional overhaul that most educational contexts cannot afford. If adding more class hours is not a realistic option, what can teachers, curriculum designers, policymakers, and researchers do?
In this plenary, I argue that while “time” is important, the role of “timing” deserves more extensive investigation. Specifically, SLA research has a critical role to play in informing how practice activities/tasks are scheduled, sequenced, and focused—precisely the variables that can maximize learning within fixed instructional time (Suzuki, 2023). This line of research, drawing on cognitive psychology and ISLA research, calls for identifying the optimal conditions for L2 learning. The talk addresses three interrelated questions to survey what we currently know about timing issues in L2 learning.
-
How much practice is needed, and what should be systematically repeated? Evidence on repetition thresholds, curriculum management, and extramural language learning points toward a core principle: recycle materials more and extend practice inside and beyond the classroom.
-
When should practice occur? Research on distributed practice and interleaving effects suggests that the scheduling of practice is consequential yet underexplored.
-
When should attention be directed to language form? Evidence suggests that the timing of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback differentially influences multiple domains of L2 learning.
Taken together, optimal conditions are desirably difficult and necessarily contingent on learner characteristics, target knowledge type, and instructional context (Suzuki, Nakata, & DeKeyser, 2019). I conclude that these findings point to a promising avenue for SLA research on optimizing L2 learning through the lens of timing—an approach with direct implications for FL classrooms and beyond.
References
Suzuki, Y. (Ed.) (2023). Practice and automatization in second language research: Perspectives from skill acquisition theory and cognitive psychology. New York: Routledge.
Suzuki, Y., Nakata, T., & DeKeyser, R. M. (2019). Optimizing second language practice in the classroom: Perspectives from cognitive psychology. The Modern Language Journal, 103, 551–561.
Suzuki, Y., Nakata, T., & DeKeyser, R. M. (2019). The desirable difficulty framework as a theoretical foundation for optimizing and researching second language practice. The Modern Language Journal, 103(3), 713-720. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12585