Ema Ushioda is a professor and Head of the Department of Applied Linguistics at the University of Warwick. She has been interested in motivation and autonomy in language learning for over 30 years, particularly from pedagogical and qualitative research perspectives. Recent books include Teaching and researching motivation (3rd ed.), co-authored with Zoltán Dörnyei (Routledge, 2021), and Language learning motivation: An ethical agenda for research (Oxford University Press, 2020).

Over the past two decades in the applied linguistics subfield of second language (L2) writing, there has been considerable interest in the topic of collaborative writing (CW). Studies in this domain have investigated different phenomena such as the nature of learner-to-learner interactions, the learning outcomes of CW, and students' perceptions of these activities when implemented in the classroom. Despite the large number of studies that have been published to date, replication research has been scarce. As such, the current article opens by making a case for replication work in the area of L2 CW, arguing why such research is both important and necessary. Following this, the article turns to a discussion of two key CW studies that have been highly influential in the L2 writing sphere. These studies are described in detail, and suggestions are provided as to how and why these studies might be replicated in the future.

The primary objective of this paper is to contribute to the advancement of second language (L2) fluency research by outlining a specific proposal for future replication studies. The overarching goal is to assess the generalisability of the original findings of the two influential studies in the area of perceived fluency: Kormos and Dénes (2004) and Rossiter (2009). This objective will be achieved by first introducing the concept of L2 fluency that often conflates two categories: (1) overall language proficiency; (2) temporal features of speech production. The paper then highlights limitations in the current fluency research paradigm emphasising the variability in the methods employed for speech analysis and rating data collection. This diversity makes it somewhat challenging to compare results across various studies. In response to these challenges, the second part of the paper proposes several close and approximate replications of the two studies.

The steady expansion in qualitative research in the area of language education over the last two decades indicates the growing recognition of its importance to investigating issues of language teaching and learning. Along with this recognition, understanding and assessing the quality of qualitative studies in this area has gained increasing significance. Addressing this concern, in this research synthesis, we qualitatively explore how 236 qualitative language education studies published in seven leading journals explicitly foreground the issue of ‘research quality’. We conducted a qualitative content analysis of how authors of these studies addressed the main quality concepts proposed by well-known frameworks of qualitative research quality. Our findings, presented as ten major themes, show that qualitative researchers' overt treatment of research quality is realised based on three distinct orientations: no explicit quality criteria, positivist views of quality, and interpretive quality conceptions. We discuss aspects of these orientations and their implications for qualitative research in language education.

This study explores the impact of power dynamics – represented by linguistic privilege, learning environment, and identity formation – on translingual practices in Chinese as a Second Language (CSL) writing education. It focuses on a specific case involving Chinese language learners at a Sino-US joint-venture university in China to elucidate these dynamics in a real-life context. The findings revealed how societal expectations, internalized power dynamics, and prevailing language ideologies nurtured perceptions of a diminished Chinese identity and influenced students' language preferences and engagement in CSL writing. The article argues that the decolonization of writing education necessitates critical awareness of power dynamics and the challenges they pose to monolingual ideologies. It also proposes pedagogical strategies to incorporate power dynamics into translingual practices by emphasizing the need to embrace language diversity and fluidity, facilitate translingual identity formation, and employ reflective practices. By raising awareness of power dynamics in translingual practices, educators can empower students to confront the linguistic status quo, promote linguistic justice, and cultivate a more equitable CSL writing education.

It is, perhaps, with some surprise that I find the native/non-native divide again attracting attention. The first I remember of this being an issue was when we were informed that the native speaker was dead (Paikeday, 1985). Needless to say, to those of us who did not feel at all deceased, this came as a surprise, but the announcement certainly attracted attention. The next contribution to the debate that I remember was Peter Medgyes's (1992) question regarding whether native or non-native was worth more. And so the dispute has continued spasmodically until the present, when we find two pieces on the subject within two recent issues of Language Teaching (Llurda & Calvet-Terré, 2024; Selvi et al., 2024).

In their “Webinar on the subject of English and applied linguistics”, Widdowson and Yazdi-Amirkhiz (2023) argues for the need to “rethink orthodox ideas about the relationship between applied linguistics and English language teaching that have been promoted in the past and still prevail” (p. 393). In the following commentary, I describe examples from my experiences as a language teacher and teacher trainer that address two of Widdowson's critiques: the supposed idealization of native-speaker competence in applied linguistics, and the impracticality of applied linguistics research.