Nicole Ziegler

Numerous empirical studies and syntheses have explored technology-mediated task-based language teaching (TMTBLT) (for example, Chong & Reinders, 2020; Lai & Li, 2011; Kim & Namkung, 2024; Ziegler, 2016), with findings highlighting the affordances of technology for interaction and its associated benefits. However, few studies have targeted program development and evaluation for task-based online curriculums for Less Commonly Taught Languages (LCTLs) (Bryfonski & McKay, 2019). To address this gap, the current study uses action research (Burns, 2010) to report a teacher-researcher’s experience in creating, implementing, and evaluating TMTBLT materials for a beginning Vietnamese language class at an American university. Action research was used as the methodological framework through two iterative cycles (that is, two consecutive semesters) conducted with two mixed cohorts of heritage language learners and second language learners. Results highlighted the benefits of AR for bottom-up curriculum development and demonstrated significant gains in learners’ speaking and writing proficiency over time. Findings also suggest learners had overall positive perceptions of TMTBLT as a pedagogical approach.

In this final contribution, the authors of the Special Issue reflect collaboratively on the work gathered in the Special Issue

Curriculum development and empirical research in the field of second language acquisition could benefit the field of critical language pedagogy (CLP) and its practitioners. This article reviews central concepts in the organization of curriculum in CLP and compares them with another major curricular initiative in second language teaching, namely task-based or task-supported approaches, with particular emphasis on task-based language teaching. Content itself (as in activities or materials) and the role of metacognitive instruction are considered. A real-world example of a task-based or task-supported short-term program is reviewed as exemplifying some areas of contact or benefit.

Research suggests that pre-task planning time provides learners with opportunities to formulate, organize, and mentally store content, thereby freeing up attentional resources during tasks (Skehan, Xiaoyue, Qian, & Wang, 2012). However, relatively few studies to date have investigated pre-task planning in a synchronous computer-mediated communication setting (e.g., Lai, Fei, & Roots, 2008; Hsu, 2012, 2015). In addition to a scarcity of computer-assisted language learning research, relatively little is known about what learners do when they plan or how they use their plans during tasks. The goals of the current study were twofold: (a) to examine the relationship between pre-task planning and learners’ production and (b) to explore the affordances offered by computer-mediated contexts to further investigate how and what learners may (or may not) be planning during pre-task and within-task planning time. Results suggest that three minutes of planning time resulted in increases in lexical complexity (but not phrasal or syntactic), although no significant findings were identified for accuracy or fluency. In addition, findings indicate that technology offers researchers a number of unique methodological affordances, such as the ability to see what learners produce, regardless of whether they transmit this information to their interlocutor, thereby providing evidence of L2 knowledge that would otherwise be unobservable.

Despite the promise of research conducted at the intersection of computer‐assisted language learning (CALL), natural language processing, and second language acquisition, few studies have explored the potential benefits of using intelligent CALL systems to deepen our understanding of the process and products of second language (L2) learning. The strategic use of technology offers researchers novel methodological opportunities to examine how incremental changes in L2 development occur during treatment as well as how the longitudinal impacts of experimental interventions on L2 learning outcomes occur on a case‐by‐case basis. Drawing on the pilot results from a project examining the effects of automatic input enhancement on L2 learners’ development, this article explores how the use of technology offers additional methodological and analytical choices for the investigation of the process and outcomes of L2 development, illustrating the opportunities to study what learners do during visually enhanced instructional activities.

The relationship between computer-assisted language learning (CALL) and second language acquisition (SLA) has been studied both extensively, covering numerous subdomains, and intensively, resulting in hundreds of primary studies. It is therefore no surprise that CALL researchers, as in other areas of applied linguistics, have turned in recent years to meta-analysis as a means to synthesize quantitative results across studies. To date, nearly 30 CALL-SLA syntheses and meta-analyses have been conducted, covering topics from hypertext glosses (Yun, 2011) to synchronous computer-mediated communication (Ziegler, 2015) to game-based learning (Chiu, Kao, & Reynolds, 2012). Despite these individual contributions, the overall effects of CALL on SLA across domains have yet to be addressed. In this 'second-order' review, we provide a thorough account of substantive findings and a critical description and evaluation of methodological practices of CALL-SLA meta-analyses. We begin by describing the generally substantial effects of CALL on L2 learning along with an examination of different types of technology such as CALL glosses and computer-mediated communication (CMC). Results of the methodological review reveal wide variability overall and in several practices associated with rigor, transparency, and utility of meta-analytic reviews. At the close of our article, we provide empirically identified recommendations for future primary and meta-analytic research.

Over the last few decades, task-based language teaching (TBLT) has garnered increasing attention from researchers and educators alike. With a strong and growing body of research demonstrating the efficacy of tasks to support and facilitate second language development and performance (e.g., Keck, Iberri-Shea, Tracy-Ventura, & Wa-Mbaleka, 2006), TBLT has become a leading pedagogical approach. Similarly, computer-assisted language learning (CALL) has also grown as a field, with the use and integration of technology in the classroom continuing to increase (Petersen & Sachs, 2015). As these fields have matured, a reciprocal relationship has developed (Lai & Li, 2011), with the literature on tasks and technology seeking to not only examine how technology might support and facilitate language learning, but how TBLT might serve as a framework to more thoroughly investigate CALL. In light of the expanding research on tasks and technology, this review article aims not only to provide a current state of the art of how technology-mediated TBLT facilitates and supports second language development and performance, but also to describe how technology can contribute to our understanding of how features of TBLT, such as task design features and task implementation, influence the success of second language acquisition. Suggestions for possible research agendas in technology-mediated TBLT are also made.

The current study reports on a meta-analysis of the relative effectiveness of interaction in synchronous computer-mediated communication (SCMC) and face-to-face (FTF) contexts. The primary studies included in the analysis were journal articles and dissertations completed between 1990 and 2012 (k= 14). Results demonstrate that interaction in SCMC and FTF had a significant impact on second language (L2) development, providing further support for previous research demonstrating the efficacy of interaction in both communication modes (e.g., Mackey & Goo, 2007; Pellettieri, 2000; Smith, 2004, 2005). There was also a small advantage for interaction in SCMC on measures of overall L2 learning outcomes, with additional analyses indicating a small advantage for SCMC interaction on productive and written measures and a small advantage for FTF interaction on receptive and oral learning outcomes. Interestingly, there were no significant differences between SCMC and FTF, suggesting the mode of communication has no statistically significant impact on the positive developmental benefits associated with interaction.