Heath Rose’s research while affiliated with University of Oxford and other places

This editorial introduction to the special issue on Global Englishes and TESOL (Teaching English to speakers of other languages) explores the shifting landscape of English language teaching in response to English's role as a global lingua franca. The increasing diversification of English speakers and contexts challenges traditional TESOL practices, which have long centered on native speaker norms. This special issue includes 15 articles that critically examine the theoretical foundations of Global Englishes, the integration of these concepts into curricula, and the need for innovative research designs to support their implementation. These articles discuss how Global Englishes can address linguistic inequities, promote social justice, and reshape English language education by focusing on real‐world language use. The collection emphasizes the need for collaboration between researchers and practitioners to ensure that pedagogical approaches reflect the diverse linguistic realities of English learners today. Additionally, it highlights the barriers posed by standardized testing, textbook content, and entrenched native speaker ideologies. By advancing empirical research and showcasing diverse global perspectives, this special issue aims to push the boundaries of Global Englishes scholarship and inspire meaningful, practical innovations in TESOL.

The growing interconnectedness of content and language is a significant global phenomenon in language education. As models of education have shifted from teaching a foreign language to teaching through a foreign language, we have seen a rise in methodologies associated with English medium instruction (EMI), content and language integrated learning (CLIL), and various models of bilingual education. In this chapter, we provide an overview of the theoretical underpinnings and development of CLIL and EMI in language education, situated within the broader field of applied linguistics. It discusses the difficulties of defining these and related terms, as models and practices vary widely between and within educational contexts. It also discusses the language-related difficulties associated with learning and teaching in a foreign language, as well as the role of language educators in addressing these challenges. The chapter also reviews evidence of the efficacy of EMI and CLIL as models of education for fulfilling the dual aims of language and content acquisition. Finally, the chapter explores the applied sociolinguistic impact of CLIL and EMI regarding issues surrounding first language use in the classroom, educational equity, domain loss in the first language, and self-colonization.

The guest editors, Masatoshi Sato (Universidad Andres Bello) and Shawn Loewen (Michigan State University), feature a collection of empirical studies focusing on the relationship between research and practice in the field of second language (L2) learning and teaching—a much-debated yet rarely-investigated topic. With articles written by like-minded researchers in light of the research-practice dialogue, the special issue aims to: (a) explore the identity of L2 researchers in relation to L2 teaching, (b) examine the relationship between L2 researchers and L2 practitioners, and (c) investigate potential ways of facilitating the dialogue in which L2 teaching is informed by L2 research, and vice-versa. The special issue will be one of the first collections of empirical studies investigating the research-practice relationship not only in the L2-related fields but in others such as medicine, engineering, social work, and general education. In L2 research, the research-practice gap was focused in the 1990s when second language acquisition (SLA) started to take shape as an independent research field with rapid theoretical and methodological advancements. Since then, researchers have discussed various causes of the divide, such as: (a) researchers’ alienation from the concerns of practitioners, (b) researchers’ identities contributing to the ivory tower culture, (c) relevance of research to instruction in the real world, (d) low ecological validity of research, (e) teachers’ resistance to change, and (f) teachers’ perceptions of researchers. In an effort to narrow the gap, researchers have considered increased ecological validity and different ways of disseminating research (e.g., study summaries). Nevertheless, the problem seems to persist; that is, research seems to have little influence on classroom practice. Perhaps, a fundamental cause of the divide is epistemological rather than logistical. When researchers are conceptualized as knowledge producers and teachers as knowledge consumers—as implied in terms such as “innovation diffusion,” “knowledge translation,” “research utilization,” “knowledge mobilization,” or “from theory to practice”—it may not be surprising that the hierarchy prevents professionals from engaging in a bi-directional and mutually-beneficial dialogue whereby knowledge and practical tools are co-created and co-owned. The articles in the special issue take a nuanced approach to this complex issue. The special issue starts with a state-of-the-art article by the guest editors. They overview the research-practice divide in various disciplines and discuss practical and epistemological obstacles to a constructive dialogue between researchers and practitioners. Ensuing studies investigate teacher perceptions of research and different ways of facilitating the dialogue between researchers and teachers such as collaborative research between teacher and researchers, and teachers’ examination of research articles. Two studies in the special issue focus on L2 researchers’ identities by having researchers investigated themselves. The issue concludes with a commentary by Spada and Lightbown, who reflect their abundant experience of classroom-based research and argue that key challenges for L2 researchers are to establish a mutual trust with practitioners and to conduct research with a mutual goal. This special issue mainly targets researchers (cf. practitioners) and aims to lead discussion of the role of research for practice.