SLA research and L2 pedagogy: Misapplications and questions of relevance

Abstract

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S026144481200050XHow to cite this article: Nina Spada SLA research and L2 pedagogy: Misapplications and questions of relevance.There has been considerable debate about the relevance and applicability of SLA theory and research for L2 pedagogy. There are those who maintain that SLA must be applicable to L2 pedagogy: a view based on the argument that because SLA is a subfield of applied linguistics, it should have direct relevance to L2 teaching. Others take the view that not all areas of SLA research need to be relevant to L2 pedagogy -only the more 'applied' areas. While I would agree that much of the work in SLA should be applicable to L2 pedagogy, particularly research on instructed SLA, my presentation takes a different perspective on the SLA/L2 pedagogy interface. It focuses on MISAPPLICATIONS of SLA theory and research to L2 pedagogy. I argue that the applicability of SLA research for L2 instruction requires a careful consideration of context and that specific SLA constructs -even those considered to be important within instructed SLA -may not have direct RELEVANCE to L2 pedagogy. Three areas of SLA research that I will discuss with respect to misapplication and relevance are: the role of instruction in SLA, the role of age in SLA, and the nature of and distinction between implicit and explicit L2 knowledge.

Teaching and learning L2 in the classroom: It's about time

“…Shortly after our meetings the Ministry of Education decided to begin EFL instruction in grade 4. As Spada (2015) commented, ‘even though input from SLA researchers was welcome, it was clearly trumped by other factors – factors that are more political and economic in nature’ (p. 75).…”

Metacognitive Instruction Enhances the Effectiveness of Corrective Feedback: Variable Effects of Feedback Types and Linguistic Targets

“…In reviewing cognitive psychological research on metacognition, which has primarily been conducted in laboratory settings, de Bruin and van Gog () called for studies that investigate “how to foster self‐monitoring and self‐regulation through instructional interventions in classrooms” (p. 245). In applied linguistics, Spada () warned that misapplication of L2 theories to pedagogy happens when “there is a failure to take into consideration the context in which the research has been carried out” (p. 70). The current study aligns well with these calls for classroom‐based research as the two instructional features examined here—metacognitive instruction and corrective feedback—are both applicable and relevant to L2 pedagogy.…”

Foreign Language Educators’ Exposure to Research: Reported Experiences, Exposure Via Citations, and a Proposal for Action

“…Instructed second language acquisition (ISLA) researchers repeatedly espouse inherent links between research and pedagogy (Hellerman, ). A persistent desire to nurture these links is clear at research conferences and in many publications (e.g., Belcher, ; Collins & Muñoz, ; Ellis, , ; Lantolf & Poehner, ; Larsen–Freeman, , ; Lightbown, ; Macaro, ; Pachler, ; Spada, ), aspiring to a reciprocal relationship in which teachers critically engage with research evidence and researchers engage with practice throughout the research process, that is, opening up a two‐way street. Research engagement has been found to develop teachers’ sense of professional identity (Winch, Oancea, & Orchard, ); offer insight into technical, practical, and theoretical aspects of pedagogical knowledge (Furlong et al., ); and provide new ways of seeing, doing, talking, knowing, and thinking (Borg, ).…”