Statement of Purpose
The AILA ReN on Interlocutor and Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA provides a central forum for the systematic investigation into relationships between interlocutor and instructor individual differences (IDs), their cognitive processes, and behavior believed to mediate second language acquisition (SLA). The long-term goals of the ReN are three-fold: create awareness of existing and ongoing research on this topic; encourage additional study and collaboration; and support the development and exchange of ideas on projects that explore how interlocutor and instructor IDs influence cognition and behavior believed to be essential for SLA, and what this means for theory and practice.
Why interlocutor/instructor IDs? Despite the central role that interlocutors and instructors play in determining the input, interaction and output opportunities second and/or foreign language learners are exposed to and interact with— whether in laboratory, quasi-experimental, or non-experimental classroom settings— to date there has not been a dedicated space for a central discussion of the IDs of these individuals, no doubt due in part to the various foci of the existing studies and the varied backgrounds of those who have or are conducting this research.
Extensive research has demonstrated that learner IDs influence their perception and use of learning opportunities (book-length volumes include Arabski & Wojtaszek, 2011; Dörnyei, 2005; Pawlak, 2012; Robinson, 2002; and Sheen, 2011). Much less research has been undertaken on the potential influence of IDs of non-learner interlocutors--researchers and instructors--in relation to their cognition and behavior, despite the central role these interlocutors play in determining L2 learning opportunities. Studies have begun to identify which interlocutor IDs are worth investigating, including proficiency (Mackey & Oliver, 2002; Mackey, Oliver, & Leeman, 2003), native language background (Árva & Medgyes, 2000; Gurzynski-Weiss, 2010; Llurda, 2005; Porte, 1994), educational background and training (Borg, 2005, 2011; Farrell, 2008; Gatbonton, 2008; Gurzynski-Weiss, 2010, 2014, 2016; Junqueira & Kim, 2013; Long, 2014; Polio & Gass, forthcoming; Polio, Gass, & Chapin, 2006; Tsui, 2003; Vásquez & Harvey, 2010), reported engagement with research (Long, forthcoming; Borg, 2010), and years of teaching experience (e.g., Aykel, 1997; Farrell, 2008; Gatbonton, 2008; Gurzynski-Weiss, 2010; Polio, Gass, & Chapin, 2006; Tsui, 2003). These interlocutor IDs have been examined in relation to cognition (Borg, 2003, 2005, 2006; Farrell, 2006; Gurzynski-Weiss, 2010, 2014, 2016; Mackey et al., 2004; Polio et al., 2006; Chu & Oliver, forthcoming), task design (Gurzynski-Weiss, in press; Johnson, 2003), task interaction (Polio & Gass, forthcoming), instruction (Long, 2014), input provision (Gurzynski-Weiss, Geeslin, Long, & Daidone, forthcoming), and feedback (Ziegler, forthcoming; Gurzynski-Weiss, 2010, 2016; Junqueira & Kim, 2013; Mackey et al., 2004; Polio et al., 2006). The complex nature of the relationships between (a) interlocutor and instructor IDs, (b) cognition and/or behavior, and (c) opportunities for and resulting learning requires additional, systematic study.
The purpose of this AILA ReN is to create awareness of existing and ongoing research on this topic, to encourage additional study and collaboration, and to provide support in the development and exchange of ideas on projects investigating how interlocutor and instructor IDs influence cognition and subsequent behavior related to SLA processes, and what this means both in theory and practice.
Why interlocutor/instructor IDs? Despite the central role that interlocutors and instructors play in determining the input, interaction and output opportunities second and/or foreign language learners are exposed to and interact with— whether in laboratory, quasi-experimental, or non-experimental classroom settings— to date there has not been a dedicated space for a central discussion of the IDs of these individuals, no doubt due in part to the various foci of the existing studies and the varied backgrounds of those who have or are conducting this research.
Extensive research has demonstrated that learner IDs influence their perception and use of learning opportunities (book-length volumes include Arabski & Wojtaszek, 2011; Dörnyei, 2005; Pawlak, 2012; Robinson, 2002; and Sheen, 2011). Much less research has been undertaken on the potential influence of IDs of non-learner interlocutors--researchers and instructors--in relation to their cognition and behavior, despite the central role these interlocutors play in determining L2 learning opportunities. Studies have begun to identify which interlocutor IDs are worth investigating, including proficiency (Mackey & Oliver, 2002; Mackey, Oliver, & Leeman, 2003), native language background (Árva & Medgyes, 2000; Gurzynski-Weiss, 2010; Llurda, 2005; Porte, 1994), educational background and training (Borg, 2005, 2011; Farrell, 2008; Gatbonton, 2008; Gurzynski-Weiss, 2010, 2014, 2016; Junqueira & Kim, 2013; Long, 2014; Polio & Gass, forthcoming; Polio, Gass, & Chapin, 2006; Tsui, 2003; Vásquez & Harvey, 2010), reported engagement with research (Long, forthcoming; Borg, 2010), and years of teaching experience (e.g., Aykel, 1997; Farrell, 2008; Gatbonton, 2008; Gurzynski-Weiss, 2010; Polio, Gass, & Chapin, 2006; Tsui, 2003). These interlocutor IDs have been examined in relation to cognition (Borg, 2003, 2005, 2006; Farrell, 2006; Gurzynski-Weiss, 2010, 2014, 2016; Mackey et al., 2004; Polio et al., 2006; Chu & Oliver, forthcoming), task design (Gurzynski-Weiss, in press; Johnson, 2003), task interaction (Polio & Gass, forthcoming), instruction (Long, 2014), input provision (Gurzynski-Weiss, Geeslin, Long, & Daidone, forthcoming), and feedback (Ziegler, forthcoming; Gurzynski-Weiss, 2010, 2016; Junqueira & Kim, 2013; Mackey et al., 2004; Polio et al., 2006). The complex nature of the relationships between (a) interlocutor and instructor IDs, (b) cognition and/or behavior, and (c) opportunities for and resulting learning requires additional, systematic study.
The purpose of this AILA ReN is to create awareness of existing and ongoing research on this topic, to encourage additional study and collaboration, and to provide support in the development and exchange of ideas on projects investigating how interlocutor and instructor IDs influence cognition and subsequent behavior related to SLA processes, and what this means both in theory and practice.
Published Research Network Summaries
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2016-b). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 26(2), 279-287.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2016-a). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 26(1) 131-143.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2015-c). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistica 25(3), 434-440.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2015-b). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 25(2), 273-290.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2015a). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 25(1), 136-138.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2014b). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24(3), 426-427.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2014a). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 288.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2013b). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 279-280.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2013a). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(1), 121.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2012). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 22(2), 281-284.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2016-a). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 26(1) 131-143.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2015-c). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistica 25(3), 434-440.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2015-b). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 25(2), 273-290.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2015a). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 25(1), 136-138.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2014b). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24(3), 426-427.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2014a). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 288.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2013b). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 279-280.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2013a). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(1), 121.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2012). AILA Research Network on Interlocutor/Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 22(2), 281-284.