LOOKING FORWARD

Looking Forward☪䏲‫يؕס‬٤‫ع‬

JALT2023 International Forum
Title - Thinking in different ways: Perspective-taking for growthAmelia Yarwood
Facilitator
On Saturday evening (25th Nov) between 5:35 and 7:05 in the Multi-purpose hall there will befive individuals standing proudly by their posters. Just as their posters will explore the notionof perspective-taking for growth, audience members will seek to take on new perspectives on
language learning pedagogies and practices. At its core, perspective-taking is the considerationof alternative perspectives, the seeking of new information and an openness to new ideas orexperiences. As educators, we know that seeing the world through the eyes of others can help us
to expand our understanding of who we are, how we interact with the world around us, and how
others move through the world in their own unique ways. This year’s forum tackles the concept ofperspective-taking by asking:
•
•
•
•
•
•

What kinds of perspectives should we encourage learners to explore? Why?
What kind of perspectives have been explored in your language classrooms?
How can materials and resources be used to explore different perspectives?
What processes are involved in challenging learners’ current perspectives?
What benefits do learners gain from taking on novel perspectives?
How do learners’ past experiences inform their current attitudes toward perspective-taking?

So, hold off on the post-conference drinks and join the LD-SIG forum presentations at the JALT2023
International Conference in Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.

Poster Presentations
Mind the Gap: Student-Developed Resources for Mediating Transitions into Self-Access Learning
Daniel Hooper, Tokyo Kasei University
Making the transition from classroom language learning to a self-access center (SAC) can be adaunting prospect for many learners. This poster is based on a study examining the discomfort
experienced by learners transitioning into a SAC and the different cognitive, social, and symbolic
resources (Zittoun, 2007) that can help to scaffold this environmental change. Based on a longitudinal
ethnography of the LC, a SAC-based student-led learning community, this study determined various
sources of anxiety for new SAC users and the ways in which the learning community attempted torespond to these issues. This poster presentation will highlight how gaps in knowledge between
exam-focused English study in secondary education and communication-focused English in SAC
social learning spaces contributed to learner anxiety in addition to insufficient social scaffolding
for SAC newcomers. I will also explain how LC members responded to these problems by
operationalizing learners’ existing skills, proactively engaging new members, and providing
low-anxiety modes of access to new knowledge. In summary, this poster will highlight the various
sociocultural obstacles that SAC newcomers must negotiate and the valuable role of student learning
communities as socializing agents bridging the gap between learners’ past and future worlds.

61

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(2)A New Paradigm: Exploring LD from an English as Lingua Franca Perspective
Ian Hurrell, Toyo University
The role of English in the world has changed greatly during the 21st century. As English is being
used more and more as a common language in multicultural contexts, it is often cited that speakers
of English as a second language are now more likely to be using English to communicate with
non-native speakers (NNS) than with native speakers (NS). As a result, many are now calling for ashift from a native speaker model of language teaching to an English as lingua franca (ELF) modelin order to reflect this change. This presentation will start with a brief overview of some of thecore tenets of teaching English from an ELF perspective, such as, transcultural communication,translanguaging, a focus on intelligibility, etc. Then, the presenter would like to discuss with theaudience some of the challenges and practical methods of introducing these concepts using theresults of a questionnaire designed to investigate the perspectives of Japanese university students
toward the ELF model of language learning.
Classroom practice: Encouraging learners to broaden their perspectives
Michelle Jerrems, Kanda University of International Studies
Research has shown that real-life experiences such as studying abroad can encourage learners
to think about alternative perspectives, and seek out new information or ideas (Enberg, 2013).
However, not all learners are able to experience such opportunities as studying abroad, especiallyin recent years due to the spread of coronavirus. This poster presentation will investigate whatthings we can do in the classroom to encourage learners to broaden their perspectives through afocus on classroom processes and activities that promote a ‘reflective learning style’ through theencouragement of student-led inquiry, critical thinking, learner autonomy and reflective learning.
This classroom or learning style involves students’ reflecting on what they have learned, analyzing
their experiences, and finding alternative ways to improve (Flanagan, 2022). The researcher willdraw on anecdotal evidence to outline the perspectives explored and methods used. Specifically,
the poster presentation will focus on the use of classroom processes and activities including
discussion, debate, speaking tests, literature and media review, essay planning, essay writing, andpost-activity and assignment reflective tools. Through these processes and activities, students
are encouraged to develop critical thinking skills and become more aware of their own learning
processes. In this way, they can broaden their perspectives and seek out new information and ideas.
Developing New Perspectives on Writing through Genre
Patrick Kiernan, Meiji University
Writing at university is naturally focused on academic writing. Yet many students struggle torecognise that academic writing differs from language they encounter in other contexts, often
resulting in inappropriate borrowings of language derived from informal talk or elsewhere. At thesame time, those trained only in academic writing may find that they are trapped in the formal suitof the language of academic writing struggling to adapt to other writing contexts. This presentation
reports on a course designed to promote growth and a broader perspective on writing by raisingawareness of genre and giving students opportunities to develop their voices through a range ofdifferent writing tasks. These tasks include a recipe; a comparative service/shop/product review;formal and informal email exchanges; a blog introduction and personal narrative; and an exam
essay. Each task was introduced through models and consciousness raising activities to draw
attention to the features of the writing genre. After the writing task, students also compared theway each of their writing samples reflected the genre. Samples of the materials used, student

62

LOOKING FORWARD

writing, and feedback on the course will be introduced in this poster presentation. The materials
used will be available to participants and I welcome ideas or suggestions.
Recalibration: questions, demonstrations, and requirements from a new perspective
Steve Paton, Chikushi Jogakuen University
Students often engage in counterproductive behaviours which hinder the development of theirlanguage skills. Classroom silence, unwillingness to ask clarifying questions, and avoidance
strategies are all-too-familiar problems that many teachers face. The reasons behind students
consistently bringing these behaviours with them into the language classroom are often deepseated aspects of culture pertaining to face-saving and perceptions of power-distance (Hofstede,
Hofstede, and Minkov, 2010). From the perspective of someone raised and educated within theculture, no frame of reference might exist against which to compare and reevaluate such common
classroom practices. It falls to teachers to provide new perspectives for students to view their own
behaviours by, whereby they might come to want for themselves to take alternative approaches
to classroom activities. Teachers can recalibrate students’ classroom behaviours by having themnotice for themselves how counterproductive such behaviours would be in other communicative
situations. For instance, students often leave a prolonged silence upon being asked a question bya teacher, but balk at the suggestion that they should try, even once, waiting just as long before
answering a question from a friend at lunchtime .In this presentation, the presenter will highlightquestions, demonstrations, and course requirements that have helped students come to viewcounterproductive behaviours from a new, but familiar and powerfully-motivating perspective- thatof just about every other social situation they ever find themselves in.

LD30 Post-Conference Publication$BMMGPS3FFDUJPOTBOE"SUJDMFTٛ‫ن‬ٝ‫٘بؠ‬٤‫כ‬鋗◄‫ⳓס‬꥗

All presenters at the LD30 Conference are invited to submit a reflection or article on theirpresentation for publication in the Post-Conference Publication, “Learning for Change
and Action, Making a Difference for the Future”. This will form a Special Issue of Learning
Learning, the biannual publication of the Learner Development SIG. All article submissions
should be made via the PCP email address ld30pcp@gmail.com.
LD30 Conferenceのすべての発表者は、ポストコンファレンス特集号「変化と行動のための学習、未来への変化をもたらす」に掲載するために、発表に基づいた振り返りや記事を提出するよう招待されています。
これは、Learner Development SIGが年2回発行する『Learning Learning』の特集号という形を取る予定です。
記事の投稿はすべて、PCPのEメールアドレス ld30pcp@gmail.com を通じて行ってください。

Both students and teachers are welcome to make a contribution. For more details see: LD 30
PCP Call for Reflections and Articles
学生も教師も投稿を歓迎する。
詳細はこちらをご覧ください：LD 30 PCP Call for Reflections and Articles

63LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(2)The LDJ7 Editorial Team Reflect on The Learner Development Journal 7,“Challenging the Conventions of Learner Development Research”

Ellen Head
Miyazaki International University
ellenhxin2@yahoo.com

Aya Hayasaki
Waseda University
hayasakiaya@gmail.com

Ryo Moriya
Waseda University
ryo.m6bell.a@gmail.com

Right now (November 2023), we are in the final stages of work on Issue 7 of The Learner Development
Journal. We came together in 2021, thanks to a shared enthusiasm for the experience we each had as
writers participating in the communities created around earlier issues of LDJ, Ryo in issue 2 “Qualitative
Research and Learner Development” and 3 “Identities and Transitions”, Ellen in issue 5 “The Multilingual
Turn in Learner Development”, and Aya in issue 6 “Learning Beyond the Classroom.” Each of us has
a different “take” on what we mean by “challenging the conventions” but we share a fascination withlearner emotions and the interplay between our identities as teachers, learners and writers. Below we
discuss how we came together as an editorial team, the experiences we had as authors in earlier issues
LDJ, and why we wanted to focus on challenging the conventions of learner development research. We
hope this will arouse your curiosity, whet your appetite in relation to LDJ7 and encourage you to think
about getting involved in a future issue of LDJ.

HOW WE CAME TOGETHER AS AN EDITORIAL TEAM: CONNECTIONS THROUGHLD SIG AND LDJ

Ellen Head: Hearing Aya speaking online about dilemmas and trajectories in adolescents’language learning at the Learner Development Forum at JALT 2020 made me think we could put
forward a theme proposal for the Learner Development journal. I was fascinated by the way she
drew on her own experience and put this together with interview data and research literature,
looking at how learners could reinterpret failure as a source of strength. She was asking newquestions. Her use of “Trajectory Equifinality Modelling” (Sato, 2006) as a way to understand life
histories, relating that to gender issues in rural Japan, was very thought-provoking. At the time, I
had been interviewing students about their experience of online learning during the pandemic, andreflecting on how positioning impacted students’ willingness to communicate (Head, 2022). Our
first suggestions for a call for papers included learner emotions in the wake of COVID and how thatexperience had brought out autonomy in some but not in all learners. Thanks to Aya’s connections,
we were able to ask Ryo Moriya to join us. At some point I realized I had already met him at ILA
2018 conference in Kobe and still had the handout of his presentation (about measuring a learner’s
emotions and heart rate during an advising session). He shared our curiosity about life-trajectories
and research methods which attempt to capture both the subtleties of individual experience andthe connection to a larger picture. Thus the theme of “challenging the conventions” emerged.
Ryo Moriya: For me, writing for LDJ was an unforgettable experience that expanded myconnections with others. As a first-year MA student, I had read numerous papers on my interests
in sociocultural theory and advising, many of which discussed the development of a few people
in detail. However, many of the studies in the classes I was taking at the time were based on
statistical analysis, and I remember being repeatedly told, “we need at least 30 subjects.” At thetime, the terms “qualitative research” and “quantitative research” were not in my mind at all. I was
simply bewildered by the gap between what I was reading voluntarily and what was covered inclass, and I was unsure if my understanding was wrong. When I talked about my research withpeople around me, they twisted my head again and again. Some of my seniors even said to me,“Our research is science,” as if my research was unscientific and inappropriate (they may not havemeant to offend me, but it is hurtful when someone close to me says something like that). Today,

64LOOKING FORWARD

I would be able to explain Kuhn’s (1962) philosophy of science (the idea that “truth” can change
depending on paradigms or worldviews) and confidently refute those seniors, but at that time, I
did not have the right words to say back to them. I even sometimes cried at my immaturity andinadequacy, wondering if I was not suited for research. But through the personal connections I
made due to LDJ editors Christina Gkonou and others, I have come to realize that I was not alone
and in fact it was the exclusivity of the research paradigm that needed challenging.
Aya Hayasaki: Like Ryo, I was feeling the sense of loneliness like a lost child in academia, until I
became a contributor to LDJ6. I have been working on rather peripheral topics in underrepresented
contexts in current applied linguistics research particularly in Japan. My main interest has been in
inequalities regarding opportunities to learn English and after learning English, and I started my PhD
by exploring life stories of female learners from rural Japan–the kind of context I myself come from.
When I joined the response community of contributors and editors for LDJ6 “Learning Beyond theClassroom”, I met practitioners working on topics that were similar to my own, such as exploring
learners’ agency in resource-limited contexts and teaching learners to critically reflect on theirlearning and develop their own learning goals. This was an empowering moment for me, giving mea safe space to nurture my identity as a qualitative researcher who takes positionality and reflexivity
seriously.
Ryo Moriya: One of the features of LDJ which struck me as an author for LDJ2, was the uniquepublication process that took about one and a half to two years to complete, while exchanging
opinions with the editors and other contributors. It was so different from anything I had ever
heard of that I could not even imagine at the start, how it would proceed. However, as a first-year
MA student and a novice in qualitative research at the time, writing the paper through dozens ofclose communications with various teachers was the best learning experience for me. When I met
the editors and contributors for the first time at the meet-up at Seikei University, I was the only
graduate student, while the other contributors were teachers who had already established theircareers to some extent. I sometimes wondered if I was worthy of being named alongside them, but
I am grateful to the editors and contributors for their thoughtful advice and comments and for the
supportive environment they provided until the very end (Moriya, 2018). Looking back, I feel that
unfortunately I needed to improve in many areas, such as responding to peer review comments
and making revisions, because it was almost the first time for me to write up a paper. However,developing this paper provided a memorable experience as a learner and contributor thanks to thisjournal. In fact, I notice that when I read a paper, my reading speed and comprehension depend
on whether or not I can meet the author and get an image of his/her personality. Related to this, inmany journals, there is an aspect of uncertainty because we do not know whether the paper will be
accepted until the very end, but having the paper accepted at the proposal stage allowed me as acontributor (with a junior Ami Ishizuka) to write the paper for LDJ3 with a relaxed mood (Moriya &Ishizuka, 2019). I hope that as editors, we have offered that kind of mood to LDJ7 authors.
Ellen Head: Maybe this is a good place to say a bit more about the process of working on
LDJ7. In LDJ7, we formed three thematic groups, one broadly concerned with learner emotions
and psychology, the second focussed on classroom-based approaches to promoting learnerdevelopment and the third interested in innovative ways of writing about teaching as a form of
self-investigation or auto-ethnography. Between June and November 2022 we had on average
three online get-togethers in which we talked in small groups about the draft articles which werebeing developed. In some cases the research was still being done at the time of the first meeting. I
joined the group concerned with learner emotions. What impressed me most was the joy that oneof the members showed when talking about her teaching. She could see that her students were
shy but she had confidence that they would develop during one school year, and they did. As it

65

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(2)happened, some of the members of this small group were researching their PhDs during the timethey were writing for LDJ and were much better read than I in the field of learner emotions. They
were able to offer peer feedback to each other, so the group process was still an effective medium
for scaffolding writing, even though sometimes I was the person who was learning the most. The
written papers do not always catch the whole of the experience, since the things which emerge
during a zoom chat or real chat inevitably give it another dimension. We considered making
some kind of video part of LDJ7 but we decided that maintaining a confidential space was more
important and would not be consistent with videoing our sessions for those outside the group. So
we didn’t end up venturing into multimedia.

CHALLENGING THE CONVENTIONS

Ellen Head: The idea of challenging the conventions can be interpreted in many ways. In the callfor papers, we were influenced by the fact that the pandemic was still going on, and the conditionsof learning seemed to have changed utterly from what they had been pre-pandemic. Three aspectsof ELT changed radically during the period 2020-2021: online learning became accepted much
more widely as a normal and inevitable practice, study abroad appeared to be in jeopardy and so
the idea of online study abroad appeared and last but not least, the ability of AI to provide fast andaccurate translation raised questions about the future role of teachers and use of AI in teaching.
The situation is still changing and causing many changes in our practices as teachers, as learners
and participants in communities. The idea of challenging the conventions emerged from our
feeling that the conventions of classroom learning had been challenged by circumstances. At thesame time, there were multiple ways in which we could understand challenging the conventionsof research. Research such as Ryo’s and Aya’s seemed to challenge the conventions by focusing
on the individual learner. One of the things that we were all interested in was looking at learners
and learning as part of a dynamic system. Although we are hesitant to use the term “complex
dynamic systems theory”, at least we could say that as a metaphor, the idea of dynamic systems
has allowed us to look at an individual’s experience without assuming that learning is a linear
chain of cause and effect. As John H. Schumann writes in the introduction to Dörnyei et al. (2014),“[Dynamic systems theory] forces us to rethink our conceptions about cause and categories; itmakes us deal with the way the world actually works not simply the way we all think it works…andleaves us open to the notion of investigation without an expectation of an ultimate answer.” (p. xvii).
Several of the papers in LDJ7 have been inspired by this kind of approach of tracking emotions orautonomy development in one or two individuals over time and experimenting with different waysof quantifying or interpreting the findings. Aya, can you say a word or two about how the theme
emerged?
Aya Hayasaki: For me the idea of challenging conventions takes me back into the story of myown research. Initially I believed the goal of my research was clear. My LDJ6 project was also
the first step of my doctoral research, concerning my experience as a woman from a rural area
whose life choices have been broadened through learning English. The goal was to find people
with similar experience, and to disseminate what I have learned from this collection of stories; andto consider whether and how its implications could help people in similar contexts navigate theirlearning journeys (Hayasaki, 2022). However, I realized through the LDJ6 project that it was notclear what exactly this meant or how it was to be done. In retrospect, from the beginning I could
not even define the key words of my research such as “rural” and “empowerment.” I also graduallyrealized that I did not dare to define them. In hindsight, I feel like I did not want to because I wasscared of losing important insights or excluding or hurting someone because of my decision to
set a boundary. Over the course of the year and a half process of the LDJ6 project, I learned
to undo, or deconstruct, the premises I had unconsciously constructed through my personal,
professional, and academic experiences. For me challenging convention meant casting doubt

66

LOOKING FORWARD

on the taken-for-granted beliefs and values underlying previous literature and my own decision
makings in life as a researcher, teacher, learner, and a person. This experience I had through LDJ6
led to the theme of LDJ7. From the beginning of the LDJ7 project to today, one of my favorite andmost important topics of discussion among us editors and contributors has been what it means tochallenge conventions; what are the conventions we want to focus on, how we can and want tochallenge them, and why, both as individuals and as a community. As it turned out, we came awaywith various interesting answers with some commonalities–some focusing on specific theories,
others methodology or writing styles.
Ellen Head: Yes, Aya, in the first draft of the call for papers, it was you who introduced the ideaof challenging the conventions. Here’s a bit from our first draft: “In today’s unpredictable society,
it is time for us to shed light on the impact of social factors on learner autonomy anew and think
about future research on learner development from a fresh angle. How has the pandemic impacted
language learner autonomy? Now, who are (or should be) learning what, when, where, how, andto what extent? And why?” It was exciting that you had the breadth of perspective to be thinking
about social justice-related issues at the same time as the interior and personal side of learning,
and to make connections between them. At the time when we submitted the theme proposal to
the steering committee, we had several meetings which helped us to shape our ideas. In particular,
Dominic Edsall was on the steering committee when we first met with them. He recommended us
to look at the transdisciplinary framework for understanding learning and teaching, created by the
Douglas Fir group (Douglas Fir Group, 2016). In his own writing Edsall makes connections between
various ways of looking at learner autonomy. We felt this was empowering for us and teacherresearchers in general, because it allows various approaches to be seen as perspectives on amulti-faceted reality. When the papers came to be submitted for LDJ7, there was quite a variety ofgenre and methodology, ranging from quite traditional, quantitative studies to reflective dialogues.
We asked Dominic to write an article for the journal to help articulate the legitimacy of presenting
the various interpretations of our theme in one journal. In a sense, LDJ has been about challenging
conventions from the start. Tim Ashwell, Andy Barfield and Alison Stewart, who were involvedin establishing the journal in 2017, gave a talk about “Breaking with the Third-party Academic
Paradigm in Writing about Inclusive Practitioner Research” (Ashwell et al., 2021) at the AILA World
Congress in 2021, which made it very clear that part of the purpose of the journal was to build acommunity of writers which was inclusive and supportive, and to get away from image of the editor
as anonymous gatekeeper.
Ryo Moriya: With regard to the theme of Issue 7 (Challenging the Conventions of Learner
Development Research), I consider it “scientia brought about by the negation of the negation.”
Scientia is Latin for knowledge in general, and the negation of the negation represents the laws ofcultural and historical development in dialectical materialism on which sociocultural theory is basedas philosophical underpinnings (Lantolf & Poehner, 2023). Just as all human wisdom has not been
built up through mere ‘negation,’ human beings have developed through dialectically respecting
and, simultaneously, ‘criticizing (reflecting on)’ the past. In fact, even if we restrict our discussion to
the field of foreign language education, transdisciplinary features of Applied Linguistics, the riseof mixed methods research, and constant endeavor to bridge theory and practice can be listed asconcrete examples of this.
Ellen Head: You almost lost me with the Latin there, but I think you have identified somethingimportant when you talk about “the negation of the negation.” Do you mean that a great diversityof methodologies and voices can legitimately co-exist? Every story has value and it is a matter of
how the stories are framed and juxtaposed which can give an impression of chaos or orderliness?
This brings us to the question of the frame for LDJ7. The closing commentary is being written by67

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(2)Dominique Vola Ambinintsoa. When it came to deciding who to invite as author of the closingcommentary on LDJ7, we decided to invite someone who has knowledge of learner development
as it is seen from the perspective of both advising and teaching. Since many of the papers inthis issue refer to contexts in Japan, we wanted the author to be someone who knows Japanbut also has a perspective from outside and a background in narrative enquiry. Dominique Vola
Ambinintsoa’s writing was known to all of us from LDJ6 and we are very happy that she agreed towrite the commentary. However, we are trying not to offer too many “spoilers” here. We hope you
will enjoy discovering more by reading the full issue!

REFERENCES

Ashwell, T., Barfield, A., & Stewart, A. (2021, August) Beyond the third-party academic paradigm
in writing about inclusive practitioner research [Paper presentation]. The 19th International
Association of Applied Linguistics World Congress, Netherlands.
Dörnyei, Z., MacIntyre, P., & Henry, A. (2014). Motivational dynamics in language learning.
Multilingual Matters.
Douglas Fir Group, (2016). A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. Modern
Language Journal, 100, 19–47. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/modl.12301/abstract
Hayasaki, A. (2022). Beyond the classroom, beyond the track: The role of English in thetransformation of career perspectives in three females in rural Japan. The Learner Development
Journal, 6, 82–96. https://doi.org/10.37546/JALTSIG.LDJ6-6
Head, E. (2022) Positioning students as “Knowers” in research interviews. In CALR Applied
Linguistics Journal, 13. Teacher Talk From Dialogic and Didactic Perspectives. https://web.aou.edu.
lb/research/online-journals/Pages/CALR---Issue-13.aspx
Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2023). Sociocultural theory and classroom second language learningin the East Asian context: Introduction to the special issue. The Modern Language Journal, 107,
3–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12816
Moriya, R. (2018). Exploring the dual role of advisors in English learning advisory sessions. The
Learner Development Journal, 2, 41–61. https://ldjournal.ld-sig.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/
LDJ2-04.pdf
Moriya, R., & Ishizuka, A. (2019). In the midst of emotion and identity: Investigating trajectories oflearners’ self-esteem from psychological and sociocultural perspectives. The Learner Development
Journal, 3, 8–25. https://ldjournal.ld-sig.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/LDJ3-02.pdf
Sato, T. (2006). Development, change or transformation: How can psychology conceive and depict
professional identity construction? European Journal of School Psychology, 4, 319–332.

68

LOOKING FORWARD

An Interview with the Co-Editors of Issue 8 of The Learner Development
Journal, “Exploring Grassroots, Innovative, and Creative Approaches toLanguage Learning Materials Development Through Inclusive PractitionerResearch”

Anna Costantino

Assia Slimani-Rolls

University of Greenwich, UK
Regent’s University, London

Open University

Nour Bouacha
Bachir Ibrahimi University, BBA

With Tim Ashwell
Tim: Thank you, Anna, Assia and Nour, for taking part in this email interview. I’d like to start, if I may,by asking about your particular interests in learner development issues, and what appeals to you
both personally and professionally about the theme of Issue 8, “Exploring Grassroots, Innovative, andCreative Approaches to Language Learning Materials Development Through Inclusive PractitionerResearch.”
Anna: Thank you, Tim, for this question. It is particularly relevant to working with Assia and Nour,
given our shared history of learning materials and practitioner research. I have always beenfascinated by materials development due to its crucial role in creating a dynamic language classand its strong correlation to learning. However, my initial perspective on how materials correlate tolearning and learner development shifted dramatically when I participated in an exploratory practice(EP) project mentored by Assia in the higher education institution where we worked. During thisproject, my puzzle was about students’ engagement with feedback. Materials came into the frame
because I used them to investigate my puzzle. They were at the heart of the potentially exploitable
pedagogical activities (PEPAs) I used. This inquiry came with several understandings, one of which
was about the way I had used materials in the past. As I de-contextualised pedagogic activities
from my routine usage, some of my assumptions about my students’ beliefs and actual knowledge
became shaky. I realised that developing activities based solely on preconceived notions of how
our students learn might be misdirected. This understanding prompted me to consider the learning
scope of materials further. This understanding also underpinned the pitch for LDJ8, where I aimed
to create a space in which language teachers could share their views on challenging the canon ofmaterials development by situating the learner centre stage.
Assia: Thanks, Anna, for this introduction. Two reasons, at least, motivated me to join in with the LDJ8
project: first, the three-year-long project which I co-directed when mentoring a group of language
teachers, including Anna as a participant, to implement an EP approach in their classrooms , which
led me ultimately to guide them to write, for publication, about their personal EP lived experience(Slimani-Rolls & Kiely, 2019). The process I used then was essentially that of an editor providing theauthors with plenty of timely feedback. I also encouraged them to discuss their writing with theirpeers, which they found helpful too. So, given this experience, I was keen to know more about the
LDJ writing processes, which I thought, at first, to be quite involved. The second interest stems from
Nour’s doctoral dissertation, which I supervised. Nour recommended that teachers and learners
should be encouraged to create their own materials, given their familiarity with the classroom
environment. So, I wanted to pursue this idea in the work with the LDJ8 contributors.
Nour: Thank you, Assia. As mentioned above, my doctoral thesis was supervised by Assia at Regent’s
University London. Part of my Ph.D. research was about learners’ views, wants, and uses of theirnationally- prescribed textbooks. To give you a bit of context, the Algerian educational system is
a top-down, centralised one whereby all educational decision-making, curriculum, syllabus, and69

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(2)textbook design are in the hands of the Ministry. Though they are the actual curriculum enactors
and textbook users, teachers and learners have been largely marginalised from such processes.
The findings of my study revealed that teachers and learners can reflect on their experiences andparticipate in material development, evaluation, and adaptation. They proved their awareness andability to play an active role in the process of material development. However, their roles have been
reduced to that of technicians and implementers. Nevertheless, the EP practitioner literature suggeststhat learners can and should be given the opportunity to participate in decision-making and material
selection given that they are the ones doing the learning. So, when the theme was suggested, I felt anatural fit and an instant link to my research interests.
Anna and I have only met virtually. But, we built a strong relationship in getting things done andmaintaining cohesion remotely as co-editors of this issue. Working with Anna and Assia was awonderful opportunity for me to exchange views on a topic that is of great interest to all of us. It was
fascinating to see how things have unfolded as we talked through and discussed ideas, queries,
and drafts with each other to reach toward co-understanding and providing diverse possibilities andperspectives.
Tim: Thank you. It is always nice to understand how co-authors or editors know each other andsomething about their interweaving paths.
I wonder if next you could explain something about your own teaching contexts and how the themeof LDJ8 intersects with your contexts and your learners?
Anna: As I mentioned earlier, I have always been interested in materials. In fact, my interest inmaterials led me to teach Materials Development in the MA in Applied Linguistics and TESOL
programme at one of the universities where I work. With my students, I encourage them to question
the conventional use of pedagogic materials and to explore ways to enhance learner autonomy.
As a practitioner researcher, I am currently considering the multimodal quality of materials from theperspective of learner creativity. To a certain extent, this resonates with the work pursued by some of
the contributors to LDJ8 and also aligns with Nour’s findings.
Nour: Indeed, from my experience working with learners as a Ph.D. researcher and as a university
lecturer (I’m currently teaching and supervising master’s students in Algeria), I found that learners
can and are capable of articulating their views and contributing to decision-making regarding theirlearning processes. I became aware of the unique nature of each classroom context and the needfor learners’ involvement and reflection. I found that this LDJ8 issue offers a unique perspective
for empowering teacher-researchers to develop their own materials and collaborate with learners
much more closely, engaging them and motivating them via materials designed by and for everyone
involved in the teaching-learning process. By engaging in LDJ8, I was allowed to engage withthe contributors’ writing, and explore how they visualise and conceptualise learners’ roles in suchprocesses, what puzzles them, and what changes, ideas, thoughts, and adaptations they bring to
instructional materials.
Assia: From my perspective as a practitioner, I realised that the student’s perceptions of the materials
are more determining than any effort put into designing a textbook to make it more palatable tothe students. They can create havoc in any task that is given to them, depending on how they
perceive the material. A telling example here is the study by Zhang Ruwen (2004), an EP practitioner
researcher, who felt that she couldn’t successfully attract the students’ attention during her reading
lessons until she involved them in the search for better understanding of the events which controlled
her classes. She appealed to the students by explaining the difficulties that she encountered as well
as shared with them the responsibility of bringing to some of the lessons the materials that they
thought would engage them and engage their peers, in order for them to build the lesson around70

LOOKING FORWARD

them. Soon, both parties started to pull their efforts towards more constructive reading lessons as
they now shared the same motivation to make their ideas work for the benefit of all concerned.
Anna: As Assia pointed out, I can relate to the change of attitude and participation among learners
when I investigated their involvement with feedback during the EP inquiry mentioned earlier. Bychanging the implementation of classroom activities, students had the opportunity to express theirthoughts and feelings on receiving feedback and interact with the learning materials at their own
pace. This experience made me realise that they possessed more knowledge than I had previously
assumed.
Tim: You all seem to have had powerful experiences of the ways in which students can exert control
over materials when given the opportunity and how this may enhance their learning. It’s a strong
message!
Changing direction a little, I wonder if you could explain where you are in the LDJ8 process? What are
you and the contributors doing now?
Nour: The contributors have just submitted their second drafts – about 2,500 to 3-500 words. The
drafts are now with the Review Network. They will submit their third piece of writing between mid
December and the end of January 2024.
Tim: I see. And how has the process worked so far? Have you encountered any bumps in the road or
have things moved along quite smoothly? What have been the biggest challenges so far in managing
an issue of the LDJ?
Nour: Although we were based in different countries with different time zones, we managed toengage with each other and with the contributors through emails and regular meetings. We, as
editors, got to work closely with the contributors at various stages to build their proposals andversions. Reading the contributors’ drafts has fed into my own thoughts and ideas about material
development and learners’ inclusivity.
Assia: We realised together, authors and editors, that it is clearly complex to publish for PR. What ispermissible and logical in academic research is not in PR. For example, a PR study must be driven by
the author’s concern about their practice rather than by finding a gap in the literature review to justify
the study. Albeit it is evident that practice is central in PR, this principle took a while to take shape.
Anna: One aspect I find challenging when doing practitioner research is the work to untangle ourcontext of practice when confronted with critical instances emerging from our practice. It is notalways easy to establish connections between our knowledge, beliefs, the lived experiences of theparticipants in the classroom, and the institutional interests and constraints. We stick to routines andassumptions. Yet, for me, the striving comes to be about questioning the given. This endeavour isalso reflected in the scholarly writing we engage in as practitioner researchers. As Assia mentioned,
we tend to resort to the given of literature, as if writing about our practice were ultimately aboutfinding a gap in the literature rather than a bumpy journey of making sense of what we do andexperience. The LDJ8 authors are working with all of this.
Tim: It sounds as if the experience of working on LDJ8 may have had some profound impacts on theway you see practitioner research.
Finally, I wonder if you can give us a hint about the range of perspectives we will find in the finished
Issue 8? How are people approaching the theme of materials development? Are there any surprises
for you in the way some people have chosen to tackle the subject?
Anna: The language contexts explored in this issue are varied, ranging across countries such as
Brazil, Germany, Japan, the USA, and Ecuador. Examining their context of practice and teaching71

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(2)materials through reflexivity lenses is a sound common thread of the contributions. Indeed, thepredominant practitioner research frames are exploratory practice and action research, withmany of the authors offering a personal take on classroom inquiry in their quest to explore andcreate learner-centred materials. The other significant commonality across the contributions is theintersecting interest in translanguaging and creative approaches to classroom pedagogy. Returning
to the underpinning idea of LDJ8, this is surprising but also telling because it shows how language
educators framing their pedagogical work through practitioner research are becoming increasingly
open to acknowledging the idiosyncrasies of learner development. Materials are viewed asopportunities for language educators and learners to make sense of their mutual learning, rather
than being a given, a magic wand for creating the perfect lesson. This is clearly illustrated by someauthors discussing the understanding they gained during a class observation as teacher-students.
They detected how a pedagogic material implemented to facilitate English spoken fluency became
a tool to repress self-expression and identity and so failed to acknowledge the learner’s multiple
perspectives present in the classroom.
Another interesting aspect that has emerged in one of the LDJ8 review pieces is mentoring
practitioner researchers, which is connected to Assia’s experience in mentoring language teachers
to become teacher researchers of their classroom environment. It is somehow self-referential within
an LDJ issue but nevertheless intriguing. The piece brings to the fore some of the issues language
teachers undergo when they engage with practitioner research, one of which is indeed what was
mentioned earlier: the practitioner’s struggle to put practice and lived experience narratively at thecentre of their enquiry. However, this aspect is addressed from the perspective of the mentor andtheir reflexivity, which might give readers further insights into the journey of a practitioner researcher.
Assia: In terms of surprises, it’s actually me, as an editor, who was surprised to see my thinking
change about the LDJ writing processes which I first thought were a bit involved and impractical tosustain given the number of editors, reviewers and also contributors required. But, I soon realisedthat it is this LDJ structure that produces the multivocality needed in terms of a variety of ideas andfeedback that benefits the authors. The ethos behind these processes is based on everybody’s
friendly and respectful ways of producing supportive feedback in a safe and inclusive environment.
The feedback is very much helped by the journal criteria that emphasize the provision of necessary
but meaningful feedback that is relevant to the author’s context. This process helps the author’s
growth in confidence and self-belief. With hindsight, I think that using such a system in my own
project would have heightened multivocality and may even have attracted more practitioners to joinin publishing for PR.
Tim: Well, I am very glad that the LDJ is giving you the space and opportunity to develop your ideas
around practitioner research. It is great to hear about your experiences so far in steering the LDJ8
project. It is interesting to learn how a focus on something as apparently humdrum as materials has
led you to develop your own thinking about teacher and learner autonomy over the years and how
you are continuing to work through your ideas on materials production, practitioner research andwriting about practitioner research as you collaborate with the LDJ8 contributors. Thank you verymuch indeed for your hard work on this interview. I wish you and the contributors every success withthe project and look forward to reading LDJ8 when it appears towards the end of next year.

REFERENCES

Slimani-Rolls, A., & Kiely, R. (2019). Exploratory practice for continuing professional development: An
innovative approach for language teachers. Palgrave Macmillan.
Zhang, R. (2004). Using the principles of exploratory practice to guide group work in an extensive
reading class in China. Language Teaching Research 8(2), 225-239.

72