Conference Agenda

Topics: In Flanders, significant gaps in the sense of school belonging and student performance exist between majority monolingual Dutch-speaking and minority multilingual pupils speaking Dutch as well as a non-Dutch heritage language (HL)^{[1, 2]}. In this study, we investigate whether these differences in school outcomes may be a result of differences in children’s emotional competence. Children’s school outcomes critically depend on their emotional competence, i.e., the capacity to experience, express, regulate emotions, and understand their own emotions as well as those of others^[3]. Children need emotional competencies to enable learning in an inherently social context such as school. For example, children who are better at identifying emotions and, hence, regulating these emotions are more likely to establish positive and supportive relationships with teachers and peers^[3] which in turn may affect their sense of school belonging. Moreover, emotionally competent children generally feel more at ease at school, even in situations of stress. Consequently, they have more cognitive capacity to focus on learning than peers who are emotionally insecure, which in turn positively impacts their performance ^[4].

Prior empirical research has repeatedly shown how among monolingual children, language competence is associated with emotional competence^[5-7]. For example, the more emotion words children know, the better they recognize others’ facial emotions ^[8]. Similarly, children’s verbal skills are positively associated with emotional awareness of self and others ^[9]. However, to date, it remains unclear whether being able to speak and comprehend multiple languages goes hand in hand with increased emotional competence and subsequent school outcomes. Moreover, if the latter is the case, it remains unclear why multilingual minority pupils often have less positive school outcomes.

Although multilingual children are likely to have more emotion concepts due to their exposure to emotions in at least two languages (and corresponding emotion cultures), whether or not this multilingual advantage materializes may critically depend on children’s language proficiency profile and the language policy of the school. Multilinguals rarely have equivalent proficiencies in their languages due to differences in language use across social contexts (cfr. complementarity principle^[10]). If emotions are rarely discussed in Dutch (e.g. because they are less discussed in school as compared to the family), children’s language skills in Dutch may not be substantive enough to induce a multilingual advantage in emotional competence. In other words, children’s language proficiency profile may be a critical factor to take into account when trying to explain differences in school outcomes between monolinguals and multilingual children. Moreover, if schools adopt a language assimilation policy, multilingual children may not be provided with the opportunity to connect their HL skills with their Dutch language skills which may hamper multilingual children’s emotional development. Hence, the relationship between language proficiency profile and emotional competence may be moderated by school’s language policy.

Research questions: How are school outcomes related to children’s language proficiency profiles (RQ1)? Does emotional competence mediate the relationship between different types of language proficiency profiles and school outcomes (RQ2?) And is the relationship between children’s language proficiency profiles and emotional competence conditional upon the role of the school’s language policy (RQ3)?

A collaborative team of European and North American researchers has been examining the development of teachers of multilingual students and meaningful engagement with students in schools for several years. In 2019, we published a literature review examining the research literature on preparing teachers to work with multilingual students in content classrooms, suggesting three large domains that must be attended to: context, orientations, and pedagogy (Viesca et al., 2019). In 2022, we published a four-nation study (Finland, Germany, England, and the US) examining the quality pedagogies of teachers of multilingual students with a strong reputation for excellence (Viesca et al., 2022). In 2022, we also conducted an exploratory study with teachers in five nations (Finland, Germany, Norway, England, and the US) regarding positive orientations for working with multilingual students. We presented the initial findings of that work at ECER 2023 (Viesca et al., 2023). Grounded in these collaborations, this paper draws on research and theory to suggest a conceptual model for the purpose of generating humanizing pedagogies with multilingual learners in practice across myriad contexts, both through teacher development activities and classroom practices with multilingual students.

In our work, we focus on a particular group of multilingual learners: students who live a multilingual life daily because they are learning content and the language of instruction simultaneously in school. With current migration patterns, this population is increasing across many nations (e.g., Arar et al., 2020; Seltzer & García, 2020). Yet, many school systems struggle to provide a quality education for such students (e.g., Anderson et al., 2016; Leider et al., 2021). Further, due to existing social hierarchies based on white supremacy, heteropatriarchy, ableism, and classism, the experiences of multilingual students and their families are often shaped by poverty, discrimination, and marginalization (Howard & Banks, 2020). As such, multilingual students and their families are often dehumanized in schools and society, necessitating explicit efforts on behalf of educators and schooling systems to generate learning opportunities and community belonging grounded in the full embrace of the total humanity of multilingual learners (Salazar, 2013), or in other words through humanizing pedagogies.

Therefore, we conceptualize humanizing pedagogies as attending to the knowledge and skills educators need around context, orientations, and pedagogies (Viesca et al, 2019). We articulate this model through the metaphor of weaving of a tapestry, which includes materials (like the knowledge and skills related to context, orientations, and pedagogies) as well as the process of weaving (which we conceptualize as the processes of critical reflection and complexity thinking). Further, as the efforts to generate humanizing pedagogies with multilingual students are at their core about justice and equity, we assert that the processes of critical reflection and complexity thinking must attend to three lenses: intrapersonal, interpersonal, and systemic. Our paper weaves all of these ideas together to generate a model of humanizing pedagogies for multilingual learners grounded in theory, research, and pedagogy while also being meaningfully practical in how it can impact teacher development across myriad contexts.

Multilingual students often face multiple challenges in school. There is often a gap in learning outcomes between students with a migrant background and those without it (OECD, 2019). Previous research has shown that the literacy skills are significantly lower among students who study Finnish as a second language (F2) compared to their Finnish as a first language (F1) peers (Ukkola & Metsämuuronen, 2023). Deficits in literacy skills are associated with both poor academic performance and with low sense of belonging and equality both in school and in society.

In the Finnish elementary school, special support is aimed at strengthening the literacy skills of F2 curriculum students. Still, this support often fails to provide the student the tools needed for adequate academic progress (Ståhlberg et al., 2023). One of the key challenges for teachers is to distinguish problems related to poor language skills and problems related to specific subject. Failing to address this question adequately has multiple negative consequences: it obscures the teacher’s ability to make objective assessment of learning, which can lead to both under- and overestimating the student’s skills. In addition, it might prevent the teacher from offering needs-based support for the F2-student.

Language awareness is a key concept in developing new pedagogic tools, which support multilingual students and their literacy skills. An important part of language awareness, multiliteracy, states that the teacher is aware of the students' language skills, the literacy of the subject being taught, the activities used to build meanings, and also a systematic approach to teaching the discipline literacy (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009; Shanahan & Shanahan, 2012). In practice, integrating language and content is challenging for a teacher who is not really specialized in teaching language.

Previous research has shown that it is difficult for subject teachers to perceive themselves as instructors of reading and writing, especially beyond vocabulary (Aalto & Tarnanen, 2015). Assessment is an important tool for teaching. Especially, studies have shown that well-targeted formative assessment (FA) promotes learning efficiently (Andrade et al., 2019; Black et al., 2004; Kingston & Nash, 2011; Kingston & Nash, 2015). The key principles in feedback as a part of FA are to identify what the learning goals are, where the student is in relation to these goals, and how the student can reach the goal (Hattie & Timperley, 2007).

To date, research on FA in teaching disciplinary literacy has been rare (Alderson et al., 2014; Gillis & Van Wig, 2015). On the other hand, literacy research has shown that feedback aimed at understanding text during reading is an effective tool for teaching (Swart et al., 2022). This paper aims to combine both theoretical and empirical research in developing a new model of feedback for teachers of environmental subjects. The new model aims to make it easier for the teacher to focus on students’ literacy skills as an integral part of content teaching. The model will be first applied to the teaching of F2 students in primary school, but the broader aim is that it is also suitable for guiding the literacy skills of F1 students. The model combines knowledge on both multiliteracy and FA. This study is based on the developmental research paradigm, which seeks theoretical insights and develops practical solutions (McKenney & Reeves, 2019).

Employers give hiring preference to university graduates with skills that apply across areas of study such as communication, teamwork, ethical decision-making, critical thinking, and knowledge application (Finley, 2021, 2023; Gray, 2023; Hart Research Associates, 2015, 2018; Social Research Centre, 2019). They value breadth and depth of learning, work ethic, persistence, and applied learning (Finley, 2021, 2023). The Council of the European Union similarly advocates for skills appropriate to the knowledge economy, including problem solving, creativity, cooperativeness, and self-regulation rather than memorization and factual learning, and strongly advocates for language learning (EUR-Lex, 2018). ePortfolios are a high impact educational practice that can help students develop these skills (Kuh et al., 2017; Watson et al., 2016).

ePortfolios are a product—an archive of learning artifacts—as well as a process that supports learning. They help students make valuable connections across learning activities through reflection. They encourage self-assessment and provide evidence of learning outcome achievement. An English language ePortfolio illustrates to students themselves, professors, classmates, and future employers what students can do in English and what they have achieved. It showcases their best work with reflections on their learning processes.

Multilingualism is a key principle of the Council of the European Union, which promotes language learning for personal and professional advancement, social cohesion, and intercultural competences (European Commission, n. d.; Le Pichon-Vorstman et al., 2020). English language skills are often a prerequisite to success in higher education and professional contexts. With 6.4 million globally mobile students worldwide comprising up to 29% of higher education enrollments in some countries (Project Atlas, 2022), integrating English language development with degree attainment is a clear directive for higher education institutions.

Flexible learning, an alternative to physical relocation, is increasing access to higher education. In the U.S., 61% of undergraduate students took at least one course by distance in fall, 2021 (National Center for Education Statistics, 2021). A prerequisite for student success in these contexts is self-regulated learning (SRL), or the ability “to control the factors or conditions affecting [students’] learning” (Dembo et al., 2006, p. 188). SRL entails forethought (purpose, goals), performance (strategy application), and self-reflection (performance monitoring) (Zimmerman 2002). Autonomy (self-direction, choice), structure (course design), and dialogue (interaction) are also important aspects of distance learning (Moore, 2013).

This study examines how students enrolled in English language workshops delivered in a blended modality developed SRL behaviors through an ePortfolio assignment.

Motivation constitutes a fundamental aspect of language acquisition, as posited by Dörnyei (2020). The sociological framework of investment, encompassing a student’s identity and commitment within the language learning process, complements the psychological dimension of motivation (Norton, 2013). Within the sociological perspective on foreign language acquisition, research explores how learners negotiate or partially reject different positions within learning contexts and analyses power relations in classrooms and language communities that either facilitate or impede the language learning process (Norton, 2022).

The theoretical foundation of investment resides at the intersection of capital, identity, and ideology. From a societal standpoint, language learning investment hinges on the cultural and human capital at one’s disposal and/or the desired capital to be attained (e.g., improved socioeconomic status), and the impact on one’s identity, particularly concerning aspects discriminated against in their first language or culture, such as homosexuality. Additionally, ideologies that structure power and dictate the inclusion or exclusion of specific societal groups play a crucial role. This triad of capital, identity, and ideologies is accessible through the social construct of agency, i.e. an individual’s ability to act within society (Darvin, 2019).

In the European context, where students are required to learn at least two additional languages, the role of third language acquisition is pivotal in education. In the German context of grammar schools (Gymnasien), students commonly choose between French and Spanish as their third language. Third language learning is characterised by intricate interactions between languages, denoted as foreign language-specific factors by Hufeisen (2018) and the multilingual factor by Herdina and Jessner (2002). Existing research indicates that the learner’s multilingual profile significantly influences their language learning motivation (author; Henry, 2017). Furthermore, recognizing the complexity and dynamic nature of multilingual systems, Włosowicz (2013) asserts that the role of motivation in third or additional language acquisition surpasses the intricacies observed in second language acquisition.

Building upon these insights, this study contends that findings on motivation for third or additional languages are transferable to the concept of investment in third or additional language learning. Dagenais (2003) underscores the complexity of investment, attributing it to the different languages learned and the varied aspects of investment associated with each language and between them. While the concept of investment has predominantly been explored in the context of English language learning among adults or immigrants, this presentation seeks to extend this scholarly domain to the third language classroom in schools. The primary objective is to address the research question: (RQ1) What causes French adolescent learners’ investment to emerge in formal French language learning?

Learner autonomy is a cornerstone of effective foreign language acquisition and is deeply intertwined with the principles of lifelong learning (Nakata, 2010). Holec (1979) defines autonomy as the ability to take charge of one’s learning journey, while Dickinson (1994) emphasizes the learner’s complete accountability for every decision made and implemented during the learning process.

Mastering the host country’s language is an indispensable step for adult immigrants’ successful integration into the new society (Dustmann & van Soest, 2001). To achieve this goal, self-directed language learning plays a pivotal role (Dörnyei, 1994; Robles, 2008).

Despite its immense social significance, the process of immigrant language acquisition remains an understudied area, encompassing limited understanding of the factors influencing the learning journeys of migrants. The heterogeneity of the immigrant population in Germany, characterized by diverse educational backgrounds and learning paths (Hünlich et al., 2018) further complicates the research landscape. In response to this need for comprehensive insights, this study embarked on the development and validation of a questionnaire designed to assess autonomous language learning among adult immigrants in Germany.

A pilot study preceding this one employed the concept of self-regulated language learning strategies (Oxford, 1990, 2011, 2016) to examine the characteristics of participants' independent learning. While the language learning strategy use questionnaire (Habók & Magyar, 2018) yielded valuable insights into participants' strategy usage, it fell short in addressing several facets of autonomy, including the ability to take responsibility for one's learning.

As the first step of this study, a comprehensive literature review identified six key factors (beyond the self-regulated language learning strategies) influencing autonomous language learning, including 1. Motivation, 2. The planning, monitoring, and evaluating of learning, 3. Attitudes towards learning, 4. Managing learning, 5. Taking responsibility, 6. Being engaged in autonomous learning activities. These factors served as the foundation for developing a comprehensive questionnaire comprising 106 items.

Following thorough translation and expert review, the questionnaire underwent pilot testing to ensure its validity and reliability (Tsang et al., 2017). Based on the pilot sampling, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis to refine the questionnaire, reducing its original 106 items to a smaller number (38). This refined questionnaire will be employed in the next phase of the research, involving a larger cohort of German language learners at A1, A2, and B1 levels (Council of Europe, 2001), to gain a deeper understanding of their autonomous learning practices.

More and more universities are using English as a medium of instruction around the world, in a variety of fields, from the most scientific to the least (Macaro et al., 2021). This evident spread of English in the tertiary sphere necessitates a high language skill from students who plan to study in these countries. Students from countries where English is not used as a medium of instruction, e.g. Syria, face a huge difficulty when moving to a new country where English is used. International students reported that one of the most challenging skills to be attained is reading (Kamal et al., 2022). One of the most cited strategies to be claimed effective is metacognition (Al-Bazi & Shukri, 2016; Deliany & Cahyono, 2020; Haling, 2022; Muhid et al., 2020; Rastegar et al., 2017). Metacognition is the ability to consciously reflect one’s own thinking as well as monitoring, controlling, and regulating that thinking, so that one reaches a previously defined goal (Lavi et al., 2019; Veenman et al., 2006). The effect of metacognition on reading skills has also been asserted to be positive (Al-Bazi & Shukri, 2016; Deliany & Cahyono, 2020; Haling, 2022; Muhid et al., 2020; Rastegar et al., 2017). One of the most renowned inventories to investigate students’ metacognitive strategies is The Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory, hereinafter, MARSI (Mokhtari & Reichard, 2002) which was revised later in 2018 (Mokhtari et al., 2018). A self-report instrument, MARSI explores the use of selected reading strategies while reading academic materials, namely planning, monitoring, and evaluating which correspond to global reading strategies, problem solving skills, and support reading skills (Al-Bazi & Shukri, 2016; Deliany & Cahyono, 2020; Haling, 2022; Muhid et al., 2020; Rastegar et al., 2017). Planning strategies engage deliberate set of tactics used by readers to while preparing for, organizing, and structuring their reading practice. Deploying these strategies, the reader aims to set goals, analyze the reading task, and develop a scheme to comprehend the task (Babashamasi et al., 2022; Mokhtari & Reichard, 2002; Muhid et al., 2020). Monitoring grips the active and continual process of cognition throughout the reading activity. It explores the awareness of the reader and questions their understanding and comprehension while engaging with the text. It has been maintained that the more skilled a reader is the higher chances of them to be able to monitor their comprehension, recognize when they do not understand, and attempt to deploy elected strategies to rectify the process (Mokhtari et al., 2018). Evaluating is concerned with the conscious and deliberate process of evaluating one’s understanding of the text once the reading process is finalized. This process integrates readers’ reflection on the content of the task and how it can relate to their background knowledge, contributing to the overall understanding of the text (Muhid et al., 2020; Rajasagaran & Ismail, 2022). Although it has received different criticisms in relation to adaptability (MacNamara, 2011; Mavrogianni et al., 2020), it is still perceived to be instrumental in tertiary education research. Henceforth, this study is planned to answer the following overarching question:

What metacognitive reading strategies do adult International students deploy in English-Taught Programs in Hungary?

This study will not only give insights about the strategies, but it is also more likely to incite curriculum designers and examiners to integrate metacognitive reading strategies in both language teaching books and exams, specifically in a heterogenous, multilingual context.

A considerable number of students face reading difficulties (e.g., 7.44% in Grade 5, Yang et al., 2022) and due to their persistence, these difficulties are likely to remain throughout life, although in a milder form (Psyridou et al., 2020). However, in addition to reading difficulties, comorbid social-emotional difficulties often occur. For students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) the comorbidity between reading disorders and ASD is unclear, requiring further research due to varied prevalence (6-30%; Hendren et al., 2018). Nevertheless, students with ASD show very heterogenous reading skills, ranging from average reading to severe difficulties (Solari et al., 2019), but often reading comprehension is impaired (McInyre et al., 2017).

ASD’s core characteristics involve persistent difficulties in interaction and communication, impacting personal, family, social and educational areas. Further, ASD is descripted as a spectrum of high and low functioning subtypes, affecting intellectual and language abilities (ICD 11; WHO, 2023). ASD severity might strongly influence reading comprehension (McIntyre et al., 2017). Further, as language abilities are often impaired, cognitive skills (e.g., intelligence, Theory of Mind (ToM), executive functions) might be even more important for students with ASD to compensate for them (Wang et al., 2023). In particular, demands posed by texts have an impact on reading comprehension difficulties, as often everyday life stories are used in assessments. Students with ASD find it difficult to relate to the storyline due to less interpersonal knowledge and ToM, their struggle to understand beliefs or intentions of others (Brown et al., 2013). It can be assumed that general language skills, cognitive skills and ASD severity are more relevant concerning reading difficulties of students with ASD than linguistic characteristics of specific languages, as international evidence supports these findings regarding reading difficulties in students with ASD, e.g., USA (Solari et al., 2019) or Brazil (Cardaso-Martins et al., 2015). Therefore, our collected data enable some in-depth understanding of reading profiles and offer the possibility to discuss implications of reading comprehension assessments for students with ASD.

This study is part of the project ASDEX (Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder and EXperiments in Science; funded by FWF), that aims to foster social inclusion and learning outcomes for students with ASD in secondary education. Specific teaching methods (e.g., experiments in smaller groups) in science classes were developed and evaluated. The data presented are helpful in understanding the reading comprehension skills of students with ASD, and the difficulties encountered should be considered in teaching methods to best serve all students.

This presentation addresses the following research questions:

-) To what extent can differences in reading skills of students with and without ASD and also within different ASD severity groups be observed?

-) To what extent do ASD characteristics, cognitive abilities, socio-economic status and first language influence the reading skills of students with ASD?

-) Which specific error patterns in reading comprehension are evident in students with ASD?

This paper analyzes reading skills of students with ASD in fifth to seventh grade in Austria, considering different ASD severity groups and reading profiles. The individual items of the reading test itself were also analyzed for error patterns according to the demands of the text. Regarding reading competence, reading comprehension, fluency and accuracy were measured, along with cognitive abilities (IQ). Further, teachers and parents assessed specific ASD characteristics. Therefore, 14 students with ASD were matched with their peers regarding gender, grade, type of school, cognitive abilities, age, socio-economic status, first language and spoken language(s) at home.

Success at school and educational opportunities are closely related to language skills (cf. Artelt et al. 2001). This insight has been accepted for 20 years and accordingly, tests to determine children’s language skills have now been introduced in almost all German states and interventions have been established for the support of children who have not succeeded in these tests, in order to promote their language acquisition. These interventions usually take place in separate groups and without connection to other educational activities in school. This can be criticized from the perspectives of inclusion and learning theory.

According to findings from various studies (e.g. Mol et al. 2008; Ennemoser et al. 2013), dialogical reading is particularly effective in supporting language development in children aged two to three, children with German as a second language and children with language development delays. The proven effects are primarily related to lexical development, while effects on grammatical abilities have not been proven so far. Dialogical reading is an implicit form of language education that is integrated into the day-to-day running of a school and is based on the content of the picture book itself and the children's experiences in life. So far, the focus has mostly been on the promotion of pragmatic and lexical skills. Morpho-syntactic skills are supported more incidentally and not purposefully via dialogical reading.

Since the acquisition of morpho-syntactic skills (in particular the further development of complex syntax, cases as well as complex verb structures) is of particular relevance for school-age children and directly influence their chances to succeed in the educational system (cf. Ruberg/Rothweiler 2012; Motsch/Rietz 2019; Lehmden et al. 2013), it is currently being discussed how the dialogic reading situation can be designed to particularly improve grammar acquisition (cf. Baldaeus et al. 2021; Lehmden et al. 2017; Schütz/Alt 2020). In this context the language support method “Goal-Oriented Dialogical Picture Book Reading" (Schütz 2021) has been developed.

“Goal-Oriented Dialogical Picture Book Reading” offers the opportunity to establish language acquisition support integrated into everyday school life. The picture book viewing can be used in the usual classroom context. The specific way in which the dialogues are designed by the teacher allows for one or several children to be specifically supported in the development of their language skills.

The aim of the ongoing study “ZDL Schule”, which was launched at the University of Bremen in September 2022, is to implement the method “Goal-Oriented Dialogical Picture Book Reading” in primary schools and to monitor the effects on the children’s language skills.

Metalinguistic knowledge is considered a prerequisite for metalinguistic activity, integral to metacognition—a person's reflective awareness of cognitive processes. Metalinguistic ability, encompassing cognition about language, involves analyzing, comparing, and extracting lexical and grammatical meaning (cf., J. N. Anderson 2008; Roehr-Brackin 2008). Bialystok’s (2001) framework elucidates the development of metalinguistic ability, perceived as conscious knowledge and sensitivity in language learning, teaching, and use (Verschik 2019), involving the analysis and extraction of information about language use (Jessner 2014). It is the awareness of how language functions in communication and making linguistic choices (Aruvee 2023). In second and foreign language learning, it aligns with plurilingual awareness, reflecting and comparing language knowledge during the learning process (Cook and Wei 2016).

Metalinguistic awareness serves as a cognitive foundation underlying the effective deployment of language learning strategies, providing learners with the capacity to analyze, compare, and extract meaningful information about language use. Oxford (1990, 2017) defines language learning strategies as specific actions or techniques that individuals employ to enhance their language learning experience, categorizing them into six major groups: cognitive, metacognitive, memory-related, affective, social, and compensation strategies. This comprehensive framework underscores the multifaceted nature of language learning, emphasizing the importance of both cognitive and affective dimensions in effective language acquisition.

Language learning strategies are intricately associated with self-regulation skills, as learners employ various cognitive and metacognitive processes to effectively manage their language learning experiences. The utilisation of strategies, such as goal-setting, planning, monitoring, and reflecting, aligns closely with the principles of self-regulation in learning (Zimmerman, 2000). The intentional selection and application of language learning strategies demonstrate learners' ability to regulate their cognitive processes and optimize their language acquisition efforts (Oxford, 1990). Actively engaging in strategic planning, learners exercise self-regulation, fostering a dynamic and adaptive approach to language learning (Cohen & Oxford, 2002).

This four-year-long study focuses on an innovative approach to supporting first-year university students' metalinguistic awareness through explicit and emphasized teaching of self-regulation skills in language learning. Previous contextual studies indicate that first-year students often exhibit deficiencies in language learning strategies, necessitating a targeted intervention (Meristo 2022). This research aims to address deficiencies in language learning strategies among first year students and evaluates the impact of this intervention on academic achievement, ethical conduct, and linguistic awareness.

In the second language (L2) field, research on pronunciation instruction has gradually captured the attention of L2 researchers. Influenced by the dominance of communicative language teaching theory, the focus of pronunciation instruction has shifted towards the development of overall communication skills. Three assessment principles proposed by numerous L2 scholars for measuring L2 learners’ pronunciation are intelligibility, comprehensibility, and accentedness (Derwing & Munro, 2005; Levis, 2005, 2020). Review studies on L2 pronunciation instruction primarily employ measurements involving human listeners and acoustic measures. Due to their close relationship with all three directions, human listeners’ judgments have constituted the majority of assessment methods for measuring outcomes in L2 pronunciation instruction. The use of acoustic measures is limited, as L2 pronunciation scholars believe acoustic analyses may not predict intelligibility accurately (Kermad & Kang, 2018). In recent years, combining advanced acoustic measures with native speakers’ judgments of specific pronunciation features has proven productive in elucidating the relationship between pronunciation features and the three principles mentioned above (Kang, Rubin & Pickering, 2010; Trofimovich & Isaacs, 2012). There has been very limited research conducted on exploring the overall effectiveness of pronunciation instructions in the L2 field and very few studies have followed an evaluation framework to guide the assessment of pronunciation instructions. Chapelle, Enright, and Jamieson (2010) proposed an argument-based validation model, suggesting a network of inferences needed to be verified to support test score interpretation and use. Six inferences were included in this model to develop a validity argument for a language test, that are domain definition, evaluation, generalization, explanation, extrapolation, and utilization (Fan & Yan, 2020). Saito and Plonsky (2019) suggested a framework for measuring the effectiveness of L2 pronunciation teaching, including the constructs, the scoring method, and the type of knowledge elicited method. Based on these two frameworks, we will propose a new evaluation framework as a theoretical base to provide a standard for designing assessments. Three domains are presented in the new proposed evaluation framework, that are the pronunciation constructs of assessments, scoring methods and reliability, and gender difference.

Three questions are discussed:

1) Do the effects of assessments vary when focusing on different pronunciation constructs?

2) Do the effects of assessments vary with scoring methods performed by human raters and acoustic scoring?

3) Do the effects of assessments vary in terms of reliability between human raters and acoustic scoring?

4) Do pronunciation instructions employ gender differences in assessments?

For some time now, multilingual children have been recognised as having an advantage over monolingual children in language awareness (cf. Bialystok 2001). For German-speaking countries, Oomen-Welke (2008) found that multilingual pupils produce more metalinguistic utterances and language-analytical actions than monolingual pupils. Wildemann, Bien-Miller and Akbulut (2016, 2018, 2020) also showed that multilingual primary school pupils produce more metalinguistic utterances, which suggests advantages in language awareness. The researchers were able to show that multilingual children produce expressions of language awareness at higher levels (see Wildemann et al. 2016 or 2020) and thus demonstrate more developed linguistic analytical skills. These correlate with overall language competence (see Akbuluth et al. 2018). Similar evidence comes from research on heritage speakers. Riehl et al 2018 postulate connections between language awareness and multilingual writing and text skills. Our project “SchreiBe Mehr” has two general goals: 1. We want to find out, which sorts of language awareness multilingual adolescents display throughout their writing processes and when being asked about their writing. 2. We try to integrate our findings and derive a model of writing awareness, which can be very useful in teaching writing.

To get a more specific notion of how language awareness is displayed and can be developed in writing, we focus on writing processes and texts by multilingual adolescents in Russian and German.

To specify a general concept of language awareness, in an initial project phase a heuristic concept of writing awareness was developed and differentiated into various sub-competences based on the data analysed in our pilot project, we identified criteria for studying writing awareness. From the literature, we adopted the division of signs of awareness into those directly related to writing and elicited aspects (cf. Wildemann et al. 2016). Observable aspects of writing awareness include visible aspects of the writing process, observable writing strategies, comments during writing, and others. Elicited aspects include comments on individual phases of the writing process, strategies and individual levels of the text, genre features, similarities and differences in the text when comparing languages. In addition, the presence of metalinguistic vocabulary is also a sign of writing awareness.

A special emphasis is laid on multilingual competences and resources in writing, e.g. the knowledge of writing schemata and genres in both languages. The genre selected for the study – a process description - is used not only in language subjects, but also in art, social and natural science subjects, which allows interdisciplinary didactic implications. We focus on the pupils´ reflection of their own writing processes and the visible or reported use of writing strategies by multilinguals in early secondary school. The texts and the interviews reveal the pupils´ knowledge of culture-specific text-schemata and how much writing such texts may be part of their (academic) lives - and in which languages. This offers many valuable insights on the interrelatedness of language, culture, and identity for linguistically responsive teachers. (Hufeisen 2008).

This outgoing study analyses the possibilities offered by school radio as an innovative ecosystem and literacy laboratory to promote communicative social justice and enhance the development of critical communicative competence in culturally diverse and low-academic performance pupils. In this sense, a case study was carried out in Secondary Education, specifically in the field of compensatory education and school language projects. During the development of the project, it was perceived that the use of school radio implies a space for knowledge exchange and citizen transformation, and a bridge between academic and social knowledge transmission, enabling students to acquire the necessary tools for the development of creative, experimental and critical thinking.

Critical literacy (CL) is considered a social practice through which a text is interpreted, considering its socio-cultural and socio-political context, it allows people to identify ideologies and intentions; and represents a way of life through which it is possible to know and understand the world, and uses texts and discourses by giving them new meanings within different contexts. Hence, CL is also understood as an agent for societal change (Canett Castro et al, 2021).

Within the school context, CL enables students to focus on understanding the purposes of the text and its function in different cultural and social settings, as well as, allows them to recognize different positions and ideologies (Cassany, 2013), analyse ideas, make judgements and assess the veracity of writings (Cassany, 2015). This link between CL and social justice offers pupils the opportunity to understand and actively participate in their social and political environment, as well as to understand and challenge social inequalities. It also implies reflecting critically on the reader's role in either reinforcing injustice through silence and doing nothing, or defying injustice through criticism and social action (Watkins, 2021).

In this way, it is essential to develop pupils' critical judgement during the educational process to acquire a socio-cognitive and socio-critical curricular conception during their education (Brito, 2017). Hence, social justice in the curricular sphere implies that people have access to the same opportunities and rights, to learn in conditions of equality, equity and mutual respect, especially those marginalised and excluded sectors.

The development of this exploratory study and the critical analysis of this emerging pedagogical experience and disruptive practice transforms this school scenario into an open space or laboratory for educational experimentation through the production of shared designs, prototypes of experiences and cultural products.

This pedagogical proposal opens up a disruptive space that redefines the classroom as a learning ecology. In this context, several elements determine the existence or not of a learning ecology (Barab & Roth, 2006), such as a plurality of learning contexts; an inter-contextual leap or between contexts; the existence of learning resources offered by all environments; and the generation of personal learning environments that determine individuality in the shaping of learning due to the diversity of possibilities that each person has at their disposal.

This addition of the ecological metaphor to the educational field contemplates research on the processes of knowledge construction and learning acquisition in a knowmadic society considering four dimensions: a) personal ecologies of lifelong learning in collective spaces of autonomous experimentation; b) learning ecologies and social mediations of formal and non-formal cultures and contexts; c) community ecologies: instituting participatory spaces and social transformation; and d) knowledge ecologies: projects generating spaces for creative work and experimentation with participatory methodologies. (Martínez & Fernández).

The study's research questions are as follows:

What are the potentialities of school radio as an innovative ecosystem to develop pupils’ communicative competence?

Can school radio function as a laboratory of critical literacy promote pupils’ communicative social justice?

Ever since Finnish was ratified as a national minority language in Sweden in 2000, pupils belonging to the Sweden Finnish minority have had the right to study the language in municipal schools. Though the right to receive Finnish mother tongue instruction is inalienable, the minority’s rights are not always met (Vuorsola 2019). The lacking support for adequate municipal mother tongue instruction (MTI) in Finnish and other heritage languages in Sweden is widely documented in research as well as in Council of Europe’s monitoring reports (Council of Europe 2022). However, the processes regarding enrollment for MTI has been under researched. As an attempt to partly rectify this, we examine how the procedures regarding the enrollment in the Finnish as a heritage language instruction in Sweden are presented in websites of different municipalities that offer additional support for the Sweden Finnish minority and the Finnish language in Sweden, and how comprehensible the instructions are.

As a theoretical background for this study, we use Ruiz’s (1984) orientations for language planning. Ruíz (1984) defines a language orientation as “a complex of dispositions toward language and its role, and toward languages and their role in society” (p. 16). Specifically, he describes three distinct orientations to language at a societal level: language-as-problem, language-as-right, and language-as-resource. Supported by international treaties on human rights, the language-as-right orientation views speaking and maintaining one’s home language as a human right (Hult & Hornberger, 2016; Ruiz, 1984; UN General Assembly, 1948). Moreover, Skutnabb-Kangas (2017) has defined linguistic human rights as inviolable basic rights. In language-as-resource orientation, multilingualism and cultural diversity are valued as resources for both individuals and society (Ruiz, 1984). Moreover, language is seen as having value with regard to identity construction, self-esteem, and intellectual engagement (Hult & Hornberger, 2016). In contrast, in the language-as-problem orientation, monolingualism is valued, while multilingualism is perceived as a threat to national unity (Ruiz, 1984). Multilingual speakers are believed to lack ability in the majority language (Ruiz, 1984) and have “reduced academic achievement” (Hult & Hornberger, 2016, p. 33), and issues of language learning are seen to correlate with larger societal problems. In this study, Ruiz’s language orientations are a relevant framework to qualitatively analyze, categorize, and discuss descriptions regarding the enrollment in the Finnish as a heritage language instruction in Sweden.

The data is analyzed through a critical genre analysis lens, which entails that discourse consist of three levels namely text, genre and professional practice (Bhatia 2015). While the text level refers to the content and composition of the information provided on the websites, discourse as genre goes beyond the text’s composition and deals with how it is “interpreted, used and exploited in specific contexts, whether social, institutional, or more narrowly professional, to achieve specific disciplinary goals, which often require the use of methods that investigate not only linguistic issues, but also socio-pragmatic ones” (Bahtia 2015: 10). Finally, we adapt the level of discourse as professional practice to apply for the families of Finnish speakers in Finland to discuss “challenges and benefits such genres are likely to bring to a particular set of readers” (Bhatia 2015: 10). Even though critical genre analysis is mostly utilized for professional genres, the methodology has been implemented by Björkvall and Nyström Höög (2021) when analyzing municipal ‘platform of values -texts’.

Our research questions are the following:

1) How comprehensible are the descriptions regarding the rights to receive instruction in Finnish as well as the procedures on how to enroll in the Finnish as a heritage language instruction in Sweden?

2) To what extent do the descriptions reflect the language policies of Sweden as well as Ruiz’s orientations?

In many countries the official status of minority languages has become stronger in recent years. This is also the case in Sweden, where for example Finnish is one of the official national minority languages. It has a protected legal position and its users have legal rights to use their language, and in some municipalities, also to get services in Finnish in pre-school and elderly care. However, thus far, there is little research on language beliefs or language use of the Finnish-speakers in Sweden. Specifically, the beliefs and language use of minority language teachers of Finnish have not been studied extensively. Investigating these beliefs and experiences is important for several reasons: beliefs and values influence actions and language policies (Borg, 2006; Johnson, 2013), and teachers’ beliefs may influence the language choices their students’ parents make at home (Curdt-Christiansen & Huang, 2020; Spolsky, 2012). This is important since supporting first language skills results in better learning outcomes (Eunjung Relyea & Amendum, 2019; Ganuza & Hedman, 2018).

Maintaining national minority languages might be threatened, if the speakers do not recognize the benefits of multilingualism (Purkarthofer, 2020). Promoting multilingualism means valuing all languages and considering them equal, as well as supporting the use of all the languages speakers know (de Jong, 2011). Several studies have shown a cognitive advantage in bilingual adults and children (for systematic reviews, see Adesope et al., 2010; van den Noort et al., 2019). Behind the language choices, i.e. language use and language policies, are always power dynamics and social contexts (Tseng, 2020); those in power, often also schools and teachers, determine what languages are considered appropriate. The home surrounding plays an important role in motivating children to maintain and develop their languages, but societal pressures related to assimilation may cause language loss, especially if minority languages are discriminated against (Cho et al., 1997). Thus, in order to be able to understand the possibilities for maintenance of minority languages, it is important to get to know how national minority language teachers use different languages, in this study mainly Finnish Swedish and English, as well as how they perceive the value of these languages. Understanding minority language teachers’ beliefs and language use also contributes to developing the education of minority speaker students.

This study aims to fill the aforementioned gaps by seeking responses to the following research questions:

RQ1: What are the language beliefs of teachers of Finnish as a national minority language in Sweden regarding Finnish, Swedish and English?

RQ2: How do teachers of Finnish as a minority language in Sweden use their languages?

In this study, we use the term (official/national) minority language to refer to the languages that have an official status as national minority languages in Sweden, including specific legal rights aiming to keep the language alive and guarantee certain services in that language to its speakers. In the case of Finnish in Sweden, also the term heritage language has been used. This term has an affiliative dimension, since sometimes heritage language speakers might only have a cultural connection to the language, no actual skills (Eisenchlas & Schalley, 2020). However, since Finnish has an official minority language status in Sweden and since our participants have skills in Finnish language, we prefer using the term (official/national) minority language. Additionally, we use the term first language when we refer to the language that an individual has the strongest skills in, or whcih they have learned in their homes. Nevertheless, we acknowledge that none of these terms is neutral and there are some problems related to their use (see e.g. Eisenchlas & Schalley, 2020).

Research on language acquisition demonstrate that in most cases, the family is the primary basis and starting point of education, positive socialization with the mother tongue, and mother tongue education. The family, as the primary factor of socialization, makes a decision that is very important for the future, taking into account linguistic socialization, thereby planning the linguistic future of children (Piller, 2002). Family language policy can be defined as an “explicit and overt planning in relation to language use within the home among family members” (King et al., 2013).

Representatives of this field of research (Curdt-Christiansen, 2009; Luykx, 2005) have attempted to integrate theory, public policy data, and language areas of children’s language acquisition. The main research preoccupations concerned “family language ideologies (how family members think about language), language practices (what they do with language), and language management (what they try to do with language)” (Spolsky, 2004).Monolingual families mostly have their own language policy, for example in terms of practical use or politeness (Blum-Kulka, 1997; Spolsky, 2004). An important area of ​​research on family language policies is how family decisions provide the framework for parental interaction and the linguistic development of children (De Houwer, 2017).

Much research has focused on bilingual and even multilingual families, in order to better understand how to preserve the inherited language(s) in their homes. These studies took into account a number of factors in order to promote child bilingualism policies, including parental consistency, child age, social contexts, and support (De Houwer, 2017). While there is no specific language policy for a bilingual family (e.g., one parent is monolingual only) and due to the fact that the child is regularly acquainted with the two languages, research suggests that a home language policy that reflects multilingualism cannot be ignored (Döpke, 1998).

An increasing number of researches examine the critical influence of children on the language use of parents. In contrast to previous research which mainly emphasised the role of parents in the linguistic socialisation of children (Garrett & Baquedano-López, 2002), more recent work focused on family socialization as a collaborative outcome, i.e., that children are also active participants in their parents’ socialization with languages (Luykx, 2005; Goodwin & Kyratzis, 2011).

Within the outlined theoretical framework the general aim of our research is to reveal the family environment factors related language socialisation strategies of the Hungarian community in the small town of Margitha (Bihor County), with a balanced Hungarian-Romanian population. Our research seeks to explore the role of family socialisation related social factors that influence the motivation and opportunities of students belonging to the Hungarian minority community in learning the Romanian language. (the official state language of Romania).

a) What are the family related factors that contribute to the linguistic socialization of children ?;

b) What is the influence of the family upon children in learning their mother tongue, learning the Romanian language,and the extent to which the Romanian language is present in different language use scenes and stages in the children and young adults life?;

c) Based on the sociological characteristics of the families of the heterogeneous Hungarian community living in Marghita, what differences can be discovered in the field of learning and use of languages inside and outside family?

In imparting subject-specific competencies, visual stimuli often serve as the basis for classroom discourse. Images are used in every subject as they serve both as stimuli for expressions and to support learning and introduce subject-specific thematic aspects (Hallet 2008). In second and foreign language teaching, there are numerous assumptions about the potential of using images for linguistic learning (Kress & van Leeuwen 2021).

In the context of scaffolding support (Gibbons 2015), multimodal practices play a significant role: According to Gibbons (2015: 45), references to various carriers of meaning provide multiple connection points to everyday experiences and already known or learned content. Gibbons describes this strategy or didactic function of relying on visualizations or other modes of support, such as gestures, with the term 'message abundancy' (Gibbons 2015: 42–45): "Message abundancy is a significant aspect of comprehensible teacher talk and is central to effective learning. When teacher talk is integrated with other systems of meaning, it is much more likely to be understood." (Gibbons: 44–45) By combining different semiotic resources, L2 learners can activate their prior knowledge, stimulating comprehension processes and thereby eliciting output. Especially when it comes to leading learners from a concrete level of observation to a more abstract, context-reduced level, this strategy can be helpful (Kniffka, & Neuer 2008: 129). Many didactic-methodological concepts and programmes for language-sensitive subject teaching are based on the assumption that visualization and contextual embedding support a dual subject-matter-specific and associated linguistic progression.

However, in dyadic classroom communication with L2-learners, it is unclear which interactional and multimodal practices come into play in relation to image perception. How knowledge is constructed depends on the way it is presented, and the methods and media used. The form of representation influences both what is learned and how it is learned (Jewitt 2008: 241). Switching between modes of representation and thus the perception of meanings from different modalities, in particular the visual material in the school subject context, their integration and implementation in a communicative act requires multiliterate discourse competence (Jewitt 2008: 255).

Therefore, the aim of this interdisciplinary exploratory study on subject-specific image discussions with L2 learners (n = 18) in secondary schools (Germany, Hesse, May–July 2023) is to capture students' image communication in relation to specific teaching objectives, to analyse and compare discourses about images. This serves to draw conclusions about the characteristics and conditions of acquisition-supportive, learning-productive, and academically challenging practices for the use of images. By describing and analysing the subject-specific and linguistic practices of students in dyadic image conversations, the study investigates which subject-specific, visual, and associated linguistic and discursive practices and competencies play a role in image reception and the associated gain in knowledge.

Conclusions about multimodal interaction via images are drawn with reference to the foundations of multimodality (Kress 2021; Rowsell & Collier 2017) and the understanding of interactional competence according to Sert (2015: 44-50), Seedhouse (2009), Hall and Pekarek Doehler (2011: 1-3), and the conceptualisation of 'classroom discourse' as a form of media-related classroom interaction (Thomson 2022: 17-21).

Embodied learning and arts integration – in which languages and/or literacies are integrated with the use of an art form, such as dance – have lately gained more attention in research on languages and literacies education (e.g., Johnson & Kontovourki, 2016; Jusslin et al., 2022). Previous research on these topics stresses the important role of teacher education in acting as a catalyst in renewing educational practices (Guerretaz et al., 2022; Jusslin et al., 2022; Møller-Skau & Lindstøl, 2022). Teacher education has an important role in preparing student teachers to teach languages and literacies and can influence their understandings thereof (e.g., Bomer et al., 2019; Kanakri, 2017).

Aiming to integrate teaching and research in teacher education, we introduced embodied and arts-integrated languages and literacies education in class teacher education for primary education (grades 1–6) at Åbo Akademi University (ÅAU), Finland. We implemented a workshop series across language and arts education courses for student teachers at ÅAU. The student teachers discussed opportunities and challenges in relation to the teaching approaches, which caught our attention. In this study, we explore the opportunities and challenges more in-depth to gain insight into aspects that teacher education needs to address regarding embodied and arts-integrated languages and literacies education.

This study engages with posthumanist theories (Barad, 2007; Haraway, 1992), which align with a relational ontology, and stresses how students, educational realities, and knowledges are constantly produced in relations. Posthumanist theories contribute with an understanding of languages and literacies as distributed across humans, spaces, and materials (Toohey et al., 2020) and as embodied processes (MacLure, 2013; Toohey et al., 2020). Further, diffraction is a key concept in the current study (Barad, 2007; Haraway, 1992) and has lately been increasingly used as an alternative to reflection in teacher education (e.g., Lambert, 2021; Moxnes & Osgood, 2018). Diffraction focuses on differences and the effects they might have (Barad, 2007, p. 28). In teacher education, diffraction offers ways to read teaching practices through, for example, different theories, policies, memories, and sensory responses, acknowledging their emergence from messy, embodied, and material encounters in teaching (Lambert, 2021).

In the workshops, the student teachers’ insights from their embodied participation in the practical workshops, discussions of theoretical perspectives, previous personal experiences, and future teaching profession became diffracted, read through one another. Engaging with this theoretical approach, this study aims to explore the student teachers’ diffractions of opportunities and challenges in using embodied and arts-integrated teaching approaches in languages and literacies education. Our analytic questions are: What did engagement in embodied and arts-integrated languages and literacies education in teacher education set in motion for the student teachers? What opportunities and challenges did such teaching approaches enable student teachers to think?

School subjects are taught through academic language. Different studies have shown that students who are proficient AL users achieve better in school (Snow et al., 1989; Smit, 2013; Kleemans, 2013). AL is used at school to communicate efficiently about abstract, not directly visible content and it has specific features at the lexical, morpho-syntactic and textual level (Aarts et al., 2011, Henrichs, 2010). Not only are subjects taught by using AL, the students’ understanding and knowledge of the subject is also assessed in AL. In addition, knowledge about AL itself is part of the content of schooling (Schleppegrell, 2004). The language students use and need in the school setting however differs substantially from the language learned at home (Henrichs, 2010; Aarts et al., 2011). Teachers can stimulate AL learning of students by using AL themselves and by helping students understand and use AL (Zwiers, 2008).

AL is used in all school subjects. In mathematics AL is necessary because complex problems are placed in a contextual framework and to solve it students need to decontextualize it (Eerde et al., 2002; Mercer & Sams, 2006). Besides this teachers and students may use interactive mathematical conversation to learn and understand mathematical concepts. Students need to learn specific language features of mathematics before they can really participate in such discourse. This language is part of the AL register (Prenger, 2005; Sfard, 2001).

Instructional methods used during mathematics instruction offer different possibilities for AL stimulating behavior. The methods explanation and discussion offer possibilities for behavior aimed at understanding and at triggering AL by the students (Dokter et al, 2017). To stimulate students’ AL development teachers should use AL themselves and show AL stimulating strategies. There are six strategies aimed at students’ AL understanding (‘modeling with think-alouds’, ‘giving meaning’, ‘recasting own language’, ‘repeating own correct language’, ‘reformulating own language’, ‘visualizing’) and six strategies aimed at students’ AL production (‘asking to be more precise’, ‘giving directions’, ‘provocative statement’, ‘recasting language of the student’, ‘repeating language of the student’, ‘reformulating language of the student’). What is equally important, is that teachers connect the home language with the academic language. Strategies that change home language into language with more AL features are called power up, strategies where AL is unpacked back into home language are called power down (Harper & Parkin, 2017).

The goal of this research was to gain an insight in the AL stimulating behavior of teachers in grade 1 and 2 during mathematics instruction. The teacher plays an important role in stimulating students’ development of AL, but the extent in which they do this differs (Schleppegrell 2004; Elbers 2012; Tomasello 2000). The AL stimulating behavior that appears during explanation or discussion in mathematics instruction may differ, because the interaction during explanation is teacher lead while interaction during discussion also may be student lead (Nijland, 2011). This leads to the following questions:

1. What differences can be seen in the AL input of primary school teachers of grade 1/2 in mathematics instruction during the instructional methods explanation and discussion?
2. What AL stimulating behavior do primary school teachers of grade 1/2 show in mathematics instruction during the instructional methods explanation and discussion?

Artificial Intelligence in a foreign language education (AIFLED) has been gaining special attention globally. The emergence of Intelligent Tutoring Systems, AI conversational agents, ChatGPT, robots and other AI tools in foreign language learning has prompted a surge in research and recommendations. The previous systematic literature reviews include a focus on the integration and impact of advanced technologies, with an emphasis on Artificial Intelligence in Language Education and a broader examination of new technologies (Liang et al., 2021; Zhang & Zou 2020; Tobing et al. 2023). Pedagogical applications, such as mobile learning, multimedia tools, and digital game elements, are highlighted as effective tools for enhancing language learning experiences and motivation. Furthermore, cognitive aspects in language education has received specific attention. Positive outcomes, including improved language skills and increased learner motivation, have been consistently reported. The studies also recognize challenges and limitations related to technology integration, emphasizing the need for ongoing research to address issues like short intervention periods and the effectiveness of emerging technologies.

The swift technological progress in the field of AI raises a multitude of inquiries and challenges related to utilization of AI in schools, encompassing its impact on language acquisition, affective or psychological states, or assessment methods. There have been several systematic literature reviews on AI in foreign language teaching, human-computer collaboration in language education, and technology-enhanced language learning; however, the research objects are mainly university or college levels and higher education learners (Ji et al., 2022; Zhang & Zou, 2020; Liang et al., 2021; Sharadgah & Sadi, 2022; Tobing et al., 2023). This study aims to add to the current research by focusing on studies in schools settings (K-12).

The objective of this systematic literature review is to investigate and synthesize the applications of AIFLED within school settings. The review aims to provide an understanding of the current state of research and identify emerging trends and gaps in the literature during the period between 2019 and 2023.

The following research questions guided our study:

• What AI tools have been employed in Foreign Language (FL) teaching in schools between 2019 and 2023?
• What pedagogical or foreign language aspects have been researched regarding the AI applications?
• What challenges and opportunities are associated with the integration of AI tools in FL education within school environments?

The conceptual framework for this review is grounded in the intersection of three main pillars:

- Pedagogical Integration: Examining how AI tools are integrated into pedagogical practices in FL teaching. This includes exploring theoretical framework, instructional design and the adaptability of AI tools.

- Learning Outcomes: Evaluating the impact of AI tools on language learning outcomes, including but not limited to linguistic proficiency, cultural understanding, student engagement and perceptions of AI.

- Challenges and Opportunities: Investigating the challenges faced and opportunities presented by the integration of AI tools in FL education. This involves exploring issues such as student acceptance, ethical considerations, and potential enhancements in language learning experiences.

The conceptual framework will guide the systematic analysis of literature, providing a structured approach to understanding application of AI tools in FL teaching in schools from 2019 to 2023.

In line with the conference theme “Education in an Age of Uncertainty,” our study explores the concept of “rewilding language education” as proposed by Thorne et al. (2021). This concept emphasizes integrating students’ digital and offline language experiences into classroom learning environments. Our research specifically focuses on the utilization of social media and streaming platforms in fostering autonomous language learning and valorisation of linguistic diversity. This aligns with the Council of Europe's agenda, which focuses on viewing learners as social agents promoting their learning autonomy and engagement (Council of Europe, 2018).

In our study, we introduce a bridging activity in Russian and Spanish language courses at a Portuguese university, tailored for future educators, translators, and linguists. Briging activity is a pedagogical design that aims to seamlessly integrate students’ extracurricular and academic language experiences, enhancing their informal language use (Thorne & Reinhardt, 2008). Previous research on bridging activities with a similar focus on social media showed positive results including target culture awareness development (Miller et al., 2019; Yeh & Mitric, 2021) and socio-pragmatic awareness development (Reinhardt & Ryu, 2013). Most of these studies are focused on text-based social interaction, so there is a gap in research regarding video consumption. Our bridging activity focuses on video consumption, exploring informal language use on social media and streaming platforms, and autonomous learning development.

The bridging activity aims to achieve several objectives:

1. Enhancing language and cultural awareness: By involving students in classroom discussions on language learning through videos and maintaining auto-ethnographic diaries of their video consumption in various languages, the activity encourages the exploration of plurilingual digital landscapes. This approach is supported by studies indicating the effectiveness of similar activities in fostering cultural and socio-pragmatic awareness (Miller et al., 2019; Yeh & Mitric, 2021; Reinhardt & Ryu, 2013).

2. Promoting self-directed learning: The activity is structured to bolster self-directed learning by valuing sharing their learning experiences with their specific strategies and techniques for language learning and foreign language video consumption. This aims to empower students to actively integrate their digital media experiences into their language learning journey.

3. Developing algorithmic and critical awareness: A crucial aspect of our study is to develop students’ critical awareness regarding the dominance of the English language in digital media and the influence of algorithms on content exposure (Jones, 2021). This objective addresses the gap in existing research concerning video-based social interactions and their impact on language learning.

The pedagogical objectives of this bridging activity go hand and hand with our research questions including: 1. What are the benefits and pitfalls of the implemented bridging activity? 2. What are the students’ perceptions of the development of language, cultural and algorithmic awarenesses? 3. What are the students' perceptions on the promotion of self-directed learning?

Overall, our study advocates for a plurilingual stance, valuing learners’ agency and cultural awareness in language education (Marshall & Moore, 2016). This perspective is integral to fostering a more inclusive and diverse linguistic environment in the classroom. The following methods allow us to collect relevant data.

ducation is of central relevance for social and system integration in multilingual European migration societies such as Austria and Germany (Hadjar & Becker 2019). In Austria and Germany, educational inequality can be observed for immigrant students at all stages of education, in correlation with disadvantaged socio-economic status and multilingualism (Dobutowitsch 2020, Döll & Knappik 2015, Ebert & Heublein 2017, Hinz & Thielemann 2013, OECD 2023, Unger et al. 2019).

It seems logical to pick up on recent developments in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) and discuss the potential of assistive AI technology such as natural language processing (NLP) tools for reducing language-based discrimination. AI-based NLP tools have already found their way into educational institutions worldwide: They are used for assessment and evaluation (e.g. feedback), management of learning processes (e.g. learning analytics), as assistants (e.g. for making contact), in the form of intelligent tutor systems and for the design of quasi-authentic meaning-focused tasks (Crompton & Burke 2023), and students use NLP tools to search for articles, translate, structure and edit texts (Garrel & Mayer 2023). It is widely recognized that AI has the potential to increase educational equality, but also carries the risk of making equal participation more difficult (GI 2023). At present, discrimination through AI is mainly discussed in terms of disadvantages due to various forms of algorithmic bias (Baker & Hawn 2021). From a power-critical anti-racist perspective, the question arises as to what extent the institutional regulation of access to assistive AI-supported NLP tools (re)produces inclusion and exclusion in education: Who is allowed to use AI-assisted NLP tools and in which situations? How are restrictions argued?

In recent years, in official German-speaking countries the term linguicism became established to describe language-related discrimination in the context of migration and multilingualism (Skutnabb-Kangas 2015). The term describes "ideologies, structures and practices which are used to legitimate, effectuate, regulate and reproduce an unequal division of power and resources (both material and immaterial) between groups which are defined on the basis of language" (Skutnabb-Kangas 1988: p. 13). Linguicism is therefore more likely to be understood as structural discrimination, which can have effects on the macro, meso and micro levels of education systems. According to Skutnabb-Kangas (2015), if the education policy of a multilingual migration society prioritizes a monolingual education system, this is linguicism at the macro level. At the meso and micro level, linguicism can occur in various forms of direct and indirect institutional discrimination (Dovidio et al. 2010, Gomolla 2023), e.g. by banning specific languages on campus or when lecturers also take linguistic aspects such as accents, sociolects or the fact of a multilingual biography into account when assessing academic performance (Döll & Knappik 2015, Dobutowitsch 2020).

Following the understanding of linguicism as a social structure, it has to be assumed that students will be allowed to use AI-supported generative NLP technology to improve the production and reception of texts to varying degrees depending on their and their family’s migration and language biography. For multilingual students from immigrant families, the strongest restrictions tend to be expected, especially in nation-state contexts such as Germany and Austria, which are characterized by neo-assimilationism (Nieke 2006, Döll 2019).

At a time when universities around the world are discussing how to deal with AI, we will use the example of two universities from Austria and Germany to examine the extent to which linguicist tendencies are emerging in the discourses on AI-supported generative NLP technology at the meso and micro level of higher education.

Foreign language (FL) learning motivation among students is an important topic in the European context, as the respect for linguistic diversity has been seen as a key principle of the European Union and learning several languages is necessary for many people (Baïdak et al., 2017). This is especially true for the examination of FL learning motivation among students with different socioeconomic status (SES), as notable discrepancies in the achievement of different SES groups of students have been documented in many European countries (e.g., the differences in PISA 2018 average reading scores between advantaged and disadvantaged students were over 100 points in Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Luxembourg, the Slovak Republic, and Switzerland, the OECD average gap being 89 points; OECD, 2019).

Recent review of EFL learning motivation research (Vonkova et al., 2021), however, has shown that the majority of research on EFL learning motivation between years 2016 and 2020 has been conducted in Asia, only a few studies focusing on Europe (10 in Spain and 3 in Sweden out of 90 analyzed studies). Also, there is a scarcity of research on the relationship between FL learning motivation and SES (Iwaniec, 2020). So far, only a few studies have studied this relationship among European students, such as Alejo and Piquer-Píriz (2016) in Spain, Iwaniec (2020) in Poland, and Vonkova et al. (2024) in the Czech Republic. Thus, the link between FL learning motivation and SES among students in Europe merits further investigation.

Currently, the L2 motivational self-system (L2MSS) is the most commonly used FL learning theory (Vonkova et al., 2021). The theory has originated in the work of Zoltán Dörnyei from Hungary (Dörnyei, 2009), who distinguished three major motivational components: the ideal L2 self, the ought-to L2 self, and L2 learning experience. The ideal L2 self concerns a desirable self image of the kind of L2 user a learner would like to become, the ought-to L2 self refers to the attributes a learner believes he/she ought to possess to meet expectations of others and to avoid possible negative outcomes, and L2 learning experience covers motives related to the immediate learning environment and experiences, such as the influence of the teacher or the peer group (Dörnyei, 2009; You & Dörnyei, 2016). L2MSS theory is a theoretical framework to L2 learning motivation we have adopted in this study.

Our study contributes to filling the gap in the current research regarding our understanding of the relationship between SES and foreign language learning motivation. We build on the findings of Vonkova et al. (2024) and aim to further explore individual ought-to L2 self items and their link to selected students’ SES-related variables. Such an analysis can help enhance our understanding of the ought-to L2 self construct and contribute to future research on the link between L2MSS components and SES in European countries. Specifically, our research question is as follows: What is the link between Czech students’ ought-to L2 self, at the level of individual items, and their selected socioeconomic characteristics (school type, and parental education)?

This paper summarizes the results of my PhD study about young children’s early literacy meaning-making, which I will defend in July 2024.

In my work, I adopt a sociocultural framework, that understands literacy as social practice (Barton & Hamilton, 2000). Instead of merely focussing on reading and writing skills, I explore how language and signs are used, which underlying social and cultural norms exist, and how different contexts shape people’s practices. Furthermore, the sociocultural framework highlights the role of language and social interactions in learning (Wells, 2009). When studying young children, this view needs to be extended to include also other semiotic resources, such as embodied modes, or the use of objects (Flewitt, 2005). Hence, early literacy meaning-making can be seen as a process of co-construction, in which participants use language or other semiotic resources, to develop a shared understanding of literacy.

For a long time, literacy learning was seen as exclusively reserved to formal school settings. The so-called ‘readiness’ perspective claimed that children have to attend a certain developmental level, before being able to learn about literacy (Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998). The emergent literacy perspective contrasts this view by acknowledging that children acquire important knowledge and skills about language, reading, and writing before they enter school (Pegorraro Schull et al., 2023). Emergent literacy affirms that children’s learning about literacy begins as early as birth (Clay, 1975) and is driven by their early engagement in literacy activities and their natural interest in learning (Sulzby and Teale,1996). Although this conceptualization has been established in research for many years, the need to develop early literacy practices in educational contexts persists. Studies have shown that children’s early literacy experiences can positively influence their educational outcomes (Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2014). However, rich and meaningful literacy practices in early childhood remain rare (Wells Rowe, 2018; Torr, 2019). While literacy in early childhood has been extensively studied from a cognitive perspective, focusing on emergent literacy skills (Brown, 2014), or in the context of shared reading situations at home (Steiner et al., 2021), only a few studies address early literacy from a sociocultural perspective and in the context of educational institutions. Furthermore, studies rarely focus on multilingual children. My PhD study addresses these research gaps by investigating the literacy practices in non-formal early education in Luxembourg. Furthermore, I explore the ways in which children make meaning in early literacy activities and how they employ different semiotic resources. The context of Luxembourg is particularly interesting to address these questions, as recent statistics have shown that more than 65% of the under-four-year old children grow up with at least two languages at home. Moreover, Luxembourg is one of the first countries to implement a multilingual educational policy for early childhood. This policy, called éducation plurlingue, requires early childhood practitioners to foster language development, collaborate with families, and network with other cultural and educational actors (MENJE & SNJ, 2021). Regarding language and literacy practices, this may involve activities in Luxembourgish and French, the inclusion of children’s home languages, and visits to local libraries.

Achievement emotions play a crucial role in students' lives (Marques et al., 2013). These emotions include feelings such as pride, enjoyment, hope, and anxiety that arise from students' academic achievements and failures (Pekrun et al., 2017). Understanding the significance of achievement emotions is essential for educators, parents, and policymakers, as it can lead to the development of effective strategies to enhance students' learning experiences. Not surprisingly, many studies have investigated the association between achievement emotions and students' academic performance, motivation, engagement, and overall well-being (e.g., Luo & Luo, 2022; Mega et al., 2014; Obermeier et al., 2022; Pekrun et al., 2017). However, there has been relatively less attention given to understanding the determinants or antecedents of these emotions.

Aligning with the goal of promoting social justice and equity in education, prior research has extensively investigated the role of socioeconomic status (SES) in various student outcomes, including achievement emotions. Due to the limited attention received by achievement emotions in writing compared to reading and mathematics, this study focused specifically on achievement emotions in the context of writing learning and the classroom, recognizing the domain specificity of these emotions (Goetz et al., 2007). To gain a better understanding of the association between SES and achievement emotions, it is crucial to explore the potential mediation mechanisms underlying this relationship. Previous research has indicated positive links between SES and students' self-concept (e.g., Wiederkehr et al., 2015), as well as between self-concept and achievement emotions (e.g., Duggleby et al., 2009). Consequently, it is expected that writing self-concept may serve as a mediator between SES and achievement emotions. However, little is known about whether writing self-concept truly mediates the association between SES and achievement emotions. As certain achievement emotions, such as enjoyment and anxiety, have been extensively studied, this particular investigation focused on the under-researched emotion of hope. Thus, one of the primary objectives of this study is to examine the mediating role of writing self-concept in the relationship between SES and hope in writing.

While it is evident that family environment, including SES, influences students' achievement emotions, the strength of this association may vary depending on the school climate and support, such as teacher support. However, little is currently known about the effect of the interaction between SES and teacher support on achievement emotions in writing. Drawing from well-established research demonstrating the relationships between SES and hope (e.g., Raats et al., 2019), as well as between teacher support and hope (e.g., David et al., 2023), it can be hypothesized that teacher support moderates the association between SES and hope in writing. In other words, teacher support may weaken the strength of the association between SES and hope in writing.

Given the hypothesis that teacher support moderates the direct association between SES and hope in writing, the question arises as to whether the indirect association, in which the relationship between SES and hope in writing is mediated by writing self-concept, may also vary depending on teacher support. To the best of our knowledge, there have been no studies exploring the moderating role of teacher support in the indirect pathways from SES to hope in writing through writing self-concept. Based on emerging evidence regarding the relationships between SES and self-concept (e.g., Wiederkehr et al., 2015), as well as between teacher support and self-concept (e.g., Mercer et al., 2011), it is possible to hypothesize the existence of a moderation mechanism involved in the indirect association between SES and hope. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate whether teacher support moderates both the direct and indirect associations between SES and hope in writing, mediated by writing self-concept.