The Editor and Board of Language Teaching are pleased to announce that the recipient of the 2010 Christopher Brumfit thesis award is Dr Susan Mary Macqueen.

In this review article on identity, language learning, and social change, we argue that contemporary poststructuralist theories of language, identity, and power offer new perspectives on language learning and teaching, and have been of considerable interest in our field. We first review poststructuralist theories of language, subjectivity, and positioning and explain sociocultural theories of language learning. We then discuss constructs of investment and imagined communities/imagined identities (Norton Peirce 1995; Norton 1997, 2000, 2001), showing how these have been used by diverse identity researchers. Illustrative examples of studies that investigate how identity categories like race, gender, and sexuality interact with language learning are discussed. Common qualitative research methods used in studies of identity and language learning are presented, and we review the research on identity and language teaching in different regions of the world. We examine how digital technologies may be affecting language learners' identities, and how learner resistance impacts language learning. Recent critiques of research on identity and language learning are explored, and we consider directions for research in an era of increasing globalization. We anticipate that the identities and investments of language learners, as well as their teachers, will continue to generate exciting and innovative research in the future.

This review aims to identify major issues in and the direction of recent L2 Japanese research by reviewing over 200 empirical studies published in English or Japanese between 2000 and 2010. The first part of this article examines topics in second language acquisition (SLA) research with regard to L2 Japanese, including vocabulary and kanji (Chinese characters transferred into Japanese) learning, syntactic development, reading and writing in L2 Japanese, interlanguage pragmatics and language socialization, affective factors, and multilingualism and the acquisition of Japanese as a heritage language. The second part offers an overview of issues and problems in pedagogical practices, including curriculum design, culture in language education, classroom discourse, and study abroad. The review of these themes illustrates a broad picture of current research in L2 Japanese learning and instruction inspired by general trends in SLA and applied linguistics research, as well as unique features of Japanese language and social contexts.

Language teaching and learning has many different cultural dimensions, and over the years more and more of these have been the subject of research. The first dimension to be explored was that of content: the images of target language countries and the world that were offered in textbooks and presented in class. The next dimension was that of the learner: the (inter)cultural learning, competence and identity of the learner or subject. The next dimension was context: the situation and role of language teaching and learning in society and in the world.

A feature of language assessment internationally is its role in the enforcement of language policies established by governments and other educational and cultural agencies. This trend has led to the near-universal adoption of curriculum and assessment frameworks, the clearest example of which is the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). What does this movement represent? What is the source of the authority of frameworks such as the CEFR, and why are they so appealing to governments? The paper argues that the determination of test constructs within policy-related frameworks leads to inflexibility, and considers the case of the testing of competence in English as a lingua franca (ELF) communication, in the context of international civil aviation communication.

Genres are staged, structured, communicative events, motivated by various communicative purposes, and performed by members of specific discourse communities (Swales 1990; Bhatia 1993, 2004; Berkenkotter & Huckin 1995). Since its inception, with the two seminal works on the topic by Swales (1990) and Bhatia (1993), genre analysis has taken pride of place in much of the ongoing research in languages for specific purposes (LSP). The goal of much of this research is pedagogic, the understanding being that good genre descriptions can feed into pedagogy in the form of syllabus and materials design. Whereas genre analysis usually focuses on language as action, this paper argues that analysis needs to focus also on content and identity. The discussion sketches out what this might mean in terms of pedagogic application.

This new strand in the journal provides a space for contributors to present a personal stance either on future research needs or on the perceived current applications of research in the classroom. Like much of our current content, it echoes the historical uniqueness of this journal in terms of its rich and expert overview of recent research in the field of L2 teaching and learning. However, this new strand takes such research as its starting point and attempts to look forward, using these findings both to debate their application in the language learning classroom and also to suggest where research would be best directed in the future. Thus, the objective of both types of paper is eminently practical: contributors to the research agenda will present suggestions for what research might usefully be undertaken, given what is currently known or what is perceived to be necessary. In the research into practice papers there will be critical appraisal both of what research is, and is not, getting through to the language learning classroom, policy making, curriculum design, evaluation of teaching and/or assessment programmes, and practical suggestions made for improving such outcomes.

This article is a personal view of the application of research on vocabulary to teaching and how there are three different types or categories of relationship between that research and the teaching to which it is applied: first, where the research is not applied or not applied well, second, where it is reasonably well applied, and third, where it is over-applied. For each of these three categories, I look at what I consider to be the most important areas of research and suggest why they fit into that category. The topics covered include planning vocabulary courses, distinguishing high frequency and low frequency words, extensive reading, the deliberate learning of vocabulary, academic vocabulary and vocabulary teaching.

A panel discussion presented at the Second Language Acquisition Graduate Student Symposium on 17 April 2010 at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Faculty and graduate students in the Doctoral Program in Second Language Acquisition (SLA) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison engage in a broad spectrum of research. From Professor Sally Magnan's research on study abroad and Professor Monika Chavez's work in foreign language policy through Professor Richard Young's examination of language-in-interaction, Professor Jane Zuengler's investigation of language socialization, Professor Diana Frantzen's research in second language (L2) vocabulary acquisition and linguistic analysis of literature, to Professor Catherine Stafford's investigation of processes involved in Spanish-English bilinguals’ acquisition of a third language (L3), our research interests encompass much of the SLA field.

Hosted by Birkbeck College, University of London, and co-organised by the International Association of Multilingualism, the AILA Research network ‘Multilingualism: Acquisition and Use’ and the Centre for Multilingual & Multicultural Research, Birkbeck; 24–25 June 2010.

The Editors, Publishers, and Board of Language Teaching would like to thank the following readers who have generously assisted with their time and expertise reviewing manuscripts in the preparation of volume 44. Reviewers are absolutely critical to the functioning of any peer reviewed journal, and we are very much in their debt.