Digital multimodal composing (DMC) has been valued as an engaging pedagogy in language teaching and learning in recent decades. Although research on DMC is flourishing and evidences its benefits for students' development as second language (L2) users and writers, there are some missing links between research findings and classroom practices. In this article, we examine three kinds of relationships between research and practice with regard to DMC: areas in which research findings have not been well applied, areas in which research findings have been reasonably well applied, and areas in which research findings have been usefully applied. As recent research–practice frameworks in education research emphasize a collaborative relationship between researchers and practitioners, we argue that L2 writing researchers' and teacher educators' reflections and experiences are crucial to facilitate the dialogue between DMC research and practice in writing contexts. We suggest that DMC should be incorporated into L2 teacher education programs so that instructors are equipped with the necessary knowledge and competence to design, implement, and assess students' DMC productions.

Task planning and its effect on the complexity of second language (L2) written production have been studied extensively. However, the results of these studies are inconclusive, and at times contradictory, potentially as a result of variation in metrics of linguistic complexity. This study is an extension of earlier research syntheses and quantitative meta-analyses on the effects of planning on oral and written L2 production. It examines the identification and selection of linguistic complexity metrics in previous research on planning and its subsequent effects on the linguistic complexity of written L2 production. This research-focused synthesis of studies surveys construct definitions and operational definitions of linguistic complexity in the research domain and provides an overview of rationales for metric selection in the included studies. Methodological implications for future research are discussed in light of the findings.

Traditionally, physical education has focused on movement competency to develop skills for successful performance in different physical activities. Recently, however, the focus of many physical educators is shifting to notions of physical literacy to promote human flourishing through embodied experiences across multiple and diverse movement contexts well beyond physical education. While this shift is a welcome corrective to more traditional approaches to physical education, mainstream conceptions of physical literacy remain unduly narrow as rooted in colonial logics that continue to separate humans from the Earth while locating dominant categories of the human in hierarchical positions of power. In response, this article is an entanglement of Western and Métis embodiments of physical literacy. Deconstructing universalising models and modes of physical literacy set in dominant Western constructs, we seek to foster culturally relevant and meaningful physical literacy to promote physical activity and the wholistic health and well-being of Indigenous, or specifically, Red River Métis teachers and learners in Winnipeg, Canada. In doing so, we seek to provide a (re)visioning of human/Earth relationships as cultivated through movement-with Land; and thus, strengthen physical educational practices that more adequately attends to social (human) and ecological (Earth) flourishing in the context of global climate change.

The advent of generative artificial intelligence (AI) models holds potential for aiding teachers in the generation of pedagogical materials. However, numerous knowledge gaps concerning the behavior of these models obfuscate the generation of research-informed guidance for their effective usage. Here, we assess trends in prompt specificity, variability, and weaknesses in foreign language teacher lesson plans generated by zero-shot prompting in ChatGPT. Iterating a series of prompts that increased in complexity, we found that output lesson plans were generally high quality, though additional context and specificity to a prompt did not guarantee a concomitant increase in quality. Additionally, we observed extreme cases of variability in outputs generated by the same prompt. In many cases, this variability reflected a conflict between outdated (e.g. reciting scripted dialogues) and more current research-based pedagogical practices (e.g. a focus on communication). These results suggest that the training of generative AI models on classic texts concerning pedagogical practices may bias generated content toward teaching practices that have been long refuted by research. Collectively, our results offer immediate translational implications for practicing and training foreign language teachers on the use of AI tools. More broadly, these findings highlight trends in generative AI output that have implications for the development of pedagogical materials across a diversity of content areas.

Based on the rigorous systematicity assumed in systematic review methodology, it is no surprise that a prominent review such as Macaro et al.'s (2018) on English medium instruction (EMI) has been used as a basis for subsequent EMI research. However, in this article, we explore the ways in which the focus of systematic reviews can be necessarily narrowed and how this poses a risk to research when readers perceive them as offering definitive conclusions on all aspects of a subject. This article addresses two significant trends in applied linguistics. First, systematic review – that is, the use of formalised systems when reviewing literature – has become far more prominent and therefore more impactful than traditional reviews as a methodology (Chong & Plonsky, 2023). Second, there has been an explosive growth in interest in EMI research (Curle et al., 2024). There are further parallels between the two trends, given that both systematic review and EMI are umbrella terms that cover a wide range of research types. As we will see, there is perhaps more disagreement over how to conduct a systematic review than lay readers would suspect. Similarly, EMI is a broader field of research than appears in its most prominent systematic review article. Studies into EMI have explored policy, language learning, the effect on subject knowledge, attitudes towards EMI, ownership of English, and so on. Thus, while EMI is a growingly recognised field of study, it is not always clear what it means to ‘study EMI’.