english language teaching research articles

• Search Menu
• Advance articles
• Editor's Choice
• Key Concepts

The View From Here

• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Why Publish?
• About ELT Journal
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Terms and Conditions
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Alessia Cogo

Reviews Editor

About the journal.

ELT Journal is a quarterly publication for all those involved in English Language Teaching (ELT), whether as a second, additional, or foreign language, or as an international Lingua Franca …

Highlights and features

Celebrating 75 Years of  ELT Journal

2021 marks 75 years since the publication of the first issue of what is now known as  ELT Journal . In celebration of this milestone, explore a selection of articles and content from the journal, including: 

• ELT Journal  editor Alessia Cogo's anniversary volume editorial
• Two landmark issues from the journal's history by A.S. Hornby and Richard Rossner
• Two articles from Richard Smith delving into  ELT Journal 's origins and history 

Explore now

Key Concepts in ELT

Explore this collection of articles looking at some of the central ideas in ELT. They are informed by current debate on aspects of theory and practice, and free to read online.

Editor’s Choice: Articles & Videos

Every issue the Editor of ELT Journal selects one paper for its high-quality and outstanding contribution to the ELT field. All articles are free to download and read, and short, introductory videos of authors discussing their Editor's Choice articles are also available.

The View from Here  is a feature which reports on specific topics of interest or issues being dealt with in diverse ELT contexts across the globe. 

Latest articles

Editor's choice, resources for authors and researchers.

Interested in submitting your research?

Read the Instructions for Authors and learn more about the  ELT Journal  submission process and requirements.

Make an impact with your work

Have you published an article? What should you do now? Read our top tips on promoting your work to reach a wider audience and ensure your work makes an impact.

Top Tips for Publishing in Linguistics Journals

Watch our top tips for publishing in Linguistics Journals video, featuring helpful advice from our Linguistics Journals editors.

Read ELT Journal

Personal subscriptions

Online-only personal subscriptions to ELT Journal start at just £25 / $47 / €37. Special rates are also available for print subscriptions.

Email alerts

Register to receive table of contents email alerts as soon as new issues of ELT Journal are published online.

Recommend to your library

Fill out our simple online form to recommend ELT Journal to your library.

Recommend now

Editor’s Choice – Author Videos

Freire’s problem-posing model: critical pedagogy and young learners

Nadine Nelson and Julian Chen discuss their article, ' Freire’s problem-posing model: critical pedagogy and young learners ' which has been selected as an Editor's Choice article for ELT Journal.

Explore all Editor’s Choice videos.

Engaging in pedagogical translanguaging in a Shanghai EFL high school

Xiaozhou (Emily) Zhou discusses her article, ' Engaging in pedagogical translanguaging in a Shanghai EFL high school class ' which has been selected as an Editor's Choice article for ELT Journal.

Learner-initiated exploratory practice: revisiting curiosity

From learners to users—errors, innovations, and universals

Elina Ranta discuss her article ‘ From learners to users—errors, innovations, and universals ' which was selected as an Editor's Choice article. 

Explore all Editor's Choice videos

More from ELT Journal

Obituary: dr norman whitney.

In April 2022, our readers and colleagues around the world were saddened to hear of the death of Dr Norman Whitney. Learn more about his contributions to the journal and read tributes from his colleagues.

Read now 

What’s the use of book reviews?

What are book reviews for? Who reads them, and why? What makes a good review?

 Alessia Cogo, former Reviews Editor for ELT Journal , discusses answers to these questions in our blog post.

An editor's advice on writing for an academic journal

Do you want to write an article for an academic journal? Don’t know how to get started? Graham Hall, former editor of ELT Journal , offers his tips and insight on the process in this blog post, covering everything from writing to the peer review process.

Follow OUP ELT on social media

Subscribe to OUP ELT YouTube channel for information about latest releases, product demonstrations, author and teacher trainer interviews, and advice and tips to help improve your English language teaching.

ELT on Twitter

Follow us for news, info, articles, videos & tools to aid your ESL/EFL teaching.

OUP ELT blog

We’ll bring you resources you can use in your classrooms, hints and tips for teaching, insights into the lives of publishers and authors, and hopefully a few surprises you won’t find on any other publisher blogs.

Related Titles

• Recommend to Your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1477-4526
• Print ISSN 0951-0893
• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Career Center
• Research in the Teaching of English

RTE is the flagship research journal of NCTE.

• Current Issue
• Write for Us
• Call for Manuscripts
• Alan C. Purves Award
• Advertise with Us
• Purchase Back Issues (Print)

Research in the Teaching of English ( RTE ) is a broad-based, multidisciplinary journal composed of original research articles and short scholarly essays on a wide range of topics significant to those concerned with the teaching and learning of languages and literacies around the world, both in and beyond schools and universities.

Subscribe Read It!

Editorial Staff

Editors and Editorial Assistants

Mollie Blackburn Ohio State University

David Bloome Ohio State University

Dorian Harrison Ohio State University

Michiko Hikida Ohio State University

Laurie Katz Ohio State University

Stephanie Power-Carter Ohio State University

Director of Publishing

Colin Murcray NCTE

Permissions

[email protected]

[email protected]

RTE Advisory Board for Volumes 58-62 (2023-2028)

Alfredo Artiles, Stanford University; Yona Asfaha, University of Asmara; April Baker-Bell, Michigan State University; Faythe Beauchemin, University of Arkansas; Pietro Boscolo, University of Padova; Maria Botelho, University of Massachusetts, Amherst; Maureen Boyd, University at Buffalo; Ayanna Brown, Elmhurst College; David Bwire, College of New Jersey; Blanca Caldas Chumbes, University of Minnesota; Gerald Campano, University of Pennsylvania; Antonia Candela, Centro de Investigación y Estudios Avanzados; Angela Cannon, Bloomington, IN; Limarys Caraballo, Teachers College, Columbia University; Lucia Cardenas, Michigan State University; Thandeka Chapman, University of California, San Diego; Caroline Clark, The Ohio State University; Catherine Compton-Lilly, University of South Carolina; Jamal Cooks, San Francisco State University; Marcus Croom, Indiana University; Denise Dávila, University of Texas at Austin; Adrienne Dixson, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Leah Durán, University of Arizona; Elizabeth Dutro, University of Colorado, Boulder; Brian Edmiston, The Ohio State University; Patricia Enciso, The Ohio State University; Jeanne Fain, Lipscomb University; Tiffany Flowers, Georgia State University; Brittany Frieson Davis, University of North Texas; Danling Fu, University of Florida; Antero Godina Garcia, Stanford University; James Paul Gee, Arizona State University; Alexandra Georgakopolou, Kings College London; María Paula Ghiso, Teachers College, Columbia University; Susan Goldman, University of Illinois, Chicago; Millie Gort, University of Colorado, Boulder; Steven Graham, Vanderbilt University; Judith Green, University of California, Santa Barbara; David Green, Jr., Howard University; Lydia Haff, Hawaii; Troy Hicks, Central Michigan University; Jim Hoffman, University of North Texas; Huili Hong, Vanderbilt University ; Ana Christina Iddings Da Silva, Vanderbilt University; Vanessa Irvin, University of Hawaii; Hilary Janks, University of Witwatersrand; Korina Jocson, University of Massachusetts Amherst; Lamar Johnson, Michigan State; Latrise Johnson, University of Alabama; Miriam Jorge, University of Missouri-St. Louis; Judith Kalman, Centro de Investigación y Estudios Avanzados; Minjeong Kim, University of Massachusetts, Lowell; Lydiah Kiramba, University of Nebraska; Kafi Kumasi, Wayne State University; Wan Shun Eva Lam, Northwestern University; Kevin Leander, Vanderbilt University; Adam Leftstein, Ben Gurion University of the Negev; Constant Leung, Kings College London; Sarah Levine, Stanford University; Cynthia Lewis, University of California, Santa Cruz; Diana Liu, Columbia University; David Low, California State University, Fresno; Ruth Lowery, University of North Texas; Lian Madsen, University of Copenhagen; Joanne Marciano, Michigan State University; Danny Martinez, University of California, Davis; Ramón Martínez, Stanford University; Wayne Martino, Western University; Stephen May, The University of Auckland; Byeonggon Min, Seoul National University; Nicole Mirra, Rutgers University; Karla Möller, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Briana Morales, St. Louis, MO; Ernest Morrell, Notre Dame University; Luz Murillo, Texas State University; Vanesa Neves, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; George Newell, The Ohio State University; Sue Nichols, University of South Australia; Carmen Helena Guerrero-Nieto, Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas ; Silvia Nogueron-Liu, University of Colorado, Boulder; Allison Wynhoff Olsen, Montana State University; Mariana Pacheco, University of Wisconsin; Kate Pahl, Sheffield University; Deborah Palmer, University of Colorado, Boulder; Uta Papen, Lancaster University; Jenell Igeleke Penn, The Ohio State University; Tonya Perry, University of Alabama, Birmingham; Grace Player, University of Connecticut; David Poveda, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid; Detra Price-Dennis, Columbia University; Ben Rampton, Kings College London; Timothy Rasinski, Kent State University; Iliana Reyes, University of Arizona; Ryan Rish, State University of New York, Buffalo; Rebecca Rogers, University of Missouri St Louis; Deborah Rowe, Vanderbilt University; Jennifer Rowsell, University of Bristol; Lee Rutherford, Westerville, Ohio; Ryan Schey, University of Georgia; Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz, Columbia University; Audra Skukauskaite, University of Central Florida;  Peter Smagorinsky, University of Georgia; Mandy Smith, Columbus, Ohio; Julia Snell, University of Leeds; Tamara Spencer, St. Mary’s College; Massimiliano Spotti, Tilburg University; Laura Sterponi, University of California, Berkeley; Amy Stornaiuolo, University of Pennsylvania; Laura Taylor, Rhodes College; Ebony Elizabeth Thomas, University of Michigan; K.C. Nat Turner, University of Massachusetts, Amherst; Cynthia Tyson, The Ohio State University; Lalitha Vasudevan, Teachers College, Columbia University; Saba Khan Vlach, University of Iowa; Jon Wargo, Boston College; Autumn West, Illinois State University; Melissa Wetzel,  University of Texas, Austin; Jill Williams, Columbus, Ohio; Arlette Willis, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Darius Wimby, Atlanta, GA; Ursula Wingate, Kings College London; Maisha Winn, University of Wisconsin; Karen Wohlwend, Indiana University; Angie Zapata, University of Missouri, Columbia

Annual Annotated Bibliographies

For many years now, RTE has been publishing an Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English. Most recently, these bibliographies have been published annually in the February issue since 2018, and they have grown larger every year. Because of their length, the bibliographies are no longer published in their entirety in the print version of the journal; the complete version is to be found only online. They are open and available to all scholars, not just RTE subscribers.

2023 Bibliography

2022 Bibliography

2021 Bibliography

2020 Bibliography

2019 Bibliography

2018 Bibliography

2016 Bibliography

2015 Bibliography

2014 Bibliography

2013 Bibliography

2012 Bibliography

2011 Bibliography

2010 Bibliography

2009 Bibliography

2008 Bibliography

2007 Bibliography

2006 Bibliography

2005 Bibliography

2004 Bibliography

2003 Bibliography

Featured Journals

• Classroom Notes Plus
• College Composition and Communication
• College English
• English Education
• English Journal
• English Leadership Quarterly
• Language Arts
• School Talk
• Talking Points
• Teaching English in the Two-Year College
• Voices from the Middle

• Open access
• Published: 13 May 2021

A meta-analysis on educational technology in English language teaching

• Jafar Rahmati 1 ,
• Siros Izadpanah   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2061-8110 1 &
• Ali Shahnavaz 2  

Language Testing in Asia volume  11 , Article number:  7 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

14k Accesses

8 Citations

6 Altmetric

Metrics details

As more various types of computer-assisted language learning (CALL) programs have been incorporated into language classrooms over the recent decades, it has become more important to uncover whether, to what extent, and under which moderator variables CALL can be yield more effective outcomes than traditional language instruction. The issue of education is one of the most important materials addressed by technology. Instead, meta-analysis is a statistical and quantitative method that leads us to a general conclusion by integrating the results of different researches. In this study, researchers worked on the impact of educational technology in English language teaching by studying 67 articles and theses (from 1000 studies that were relevant in title and abstract). All articles and theses were included from 2009 to 2020 and 7 articles were excluded from this study due to insufficient information. Furthermore, two instruments, SPSS (mainly its sub-branch Kruskal-Wallis test) and CMA were used to calculate and evaluate data in this research. The total effect size calculated for studies under both fixed and random models was statistically significant and also the study of effects by year of publication, instruments used in research and research methods showed that their effect size was significant. Teaching English with the help of technology has an effective effect size and has shown the success of this technology in language learning.

Introduction

Due to the rapid advances in Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in the world, there is growing attention to combine technologies into the classrooms to prepare learners to meet the needs of a progressively technological-dependent culture (Bond). The presence of technology and its constant advances have been disclosed into society by shifting the way how people cooperate with technology itself and through technology devices (Hollands & Escueta, 2020 ; Gonzalez-Acevedo, 2016 ). Warni, Aziz, and Febriawan ( 2018 ) believe that technology allows students to study independently and cooperate with their peers. This is possible because technology inspires students to reflect and analyze where these two capabilities are at the basics of developing autonomy. Since the 1960s, educational technologists have tried to make this image become a reality through emerging programs based on computer-assisted instruction (CAI) to drill, train, and test students (Andone & Frydenberg, 2019 ). According to Xiao ( 2019 ), every educator must utterly think about, update concepts, be courageous in innovation, let advanced science and technology assist college English education, and familiarize multimedia technology with a large amount of information, closeness and interactivity into college English teaching. Many educational researchers believe that computer-assisted language learning (CALL) would prove to be effective because it would decrease educational costs and increase learning outcomes in the long period (Atabek, 2020 ; Oz, Demirezen, & Pourfeiz, 2015 ).

Research in English language teaching sometimes contradicts differences in educational measures, situations, measurement instruments, and research methods that make it difficult for the researcher to easily compare the findings (Ozkale & Koc, 2020 ).

The disagreement between the results means that there is no acceptable answer to guide policymakers, and there is always an endless demand for re-research. There is a danger that the sponsors of social and educational research would conclude that this research is unproductive and unscientific. In addition, reviewing the sources of empirical research is usually not helpful, and because it depends so much on the opinion, judgment, preferences, and tendencies of the reviewers, conflicting interpretations of a piece of evidence are not uncommon.

However, examining the effectiveness of CALL is not easy for a number of reasons. First, the effect of any CALL program on learning outcomes is some way related to its uses. A specific CALL program may have great educational potential not revealed until it is used properly. Hence, evaluating the effectiveness of the CALL in language education is evaluating its uses rather than the CALL program itself. Second, the effectiveness of CALL is affected by some other moderator variables such as the learners, tasks, the educational setting conditions, and the assessment instruments. Third, CALL can be used either in isolation, as the sole instrument to convey language knowledge to the students, or in combination with traditional, face-to-face teaching methods (Sadeghi & Dousti, 2013 ). In addition to the above obstacles, no individual study by itself can show whether CALL programs are actually effective or not. In most countries, the use of educational technology is a headway and a national movement, and many organizations and educational institutions have been created in order to properly use educational technology and find better and more complete ways and techniques.

General objectives of the article: The role of educational technology in teaching English in Iran

Literature review

• Educational technology

An accurate understanding of the definition, subject, and scope of educational technology depends largely on the root meaning of the word technology. The word is derived from the word technology in Greek, meaning systematically performing art or profession. The first part of this word (technologia) is a combination of performing art and a technique involving knowledge of the meaning of the principles and the ability to achieve the desired results. In other words, logos mean practical things like knowing and doing. The word root means reasoning, explanation, principle, and ratiocination. So technology means the rational application of knowledge. The word consists of two words “technique” and “logic.” “Technique” means skillfully doing any work and “logic” is equivalent to the “knowing” suffix and means “science and knowledge.” Technology can, therefore, be regarded as methodology or knowledge and science in subtle ways of doing things. The second meaning is what the word “technology” is mostly used to express (Faradanesh, 2001 ).

Concept of educational technology

There are many definitions of educational technology, each referring to its various aspects. Before the application of technology in its new sense, planners helped improve the teaching and learning outcomes of audiovisual cases and devices. Thus, it can be concluded that the contributions of this branch are summarized from education to the use of purely educational items. But Brown ( 1972 ) has defined educational technology differently: Educational technology goes beyond the use of instruments. Educational technology is thus more than just a set of components (Ipek & Ziatdinov, 2018 ). It is a systematic way of designing, executing, and evaluating the whole process of research and learning to use specific goals, utilizing research findings in psychology and human communication, and employing a combination of human and non-human resources to create more effective learning, more reliable, and more deeply. In-depth attention to the above definition leads the reader to several basic conclusions:

The first conclusion to be drawn from the first part of the definition is that educational technology is not just about the use of educational instruments, but the broader scope of the use of educational instruments and the use of educational materials as part of it.

As educational technology is considered to be a systematic way or method, so it is more like an empire than its constituent parts because they are actions and reactions. Because the action, reaction, or interaction between its constituents lead to effects and results that are greater than the sum of its constituent elements.

Educational technology uses scientific findings such as psychology and the humanities to design and implement the whole process of teaching and learning.

Educational technology employs a good mix of human and non-human resources. In other words, unlike the use of educational materials or audio-visual training in which the use of material instruments is concerned, in technology, human resources are appropriately used.

The most recent definition agreed by educational technology experts, The American Association of Educational Communication & Technology (AECT) stated that educational technology is the theory and practice of designing, producing, using, and evaluating learning processes and resources (Spector & Yuen, 2016 ). Caffarela and Fly ( 1992 ) define this as considering that in any field of science philosophical issues such as epistemological epistemology and methodology are raised and that experts in different disciplines present theories in that field.

Application of educational technology in English language teaching

The application of educational technology in English language teaching includes any possible means and information that can be used in language teaching. It deals with language teaching instruments such as television, language labs, and a variety of designed media. In other words, the use of educational technology in language teaching is the same folk concept of educational technology as the use of audiovisual devices, monitors, and computer keyboards. The public domain of its audiovisual equipment consists of two distinct parts: the hardware and the software. The hardware talking part deals with physical and real equipment, such as projectors, sound recorders, TV sets, microcomputers, etc., and the software part includes many items used in connection with such equipment and devices like slide, audiotapes, videotapes of computer programs, written languages, and more (Ahdian, 2007 ); (Xu, Banerjee, Ramirez, Zhu, & Wijekumar, 2019 ).

Research in the field of education is sometimes contradictory. Differences in educational measures, situations, measuring tools, and research methods make it difficult for the researcher to compare the findings (Rai'i, Farzaneh, & Delavar, 2013 ). The contradiction between the results leads to no acceptable answer to be a guidance for policy makers (Talan, 2021 ). It also means that there is always an endless demand for research and re-research. There is a risk that research sponsors may conclude that this research is confusing, unproductive, and unscientific (Asgharpour, 2006 ).

Considering the research done in the field of language learning with the help of technology, it can be seen that there are a lot of disagreements about the success rate of teaching English with the help of technology. Some researchers such as Sung, Cheng and Liu ( 2016 ) and Lee ( 2010 ) are its defenders, while other researchers such as Lipsey and Wilson ( 2001 ), Norris and Ortega ( 2000 ), and Oswald and Plonsky ( 2010 ) have expressed doubts about its success.

Proponents of using technology for language learning, giving the learner freedom of action, access to a variety of language content, ease of access and its inherent attractiveness, opponents of factors such as lack of infrastructure, lack of software and hardware to especially in developing countries, students and teachers are not familiar with this technology, teachers do not master technology to produce appropriate educational content, superficial and unrealistic interactions in existing software, too much emphasis on the use of multimedia, heavy volume Content for language learners, lack of appropriate feedback and finally receiving superficial and unrealistic feedback as reasons for their opposition to using technology for language learning. These contradictory reasons led us to perform meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of technology-assisted language learning and, in general, whether it was successful or not. These reasons became contradictory in order to determine the effectiveness of language learning through meta-analysis with the help of technology and to reach a general conclusion whether it was successful or not.

Research methods

Considering that the purpose of this research was to describe, analyze, and combine the studies presented in the field of educational technology in English language teaching based on research; the method of this research was a meta-analysis. Meta-analysis is a set of statistical methods that are performed in order to combine the results of independent experimental and correlation studies that have the same research questions on a single topic, and leads to a single estimate and result. Unlike traditional research methods, a meta-analysis uses statistical summaries of individual studies as research data.

Based on the main assumption of this method, each study provided different estimates of the underlying relationships in society. Therefore, by combining the results of these studies, a more accurate view of these relationships could be provided, which was provided by estimating individual studies. Meta-analysis research was applied type and was among the few pieces of research. The method used to collect data in this research was the library.

General objective subgroups: variables

Hypothesis 1 — There is a significant difference between the years of publication in research on the application of technology in English language teaching.

Hypothesis 2 — The research method used in the research has been used in the field of application of educational technology in English language teaching.

Hypothesis 3 — Research tools have been used in the application of educational technology in English language teaching.

Hypothesis 4 — There is a significant difference between the effect size of different statistical methods in research in the field of technology application in English language teaching.

Hypothesis 5 — There is a significant difference between the size of the work based on the gender of the sample in research on the application of technology through English language teaching.

Eligibility criteria and exclusion criteria

In this research, 67 articles or theses out of 1000 articles or theses which were related to technology in English language teaching in Iranian cites, like Tehran, Shahr-e- Qods, Yasouj, Shahrood, Mazandaran, Bandar Abbas, Alborz, Shahrekord, Ahvaz, Qeshm, Guilan, Semnan, and Chabahar, were randomly chosen from Iran Doc, google scholar, and science direct websites.

It is important to mention that 7 out of 67 articles and theses were ignored in this thesis based on the table that has been mentioned (Additional file 1 : Appendix A). Topics in selected articles were completely consistent and had a relatively high and appropriate subject similarity for meta-analysis were from the years between 2009 and 2020 (Additional file 1 : Appendix B). Conditions were detected and meta-analysis tests had been performed on them. It should be noted that in the meta-analysis method, there is no specific limit on the number of studies.

Method of data collection

To perform meta-analysis, the specifications of all theses in the field of educational technology in English language teaching, which are the year of publication, sampling method, statistical method, research method, and gender of the sample were studied. These data were then used in analysis, syntheses, and comparison.

Instruments

Meta-analysis is the statistical method which was used in this study. The SPSS (Sciences Statistical Package for the Social) software (SPSS Statistics 26) that researchers examined the frequency and statistical significance. The research hypotheses were also tested by SPSS software. CMA 2 software (Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 2) was used to calculate the effect size for each study, the overall size effect, and the size of the discriminant effect to test their statistical significance in this research.

In addition, the research hypotheses were tested using SPSS software and the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test. The effect size in this r was calculated using the Hex method.

The Egger regression method has also been used to evaluate the homogeneity of the studies. The advantage of this method compared to other tests is that it is stronger. This method uses real effect size methods for prediction.

Data analysis

Part 1: descriptive analysis, description of general characteristics of the studied samples.

Descriptive information about the year of publication of the studies was examined in this study.

As can be seen in Table 1 , the highest percentage is related to research published during the years 2015 to 2017 with a rate of 51.7% and the lowest percentage is related to research published in the years 2018 to 2020 with a rate of 6.7 percentage.

Descriptive information about the research methods used in the studies reviewed in this study

As can be seen in Table 2 , the highest percentage is related to the quasi-experimental research method with 36.7% and the lowest percentage is related to the qualitative research method with 3.3%.

Descriptive information about the instruments used in the studies examined in this study

As can be seen in Table 3 , for the instruments used, the highest percentage is related to the Questionnaire instrument with 37% and the lowest percentage is related to the Observations instrument with a rate of 3.3%.

Descriptive information about the statistical method used in the studies examined in this study

As can be seen in Table 4 , the highest percentage is related to the method of using pre- and post-tests with 56.7% and the lowest percentage is related to the statistical method of ANOVA with 1.7%.

Descriptive information about the sex of the sample in the studies

As can be seen in Table 5 , for the sample gender, the highest percentage is related to mixed-gender with a rate of 48% and the lowest percentage is related to female gender with a rate of 20%.

Homogeneity of studies

In order to check the homogeneity of the studies, the Eger regression test is used and the results of this test are summarized in the following table:

As can be seen in Table 6 , due to the value of Sig, which is greater than 0.05, the assumption of homogeneity of studies at an error level of 0.05% is accepted.

The following Fig.  1 is used to determine whether the initial studies are biased and their impact on data analysis.

Funnel diagram shape the size of each study with the effect size accuracy

If the initial studies do not have a diffusion bias, they should be distributed symmetrically around the average effect size, as shown in the diagram above.

Overall effect size

Before examining the effect size separately for the variables in this study, the overall effect size is calculated in two modes: a model with random effects and a model with fixed effects, and the results are recorded in the table below.

It should be noted that due to the homogeneity of the initial studies in this study, the model with fixed effects is more efficient than the model with random effects.

As can be seen in Table 7 , considering that the sig value for both models is less than 0.01, it can be accepted that the total effect size in both models is significant with random effects and fixed effects at the error level of one percent.

Effect size by year of publication

The following table records the results related to the effect size by year of publication of studies in both model modes with random effects and fixed effects.

According to the Sig values obtained in Table 8 , the size of the effects in all the studied years is significant in both types of models with fixed effects and random effects.

The size of the work is used separately according to the research method

In the table below, the results related to the size of the effect are recorded separately by the research method used in the studies in both models with random effects and fixed effects.

According to the Sig values obtained in Table 9 , the size of the effects in all research methods used in the studies under study in both types of models with fixed effects and random effects are significant.

Effect size by the instrument used

In the table below, the results related to the size of the effect by instruments used in the studies are recorded in both model modes with random effects and with fixed effects.

According to the Sig values obtained in Table 10 , the size of the effects in all instruments used in the studies under study in both types of models with fixed effects and random effects are significant.

The size of the work is separated by statistical methods

In the table below, the results related to the effect size are recorded separately by the statistical methods used in the studies in both models with random effects and with fixed effects.

According to the Sig values obtained in Table 11 , the size of the effects in all statistical methods used in the studies in both types of models with fixed effects and random effects, except the random effects model in the case where the statistical instrument is used Qualitative Have been meaningful.

Effect size by sample gender

In the table below, the results related to the effect size by sample gender in both models with random effects and fixed effects are recorded.

According to the Sig values obtained in Table 12 , the size of the effects on the sex of the sample in both types of models with fixed effects and random effects are significant.

Part II: Inferential analysis

Hypothesis 1.

There is no significant difference between the size of the effect of years of the publication on research in the application of educational technology in English language teaching.

To test the above hypothesis, the Kruskal-Wallis test was used and the results of this test are recorded in the following tables:

As can be seen in Table 13 , considering the value of Sig = 0.151, which is greater than 0.05, the assumption of zero, i.e. the assumption that the size of the work is the same according to the year of publication is not rejected at the level of 5% error.

The effect of years of publication in research in the field of technology application in English language teaching is not significantly different.

Hypothesis 2

There is no significant difference between the size of the work and the research method used. Research conducted in the field of technology application in English language teaching.

To test the above hypothesis, the Kruskal-Wallis test was used and the results of this test are recorded in the following table:

As can be seen in Table 14 , considering the value of Sig = 0.302, which is greater than 0.05, the null hypothesis, i.e. the assumption that the size of the work is the same, is not rejected at the 5% error level, so researchers can say: There is no significant difference between the size of the work and the research method used in the field of technology application in English language teaching.

Hypothesis 3

There is no significant difference between the size of the work and the instruments used in research in the field of technology application in English language teaching.

To test the above hypothesis, Kruskal-Wallis test was used and the results of this test are recorded in the following table:

As can be seen in Table 15 , considering the value of Sig = 0.830, which is greater than 0.05, the null hypothesis, i.e. the assumption that the size of the work is the same, is not rejected at the 5% error level, so researchers can say: There is no significant difference between the size of the work and the instruments used in research in the field of technology application in English language teaching.

Hypothesis 4

There is no significant difference between the size of the work according to the statistical method used in research in the field of technology application in English language teaching.

To test the above hypothesis, Kruskal-Wallis test was used and the results of this test are recorded in the following tables:

As can be seen in Table 16 , considering the value of Sig = 0.814, which is greater than 0.05, the null hypothesis, i.e. the assumption that the size of the work is the same, is not rejected at the 5% error level, so researchers can say: There is no significant difference between the size of the work according to the statistical method used in research in the field of technology application in English language teaching.

Hypothesis 5

There is no significant difference between the size of the work by gender of the sample in research in the field of technology application through English language teaching.

As can be seen in Table 17 , considering the value of Sig = 0.819, which is greater than 0.05, the null hypothesis, i.e. the assumption which the size of the work is the same, is not rejected at the 5% error level, so researchers can say: There is no significant difference between the size of the work by gender of the sample in research in the field of technology application through English language teaching.

In this part, researchers describe the collected results in general and discuss the statistical results obtained. The present study includes 67 studies out of 1000 theses and articles which 7 of them were excluded from this study due to a lack of sufficient information ( Appendix A ).

The main purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of educational technology on English language teaching. The optimal research method to achieve this goal was meta-analysis. In this method, “each research” was a unit of study, furthermore, the amount of effect size was calculated for each research in order to obtain the effectiveness of each research.

Our results indicate that technology applications have a large effect (1.68 and 0.91, fixed effect model and random effect model respectively) on English language teaching. This proposes that the use of technology is more effective than traditional teaching methods without technology for English language teaching quality.

Overall effects of educational technology on English language teaching

The result of a medium-sized overall positive effect of educational technology on English language teaching confirmed that the use of a computer, telegram, mobile, laptop devices, and software could facilitate language learning. These results were consistent with other research findings regarding the effects of different devices and software on English language teaching.

Related to the first research question: Year of publication

This research question was in line with Sung, Yang, and Lee ( 2017 ) and Chauhan ( 2017 ), which both had the same experimental results show that their meta-analysis was not substantially affected by publication bias. The most obvious finding to emerge from this research question was that years of publication did not have a significant result in this research.

Based on the fact, the year of publication was selected for research as a variable; if years are considered differently, that is, for example, the year 2009 is assumed alone, they are meaningful. They also have the same feature for the year of publication until 2020. However, based on the research question of how much the effect of the year of publication affects educational technology, it should be noted that this variable is not recommended for future research because it changes every time based on advances in technology and different methods for research. Considering the year of publication, it will not have a significant effect as a whole on the effect size of the work.

Related to the second research question: research method

It is in line with Farzaneh Shakki ( 2015 ). There is no significant difference between the effect size by the research method used and the research conducted in the field of technology application in the English language teaching.

In fact, the research method as a whole depends on the researcher and the type of research that is being done. In this research, we conclude that if we want to consider the research methods one by one we can claim that they all have a significant effect but when we want to consider all of them relative to each other, they do not have a significant effect. Therefore, this research shows us that the required research methods or resources required as well as different goals can be variable, so it depends on the researcher in what circumstances, in what environment and with what tools they can choose the research method. Of course, a single research method may not be used in an article, and several types can be used.

Related to the third research question: instruments

It was in line with Fazeli ( 2016 ). It was not in line with Pourtayebi ( 2015 ), Alinejad ( 2015 ), Sadeqi ( 2015 ), Rastegar ( 2014 ), Shahkooei ( 2016 ), and Parinaz ( 2010 ). There is no significant difference between the effect size and the instruments used in research in the field of technology application in English language teaching

As we have seen, among the number of theses and articles we reviewed, a variety of instruments were used. In the meantime, the questionnaire was used more than other instruments, but this does not mean that this instrument is superior to others in research instruments. In this study, in each of the articles and theses, one or more instruments were used, which were significant, but in general, they were not significant in comparison to each other. This means that we cannot say which tool is better than other instruments so it depends on the researcher which instrument to choose over the research.

Related to the fourth research question: statistical method

It was not in line with Shahkooei ( 2016 ). There is no significant difference between the size of the work according to the statistical method used in research in the field of technology application in English language teaching. Although the number of statistical methods used in these studies was different, in the ranking, they did not have a significant difference.

To check the quantitative research data, the use of statistical tests is mandatory. A statistical method is necessary to use for each research. Reviewing all statistical tests can be a good guide for analyzing data in an article. Meanwhile, it may not always be enough to use a test.

Statistical methods are one of the practical ways to identify problems and provide solutions to managerial, social, and psychological problems, etc. that, if implemented correctly, can provide real data for our research.

In other words, there may be different ways of doing research or how we can collect our data to prove or answer questions. At this point, having high analytical power, problem-solving ability. And sufficient experience can help you to know the correct method of research. Because it directly uses people’s opinions, it can solve society’s problems, and these studies are often very practical and can be cited.

Related to the fifth research question: gender

It was in line with Alipour ( 2017 ), Sadeqi ( 2015 ), Nateghi ( 2018 ), Dayani ( 2014 ), Ghazavi ( 2017 ), and Aliakbari ( 2013 ). It was not in line with Mohammadi ( 2014 ), Alashti ( 2013 ), AsgharHeidari ( 2014 ), and Nakhaei ( 2017 ) found the result of the study that the attitudes of English teachers or students regarding their gender towards the use of the Internet, mobile or other devices were positive and high.

According to the statistical part of this study, the participants were mixed in most of the articles, but in some of them, exclusively female participants or in some other male participants were used to conduct the research. Based on the findings, we conclude that there is not much difference between men being superior to women or vice versa.

Based on the availability of technology in education, educational technology has caused many changes in the field that meet the needs of students in different ways. With the provision of software that teaches students with special needs, the appropriate educational equipment is designed to make learning easier for the individual.

With the use of technology, the concept of education is changing for both students and teachers to progress. Therefore, the introduction of technology in education is very important.

Research limitations

The present meta-analysis, like many others, has its limitations and forces the researcher to interpret the findings with extreme caution.

Lack of access to some articles and dissertations that did not receive a response from the authors despite sending an email.

Suggestion for further study

Due to the limitations that researchers applied in this research, 67 theses and articles were selected from different cities of Iran that had a topic related to the subject of this research, but it should be noted that due to development and progress in recent years, the importance of this thesis is observed. It is better to select researches that have been published in reputable publications all over the world, in addition to this, it is suggested to work on other various variables.

A meta-analysis of research on the application of technology in English language teaching, which was published in valid journals in this field and examined, showed that the application of information technology in this field has an acceptable impact factor.

In this section, the overall findings of the current study were presented. According to the studied variables, we conclude that the five variables studied and researched, according to their statistical information in this study, did not have a significant effect size. And in response to the overall purpose of the article, how much technology can affect English language teaching, it can be concluded that, initially, compared to the variable of the year, 2017 to 2020, the size of the work was more representative than previous years, so technology has been effective. Other variables, such as tools, research methods, statistical methods, and gender, have had a smaller effect than size that we can ignore.

The results showed that all chosen variables in this study, considering every unique thesis or article, were significant, but as the whole consideration of each variable to 60 theses and articles, they were not significant.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Information and communication technology

Computer-assisted language learning

Abbassi, Z. (2015). A comparative study of applying websites and mobile phones on learning collocations among Iranian EFL learners . Thesis (Unpublished). Khatam University.

Ahdian, M. (2007). Introduction to Educational Technology, Tehran, Iran .

Alashti, L. A. (2013). Exploring and comparing the attitudes of Iranian English teachers and learners toward using the Internet for language learning . Thesis (Unpublished). Semnan University.

Aliakbari, M., (2013). Teachers’ perception of the barriers to critical thinking. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70 , 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.031 .

Alinejad, J. (2015). The impact of interactive whiteboard on developing vocabulary learning , Thesis (Unpublished) (). Shahrood: Islamic Azad University.

Google Scholar  

Alipour, M. (2017). The effect of using social networks on developing EFL learners’ pragmatic competence through speaking accuracy and fluency . Thesis (Unpublished). Islamic Azad University.

Andone, D., & Frydenberg, M. (2019). Creating virtual reality in a business and technology educational context. In Augmented reality and virtual reality (pp. 147-159). Springer.

Ardebili, M. (2013). Computer-assisted language learning: attitudes of Iranian EFL learners . Thesis (Unpublished). Urmia University.

AsgharHeidari, F. (2014). The impact of media analysis on the development of critical thinking and reading comprehension skills of the EFL learners . Thesis (Unpublished). University of Guilan.

Asgharpour, D. (2006). Bibliography of research methods and methodology of humanities. Seminary and University of Humanities Methodology , 12 (48), 154–167.

Atabek, O. (2020). Associations between emotional states, self-efficacy for and attitude towards using educational technology. International Journal of Progressive Education , 16 (2), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2020.241.12 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Bozorgmanesh, B. (2013). Innovative versus traditional approaches to vocabulary teaching: examining effects of online quotations in teaching vocabulary in Iranian EFL context . Thesis (Unpublished). Ilam University.

Brown, J. W. (1972). Administering educational media: Instructional Technology and Library Services . USA: McGraw-Hill Companies.

Caffarella, E. P., & Fly, K. (1992). Developing a knowledge base and taxonomy in instructional technology . Retrieved April 22, 2021 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/144856/.

Chauhan, S. (2017). A meta-analysis of the impact of technology on learning effectiveness of elementary students. Computers & Education , 105 , 14–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.11.005 .

Dayani, A. (2014). The effect of using blogs on Iranian EFL learners’ critical thinking . thesis (unpublished). Shahid Chamran University.

Dousti, M. (2012). The effect of length of exposure to call technology on young Iranian EFL learners’ grammar and vocabulary gain . Thesis (Unpublished). Urmia University.

Ebrahimi, H. (2014). The impact of teaching- medium on EFL learners’ meta-pragmatic information: the case of compliment . Thesis (Unpublished). University of Guilan.

EbrahimiSeraji, N. (2016). Teacher’s attitudes toward educational technology in language institutes in Mazandaran . Thesis (Unpublished). Islamic Azad University.

Esferjani, R. (2017). Effect of internet-assisted pronunciation instruction on Iranian l2 learners’ production of primary stress in English compound nouns. Thesis (Unpublished). Shahrekord University, Shahrekord.

Esmaili, S. (2012). EFL writing and computer-assisted language learning: towards an “eclectic” view and far “beyond” that . Thesis (Unpublished). Chabahar Maritime University.

Ezzatian, S. (2013). The differential effects of debate and media analysis as relate to enhancing EFL learners’ critical thinking ability and writing performances . Thesis (Unpublished). Sheykhbahayee University.

Faradanesh, H (2001). Theoretical foundations of educational technology . Tehran: Organization for the Study and Compilation of Humanities Books.

Fard, M. K. (2016). A comparative study on the use of teaching aids in Iranian EFL institutes and schools . Thesis (Unpublished). Payame Noor University.

Farhesh, S. (2012). On the effect of using PPT slides on vocabulary and grammar acquisition, and students’ attitudes . Thesis (Unpublished). Allameh Tabataba’i University.

Farshadnia, S. (2010). Culture in online communication: netiquette applications and implementations in TEFL community . Thesis (Unpublished). Al-Zahra University.

Fazeli, S. A. (2016). An investigation into the effectiveness of call in the writing ability of young adolescent EFL learners: with some reference to the perceptions of call teachers and learners . Thesis (Unpublished). Yasouj University.

Ghazavi, A. Z. (2017). EFL student’s assumptions on using smartphone applications in learning English language: a case study of students at the Department of English, Razi University . Thesis (Unpublished). Razi University.

Ghaziyani, N. N. (2017). The effect of selective feedback on paragraph writing performance of Iranian intermediate EFL learners in telegram as a social network setting . Thesis (Unpublished). Payame Noor University.

Gonzalez-Acevedo, N. (2016). Technology-enhanced-gadgets in the teaching of English as a foreign language to very young learners. Ideas on implementation. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232 , 507-513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.070 .

Hassanzadeh, M. (2010). A comparison and contrast of two distance education systems (e-learning vs. print-based learning) in the reading comprehension skill . Thesis (Unpublished). Payam-e-Noor University.

Hollands, F., & Escueta, M. (2020). How research informs educational technology decision-making in higher education: the role of external research versus internal research. Educational Technology Research and Development , 68 (1), 163–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09678-z .

Inanloo, F. (2017). The impact of community-based web sites, online discussions forums and chat rooms on l2 learners’ expressive writing skill improvement . Thesis (Unpublished). Islamic Azad University.

Ipek, I., & Ziatdinov, R. (2018). New approaches and trends in the philosophy of educational technology for learning and teaching environments. arXiv preprint arXiv.

Javdani, M. (2017). Iranian EFL teachers’ attitudes toward blended learning approach . Thesis (Unpublished). Islamic Azad University.

Kashani, N. N. (2015). The impact of multimedia-supported metacognitive listening strategies instruction on Iranian EFL learners’ listening proficiency . Thesis (Unpublished). Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University.

KhademianHashemi, H. (2014). The effect of video-mediated listening texts on EFL learners’ writing ability . Thesis (Unpublished). Islamic Azad University.

Khalilabad, M. H. (2016). The effect of multimedia texts presented on the interactive whiteboard (smart board) on high school EFL learners’ reading comprehension . Thesis (Unpublished). Hakim Sabzevari University.

Khalili, S. (2013). Vocabulary instruction through blended learning and multimedia softwares in Iranian EFL classes . Thesis (Unpublished). Sheikhbahaee University, Esfahan.

Khazaee, S. (2017). Comparing the efficacy of chatting as one of the call-based activities on children vs. adult EFL learners’ speaking ability . Thesis (Unpublished). Chabahar Maritime University.

Lee, I. (2010). Writing teacher education and teacher learning: testimonies of four EFL teachers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19 (3), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.05.001.

Letafati, M. (2013). The effect of asynchronous forum discussions on the writing ability of Iranian EFL learners . Thesis (Unpublished). Payam-e-Noor University.

Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: a meta-analysis. Language Learning , 61 (2), 319–365.

Lipsey, M. W. ,& Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis . Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Mardian, F. (2014). A socio-cultural study of the impact of computer-mediated corrective feedback on the development of EFL learners’ grammatical knowledge . Thesis (Unpublished). Alzahra University.

Mohammadi, M. (2014). The relationship between internet use and academic procrastination of EFL learners . Thesis (Unpublished). University of Guilan.

Najafi, S. (2013). The effects of call multimedia (still-picture and motion-picture multimedia) on the vocabulary learning of elementary EFL students . Thesis (Unpublished). Shahid Madani University.

Nakhaei, M. (2017). The effect of using telegram as a social network on vocabulary learning of iranian students . Thesis (Unpublished). Islamic Azad University.

Nami, F. (2020). Educational smartphone apps for language learning in higher education: students’ choices and perceptions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 5 , 82–95.

Nateghi, M. (2018). The effect of mobile learning for collaborative dialogues on EFL Iranian learners’ speaking performance . Thesis (Unpublished). Islamic Azad University.

Noghani, F A. (2015). The effect of multimodal presentation on EFL learners’ listening comprehension and self-efficacy . Thesis (Unpublished). Hakim Sabzevari University.

Noori, L. (2014). The effect of wiki on complexity, accuracy and fluency of intermediate EFL learners’ writing performance . Thesis (Unpublished). University of Zanjan.

Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and a quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.

Oswald, F. L., & Plonsky, L. (2010). Meta-analysis in second language research: choices and challenges. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , 31 , 85.

Oz, H., Demirezen, M., & Pourfeiz, J. (2015). Digital device ownership, computer literacy, and attitudes toward foreign and computer-assisted language learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences , 186 , 359–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.028 .

Ozkale, A., & Koc, M. (2020). Investigating academicians’ use of tablet PC from the perspectives of human computer interaction and Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science , 4 (1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.v4i1.36 .

Parinaz, I. (2010). The impact of web-based reading lessons on EFL students reading comprehension, motivation, and autonomy . Thesis (Unpublished). Al-Zahra University.

Parisa, P. (2017). On the relationship between media literacy and personality traits and Iranian EFL learners’ listening comprehension . Thesis (Unpublished). Imam Khomeini International University.

Paslar, Z. (2017). Politeness strategies used by intermediate Iranian EFL learners in online what’s app interactions . Thesis (Unpublished). Islamic Azad University.

Poorkhalil, M. R. (2016). The effect of using multimedia on vocabulary learning of basic and elementary Iranian EFL learners . Thesis (Unpublished). Semnan University.

Pour, A. M. (2015). The impact of synchronous computer-mediated communication on writing ability, patterns of collaboration and motivation of Iranian EFL learners . Thesis (Unpublished). University of Guilan.

Pourtayebi, H. (2015). The effect of mobile instant messaging on reading comprehension ability . Thesis (Unpublished). Hakim Sabzevari University.

Rafei, A. (2017). The relationship between willingness to communicate and internet use among Iranian EFL learners . Thesis (Unpublished). Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University.

Rai'i, Farzaneh, & Delavar, A. (2013). Meta-analysis: the art of correcting the mistakes of others. Journal of Educational Measurement , 4 (13), 119–132.

Rajabi, S. (2016). Traditional class environment (TCE) vs. mobile assisted language learning (mall): the case of intermediate Iranian EFL learners English idioms achievement. Thesis (Unpublished). Alborz University of Higher Education.

Rastegar, S. (2014). The effect of interactive text-messaging on learning English phrasal verbs by Iranian EFL learners . Thesis (Unpublished). University of Mazandaran.

Raye-Ahmadi, M. V. (2014). Media literacy in the mediation of English language learning . Ph.D. DISSERTATION. Alzahra University.

Razavi, A. (2016). Constructing and validating a multimedia techniques (MTS) scale and examining the impact of using technology in teaching English in Iranian high schools on students’ attitudes, anxiety, and language proficiency . Thesis (Unpublished). Imam Reza International University.

Sadeqi, M. (2015). The effects of call and online resources on learning collocation of Iranian EFL learners . Thesis (Unpublished). Islamic Azad University.

Sadeghi, K., & Dousti, M. (2013). The effect of length of exposure to CALL technology on young Iranian EFL learners' grammar gain. English Language Teaching, 6 (2), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n2p14 .

Salimi, H. (2016). The application of wiki-mediated collaborative writing as a pedagogical instrument to promote ESP learners’ writing performance, autonomy, and perceptions of uses of wikis . Thesis (Unpublished). Allameh Tabataba’i University.

Shafaghiha, G. (2016). Watching English language TV series and visual literacy of Iranian EFL learners: challenges, possibilities, reasons . Thesis (Unpublished). Alzahra University.

Shafati, M. (2013). The effects of etymological elaboration and multimedia instruction on EFL learners’ idiom retention . Thesis (Unpublished). Sheikhbahaee University.

Shahkooei, S. (2016). A comparison of traditional flash-card vs. mobile learning: Using mms for learning idioms by Iranian EFL learners (idiomobile) . Thesis (Unpublished). Allameh Mohaddes Nouri University.

Shakki, F. (2015). The effect of dynamic assessment on EFL learners’ listening comprehension through mediational strategies . Thesis (Unpublished). Islamic Azad University.

Shargh, S. N. (2010). The pedagogical effectiveness of multimedia call software on vocabulary recall and retention of Iranian pre-intermediate EFL learners . Thesis (Unpublished). Ferdowsi University.

Spector, J. M., & Yuen, A. H. (2016). Educational technology program and project evaluation . Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315724140 .

Book   Google Scholar  

Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., & Liu, T. C. (2016). The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students’ learning performance: A meta analysis and research synthesis. Computers & Education, 94 , 252–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.008 .

Sung, Y. T., Yang, J. M., & Lee, H. Y. (2017). The effects of mobile-computer-supported collaborative learning: meta-analysis and critical synthesis. Review of Educational Research , 87 (4), 768–805. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317704307 .

Talan, T. (2021). The effect of simulation technique on academic achievement: a meta-analysis study. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 5 (1), 17–36. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.706231 .

Warni, S., Aziz, T. A., & Febriawan, D. (2018). The use of technology in English as a foreign language learning outside the classroom: an insight into learner autonomy. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching , 21 (2), 148–156.

Xiao, L. (2019). Application development of modern multimedia technology in English teaching. Frontiers in Educational Research , 2 (2), 12–39.

Xu, Z., Banerjee, M., Ramirez, G., Zhu, G., & Wijekumar, K. (2019). The effectiveness of educational technology applications on adult English language learners’ writing quality: a meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning , 32 (1-2), 132–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1501069 .

Zakeri, D. (2018). A study of the effects of using multimedia in teaching technical translation model for Iranian students . Thesis (Unpublished). Islamic Azad University.

Zanussi, M. P. (2015). The impact of watching captioned TV series on vocabulary development of EFL students . Thesis (Unpublished). Allameh Mohaddes Nouri University.

Zarat-ehsan, M. (2015). The impact of multimedia glosses on intermediate EFL learners’ vocabulary learning and retention . Thesis (Unpublished). University of Guilan.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of English Language Teaching, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran

Jafar Rahmati & Siros Izadpanah

Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran

Ali Shahnavaz

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors of the research had more or less equal contributions in the process of conception, design, acquisition of data, analysis, and interpretation of data. They have all been involved in revising the manuscript critically to the same extent. All take public responsibility for the whole content. All are equally accountable for all aspects of the work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Siros Izadpanah .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1. .

Abbassi, 2015 , Ardebili, 2013 , Bozorgmanesh, 2013 , Dousti, 2012 , Ebrahimi, 2014 , EbrahimiSeraji, 2016 , Esferjani, 2017 , Esmaili, 2012 , Ezzatian, 2013 , Fard, 2016 , Farhesh, 2012 , Farshadnia, 2010 , Ghaziyani, 2017 , Hassanzadeh, 2010 , Inanloo, 2017 , Javdani, 2017 , Kashani, 2015 , KhademianHashemi, 2014 , Khalilabad, 2016 , Khalili, 2013 , Khazaee, 2017 , Letafati, 2013 , Li, 2010 , Mardian, 2014 , Najafi, 2013 , Nami, 2020 , Noghani, 2015 , Noori, 2014 , Parisa, 2017 , Paslar, 2017 , Poorkhalil, 2016 , Pour, 2015 , Rafei, 2017 , Rajabi, 2016 , Raye-Ahmadi, 2014 , Razavi, 2016 , Salimi, 2016 , Shafaghiha, 2016 , Shafati, 2013 , Shargh, 2010 , Zakeri, 2018 , Zanussi, 2015 , Zarat-ehsan, 2015 , Zhang & Liu, 2019.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Rahmati, J., Izadpanah, S. & Shahnavaz, A. A meta-analysis on educational technology in English language teaching. Lang Test Asia 11 , 7 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-021-00121-w

Download citation

Received : 26 December 2020

Accepted : 13 April 2021

Published : 13 May 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-021-00121-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• English language teaching
• Meta-analysis

Current Landscape of English Language Teaching Research in Southeast Asia: A Bibliometric Analysis

• Regular Article
• Published: 28 July 2022
• Volume 32 , pages 517–529, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Bui My Ngoc 1 &
• Jessie S. Barrot   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8517-4058 1  

587 Accesses

2 Citations

Explore all metrics

This study sought to provide a comprehensive analysis of English language teaching (ELT) research in Southeast Asia (SEA) using both quantitative and qualitative data. Specifically, this paper sought to describe the characteristics, growth, impact, trajectory, and distribution of ELT research in the SEA region, determine the research themes that emerged and how they have evolved for the past 6 years, and identify the extent of collaboration among SEA ELT scholars. This examination, covering a 6-year period, showcases the breadth and depth of research undertaken in the region. Overall, the research productivity and citations in the region have been increasing during the inclusive years, with Singapore, Vietnam, and Malaysia leading the list in almost all metrics. Research designs have also become more sophisticated in recent years as research contexts and topics continue to expand. Popular topics include teacher cognition and agency, teaching practices, computer-assisted language learning, and teaching macro skills. Although collaboration among SEA countries remains modest, their collaboration with western countries is relatively extensive, especially Vietnam and Singapore. Policy implications and future directions are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Research on English Language Teaching in Higher Education in the United Arab Emirates, 2010–2020: An Overview of Journal Articles

Research Paradigms in TESOL and Language Education

The International Dimension of Teaching and Learning

American Association for Applied Linguistics (2022). Call for proposals . Retrieved January 31, 2022 from https://www.aaal.org/news/2022-call-for-proposals

Arik, E. (2015). A bibliometric analysis of linguistics in Web of Science. Journal of Scientometric Research, 4 (1), 20–28.

Article   Google Scholar  

Arik, E., & Arik, B. T. (2021). The different aspects of English language teaching and learning: A scientometric analysis. Journal of Scientometric Research, 10 (1), 84–93.

Barrot, J. S. (2015). A sociocognitive-transformative instructional materials design model for second language (L2) pedagogy in the Asia Pacific: Development and validation. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24 (2), 283–297.

Barrot, J. (2016a). Examining the teaching beliefs and practices of experienced ESL teachers: A sociocognitive-transformative perspective. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 22 (1), 153–163.

Barrot, J. S. (2016b). Using Facebook-based e-portfolio in ESL writing classrooms: impact and challenges. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 29 (3), 286–301.

Barrot, J. S. (2017). Research impact and productivity of Southeast Asian countries in language and linguistics. Scientometrics, 110 (1), 1–15.

Barrot, J. S. (2021a). Research on education in Southeast Asia (1996–2019): a bibliometric review. Educational Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2021.1907313

Barrot, J. S. (2021b). Scientific mapping of social media in education: A decade of exponential growth. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59 (4), 645–668.

Barrot, J. S., Acomular, D. R., Alamodin, E. A., & Argonza, R. C. R. (2022). Scientific mapping of English language teaching research in the Philippines: A bibliometric review of doctoral and master’s theses (2010–2018). RELC Journal, 53 (1), 180–193.

Cahyani, H., de Courcy, M., & Barnett, J. (2018). Teachers’ code-switching in bilingual classrooms: Exploring pedagogical and sociocultural functions. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21 (4), 465–479.

Dang, T. N. Y., Coxhead, A., & Webb, S. (2017). The academic spoken word list. Language Learning, 67 (4), 959–997.

De Costa, P. I., Park, J., & Wee, L. (2019). Linguistic entrepreneurship as affective regime: Organizations, audit culture, and second/foreign language education policy. Language Policy, 18 (3), 387–406.

East, M. (2021). What do beginning teachers make of task-based language teaching? A comparative re-production of East (2014). Language Teaching, 54 (4), 552–566.

Fan, L., Wang, Y., Ding, S., & Qi, B. (2020). Productivity trends and citation impact of different institutional collaboration patterns at the research units’ level. Scientometrics, 125 (2), 1179–1196.

Firdaus, F. (2013). Indonesian language education in Australia: Politics, policies and responses. Asian Studies Review, 37 (1), 24–41.

Gong, Y., Lyu, B., & Gao, X. (2018). Research on teaching Chinese as a second or foreign language in and outside mainland China: A bibliometric analysis. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 27 (4), 277–289.

Hallinger, P., & Kovačević, J. (2019). A bibliometric review of research on educational administration: Science mapping the literature, 1960 to 2018. Review of Educational Research, 89 (3), 335–369.

Hayden, M., & Le-Nguyen, D. C. (2020). A review of the reform agenda for higher education in Vietnam. In P. Ha & D. Ngoc (Eds.), Higher education in market-oriented socialist Vietnam (pp. 21–39). Springer.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Hew, J., Lee, V., Ooi, K., & Lin, B. (2021). Computer science in ASEAN: A ten-year bibliometric analysis (2009–2018). Journal of Computer Information Systems, 61 (3), 247–255.

International Monetary Fund (2022). World economic outlook database . Retrieved May 11, 2022 from https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/Issues/2022/04/19/world-economic-outlook-april-2022

Kam, H. W. (1998). English language teaching in Southeast Asia: Continuity and change. Asian Englishes, 1 (1), 5–30.

Kam, H. W. (2002). English language teaching in East Asia today: An overview. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 22 (2), 1–22.

Kirkpatrick, A. (2012). English in ASEAN: Implications for regional multilingualism. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33 (4), 331–344.

Kirkpatrick, A., & Liddicoat, A. J. (2017). Language education policy and practice in East and Southeast Asia. Language Teaching, 50 (2), 155–188.

Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). TESOL methods: Changing tracks, challenging trends. TESOL Quarterly, 40 , 59–81.

Lei, L., & Liao, S. (2017). Publications in linguistics journals from Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Macau (2003–2012): A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 24 (1), 54–64.

Lei, L., & Liu, D. (2019). Research trends in applied linguistics from 2005 to 2016: A bibliometric analysis and its implications. Applied Linguistics, 40 (3), 540–561.

Levine, T. R. (2010). Rankings and trends in citation patterns of communication journals. Communication Education, 59 (1), 41–51.

Lin, T. C., Lin, T. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2014). Research trends in science education from 2008 to 2012: A systematic content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 36 (8), 1346–1372.

Loh, C. E., & Liew, W. M. (2016). Voices from the ground: The emotional labour of English teachers’ work. Teaching and Teacher Education, 55 , 267–278.

Mahfoodh, O. H. A. (2017). “I feel disappointed”: EFL university students’ emotional responses towards teacher written feedback. Assessing Writing, 31 , 53–72.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6 (7), e1000097.

Nguyen, H. T. M., & Bui, T. (2016). Teachers’ agency and the enactment of educational reform in Vietnam. Current Issues in Language Planning, 17 (1), 88–105.

Nguyen, N. D., Nguyen, T. D., & Dao, K. T. (2021). Effects of institutional policies and characteristics on research productivity at Vietnam science and technology universities. Heliyon, 7 (1), e06024.

Nguyen, T. V., & Pham, L. T. (2011). Scientific output and its relationship to knowledge economy: An analysis of ASEAN countries. Scientometrics, 89 , 107–117.

Nguyen, T. M. H., & Webb, S. (2017). Examining second language receptive knowledge of collocation and factors that affect learning. Language Teaching Research, 21 (3), 298–320.

Pegkas, P., Staikouras, C., & Tsamadias, C. (2019). Does research and development expenditure impact innovation? Evidence from the European Union countries. Journal of Policy Modeling, 41 (5), 1005–1025.

Renandya, W. A., Lee, L. W., Wah, C. L. K., & Jacobs, G. M. (1999). A survey of English language teaching trends and practices in Southeast Asia. Asian Englishes, 2 (1), 37–65.

Schimanski, L. A., & Alperin, J. P. (2018). The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future. F1000Research . https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.16493.1

Sercombe, P. (2018). Current ELT trends in Southeast Asia. In J. Liontas (Ed.), The TESOL encyclopedia of English language teaching (pp. 1–9). Wiley.

Google Scholar  

Singleton, R. A., & Straits, B. C. (2010). Approaches to social research (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Smotrova, T. (2017). Making pronunciation visible: Gesture in teaching pronunciation. TESOL Quarterly, 51 (1), 59–89.

Stolerman, I. P., & Stenius, K. (2008). The language barrier and institutional provincialism in science. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 92 , 1–2.

Sun, Y. (2017). Major trends in the global ELT field: A non-native English-speaking professional’s perspective. In K. Kimura & J. Middlecamp (Eds.), Asian-focused ELT research and practice: Voices from the far edge (pp. 17–32). IDP Education.

Tantengco, O., Aquino, I., Asis, J., Tan, J., Uy, M., & Pacheco, E. (2021). Research trends in gestational diabetes mellitus in Southeast Asia: A bibliometric analysis (1975–2020). Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews, 15 (4), 102202.

Thai, C., & Boers, F. (2016). Repeating a monologue under increasing time pressure: Effects on fluency, complexity, and accuracy. TESOL Quarterly, 50 (2), 369–393.

UNESCO (2022). R&D spending per country . Retrieved May 11, 2022 from http://uis.unesco.org/apps/visualisations/research-and-development-spending/

United Nations Population Fund (2022). World population dashboard . Retrieved May 11, 2022 from https://www.unfpa.org/data/world-population-dashboard

van Raan, A. F. J. (2003). The use of bibliometric analysis in research performance assessment and monitoring of interdisciplinary scientific developments. Technikfolgenabschätzung: Theorie Und Praxis, 12 (1), 20–29.

Vergidis, P., Karavasiou, A., Paraschakis, K., Bliziotis, I., & Falagas, M. (2005). Bibliometric analysis of global trends for research productivity in microbiology. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 24 (5), 342–346.

Vuong, Q. H., Napier, N. K., Ho, T. M., Nguyen, V. H., Vuong, T. T., Pham, H. H., & Nguyen, H. K. T. (2019). Effects of work environment and collaboration on research productivity in Vietnamese social sciences: Evidence from 2008 to 2017 Scopus data. Studies in Higher Education, 44 (12), 2132–2147.

Zou, Y. (2022). A bibliometric study on the R&D funding and academic research performance in Shenzhen. Science and Public Policy . https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scab092

Download references

This research is funded by the University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Foreign Languages, University of Economics, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Bui My Ngoc & Jessie S. Barrot

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jessie S. Barrot .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors have not disclosed any competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Ngoc, B.M., Barrot, J.S. Current Landscape of English Language Teaching Research in Southeast Asia: A Bibliometric Analysis. Asia-Pacific Edu Res 32 , 517–529 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-022-00673-2

Download citation

Accepted : 09 July 2022

Published : 28 July 2022

Issue Date : August 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-022-00673-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• ELT research
• Research performance
• Research productivity
• Southeast Asia
• Bibliometric review
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

British Council

Six trends for the new future of english language teaching, by chia suan chong, 27 october 2021 - 08:48.

Poyraz Tütüncü/Pinhole Istanbul, Author MAHMUT CEYLAN

What has inspired your teaching and teacher development this year? Chia Suan Chong, writer, communication skills and intercultural skills trainer, who reported live from the ELTons awards in November 2021, lists her top six.

The announcement of the finalists of the ELTons, a.k.a. the British Council ELTons awards for innovation in English language teaching, has always been an interesting and revealing time. It is a time when teams and individuals are celebrated for their innovation in the courses, books, platforms, apps, projects, and more that they’ve contributed to the world of English language teaching. It is also a time when we get to learn about the current trends of our industry and the directions we are heading in.

As I excitedly clicked through the lists of finalists for the 19th year of the ELTons, here are some of the trends that became apparent.

Using the real world

One exciting thing about language teaching is the flexibility of the content of our materials. Science teachers teach scientific theories and facts and history teachers have historical events and stories as the subject content, but English teachers can use a variety of topics as vehicles to present the English language. We can teach English using fairy tales, workplace rules or quirky homes around the world. Some of the ELTons finalists have discovered the value in using real world events and acquainting learners with real-world scenarios where they might be using English. Sensations English (UK) for example uses news-based video and articles to help students learn about real-world events while improving their language skills. Immerse Virtual Language Experience Platform (Immerse VR, USA) puts students in a 3D world as they experience language and culture in real-world scenarios. And Vlogger Academy (Digital Learning Associates Ltd with The Weirdos and Creatives Collective, UK) uses real-life YouTubers and authentic content to expose learners to the global English used in the world today.

Using English to communicate with the world

There is no doubt that English is an indispensable tool for international communication today. Whether our learners are posting on social media, creating videos on video-sharing platforms or working in international project teams, the English language provides them with the opportunity to communicate not just with people who use English as a first language, but also those who use English as a second or foreign language. 

This reality is reflected not just in products like the already-mentioned Vlogger Academy, but also Converse Across the Universe: Managing Cross-Cultural Communication (Yelena Golovatch, Margarita Kochan, Yauheni Radzetski, Belarus), where students develop critical thinking and communication skills in practical everyday situations where they might encounter different cultures and different attitudes and ways of behaving. 

Even in Online English Pronunciation Course (Luke Nicholson, Improve your accent, UK) that is written for learners based in the UK, the emphasis is on intelligibility, i.e. being understood, and not only becoming someone that learners are not. 

As Our Languages (Stand For/FTD Educação, Brazil) very appropriately describes it, English is a tool for our students to express themselves – a tool not unlike the language of art, music or social media – a tool used to communicate with the world. And like these different forms of expression, learners need to feel a sense of ownership of the English language and own their language learning experience. English will serve to express their identities – a theme that is explored in Communicating Identities (Routledge, UK), a teacher’s guide that supports learners in their exploration and reflection of the different aspects of their identities.

Life skills  

As we provide our learners with opportunities to practise communicating in English, there is flexibility not only in the content of the texts we use but also in the tasks that we get learners to perform. Through these tasks, learners not only have the chance to enhance their language skills, but they are also able to develop other life skills. We saw the development of intercultural skills in the already-mentioned Converse Across the Universe: Managing Cross-Cultural Communication. This focus on expanding the learners’ knowledge of the world is also seen in Talk about China with Oxford (OUP China Ltd with Jingban Beijing Education Culture Media Co. Ltd, China), a series of courses that enable young learners to learn about China via the English language.

Other life skills that feature heavily among the finalists are problem-solving skills and collaboration skills – common features of materials that make use of a task-based learning approach to language learning. Escape the Classroom (Perceptia Press, UK/Japan) for example, requires students to work together in teams to figure out ways of solving puzzles and breaking codes in order to escape a room. Oxford Discover Futures (OUP – English language teaching, UK, Egypt, Mexico, Turkey, Spain and the Middle East) promotes critical thinking and collaboration skills through thought-provoking questions. And English Code (Pearson English, UK) uses code-breaking activities and creative tasks to help nurture the spirit of experimentation, collaboration, resilience and curiosity in primary school students. 

Included in life skills are higher-order thinking skills and exam-taking skills, and this can be done in innovative ways. Literatu Scribo for IELTS Writing Success (Literatu Pty Ltd Australia, Australia), for example, uses an online platform to help students improve their core English writing skills. The approach that Fun Skills (CUP and Cambridge Assessment English, UK) takes to this is perhaps reflected in its title, as children prepare for the exams they need to take in the future through songs and entertaining stories. 

The power of stories

Learning through stories is another clear thread that we see in many of the finalists this year. Fiction Express (Fiction Express, Spain/UK) develops literacy skills through well-supported reading texts while BOOKR Class (BOOKR Kids, Hungary) uses a gamified library app to provide interactive books from the classics of world literature and original stories. 

In this age when we have access to an incredible selection of stories in the form of TV shows we watch through online streaming services, Days Crossing (Chasing Time English, New Zealand) provide learners with original TV series that are specifically made for English language learners. 

Inclusion and wellbeing

Perhaps Link Online Learners a.k.a LOL (hundrED, Finland, with volunteers and educators from 13 different countries) is an example of how the trends of life skills, using real world content and helping learners to English to communicate with the world can all be embodied in one product. LOL provides a platform for teachers and students as a way of connecting with a diverse global youth network in order to develop curiosity, empathy for other cultures and an understanding of different perspectives and ways of life. The volunteers and educators involved in this project are from a diverse range of countries, demonstrating the inclusive nature of this project. 

The importance of diversity and inclusion in English language teaching was highlighted at the ELTons 2020 when the British Council created the new judge’s commendation category for Equality, Diversity and Inclusion – celebrating finalists whose resources bridge educational inequality, reflect diversity and promote the inclusion of typically underrepresented groups. ( Click here to find out more about last year’s Equality, Diversity and Inclusion winners)

This year, we continue to see the importance of this theme as we look at the finalists across the different categories of the ELTons. From English competency courses for Para Powerlifters (World Para Powerlifting, Germany, with International Paralympic Committee) and grammar for the deaf and hard of hearing (General Directorate for special education and continuous education, Ministry of Education in Sultanate of Oman with AI ROYAA NEWSPAPER, Sultanate of Oman), to Helping Matters – an English course for social workers (Perceptia Press, UK/Japan) and guides for volunteers at conversation clubs (Learning and Work Institute with Learning Unlimited, UK), we see products that are catered for learners and teachers with a wide range of needs and backgrounds.

The importance of inclusion can also be seen in CIELL-Comic for Inclusive English language learning (Lancaster University, UK, with AKTO Art & Design College, Greece, Innovation in Learning Institute, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität, Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany, Language Centre, University of Cyprus, Cyprus) and many of the finalists in the category for Local Innovation awards, such as Mosaik Dogme Toolkit , a toolkit that helps English teachers of refugees make learning communicative and engaging.  Teaching in challenging circumstances (Cambridge University Press, UK) is another example of support provided to teachers involved in formal or informal teaching in areas with a growing number of refugees and displaced people.

Many of these projects focus on including diverse student groups and providing support for both their learning and their wellbeing. But in the process of doing so, we should also remember to look after ourselves. Teacher Wellbeing (Oxford University Press, UK) provides teachers will a variety of practical ideas to support and maintain teacher wellbeing as teachers while nurturing the professional relationships they have.  

Our next normal   

The last couple of years have no doubt presented teachers with new challenges, and so it is no surprise that these new challenges are reflected in several ELTons finalists this year. The Teachers’ Classroom App (PeacheyPublications Ltd, UK) makes the transition to online teaching easier by offering teachers training of common digital tools and ready-made lessons that teachers can launch and deliver from their desktop. LearnCube Homework Application (LearnCube, UK) provides a digital solution to teachers who have to or want to manage homework and give personalised feedback for their online classes. Engaging language learners in contemporary classrooms (Cambridge University Press) recognises the distractions that learners face today and helps teachers consider the aspects of learner engagement that they have power to influence more directly. And the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary App (OUP, UK, with Paragon Software, Germany/Russia) gives learners to autonomy to improve their vocabulary and pronunciation anytime, anywhere as they navigate flipped learning, online learning and blended learning. 

Previous-ELTons winner, The HandsUp Project, also adapted in response to the school closures in 2020/21. Their Facebook Live Team teaching for the Palestinian English Curriculum (The Hands Up Project, UK with UNRWA, Gaza) delivered daily live team-taught classes remotely, led by a Palestinian English teacher and a teacher in another country. This push towards online lessons in the past couple of years has also resulted in us embracing global communication and increased learner autonomy.

As we reflect on the current trends of our industry through the ELTons finalists of 2021, we realise that the events of 2020/21 might have fast-forwarded some of the trends that were already developing in our industry, but none of them come as a surprise. If anything, this serves as confirmation as to where English language teaching and learning is going and will be going in the years to come. 

Watch recordings of the ELTons online  and meet the winners. Chia reported live from the event alongside teacher, writer, editor, and conference speaker Callie Massey.

Chia also guest tweeted live using the username @BCEltons . Join in the Twitter discussion using #ELTons.

Teachers, visit our TeachingEnglish website for lesson plans and activities.

View the discussion thread.

British Council Worldwide

• Afghanistan
• Bosnia and Herzegovina
• Czech Republic
• Hong Kong, SAR of China
• Korea, Republic of
• Myanmar (Burma)
• Netherlands
• New Zealand
• North Macedonia
• Northern Ireland
• Occupied Palestinian Territories
• Philippines
• Saudi Arabia
• Sierra Leone
• South Africa
• South Sudan
• Switzerland
• United Arab Emirates
• United States of America

Research Studies in English Language Teaching and Learning

Announcements, update to our privacy statement.

Dear RSELTL Community,

We wish to inform you of an upcoming change to the Privacy Statement of Research Studies in English Language Teaching and Learning (RSELTL). Our commitment to protecting your personal information remains steadfast, and these updates reflect our ongoing efforts to enhance privacy protections and comply with legal requirements.

Adoption of DOI through CrossRef by the Research Studies in English Teaching and Learning Journal

Call for papers: research studies in english language teaching and learning (rseltl) journal, volume 2, issue 4, 2024, change of style to apa 7th, call for papers: research studies in english teaching and learning (rseltl) journal, volume 2, issue 3, 2024, current issue.

Short Movies and Narrative Assessment in English Lessons

The impact of role-playing exercises on conversational english proficiency among university students: a study in linguistic confidence and fluency enhancement, digital versus traditional reading materials in english language learning: a comparative analysis of student perceptions and outcomes, enhancing english vocabulary learning through mobile apps: a new paradigm in educational technology, english as a lingua franca in global business: balancing efficiency and cultural sensitivity, evaluating the efficacy of peer and teacher feedback on writing development among secondary students in bologna, italy.

Research Studies in English Language Teaching and Learning (RSELTL) is an academic publication dedicated to exploring and disseminating innovative approaches, research findings, and practical insights in the field of English language teaching (ELT) across the world. The journal aims to provide a forum for ELT practitioners, scholars, researchers, and policy makers to share their experiences, ideas, and perspectives on various aspects of ELT.

The scope of RSELTL is broad and inclusive, covering various topics related to ELT, including but not limited to:

• Cognitive and Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching : Explores the intersection of cognitive processes, linguistic theory, and practical teaching approaches, underpinning the methodologies, approaches, and techniques in English language teaching.
• Innovative Teaching Methodologies : Highlights novel teaching approaches, including technology-enhanced, student-centred learning, and the integration of digital tools in ELT, reflecting the broad spectrum of English teaching methodologies.
• Language Acquisition and Development : Covers studies on first, second, and foreign language acquisition, incorporating theories of second language acquisition with a focus on English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and English as a Second Language (ESL).
• Curriculum Design and Development : Focuses on the strategies for planning, implementing, and evaluating English language curricula, including curriculum and syllabus design and its evaluation.
• Assessment and Evaluation in ELT : Examines both traditional and innovative assessment methods, their impact on language education, and the development of English language proficiency standards and frameworks.
• Teacher Education and Professional Development : Investigates the spectrum of pre-service and in-service teacher education, development, and professionalization, including critical language pedagogy and the promotion of social justice in ELT.
• Multilingualism, Multiculturalism, and Diversity in ELT : Studies the effects of cultural and linguistic diversity on English language teaching, addressing multilingualism, multiculturalism, and intercultural competence development.
• English for Specific Purposes (ESP) and Academic Purposes (EAP) : Dedicated to the specialised fields of ESP and EAP, including curriculum design and teaching methodologies tailored to specific professional or academic needs.
• English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) and World Englishes : Explores the global role of English, its variations, and its use across the world, alongside the implications for teaching, learning, and cross-cultural communication.
• Language Policy and Planning : Analyses the formation and impact of language policies on English teaching and learning, including their implications at local, national, and international levels.
• Use of Technology in ELT : Investigates how technology and online environments enhance language teaching and learning, embracing the use of digital innovations in the classroom.
• Cross-Cultural Communication and Intercultural Competence Development : Focuses on the skills required for effective cross-cultural communication, the development of intercultural competence among learners, and its importance in globalised contexts.
• Translation Studies in Language Teaching : Looks at the role of translation in language learning, supporting linguistic competence, cultural understanding, and bilingualism, bridging language and cultural divides.

RSELTL welcomes original research articles, literature reviews, book reviews, case studies, and practical reports related to ELT. The journal employs a double-blind peer-review process to ensure the quality and rigor of its published articles. RSELTL also supports open access to scholarly publications, making its articles freely available to readers worldwide.

RSELTL is an important publication for ELT scholars, practitioners, and researchers worldwide, providing a platform for the dissemination of innovative ideas and research findings that can help improve the quality of ELT practices and policies across the world.

How to get your paper published in RSELTL

Here are some steps you can follow to increase your chances of getting your paper published in the Research Studies in English Language Teaching and Learning journal:

• Read previous publications: Before submitting your paper, read through previous publications in the journal to get an idea of the types of articles that are typically published. This will help you ensure that your paper is a good fit for the journal.
• Follow the submission guidelines: Make sure to carefully read the submission guidelines on the journal's website. This will give you an idea of the journal's requirements, including formatting, length, and style guidelines.
• Prepare your paper: Follow the guidelines for formatting, length, and style to prepare your paper. Make sure to proofread and edit your paper thoroughly before submitting it.
• Write a cover letter: Along with your paper, you should also include a cover letter that briefly introduces your paper and highlights its significance and contribution to the field of English language teaching and learning.
• Submit your paper: Once your paper is ready, submit it through the journal's online submission system. Be patient as the review process can take some time.
• Respond to reviewers' comments: If your paper is accepted for publication, you may be asked to make revisions based on feedback from the reviewers. Make sure to carefully address each comment and resubmit your paper in a timely manner.

By following these steps, you can increase your chances of getting your paper published in the Research Studies in English Language Teaching and Learning journal.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

ISSN: 2977-0394 

Under Creative Commons Licence : Atribución 4.0 Internacional  (CC BY 4.0)   

RSELTL is published and managed by Pierre Online Publications Ltd, a UK publishing house.

Journal ISSN:

Journal issn-(e): 2977-0394.

Make a Submission

Rseltl indexed & listed in:.

Information

• For Readers
• For Authors
• For Librarians

RSELTL Visitors

Visitors overview

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.7(9); 2021 Sep

Evidence-based reading interventions for English language learners: A multilevel meta-analysis

Associated data.

Data included in article/supplementary material/referenced in article.

The number of English Language Learners (ELLs) has been growing worldwide. ELLs are at risk for reading disabilities due to dual difficulties with linguistic and cultural factors. This raises the need for finding practical and efficient reading interventions for ELLs to improve their literacy development and English reading skills. The purpose of this study is to examine the evidence-based reading interventions for English Language Learners to identify the components that create the most effective and efficient interventions. This article reviewed literature published between January 2008 and March 2018 that examined the effectiveness of reading interventions for ELLs. We analyzed the effect sizes of reading intervention programs for ELLs and explored the variables that affect reading interventions using a multilevel meta-analysis. We examined moderator variables such as student-related variables (grades, exceptionality, SES), measurement-related variables (standardization, reliability), intervention-related variables (contents of interventions, intervention types), and implementation-related variables (instructor, group size). The results showed medium effect sizes for interventions targeting basic reading skills for ELLs. Medium-size group interventions and strategy-embedded interventions were more important for ELLs who were at risk for reading disabilities. These findings suggested that we should consider the reading problems of ELLs and apply the Tier 2 approach for ELLs with reading problems.

English language learners, Evidenced-based intervention, Meta-analysis, Reading.

1. Introduction

There is a growing body of literature that recognizes the importance of quality education for learners who study in a language other than their native language ( Estrella et al., 2018 ; Ludwig et al., 2019 ). As cultural, racial, ethnic, and linguistic diversification takes place globally, the number of students studying a second language different from their native language is also increasing worldwide. In the United States, nearly 5 million learners who are not native speakers of English are currently attending public schools, and this figure has increased significantly over the past decade ( NCES, 2016 ). As the number of children whose native language is not English increased, the need for educational support also increased. Furthermore, the implementation of NCLB policy emphasizes the need for quality education for all students included in all schools. Accordingly, NCLB has emerged as a critical policy for learners to study in their second language. In other words, there is an urgent need to ensure that non-native English speakers receive appropriate education due to NCLB, which has not only increased the demand for education but also led to the practice of enhanced education for learners whose English is not their native language.

ELLs (English language learners) refer to the education provided for learners whose native language is not English in English-speaking countries ( National Center for Education Statistics, 2021 ). The education provided to these ELLs is called ESL (English as a second language), ESOL (English to speakers of other languages), EFL (English as a foreign language), and so on. Each term is adopted differently depending on the policy, purpose, and status of operation of the state and/or school district. While a variety of terms have been suggested, this paper uses the term ‘ELLs’ to refer to learners who are not native speakers of English and uses the terms ‘the English education program’ and the ‘ELL program’ to refer to the English education program provided to ELLs.

To ensure quality education, students identified as ELLs can participate in supportive programs to improve their English skills. These ELL programs can be broadly divided into two methods: “pull-out” and “push-in” ( Honigsfeld, 2009 ). In the pull-out program, students are taken to a specific space other than the classroom at regular class time and are separately taught English. In the push-in program, the ELL teacher joins the mainstream ELLs’ classroom and assists them during class time. Through these educational supports, ELLs are required to achieve not only English language improvements addressed in Title III of NCLB but also language art achievements appropriate to their grade level addressed in Title I of NCLB. ELLs are expected to achieve the same level of academic achievement as students of the same grade level, as well as comparable language skills.

A considerable amount of literature has been published on the achievement and learning status of ELLs ( Ludwig, 2017 ; Soland and Sandilos, 2020 ). These studies revealed that despite the intensive, high-quality education support for ELLs, they encounter difficulties learning and academic achievement. The National Reading Achievement Test (NAEP) results show that the achievement gap between non-ELLs and ELLs is steadily expanding in the areas of both mathematics and reading ( Polat et al., 2016 ). Ultimately, ELLs are reported to have the highest risk of dropping out of school ( Sheng et al., 2011 ). These difficulties are not limited to early school age. Fry (2007) reported that the results from a national standardized test of 8th-grade students found that ELLs performed lower than white students in both reading and math. Callahan and Shifrer (2016) analyzed data from a nationally representative educational longitudinal study in 2002 and found that, despite taking into account language, socio-demographic and academic factors, ELLs still have a large gap in high school academic achievement. Additionally, research has suggested that ELLs are less likely to participate in higher education institutions compared to non-ELL counterparts ( Cook, 2015 ; Kanno and Cromley, 2015 ).

Factors found to influence the difficulties of ELLs in learning have been explored in several studies ( Dussling, 2018 ; Thompson and von Gillern, 2020 ; Yousefi and Bria, 2018 ). There are two main reasons for these difficulties. First, ELLs face many challenges in learning a new language by following the academic content required in the school year ( American Youth Policy Forum, 2009 ). Moreover, language is an area that is influenced by sociocultural factors, and learning academic contents such as English language art and math are also influenced by sociocultural elements and different cultural backgrounds, which affects the achievement of ELLs in school ( Chen et al., 2012 ; Orosco, 2010 ). Second, it is reported that the heterogeneity of ELLs makes it challenging to formulate instructional strategies and provide adequate education for them. Due to the heterogeneous traits in the linguistic and cultural aspects of the ELL group, there are limitations in specifying and guiding traits. Therefore, properly reflecting their characteristics is difficult.

The difficulties for ELLs in academic achievement raise the necessity for searching practical and efficient reading interventions for ELLs to improve English language and academic achievement, including ELLs' English language art achievement. These needs and demands led to the conduct of various studies that analyze the difficulties of ELLs. Over the past decade, these studies have provided important information on education for ELLs. The main themes of the studies are difficulties in academic achievement and interventions for ELLs, including reading ( Kirnan et al., 2018 ; Liu and Wang, 2015 ; Roth, 2015 ; Shamir et al., 2018 ; Tam and Heng, 2016 ), writing ( Daugherty, 2015 ; Hong, 2018 ; Lin, 2015 ; nullP ) or both reading and math ( Dearing et al., 2016 ; Shamir et al., 2016 ). The influences of teachers on children's guidance ( Kim, 2017 ; Daniel and Pray, 2017 ; Téllez and Manthey, 2015 ; Wasseell, Hawrylak, Scantlebuty, 2017 ) and the influences of family members ( Johnson and Johnson, 2016 ; Walker, Research on 2017 ) are also examined.

Reading is known to function as an important predictor of success not only in English language art itself but also in overall school life ( Guo et al., 2015 ). This is because reading is conducted throughout the school years, as most of the activities students perform in school are related to reading. Furthermore, reading is considered one of the major fundamental skills in modern society because it has a strong relationship with academic and vocational success beyond school-based learning ( Lesnick et al., 2010 ). In particular, for ELLs, language is one of the innate barriers; thereafter, reading is one of the most common and prominent difficulties in that it is not done in their native language ( Rawian and Mokhtar, 2017 ; Snyder et al., 2017 ). In this respect, several studies have investigated reading for ELLs. These studies explore effective interventions and strategies ( Kirnan et al., 2018 ; Mendoza, 2016 ; Meredith, 2017 ; Reid and Heck, 2017 ) and suggest reading development models or predictors for reading success ( Boyer, 2017 ; Liu and Wang, 2015 ; Rubin, 2016 ). For these individual studies to provide appropriate guidance to field practitioners and desirable suggestions for future research, aggregation of the overall related studies, not only of the individual study, and research reflections based on them are required. Specifically, meta-analysis can be an appropriate research method. Through meta-analysis, we can derive conclusions from previous studies and review them comprehensively. Furthermore, meta-analysis can ultimately contribute to policymakers and decision-makers making appropriate decisions for rational strategies and policymaking.

Although extensive research has been carried out on the difficulties of ELLs and how to support them, a sufficiently comprehensive meta-analysis of these studies has not been carried out. Some studies have focused on specific interventions, such as morphological interventions ( Goodwin and Ahn, 2013 ), peer-mediated learning ( Cole, 2014 ), and video game-based instruction ( Thompson and von Gillern ). Ludwig, Guo, and Georgiou (2019) demonstrated the effectiveness of reading interventions for ELLs. However, they divided reading-related variables into “reading accuracy”, “reading fluency”, and “reading comprehension” and examined the effectiveness of the reading-related attributes in each of the variables. Therefore, the study has limitations for exploring the various aspects of reading and their effectiveness for reading interventions.

Individual studies have their characteristics and significance. However, for individual studies to be more widely adopted in the field and to be a powerful source for future research, it is necessary to analyze these individual studies more comprehensively. Meta-analysis reviews past studies related to the topic by 'integrating' previous studies, analyzes and evaluates them through 'critical analysis', provides implications to the field, and gives rise to intellectual stimulation to future studies by ‘identifying issues’ ( Cooper et al., 2019 ). Through this, meta-analysis can be a useful tool for diagnosing the past where relevant research has been conducted, taking appropriate treatment for the present, and providing intellectual stimulation for future studies.

Therefore, the purposes of this study are to examine evidence-based reading interventions for ELLs presented in the literature to analyze their effects and to identify the actual and specific components for creating the most effective and efficient intervention for ELLs. The findings of this study make a major contribution to research on ELLs by demonstrating the implications for the field and future study.

2.1. Selection of studies

A meta-analysis of peer-reviewed articles on ELL reading interventions published between January 2008 and March 2018 was conducted. According to the general steps of a meta-analysis, data related to reading interventions for English language learners were collected as follows. First, educational and psychological publication databases, such as Google Scholar ( https://scholar.google.co.kr ), ERIC ( https://eric.ed.gov/ ), ELSEVIER ( http://www.elsevier.com ), and Springer ( https://www.springer.com/gp ) were used to find the articles to be analyzed using the search terms “ELLs,” ESL,” “Reading,” “Second language education,” “Effectiveness,” and “Intervention” separately and in combination with each other. We reviewed the results of the web-based search for articles and included all relevant articles on the preliminary list. We selected the final list of the articles to be analyzed by applying inclusion and exclusion criteria to the preliminary list of articles. Studies were included in the final list based on three primary criteria. First, each study should evaluate the effectiveness of a school-based reading intervention using an experimental or quasi-experimental group design. In this process, single case, qualitative, and/or descriptive studies for ELLs were excluded from the analysis. Second, we included all types of reading-related interventions (i.e., phonological awareness, word recognition, reading fluency, vocabulary, and reading comprehension). Third, each study needed to report data in a statistical format to calculate an effect size. Fourth, we only included studies whose subjects were in grades K-12. The preliminary list had 75 articles, but since some of these studies did not meet the inclusion criteria, we excluded them from the final list for analysis. In total, this meta-analysis included 28 studies with 234 effect sizes (see Figure 1 ).

Prisma flow diagram.

2.2. Data analysis

2.2.1. coding procedure.

To identify the relevant components of the evidence-based reading interventions for ELLs, we developed an extensive coding document. Our interest was in synthesizing the effect sizes and finding the variables that affect the effectiveness of reading interventions for ELLs. The code sheet was made based on a code sheet used in Vaughn et al. (2003) and Wanzek et al. (2010) . All studies were coded for the following: (a) study characteristics, including general information about the study, (b) student-related variables, (c) intervention-related variables, (d) implementation-related variables, (e) measurement-related variables, and (f) quantitative data for the calculation of effect sizes.

Within the study characteristics category, we coded the researchers’ names, publication year, and title from each study to identify the general information about each study. For the student-related variables, mean age, grade level(s), number of participants, number of males, number of females, sampling method, exceptionality type (reading ability level), identification criteria in case of learning disabilities, race/ethnicity, and SES were coded. We divided grade level(s) into lower elementary (K-2), upper elementary (3–5), and secondary (6–12). When students with learning disabilities participated in the study, we coded the identification criteria reported in the study. For race/ethnicity, we coded white, Hispanic, black, Asian, and others. Within intervention-related variables, we coded for the title of the intervention, the key instructional components of the intervention, the type of intervention, and the reading components of the intervention. The reading components coded were phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, reading comprehension, listening comprehension, and others. If an intervention contained multiple reading components, all reading components included in the intervention were coded. Fourth, within implementation-related variables, we coded group size, duration of the intervention (weeks), the total number of sessions, frequency of sessions per week, length of each session (minutes), personnel who provided the intervention (i.e., teacher, researchers, other), and the setting. Fifth, in measurement-related variables, we coded the title of the measurement, reliability coefficient, validity coefficient, type of measurement, type of reliability, and type of validity. We also coded quantitative data such as the pre- and posttest means, the pre- and posttest standard deviations, and the number of participants in the pre- and posttests for both the treatment and control groups. These coding variables are defined in Table 1 . The research background and sample information are in Appendix 1 .

Table 1

Coding variables.

2.2.2. Coding reliability

The included articles were coded according to the coding procedure described above. Two researchers coded each study separately and reached 91% agreement. Afterward, the researchers reviewed and discussed the differences to resolve the initial disagreements.

2.2.3. Data analysis

First, we calculated 234 effect sizes from the interventions included in the 28 studies. The average effect size was calculated using Cohen's d formula. In addition, we conducted a two-level meta-analysis through multilevel hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) using the HLM 6.0 interactive mode statistical program to analyze the computed effect sizes and find the predictors that affect the effect sizes of reading interventions. HLM is appropriate to quantitatively obtain both overall summary statistics and quantification of the variability in the effectiveness of interventions across studies as a means for accessing the generalizability of findings. Moreover, HLM easily incorporates the overall mean effect size using the unconditional model, and HLM is useful to explain variability in the effectiveness of interventions between studies in the conditional model. The aim of the current study is to provide a broad overview of interventions for ELLs. To achieve this aim, we conducted an unconditional model for overall mean effect size and conducted a conditional model to identify factors that have an impact on the strength of effect sizes. In regard to variables related to the effectiveness of interventions, we conducted a conditional model with student-related, measurement-related, intervention-related, and implementation-related variables. In the case of quantitative meta-analyses, it is assumed that observations are independent of one another ( How and de Leeuw, 2003 ). However, this assumption is usually not applied in social studies if observations are clustered within larger groups ( Bowman, 2003 ) because each effect size within a study might not be homogeneous ( Beretvas and Pastor, 2003 ). Thus, a two-level multilevel meta-analysis using a mixed-effect model was employed because multiple effect sizes are provided within a single education study. To calculate effect size (ES) estimates using Cohen's d, we use the following equation [1]:

The pooled standard deviation, SD pooled , is defined as

In HLM, the unconditional model can be implemented to identify the overall effect size across all estimates and to test for homogeneity. If an assumption of homogeneity is rejected by an insignificant chi-square coefficient in the unconditional model, this means that there are differences within and/or between studies. This assumption must go to the next step to find moderators that influence effect sizes. This step is called a level two model or a conditional model. A conditional model is conducted to investigate the extent of the influence of the included variables.

The level one model (unconditional model) was expressed as [3], and the level two model (the conditional model was expressed as [4].

In equation (3) , δ j represents the mean effect size value for study j, and e j is the within-study error term assumed to be theoretically normally distributed with a mean of 0 and a variance of V j . In the level two model equation [4], γ 0 represents the overall mean effect size for the population, and u j represents the sampling variability between studies presumed to be normally distributed with a mean of 0 and a variance τ .

Regarding publication bias, we looked at the funnel plot with the 'funnel()' command of the metafor R package ( Viechtbauer, 2010 ), and to verify this more statistically, we used the dmetar R package ( Harrer et al., 2019 ). Egger's regression test ( Egger et al., 1997 ) was conducted using the 'eggers.test()' command to review publication bias. Egger's regression analysis showed that there was a significant publication error (t = 3.977, 95% CI [0.89–2.54], p < .001). To correct this, a trim-and-fill technique ( Duval and Tweedie, 2000 ) was used. As a result, the total effect size corrected for publication bias was also calculated. The funnel plot is shown in [ Figure 2 ].

Funnel plot.

We analyzed 28 studies to identify influential variables that count for reading interventions for ELLs. Before performing the multilevel meta-analysis, the effect size of 28 studies was analyzed by traditional meta-analysis. The forest plots for the individual effect sizes of 28 studies are shown in Appendix 2. We present our findings with our research questions as an organizational framework. First, we showed an unconditional model for finding the overall mean effect size. Then, we described the variables that influenced the effect size of reading interventions for ELLs using a conditional model.

3.1. Unconditional model

An unconditional model of the meta-analysis was tested first. In the analysis, restricted maximum likelihood estimation was used. This analysis was conducted to confirm the overall mean effect size and to examine the variability among all samples. The results are shown in Table 2 .

Table 2

Results of the unconditional model analysis.

∗∗∗ p < 0.001, df: degree of freedom.

The intercept coefficient in the fixed model is the overall mean effect size from 234 effect sizes. This means that the effect of reading intervention for English language learners is medium based on Cohen's d. Cohen's d is generally interpreted as small d = 0.2, medium d = 0.5 and large d = 0.8. The variance component indicates the variability among samples. The estimate was 0.589 and remained significant (χ 2 = 1245.90, p < . 001). This statistical significance means that moderator analysis with dominant predictors in a model is required to explore the source of variability.

3.2. Conditional model

Moderator analysis using the conditional model was expected to identify factors that have an impact on the strength of effect sizes. In this study, the moderator analysis was administered by nine critical variable categories: students’ grade, exceptionality, SES, reading area, standardized test, test reliability, intervention type, instructor, and group size. Variables in each category were coded by dummy coding. Dummy coding was used to identify the difference in dependent variables between the categories of independent variables. For example, we used four dummy variables to capture the five dimensions. The parameter estimates capture the differences in effect sizes between the groups that are coded 1 and a reference group that is coded 0. From a mathematical perspective, it does not matter which categorical variable is used as the referenced group ( Frey, 2018 ). We labeled one variable in each category as a reference group to make the interpretation of the results easier. We used an asterisk mark to denote the reference group for each category; if a word has an asterisk next to it, this indicates that it is the reference group for that category.

• 1) Student-related variables

The results of the conditional meta-analysis for students' grade variables are presented in Table 3 . In Table 3 , the significant coefficients mean that mean effect sizes are significantly larger for studies in reference conditions. For student grades, upper elementary students showed significantly larger mean effect sizes than secondary students (2.720, p = 0.000), but preschool students showed significantly lower mean effect sizes than secondary students (-0.103, p = 0.019). The Q statistic was significant for students’ grades ( Q = 27.20, p < 0.001) (see Table 4 ).

Table 3

Results of the moderator analysis for student grade.

df: degree of freedom.

Table 4

Results of the moderator analysis for exceptionality.

For the student-related variables, students with low achievement showed significantly larger mean effect sizes scores than general students (0.707, p = 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between students with low achievement and general students. The Q statistic was significant for students’ exceptionality ( Q = 0.0278, p < 0.001).

Table 5 shows that low and low-middle SES was not significantly different from students with no information about SES (0.055, p = 0.666). Moreover, students with middle and upper SES did not have significantly smaller effect sizes than students with nonresponse (-0.379, p = 0.444). The Q statistic was significant for students’ SES ( Q = 68.50, p < 0.001).

Table 5

Results of the moderator analysis for SES.

• 2) Measurement-related variables

Table 6 shows the results of the moderator analysis for measurement types. The coefficient for the standardized measurement-related variable was not significant. The Q statistic was significant for the standardization of measurement tools ( Q = 5.28, p < 0.001).

Table 6

Results of the moderator analysis for standardization of measurement tools.

Table 7 shows the results of the moderator analysis for the reliability of the measurement tools. The coefficient for the measurement reliability-related variable was significant (0.409, p = 0.003), which means that the effect sizes of measurements that reported reliability (ES = 0.770) were significantly larger than the effect sizes of measurements that had information about reliability (ES = 0.361). The Q statistic was significant for the reliability of the measurement tools ( Q = 5.82, p < 0.001) (see Table 8 ).

Table 7

Results of the moderator analysis for reliability.

Table 8

Results of the moderator analysis for content of the intervention.

• 3) Intervention-related variables

The content of the intervention was divided into phonological awareness, reading fluency, vocabulary, reading comprehension, listening comprehension, and other areas. Studies measured other areas that functioned as a reference group. For the measurement area, all reading areas were significantly larger than other areas. Reading fluency (1.150, p = 0.001), reading comprehension (0.971, p = 0.000) and listening comprehension (0.834, p = 0.002) were significantly larger than those in the other areas. However, phonological awareness and vocabulary were significantly larger than other areas but lower than reading fluency, reading comprehension, and listening comprehension (0.528, p = 0.013; 0.442, p = 0.000). The Q statistic was significant for the content of the intervention ( Q = 24.005, p < 0.001).

For intervention types, strategy instruction, peer tutoring, and computer-based learning were compared to other methods, which were fixed as a reference group. Table 9 shows that strategy instruction was significantly larger than other methods in mean effect sizes (0.523, p = 0.001). However, studies that applied peer tutoring and computer-based learning showed lower than other methods, but these differences were not statistically significant (-0.113, p = 0.736; -0114, p = 0.743). The Q statistic was significant for intervention types ( Q = 73.343, p < 0.001).

Table 9

Results of the moderator analysis for intervention types.

• 4) Implementation-related variables

For instructor-related variables, other instructor-delivered instructions were assigned as a reference group. Table 10 shows that the teacher and researcher groups showed significantly larger than the other instructors. Moreover, the teacher group showed larger than the researcher group (0.909, p = 0.000). The Q statistic was significant for instructor-related variables ( Q = 14.024, p < 0.001).

Table 10

Results of the moderator analysis for instructor.

For group size, mixed groups were fixed as a reference group. Group size variables were divided into a small group (1 or more and 5 or less), a middle group (6 or more and 15 or less), and a large group or class size (16 or more). Table 11 shows that the middle group (6 or more and 15 or less) and the small group (1 or more and 5 or less) were significantly larger than the mixed group (0.881, p = 0.000; 0.451, p = 0.006). However, the difference between the large group and the mixed group was not significant (0.120, p = 0.434). The Q statistic was significant for group size variables ( Q = 17.756, p < 0.001).

Table 11

Results of the moderator analysis for group size.

4. Discussion

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to explore the effects of reading interventions for ELLs and to identify research-based characteristics of effective reading interventions for enhancing their reading ability. To achieve this goal, this study tried to determine the answers to two research questions. What is the estimated mean effect size of reading interventions for ELLs in K-12? To what extent do student-, intervention-, implementation-, and measurement-related variables have effects on improving the reading ability of ELLs in K-12? Therefore, our study was limited to recent K-12 intervention studies published between January 2008 and March 2018 that included phonological awareness, fluency, vocabulary, reading comprehension, and listening comprehension as intervention components and outcome measures. A total of 28 studies were identified and analyzed. To inquiry the two main research questions, a two-level meta-analysis was employed in this study. For the first research question, the unconditional model of HLM was conducted to investigate the mean effect size of reading interventions for ELLs. The conditional model of HLM was conducted to determine which variables have significant effects on reading interventions for ELLs. Below, we briefly summarized the results of this study and described the significant factors that seem to influence intervention effectiveness. These findings could provide a better understanding of ELLs and support implications for the development of reading interventions for ELLs.

4.1. Effectiveness of reading interventions for ELLs

The first primary finding from this meta-analysis is that ELLs can improve their reading ability when provided appropriate reading interventions. Our findings indicated that the overall mean effect size of reading interventions of ELLs yielded an effect size of 0.653, which indicates a medium level of effect. From this result, we can conclude that the appropriate reading interventions generally have impacts on reading outcomes for ELLs in K-12. This is consistent with prior syntheses reporting positive effects of reading interventions for ELLs ( Vaughn et al., 2006 ; Abraham, 2008 ).

Effect size information is important to understand the real effects of the intervention. Therefore, this finding indicated that supplementary reading interventions for ELLs will be developed and implemented. This finding also showed that states are required to develop a set of high-quality reading interventions for ELLs. Language interventions for ELLs have become one of the most important issues in the U.S. Increasing numbers of children in U.S. schools have come from homes in which English is not the primary language spoken. NCES (2016) showed that 4.9 million students, or 9.6% of public school students, were identified as ELLs, which was higher than the 3.8 million students, or 8.1%, identified in 2000 ( NCES, 2016 ). While many students of immigrant families succeed in their academic areas, too many do not. Some ELLs lag far behind native English speakers in the school because of the strong effect of language factors on the instruction or assessment. Although English is not their native language, ELLs should learn educational content in English. This leads to huge inequity in public schools. Thus, improving the English language and literacy skills of ELLs is a major concern for educational policymakers. This finding can support practitioners’ efforts and investments in developing appropriate language interventions for ELLs.

4.2. The effects of moderating variables

The second primary finding of this meta-analysis relates to four variable categories: student-, intervention-, implementation-, and measurement-related variables. Effective instruction cannot be designed by considering one factor. The quality of instruction is the product of many factors, including class size, the type of instructions, and other resources. This finding showed which factors affected the effectiveness of reading interventions. Specifically, we found that the variables that proved to have significant effects on reading outcomes of ELLs were as follows: upper elementary students, reliable measurement tools, reading and listening comprehension-related interventions, strategy instruction, and the middle group consisting of 6 or more and 15 or less. Teachers and practitioners in the field may choose to adopt these findings into their practices. ELL teachers may design their instruction as strategy-embedded instruction in middle-sized groups.

We found that grades accounted for significant variability in an intervention's effectiveness. Specifically, we found that reading interventions were substantially more effective when used with upper elementary students than secondary students. This means that the magnitude of an intervention's effectiveness changed depending on when ELLs received reading interventions. Specifically, the larger effect sizes on upper elementary students than secondary schools showed the importance of early interventions to improve ELLs' language abilities. Students who experience early reading difficulty often continue to experience failure in later grades. ELLs, or students whose primary language is other than English and are learning English as a second language, often experience particular challenges in developing reading skills in the early grades. According to Kieffer (2010) , substantial proportions of ELLs and native English speakers showed reading difficulties that emerged in the upper elementary and middle school grades even though they succeeded in learning to read in the primary grades.

Regarding students’ English proficiency and academic achievement, there was no statistically significant difference between students with low achievement and general students. Given the heterogeneity of the English language learner population, interventions that may be effective for one group of English language learners may not be effective with others ( August and Shanahan, 2006 ). This result is similar to the results achieved by Lovett et al. (2008) . Lovett et al. (2008) showed that there were no differences between ELLs and their peers who spoke English as a first language in reading intervention outcomes or growth intervention. This finding suggests that systematic and explicit reading interventions are effective for readers regardless of their primary language.

For students' socioeconomic status (SES), there was no significant difference between the low-middle group and the nonresponse group. However, we cannot find that students' SES is critical for implementing reading interventions. Low SES is known to increase the risk of reading difficulties because of the limited access to a variety of resources that support reading development and academic achievement ( Kieffer, 2010 ). Many ELLs attend schools with high percentages of students living in poverty ( Vaughn et al., 2009 ). These schools are less likely to have adequate funds and resources and to provide appropriate support for academic achievement ( Donovan and Cross, 2002 ). Snow, Burns and Griffin (1998) highlighted multiple and complex factors that contribute to poor reading outcomes in school, including a lack of qualified teachers and students who come from poverty. Although this study cannot determine the relationship between the effectiveness of reading interventions and the SES of students, more studies are needed. In addition, these results related to students’ characteristics showed that practitioners and teachers can consider for whom to implement some interventions. Researchers should provide a greater specification of the student samples because this information will be particularly critical for English language learners.

Although many of the studies measured a variety of outcomes across all areas of reading, interventions that focused on improving reading comprehension and listening comprehension obtained better effects than other reading outcomes. This result is similar to those discussed in previous findings ( Wanzek and Roberts, 2012 ; Carrier, 2003 ).

With regard to effective intervention types, the findings indicated that strategy instruction was statistically significant for improving the reading skills of ELLs. However, computer-based interventions, which are frequently used for reading instruction for ELLs in recent years, showed lower effect sizes than mixed interventions. Strategy instructions are known as one of the effective reading interventions for ELLs ( Proctor et al., 2007 ; Begeny et al., 2012 ; Olson and Land, 2007 ; Vaughn et al., 2006 ). These strategies included activating background knowledge, clarifying vocabulary meaning, and expressing visuals and gestures for understanding after reading. Some studies have shown that computer-based interventions are effective for ELLs ( White and Gillard, 2011 ; Macaruso and Rodman, 2011 ), but this study does not. Therefore, there is little agreement in the research literature on how to effectively teach reading to ELLs ( Gersten and Baker, 2000 ). Continued research efforts must specify how best to provide intervention for ELLs.

With respect to the implementation of the intervention, teachers and researchers as instructors would produce stronger effects than other instructors. In this study, multiple studies showed that various instructors taught ELLs, including teachers, graduate students, and researchers. The professional development of instructors is more important than that of those who taught ELLs. This finding is consistent with Richards-Tutor et al. (2016) . They also did not find differences between researcher-delivered interventions and school personnel-delivered interventions. Continuing professional development should build on the preservice education of teachers, strengthen teaching skills, increase teacher knowledge of the reading process, and facilitate the integration of newer research on reading into the teaching practices of classroom teachers ( Snow et al., 1998 ). Overall, professional development is the key factor in strengthening the reading skills of ELLs.

This study showed that medium-sized groups of 6 or more and 15 or less had larger effect sizes than the mixed groups. In addition, the medium-sized group showed a larger effect size than the small group of 5 or less. This finding showed that a multi-tiered reading system should be needed in the general classroom. This finding is linked to the fact that the reaction to intervention (RTI) approach is more effective for ELLs. Linan-Thompson et al. (2007) pointed out that RTI offers a promising alternative for reducing the disproportionate representation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in special education by identifying students at risk early and providing preventive instruction to accelerate progress. Regarding interventions for ELLs who are struggling with or at risk for reading difficulties, Ross and Begeny (2011) compared the effectiveness between small group interventions and implementing the intervention in a 1/1 context for ELLs. They showed that nearly all students benefitted from the 1/1 intervention, and some students benefitted from the small group intervention. This finding is commensurate with a previous study investigating the comparative differences between group sizes and suggests research-based support for the introduction of the RTI approach.

However, most implementation-related variables, including duration of intervention, the total number of sessions, frequency per week, length of each session, settings, and instructor, did not have any significant effect on the reading ability of ELLs. That is, ELLs are able to achieve their reading improvement regardless of the duration of intervention, where they received the reading intervention, and who taught them. This finding is similar to those discussed by Snyder et al. (2017) . They also synthesized the related interventions for ELLs and showed that the length of intervention did not seem to be directly associated with overall effect sizes for reading outcomes. This finding is also the same as recent research on intervention duration with native English speakers ( Wanzek et al., 2013 ). Wanzek and colleagues examined the relationship between student outcomes and hours of intervention in their meta-analysis. The findings showed no significant differences in student outcomes based on the number of intervention hours. Elbaum et al. (2000) stated that the intensity of the interventions is most important for effectiveness. Our results somewhat support these researchers’ opinions, but we cannot be certain that a brief intervention would have the same overall effect on reading outcomes as a year-long intervention. Thus, we should consider the intervention intensity, such as student attendance at the sessions, with the duration of the intervention.

4.3. Implications for practice and for research

The most effective and efficient education refers to education that is made up in the right ways, that includes proper content, and that is delivered on time so that the students can benefit the most. To implement this, research to identify a particular framework based on the synthesis of research results through meta-analysis, such as this study, must be conducted. Furthermore, the implications based on the results must be deeply considered. In this respect, important implications for the practice and research of practitioners, researchers, and policymakers on enhancing reading competence for ELLs of this study are as follows.

First, reading interventions for ELLs are expected to be the most efficient when conducted on a medium-sized group of 6–15 students. This indicates that implementing reading interventions for ELLs requires a specially designed group-scale configuration rather than simply a class-wide or one-to-one configuration. Second, the implementation of reading interventions for ELLs is most effective when conducted for older elementary school students. This is in contrast to Morgan and Sideridis (2006) , who demonstrated the characteristics of students with learning disabilities using multilevel meta-analysis and showed that age groups were irrelevant in the effect size of reading interventions for students with learning disabilities. Therefore, it can be seen that the ELLs group, unlike the learning disability group, the students of which have reading difficulty due to their disabilities, is in the normal development process but has reading difficulty due to linguistic differences. Accordingly, it can be seen that the senior year of elementary school, in which a student has been exposed to the academic environment for a sufficiently long time and language is sufficiently developed, is the appropriate time for learning English for ELLs. Third, effective reading interventions for ELLs should be performed with a strategy-embedded instruction program. This is based on the fact that strategic instructions are effective for vocabulary or concepts in unfamiliar languages ( Carlo et al., 2005 ; Chaaya and Ghosn, 2010 ).

The above implications require the implementation of Tier 2 interventions for reading interventions for ELLs in practice. In Tier 2 interventions, students can participate in more intensive learning through specially designed interventions based on their personal needs ( Ortiz et al., 2011 ). In other words, in policymaking and administrative decision-making, intensive education programs for ELLs who have been exposed to the academic environment for a certain period but still have reading difficulties, including having achievements that fall short of the expected level, are needed.

Considering further applications, these findings could guide practitioners and policymakers to develop effective evidence-based reading programs or policies. The significant variables in this study can be considered to develop new programs for ELLs.

Declarations

Author contribution statement.

All authors listed have significantly contributed to the development and the writing of this article.

Funding statement

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2020S1A3A2A02103411).

Data availability statement

Declaration of interests statement.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

No additional information is available for this paper.

Appendix A. Supplementary data

The following is the supplementary data related to this article:

• Abraham L.B. Computer-mediated glosses in second language reading comprehension and vocabulary learning: a meta-analysis. Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn. 2008; 21 (3):199–226. [ Google Scholar ]
• August D., Shanahan T. In: Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language Minority Children and Youth. August D., Shanahan T., editors. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; Mahwah, NJ: 2006. Synthesis: instruction and professional development; pp. 351–364. [ Google Scholar ]
• Begeny J.C., Ross S.G., Greene D.J., Mitchell R.C., Whitehouse M.H. Effects of the Helping Early Literacy with Practice Strategies (HELPS) reading fluency program with Latino English language learners: a preliminary evaluation. J. Behav. Educ. 2012; 21 (2):134–149. [ Google Scholar ]
• Beretvas S.N., Pastor D.A. Using mixed-effects models in reliability generalization studies. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 2003; 63 (1):75–95. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bowman N.A. Effect sizes and statistical methods for meta-analysis in higher education. Res. High. Educ. 2003; 53 :375–382. [ Google Scholar ]
• Boyer K. The Relationship Between Vocabulary and Reading Comprehension in Third Grade Students Who Are English Language Learners and Reading Below Grade Level. 2017. (Masters Thesis) [ Google Scholar ]
• Carlo M.S., August D., Snow C.E. Sustained vocabulary-learning strategy instruction for English-language learners. Teach. Learn. Vocabul.: Bring. Res. Pract. 2005:137–153. [ Google Scholar ]
• Carrier K.A. Improving high school English language learners' second language listening through strategy instruction. Biling. Res. J. 2003; 27 (3):383–408. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chaaya D., Ghosn I.K. Supporting young second language learners reading through guided reading and strategy instruction in a second grade classroom in Lebanon. Educ. Res. Rev. 2010; 5 (6):329–337. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen X., Ramirez G., Luo Y.C., Geva E., Ku Y.M. Comparing vocabulary development in Spanish-and Chinese-speaking ELLs: the effects of metalinguistic and sociocultural factors. Read. Writ. 2012; 25 (8):1991–2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cole M.W. Speaking to read: meta-analysis of peer-mediated learning for English language learners. J. Lit. Res. 2014; 46 (3):358–382. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cooper H., Hedges L.V., Valentine J.C., editors. The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis. Russell Sage Foundation; 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Daniel S.M., Pray L. Learning to teach English language learners: a study of elementary school teachers’ sense-making in an ELL endorsement program. Tesol Q. 2017; 51 (4):787–819. [ Google Scholar ]
• Daugherty J.L. 2015. Assessment of ELL Written Language Progress in Designated ESL Noncredit Courses at the Community College Level. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dearing E., Walsh M.E., Sibley E., Lee-St. John T., Foley C., Raczek A.E. Can community and school-based supports improve the achievement of first-generation immigrant children attending high-poverty schools? Child Dev. 2016; 87 (3):883–897. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Donovan M.S., Cross C.T. National Academies Press; Washington, DC: 2002. Minority Students in Special and Gifted Education. 2101 Constitution Ave., NW, Lockbox 285, 20055. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dussling T.M. Examining the effectiveness of a supplemental reading intervention on the early literacy skills of English language learners. Liter. Res. Instr. 2018; 57 (3):276–284. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duval S., Tweedie R. Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot–based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics. 2000; 56 (2):455–463. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Egger M., Smith G.D., Schneider M., Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Bmj. 1997; 315 (7109):629–634. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elbaum B., Vaughn S., Tejero Hughes M., Watson Moody S. How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. J. Educ. Psychol. 2020; 92 (4):605–619. [ Google Scholar ]
• Estrella G., Au J., Jaeggi S.M., Collins P. Is inquiry science instruction effective for English language learners? A meta-analytic review. AERA Open. 2018; 4 (2) 2332858418767402. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Frey B.B. Sage Publications; 2018. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gersten R., Baker S. What we know about effective instructional practices for English-language learners. Except. Child. 2000; 66 (4):454–470. [ Google Scholar ]
• Guo Y., Sun S., Breit-Smith A., Morrison F.J., Connor C.M. Behavioral engagement and reading achievement in elementary-school-age children: a longitudinal cross-lagged analysis. J. Educ. Psychol. 2015; 107 (2):332–347. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goodwin A.P., Ahn S. A meta-analysis of morphological interventions in English: effects on literacy outcomes for school-age children. Sci. Stud. Read. 2013; 17 (4):257–285. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harrer M., Cuijpers P., Furukawa T.A., Ebert D.D. Doing meta-analysis with R: A hands-On guide. from. 2019. https://bookdown.org/MathiasHarrer/Doing_Meta_Analysis_in_R/ [ Google Scholar ]
• Hong H. Exploring the role of intertextuality in promoting young ELL children’s poetry writing and learning: a discourse analytic approach. Classr. Discourse. 2018; 9 (2):166–182. [ Google Scholar ]
• Honigsfeld A. ELL programs: not ‘one size fits all’ Kappa Delta Pi Rec. 2009; 45 (4):166–171. [ Google Scholar ]
• How J.J., de Leeuw E.D. In: Multilevel Modeling: Methodological Advances, Issues, and Applications. Reise S.P., Duan N., editors. Lawrence Erlbaum; Mahwah, NJ: 2003. Multilevle model for meta-analysis; pp. 90–111. [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson E.J., Johnson A.B. Enhancing academic investment through home-school connections and building on ELL students' scholastic funds of knowledge. J. Lang. Literacy Educ. 2016; 12 (1):104–121. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kieffer M.J. Socioeconomic status, English proficiency, and late-emerging reading difficulties. Educ. Res. 2010; 39 (6):484–486. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim K. Global Conference on Education and Research (GLOCER 2017) 2017. May). Influence of ELL instructor’s culturally responsive attitude on newly arrived adolescent ELL students’ academic achievement; pp. 239–242. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kirnan J., Ventresco N.E., Gardner T. The impact of a therapy dog program on children’s reading: follow-up and extension to ELL students. Early Child. Educ. J. 2018; 46 (1):103–116. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lesnick J., Goerge R., Smithgall C., Gwynne J. Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago; Chicago, IL: 2010. Reading on Grade Level in Third Grade: How Is it Related to High School Performance and College Enrollment. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin S.M. A study of ELL students' writing difficulties: a call for culturally, linguistically, and psychologically responsive teaching. Coll. Student J. 2015; 49 (2):237–250. [ Google Scholar ]
• Linan-Thompson S., Cirino P.T., Vaughn S. Determining English language learners' response to intervention: questions and some answers. Learn. Disabil. Q. 2007; 30 (3):185–195. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu S., Wang J. Reading cooperatively or independently? Study on ELL student reading development. Read. Matrix: Int. Online J. 2015; 15 (1):102–120. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lovett M.W., De Palma M., Frijters J., Steinbach K., Temple M., Benson N., Lacerenza L. Interventions for reading difficulties: a comparison of response to intervention by ELL and EFL struggling readers. J. Learn. Disabil. 2008; 41 (4):333–352. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ludwig C. University of Alberta; Canada: 2017. The Effects of Reading Interventions on the Word-Reading Performance of English Language Learners: A Meta-Analysis (Unpublished Master’s Thesis) [ Google Scholar ]
• Ludwig C., Guo K., Georgiou G.K. Are reading interventions for English language learners effective? A meta-analysis. J. Learn. Disabil. 2019; 52 (3):220–231. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Macaruso P., Rodman A. Benefits of computer-assisted instruction to support reading acquisition in English language learners. Biling. Res. J. 2011; 34 (3):301–315. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mendoza S. Reading strategies to support home-to-school connections used by teachers of English language learners. J. English Lang. Teach. 2016; 6 (4):33–38. [ Google Scholar ]
• Meredith D.C. Trevecca Nazarene University; 2017. Relationships Among Utilization of an Online Differentiated Reading Program, ELL Student Literacy Outcomes, and Teacher Attitudes. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morgan P.L., Sideridis G.D. Contrasting the effectiveness of fluency interventions for students with or at risk for learning disabilities: a multilevel random coefficient modeling meta-analysis. Learn. Disabil. Res. Pract. 2006; 21 (4):191–210. [ Google Scholar ]
• National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) 2021. English Language Learners in Public Schools. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgf Retrieved from. [ Google Scholar ]
• Olson C.B., Land R. A cognitive strategies approach to reading and writing instruction for English language learners in secondary school. Res. Teach. Engl. 2007:269–303. [ Google Scholar ]
• Orosco M.J. A sociocultural examination of response to intervention with Latino English language learners. Theory Into Pract. 2010; 49 (4):265–272. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ortiz A.A., Robertson P.M., Wilkinson C.Y., Liu Y.J., McGhee B.D., Kushner M.I. The role of bilingual education teachers in preventing inappropriate referrals of ELLs to special education: implications for response to intervention. Biling. Res. J. 2011; 34 (3):316–333. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pang Y. Empowering ELL students to improve writing skills through inquiry-based learning. N. Engl. Read. Assoc. J. 2016; 51 (2):75–79. [ Google Scholar ]
• Polat N., Zarecky-Hodge A., Schreiber J.B. Academic growth trajectories of ELLs in NAEP data: The case of fourth-and eighth-grade ELLs and non-ELLs on mathematics and reading tests. J. Educ. Res. 2016; 109 (5):541–553. [ Google Scholar ]
• Proctor C.P., Dalton B., Grisham D.L. Scaffolding English language learners and struggling readers in a universal literacy environment with embedded strategy instruction and vocabulary support. J. Literacy Res. 2007; 39 (1):71–93. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rawian R.M., Mokhtar A.A. ESL reading accuracy: the inside story. Soc. Sci. 2017; 12 (7):1242–1249. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reid T., Heck R.H. Exploring reading achievement differences between elementary school students receiving and not receiving English language services. AERA Online Paper Repositor. 2017 [ Google Scholar ]
• Richards-Tutor C., Baker D.L., Gersten R., Baker S.K., Smith J.M. The effectiveness of reading interventions for English learners: a research synthesis. Except. Child. 2016; 82 (2):144–169. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ross S.G., Begeny J.C. Improving Latino, English language learners' reading fluency: the effects of small-group and one-on-one intervention. Psychol. Sch. 2011; 48 (6):604–618. [ Google Scholar ]
• Roth A. Northwest Missouri State University; United States: 2015. Does Buddy Reading Improve Students' Oral Reading Fluency? Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rubin D.I. Growth in oral reading fluency of Spanish ELL students with learning disabilities. Interv. Sch. Clin. 2016; 52 (1):34–38. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shamir H., Feehan K., Yoder E. EdMedia+ Innovate Learning. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE); 2016. June). Using technology to improve reading and math scores for the digital native; pp. 1425–1434. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shamir H., Feehan K., Yoder E., Pocklington D. MANAGEMENT AND MARKETING (MAC-EMM 2018); 2018. Can CAI Improve Reading Achievement in Young ELL Students? ECONOMICS; p. 229. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sheng Z., Sheng Y., Anderson C.J. Dropping out of school among ELL students: implications to schools and teacher education. Clear. House. 2011; 84 (3):98–103. [ Google Scholar ]
• Snow C.E., Burns S.M., Griffin P. Predictors of success and failure in reading. Prevent. Read. Difficul. Young Child. 1998:100–134. [ Google Scholar ]
• Snyder E., Witmer S.E., Schmitt H. English language learners and reading instruction: a review of the literature. Prev. Sch. Fail.: Alter. Educ. Child. Youth. 2017; 61 (2):136–145. [ Google Scholar ]
• Soland J., Sandilos L.E. English language learners, self-efficacy, and the achievement gap: understanding the relationship between academic and social-emotional growth. J. Educ. Stud. Placed A. T. Risk. 2020:1–25. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tam K.Y., Heng M.A. Using explicit fluency training to improve the reading comprehension of second grade Chinese immigrant students. Mod. J. Lang. Teach Methods. 2016; 6 (5):17. [ Google Scholar ]
• Téllez K., Manthey G. Teachers’ perceptions of effective school-wide programs and strategies for English language learners. Learn. Environ. Res. 2015; 18 (1):111–127. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thompson C.G., von Gillern S. Video-game based instruction for vocabulary acquisition with English language learners: a Bayesian meta-analysis. Educ. Res. Rev. 2020; 30 :100332. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vaughn S., Kim A., Sloan C.V.M., Hughes M.T., Elbaum B., Sridhar D. Social skills interventions for young children with disabilities: a synthesis of group design studies. Remedial Spec. Educ. 2003; 24 :2–15. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vaughn S., Martinez L.R., Linan-Thompson S., Reutebuch C.K., Carlson C.D., Francis D.J. Enhancing social studies vocabulary and comprehension for seventh-grade English language learners: findings from two experimental studies. J. Res. Educ. Effect. 2009; 2 (4):297–324. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vaughn S., Mathes P., Linan-Thompson S., Cirino P., Carlson C., Pollard-Durodola S., Francis D. Effectiveness of an English intervention for first-grade English language learners at risk for reading problems. Elem. Sch. J. 2006; 107 (2):153–180. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Viechtbauer W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J. Stat. Softw. 2010; 36 (3):1–48. [ Google Scholar ]
• Walker S.A. Chicago State University; 2017. Exploration of ELL Parent Involvement Measured by Epstein's Overlapping Spheres of Influence. Doctoral dissertation. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wanzek J., Roberts G. Reading interventions with varying instructional emphases for fourth graders with reading difficulties. Learn. Disabil. Q. 2012; 35 (2):90–101. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wanzek J., Wexler J., Vaughn S., Ciullo S. Reading interventions for struggling readers in the upper elementary grades: a synthesis of 20 years of research. Read. Writ. 2010; 23 (8):889–912. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wanzek J., Vaughn S., Scammacca N.K., Metz K., Murray C.S., Roberts G., Danielson L. Extensive reading interventions for students with reading difficulties after grade 3. Rev. Educ. Res. 2013; 83 (2):163–195. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wassell B.A., Hawrylak M.F., Scantlebury K. Barriers, resources, frustrations, and empathy: teachers’ expectations for family involvement for Latino/a ELL students in urban STEM classrooms. Urban Educ. 2017; 52 (10):1233–1254. [ Google Scholar ]
• White E.L., Gillard S. Technology-based literacy instruction for English language learners. J. Coll. Teach. Learn. 2011; 8 (6):1–5. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yousefi M.H., Biria R. The effectiveness of L2 vocabulary instruction: a meta-analysis. Asian-Pacific J. Second Fore. Lang. Educ. 2018; 3 (1):1–19. [ Google Scholar ]

References for studies included in the meta-analysis

• Amendum S.J., Bratsch-Hines M., Vernon-Feagans L. Investigating the efficacy of a web-based early reading and professional development intervention for young English learners. Read. Res. Q. 2018; 53 (2):155–174. [ Google Scholar ]
• American Youth Policy Forum. (2009). Issue brief Moving English language learners to college and career readiness. Retrieved November 22,2009, from: www.aypf.org/documents/ELLIssueBrief
• Callahan R.M., Shifrer D. Equitable access for secondary English learner students: course taking as evidence of EL program effectiveness. Educ. Admin. Q. 2016; 52 (3):463–496. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cho H., Brutt-Griffler J. Integrated reading and writing: a case of Korean English language learners. Read. Foreign Lang. 2015; 27 (2):242. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chow B.W.Y., McBride-Chang C., Cheung H. Parent–child reading in English as a second language: effects on language and literacy development of Chinese kindergarteners. J. Res. Read. 2010; 33 (3):284–301. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cruz de Quiros A.M., Lara-Alecio R., Tong F., Irby B.J. The effect of a structured story reading intervention, story retelling and higher order thinking for English language and literacy acquisition. J. Res. Read. 2012; 35 (1):87–113. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cook A.L. Exploring the role of school counselors. J. Sch. Couns. 2015; 13 (9):1–33. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dabarera C., Renandya W.A., Zhang L.J. The impact of metacognitive scaffolding and monitoring on reading comprehension. System. 2014; 42 :462–473. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dockrell J.E., Stuart M., King D. Supporting early oral language skills for English language learners in inner city preschool provision. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 2010; 80 (4):497–515. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Filippini A.L., Gerber M.M., Leafstedt J.M. A vocabulary-added reading intervention for English learners at-risk of reading difficulties. Int. J. Spec. Educ. 2012; 27 (3):14–26. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fry R. How far behind in math and reading are English language learners? Pew Hispanic Center; Washington, DC: 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jamaludin K.A., Alias N., Mohd Khir R.J., DeWitt D., Kenayathula H.B. The effectiveness of synthetic phonics in the development of early reading skills among struggling young ESL readers. Sch. Effect. Sch. Improv. 2016; 27 (3):455–470. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kanno Y., Cromley J. English language learners’ pathways to four-year colleges. Teachers College Record. 2015; 117 (12):1–44. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mancilla-Martinez J. Word meanings matter: cultivating English vocabulary knowledge in fifth-grade Spanish-speaking language minority learners. Tesol Q. 2010; 44 (4):669–699. [ Google Scholar ]
• McMaster K.L., Kung S.H., Han I., Cao M. Peer-assisted learning strategies: a “Tier 1” approach to promoting English learners' response to intervention. Except. Child. 2008; 74 (2):194–214. [ Google Scholar ]
• Olivier A.M., Anthonissen C., Southwood F. Literacy development of English language learners: the outcomes of an intervention programme in grade R. S. Afr. J. Commun. Disord. 2010; 57 (1):58–65. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pollard-Durodola S.D., Gonzalez J.E., Saenz L., Resendez N., Kwok O., Zhu L., Davis H. The effects of content-enriched shared book reading versus vocabulary-only discussions on the vocabulary outcomes of preschool dual language learners. Early Educ. Dev. 2018; 29 (2):245–265. [ Google Scholar ]
• Proctor C.P., Dalton B., Uccelli P., Biancarosa G., Mo E., Snow C., Neugebauer S. Improving comprehension online: effects of deep vocabulary instruction with bilingual and monolingual fifth graders. Read. Writ. 2011; 24 (5):517–544. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rodríguez C.D., Filler J., Higgins K. Using primary language support via computer to improve reading comprehension skills of first-grade English language learners. Comput. Sch. 2012; 29 (3):253–267. [ Google Scholar ]
• Silverman R., Hines S. The effects of multimedia-enhanced instruction on the vocabulary of English-language learners and non-English-language learners in pre-kindergarten through second grade. J. Educ. Psychol. 2009; 101 (2):305–314. [ Google Scholar ]
• Slavin R.E., Madden N., Calderón M., Chamberlain A., Hennessy M. Reading and language outcomes of a multiyear randomized evaluation of transitional bilingual education. Educ. Eval. Pol. Anal. 2011; 33 (1):47–58. [ Google Scholar ]
• Solari E.J., Gerber M.M. Early comprehension instruction for Spanish-speaking English language learners: teaching text-level reading skills while maintaining effects on word-level skills. Learn. Disabil. Res. Pract. 2008; 23 (4):155–168. [ Google Scholar ]
• Spycher P. Learning academic language through science in two linguistically diverse kindergarten classes. Elem. Sch. J. 2009; 109 (4):359–379. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tong F., Irby B.J., Lara-Alecio R., Koch J. Integrating literacy and science for English language learners: from learning-to-read to reading-to-learn. J. Educ. Res. 2014; 107 (5):410–426. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tong F., Irby B.J., Lara-Alecio R., Mathes P.G. English and Spanish acquisition by Hispanic second graders in developmental bilingual programs: a 3-year longitudinal randomized study. Hisp. J. Behav. Sci. 2008; 30 (4):500–529. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tong F., Irby B.J., Lara-Alecio R., Yoon M., Mathes P.G. Hispanic English learners' responses to longitudinal English instructional intervention and the effect of gender: a multilevel analysis. Elem. Sch. J. 2010; 110 (4):542–566. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tong F., Lara-Alecio R., Irby B.J., Mathes P.G. The effects of an instructional intervention on dual language development among first-grade Hispanic English-learning boys and girls: a two-year longitudinal study. J. Educ. Res. 2011; 104 (2):87–99. [ Google Scholar ]
• Townsend D., Collins P. Academic vocabulary and middle school English learners: an intervention study. Read. Writ. 2009; 22 (9):993–1019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vadasy P.F., Sanders E.A. Efficacy of supplemental phonics-based instruction for low-skilled kindergarteners in the context of language minority status and classroom phonics instruction. J. Educ. Psychol. 2010; 102 (4):786–803. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vadasy P.F., Sanders E.A. Efficacy of supplemental phonics-based instruction for low-skilled first graders: how language minority status and pretest characteristics moderate treatment response. Sci. Stud. Read. 2011; 15 (6):471–497. [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Staden A. Reading in a second language: considering the 'simple view of reading' as a foundation to support ESL readers in Lesotho, Southern Africa. Per Linguam: J. Lang. Learn. 2016; 32 (1):21–40. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yeung S.S., Siegel L.S., Chan C.K. Effects of a phonological awareness program on English reading and spelling among Hong Kong Chinese ESL children. Read. Writ. 2013; 26 (5):681–704. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Many Black Americans speak African American English. But is it embraced in schools?

Geneva Smitherman ended up in speech therapy in her freshman year at Wayne State University in the 1950s, when she failed a test to screen incoming teaching students for possible speech problems.

The speech therapy class was largely made up of people of color, including Black students like Smitherman, who spoke in Black English, a language spoken by many Black people across the country. The teaching assistant leading the class quickly realized that neither Smitherman nor most of the other students had speech impairments the test screened for, such as stuttering. They just spoke differently, pronouncing words contrary to standard American English and used different phrases.

Being placed in a speech class made Smitherman mad, but she was used to being underestimated. As a child, her family was among Black Southerners who migrated north where good-paying jobs were plenty in the Midwest and to escape Jim Crow laws. When she moved north from Tennessee, Smitherman recalled, she was placed in second grade when her school records indicated she was supposed to be in third, even though she'd already learned to read.

"I was just repeating stuff I learned already," she said.

After getting placed in speech therapy, Smitherman committed her career to teaching and researching sociolinguistics, African American language specifically, and its place in the country. She's a co-founder of the African American and African Studies Department at Michigan State University. Multiple professors raised her name as one of the foundational researchers in African American English and its treatment in schools. Smitherman was also a central expert in a federal court case in Ann Arbor, a battle that revolved around the treatment of Black English speakers learning to read.

As debates rage across the country over the way children learn to read and state lawmakers work to adopt measures that would promote the science of reading in schools, there's an oft-overlooked component to teaching children how to read: the language in which students speak, and specifically the language many Black students speak.

Embracing the language that some Black students speak can encourage literacy, education leaders say. But other scholars still say there's work to be done to embrace Black English in the classroom and in understanding the most effective ways to teach speakers how to read and stoke enthusiasm about reading and literature as they age.

Black English, or African American English, is a language spoken among Black Americans, according to scholars. The language originated as Africans and Europeans interacted during the slave trade, according to Smitherman.

Raven L. Jones, an associate professor of teacher education at Michigan State University and co-founder of the Zuri Reads Initiative, which promotes literacy across metro Detroit, said the word "Yo" is one example of another way to say "hello" or refer to something as "your" in African American English. Jones wants her students, prospective teachers, to understand that there are many valid ways of speaking, reading and articulating ideas, including in academic environments.

"I'm not saying that there shouldn't be a certain criticality or skill set that you bring into these environments," she said. "But they should also be representative of who you are."

Ann Arbor school was front-and-center in Black English debate

An Ann Arbor school in the late 1970s was once central in a court battle that started out about literacy and morphed into a case around Black English.

In July 1977, about a dozen Black children attending Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary School sued Ann Arbor Public Schools, claiming the district was providing an inadequate education. While the school was largely white, according to news stories from that time, the students who sued lived in public housing, and the suit claimed a higher proportion of students living in the public housing development were classified as students with disabilities, which they claimed was not a proper designation. Many of the students in the suit struggled to read.

As the suit evolved, the judge limited the case to a language barrier issue. Attorneys with the Student Advocacy Center argued the children did not possess learning disabilities, but instead spoke African American English, a language the school's white teachers struggled to grasp or accept.

Smitherman, now a distinguished professor emerita at Michigan State University, was tapped as an expert in the case.

"This failure of the teachers to recognize the language as legitimate and the corresponding negative attitudes toward the children's language led to negative expectations of the children which turned into self-fulfilling prophecies," Smitherman wrote in 1981, reflecting on the case. "One critical consequence was that the childrenwere not being taught to read."

A federal district court judge ruled in July 1979 that the school district had discriminated against the students due to the language barrier. According to a Free Press article from that time, the district was ordered to better train its teachers to understand Black English. Later, in 1997, the children and mothers involved in the case expressed mixed feelings about its outcome, and whether the training teachers received made a difference.

Still, the case remains a milepost for a larger discussion of African American English in schools.

In 1980, 5,000 people came to a symposium organized by Smitherman at Wayne State University, where the writer and civil rights activist James Baldwin delivered an address on Black English, telling the crowd that "all Americans speak an English that has been transformed by language of Black Americans." The symposium brought Baldwin, attorneys from the case and other education leaders together, who spoke about the impact of the judge's decision and the broader treatment of Black students in reading instruction.

Teaching African American English

African American English still isn't fully embraced in the classroom, scholars and advocates said, but Smitherman and others said they're optimistic that educators today are doing a better job of responding to students who speak the language. And research by dozens of linguistics scholars, many of whom are in Michigan, has contributed to understanding the nuances and particulars of the language, including its role in the classroom and reading instruction.

Yolanda Holt, a professor in the department of communication sciences and disorders and sociolinguist at East Carolina University, said consciously involving community members in research around reading and language is crucial to understanding how educators can better teach students who speak African American English.

"All languages have value; if the child is able to communicate effectively, that's good," she said. "We want to use the language that they bring to school to engage them with literacy practices."

Often, the conversation around African American English has seen the language as a deficit that needs to be addressed in school, Holt said, instead of an asset. And much of the broader research and dialogue around how children learn to read, often referred to as the science of reading, often leaves out the science of how African American English speakers learn to read, Holt said.

One important nuance, Holt explained, is how African American English speakers might pronounce certain words. While words like "knob" are often universally pronounced the same way, there might be variations in how a child pronounces the word "fire," for example. An African American English speaker might pronounce fire like "fiyah." Using a science of reading approach, teachers often help students through phonics, mapping sounds to letters. But they may not take into account different pronunciations or language variations or may see the different pronunciation as a problem.

If a student is using the "fiyah" pronunciation of the word, Holt said, "You have to direct them: 'Well, there's an 'R' sound on the end. ... So I understand what you're saying and that's perfect and beautiful, but we want to make sure that when you're reading, writing and listening, that we map that,' " she said. "That's a really simple thing. But we rarely see that talked about in the literature."

Jamesia Nordman, a professor of English at Grand Valley State University who has taught English Language Arts and English across different grade levels, said, like Spanish speakers, young African American English speakers tend to oscillate between languages, from African American English to standard American English (SAE).

Teachers should "let them vacillate between AAE and SAE, and gradually teach them the SAE rules and mechanics and things like that. ... I think you just teach them in conjunction with one another," Nordman said.

'A place of understanding'

Beyond the mechanics of reading instruction, there's another dimension to understanding African American English in classrooms: embracing it and showing children that they should value their language, Nordman said.

"It is a language, it's not slang," she said. "We need to teach our kids that they're both valid and valuable."

Nordman didn't always feel like her first language, African American English, was seen as valuable as a student growing up in Detroit, and felt she was often made to feel ashamed for the way she spoke, constantly being corrected. In college at Eastern Michigan University, people always noted her "accent," even though she was from Detroit, a 40-minute drive to EMU's campus.

"It would have been really powerful if I had been able to come from a place of understanding," she said.

To foster inclusion and hone a passion for reading, school libraries, classroom bookshelves and required reading should include books that include African American English, Nordman and others said. Some examples: "Game" by Walter Dean Myers, "Bud, Not Buddy" by Christopher Paul Curtis, "The Hate U Give" by Angie Thomas, and "An Ode to the Fresh Cut" by Derrick Barnes.

Jones said to show they value the identities and experiences of students, educators can teach standard and Black English ideas side-by-side. For example, she said, standard English-speakers might say, "I'm OK." But there are other ways of communicating that in different communities, such as: "I'm straight," "We alright" and "I'm good."

"Even though standard English is telling us one way of being and saying, it's the same with African American English: we're doing the same thing just in a different way, which is more culturally responsive to our needs," Jones said. "Sometimes, I'm not going to get out of 'To Kill a Mockingbird' what I'm going to get out of 'Push' by Sapphire, and 'Push' is saturated with African American English."

Research around African American English is ongoing, and Holt encourages Detroit residents, if asked to participate in such research, to ask questions about the research being conducted, and to ask whether researchers are engaging Black families as part of that research process.

"African American English, it's positive, it's not going anywhere," she said. "We want to encourage people to use a language that speaks to their soul."

Smitherman is optimistic. Attitudes around "everything that's not the queen's English" have changed for the better, she said, adding, "I feel very good about the changes that have been made and that I've been a part of."

Contact Lily Altavena: [email protected].