Cited by 164EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Learning and TeachingEducational Research and Methods

Evolving the TESOL Teaching–Research Nexus

Mckinley, Jim·2019·TESOL Quarterly

Abstract

TESOL research was traditionally led by researcher‐practitioners, who acknowledged real‐world English language teaching problems (in alignment with developments in establishing applied linguistics as a field of study) as the basis for research enquiries. Take, for instance, TESOL Quarterly's first two issues. Published in 1967, articles offer descriptions of and suggestions for actual classroom practices. Some include sample exercises, based on either the author's own practices (see, e.g., Arapoff, 1967) or on a combination of literature and personal experience (see, e.g., Ross, 1967). Over time, however, the focus moved away from anecdotes for teaching English towards empirical TESOL research, grounded in educational, linguistic, or psychological principles. This movement was part of a larger trend in educational research and has led to continued calls from some higher education scholars to refocus on the teaching–research nexus (see, e.g., Neumann, 1992). These changes have contributed to a teaching and research bifurcation, where studies conducted by researchers who are removed from teaching tend to be more highly valued by the TESOL research community than many of the practical classroom‐based, teaching‐led work done by researcher‐practitioners.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/tesq.509

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The volume of published qualitative studies in language education has notably increased in the 25 years since Edge and Richards' (1998) landmark discussion.

    “In the 25 years since the publishing of Edge and Richards ' (1998) landmark discussion of epistemological claims in qualitative applied linguistics research, the volume of published qualitative studies in language education has notably increased (Benson et al., 2009; Lazaraton, 2000; McKinley, 2019; Richards, 2006, 2009; Zhang, 2019).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 32 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mckinley, J.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Mckinley, Jim
Venue
TESOL Quarterly
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-04-21
Volume
53
Issue
3
Pages
875-884
ISSN
  • 0039-8322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-7249
OpenAlex
W2938413357
Cited by
164
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 4
FWCI
55.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • TESOL Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Second Language Learning and Teaching
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Research and Methods
Keywords
integration of teaching and research, practitioner-researchers, empirical research, applied linguistics, English language teaching

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review