This presentation explores various transformations that inform Deaf Studies research, ranging from transformations in deaf networks to larger sign language networks and transformations in applied linguistics, society, and language ideologies, and the related potential impact on sign language policy and revitalisation. After discussing some new research lenses in Deaf Studies, such as visual methods, the presentation suggests some ways forward for Deaf Studies in terms of research priorities and rights discourses.
LINK
When teaching grammar, one of the biggest challenges teachers face is how to make their students achieve conceptual understanding. Some scholars have argued that metaconcepts from theoretical linguistics should be used to pedagogically and conceptually enrich traditional L1 grammar teaching, generating more opportunities for conceptual understanding. However, no empirical evidence exists to support this theoretical position. The current study is the first to explore the role of linguistic metaconcepts in the grammatical reasoning of university students of Dutch Language and Literature. Its goal was to gain a better understanding of the characteristics of students’ grammatical conceptual knowledge and reasoning and to investigate whether students’ reasoning benefits from an intervention that related linguistic metaconcepts to concepts from traditional grammar. Results indicate, among other things, that using explicit linguistic metaconcepts and explicit concepts from traditional grammar is a powerful contributor to the quality of students’ grammatical reasoning. Moreover, the intervention significantly improved students’ use of linguistic metaconcepts.
The field of applied linguistics is increasingly adopting open science practices. As open access publication gains traction, ethical issues emerge that need to be addressed by the field. This viewpoint paper addresses the concern that open science is not equally open for everyone. This paper describes how open access publication is increasingly being commercialized and explains how open access publication coincides with systemic inequality. We offer the following viewpoints for the field to consider:1.) We are morally obligated to make our research output accessible.2.) Hybrid, Gold, and Green open access publishing lead to systemic inequality in open access publishing, benefiting commercial publishers and those working in research-intensive universities and rich countries.3.)Diamond open access publication removes the systemic inequalities; hence, Diamond open access should be prioritized over Hybrid, Gold, and Green open access publication models.4.)We should move away from publish-and-read agreements and Green open access publishing, because they prevent system change.5.)Through our choices in our work as researchers, editors, reviewers, authors and teachers, we can contribute to the transition towards truly equitable open access publishing practices.6.)Senior researchers are in the position and have the moral obligation to be drivers of these changes.
