AAAL 2026: Invited Colloquium

Open Scholarship in Applied Linguistics: Toward More Accessible, Transparent, and Responsible Research

Conveners:

Discussant: 

Charlie Nagle, University of Texas-Austin

Colloquium Abstract

This colloquium brings together leading applied linguists to discuss innovative perspectives on open scholarship, illustrated through their respective methodological stances and research domains. Open scholarship (also known as “open science” or “open research”) refers to various practices intended to open the process of knowledge creation, evaluation, and communication to stakeholders beyond the traditional scientific community. 

Initiatives to make multilingual scientific knowledge openly available, accessible, and reusable have gained significant momentum, effectively initiating an open era in applied linguistics research. However, a number of open scholarship topics have yet to receive sufficient attention. Unresolved tensions between open scholarship and different epistemologies is one such example. Indeed, not all research traditions have engaged equally with open scholarship initiatives, and it remains unclear whether the utility and feasibility of such practices apply uniformly across diverse research paradigms. The ethical dimension of open scholarship too is under-examined. We argue that these tensions present a transformative opportunity: by grappling with and reflecting on these topics, the field can expand what “openness” means in applied linguistics research and illuminate enablers of and barriers to sustainable open scholarship practices, thereby contributing to more inclusive, transparent and responsible research in applied linguistics.

This colloquium will provide a critical shared forum for understanding open scholarship by bringing diverse theoretical and methodological traditions of applied linguistics research into dialogue with open scholarship principles. Together, these diverse perspectives on the feasibility, contribution, and uptake of open science practices will help clarify areas of tensions and possibilities in open scholarship as well as the implications for reimagining disciplinary practices—the conference theme. The session will open with an introduction by the organizers and four presentations by the panelists that are unified through a shared set of questions, followed by Charlie Nagle as discussant before opening up to audience questions and comments.

Open Access as an Ethical Imperative: A Global South Perspective

Ali H. Al-Hoorie, Saudi TESOL Association

Scholars in the Global South face significant challenges that many in the Global North may not fully recognize. One of the most pressing issues is limited access to scholarly literature in their respective fields. Without access to the latest research, Global South scholars are hindered in their ability to contribute to ongoing academic discussions, ultimately rendering their voices marginalized within their disciplines. This presentation argues that current publishing models adhere to an inherited and outdated system that must be reformed through the integration of modern technology. It will also examine various publishing models—including closed, hybrid, green, gold, and diamond—as well as lesser-known models such as bronze, grey, and black. Additionally, it will highlight the critical role of preprints and postprints in fostering equitable access to scholarship. Ultimately, this talk underscores the urgent need for reform in publishing practices within applied linguistics to promote greater inclusivity and accessibility.

Reimagining our Qualitative Research Practices: Tracing the Interpretive Process to Increase Transparency

Nathan Thomas, University College London

Qualitative research in applied linguistics has recently garnered increased attention regarding study quality (see Ghanbar et al., 2024; Mirhosseini & Pearson, 2024; Riazi et al., 2023). Transparency is one aspect of study quality (Plonsky, 2024a), and it is usually promoted alongside rigor within discussions of open scholarship (Liu & Marsden, 2024; Plonsky, 2024b). However, the intersection between qualitative research and open scholarship is a complex junction, with no clear definition or best practices. Multiple “streets” intersect as researchers navigate through the traffic maze of methods, perspectives, and worldviews. The idea that one’s interpretive work—the heart of qualitative inquiry—could somehow be made open and transparent is difficult to imagine for many researchers. Ethically, the challenge intensifies when open data (Isbell, 2024) and replicability (McManus, 2024) are concerned. However, rather than sticking to the side streets and avoiding the intersection altogether, I argue that researchers should (a) accelerate towards increased interpretive transparency as a methodological imperative for qualitative research that claims to be rigorous; (b) proceed with caution regarding open data; and (c) share the road with researchers who seek replicability, through the provision of (a) and (b), since replicability is at odds with an epistemological commitment to qualitative inquiry. To illustrate how qualitative researchers can reimagine open scholarship through interpretive transparency, I provide worked examples from two currently unpublished studies on strategic language learning and use. Methodologically, the first study used Narrative Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (NIPA). NIPA is inductive, exploratory, and phenomenologically informed. The second study used Psychological Process Tracing (PPT). PPT is abductive, mechanistic, and aimed at building and testing causal theories. NIPA and PPT are distinct methodologies with very different epistemological foundations. Thus, if interpretive transparency can be achieved by tracing the interpretive process across such extreme cases, then it can be achieved with most qualitative methods. 

The Good, the Bad, the Messy: Opening Conversations on Quantitative Applied Linguistics Researcher Decision Making

Katherine Yaw, University of South Florida
Tove Larsson, Northern Arizona University
Luke Plonsky, Northern Arizona University
Scott Sterling, Indiana State University
Merja Kytö, Uppsala University

Open scholarship (OS) in quantitative applied linguistics (AL) is characterized by a focus on transparency, accessibility, inclusivity, and study quality (for multiple perspectives on this topic, see Plonsky, 2024). Visible evidence of the OS movement includes open sharing of pre-registered study plans, data collection materials, data analysis code, and data sets themselves. Less visible, however, are the myriad researcher decisions made across the research cycle that impact our scholarship, including decisions on engaging in OS.
 
From an ethics perspective, Kubanyiova (2008) distinguishes between researchers’ day-to-day decisions (i.e., micro-ethics) and procedural activities for compliance with ethics review boards (i.e., macro-ethics). Quantitative methods training tends to emphasize procedural research aspects (Wood et al., 2024), with relatively little attention on day-to-day researcher decisions and the potential for questionable research practices (QRPs). Indeed, the decision (not) to engage in OS practices carries ethical implications directly tied to QRPs. Notably, QRPs reflect decisions not universally viewed as ethical (i.e., responsible conduct of research) nor as unethical (i.e., blatant scientific misconduct). Rather, they exist in a context-dependent ethical grey zone. The vast majority of quantitative AL researchers (including us) have faced these QRP decision points (Isbell et al., 2022; Larsson et al., 2023), yet conversations about QRPs and OS can feel face-threatening and remain limited within AL. 

Bringing these day-to-day researcher decisions to the forefront is an important next step in the OS movement. We offer several recommendations for accomplishing this: more (visible) quantitative researcher reflexivity (e.g., Andringa & Godfroid, 2025), inclusion of micro-ethics in quantitative researcher training and mentoring (e.g., Wood et al., 2024), and perhaps most importantly, more intergroup conversations across methodological and disciplinary paradigms (see Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). This reimagining of how we openly discuss our roles as researchers can benefit quantitative scholars, along with our field, communities, and society more broadly. 

Investing in Open Scholarship Practices and Negotiating Issues of Identity, Capital, and Ideology

Ron Darvin, University of British Columbia

Framed through a critical and poststructuralist lens, this paper defines open scholarship as a transformative and inclusive practice that interrogates and disrupts established power relations in the production and dissemination of knowledge in applied linguistics. Central to this conceptualization is the commitment to epistemic justice, the redistribution of scholarly authority, and the fostering of dialogues beyond academic boundaries. As a researcher who focuses on issues of identity and power in language learning and digital literacies, I align with open scholarship’s core values of accessibility, transparency, and collaborative knowledge production (Liu et al., 2023). Drawing on Darvin and Norton’s (2015) model of investment, I recognize that investing in open scholarship practices involves the complex negotiation of identities, capital, and ideologies. As scholars assert their legitimacy in academic discourse communities, they navigate tensions between the openness of such practices and the boundedness of traditional academic structures of paywalled publishing, hierarchical peer review systems, authorship norms, and tenure and promotion criteria. Practices of open data sharing, multimodal dissemination formats and initiatives that bridge practitioner-researcher divides facilitate open dialogue and the sharing of capital or resources. At the same time, open data poses challenges involving ethical considerations around data anonymization and the traceability of participant-generated online content, issues that become even more significant when working with vulnerable populations. This critical engagement thus necessitates reflexive practices to ensure participant rights are upheld, while simultaneously interrogating institutional norms and structures and advocating for open, socially responsive research. By amplifying the voices of underrepresented others and enabling polyphonic spaces and interactions, open scholarship reimagines disciplinary boundaries in applied linguistics by democratizing knowledge, validating diverse epistemologies and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration.

>>>Back to AAAL 2026 Chicago Invited Colloquia