In this commentary contextualizing the complexities at the nexus of disability and applied linguistics (AL), the authors highlight the paucity of conscientious attention to disabled populations in AL research, explore the intricacies of choosing appropriate terminology to describe disability and disabled people, challenge scholars in the field to reflect on and make explicit their emic or etic positionality vis-à-vis disability in their research, and call researchers to consider researching with, rather than merely about, disabled second language learners. The authors (a) illustrate how a collection of emergent research studies illuminates critical considerations at this underresearched interdisciplinary intersection in the field, and (b) demonstrate, via example studies in other areas of AL, how scholars may choose to center the disabled second-language learning experience rather than relegate it to the far corners of the field.

This paper reports a study that investigated how first language (L1) reading comprehension, L1 low-level skills, working memory capacity, and reading anxiety are related to the accuracy of responses and completion time in a second language (L2) reading test. The data obtained from Hungarian secondary school learners of English showed that anxiety related to processing the L2 reading text, time pressure, and the response tasks as well as L1 reading comprehension scores and backward digit span were significant predictors of L2 reading scores. L1 low-level skills did not contribute significantly to L2 reading accuracy. Higher levels of reading-related anxiety were associated with slower reading, and L2 learners with concurrently lower levels of L1 and L2 reading ability needed more time to complete the reading test. These findings highlight that L2 reading tests should be flexibly timed so that everyone, including test takers with literacy-related difficulties such as dyslexia, can demonstrate their abilities.

This meta-analysis aimed to determine whether Chinese-English bilingual children with reading difficulties (RD) have significant deficits in morphological awareness (MA), phonological awareness, and word reading, in both their first and second languages (L1 and L2). It also evaluated the influence of RD severity, age, diglossia context, and methodological design on effect sizes. The study included 29 samples (N = 4,516) from 14 studies on children with RD in L1 morphosyllabic Chinese and L2 morphophonemic English. Results showed medium effect sizes for MA (g = −0.722) and PA (g = −0.625), and a large effect size for word reading (g = −2.042) in L1 Chinese. In L2 English, medium to large effect sizes were found for MA (g = −1.083), PA (g = −0.857), and word reading (g = −0.730). Age was the only significant moderator, with larger deficits observed as age increased. These findings align with studies on monolinguals with dyslexia and bilinguals with normal abilities or disabilities, recommending MA tasks in assessments.

This study, grounded in critical disability studies, explores ableism in language education and its impact on Deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) students learning English as a foreign or third language (L3). Using interpretative phenomenological analysis, the lived experiences of 14 Iranian DHH undergraduate students, proficient in Esharani (sign language used by the Iranian Deaf community) and Persian, were analyzed. Participants recounted their experiences with ableism in English education through interviews. Analyzing interviews resulted in the emergence of three key themes: a) lack of awareness of (dis)ability and ableism throughout their English education, b) the prevalence of overt and covert ableism viewing deafness as a marker of “otherness,” and c) the need for advocacy and more inclusive practices and environments for DHH learners acquiring L3. This study highlights the challenges DHH learners face in L3 acquisition and calls for more inclusive language education policies to better support disabled students.

This study investigates whether the second language (L2) development of d/Deaf and hard of hearing (d/DHH) learners in comparison to the L2 development of hearing learners, based on the processability theory (PT) developed by Pienemann (1998, 2005) in the field of second language acquisition (SLA). Thirty-eight d/DHH and 32 hearing secondary school learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) completed a series of speaking tasks designed to elicit specific morphosyntactic structures that, according to PT, align with L2 developmental stages. Implicational scaling revealed that although d/DHH learners followed a similar developmental sequence to their peers, they displayed a noticeable delay. They also appeared to require additional time and practice to fully produce the entire target structures after reaching certain developmental stages. The results provide stronger empirical evidence for d/DHH learners’ L2 development, supporting the qualitative similarity hypothesis in the field of special education, which posits that despite quantitative delays, d/DHH learners exhibit qualitatively similar L2 development to their hearing peers.

Visual impairment (VI) affects around 2.2 billion people globally (World Health Organization, 2019). VI language learners need strong vocabulary knowledge as much as sighted (SI) learners, yet little is known about how different instruction types impact their vocabulary development. In this study, 16 VI and 16 SI learners of English were taught 60 vocabulary items counterbalanced through two aural input methods: codeswitching (CS), giving first language (L1) explanations, and aural input manipulation (AIM) with CS (AIMCS), where increased volume emphasized words alongside CS explanations. Pre-, post-, and delayed post-tests indicated that AIMCS led to better short-term vocabulary retention for both groups, with no significant differences longer term. VI learners benefited more overall, and learners with lower initial vocabulary showed the greatest gains. Listening proficiency moderated the effects, with AIMCS offering greater short-term benefits for learners with higher listening proficiency. The study suggests AIMCS enhances short-term vocabulary learning, particularly for VI learners, but listening proficiency is critical.

This study examined whether the contribution of memory systems that play a role in second/additional language (L2/A) learning in adults with neurotypical cognition differs in L2/A learning in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Participants (N = 154) learned an artificial L2/A with morphophonological rules and completed assessments of working, declarative, and procedural memory, as well as an ADHD questionnaire. Our results did not find evidence for differences in L2/A learning between participants diagnosed with ADHD and neurotypical controls. We also did not find that the role of memory differed among learners based on ADHD symptomatology, although we tentatively interpreted an interaction between declarative memory and ADHD symptomatology. We did find evidence for a general role of working memory on learning for one type of morphophonological rule. Overall, the results contribute to a broader understanding of the role of memory systems in L2/A for both neurodivergent and neurotypical language learners.

This study investigated the beliefs about additional language learning and use and knowledge of additional languages of 226 multilingual adults with Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) with Polish L1. The data were collected via an online questionnaire with Likert-type statements. Data were analyzed using mixed models (GLMMs). The findings show that a) individuals with ADHD hold a neutral view of their additional language learning and use experiences; b) the hyperactivity/impulsivity ADHD presentation may positively affect additional language learning; and c) Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) or dyslexia has no impact on additional language knowledge in the context of ADHD. The discussion points to the importance of attention in additional language acquisition and the possible compensatory role of ADHD and ASD in the context of dyslexia and language learning.

English learners (ELs) with disabilities are disproportionately less likely than their EL peers without disabilities to be reclassified as Fluent English Proficient (FEP) in US public schools. Research has begun to explore how state reclassification policies, specifically the criteria needed to be considered FEP, may contribute to reclassification disparities. Given the complexities of measuring and understanding English language proficiency (ELP) growth for ELs with disabilities, there have been calls for states to incorporate teacher or team input as a criterion for reclassification. Research, however, has yet to examine how teachers make sense of ELP data for ELs with disabilities and ultimately make reclassification recommendations. This qualitative case study fills this gap, investigating the data interpretation and decision-making of teachers in one urban school district. It documents how teachers’ beliefs about standardized ELP assessment data coupled with a scarcity of resources and training contributed to reclassification decision-making driven not by data but by teachers’ values and instincts.

Ableist ideologies in schools and among clinicians have impeded equity for students with disabilities. By excluding individuals with diagnoses of learning disability (SLD) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) from foreign language (FL) courses, professionals and schools discriminate against students who could benefit from participation. This essay reviews evidence falsifying the notion of an FL learning disability and contradicting the practice of FL substitutions for students with SLDs and ADHD. Evidence demonstrates that most students with SLDs and ADHD can pass FL classes. We maintain that clinicians who make these diagnoses and educators who recommend FL substitutions have no expertise in determining students’ suitability for FL learning. Their automatic assumptions regarding exclusion from rather than inclusion in FL courses are a form of systemic ableism that ignores the intent of disability law and denies agency to these students. We explore how the myth of an FL “learning disability” emerged and why the myth persists despite evidence to the contrary.

This paper calls for a critical re-evaluation of research ethics in applied linguistics (AL) and second language acquisition (SLA) research, particularly concerning the ethical treatment of members of the disabled community. Historically, AL and SLA research has often perpetuated deficit views of disability by focusing on cognitive or affective differences. This paper examines the ethical implications of deficit-based research and tensions between institutional research policies and everyday ethical dilemmas through a disability justice lens. To address these gaps within the field, we propose an emancipatory, rights-based framework that fundamentally reimagines research ethics in AL and SLA by centering respect, representation and reciprocity, informed consent, privacy and confidentiality, and accessibility. Through a focus on disability rights and actionable guidelines, this framework seeks to dismantle systemic barriers in research ethics. It also highlights more equitable and inclusive research practices for disabled people and marginalized groups in AL and SLA research.