Empowering Language Teachers: The Research Literacy Framework

In this blog post I talk about an article that appeared in the European Journal of Teacher Education, by myself, Eleni Motsiou and Georgios Vleioras. In the article, we talk about a research literacy framework for teachers of second, additional and foreign languages. You can download a pre-print of the article if you scroll down —but before that, a short trip down memory lane.

---

Schools and Manufactured Ignorance

A few years ago, language education in Greece found itself in the middle of a very peculiar war. The trigger was a new primary school grammar textbook, which included the unremarkable observation that Modern Greek has five vowel sounds. One teacher, apparently unable to tell the difference between letters and phonemes, raised the alarm. What might have been an amusing misunderstanding quickly escalated into a moral panic, fueled by an improbable alliance of ultra-nationalists and the far left. In their telling, shadowy EU forces were conspiring to mutilate the Greek language, identity and nation by “removing” two vowels from the alphabet. The uproar reached parliament. Linguists who attempted to explain the distinction publicly had their personal details circulated online, their expertise ridiculed, and some even faced physical intimidation in their university offices.

This first brush with entrenched but misguided beliefs among teachers was when I first started thinking seriously about the need to challenge what one might call manufactured ignorance. I believe that one of the most effective ways to challenge this, while respecting the teachers’ autonomy and professionalism is to empower them to find their own informed answers, and I have spent a good part of my professional life working on teacher research literacy, i.e., the knowledge and skills that will help them to do so.

Challenging Manufactured Ignorance through Teacher Research Literacy

It is hardly a secret that most teachers keep a respectful distance from research. In a landmark study published in 2009, Simon Borg asked 505 teachers in 13 countries whether they read scholarly articles or conducted any empirical research themselves. Fewer than one in eight did and even that number was probably exaggerated by self-selection and social desirability biases. A decade later, a study I co-authored (Kostoulas et al., 2019) painted a similar picture: many teachers viewed research as something that belonged to universities, not to their own professional role.

In the Research Literacy of Teachers project, we are actively involved in challenging such perceptions. We also work towards producing resources that can empower teachers of second, additional and foreign languages to not only to engage with the collective published knowledge of language education, and also meaningfully contribute to it, by generating insights from their own classrooms and sharing them with the wider community.

My colleagues, Eleni Motsiou, Georgios Vleioras and I have presented some aspects of our ongoing work in an article entitled Developing a teacher research literacy framework for language teacher education, which just appeared at the European Journal of Teacher Education, and I would like to take this opportunity to say a few words about this publication.

What is Teacher Research Literacy?

The core construct of our newly-published article is what we call (language) teacher research literacy. In the article, we define this as the teachers’ ability to effectively engage with the collective knowledge of the profession, in ways that challenge local constraints and expand pedagogical possibility.

But, despite the imperfection of this definition, research literacy is not just the ability to read academic papers. Crucially, it also includes being able to build on this published professional knowledge and adapt theory to practice. As hinted above, it also includes the ability to generate-based insights and to share these with other teachers and even stakeholders outside our immediate professional circles.

…and why does it matter?

This vision of research-literate teachers is grounded on much broader debates about the role of teachers and education. Over the last decades, education ­­—not just language education— has become increasingly commodified and teachers are seen as skilled technicians whose task is the efficient delivery of knowledge. This contrasts with an alternative vision of teachers as public intellectuals, people with robust theoretical and historical knowledge that enables them to understand their professional context, the confidence to unsettle ‘the known’, and the competence to put in its place visions of education and society that are more equitable, humane, and responsive to the needs of learners and societies.

A lot of my thinking on this builds on the theoretical work of Henry Widdowson, who always positioned language teaching as a theoretical and practical endeavour –although I suspect that he would frown upon the more overtly political contours of my thinking. Those bring me closer to another Henry, Henry Giroux, who described critical pedagogy as the “theoretical and political practices” aimed to resist “the increasingly prevalent approach to pedagogy that views [teaching] as a skill, technique or disinterested method” devoid of considerations of “justice, values, ethics and power” (Giroux, 2011, p.1).¹ A third formative experience is a The Reflective Teacher Educator (2011), a book by one of my mentors,² Julian Edge, who positions reflecting, theorising about practice and acting as more mature aspects of the experience of being a language teacher.

I believe that these strands of thought are important because they give us a sense of why research literacy matters. But they also raise a practical question: if we want teachers to move beyond the role of technicians, what kinds of knowledge, skills, and dispositions do they actually need?

The ReaLiTea Research Literacy Framework

This is where our ReaLiTea work comes in. One of the deliverables of the project is a research literacy development framework, where we describe research literacy not as a single competence, but as a developmental process with several interrelated facets. Our newly-published article outlines this framework, but I will try to summarise it here as well.

Background knowledge

The first important facet of teacher research literacy is background knowledge teachers are expected to have. This includes academic language skills, which teachers need  in order to navigate the often dense style of scholarly writing (especially when this is in languages that they are not fully proficient in); schematic knowledge from related fields such as linguistics, pedagogy, psychology, and cultural studies, which provides the background against which new insights can be understood; and, finally, a cluster of practices such as digital literacy, information management, and meta-learning skills that enable teachers to access, process, and sustain their professional growth in research-informed ways.

Competence	Knowledge areas or skills
Linguistic proficiency	Oral communication skills Written communication skills Familiarity with research communication genres Visual communication skills
Schematic knowledge	(Applied) Linguistics Language education psychology Education theory Cultural knowledge
Knowledge practices	Digital literacy Learning practices Information management Knowledge attribution
Knowledge autonomy	Problem-setting Self-directed growth

Benefiting from existing knowledge

The second facet of teacher research literacy is about using knowledge base of language education,³ or what Borg (2013) calls engaging with research. This does not just refer to “reading” about empirical work: teachers need to know how to find relevant information amid an overwhelming flow of publications, often hidden behind paywalls, and then extract what is useful for their own practice. It also requires transferable skills such as careful reading, note-taking, and (where necessary) working across languages, e.g., by reading in one and summarising in another. Just as crucial is the ability to judge the quality and authority of what one reads, especially given the rise of predatory outlets and unchecked online material. Finally, teachers must be able to synthesise insights from multiple sources into coherent understandings of classroom realities, a task made even more pressing in an age where AI-generated summaries are convenient but frequently superficial or misleading.

Competence	Knowledge areas or skills
Locating appropriate sources	Searching for information Filtering information Accessing information
Extracting information	General comprehension skills Detailed comprehension Note-taking
Evaluating information	Understanding authority Evaluating trustworthiness Evaluating local relevance Evaluating potential impact
Synthesising information	Scope of synthesis Organisation of synthesis Criticality of synthesis

Making sense of what one learns

The one aspect that is most uniquely related to our perspective is what we call theorising for practice, that is, being able to turn insights from reading and classroom inquiry into locally relevant understandings. This ‘theorisation’, i.e., the sum of locally relevant insights, represents our best understanding of ‘how things are’ in our professional context, and ‘why they are so’.

This requires several layers of intellectual work: synthesising different sources of knowledge into a coherent personal stance; developing contextual sensitivity to the particular constraints and affordances of one’s classroom; and cultivating reflexive awareness of how one’s own experiences and values shape professional beliefs. Crucially, theorising for practice also means being able to translate these insights into thoughtful, context-sensitive actions: not quick fixes, but decisions that one can continuously refine through ongoing reflection.

Competence	Knowledge areas or skills
Theoretical positioning	Conceptual grounding of theorisation Historical grounding of theorisation Experiential grounding of theorisation Theoretical grounding of theorisation
Contextual sensitivity	Connecting theorisation to sociocultural influences Connecting theorisation to policies and practices Connecting theorisation to group dynamics / small-cultures
Reflexive awareness	Understanding reflexivity in teaching Understanding reflexivity in research
Practicality	Understanding implications for teaching Understanding implications for research

Generating new knowledge in our classrooms

The fourth facet of teacher research literacy is about producing knowledge through classroom-based research.⁴ Here, “research” does not mean large-scale academic projects, but the kind of systematic, small-scale inquiries teachers can carry out in their classrooms and schools. This involves developing the ability to design classroom-based projects (e.g., action research, exploratory practice, practice-based research) by setting clear goals, choosing appropriate methods, and deliberate planning. It also requires skills in generating and analysing data, whether through surveys, interviews, classroom observations, or basic qualitative and statistical techniques. Just as importantly, teachers need to develop strong ethical awareness, ensuring that their inquiries are respectful, safe, and appropriate, especially when working with minors or vulnerable learners.

Competence	Knowledge areas or skills
Research design competences	Formulating research questions Designing research protocols Planning for the use of resources
Data generation competences	Sampling Qualitative data generation Quantitative data generation
Data analysis competences	Qualitative data analysis Quantitative data analysis Synthesising multiple (mixed) research strands
Ethical competences	Informed consent Beneficence and non-malfeasance Confidentiality and data protection Working with minors and vulnerable populations

Sharing what we have learnt

The fifth and final facet of research literacy is about sharing knowledge and contributing to wider communities. Research is never a private activity; its purpose is to improve practice, and that means communicating insights in ways that matter. For teachers, this can involve talking about research (e.g., through presentations, workshops, or professional dialogue) or writing about it, whether for colleagues, stakeholders, and yes, in academic forums as well. Beyond individual skills, it also means participating in communities of practice, such as our ReaLiTea virtual community: creating networks, mentoring peers, and collaborating in ways that support collective knowledge-building. At its broadest, this facet extends to engaging with the wider public and with decision-makers, helping to ensure that the knowledge generated in classrooms informs not only teaching, but also educational debates and policies.

Competence	Knowledge areas or skills
Talking about research	Presentations Asking questions and providing feedback Responding to questions
Writing about research	Text production Selecting publication outlets and submitting work for publication Dealing with peer review
Community participation	Networking Knowledge building
Community engagement	Mentoring Peer interaction Engaging with authority Public engagement

---

To clarify, we do not view this framework as a checklist, and neither should you. We envisage teacher research literacy as a process of becoming, a gradual developmental process that brings us closer to who we want to be. Such growth, we argue happens through experience, reflection and deliberate professional development. We recognize that different teachers will be at different points along this trajectory, and while the framework associates certain milestones with BA, M-level and more advanced studies, we are aware that progress will not be  —and need not be!— uniform. The focus is not on channeling professional development, but rather on autonomous growth and transformation.

Creating and validating the framework

A great deal of work has gone into developing this framework, which brings together insights from several sources. It draws, first of all, on our own professional experience as teacher educators working with pre-service and in-service teachers in diverse settings across a number of countries. To broaden our perspective, we also carried out an extensive review of the relevant literature, for which I would like to mostly acknowledge by colleague Ms Chrysa Ntai. Most importantly, we benefited from the wisdom of five leading experts in language teacher education, who generously shared their time and insights to help us shape the framework. Exchanging ideas with them and learning from their experiences was one of the highlights of this project, for me.

As the work progressed, we carried out two small-scale surveys to refine the framework. The first was designed to check that the competences we included were comprehensive, and that the developmental milestones we proposed made sense in relation to expectations in teacher education and higher education. The second, which is reported in more detail in the article, focused on whether we had grouped the competences in sensible ways. The findings suggest that the structure we put forward is broadly sound, though they also indicate that users may need some training to apply the framework effectively.

What these validation steps offer us is reassurance that the framework is conceptually robust and also that it can be used effectively for its intended purpose: to guide teachers as they work towards developing their research literacy skills.

What this means for language teachers

There is a risk, when reading such ambitious documents, that readers might feel overwhelmed: are we really expected to do all this? If you take such a perspective, the framework is definitely going to lead to frustration and disempowerment.

Rather, the way we would like language teachers to view this framework is the exact opposite. Every teacher is likely to have strengths in at least some of the areas we have identified as facets of teacher research literacy. What the framework offers is a set of ideas about how to complement, broaden and build on these strengths.

Even small actions, such as discussing an article with colleagues, contribute to research literacy. Doing a small-scale classroom-research project (e.g., systematically comparing two teaching approaches to test which works best in your setting) may sound inconsequential ­—but it challenges dominant beliefs about teacher roles, and helps to reclaim professional agency and reposition decision-making where it belongs: inside the classroom.

I will not pretend that this is always easy. Yet, for me, this is precisely what developing research literacy entails: stepping beyond our comfort zones, acknowledging that there is always more to learn, and making the conscious choice to rise to the challenge. It is only through this process that we continue to grow as professionals.

Concluding remarks

In the end, research literacy is not about turning every teacher into a researcher, nor about adding yet another burden to already busy lives. It is about reclaiming ownership of our professional knowledge, refusing to see ourselves as passive recipients of other people’s theories, and taking seriously the insights that emerge from our own classrooms. If the framework outlined here offers a roadmap, it is one that you can travel at your own pace, in your own way, and alongside colleagues who share the same commitment to growth.

My hope is that this article, and the wider work of the ReaLiTea project, will encourage teachers to see research not as something distant or intimidating, but as part of what it means to be an engaged, reflective, and autonomous professional. In times when education is too often reduced to efficiency and compliance, choosing to become research literate is an act of resistance —and, I would argue, an act of educated hope.

---

---