Rewrite the definition
The post starts from Chris Brumfit's definition of applied linguistics:
"the theoretical and empirical investigation of real-world problems in which language is a central issue"
Brumfit, 1995, p. 27
The author is not keen on the word "problem", because linguistic knowledge applies to many situations that are not problematic. Do you agree?
Test it against the four elements
Where is the boundary?
The post notes that applied linguistics overlaps with classroom management, education policy, work on inequality, and the psychology of teachers and learners. Place each study on the scale and explain your choice.
So what? Now what?
The post describes applied linguistics as answering two questions about linguistic insights: "so what?" and "now what?". It gives two historical examples of ideas about language shaping teaching.
Now apply the same reasoning to something teachers are being encouraged to use today, such as a learning app, a new method, or a coursebook.
Answer a lay theory
Everyone uses language, so everyone has intuitions about how it is learnt. The post lists some beliefs that teachers regularly meet.
Challenge a given
The post argues that empirical work does not need to be ambitious. What matters is a commitment to using facts and a willingness to challenge "givens", using the resources a teacher already has.
Do teachers need theory?
Péter Medgyes has argued that one can be a very good language teacher without knowing much about research, theory or applied linguistics. The post grants that this has some merit, but raises two problems with it: it limits teachers' understanding of their context, and it leaves them exposed to lay theories.
Your work
Everything you have written, in one place. Copy it into your course forum, a document or an email. If you are working with a group, share it there so others can challenge your answers.