1This paper considers the notion of empowerment in language learning and teaching. The term empowerment has been frequently employed in academia since the late 1970s, especially in the social sciences (Calvès, 2009). Whether featured against the backdrop of politics and business, or popular psychology with self-help books and trending videos on social media platforms, empowerment as a notion has been widely adopted, without any real consideration given to what this entails. In the field of education and language learning, concepts such as autonomy (Holec, 1981; Little, 1991), independence (Benson & Voller, 1997), and agency (Oxford, 2003) have been and continue to be explored, sometimes with the perspective of fostering learner empowerment. While concepts such as agency, autonomy, self-directed learning, and strategies such as self-regulation have been given much consideration in the literature on language education, we still do not really know what it means to “empower” language learners. How is the concept employed in the literature and what kind of research is being done to comprehend the notion and foster empowering practices?
2The present study sought to explore and understand the concept of empowerment for language education. A scoping review approach was adopted to systematically identify 50 studies that were either primary studies, theoretical studies or critical reviews. The historical significance of the concept of empowerment is briefly explained in section 1, followed by an extensive detailing of the five-step scoping review process outlined by Arksey & O’Malley (2005) that was adopted for this study (section 2). The first step of the scoping review framework was to identify research questions (section 2.1) which are answered in section 3 of the paper. The discussion of the paper brings some of the salient results together and proposes a framework for defining empowerment in language education.
- 1 Sir Edward Dering (1598-1644) was an antiquary and religious controversialist (OED, 2023).
3Oxford English Dictionary (OED, empowerment, 16 May 2025) traces the earliest use of the transitive verb empower and the noun empowerment to the mid-1600s, with Sir Edward Dering’s1 1641 Speech to the Common House: “[y]ou will please to select a Subcommittee of 4, 6, 8, or 10 at the most, and to impower them for the discovery of the great number of oppressed Ministers.” Impowering someone meant giving the person the legal authority or formal power to do something. The transitive verb empower is defined by Collins English Language Dictionary (1987, empower) as “to invest with legal or formal power or authority; to authorize or license to do something or for a purpose”. The two examples given by Collins are: 1) the Act of 1936 empowered the police to ban political processions and 2) his assistant will be empowered to act on his behalf in less weighty matters.
4In both cases, a higher authority (the Act of 1936 or the assistant’s boss) assigns power or authorizes a person (or an entity) with lesser authority to act on behalf of them. As a verb then, the term denotes a certain hierarchy that underlines power which is attributed to a person, rather than relinquished (Collins English Language Dictionary 1987, empower).
5Formed through derivation with the suffix ment, empowerment is “the state or fact of being empowered” (OED, empowerment) and recognized in contemporary society as “the fact or action of acquiring more control over one’s life or circumstances through increased civil rights, independence, self-esteem, etc.” (OED, empowerment). This modern use of the term can thus be traced back to the 1960s and the 1970s with inspiration drawn from movements arising from feminism, Black Power and even Gandhism (Calvès, 2009). Not until the 1976 seminal publication of Black Empowerment: Social Work in Oppressed Communities by Barbara Solomon does the term formally come into usage by social service providers and researchers. Gradually, as the notion gained popularity, it appeared in the field of media and mass communication and became widely established in various social protest movements – particularly in the United States, but also in other countries, such as India (Van Cuyck, 2015). It also concerns marginalized groups such as African Americans, women, gays and lesbians, and people with disabilities (Calvès, 2009).
- 2 Originally written in Portuguese between 1967 and 1968, Paulo Freire’s Pedagogia do Oprimido was fi (...)
6Among the many sources of inspiration for work on empowerment is the conscientization approach developed by Brazilian theorist Paulo Freire in Pedagogy of the Oppressed in 19682. Freire advocates for a teaching method that actively encourages reflection of the role of conscientizaçāo, which “refers to learning to perceive social, political, and economic contradictions, and to take action against the oppressive elements of reality” (Freire, 2005, p. 35). One such contradiction can be found in Julian Rappaport’s empowerment model in which he observed “the paradoxical nature of social/community problems” (1981, p. 2) through freedom and equality. In lay terms, the more freedom individuals are given within a group, the more power the strongest will tend to accrue and exert, to the detriment of the seemingly weaker members. The principle of freedom is thus defeated as power is amassed by the already powerful. While this could be considered a danger to empowerment, both Freire and Rappaport respond to it in different ways.
7Freire’s concept of “developing critical consciousness” (Freire, 2005) makes it possible for the more “oppressed” masses to move from understanding to acting. For him, the role of a “problem-posing educator is to create, together with the students, the conditions under which knowledge at the level of the doxa is superseded by true knowledge, at the level of the logos” (Freire, 2005, p. 81). This would help an individual eventually attain “critical consciousness” (Freire, 2005, p. 35) as opposed to a “dominated consciousness” (Freire, 2005, p. 142) where a small number of people dominate and exert power over the general masses. We can take this idea further with Rappaport’s paper in which he advocates for a “public policy of empowerment” (1981, p. 18) or an “empowerment ideology [that] force[s] us to pay attention to the mediating structures of society, i.e., those that stand between the large impersonal social institutions and individual alienated people” (p. 19). In his own words:
As researchers, our obligations are to study and understand more about how such settings actually work to provide niches for people that enhance their ability to control their lives and allow them both affirmation and the opportunity to learn and experience growth and development (Rappaport, 1981, p. 19).
8Compared to the literature cited above, the use of the term “empowerment” in language education is relatively new. The earliest use of the term is found in a study published in 1994, in which language empowerment is somewhat likened to metacognitive strategies. This scoping review was expressly conducted with the aim of understanding how the term is referred to in the literature on language teaching and learning.
9As the name suggests, a scoping review, or scoping study, is an evidence-synthesis approach that is used to “determine the scope or coverage of a body of literature on a given topic and give clear indication of the volume of literature and studies available as well as an overview (broad or detailed) of its focus” (Munn et al., 2018, p. 2). A traditional literature review relies on an author’s pre-existing knowledge and experience and is therefore potentially subjective in nature and thus biased. A scoping review, on the other hand, not only has an explicit, transparent and often exhaustive search strategy but also ensures that data is extracted and presented in a structured manner (Munn et al., 2018). It is however not considered to be a systematic review (see Gough, Oliver & Thomas, 2017) but could be considered as a precursor (Munn et al., 2018). The key difference between the two lies in the “scope” of the study, which is wider than a systematic review and has correspondingly wider inclusion criteria. This feature of a scoping review can be very useful for examining emerging evidence when the topic is “of a complex or heterogeneous nature” (Pham et al., 2014, p. 371) and thus helps determine the value of conducting a full systematic review (Armstrong et al., 2018). Given the intention and scope of the current study that seeks to recognize empowerment in language education, a scoping review seems more appropriate than a systematic review, which could be undertaken subsequently.
10This review was guided by a five-stage framework proposed by Arksey & O’Malley (2005) while the study selection was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement (Page et al., 2021). Combining the two frameworks helped create a thorough search and extraction system that could allow for the replication and continuation of such systematic studies on this theme. The five stages of Arksey & O’Malley’s (2005) framework are (1) identifying the initial research questions (section 2.2), (2) identifying relevant studies (section 2.3), (3) study selection (section 2.4), (4) charting the data (section 2.5), and (5) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results (section 2.6).
11This review aims to summarize the overall features of research on empowerment for language education, mapping the theoretical perspectives of the authors, analysing the research foci and methodological features of the studies included in the review. Three research questions were formulated as follows:
-
RQ1. What are the general attributes of studies published on empowerment for language education?
-
RQ2. How is empowerment conceptualized in the studies on language education?
-
RQ3. How is empowerment operationalized in the studies on language education?
12Systematic studies often tend to focus on high-impact factor journals and papers, leaving publications from smaller, local journals unexplored. In line with the spirit of this paper, it was decided that articles from European and Asian journals, which may not always be identified by databases that focus on high-impact factor journals, would also be included in this study. With a view to prioritizing open research, OpenAlex (Priem, Piwowar, & Orr, 2022) was selected as the chosen database and then completed with results from Google Scholar3. Simultaneously, in order to better situate results and in line with the requirements of a scoping review, inclusion and exclusion criteria were further defined (Table 1).
Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria
|
Inclusion criteria
|
Exclusion criteria
|
|
Year of publication
|
Until December 2024
|
After December 2024
|
|
Publication type
|
Articles in online journals
|
Book chapters, theses / PhD dissertations, presentations, conference proceedings
|
|
Availability
|
Available online or sent by the author(s)
|
Pay to read
|
|
Primary fields
|
Education, language learning, linguistics
|
Business and management, economics, sociology, etc.
|
13Identifying appropriate keywords is always a difficult task (see Kalyaniwala & Ciekanski, 2021). Moreover, owing to the multidisciplinary nature of the concept of empowerment, it was important to remain flexible (i.e. read studies published in other fields) and be restricted to the confines of our primary fields (i.e. education and language learning). The only keywords finally selected were “empower*” and “language learning” (Table 2), and then filtered by type and Boolean operators (AND/OR). The focus was on articles published exclusively in the English language. This seemed to be the obvious choice since it is extremely difficult to find a translation of the word empowerment in other languages.
Table 2. Filter and keyword selection
|
Source
|
Filter
|
Keywords identified
|
|
OpenAlex
|
[fulltext]
|
empower*; language learning
|
|
[type]
|
article
|
|
[language]
|
English
|
|
[title and abstract]
|
empower*; language learning
|
|
Google Scholar
|
|
empower*; language learning
|
14This initial search yielded 679 results on OpenAlex (50.2% were available in open access) and 107,000 results on Google Scholar. All the results from OpenAlex were exported to a local spreadsheet while pages on Google Scholar were scoured through until no relevant articles could be found. Thus, 13 pages (10 results on each page) were explored till no more results (i.e. 50 consecutive papers with no relevance) could be obtained with the two concepts.
15As required by the inclusion criteria set at the outset of the study, the final set of 50 papers included in this review mention empower* in the title, 13 also make a mention of it in their keywords, and 32 in the abstract. If a systematic review were to be conducted, and articles shortlisted by the term found in the title, abstract and keywords, very few papers (n=12) would suit the requirements. The choice to conduct a scoping review is thus appropriate.
16The inclusion and exclusion criteria identified in the step above facilitated the exclusion of several studies that did not meet with the criteria: either the papers were not published in journals (but in books), were not available online or were published in different primary fields. The flowchart below (Figure 1) traces the different steps that finally resulted in identifying 50 full text studies (see Appendix A) that were exported, read, and annotated for the purposes of the present review.
Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart for study selection
17Once the full text studies were identified and exported to a spreadsheet (Excel), they were first arranged chronologically (earliest study first) and then alphabetically (if multiple studies had been published in the same year). Each study was then attributed a unique identification number (ID1, ID2, and so on).
18A detailed descriptive coding scheme that took the research questions into account was designed for the corpus. Included articles were coded with the following parameters: (1) publication data (year of publication), author(s), journal of publication, title of the paper, abstract, and keywords (wherever applicable); (2) theoretical perspectives; (3) research themes; (4) research background, including the location where the study was conducted, primary field of study, and target language; (5) methodologies, including types of data, research design, instruments for data collection, and types of analysis.
- 4 The full set of variables and coded data will be made available on HAL as supplementary material on (...)
19Since the primary focus of this review was to uncover the key features of studies that defined, operationalized, or dealt with the concept of empowerment for language education, the abstract, introduction, and methods sections of the articles were thoroughly examined. In cases where the information was not explicitly stated in these sections, other sections of the studies were consulted. Information obtained was coded thematically (Saldaña, 2021) in the spreadsheet4. Descriptive statistics were then used to quantitatively analyse the codes and provide insight into the features of the relevant studies. Table 3 provides the comprehensive list of the variables used to answer the research questions with some examples of the sample codes in the second column.
Table 3. Variables and sample codes
|
Variables
|
Sample codes (examples)
|
|
RQ1. General attributes of included studies
|
|
Author(s)
Year of publication
Publication source
Primary fields of study
Geographical location of study
|
Quicke & Winter
Numerical value (1994)
Frontiers in Educational Research
Education; CALL; language learning
Germany, UK, US
|
|
RQ2. Conceptualization of empowerment in language education
|
|
Position of empower* in study
Status of language in studies
Key concepts in literature review
Tool(s) used to foster empowerment
|
IMRDC (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion)
First, second, foreign, additional
Empowerment, autonomy
CALL tools, AI tool
|
|
RQ3. Methodological features of included studies
|
|
Type of study
Type of data
Research design
Data collection instrument
Type of analysis
|
Theoretical, empirical, critical review
Qualitative, quantitative, mixed
Descriptive, experimental, observational
Questionnaire, interview, observations
Descriptive statistics, thematic coding
|
20The five-stage methodology of the scoping review outlined above was not only suitable for framing research questions but also helped in identifying relevant variables for answering the questions. Findings are presented below.
21The aim of the first research question was to identify the general attributes of studies published on empowerment for language education, namely the overall trend of publication of the 50 papers, the primary field of each study, and countries in which the studies had been conducted.
22Journal articles referencing empowerment for language education span 30 years, from 1994 to 2024 as represented in Figure 2. This shows that the term has been newly introduced in the literature on language learning and teaching. Only 1 paper with empowerment in the title was published each year from 1994 to 2013. A total of 3 papers were published in 2014 and 2015, 6 in 2020, 12 in 2023 and 10 in 2024. This trend does suggest a rise in the use of the concept in the literature on language education.
Figure 2. Overall trend of publication
23The 50 articles included in this review were published in 48 different journals indicating significant variety in publication venues. Only 2 journals were repeated (Frontiers in Educational Research and System). This seems to suggest that the use of the term is not restricted to certain fields.
24The primary field of each study can be found in Figure 3, with the maximum number of articles published in the field of language learning (n=21 or 42%), followed by education (n=9 or 18%), language teaching and Computer Assisted Language Learning or CALL (n=7 or 14%). Only 1 study takes both language learning and language teaching (LL and LT) into consideration, while the remaining 5 studies include applied linguistics, bilingualism, migration, second language acquisition, social sciences, and humanities.
Figure 3. Primary field of study
25Studies were designed by researchers from 19 different countries (see Figure 4) with 9 studies conducted in Indonesia (18%), followed by the United States (n=8 or 16%), and China (n=4 8%). Two studies were published by authors from different countries and were categorized as “international”.
26Out of the 50 studies, 48 were conducted by different authors. IDs 6 and 9 were written by the same author. This clearly shows that the term empowerment exists in a variety of primary fields, which would entail a variety of definitions and explanations of how the term is used in the targeted field of study.
Figure 4. Geographical location of the study
27Geographical location of designed studies is of some interest as it provides more information to the previous finding (Figure 2), which suggests that the term empowerment is used across journals published all over the world. While that might be the case, Figure 4 clearly establishes that the term is favoured by researchers publishing in Asian journals – 26 out of the 50 studies are conducted or designed in Asia (52%) compared to Europe (n=11, 22%), the US and Canada (n=10, 20%), Brazil (n=1), and others (US/Turkey, n=2).
28The aim of the second research question was to gain conceptual understanding of empowerment for language education. Four points of interest were brought to the fore: (1) the position of the keyword “empower*” in the study, (2) the status awarded to language by the author(s) of the study, (3) the principal keywords used in the literature review, and (4) the tools used in the studies to foster empowerment.
29The first point of interest was the position and status of this study’s keywords, namely “empower*” and “language education,” in order to appreciate how they fit into the included studies. For “empower*,” it was essential to identify where in the body of the article the term had been included to better ascertain the frequency of the term in the study and thus, its importance. We note that all 50 papers mentioned “empower*” in the title of the paper, and 32 mentioned it in the title and abstract. Then, 12 out of the 50 articles (24%) mentioned the term only in the title and/or abstract of the paper. The position of “empower*” in the remaining 76% is reported in Figure 5, which reveals that 35 studies mention the term in the introduction of the paper, 19 in the methods section, 18 in the results section, 11 in the discussion and 12 in the conclusion of the paper.
Figure 5. Position of empower* in the included studies
30Language (Figure 6) is predominantly identified by the author(s) of the studies as a foreign language (FL) in 20 studies (40%), as a second language in 9 studies (18%), and as both second and foreign language in 5 studies (10%). In 12 studies (24%), there was a preference not to label the language, using more generic terms such as “German/ English Language Learning” or simply “as a language”. In 3 studies (6%), the target language was recognized as an “additional language”, doing away with the confines of second or foreign language; it was classified as a first language in one study and the status of the language was not deemed applicable in two studies.
Figure 6. Status of language in the included studies
- 5 Mention of empower* in at least three of the following sections: introduction, methods, results, di (...)
31Perhaps one of the best ways to “conceptualize” an abstract idea such as “empowerment,” albeit tricky, is by recognizing how it is situated in the theoretical context identified by the authors of the studies. To do this, each study was read several times to identify the key concepts that appeared in the literature and to see if empowerment was defined in explicit terms by the author(s) of the study. Since 12 articles had made a mention of empower* only in the title of the paper (see ID #3, 4, 10, 11, 22, 29, 32, 35, 37, 40, 48, 50), they were excluded from the next two analyses presented in this section. Broadly, 24 studies (or 48% of the corpus) do not define empowerment explicitly or even make implicit references that would help the reader understand what the term means. Empowerment as a concept seems to be taken for granted by these authors, even though it can occur frequently5 in the text.
32Nevertheless, a variety of concepts appear in the literature on empowerment for language education. A two-level coding scheme was employed to structure and organize the concepts. First, they were exhaustively coded, applying a new code for every new concept found. This generated 38 different codes. Codes were then grouped together at a higher level depending on their nature or the closest theoretical concept they could be grouped into. For instance, learner autonomy was coded 4 times, but closely related concepts (agency, metacognition, self-regulation, self-directed learning, self-determination, and personalized learning) were added to the main “autonomy” code resulting in 11 occurrences. Figure 7 below provides an overview of the key concepts identified by the authors in their literature review of the studies and are represented here at their highest-level codes.
Figure 7. An overview of the key concepts used in the literature on empowerment for language education
- 6 NB: Percentages were calculated with a total of 38 papers and not 50, since 12 articles that had ma (...)
33Besides studies around autonomy, 11 studies (28.9%6) explicitly identify empowerment in their literature review whereas language learning or education (25%) was a code given to literature that identified language as a catalyst and lack of language as a barrier to human empowerment. Language learning theories (cognitivism, Complex Dynamic Systems Theory, constructivism, dialogic framework, sociocultural theory, situated and distributed learning, and translanguaging) were clearly identified in 8 studies (21.05%) as means to empowerment. Pedagogical practices such as enactment, active learning, lifelong learning, open critical pedagogy, data-driven learning, and task or project-based learning were identified in 7 studies (18.4%). Six studies (15.7%) were rooted in identity construction, while 5 studies (13.1%) each linked human values and Mobile-Assisted Language Learning (MALL) to language empowerment. Learning strategies and CALL and AI tools were identified by 3 studies (7.8%) each. Three occurrences of codes (10.5%) were uncategorized (motivation, engagement, and transdisciplinary) since they did not fit into any of the above-mentioned categories.
- 7 Same note as above.
- 8 In ID13, “liberatory autonomy” refers to the ability of ESL learners to “preserve their own L1 alon (...)
34Finally, multiple tools were used in the studies to foster empowerment (Figure 8). For this analysis, the word “tool” is to be understood in its largest sense, since studies did not always mention physical or material tools, but also abstractions, actions, and human beings. CALL tools including online platforms, ChatGPT, corpora, and other technological tools were mentioned in 14 studies (36.8%7), whereas language was considered important for empowering learners and teachers in 9 studies (23.6%). Abstract qualities such as awareness (n=4), motivation (n=3), and liberatory autonomy8 (n=1) were also deemed necessary to foster empowerment. Strategies (n=2), materials (n=2), tasks or projects (n=2), and communities (n=1) made up for the rest of the “tools” identified.
Figure 8. An overview of the tools used in the studies to foster empowerment for language education
35Since conceptualization and operationalization go hand-in-hand, the next section will look at how the concept of empowerment is operationalized in the included studies.
36Operationalization involves assigning transparent attributes to a variable or concept in order to reduce subjectivity and research bias. Five features were taken into consideration for this research question: (1) type of study, (2) research design, (3) data collection instruments, (4) types of data, and (5) types of analysis.
37Three main types of studies were identified in this review. A study was qualified as a primary study if the data was collected directly from the participants and if the methods and the results were duly reported. A study was qualified as being theoretical if it sought to explain and deconstruct abstract principles on a particular topic; and when such a study was conducted systematically, the study was qualified as a critical review. Figure 9 reveals that most studies were empirical or primary studies (n=37 or 74%), followed by theoretical studies (n=11 or 22%). Only two critical reviews (4%) were found in the dataset.
Figure 9. Types of study
38Collected data (Figure 10) were qualitative (n=17 or 34%), quantitative (n=11 or 22%), and mixed (n=11 or 22%) in nature. The remaining 11 theoretical studies were not considered applicable for this analysis and have been categorized as N/A in the figure below.
Figure 10. Types of data
39Since theoretical studies seem to be largely subjective in nature and do not always have a research design, only empirical studies and critical reviews (n=39) were considered for the following analyses, i.e., research designs, instruments for data collection, and types of data analyses.
40An overview of the various research designs as defined by the authors of the 39 studies is provided in Figure 11. Studies were predominantly identified by the authors as being descriptive in nature (n=16, 41.02%), followed by case studies or interventionist studies (n=5 or 12.8% each). Four experimental (10.2%) and two quasi-experimental (5.1%) studies were identified. The two critical reviews were categorized as systematic studies. Other studies included narrative enquiry (n=2 or 5.1%), action research, critical school of research, and research and development.
Figure 11. Research designs of empirical articles and critical reviews
41More than half of the empirical and critical review studies (n=25 or 64.1%) made use of more than one instrument to collect data (Figure 12). Instruments for data collection included open and closed-ended questionnaires (n=23 or 58.9%); structured, semi-structured and narrative interviews (n=11 or 28.2%); observations (n=11) of a wide range of activities (classroom activity, discussion groups, workshops, use of online and mobile applications, seminars, audio and video recordings, and other types of student activities); test scores (n=9 or 23.07%); reflective tools (n=5 or 12.8%) such as journals, learner and teacher diaries or papers; student corpora like multimodal compositions; essays (n=2 or 5.1%); focus groups (n=2); and other empirical studies selected for critical reviews (n=2).
Figure 12. Instruments for data collection
42Data collected in the studies were analysed using the methods listed in Figure 13. A quarter of empirical studies and critical reviews (n=10 or 25.6%) used more than one type of analysis. Thematic analysis (n=15 or 38.4%) and descriptive statistics (n=11 or 28.2%) were the most frequently used, followed by triangulation (n=4 or 10.2%). Two out of the three studies that used correlations studied coefficients using Cronbach’s Alpha for purposes of reliability. T-tests (n=3 or 7.7%) and Anova (n=2 or 5.1%) were also used.
Figure 13. Types of data analysis methods
43Other types of analyses (n=7 or 17.9%) included simple descriptions, content analysis, discursive analysis, design and development, Manova, social network analysis and text-mining techniques. Four studies (10.2%) did not mention the type of analyses that were conducted making it difficult to assign a code to these studies.
- 9 The participants of this study were referred to as “pupils” and their age has not been explicitly m (...)
44The purpose of this scoping review was to explore and gain better understanding of the use of the term empowerment in the context of language education. The focus was on 50 open-access and available journal articles published between 1994 and 2024 inclusive. Firstly, this review found that the term empowerment has been in use in the context of language education since 1994 with Quicke & Winter’s exploratory study (ID1) into first language use of English with a small group of male first-year9 secondary school pupils. Their study leaned towards a metacognitive approach to pupil empowerment, wherein learning strategies enabled vocabulary acquisition and pupils showed the ability to take a step back and reflect on their own learning and that of their peers. Since then, empowerment has been fostered not just through metacognition and awareness of one’s potential and limits but also through CALL, AI tools, and language (Figure 8).
45Learner autonomy is “often used as an umbrella term in language teaching and learning,” (Kalyaniwala & Ciekanski, 2021, p. 123) to refer to independent and personalized ways of learning a language. Metacognitive and self-regulatory strategies are brought to the fore and questions of learner agency become important. The key theoretical concepts identified in the studies of this scoping review (see Figure 7) also demonstrate that autonomy and other connected constructs (such as agency) occupy an important place in the literature on empowerment for language education. How then is one to define empowerment in the field of language education?
46Out of the 50 studies identified in this scoping review, 27 define or explain the concept of empowerment, with 25 of them referring to some aspect or dimension of autonomy in the study. Fifteen out of these 27 studies (55.6%) were conducted or designed in Asia, which strongly implies that empowerment as a term is largely favoured in Asian countries, unlike Europe and the rest of the world (cf. Figure 4). This finding might be the result of the narrow focus of this study on open-access journals and further research is therefore needed on whether the choice of the term is geographically inclined.
47This review also found that one third of these 27 studies (n=9) that explain the concept (IDs #27, 29, 36, 40, 42, 44, 45, 47, 48) choose “empower*” although they are actually referring to learner autonomy or the ability or capacity to take charge of one’s own learning (Holec, 1981), and also mention the term autonomy. All 9 studies are conducted in Asian contexts (Indonesia, China, Thailand, etc.), and all of them posit that CALL tools such as corpora, digital applications, technologies, and mobile-assisted language learning foster learner and teacher empowerment.
48Two other studies (ID2 and ID21) include autonomy in their definitions of empowerment. While for ID2, empowerment includes autonomy, it also includes equality and learning skills. For ID21, learner autonomy is “a complementary element of learner empowerment” as it “enables students to be more aware of and involved in the learning process itself” (Dağgöl, 2020, p. 22). Empowerment therefore is seen as “a process of boosting an internal willingness” (Dağgöl, 2020, p. 21), motivation for meaningful tasks, with the result that students develop positive emotions during the language learning process (Dağgöl, 2020).
49These observations make it clear that there is still room in the literature on language education for distinguishing between the two concepts, empowerment and autonomy. While one might be tempted to think that the terms mean the same thing, that might not necessarily be the case. In language education, an autonomous learner is often understood as one who has the capacity to take charge of their own learning (Holec, 1981) but may not be empowered to do so. A working definition of empowerment is thus proposed in section 4.3.
50Questions of emancipation (ID14; ID15), language and identity (ID13; ID32) also play a determining role in defining empowerment, although such studies are fewer in number (n=4). These are studies that focus on questions of “power” in empowerment and in spite of being fewer in number, they need to be taken into account if we are to better comprehend the concept and apply it to language education. According to ID14, language empowerment can only occur through critical language awareness and by getting rid of the normative perception of language often transmitted by language teachers themselves. In other words, if teachers are sufficiently aware of the (normative) nature of language, they can help break the iterative cycle of language normativity that often marginalizes additional language learners. In ID13, the authors insist:
(…) Power does not operate only at the macro level of powerful institutions such as the legal system, the education system, and the social welfare system, but also at the micro level of everyday social encounters between people with differential access to symbolic (e.g., language, education, and friendship) and material (e.g., capital goods, real estate, and money) resources—encounters which are inevitably produced within language (Tadayon & Khodi, 2017, p. 7).
51This is a compelling perspective to deciphering language empowerment as it professes how we, as language teachers, are probably not even aware of perpetuating an unequal balance between first language and “other” language users.
52One way of responding to such language inequalities and fostering language empowerment might be by using the term “additional” instead of “foreign” language teaching and learning. A quick search of the term on the internet reveals that “additional language” goes back to at least 1977 when J. A. Fishman used it in TESOL Quarterly, followed by J. K. Hall (2000) in a book chapter. While authors of the included studies stipulate a distinct preference for the terms “foreign” or “second language” (see Figure 6), a total of 20 studies (40%) refer to language either as a language (without the second/foreign tag), as an additional language or simply focus on both second and foreign language with the ambition of including different language learners. Referring to language as a second or a foreign language could be useful at times when the teacher needs to choose between activities of different levels of difficulty.
53However, with language playing a vital role in shaping learner identities (Tadayon & Khodi, 2017), the tag that we attribute to language as teachers and researchers matters considerably. Could referring to learning a language as an additional language be more relevant in the contemporary sociolinguistic landscape? Would using additional be a more efficient manner of validating language practices of immigrants who already use multiple languages? If that is the case, additional could apply to the national language of the country immigrants are living in, without them having to qualify it as their first or second language. How liberating would that be! Researchers focusing on empowering language learners would also benefit from such discourse as it would enable them to question linguistic hegemonies that are passed on from one generation to the next.
54It is difficult to define the term empowerment when it overlaps with a host of keywords and theoretical constructs (see Figure 7) that it can be situated in. After careful consideration of the included studies, the present scoping review proposes the following working definition of the concept of empowerment for language education:
55Empowerment in language education constitutes a multidimensional social process through which learners of an additional language are encouraged to critically examine the mechanisms of their own language learning. They can do so by interrogating the power dynamics that construct and regulate their identities as language learners. Language empowerment may include a host of practices that are inscribed in the literature such as self-directed learning, metacognitive or self-regulatory practices, and easy access to technological tools. However, true learner empowerment goes beyond methodological considerations and questions the pursuit of normative proficiency, which the learner perceives as problematic. An empowered language learner thus strives for language proficiency that is embedded in meaningful language use, critical thinking, and a keen awareness of power hegemonies.
56The present scoping review sought to summarize the overall features of research on empowerment for language education by mapping the theoretical perspectives, research foci, and methodological features of the studies included. Arksey & O’Malley’s (2005) five-stage framework was adopted to systematically identify and synthesize 50 studies that referred to both language learning and empower*. Three main types of studies were found: primary studies, theoretical studies, and critical reviews. The methodological attributes of the studies helped in gauging the variety of techniques and methods that are employed with the two keywords in context.
57This scoping review found that the concept of empowerment is often used in academia without being defined. Only 27 out of the 50 studies (54%) identified in this review actually explained or defined the concept. Results revealed that the term “empowerment” is often steeped in a range of educational notions originating in various contexts and primary fields of research, even though the focus of the articles is clearly on language education. Included studies did, however, also mention other concepts such as autonomy, self-regulation, or agency, which were defined in the study, making it difficult to ascertain what empowerment really means. Taking both academic and non-academic settings into consideration, the present review offers a working definition of empowerment situated in the context of language education. It is hoped that this definition will provide a stepping-stone for other studies that wish to consider the construct and focus on fostering empowerment through conscientizaçāo (Freire, 2005) of language use in social contexts.
58Future research needs to uncover and clearly define the linkages and contours that are drawn around learner autonomy and language empowerment. How different are the two constructs? Is the choice of the term geographically inclined as this paper argues or does one have an impact on the other? In other words, does a learner need to be empowered in order to become an autonomous language learner or does their autonomy empower language learning? How does the learner of an additional language become empowered, and what support can language advisors and teachers effectively provide? For Bernhardt (2022), ID25, analysing learning trajectories of language learners might be helpful in answering these questions as they highlight biographical and social experiences that are embedded across contexts, time, power relations, and help recognize meaningful use of language in social contexts. These questions could be addressed through primary studies but also through systematic and critical reviews that focus on literature and contexts of additional language acquisition. While descriptive studies are clearly preferred as this review demonstrates, other types of research designs such as narrative enquiry are also needed.
59Finally, the focus of this review has been on articles available in open-access journals, which do not always have an impact factor and may not be as frequently cited as those published in journals that do so. While this choice could be perceived as a limitation, it does raise two important points. The first point is inextricably linked to the value of open science. While most public universities (at least in France) seem to favour the open-science framework, book chapters and articles published often cite articles that are not always available in open access. This makes replication studies difficult. The second argument is the need to consider research published in local and national journals that could be filtered out by reviewers due to certain pre-fixed parameters (such as high-impact factors). If a notion like “empowerment” is indeed favoured by researchers writing in Asian educational contexts, how fair would it be to expect them to write in pay-to-publish European and American journals? This paper has demonstrated that it is possible to conduct a scoping review using only open-access research, thereby avoiding dependence on costly, subscription-based databases maintained by academic institutions. While this approach may introduce certain limitations in scope and comprehensiveness, it is also empowering in many different ways.
The author would like to express her thanks and gratitude to Alex Boulton and Maud Ciekanski (University of Lorraine) for their advice and thought-provoking discussions on the topic. Many thanks also to the anonymous reviewers for their extremely valuable comments and suggestions.