Stern (1983) reminds us of the ethical reasons for doing second language (L2) research. That is, given the considerable human and financial investments that go into language education, the practical activities of teaching “should not exclusively rely on tradition, opinion, or trial-and-error but should be able to draw on rational enquiry, systematic investigation, and, if possible, controlled experiment” (p. 57). Elsewhere Stern argues for the use of interdisciplinary teams to carry out such research. The studies in this special issue illustrate the aptness of Stern's advice. These articles present findings from a large-scale classroom research project that compared a deductive approach to teaching Spanish grammar to guided induction using the PACE model. The multidisciplinary team made use of different types of data, which were examined through different theoretical lenses. This discussion article considers the implications of these studies for L2 research, educational practice, teacher education, and the relationship between theory and practice.

中文翻译：

---

ISLA 研究中的过程和产品：对歧义的勇气、承诺和容忍度

Stern (1983) 提醒我们进行第二语言 (L2) 研究的伦理原因。也就是说，鉴于语言教育投入了大量的人力和财力，教学的实践活动“不应仅仅依靠传统、观点或试错，而应能够利用理性的探究、系统的调查、并且，如果可能的话，进行受控实验”（第 57 页）。在其他地方，斯特恩主张使用跨学科团队进行此类研究。本期特刊中的研究说明了斯特恩建议的恰当性。这些文章介绍了一个大型课堂研究项目的发现，该项目比较了使用 PACE 模型教授西班牙语语法的演绎方法和引导归纳法。多学科团队利用不同类型的数据，通过不同的理论镜头对其进行了检验。这篇讨论文章考虑了这些研究对二语研究、教育实践、教师教育以及理论与实践之间的关系的影响。