{"id":2109,"date":"2026-04-06T17:22:31","date_gmt":"2026-04-07T00:22:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/?page_id=2109"},"modified":"2026-04-08T10:19:12","modified_gmt":"2026-04-08T17:19:12","slug":"2026-invited-colloquia","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/2026-invited-colloquia\/","title":{"rendered":"2026 Invited Colloquia"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Remaining human in AI-shaped writing education: Wr<\/strong><\/a>i<\/a><\/strong>ting teacher expertise, judgment, and care in higher education contexts<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Organizer<\/strong>
Mayumi Fujioka, Osaka Metropolitan University, Japan<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presenters<\/strong>
Mayumi Fujioka, Osaka Metropolitan University, Japan
Chiaki Baba, Teikyo University of Science, Japan
Ryuichi Sato, Kyoto University, Japan
Madoka Kawano, Meiji University, Japan
Naoya Shibata, Osaka Kyoiku University, Japan<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Humanity in AI-assisted second language writing: Agency, ethics, and pedagogical design<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Organizer<\/strong>
Cong Zhang, Zhejiang University, China<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presenters<\/strong>
Cong Zhang, Zhejiang University, China
Yachao Sun, Duke Kunshan University, China
Jian Xu, Sichuan International Studies University, China
Xiaodong Zhang, Beijing Foreign Studies University, China
Yabing Wang, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, China<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Click on the titles above to see the abstracts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Remaining human in AI-shaped writing education: Writing teacher expertise, judgment, and care in higher education contexts<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Organizer<\/strong>
Mayumi Fujioka, Osaka Metropolitan University, Japan<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presenters<\/strong>
Mayumi Fujioka, Osaka Metropolitan University, Japan
Chiaki Baba, Teikyo University of Science, Japan
Ryuichi Sato, Kyoto University, Japan
Madoka Kawano, Meiji University, Japan
Naoya Shibata, Osaka Kyoiku University, Japan<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Recent developments in artificial intelligence (AI) have profoundly reshaped the environments in which second language (L2) writing is taught and learned. AI-mediated tools are now routinely involved in writing processes, feedback practices, assessment, and instructional design, creating new possibilities as well as new tensions for writing teachers. Much of the emerging discussion has focused on how AI can support writing instruction or enhance efficiency. Far less attention, however, has been paid to what these changes mean for writing teachers\u2019 professional expertise as a human, relational, and situated practice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This invited colloquium addresses this gap by foregrounding the humanity of writing teachers as it is lived, strained, and negotiated in everyday teaching under AI-shaped conditions. Rather than treating expertise as a stable set of skills or technical knowledge that teachers either possess or lack, the colloquium conceptualizes expertise as a fundamentally human responsibility as well as a resource\u2014one enacted through judgment, care, ethical accountability, and continual negotiation within institutional and pedagogical constraints. From this perspective, AI does not simply add new tools to teachers\u2019 repertoire; it reshapes the moral and professional terrain of writing instruction by intensifying existing asymmetries, exposing structural limitations, and altering the conditions under which teachers are expected to exercise judgment, sustain relationships with learners, and take responsibility for decisions they do not always control.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Across higher education contexts\u2014illustrated in this colloquium through the case of Japanese universities\u2014writing teacher expertise emerges at the intersection of uneven student preparation, institutional designs that marginalize writing expertise, disciplinary differences in beliefs about writing, and employment structures that unevenly distribute authority and responsibility. In such environments, the presence of AI does not resolve long-standing tensions in writing instruction. Instead, it renders visible forms of expertise that are often taken for granted, undervalued, or structurally constrained, while simultaneously increasing expectations placed on teachers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The five presentations in this colloquium examine how writing teacher expertise is reconfigured at multiple, interconnected levels: theoretical, pedagogical, institutional, organizational, and personal. Together, they foreground the humanity of writing teachers by attending to the interpretive, ethical, and affective dimensions of their work\u2014dimensions that cannot be reduced to technological function, instructional efficiency, or tool mastery. By situating AI as a condition rather than a solution, this colloquium addresses pressing questions about how L2 writing can remain a meaningful human practice, and how writing teachers can remain professionally and ethically human, in increasingly AI-shaped educational environments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presentation 1<\/strong>: Reconsidering Writing Teacher Expertise in the Age of AI: A Conceptual Perspective<\/strong>
Mayumi Fujioka, Osaka Metropolitan University, Japan<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This presentation provides a conceptual foundation for the colloquium by revisiting how writing teacher expertise has been theorized in L2 writing research and examining how these discussions need to be reconsidered in the age of AI. Prior scholarship has emphasized notions such as adaptive expertise, professional judgment, and teacher learning, often framing expertise as the capacity to respond flexibly to pedagogical complexity. However, these discussions have rarely addressed how technological conditions reshape the very contexts in which such expertise is enacted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Drawing on key theoretical debates on L2 writing teacher expertise (e.g., Lee, 2025; Seloni, 2022), this presentation argues that writing teacher expertise should not be understood primarily as technical competence or tool-related knowledge, but as a form of human judgment exercised under conditions of uncertainty, responsibility, and ethical tension. By situating AI within these conceptual discussions, the presentation reframes expertise as a relational and moral practice rather than a purely instrumental one. This perspective establishes a conceptual anchor for the colloquium, clarifying what is at stake when the humanity of writing teachers is foregrounded in AI-influenced writing environments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presentation 2<\/strong>: Teaching Remedial Writers with AI: Expertise as Care, Judgment, and Pedagogical Relationship<\/strong>
Chiaki Baba, Teikyo University of Science, Japan<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Focusing on remedial writing contexts, this presentation examines how writing teacher expertise is enacted when students lack basic understandings of what writing is and how it works. In such contexts, the introduction of AI poses particular challenges: students may delegate writing entirely to AI systems, disengaging from learning processes, authorial responsibility, and reader awareness. Writing teachers are thus required to make complex pedagogical and ethical judgments that extend beyond instructional technique.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Drawing on experiences teaching remedial university students, this presentation conceptualizes expertise as a form of care-oriented practice. It highlights how teachers build rapport, foster a sense of audience, and sustain learner engagement under conditions of profound asymmetry in knowledge and confidence. Rather than framing AI use as a problem of regulation or control, the presentation argues that writing teacher expertise in remedial contexts lies in sustaining pedagogical relationships that make meaningful writing possible in the first place. In doing so, it foregrounds the emotional and relational labor that underpins humanity in writing instruction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presentation 3<\/strong>: Institutional Constraints on Writing Teacher Expertise in Japanese Higher Education<\/strong>
Ryuichi Sato, Kyoto University, Japan<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This presentation shifts the focus from individual classrooms to institutional structures that shape writing instruction. Drawing on a large-scale analysis of over 1,400 university syllabi, it demonstrates that EFL writing instruction in Japanese higher education remains predominantly product-oriented, textbook-driven, and minimally genre-based. These patterns reflect institutional design rather than individual teacher beliefs, systematically marginalizing writing expertise while simultaneously expanding expectations placed on instructors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The presentation argues that efforts to integrate AI into writing instruction cannot be understood apart from these structural constraints. Even when teachers recognize the pedagogical potential of AI, institutional frameworks often limit how professional judgment can be exercised in practice. By foregrounding the institutional conditions under which writing is taught, this presentation reframes writing teacher expertise as something that is not merely enacted\u2014or not enacted\u2014by individuals but enabled or constrained by educational systems. AI, in this sense, functions as a lens that makes these constraints newly visible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presentation 4<\/strong>: Managing Disciplinary Difference: Writing Expertise, AI, and Organizational Mediation<\/strong>
Madoka Kawano, Meiji University, Japan<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This presentation examines writing teacher expertise from the perspective of organizational and disciplinary mediation. Drawing on experiences coordinating EAP\/ESP courses within a science faculty, it explores how AI has intensified existing differences in beliefs about writing among instructors from diverse disciplinary backgrounds. Conflicting assumptions about the purposes of writing, appropriate instructional approaches, and the role of AI often generate tension and uncertainty at the program level.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Through concrete cases of syllabus coordination and policy development, the presentation conceptualizes expertise as a form of mediating and managerial practice. Writing teacher expertise, from this perspective, involves aligning divergent beliefs, translating across disciplinary cultures, and sustaining instructional coherence among stakeholders. By highlighting these often-invisible forms of labor, the presentation expands conventional understandings of writing expertise beyond classroom teaching to include professional judgement and organizational responsibility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presentation 5<\/strong>: Writing Teacher Expertise from the Margins: An Autoethnographic Perspective<\/strong>
Naoya Shibata, Osaka Kyoiku University, Japan<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The final presentation foregrounds writing teacher expertise as it is lived under conditions of limited authority and structural precarity. Drawing on autoethnographic reflection as an instructor, it examines how writing teachers enact professional judgment, ethical responsibility, and care while operating within institutional systems that restrict control over course design, assessment policy, and AI-related decision-making.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By narrating moments of pedagogical decision-making, emotional labor, and ethical tension, this presentation highlights the uneven distribution of authority and responsibility in writing instruction. It argues that understanding the humanity of writing teachers in the age of AI requires attending not only to pedagogy and policy, but also to the labor conditions under which expertise is recognized, constrained, or rendered invisible. This perspective brings the colloquium full circle by grounding conceptual and institutional discussions in lived professional experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

About the Presenters<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mayumi Fujioka<\/strong>\u00a0is a professor of English in the Faculty of Liberal Arts, Sciences, and Global Education at Osaka Metropolitan University.\u00a0She holds a PhD in Foreign Language Education.\u00a0Her research interests include English for Academic Purposes (EAP) and L2 writing teacher development. She is currently working on connecting undergraduate and graduate EAP writing instruction. Her publications have appeared in Journal of Second Language Writing, as well as international edited collections on graduate-level academic literacy practices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chiaki Baba<\/strong> is a professor at the Department of School Education, Teikyo University of Science, Japan. She has a Ph.D. in Education. Her research interests include teaching novice EFL learners, EFL writing and its assessment, and English teacher training for novice university students. Her articles have been published in several journals and books. She is currently a Vice-President of the Japan Association of College English Teachers (JACET).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ryuichi Sato<\/strong> is a Program-Specific Senior Lecturer at the Institute for Liberal Arts and Sciences, Kyoto University, Japan. He holds a Ph.D. in English and works at the intersection of second language writing, English-medium instruction (EMI), and writing pedagogy in higher education. His research examines how institutional design, curricular structures, and assessment practices shape teachers\u2019 professional judgment and learners\u2019 engagement in L2 writing contexts. His publications have appeared in the Journal of Asia TEFL as well as a chapter in an international edited volume on EMI education.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Madoka Kawano<\/strong> is a professor in the Department of Interdisciplinary Mathematical Sciences, Meiji University, Japan. Her research examines L2 writing pedagogy from the perspectives of academic literacy and critical thinking skills, with a particular focus on EAP\/ESP for science students. She has developed instructional materials for pharmacy students and STEM majors and has conducted collaborative research on L2 writing instruction, poster presentations, material evaluation, and curriculum design at secondary and tertiary education.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Naoya Shibata<\/strong> is a specially-appointed associate professor at Osaka Kyoiku University, Japan. He holds an Ed.D. in TESOL and researches second language writing, content and language integrated learning, materials development, and teacher training. He received the Japan Association for Language Teaching (JALT) Early Career Excellence Award in 2024 and the Michele Steele Best of JALT Award in 2025. His publications have appeared in the Language Teaching<\/em>, CALL-EJ<\/em>, Folio<\/em>, and other journals and books.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Back to 2026 Invited Colloquia<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Humanity in AI-assisted second language writing: Agency, ethics, and pedagogical design<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Organizer<\/strong>
Cong Zhang, Zhejiang University, China<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presenters<\/strong>
Cong Zhang, Zhejiang University, China
Yachao Sun, Duke Kunshan University, China
Jian Xu, Sichuan International Studies University, China
Xiaodong Zhang, Beijing Foreign Studies University, China
Yabing Wang, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, China<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The rapid integration of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) into second language (L2) writing has fundamentally reshaped how texts are produced, evaluated, and taught. While much public and scholarly discourse has centered on what AI can do\u2014its efficiency, accuracy, and scalability\u2014less attention has been paid to what AI means for the human dimensions of writing: agency, voice, judgment, responsibility, and ethical action. This colloquium brings these human concerns to the foreground by examining AI-assisted second language writing not as a technical problem to be managed, but as a pedagogical, ethical, and relational practice to be designed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Across diverse contexts\u2014university and secondary education, EFL and EAL settings, teacher and learner perspectives\u2014this colloquium advances a shared premise: humanity in AI-assisted writing does not reside in rejecting technology, nor in uncritical adoption, but in how humans actively mediate, negotiate, and reassert meaning-making in AI-rich environments. The five presentations collectively challenge instrumental and surveillance-driven approaches to AI (e.g., detection-first regimes, grammar-only feedback, automation of judgment) and instead highlight the roles of teachers as ethical designers, learners as agentive decision-makers, and pedagogy as a site for cultivating voice, responsibility, and critical engagement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Methodologically, the colloquium brings together qualitative, mixed-methods, and action research approaches, offering both empirical insight and pedagogical innovation. Conceptually, it reframes AI as neither replacement nor authority, but as a socio-technical participant whose influence must be interpreted, constrained, and reshaped through human values and professional judgment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Together, these studies argue that the future of AI-assisted second language writing depends not on better tools alone, but on sustaining humanity through ethical design, learner agency, meaningful feedback engagement, and pedagogies that prioritize voice, purpose, and learning over automation and control.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presentation 1: Teachers as Ethical Designers: Reclaiming Pedagogical Agency in AI-Assisted Second Language Writing<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cong Zhang,<\/strong> Zhejiang University, China<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The rapid integration of generative AI into second language (L2) writing instruction has intensified long-standing questions about teacher agency, professional responsibility, and the ethical foundations of pedagogy. While much existing research emphasizes what AI tools can do for writing development, far less attention has been paid to how teachers actively design, regulate, and ethically position AI within classroom practice. This study reconceptualizes L2 writing teachers not as passive adopters of AI technologies, but as ethical designers who exercise pedagogical judgment in shaping human\u2013AI interactions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Drawing on qualitative data from in-depth interviews, instructional artifacts, and reflective narratives of L2 writing teachers, the study examines how teachers negotiate ethical concerns such as authorship, learning legitimacy, fairness, and student dependence when integrating AI into writing tasks and feedback practices. The analysis foregrounds teachers\u2019 design decisions, including when and how AI use is permitted, how AI-assisted tasks are framed, and how AI-generated outputs are repositioned as resources for learning rather than substitutes for writing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Findings show that teachers\u2019 agency is enacted through ongoing ethical design work that reasserts human judgment, pedagogical values, and relational responsibility in AI-mediated writing environments. Rather than relinquishing authority to AI systems, teachers strategically position themselves as curators, interpreters, and moral anchors of writing instruction. This work reshapes teachers\u2019 professional identities and highlights humanity as an irreducible dimension of AI-assisted pedagogy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By theorizing teachers as ethical designers, this study contributes to emerging scholarship on humanity in AI-assisted writing and offers a framework for understanding teacher agency beyond instrumental adoption. Pedagogical implications are discussed for sustaining human-centered L2 writing instruction in increasingly AI-rich educational contexts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presentation 2: Beyond Detection in GenAI-Mediated EAL Writing Education<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yachao Sun, <\/strong>Duke Kunshan University, China<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) becomes embedded in English as an additional language (EAL) writing education, institutional responses have increasingly emphasized detection and policing. This study critically examines how such detection-oriented regimes shape students\u2019 writing practices and, more importantly, how they reconfigure the human dimensions of learning and assessment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Using screen recordings, written drafts, and interviews with five Chinese EAL university students, the study identifies four recurrent GenAI functions in students\u2019 writing: brainstorming, structuring, occasional drafting, and revising. However, students\u2019 engagement with these functions was consistently calibrated against perceived risks of being flagged by AI-detection tools. To mitigate these risks, participants shuttled between ChatGPT, Grammarly, and self-paraphrasing strategies to \u201chumanize\u201d AI-generated output. In doing so, they often reallocated effort away from idea development and argumentation toward surface-level revision and textual disguise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These findings problematize a detection-first approach in three ways. First, such regimes encourage strategic but pedagogically hollow manipulation of text. Second, they blur distinctions between originality and plagiarism by foregrounding algorithmic judgment over writer intention and learning processes. Third, they risk shifting writing assessment toward product-centric criteria that marginalize voice, creativity, and rhetorical quality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The study argues for moving beyond detection toward critical AI literacy in EAL writing education. Rather than policing AI use, pedagogy should support learners in making informed, reflective decisions about when, why, and how to engage with GenAI. Prioritizing voice, argument quality, and learning-oriented writing practices is essential for sustaining humanity in AI-mediated EAL instruction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presentation 3: Understanding Agency in AI Use and Engagement with AI Feedback among University L2 Learners<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jian Xu, <\/strong>Sichuan International Studies University, China<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This mixed-methods study examines second language (L2) learners\u2019 agency in AI use and their engagement with AI-generated feedback in university learning contexts. While AI feedback is often framed as efficient and supportive, less is known about how learners exercise agency in interacting with it and how different dimensions of agency relate to engagement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The study draws on questionnaire data from 1,166 L2 learners and semi-structured interviews with six focal participants. Quantitative analyses (descriptive statistics, repeated-measures ANOVA, and structural equation modeling) reveal significant variation across agency dimensions. Learners reported the highest levels of agency in actions (e.g., deciding whether to use AI), followed by abilities and mentalities. In terms of engagement, cognitive and behavioral engagement were rated higher than affective engagement. Actions significantly predicted both cognitive and behavioral engagement, while mentality predicted affective and cognitive engagement; perceived abilities showed no significant predictive power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Qualitative findings provide depth to these patterns. Learners described exercising agency by selectively adopting AI feedback, preserving decision-making authority, and viewing AI as a collaborator rather than an authority. Importantly, participants reported that AI created an emotionally safe environment that reduced anxiety and encouraged sustained practice, particularly when AI use was framed as supportive rather than evaluative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Together, the findings suggest that agency in AI-assisted L2 learning is not monolithic but multidimensional and relational. Supporting humanity in AI-mediated feedback requires pedagogical designs that strengthen learners\u2019 sense of control, reflection, and responsibility. Implications are discussed for fostering learner agency and meaningful engagement with AI feedback in L2 writing instruction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presentation 4: Optimizing ChatGPT-Assisted Writing for Secondary L2 Students\u2019 Academic Transition: A Systemic Functional Linguistics Approach<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Xiaodong Zhang, <\/strong>Beijing Foreign Studies University, China<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT are increasingly present in second language (L2) classrooms, yet their role in supporting secondary students\u2019 transition to academic writing remains underexplored. While ChatGPT can assist with grammar and vocabulary, its default support often emphasizes surface-level language forms, offering limited guidance for the meaning-making demands of advanced academic writing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This paper argues that integrating systemic functional linguistics (SFL) with ChatGPT can better support secondary L2 students\u2019 academic transition. Grounded in Halliday\u2019s (1993) SFL framework, the paper conceptualizes writing as a process of meaning construction shaped by the interaction of ideational, interpersonal, and textual resources. From this perspective, effective academic writing requires more than accuracy; it requires control over how content, stance, and organization work together in context.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The paper reviews literature on SFL-informed L2 writing pedagogy and examines how ChatGPT\u2019s affordances can be reoriented through an SFL lens. It then proposes practical strategies and illustrative cases in which teachers guide students to use ChatGPT not only to refine language forms but also to analyze genre, develop arguments, and make purposeful rhetorical choices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By aligning ChatGPT\u2019s technological capabilities with SFL\u2019s theoretical insights, the paper advances a human-centered framework for AI-assisted writing instruction. This approach positions AI as a mediational resource rather than an authority, enabling secondary L2 students to develop the conceptual and linguistic foundations necessary for successful academic writing in higher education.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presentation 5:<\/strong> Enhancing Engagement with GenAI Feedback in EFL Narrative Writing: A Teacher-Led Action Research<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yabing Wang, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, China<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although GenAI is rapidly reshaping L2 writing feedback, students\u2019 engagement with AI suggestions often remains superficial, characterized by grammar-only edits or uncritical copy-paste revisions. This teacher-led action research investigates how instructional design can foster deeper engagement with GenAI feedback in a college EFL narrative writing course.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Across three iterative cycles in a semester-long module, the instructor implemented a sequence of pedagogical interventions: (1) rubric anchoring that foregrounded two narrative dimensions per task (e.g., plot coherence, showing details) alongside an uptake decision log; (2) a Verify\u2013Select\u2013Rewrite protocol requiring students to evaluate, justify, and paraphrase AI suggestions; and (3) brief teacher-mediated micro-conferences using diagnostic questioning to prompt authorial decision-making.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Data sources included teacher reflective journals, lesson materials, AI interaction excerpts, student drafts and revisions, uptake logs, and stimulated-recall interviews. Framework-guided thematic analysis shows that students gradually increased multi-turn querying, critical evaluation of feedback, and meaningful revision participation. The teacher attributed these improvements to clearer goal alignment and strengthened learner agency, while also identifying tensions related to uneven digital literacy and integrity-oriented assessment practices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The study highlights the central role of teachers in mediating AI feedback and sustaining humanity in AI-assisted writing. Rather than treating GenAI as an autonomous feedback provider, the findings underscore the importance of teacher-led design in supporting voice, agency, and purposeful revision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

About the Presenters<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cong Zhang <\/strong>is a Professor of Applied Linguistics at the School of International Studies, Zhejiang University, China. She got her PhD in Second Language Studies from Purdue University. Her research interests include second language writing, technology-assisted language learning, and teacher education. Her recent work has appeared in the Journal of Second Language Writing, System, Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, RELC Journal, European Journal of Education, and the Asia-Pacific Education Researcher,<\/em> among others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ORCID: https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-2571-0562<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yachao Sun <\/strong>is an assistant professor in the Language and Culture Center at Duke Kunshan University. He got his PhD in Second Language Studies from Purdue University. His research interests include multilingual writing, translingual studies, technology-empowered language education, and multimodal composition. His recent publications have appeared in Journal of Second Language Writing, System, Language Teaching Research, Assessing Writing,<\/em> among others. ORCID: https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-8238-6079<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jian Xu<\/strong> is a Professor at Sichuan International Studies University, China. He obtained his Ph.D. degree from The Chinese University of Hong Kong. His research interests include second language writing and listening comprehension. His work has appeared in several journals, such as Journal of Second Language Writing<\/em>, Assessing Writing, System, Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, Language Teaching Research, RELC Journal, Applied Linguistics Review, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, and Higher Education Research & Development<\/em>, among others. ORCID: https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-2275-6197<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Xiaodong Zhang<\/strong><\/a> is a professor at Beijing Foreign Studies University, China. He holds a Ph. D degree in Linguistics from University of Georgia, U.S.A. His work has appeared in several international journals, such as Assessing Writing<\/em>, Computers & Education, Teaching in High Education, Applied Linguistics Review, Language Teaching Research, Language and Education, <\/em>and Linguistics and Education. <\/em> ORCID<\/strong>: <\/em>https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-7216-6542<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yabing Wang <\/strong>is an associate professor at the School of English Education and the Center for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. She got her PhD in Educational Psychology from the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. Her research interests include second language acquisition, individual differences, and emotions. Her recent publications have appeared in System, Language Teaching Research, Assessing Writing, Applied Linguistics Review, Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, British Journal of Educational Technology, Asian Journal of Psychiatry, The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, among others<\/em>. ORCID: http:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-3539-2633<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Back to 2026 Invited Colloquia<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Remaining human in AI-shaped writing education: Writing teacher expertise, judgment, and care in higher education contexts OrganizerMayumi Fujioka, Osaka Metropolitan University, Japan PresentersMayumi Fujioka, Osaka Metropolitan University, JapanChiaki Baba, Teikyo University of Science, JapanRyuichi Sato, Kyoto University, JapanMadoka Kawano, Meiji University, JapanNaoya Shibata, Osaka Kyoiku University, Japan Humanity in AI-assisted second language writing: Agency, ethics,…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-2109","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\n2026 Invited Colloquia - Symposium on Second Language Writing<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/2026-invited-colloquia\/\" \/>\n<link rel=\"next\" href=\"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/2026-invited-colloquia\/2\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"2026 Invited Colloquia - Symposium on Second Language Writing\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Remaining human in AI-shaped writing education: Writing teacher expertise, judgment, and care in higher education contexts OrganizerMayumi Fujioka, Osaka Metropolitan University, Japan PresentersMayumi Fujioka, Osaka Metropolitan University, JapanChiaki Baba, Teikyo University of Science, JapanRyuichi Sato, Kyoto University, JapanMadoka Kawano, Meiji University, JapanNaoya Shibata, Osaka Kyoiku University, Japan Humanity in AI-assisted second language writing: Agency, ethics,...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/2026-invited-colloquia\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Symposium on Second Language Writing\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-04-08T17:19:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"17 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/2026-invited-colloquia\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/2026-invited-colloquia\\\/\",\"name\":\"2026 Invited Colloquia - Symposium on Second Language Writing\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-04-07T00:22:31+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-04-08T17:19:12+00:00\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/2026-invited-colloquia\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/\",\"name\":\"Symposium on Second Language Writing\",\"description\":\"Premier international conference on research and teaching of writing in additional languages.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Symposium on Second Language Writing\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/03\\\/cropped-sslwlogo_wordmark.png?fit=1500%2C500&ssl=1\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/03\\\/cropped-sslwlogo_wordmark.png?fit=1500%2C500&ssl=1\",\"width\":1500,\"height\":500,\"caption\":\"Symposium on Second Language Writing\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/pmatsuda.net\\\/sslw\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"2026 Invited Colloquia - Symposium on Second Language Writing","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/2026-invited-colloquia\/","next":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/2026-invited-colloquia\/2\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"2026 Invited Colloquia - Symposium on Second Language Writing","og_description":"Remaining human in AI-shaped writing education: Writing teacher expertise, judgment, and care in higher education contexts OrganizerMayumi Fujioka, Osaka Metropolitan University, Japan PresentersMayumi Fujioka, Osaka Metropolitan University, JapanChiaki Baba, Teikyo University of Science, JapanRyuichi Sato, Kyoto University, JapanMadoka Kawano, Meiji University, JapanNaoya Shibata, Osaka Kyoiku University, Japan Humanity in AI-assisted second language writing: Agency, ethics,...","og_url":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/2026-invited-colloquia\/","og_site_name":"Symposium on Second Language Writing","article_modified_time":"2026-04-08T17:19:12+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"17 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/2026-invited-colloquia\/","url":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/2026-invited-colloquia\/","name":"2026 Invited Colloquia - Symposium on Second Language Writing","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-04-07T00:22:31+00:00","dateModified":"2026-04-08T17:19:12+00:00","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/2026-invited-colloquia\/"]}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/#website","url":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/","name":"Symposium on Second Language Writing","description":"Premier international conference on research and teaching of writing in additional languages.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/#organization","name":"Symposium on Second Language Writing","url":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/cropped-sslwlogo_wordmark.png?fit=1500%2C500&ssl=1","contentUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/cropped-sslwlogo_wordmark.png?fit=1500%2C500&ssl=1","width":1500,"height":500,"caption":"Symposium on Second Language Writing"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2109","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2109"}],"version-history":[{"count":20,"href":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2109\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2991,"href":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2109\/revisions\/2991"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pmatsuda.net\/sslw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2109"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}