Today, we globally observe a sharp increase in learners’ engagement in extramural (out-of-class) English (EE; Sundqvist 2009). This undoubtedly affords new opportunities for, but also challenges to, English language teaching (ELT) and learning. To our knowledge, this study is the first to explore this topic from a cross-national perspective. Upper secondary English teachers (N = 534) from Austria, France (‘dubbing countries’), Finland, and Sweden (‘subtitling countries’) answered a web-based survey on their students’ EE practices and the estimated impact on teaching and learning. Results showed that overall EE use appears lower in the dubbing countries, especially France (p < 0.001). The teachers’ estimated effect of EE on different areas of learning overall was also the weakest in France (p ≤ .01). Further, teachers in subtitling countries agreed more strongly with statements about adapting instruction to what is (not) learned extramurally (p < 0.001). As EE use is growing, individual learner needs within a class, such as emerging gaps in learner motivation and/or language knowledge and skills, will increasingly have to be catered to in ELT.

Today, the Common European Framework of Reference (2009), and with it the action-based approach, underlies English Language Teaching (ELT) curricula throughout Europe. However, actual teaching practices are likely to vary according to factors such as the educational level and supra-national differences, including legal guidelines and the level of extramural English, i.e. out-of-school use of English (Sundqvist, 2009). Those factors presumably influence the role of grammar teaching in foreign language classrooms, which has been the subject of continuous debate (see Graus & Coppen, 2016; Thornbury, 1999; Ur, 2011). Such potential differences in teacher-reported ELT practices across Europe have not yet been investigated in instructed second language acquisition research. Therefore, the present study aims to compare the type of instruction in lower vs. upper secondary school in Sweden, Austria, and France, countries ranking differently in the EF Proficiency index (Education First, 2019). 615 secondary English teachers across the three countries filled in an online questionnaire designed to assess their use of planned vs. incidental form focus, implicit vs. explicit, and inductive vs. deductive instruction (Ellis, 2001a, 2009; Long, 1991). Results seem to indicate that (1) in lower secondary, Swedish teachers teach less explicitly than teachers in Austria and France; (2) Sweden provides ELT that is more implicit-fluency-based than does Austria and France; (3) incidental (rather than planned) grammar teaching is more dominant in upper than in lower secondary across countries and in Sweden and France as compared to Austria; and (4) French teachers differ from the other groups in their application of more inductive rather than deductive instruction. We argue that both the educational level and a country’s language policies and ideologies – and consequently also the extent to which they encourage use and exposure to extramural English – may be determining factors in the type of instruction applied in ELT.

European learners of English are increasingly using this language recreationally, which is referred to as Extramural English (henceforth EE). The level of EE use in a given country might be reflected in English Language Teaching (ELT) practices. Yet, no research so far has examined cross-nationally what potential for language learning teachers perceive in their learners’ EE engagement and how this relates to ELT practices. To address this gap, the present study draws on interview data from lower secondary English teachers from Austria, France, and Sweden (n = 20). They were enquired about (1) their students’ EE engagement and its effects on learning, (2) their accuracy and fluency teaching methods, and (3) the perceived link between EE and ELT. Swedish teachers seemed to have a more positive and fine-grained conceptualization of the impact of EE on learning than Austrian and French participants, especially in terms of grammar acquisition. The implicit learning environment that Swedish students encounter extramurally might extend to the classroom, where the use of explicit grammar rules occurs less dominantly than in the Austrian and French samples. The countries converged in the type of fluency-based instruction they reported. Gaps in language areas not (fully) developed through EE seem to be more intentionally addressed in ELT in Sweden.

Extramural English (EE), referring to English-mediated leisure activities, has become a core part of English learning in many contexts. This prompts the need to explore how informal learning can best interact with English language teaching (ELT). To investigate possible ways of linking EE and ELT, we asked secondary school teachers in Austria, Finland, France, and Sweden in a survey to illustrate an activity they would do with students making extensive use of EE. We recruited teachers through convenience sampling and received responses from 239 teachers. Swedish teachers most frequently illustrated activities, followed by Austrian, Finnish, and French teachers. Austrian and French teachers mostly referred to activities based on authentic (i.e. non-pedagogic) material. Contrarily, Finnish and Swedish teachers more often illustrated activities raising learners’ awareness of register differences. The findings point to possible contextual variation in how EE is considered in instruction, potentially influenced by political and sociocultural factors, such as learners’ average EE use and dominant instructional priorities. The findings can inform stakeholders seeking to support teachers in effectively connecting classroom instruction with learners’ EE.

A key debate in second language acquisition research revolves around the relative significance of explicit and implicit learning conditions in grammar learning. However, little is known about the potential of learners’ extramural (i.e., out‐of‐class) language use in fostering implicit and/or automatized knowledge as compared to explicit knowledge. Therefore, the present study investigated the effect of extramural English (EE) on implicit, automatized, and explicit knowledge among 13‐ to 14‐year‐old learners in Austria and Sweden ( N = 213). According to the results generated by linear mixed models, EE use can predict implicit and/or automatized knowledge. The strength of this relationship seems to be influenced by the extent, starting age, and nature of EE use, with productive but also multimodal and highly interest‐driven activities showing the greatest effect. Explicit knowledge, however, was not affected by EE use. Overall, learner reports on the role of EE and instruction in grammar learning support the findings.

The present study administered six test instruments to 13‐ to 14‐year‐old learners of English in Austria and Sweden (N = 213), countries offering settings with more explicit and implicit learning environments, respectively. Confirmatory Factor Analyses for Austria yielded a factor comprising timed grammaticality judgment tests, an oral narrative test, and elicited imitation, labelled in this study Automatized and/or Implicit Knowledge, and a factor including an untimed grammaticality judgment test and a metalinguistic knowledge test, named in this study Explicit Knowledge. In the Swedish context, goodness‐of‐fit indices provided some evidence that a single‐factor model shows a better fit, although a comparison of this model with two‐factor models did not reach statistical significance. The findings point to the potential importance of considering the specificities of a learning environment in interpreting learner achievement on measures of the implicit versus explicit knowledge spectrum.