中国大学英语教学环境中以内容为依托的外语教学模式研究
|
摘要
在过去的几十年,语言教学中一直存在一种总体趋势,不再探求语言本身,而强调将语言作为一种真正的交际工具来教。依托课程内容进行外语教学模式(简称“依托式外语教学”),作为这种趋势的直接产物,已日益广泛用于各种教学环境,成为提高学生语言能力的一种方法。依托式外语教学将二语/外语教学与学科内容结合起来进行教学,被认为是当代二语/外语教学法中最有代表性的贡献之一。
以内容为依托的外语教学模式有着深厚的理论基础。首先,普通教育学理论,包括体验式学习理论及建构主义论,为依托式外语教学提供了有力支持。第二,依据功能语言学观点,语言是表达功能意义的途径,语言学习不仅是要学习语言的“用法”,更要学习语言在现实环境中的“使用”。最后,第二语言习得理论认为自然语言习得,产生于有上下文的语境中,学习者通过接触大量的语言输入习得语言。
依托式外语教学提供了一个语境,使语言学习者能进行有意义的交际活动,有效地促进了语言习得产生。随着依托式语言教学的深入,学习者二语习得将进一步发展,这是因为语言学习的最佳条件是将学习的重点放在学习与语言学习者相关而且有意义的内容上,而不只是语言本身。在依托式外语教学中所使用的知识框架理论(Mohan, 1986),任务教学理念,以及“六-T”教学原则(Stoller & Grabe, 1997)都有助于语言学习者的语言习得。
依托式外语教学已经在全世界范围内,以丰富多样的教学形式,广泛用于各种教学场景中。人们已经通过许多实证性研究证明依托式语言教学对提高学习者语言水平的作用,这种研究在英语为第二语言的环境中尤为多见。然而,依托式语言教学的实证性研究在以英语为外语,尤其在中国大学英语的教学环境中开展的依托式外语教学研究却很少报道。
本研究的目的在于考察在大学英语教学环境中,依托式外语教学对以英语为外语的中国语言学习者英语水平提高所起的影响作用,着重考察学生在依托式外语教学中英语水平,以及影响学生英语水平提高的学习者个人因素,包括英语学习动机,学习英语时的焦虑感和英语学习策略;同时,也将研究依托式语言教学中“教”和“学”的过程。参加本项研究的被试是来自于中国大陆一所重点大学的149名非英语专业学生。他们年龄相近,所受教育背景相仿,实验开始时刚升入大学第四学期学习,并均已通过全国大学四级英语考试。研究中,实验组有76名学生,开展以学科内容为依托的语言教学;对照组有73名学生,仍以常规的大学英语教学模式进行教学。在研究过程中采用了定量研究和定性研究的方法加以进行,定量研究包括一系列以测试为基础、以结果为目标的实验,以确定依托式外语教学对学习者目标语言水平、学习者个人情感因素及学习策略的影响作用;定性研究包含对依托式外语教学模式的学习环境和学习过程的研究,将以课堂教学研究为基础、以教学过程考察为目标。
本实验研究从2005年2月开始,持续到7月,经历一个学期。在教学实验前,试验组和对照组的学生都参加了英语水平、英语学习动机水平、英语学习时焦虑感水平及英语学习策略方面的测试,结果发现两组学生在上述测试中均未见显著性差异。在实验过程中,对两组学生进行了课堂观察,并将教学过程进行了记录。在实验结束时,两组学生再次参加了与前测检验项目近乎相同的后测,并接受了有关两种教学方法方面的调查询问。
本研究对收集到的数据进行采用了多元统计分析,以确保对中国大学英语教学环境中依托式语言教学效果的检验更为系统有效。结果发现:
1.参加依托式语言教学的同学比在常规的大学英语教学班级的同学总体上表现出更强烈的学习动机。具体表现在,实验结束时,实验组成员比对照组成员有更为强的学习英语的愿望,不过,在动机强度方面两组学生没有差异。在依托式外语教学班级中,各种语言水平的学习者,其学习英语的动机水平都较实验前有了提高。
2.在实验结束时,实验组和对照组在测试焦虑,害怕负面评价,以及总体的英语学习焦虑感方面没有差异。然而,两组学生在用英语交际时的表现出来的恐惧感方面有显著性差异,实验组学生在用英语进行实际交流时更有信心。在实验组内部,英语水平一开始就高的学生学习英语时没有焦虑感;那些英语水平为中间的学生,其焦虑感水平也有了显著降低,他们和英语水平高的那组学生一样在英语学习中有信心。而英语水平实验一开始就低的那组学生在整个的教学实验期间都有某种程度的焦虑感。
3.尽管实验组和对照组在实验开始时在英语学习策略使用上不呈显著性差异,但实验结束时,依托式教学班级的学习者比在常规大学英语教学班级学习者更多地使用学习策略,在学习英语的过程中变得更为有自主性和自我管理意识。在依托式教学班级中,学习者经常使用的英语学习策略有元认知策略,补偿策略和社交策略。在实验组内部,英语水平在属于高分组和中间组的学习者在总体的英语学习策略使用上所取得的进步最大,而英语水平实验一开始就低的学习者在英语学习策略使用方面没有显著性提高。
4.在本研究中,依托式外语教学模式和常规的大学英语教学模式都有助于学生总体的英语水平的提高。然而,与在常规的大学英语教学班级学生相比,依托式外语教学班级的学生能更快地提高他们的总体英语水平,表现出更高的接收性语言技能,如阅读与听力。他们在语境中使用语言的能力以及口语技能都较对照组学习者强。然而,在写作技能上,依托式教学班级的学习者与常规的大学英语教学班级的学习者不呈显著性差异。另外,在依托式外语教学班级中,实验初始时,中级或高级英语水平的学习者,其语言水平有显著性提高,而初始水平为低级的语言学习者,其语言水平的提高不及其它两组学习者。
此外,依托式外语教学模式提供了一种有利于语言习得的学习环境。在依托式外语教学的班级中,语言输入多种多样而且真实,对学习者的英语学习动机有积极影响作用。教师不仅是一个知识提供者,而且还是学习的促进者,要给学习者提供一个环境,使学习者通过探索发现来学习,使学习者获得机会进行相互交流。学习者在学习过程中起积极作用,他们通过完成各种任务和解决现实问题来提高语言水平,接触学科知识以及提升思维技能。
可以得出结论,大学英语教学环境中实施以内容为依托的外语教学模式,能有效地提高中国英语学习者的英语水平和思维技能,帮助他们学习学科知识。该教学模式可以作为大学英语教学环境中众多教学方法当中的一种选择,尤其是当语言学习者通过了大学英语四级考试并达到了大学英语教学大纲规定的最低要求以后。由于在依托式语言教学中,学习者能接触大量语言输入,受到激励去学习学科内容和语言,在彼此之间有更多的机会去进行交流,练习目标语技能,从而导致语言习得的产生。如果在大学英语教学环境中,依托式语言教学的一些条件能够得到满足(如教师资质及开展依托式外语教学前学习者的语言水平),该教学方法将能体现出其无法替代的优势,帮助以英语为外语的中国语言学习者提高其英语水平。
Over the last decades there has been a general movement in language teaching away from studying about language towards a focus on teaching the language as a real tool to communicate. As a direct consequence of this trend, content-based instruction (CBI) has become increasingly popular as a means of developing linguistic ability in a great variety of educational contexts. CBI is a method of teaching second/foreign languages that integrates language instruction with instruction in the content areas. CBI is accepted as one of the most representative contributions to contemporary second/foreign language pedagogy.
CBI possesses a solid theoretical foundation. In the first instance, general educational theories, including experiential learning theory and constructivism, provide support to CBI. Secondly, according to the functional view of language, language is a vehicle for the expression of functional meaning; learning a language is not only learning its“usage”, but also its“use”in real situations. Finally, theories of second language acquisition indicate that natural language acquisition occurs in context, and learners can acquire the language by being exposed to a significant amount of input. CBI provides a context in which meaningful communication may occur and lead to efficient language acquisition. Second language acquisition increases with content-based language instruction because learners learn language best when there is an emphasis on relevant and meaningful content rather than on the language itself. The Knowledge Framework (Mohan, 1986), the task-based approach and the Six-T’s approach (Stoller & Grabe, 1997) all contribute to learners’language acquisition in CBI.
CBI has been widely used in an extensive number of educational settings all over the world in a variety of models. Numerous empirical studies exist to demonstrate the efficacy of CBI in developing the learners’language proficiency, especially in the ESL settings. However, there have been very few reports on empirical studies on CBI in the EFL context, especially in the Chinese College English context.
The purpose of this study is to examine the efficacy of CBI on the development of Chinese EFL learners’English proficiency in the College English context, focusing on learners’English proficiency gains and the learners’individual factors affecting their achievements under CBI, such as motivation to learn English, anxiety in learning English as well as English learning strategies. In the meantime, this study investigated the teaching and learning process with the content-based approach. The participants involved in this study consisted of 149 non-English majors from a key university in Chinese mainland China with similar age and educational backgrounds, who were in their fourth academic semester and had passed the CET-4. The treatment group included 76 participants, who were taught with a content-based approach, and the control group contained 73 participants, who were in the regular College English class. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were employed in this research. The quantitative study contained a series of test-based and product-oriented experiments, examining the effects of CBI on learners’target language proficiency, learners’affective factors as well as the learning strategies that were adopted. The qualitative study explored the learning context and learning process under CBI by using classroom-based and process-oriented research methods.
The experimental teaching program lasted one semester, commencing from February and extending to July, 2005. Prior to the teaching program, participants in both the treatment group and the control group took the pretest in English proficiency, motivation to learn English, anxiety in learning English and learning strategies and it was revealed that there were no significant differences in the aspects as listed above. In the course of the teaching experiment, the two groups of learners were observed in the classroom and the teaching processes were recorded. At the end of the experimental teaching program, participants in both the treatment group and the control group took the posttest in terms of aspects similar to the pretest, and they were interviewed with regard to the two teaching methods.
Multivariate statistical analyses were conducted to process the data collected to guarantee a more unitary examination concerning the efficacy of content-based instruction in the Chinese College English context. It was found that:
1. Learners in the CBI program generally demonstrated a stronger motivation to learn English than those in the regular College English program. To be specific, the learners in the treatment group had a much stronger desire to learn English than their counterparts in the control group, but no difference was seen between the two groups of learner in motivational intensity in learning English at the end of the experimental teaching program. Moreover, learners with different English proficiency levels in the CBI class under study enhanced their motivation to learn English.
2. At the end of the experiment, learners in the two groups did not show any differences in the aspects of testing anxiety, fear of negative appraisal and the overall anxiety of learning English. But there was a significant difference in communication apprehension between the treatment group and the control group and learners in the treatment group had more confidence in their use of English in real communication. With regard to the learners in the treatment group, the learners with an initial high level of English proficiency did not have any anxiety in learning English. Learners of intermediate level of English proficiency lowered their anxiety to such a significant extent that they were as confident as the learners of high English proficiency in learning English. The learners with an initial low level of English proficiency in the treatment group displayed somewhat anxiety during the experimental teaching period.
3. Learners in the CBI classes used English learning strategies more frequently than those in the regular College English classes although the two groups of learners had the same level in using learning strategies when the experimental program commenced. As a result, they tended to be more autonomous and self-regulated in learning English. The English learning strategies frequently used by the learners in the CBI classes were metacognitive strategies, compensation strategies and social strategies. In the treatment group, learners of an initial high or intermediate level of English proficiency remarkably increased their overall use of English learning strategies. However, the learners of an low level of English proficiency at the beginning of the program still did not show any significant progress in their use of English learning strategies.
4. Both the CBI program and the regular College English program helped to develop learners’general English proficiency in this study. However, the learners in the CBI classes developed their general English proficiency at a faster rate and demonstrated a higher proficiency in receptive skills, including reading and listening than their counterparts in the regular College English class. They still had a stronger ability in using English in real communication and better speaking skills than those learners in the regular College English class. However, as for writing skill, there was no significant difference between the learners in the CBI class and those in the regular College English class. In addition, learners with an initial medium or high level of English proficiency developed their English proficiency significantly while the learners with a low level of English proficiency didn’t progress as much as those with a medium or high level proficiency in the CBI class.
In addition, the CBI model provided a learning context which facilitated language acquisition. Input in the CBI class was full of variety and authentic, having a positive effect on learners’motivation to learn English. The teacher in this instruction model not only played a role of knowledge giver, but also a facilitator, providing an environment for learners to learn by discovering and opportunities for them to interact with each other. Learners took an active role in the learning process, and they improved their language proficiency, got access to the subject matter and upgraded their thinking skills by completing various tasks and solving real problems.
The conclusion can be drawn that CBI in the College English context is an effective way to develop Chinese EFL learners’English proficiency and thinking skills, helping them to gain the knowledge about the subject matter. It can be an option among the various language teaching methods in the College English context, especially after the learners have passed the CET-4 and met the basic requirements of the College English Syllabus. Learners in the CBI model are exposed to a large amount of language input and motivated to learn both content and language, and they have more opportunities to practice the target language skills when they communicate with each other, which enhances their language acquisition. When some conditions (e.g. the teacher’s qualifications and learners’language proficiency prior to CBI ) are satisfied in the College English context, the CBI approach can display its advantages in helping the Chinese EFL learners to develop their English proficiency.
以内容为依托的外语教学模式有着深厚的理论基础。首先,普通教育学理论,包括体验式学习理论及建构主义论,为依托式外语教学提供了有力支持。第二,依据功能语言学观点,语言是表达功能意义的途径,语言学习不仅是要学习语言的“用法”,更要学习语言在现实环境中的“使用”。最后,第二语言习得理论认为自然语言习得,产生于有上下文的语境中,学习者通过接触大量的语言输入习得语言。
依托式外语教学提供了一个语境,使语言学习者能进行有意义的交际活动,有效地促进了语言习得产生。随着依托式语言教学的深入,学习者二语习得将进一步发展,这是因为语言学习的最佳条件是将学习的重点放在学习与语言学习者相关而且有意义的内容上,而不只是语言本身。在依托式外语教学中所使用的知识框架理论(Mohan, 1986),任务教学理念,以及“六-T”教学原则(Stoller & Grabe, 1997)都有助于语言学习者的语言习得。
依托式外语教学已经在全世界范围内,以丰富多样的教学形式,广泛用于各种教学场景中。人们已经通过许多实证性研究证明依托式语言教学对提高学习者语言水平的作用,这种研究在英语为第二语言的环境中尤为多见。然而,依托式语言教学的实证性研究在以英语为外语,尤其在中国大学英语的教学环境中开展的依托式外语教学研究却很少报道。
本研究的目的在于考察在大学英语教学环境中,依托式外语教学对以英语为外语的中国语言学习者英语水平提高所起的影响作用,着重考察学生在依托式外语教学中英语水平,以及影响学生英语水平提高的学习者个人因素,包括英语学习动机,学习英语时的焦虑感和英语学习策略;同时,也将研究依托式语言教学中“教”和“学”的过程。参加本项研究的被试是来自于中国大陆一所重点大学的149名非英语专业学生。他们年龄相近,所受教育背景相仿,实验开始时刚升入大学第四学期学习,并均已通过全国大学四级英语考试。研究中,实验组有76名学生,开展以学科内容为依托的语言教学;对照组有73名学生,仍以常规的大学英语教学模式进行教学。在研究过程中采用了定量研究和定性研究的方法加以进行,定量研究包括一系列以测试为基础、以结果为目标的实验,以确定依托式外语教学对学习者目标语言水平、学习者个人情感因素及学习策略的影响作用;定性研究包含对依托式外语教学模式的学习环境和学习过程的研究,将以课堂教学研究为基础、以教学过程考察为目标。
本实验研究从2005年2月开始,持续到7月,经历一个学期。在教学实验前,试验组和对照组的学生都参加了英语水平、英语学习动机水平、英语学习时焦虑感水平及英语学习策略方面的测试,结果发现两组学生在上述测试中均未见显著性差异。在实验过程中,对两组学生进行了课堂观察,并将教学过程进行了记录。在实验结束时,两组学生再次参加了与前测检验项目近乎相同的后测,并接受了有关两种教学方法方面的调查询问。
本研究对收集到的数据进行采用了多元统计分析,以确保对中国大学英语教学环境中依托式语言教学效果的检验更为系统有效。结果发现:
1.参加依托式语言教学的同学比在常规的大学英语教学班级的同学总体上表现出更强烈的学习动机。具体表现在,实验结束时,实验组成员比对照组成员有更为强的学习英语的愿望,不过,在动机强度方面两组学生没有差异。在依托式外语教学班级中,各种语言水平的学习者,其学习英语的动机水平都较实验前有了提高。
2.在实验结束时,实验组和对照组在测试焦虑,害怕负面评价,以及总体的英语学习焦虑感方面没有差异。然而,两组学生在用英语交际时的表现出来的恐惧感方面有显著性差异,实验组学生在用英语进行实际交流时更有信心。在实验组内部,英语水平一开始就高的学生学习英语时没有焦虑感;那些英语水平为中间的学生,其焦虑感水平也有了显著降低,他们和英语水平高的那组学生一样在英语学习中有信心。而英语水平实验一开始就低的那组学生在整个的教学实验期间都有某种程度的焦虑感。
3.尽管实验组和对照组在实验开始时在英语学习策略使用上不呈显著性差异,但实验结束时,依托式教学班级的学习者比在常规大学英语教学班级学习者更多地使用学习策略,在学习英语的过程中变得更为有自主性和自我管理意识。在依托式教学班级中,学习者经常使用的英语学习策略有元认知策略,补偿策略和社交策略。在实验组内部,英语水平在属于高分组和中间组的学习者在总体的英语学习策略使用上所取得的进步最大,而英语水平实验一开始就低的学习者在英语学习策略使用方面没有显著性提高。
4.在本研究中,依托式外语教学模式和常规的大学英语教学模式都有助于学生总体的英语水平的提高。然而,与在常规的大学英语教学班级学生相比,依托式外语教学班级的学生能更快地提高他们的总体英语水平,表现出更高的接收性语言技能,如阅读与听力。他们在语境中使用语言的能力以及口语技能都较对照组学习者强。然而,在写作技能上,依托式教学班级的学习者与常规的大学英语教学班级的学习者不呈显著性差异。另外,在依托式外语教学班级中,实验初始时,中级或高级英语水平的学习者,其语言水平有显著性提高,而初始水平为低级的语言学习者,其语言水平的提高不及其它两组学习者。
此外,依托式外语教学模式提供了一种有利于语言习得的学习环境。在依托式外语教学的班级中,语言输入多种多样而且真实,对学习者的英语学习动机有积极影响作用。教师不仅是一个知识提供者,而且还是学习的促进者,要给学习者提供一个环境,使学习者通过探索发现来学习,使学习者获得机会进行相互交流。学习者在学习过程中起积极作用,他们通过完成各种任务和解决现实问题来提高语言水平,接触学科知识以及提升思维技能。
可以得出结论,大学英语教学环境中实施以内容为依托的外语教学模式,能有效地提高中国英语学习者的英语水平和思维技能,帮助他们学习学科知识。该教学模式可以作为大学英语教学环境中众多教学方法当中的一种选择,尤其是当语言学习者通过了大学英语四级考试并达到了大学英语教学大纲规定的最低要求以后。由于在依托式语言教学中,学习者能接触大量语言输入,受到激励去学习学科内容和语言,在彼此之间有更多的机会去进行交流,练习目标语技能,从而导致语言习得的产生。如果在大学英语教学环境中,依托式语言教学的一些条件能够得到满足(如教师资质及开展依托式外语教学前学习者的语言水平),该教学方法将能体现出其无法替代的优势,帮助以英语为外语的中国语言学习者提高其英语水平。
Over the last decades there has been a general movement in language teaching away from studying about language towards a focus on teaching the language as a real tool to communicate. As a direct consequence of this trend, content-based instruction (CBI) has become increasingly popular as a means of developing linguistic ability in a great variety of educational contexts. CBI is a method of teaching second/foreign languages that integrates language instruction with instruction in the content areas. CBI is accepted as one of the most representative contributions to contemporary second/foreign language pedagogy.
CBI possesses a solid theoretical foundation. In the first instance, general educational theories, including experiential learning theory and constructivism, provide support to CBI. Secondly, according to the functional view of language, language is a vehicle for the expression of functional meaning; learning a language is not only learning its“usage”, but also its“use”in real situations. Finally, theories of second language acquisition indicate that natural language acquisition occurs in context, and learners can acquire the language by being exposed to a significant amount of input. CBI provides a context in which meaningful communication may occur and lead to efficient language acquisition. Second language acquisition increases with content-based language instruction because learners learn language best when there is an emphasis on relevant and meaningful content rather than on the language itself. The Knowledge Framework (Mohan, 1986), the task-based approach and the Six-T’s approach (Stoller & Grabe, 1997) all contribute to learners’language acquisition in CBI.
CBI has been widely used in an extensive number of educational settings all over the world in a variety of models. Numerous empirical studies exist to demonstrate the efficacy of CBI in developing the learners’language proficiency, especially in the ESL settings. However, there have been very few reports on empirical studies on CBI in the EFL context, especially in the Chinese College English context.
The purpose of this study is to examine the efficacy of CBI on the development of Chinese EFL learners’English proficiency in the College English context, focusing on learners’English proficiency gains and the learners’individual factors affecting their achievements under CBI, such as motivation to learn English, anxiety in learning English as well as English learning strategies. In the meantime, this study investigated the teaching and learning process with the content-based approach. The participants involved in this study consisted of 149 non-English majors from a key university in Chinese mainland China with similar age and educational backgrounds, who were in their fourth academic semester and had passed the CET-4. The treatment group included 76 participants, who were taught with a content-based approach, and the control group contained 73 participants, who were in the regular College English class. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were employed in this research. The quantitative study contained a series of test-based and product-oriented experiments, examining the effects of CBI on learners’target language proficiency, learners’affective factors as well as the learning strategies that were adopted. The qualitative study explored the learning context and learning process under CBI by using classroom-based and process-oriented research methods.
The experimental teaching program lasted one semester, commencing from February and extending to July, 2005. Prior to the teaching program, participants in both the treatment group and the control group took the pretest in English proficiency, motivation to learn English, anxiety in learning English and learning strategies and it was revealed that there were no significant differences in the aspects as listed above. In the course of the teaching experiment, the two groups of learners were observed in the classroom and the teaching processes were recorded. At the end of the experimental teaching program, participants in both the treatment group and the control group took the posttest in terms of aspects similar to the pretest, and they were interviewed with regard to the two teaching methods.
Multivariate statistical analyses were conducted to process the data collected to guarantee a more unitary examination concerning the efficacy of content-based instruction in the Chinese College English context. It was found that:
1. Learners in the CBI program generally demonstrated a stronger motivation to learn English than those in the regular College English program. To be specific, the learners in the treatment group had a much stronger desire to learn English than their counterparts in the control group, but no difference was seen between the two groups of learner in motivational intensity in learning English at the end of the experimental teaching program. Moreover, learners with different English proficiency levels in the CBI class under study enhanced their motivation to learn English.
2. At the end of the experiment, learners in the two groups did not show any differences in the aspects of testing anxiety, fear of negative appraisal and the overall anxiety of learning English. But there was a significant difference in communication apprehension between the treatment group and the control group and learners in the treatment group had more confidence in their use of English in real communication. With regard to the learners in the treatment group, the learners with an initial high level of English proficiency did not have any anxiety in learning English. Learners of intermediate level of English proficiency lowered their anxiety to such a significant extent that they were as confident as the learners of high English proficiency in learning English. The learners with an initial low level of English proficiency in the treatment group displayed somewhat anxiety during the experimental teaching period.
3. Learners in the CBI classes used English learning strategies more frequently than those in the regular College English classes although the two groups of learners had the same level in using learning strategies when the experimental program commenced. As a result, they tended to be more autonomous and self-regulated in learning English. The English learning strategies frequently used by the learners in the CBI classes were metacognitive strategies, compensation strategies and social strategies. In the treatment group, learners of an initial high or intermediate level of English proficiency remarkably increased their overall use of English learning strategies. However, the learners of an low level of English proficiency at the beginning of the program still did not show any significant progress in their use of English learning strategies.
4. Both the CBI program and the regular College English program helped to develop learners’general English proficiency in this study. However, the learners in the CBI classes developed their general English proficiency at a faster rate and demonstrated a higher proficiency in receptive skills, including reading and listening than their counterparts in the regular College English class. They still had a stronger ability in using English in real communication and better speaking skills than those learners in the regular College English class. However, as for writing skill, there was no significant difference between the learners in the CBI class and those in the regular College English class. In addition, learners with an initial medium or high level of English proficiency developed their English proficiency significantly while the learners with a low level of English proficiency didn’t progress as much as those with a medium or high level proficiency in the CBI class.
In addition, the CBI model provided a learning context which facilitated language acquisition. Input in the CBI class was full of variety and authentic, having a positive effect on learners’motivation to learn English. The teacher in this instruction model not only played a role of knowledge giver, but also a facilitator, providing an environment for learners to learn by discovering and opportunities for them to interact with each other. Learners took an active role in the learning process, and they improved their language proficiency, got access to the subject matter and upgraded their thinking skills by completing various tasks and solving real problems.
The conclusion can be drawn that CBI in the College English context is an effective way to develop Chinese EFL learners’English proficiency and thinking skills, helping them to gain the knowledge about the subject matter. It can be an option among the various language teaching methods in the College English context, especially after the learners have passed the CET-4 and met the basic requirements of the College English Syllabus. Learners in the CBI model are exposed to a large amount of language input and motivated to learn both content and language, and they have more opportunities to practice the target language skills when they communicate with each other, which enhances their language acquisition. When some conditions (e.g. the teacher’s qualifications and learners’language proficiency prior to CBI ) are satisfied in the College English context, the CBI approach can display its advantages in helping the Chinese EFL learners to develop their English proficiency.
引文
Aida, Y. (1994). Examination of Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope’s construct of foreign language anxiety: The case of students of Japanese. Modern Language Journal, 78, 155-167.
Alexander, P. A., Kulikowich, J. M., & Jetton, T. L. (1994). The role of subject-matter knowledge and interest in the processing of linear and nonlinear texts. Review of Educational Research, 64, 201-252.
Anderson, J. R. (1990). Cognitive psychology and its implications (3rd ed.). NY: W. H. Freeman. Anderson, J. R. (1993). Problem solving and learning. American Psychologist, 48, 35-44.
Anderson, R. C., & Pearson P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 255-291). NY: Longman.
Ausubel, D. A. (1963). Cognitive structure and the facilitation of meaningful verbal learning. Journal of Teacher Education, 14, 217-221.
Bailey, K. (1983). Competitiveness and anxiety in adult second language learning. In H. W. Seliger & M. H. Long (Eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition (pp. 67-102). NY: Newbury House.
Ballman, T. L. (1997). Enhancing beginning language courses through content-enriched instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 2, 173-186.
Belmechri, F., & Hummel, K. (1989). Orientations and motivation in the acquisition of English as a second language among high school students in Quebec City. Language Learning, 48, 219-224.
Benesch, S. (1988). Linking content and language teachers: Collaboration across the curriculum. In S. Benesch (Ed.), Ending remediation: Linking ESL and content in higher education (pp. 53-65). Washington, DC: TESOL.
Berado, S. A. (2006). The use of authentic materials in the teaching of reading. The Reading Matrix, 2, 60-69.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bialystok, E. (1979). The role of conscious strategies in second language proficiency. Canadian Modern Language Review, 35, 372-394.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1994). Corpus-based approaches to issues in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 15, 169-189.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain. NY: David McKay Co.
Breen, M. (1987). Learner contributions to task design. In C. Candlin & D. Murphy (Eds.), Language learning tasks (pp. 23-46). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Brinton, D. M. (1997). The challenges of administering content-based programs. In M. A. Snow & D. M. Brinton (Eds.), The Content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (pp. 340-346). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Brinton, D.M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. B. (1989). Content-based second language instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Brown, H. D. (1987). Principles of language learning and teaching (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Brown, H. D. (1991). TESOL at twenty-five: What are the issues? TESOL Quarterly, 25(2), 245-260.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bruner, J. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21-32.
Bruner, J. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Buch, G., & de Bagheera, I. (1978). An immersion program for the professional improvement of non-native teachers of ESL. In C.H. Blatchford & I. Schachter (Eds.), On TESOL’78 (pp.106-117). Washington. DC: TESOL.
Bull, S. (2000). Individualized recommendations for learning strategy Use. In G. Gauthier, C. Frasson & K. VanLehn (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (pp.594-603). Springer-Verlag, Berlin: Heidelberg.
Burden, R., & Williams, M. (1997). Psychology for language teachers: A social constructivist approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Burger, S., & Chrétien, M. (2001). The development of oral production in content-based second language courses at the University of Ottawa. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 1, 84-102.
Burger, S., Wesche M., & Migneron, M. (1997). Late immersion: Discipline-based second language teaching at the University of Ottawa. In R. K. Johnson & M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion education: International perspectives (pp. 65-84). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Byrnes, H. (2000). Languages across the curriculum—intradepartmental curriculum construction: Issues and options. In M. R. Kecht, & K. von Hammerstein (Eds.), Languages across the curriculum: Interdisciplinary structures and internationalized education (pp. 151-175). Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Press.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Cantoni-Harvey, G. (1987). Content-area language instruction: Approaches and strategies. Reading,MA: Addison Wesley.
Cazabon, M., Lambert, W., & Hall, G. (1992). Two-way bilingual education: A progress report on the Amigos program. Santa Cruz, CA and Washington, DC: National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.
Celce-Murcia, M. (1991). Teaching English as a second or foreign language (2nd ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Olshtain, E. (2000). Discourse and context in language teaching: A guide for teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chadran, J., & Esarey, G. (1997). Content-based instruction: An Indonesian example. In S. B. Stryker & B. L. Leaver (Eds.), Content-based instruction in foreign language education: models and methods (pp. 222-236). Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Press.
Chamot, A.U. (1987). The learning strategies of ESL students. In A, Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 77-83). Hemel Hempstead: Prentice-Hall.
Chamot, A.U., & Kupper, L. (1989). Learning strategies in foreign language instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 22, 13-24.
Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M. (1994). Language learner and learning strategies. In N. C. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 371-392). London: Academic.
Chang, H.O. (2001). Solving problems in content textbook reading: A learning-centered approach. Selected Papers from the Tenth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 208-218). Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Chapple, L., & Curtis, A. (2000). Content-based instruction in Hong Kong: Student responses to film. System, 28, 419-433.
Chaput, P. P. (1993). Revitalizing the traditional program. In M. Kreuger & F. Ryan (Eds.), Language and content: Discipline-and content-based approaches to language study. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Chen, T. Y. (1998). ESP in technology colleges: Instruction and investigation. In The Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on English Teaching (vol. 1, pp. 279-288). Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Chumpavan, S. (2001). A comparative study of two English as a foreign language (EFL) programs: Non-content-based and content-based at the University level in Thailand. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Illinois State University.
Cohen, A. D. (1990). Language Learning: Insights for learners, teachers, and researchers. NY: Newbury House/Harper & Row.
Cohen, A. D. (1994). The language used to perform cognitive operations during full-immersion math tasks. Language Testing, 2, 171-195.
Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. London: Longman.
Colombo, G., Cullen, R., & Lisle, B. (1989). Rereading America: Cultural contexts for critical thinking and writing. NY: St. Martin’s Press.
Crandall, J. A. (1987). ESL through content-area instruction: Mathematics science, social studies. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Crandall, J., & Tucker, G. R. (1990). Content-based instruction in second and foreign languages. In A. Padilla, H. H. Fairchild, & C. Valadez (Eds.), Foreign Language Education: Issues and strategies. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Crandall, J. (1993). Content-centered learning in the United States. In W. Grabe, C. Ferguson, R. B. Kaplan, G. R. Tucker, & H. G. Widdowson (Eds.), Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13. Issues in second language teaching and learning (pp. 111-126). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Crookall, D., & Oxford, R. (1991). Dealing with anxiety: Some practical activities for language learners and teacher trainees. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications (pp.141-150). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Crookes, G., & Schmidt, R. (1991). Motivation: reopening the research agenda. Language Learning, 41, 469-512.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row. Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Education Research, 49, 222-251.
Cummins, J. (1984). Wanted: A theoretical framework for relating language proficiency to academic achievement among bilingual students. In C. Rivera (Ed.), Language proficiency and academic achievement (pp. 2-19). Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.
Cummins, J. (1994). Knowledge, power and identity in teaching English as a second language. In F. Genesee (Ed.), Educating second language children: The whole child, the whole curriculum, the whole community (pp. 33-58). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Curtain, H. (1995). Video entitled“Helena Curtain: Integrating language and content instruction,”available through the NFLRC Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Curtain, H.A., & Pesola, C.A. (1994). Languages and children: Making the match. NY: Longman. D’Anglejan, A., & Tucker, R. (1975). The acquisition of complex English structures by adult learners. Language Learning, 25, 281-296.
Davies, S. (2003). Content based instruction in EFL contexts. The Internet TESL Journal, 2, RetrievedSeptember 20, 2006, from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Davies-CBI.html.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. NY: Plenum.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. NY: Collier Books, MacMillan Publishing Company. Divine, R.A., Breen, T. H., Frederickson, G. M., Williams, R. H., & Randy, R. (1990). America: Past and present (2nd ed.). USA: Scott, Foresman.
D?rnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
D?rnyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientations, and motivations in language learning: Advances in theory, research, and applications. Language Learning, 53(SUPP/1), 3-32.
Dupuy, B. C. (2000). Content-based Instruction: Can it help ease the transition from beginning to advanced foreign language classes? Foreign Language Annals 33, 2, 205-222.
Early, M., & Hooper, H. (2001). Implementation of the Vancouver School Board’s ESL initiatives. In B. Mohan, C. Leung, & C. Davison (Eds.). English as a second language in the mainstream: Teaching, learning, and identity (pp. 138-150). Harlow, England: Pearson Education. Echevarria, J., & Graves, A. (2003). Sheltered content instruction: Teaching students with diverse needs (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Allyn & Bacon.
Edelsky, C., Altwerger, B., & Flores, B. (1991). Whole language: What’s the difference? Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Heinemann.
Edwards, H. P., Wesche, M. B., Krashen, S., Clement, R., & Kruidenier, B. (1984). Second language acquisition through subject matter learning: A study of sheltered psychology classes at the University of Ottawa. Canadian Modern Language Review, 41, 268-282.
Ehrman M.E., & Oxford, R. (1990). Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive training setting. Modern Language Journal, 74, 311-327.
Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (1993). The structural syllabus and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 91-113.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Eysenck, M. W. (1979). Anxiety, learning and memory: A reconceptualization. Journal of Research in Personality, 13, 365-385.
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1983). Strategies in interlanguage communication. London: Longman. Fishman, J.A., Cooper, R.L., & Conrad, A.W. (1977). The spread of English: The sociology of English as an additional language. Rowley, MA.: Newbury House.
Fruhauf, G., Coyle, D., & Christ, I. (1996). Teaching content in a foreign language. Practice and perspective in European bilingual education. Alkmaar: Stichting Europrint.
Gaffield-Vile, N. (1996). Content-based second language instruction at the tertiary level. English Language Teaching Journal, 50(2), 108-114.
Gan, Z., Humphreys, G., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (2004). Understanding successful and unsuccessful EFL students in Chinese universities. Modern Language Journal, 2, 229-244.
Ganschow, L., & Sparks, R. L. (1996). Anxiety about foreign language learning among high school women. Modern Language Journal, 80, 199-212.
Gardner, R.C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation, London: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R.C. (2001). Language learning motivation: the student, the teacher, and the researcher. Texas Papers in Foreign Language Education, 6, 1-18.
Genesee, F. (1983). Bilingual education for majority language children: The immersion experiments in review. Applied Psycholinguistics, 4, 1-46.
Genesee, F. (1994). Integrating language and content: Lessons from immersion. Educational Practice Report 11. National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning. Goodman, K. (1987). Language and thinking in school. NY: Richard C. Owen Publishers.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (1997). Content-based instruction: Research foundations. In M. A. Snow & D. M. Brinton (Eds.), The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (pp. 5-21). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Graham, J. G., & Beardsley, R.S. (1986). English for specific purposes: Content, language, and communication in a pharmacy course model. TESOL Quarterly, 2, 227-239.
Grandin, J. (1993). The University of Rhode Island’s international engineering program. In M. Krueger & F. Ryan (Eds.), Language and Content (pp. 57-79). Lexington, MA.: D.C. Heath.
Green, J. (1991). Language learning strategies of Puerto Rican university students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez.
Green, J., & Oxford, R. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 261-297.
Guariento, W., & Morley, J. (2001). Text and task authenticity in the EFL Classroom. ELT Journal, 4, 347-353.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1975). Learning how to mean. London: Edward Arnold.
Harmer, J. (1983). The practice of English language teaching. London: Longman.
Harmer, J. (2004). How to teach writing. England: Pearson Education Limited.
Hatch, E. (1978). Discourse analysis and second language acquisition. In E. Hatch (Ed.), Second language acquisition: A book of readings (pp. 401- 435). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Hauptman, P. C., Wesche, M. B., & Ready, D. (1988). Second language acquisition through subject-matter learning: A follow-up study at the University of Ottawa. Language Learning, 3,433-467.
Holten, C. (1997). Literature: A quintessential content. In M. A. Snow & D.M. Brinton (Eds.), The Content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (pp. 377-287). White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. Modern Language Journal, 70, 125-132.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. A. (1991). Foreign language classroom anxiety. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications (pp. 27-36). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Houle, C. (1980). Continuing Learning in the Professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hsu, H. L. (2000). Teaching technical English in a two-year college. In Selected Papers from the Ninth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 628-639). Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Hu, G. (2002). Recent important developments in secondary English language teaching in the People’s Republic of China. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 1, 30-49.
Huang, Y. K. (2003). Easing into e-news: An EAP course for advanced readers. In Selected Papers from the Twelfth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 414-423). Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Hudson, T. (1991). A content comprehension approach to reading English for science and technology. TESOL Quarterly, 25(1), 77-104.
Hutchings, P., & Wutzdorff, A. (1988). Experiential learning across the curriculum: Assumptions and principles. In P. Hutchings & A. Wutzdorff (Eds.), New directions for teaching and learning (pp. 5-10). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hymes, D. H. (1967). Linguistic problems in defining the concept of“tribe”. In J. Helm (Ed.), Essays on the problem of the tribe (pp. 23-48). Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). England: Penguin.
Inoue, Y. (1998). Reading and the ESL student. Retrieved March 20, 2006, from the ERIC database. Jan, L. (2004). Content-based University EAP in Taiwan: A Course Integrating CALL and TBLT. Unpublished master’s thesis, California State University.
Johnson, R.K., & Swain, M. (1997). Immersion education: International perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5-14.
Kasper, L. F. (1994). Improved reading performance for ESL students through academic course pairing. Journal of Reading, 37(5), 376-384.
Kasper, L. F. (1997). The impact of content-based instructional programs on the academic progress of ESL students. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 309-320.
Kasper, L. F. (Ed.) (2000). Content-based college ESL instruction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kaylani, C. (1996). The influence of gender and motivation on EFL learning strategy use in Jordan. In R. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 75-88). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
Kelly, L.G. (1969). 25 centuries of language teaching. NY: Newbury House.
Krapp, A., Hidi, S., & Renninger, K.A. (1992). Interest, learning, and development. In A. Krapp, A. S. Hidi, & K. A. Renninger (Eds.), The Role of interest in learning and development (pp.3-25). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Krashen, S. D. (1976). Formal and informal linguistic environments in language acquisition and learning. TESOL Quarterly, 10, 157-168.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practices in second language acquisition. NY: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1985a). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. NY: Longman.
Krashen, S. D. (1985b). Applications of psycholinguistic research to the classroom. In C. James (Ed.), Practical applications of research in foreign language teaching (pp. 51-66). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Co.
Krashen, S. D. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: additional evidence for input hypothesis. Modern Language Journal, 73, 440-464.
Krashen, S. D. (1994). The input hypothesis and its rivals. In N. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of language (pp. 45-77). London: Academic.
Krashen, S. D., & Biber, D. (1988). On course: Bilingual education’s success in California. Sacramento: California Association for Bilingual Education.
Krashen, S. D., & Terrel, T. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Oxford: Pergamon.
Krueger, M., & Ryan, F. (1993). Language and content: Discipline-and content-based approaches to language study. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
Lafayette, R. C., & Buscaglia, M. (1985). Students learn language via a civilization course—A comparison of second language classroom environments. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18 (3): 323-342.
Lapkin, S., & Swain, M. (2004). What underlies immersion students’production: The case of avoir besoin de. Foreign Language Annals, 37, 349-355.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press
Lee, H. F. (2002). Content-based language course—experiences of the United States, Canada, Hong Kong and Japan. Education Studies, 8, 129-143.
Levitt, E. E. (1980). The psychology of anxiety. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lightbown, P., & Spada, F. (1999). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lin, Chi-Hsiang. (2006). Effects of a creative thinking action research on“A Friendly City-Kaohiusng”on English reading and writing development of gifted students in two junior high schools. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Lin, W. S. (2004). The theory and practice of“literature group”. Journal of Education Research, 126, 33-44.
Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Long, M. (1981). Questions in foreigner talk discourse. Language Learning, 31 (1), 136-157.
Long, M. (1982). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation in the second language classroom. In M. Long & C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A book of readings (pp. 339-354). NY: Newbury House.
Long, M. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4 (2), 126-141.
Long, M. (1985a). Input and second language acquisition theory. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition(pp. 377-393). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Long, M. (1985b). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language training. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modeling and assessing second language acquisition (pp. 77-99). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego, CA: Academic.
Long, M., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom SLA (pp. 15-41). NY: Cambridge University Press.
MacIntyre, P. D. (1994). Towards a social psychological model of strategy use. Foreign Language Annuals, 27, 185-195.
MacIntyre, P. D. (1995). How does anxiety affect second language learning? A reply to Sparks and Ganschow. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 90-99.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R.C. (1994). The subtle effects of language anxiety on cognitive processing in the second language. Language Learning, 44, 283-305
Marsh, D., & Langé, G. (1999). Implementing content and language integrated learning. Jyv?skylá,Finland: UniCOM
Marsh, D., & Langé, G. (2000). Using languages to learn and learning to use languages. Jyv?skylá, Finland: UniCOM
Martin, N. (1976). Writing across the curriculum pamphlets. NJ: Indiana University Press.
Martin, N., D’Arcy. P, Newton. P, & Parker, R. (1976). Writing and Learning across the Curriculum 11-16. London: Ward Lock Educational.
Martinez, A.G. (2002). Authentic Materials: An overview on Karen’s linguistic issues. -http://www3.telus.net/linguisticsissues/authenticmaterials.htm.l
Masih, J. (1999). Learning through a Foreign Language: Models, methods and outcomes. CILT, Londra.
McArthur, T. (1998). The English languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McArthur, T. (2002). The Oxford guide to world English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Met, M. (1991). Learning language through content: learning content through language. Foreign Language Annals, 24, 281-295.
Met, M. (1999). Making Connections. Foreign Language Standards: Linking Research, Theories, and Practices. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Co.
Mitchell, W. (1994). The reconfigured eye: Visual truth in a post photographic era. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Mohan, B. (1986). Language and content. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Mohan, B. (2001). The second language as a medium of learning. In B. Mohan, C. Leung, & C. Davison (Eds.), English as a second language in the mainstream: Teaching, learning and identity (pp. 107-126). London: Longman.
Mohan, B., & Beckett, G. H. (2001). A functional approach to research on content-based language learning: Recasts in causal explanations. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 58(1), 133-155.
Mohan, B., & Huang, J. (2002). Assessing the integration of language and content in a Mandarin as a foreign language classroom. Linguistics and Education, 13 (3), 407-435.
Murphey, T. (1997). Content-based instruction in an EFL setting: Issues and strategies. In A.M. Snow & D.M. Britons (Eds.), The Content-based classroom: Perspectives in integrating language and content (pp. 117-131). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., & Todesco, A. (1975). The good second language learner. TESL Talk, 6 (1), 58-75.
Nelson, G., & Schmid, T. (1989). Reading: Schema theory and standardized tests. TESOL Quarterly, 23 (3), 539-543.
Ni, X. (2005). Krashen’s second language acquisition theory and the teaching of spoken English.US-China Foreign Language, 3, 48-51.
Noels, K. A., Pelletier, L. C., Clément R., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). Why are you learning a second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language Learning, 50 (1), 57-85.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (1992). Collaborative language learning and teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (1999). Foreign and second language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nuttall, C. (1996). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language (New Edition). Oxford: Heinemann.
Okada, M., Oxford, R.L., & Abo, S. (1996) Not all alike: Motivation and learning strategies among students of Japanese and Spanish in an exploratory study. In R. L. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning motivation: Pathways to the new century (pp. 107-119). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A.U., Stewner-Manzanares, G., Kupper L., & Russo, R. P. (1985). Learning strategies used by beginning and intermediate ESL students. Language Learning, 35(1), 21-46.
O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A.U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Owen, H., & Stadler, A. (1999). Open space technology. In P. Holman & T. Devane (Eds.), The change handbook: Group methods for changing the future (pp. 233-244). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Oxford, R.L. (1985). A new taxonomy for second language learning strategies. Washington, DC.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Language and Linguistics.
Oxford, R. L, & Crookall. D. (1988).“Learning Strategies.”You can take it with you: Helping students maintain second language skills. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Oxford, R. L., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choices of language learning strategies by university students. Modern Language Journal, 73, 291-300.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. NY: Newbury House/Harper & Row.
Oxford, R. L. (1996). Language learning strategies around the World: Cross-cultural perspectives. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Oxford. R. L. (1999). Anxiety and language learner: New insights. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L., & Burry-Stock, J. A. (1995). Assessing the use of language learning strategies worldwide with ESL/EFL version of the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). System, 23(2), 153-175.
Oxford, R. L., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students. Modern Language Journal, 73(3), 291-300
Oxford, R.L., Park-Oh, Y., Ito, S., & Sumrall, M. (1993). Learning Japanese by Satellite: What influences student achievement? System, 21, 31-48.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition & Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
Park, G. (1997). Language learning strategies and language proficiency in Korean students, Foreign Language Annals, 30, 197-216.
Peacock, M. (1997). The effect of authentic materials on the motivation of EFL learners. ELT Journal, 51(2), 144-156.
Peregoy, S. & Boyle, O. (1997). Reading, writing, and learning in ESL (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Piaget, J. (1967). Biology and knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Pica, T. (1994). Research on Negotiation: What does it reveal about second language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44(3), 493-527.
Pica, T. (2000). Tradition and transition in English teaching methodology. System, 28, 1-18.
Pica, T., Kanagy, R., & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction and research. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and Language Learning: Integrating theory and practice (9-34). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Prabhu, N.S. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Purpura, J. E. (1998). Investigating the effects of strategy use and second language test performance with high-and low ability test takers: a structural equation modeling approach. Language Testing 1998, 15 (3), 333-379.
Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. NY: Oxford University Press.
Raphan, C., & Moser, J. (1994). Linking language and content: ESL and art history. TESOL Quarterly, 3, 17 -21.
Ready, D., & Wesche, M. (1992). An evaluation of the University of Ottawa's sheltered program: Language teaching strategies that work. In R. Courchêne, J. I. Glidden, J. S. John., & C. Thérien (Eds.), Comprehension-based second language teaching/L'enseignement des langues secondes axésur la comprehension (pp. 389-405). Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
Renninger, A. K., Hidi, S., & Krapp, A. (1992). The role of interest in learning and development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Richards, J., Plat, J., & Platt, H. (1992). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Essex: Longman.
Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Rifkin, B. (2005). A ceiling effect in traditional classroom foreign language instruction: Data from
Russian. Modern Language Journal, 89 (1), 3–18.
Rivers, W. M. (1981). Teaching foreign-language skills (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rosebery, A.S., Warren, B., & Conant, F.R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. Santa Cruz, CA and Washington, DC: National Center for
Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.
Rosenshine, B. (1997). Advances in research on instruction. In J. W. Lloyd , E. J. Kameenui , & D. Chard (Eds.), Issues in educating students with disabilities(pp. 197-220). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Rossi-Le, L. (1989). Perceptual learning style preferences and their relationship to language learning strategies in adult students of English as a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Drake University, Des Moines, IA.
Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: Theoretical assumptions, research history and typology. In A. L. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 15-30). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Rüschoff, B. (1998). Language Learning and the Knowledge Society: Using New Technologies to Enhance Foreign Language Learning. http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/phil/english/chairs/ linguist/real/independent/llc/Conference1998/Papers/Rueschoff/rueschoff.htm.
Sanderson, P. (1999). Using Newspapers in the Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Scovel, T. (1978). The effect of affect on foreign language learning: A review of the anxiety research. Language Learning, 28, 129-142.
Schwarzer, R. (1986). Self-related cognition in anxiety and motivation: An introduction. In R.
Schwarzer (Ed.), Self-related cognition in anxiety and motivation (pp.1-17). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Sheorey, R. (1998). The state of English and English language teaching in India. TESOL Matters, 8 (4), 1, 19.
Singer, M. (1990). Psychology of language: An introduction to sentence and discourse processing. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Singer, H., & Donlon, D. (1980). Reading and learning from text. Boston: Little, Brown.
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second language learning. London: Arnold
Smith, M. K. (2003). Introduction to informal education: The encyclopedia of informal education. http://www.infed.org/i-intro.htm.
Snow, M.A. (1991). Teaching language through content. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign Language (2nd ed.) (pp. 315-327). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Snow, M.A. (1993). Discipline-based foreign language teaching: Implications from ESL/EFL. In M. Krueger & F. Ryan (Eds.), Language and Content: Discipline-and content-based approaches to language study (pp. 37-56). Lexington, MA; D. C. Heath.
Snow, M. A. (1998). Trends and issues in content-based instruction. In W. Grabe et al. (Eds.), Annual Review of Applied Linguistics (pp. 243-267). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Snow, M. A., & Brinton, D. (1988). The adjunct model of language instruction: An ideal EAP framework. In S. Benesch (Ed.), Ending Remediation: Linking ESL and Content in Higher Education (pp. 33-52). Washington, DC: TESOL.
Snow, M. A., Met, M., & Genesee, F. (1989). A conceptual framework for the integration of language and content in second/foreign language instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 201-217.
Spielberger, C. D. (1983). Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory (Form Y). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Spolsky, B. (1978). Approaches to Language Testing. Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics. Srole, C. (1997). Pedagogical responses from content faculty: Teaching content and language in History. In M. A. Snow & D.M. Brinton (Eds.), The Content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (pp. 104-116). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stern, H. H. (1992). Issues and options in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Stryker, S. B. (1997). The Mexico experiment at the Foreign Service Institute. In S.B. Stryker & B.L. Leaver (Eds.), Content-based instruction in foreign language education (pp. 200-218). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Stryker, S. B., & Leaver, B. L. (1993). Content-based instruction in foreign language education. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Stryker, S. B., & Leaver, B. L. (1997). Content-based instruction in foreign language education: Models and methods. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Swain, M. (1981). Early French immersion later on. Journal of Multicultural Development, 2 (1): 1-23. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M. (1988). Manipulating and complementing content teaching to maximize second language learning. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL du Canada, 6(1), 68-84.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In. G. Cook &G. Seidhofer (Eds.), Principles and practices in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (1999). Integrating language and content teaching through collaborative tasks. In C. Ward & W. Renandya (Eds.), Language teaching: New insights for the language teacher (pp.125-147). Singapore: RELC.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 99-118). London: Longman.
Taguchi, E., Takayasu-Maass, M., & Gorsuch, G. J. (2004). Developing reading fluency in EFL: How assisted repeated reading and extensive reading affect fluency development. Reading in a Foreign Language, 16(2), 70-96.
Taylor, W. L. (1953). Cloze procedure: a new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quarterly, 30, 414-438.
Taylor, E. (1998). The theory and practice of transformative learning: A critical review. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education (Information Series No. 374).
Thompson, I., & Rubin, J. (1993). Improving listening comprehension in Russian. Washington, DC: Department of Education, International Research and Studies Program.
Torres, C. I. (2000). The bilingual immersion model compared to the traditional model for teaching English in Puerto Rico. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Dowling College.
Tucker, G. R., & Crandall, J. A. (1989). The integration of language and content instruction for language minority and language majority students. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Language teaching, testing, and technology: Lessons from the past with a view toward the future (pp. 39-50).
Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Ullmann, R., & Geva, E. (1984). Approaches to observation in second language classes. In P. Allen &
M. Swain (Eds.), Language issues and education policies, ELT Documents: 119. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Vann R.J., & Abraham, R.G. (1990). Strategies of unsuccessful language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 177-198.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism a way of knowing. A series in studies in mathematics education. London: Falmer.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wallace, C. (1992). Reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wang, J., Pu, Y., & Sun, C. (2001). CBI and its application in College English Teaching of China,Journal of Chongqing Institute of Technology, 111-115.
Watanabe, Y. (1990). External variables affecting language learning strategies of Japanese EFL learners: Effects of entrance examination, years spent at college/university, and staying overseas. Unpublished master’s thesis. Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Wang, X. (2006). The role of motivation in university learners’language acquisition. China Sino-US English Teaching, 9, 32-34.
Wells, G. (1994). The complementary contributions of Halliday and Vygotsky to a“language-based theory of learning.”Linguistics and Education, 6, 41-90.
Wenden, A. L. (1986). What do second language learners know about their language learning? A second look at retrospective accounts. Applied Linguistics, 7 (2), 186-205.
Wenden, A. L., & Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies in language learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Wenden, A. L. (1991). Learner Strategies for learner autonomy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Wesche, M. B. (1993). Discipline-based approaches to language study: Research issues and outcomes. In M. Krueger & F. Ryan (Eds.), Language and content: Discipline-and content-based approaches to language study. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Wesche, M. B., & Skehan, P. (2002). Communicative, task-based, and content-based language instruction. In R. B. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 207-243). NY: Oxford University Press.
Wharton, C. (2000). Language learning strategy use of bilingual foreign language learners in Singapore. Language Learning, 50, 2, 203-243.
Widdowson, H.G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Widdowson, H.G. (1983). Learning purpose and language use. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Widdowson, H.G. (1993). The relevant conditions of language use and learning. In M. Krueger & F. Ryan (Eds.), Language and content: Discipline-and content-based approaches to language study (pp. 27-36). Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Wilke, R. R., & Straits, W. J. (2001). The effects of discovery learning in a lower-division biology course. Advances in Physiology Education. 25, 62-69.
Wilkins, D. (1976). Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Williams, M., & R. L. Burden. (1997). Psychology for Language Teachers: A Social Constructivist Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wu, Y. A., Liu, R. Q., Jeffery, P., Yang, Y., & Zhou, Y. (1996). Learner factors and learning achievement: A study of the effect of factors affecting English language learning. In G. Xu & R. Liu (Eds.), ELT in China 1992 (pp. 1-38). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Xing, L. (2006). An Experimental Study of Content-based Instruction in Extensive Reading. Unpublished master’s thesis, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Yalden, J. (1983). The communicative syllabus. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Yang, N. D. (1993). Beliefs about language learning and learning strategy use: A study of college students of English in Taiwan. Proceedings of the 10th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the R.O.C (pp. 193-219). Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co. Ltd.
Yang, N. D. (1994). A study of factors affecting college EFL students’use of learning strategies. Papers from the 11th conference on English teaching and learning in R.O.C. (pp. 137-153). Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co. Ltd.
Zhao, Y. (2004). Applying content-based instruction to extensive reading class in senior middle school. Unpublished master’s thesis, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Zhou, Y. (1992). The effect of explicit instruction on the acquisition of English grammatical structures by Chinese learners. In J. Carl & P. Garrett (Eds.), Language Awareness in the Classroom (pp. 254-277). London: Longman.
蔡基刚,2003,外语能力培养与我国外语政策,《外语与外语教学》第5期,29-32。
蔡坚,2005,第二语言习得与CBI教学模式的研究,《北京第二外国语学院学报》第3期, 13-15。
曹贤文, 2005,内容教学法在对外汉语教学中的运用,《云南师范大学学报》第1期,7-11。
《大学英语教学大纲》修订工作组,1986,大学英语教学大纲(文理科),上海:上海外语教育版社。
戴庆宁、吕晔,2004,CBI教学理念及其教学模式,《国外外语教学》第4期,16-20。
戴炜栋,2001a,构建具有中国特色的英语教学“一条龙”体系,《外语教学与研究》第5期, 322-27。
戴炜栋,2001b,“外语教学的费时低效”现象:思考与对策,《外语与外语教学》第7期,1转32。
教育部高等教育司,2004,大学英语课程教学要求(试行),北京:高等教育出版社。
江晓红,2003,成就动机和归因对英语学习策略选择的影响,《解放军外国语学院学报》第2期,69-72。
李炯英,2002,中国学生二语学习策略的观念与运用,《外语教学》第1期,42-49。
李丽生,2002,SCLT教学模式及其对我国大学英语教学改革的启示,《外语界》第4期,36-40。
刘润清,2003,高校英语教学改革笔谈之二(四篇),《外语教学与研究》第3期,221。
刘祥福、蔡芸,1997,浸泡式英语教学实验报告,《现代外语》第3期,44-51。
罗嘉文、简晓明、王月芳, 2004,学习动机、外语学习策略与学习成绩之间的关系研究,《教学研究》第2期,146-151。
司建国、赵继政、贺梦依,2005,中国高职学生英语学习策略调查,《国外外语教学》第1期,23-27。
王春晖、关晓燕,2006,英语学习者学习策略使用的差异,《长春金融高等专科学校学报》第4期,59-61。
王蒙,2006,CBI与大学英语四级后教学,《山东外语教学》第2期,29-32。
王奇民,2002,制约大学英语教学效果的因素及对策,《外语界》第4期,27-35。
文秋芳,2004,学习者可控因素与英语成绩的关系,西安:陕西师范大学出版社。
文秋芳、王立非,2004,影响外语学习策略系统运行的各种因素评述,《外语与外语教学》第9期,28-32。
吴一安,2002,走出英语教学的误区,《外语教学与研究》第6期,407-408。
徐德宽,2006,汉语言专业欧美语言学课程CBI实验报告,《国外外语教学》第1期,29-33。
杨惠中, 1998,大学英语四、六级考试回顾与展望,《外语界》第3期, 27-31。
杨惠中,2003,大学英语四、六级考试十五年回顾,《外国语》第3期,21-29。
杨玉英,2005,内容型教学理论及应用研究,硕士论文,东北师范大学。
俞理明、韩建侠,2003,渥太华依托式课程教学及其启示,《外语教学与研究》第6期,465-466。
张彬、师彦灵,2004,语言学习策略与大学英语四级考试成绩的关系研究,《兰州大学学报》第1期,132-137。
张汾喜、闫玉枝,2001,大学英语教学存在的问题与对策探讨,《中国高等教育》第17期,17-18。
张文霞、罗立胜,2004,关于大学英语教学现状及其发展的几点思考,《外语界》第3期, 2-7。
张尧学,2003,关于大学本科公共英语教学改革的再思考,《中国高等教育》第12期,19-21。
朱浦,2003,论上海中小学双语教学实验,《课程·教材·教法》第6期, 52-58。
Alexander, P. A., Kulikowich, J. M., & Jetton, T. L. (1994). The role of subject-matter knowledge and interest in the processing of linear and nonlinear texts. Review of Educational Research, 64, 201-252.
Anderson, J. R. (1990). Cognitive psychology and its implications (3rd ed.). NY: W. H. Freeman. Anderson, J. R. (1993). Problem solving and learning. American Psychologist, 48, 35-44.
Anderson, R. C., & Pearson P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 255-291). NY: Longman.
Ausubel, D. A. (1963). Cognitive structure and the facilitation of meaningful verbal learning. Journal of Teacher Education, 14, 217-221.
Bailey, K. (1983). Competitiveness and anxiety in adult second language learning. In H. W. Seliger & M. H. Long (Eds.), Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition (pp. 67-102). NY: Newbury House.
Ballman, T. L. (1997). Enhancing beginning language courses through content-enriched instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 2, 173-186.
Belmechri, F., & Hummel, K. (1989). Orientations and motivation in the acquisition of English as a second language among high school students in Quebec City. Language Learning, 48, 219-224.
Benesch, S. (1988). Linking content and language teachers: Collaboration across the curriculum. In S. Benesch (Ed.), Ending remediation: Linking ESL and content in higher education (pp. 53-65). Washington, DC: TESOL.
Berado, S. A. (2006). The use of authentic materials in the teaching of reading. The Reading Matrix, 2, 60-69.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bialystok, E. (1979). The role of conscious strategies in second language proficiency. Canadian Modern Language Review, 35, 372-394.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1994). Corpus-based approaches to issues in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 15, 169-189.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain. NY: David McKay Co.
Breen, M. (1987). Learner contributions to task design. In C. Candlin & D. Murphy (Eds.), Language learning tasks (pp. 23-46). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Brinton, D. M. (1997). The challenges of administering content-based programs. In M. A. Snow & D. M. Brinton (Eds.), The Content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (pp. 340-346). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Brinton, D.M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. B. (1989). Content-based second language instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Brown, H. D. (1987). Principles of language learning and teaching (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Brown, H. D. (1991). TESOL at twenty-five: What are the issues? TESOL Quarterly, 25(2), 245-260.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bruner, J. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21-32.
Bruner, J. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Buch, G., & de Bagheera, I. (1978). An immersion program for the professional improvement of non-native teachers of ESL. In C.H. Blatchford & I. Schachter (Eds.), On TESOL’78 (pp.106-117). Washington. DC: TESOL.
Bull, S. (2000). Individualized recommendations for learning strategy Use. In G. Gauthier, C. Frasson & K. VanLehn (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (pp.594-603). Springer-Verlag, Berlin: Heidelberg.
Burden, R., & Williams, M. (1997). Psychology for language teachers: A social constructivist approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Burger, S., & Chrétien, M. (2001). The development of oral production in content-based second language courses at the University of Ottawa. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 1, 84-102.
Burger, S., Wesche M., & Migneron, M. (1997). Late immersion: Discipline-based second language teaching at the University of Ottawa. In R. K. Johnson & M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion education: International perspectives (pp. 65-84). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Byrnes, H. (2000). Languages across the curriculum—intradepartmental curriculum construction: Issues and options. In M. R. Kecht, & K. von Hammerstein (Eds.), Languages across the curriculum: Interdisciplinary structures and internationalized education (pp. 151-175). Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Press.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Cantoni-Harvey, G. (1987). Content-area language instruction: Approaches and strategies. Reading,MA: Addison Wesley.
Cazabon, M., Lambert, W., & Hall, G. (1992). Two-way bilingual education: A progress report on the Amigos program. Santa Cruz, CA and Washington, DC: National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.
Celce-Murcia, M. (1991). Teaching English as a second or foreign language (2nd ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Olshtain, E. (2000). Discourse and context in language teaching: A guide for teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chadran, J., & Esarey, G. (1997). Content-based instruction: An Indonesian example. In S. B. Stryker & B. L. Leaver (Eds.), Content-based instruction in foreign language education: models and methods (pp. 222-236). Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Press.
Chamot, A.U. (1987). The learning strategies of ESL students. In A, Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 77-83). Hemel Hempstead: Prentice-Hall.
Chamot, A.U., & Kupper, L. (1989). Learning strategies in foreign language instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 22, 13-24.
Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M. (1994). Language learner and learning strategies. In N. C. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 371-392). London: Academic.
Chang, H.O. (2001). Solving problems in content textbook reading: A learning-centered approach. Selected Papers from the Tenth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 208-218). Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Chapple, L., & Curtis, A. (2000). Content-based instruction in Hong Kong: Student responses to film. System, 28, 419-433.
Chaput, P. P. (1993). Revitalizing the traditional program. In M. Kreuger & F. Ryan (Eds.), Language and content: Discipline-and content-based approaches to language study. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Chen, T. Y. (1998). ESP in technology colleges: Instruction and investigation. In The Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on English Teaching (vol. 1, pp. 279-288). Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Chumpavan, S. (2001). A comparative study of two English as a foreign language (EFL) programs: Non-content-based and content-based at the University level in Thailand. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Illinois State University.
Cohen, A. D. (1990). Language Learning: Insights for learners, teachers, and researchers. NY: Newbury House/Harper & Row.
Cohen, A. D. (1994). The language used to perform cognitive operations during full-immersion math tasks. Language Testing, 2, 171-195.
Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. London: Longman.
Colombo, G., Cullen, R., & Lisle, B. (1989). Rereading America: Cultural contexts for critical thinking and writing. NY: St. Martin’s Press.
Crandall, J. A. (1987). ESL through content-area instruction: Mathematics science, social studies. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Crandall, J., & Tucker, G. R. (1990). Content-based instruction in second and foreign languages. In A. Padilla, H. H. Fairchild, & C. Valadez (Eds.), Foreign Language Education: Issues and strategies. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Crandall, J. (1993). Content-centered learning in the United States. In W. Grabe, C. Ferguson, R. B. Kaplan, G. R. Tucker, & H. G. Widdowson (Eds.), Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13. Issues in second language teaching and learning (pp. 111-126). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Crookall, D., & Oxford, R. (1991). Dealing with anxiety: Some practical activities for language learners and teacher trainees. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications (pp.141-150). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Crookes, G., & Schmidt, R. (1991). Motivation: reopening the research agenda. Language Learning, 41, 469-512.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row. Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Education Research, 49, 222-251.
Cummins, J. (1984). Wanted: A theoretical framework for relating language proficiency to academic achievement among bilingual students. In C. Rivera (Ed.), Language proficiency and academic achievement (pp. 2-19). Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.
Cummins, J. (1994). Knowledge, power and identity in teaching English as a second language. In F. Genesee (Ed.), Educating second language children: The whole child, the whole curriculum, the whole community (pp. 33-58). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Curtain, H. (1995). Video entitled“Helena Curtain: Integrating language and content instruction,”available through the NFLRC Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Curtain, H.A., & Pesola, C.A. (1994). Languages and children: Making the match. NY: Longman. D’Anglejan, A., & Tucker, R. (1975). The acquisition of complex English structures by adult learners. Language Learning, 25, 281-296.
Davies, S. (2003). Content based instruction in EFL contexts. The Internet TESL Journal, 2, RetrievedSeptember 20, 2006, from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Davies-CBI.html.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. NY: Plenum.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. NY: Collier Books, MacMillan Publishing Company. Divine, R.A., Breen, T. H., Frederickson, G. M., Williams, R. H., & Randy, R. (1990). America: Past and present (2nd ed.). USA: Scott, Foresman.
D?rnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
D?rnyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientations, and motivations in language learning: Advances in theory, research, and applications. Language Learning, 53(SUPP/1), 3-32.
Dupuy, B. C. (2000). Content-based Instruction: Can it help ease the transition from beginning to advanced foreign language classes? Foreign Language Annals 33, 2, 205-222.
Early, M., & Hooper, H. (2001). Implementation of the Vancouver School Board’s ESL initiatives. In B. Mohan, C. Leung, & C. Davison (Eds.). English as a second language in the mainstream: Teaching, learning, and identity (pp. 138-150). Harlow, England: Pearson Education. Echevarria, J., & Graves, A. (2003). Sheltered content instruction: Teaching students with diverse needs (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Allyn & Bacon.
Edelsky, C., Altwerger, B., & Flores, B. (1991). Whole language: What’s the difference? Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Heinemann.
Edwards, H. P., Wesche, M. B., Krashen, S., Clement, R., & Kruidenier, B. (1984). Second language acquisition through subject matter learning: A study of sheltered psychology classes at the University of Ottawa. Canadian Modern Language Review, 41, 268-282.
Ehrman M.E., & Oxford, R. (1990). Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive training setting. Modern Language Journal, 74, 311-327.
Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (1993). The structural syllabus and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 91-113.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Eysenck, M. W. (1979). Anxiety, learning and memory: A reconceptualization. Journal of Research in Personality, 13, 365-385.
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1983). Strategies in interlanguage communication. London: Longman. Fishman, J.A., Cooper, R.L., & Conrad, A.W. (1977). The spread of English: The sociology of English as an additional language. Rowley, MA.: Newbury House.
Fruhauf, G., Coyle, D., & Christ, I. (1996). Teaching content in a foreign language. Practice and perspective in European bilingual education. Alkmaar: Stichting Europrint.
Gaffield-Vile, N. (1996). Content-based second language instruction at the tertiary level. English Language Teaching Journal, 50(2), 108-114.
Gan, Z., Humphreys, G., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (2004). Understanding successful and unsuccessful EFL students in Chinese universities. Modern Language Journal, 2, 229-244.
Ganschow, L., & Sparks, R. L. (1996). Anxiety about foreign language learning among high school women. Modern Language Journal, 80, 199-212.
Gardner, R.C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation, London: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R.C. (2001). Language learning motivation: the student, the teacher, and the researcher. Texas Papers in Foreign Language Education, 6, 1-18.
Genesee, F. (1983). Bilingual education for majority language children: The immersion experiments in review. Applied Psycholinguistics, 4, 1-46.
Genesee, F. (1994). Integrating language and content: Lessons from immersion. Educational Practice Report 11. National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning. Goodman, K. (1987). Language and thinking in school. NY: Richard C. Owen Publishers.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (1997). Content-based instruction: Research foundations. In M. A. Snow & D. M. Brinton (Eds.), The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (pp. 5-21). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Graham, J. G., & Beardsley, R.S. (1986). English for specific purposes: Content, language, and communication in a pharmacy course model. TESOL Quarterly, 2, 227-239.
Grandin, J. (1993). The University of Rhode Island’s international engineering program. In M. Krueger & F. Ryan (Eds.), Language and Content (pp. 57-79). Lexington, MA.: D.C. Heath.
Green, J. (1991). Language learning strategies of Puerto Rican university students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez.
Green, J., & Oxford, R. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 261-297.
Guariento, W., & Morley, J. (2001). Text and task authenticity in the EFL Classroom. ELT Journal, 4, 347-353.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1975). Learning how to mean. London: Edward Arnold.
Harmer, J. (1983). The practice of English language teaching. London: Longman.
Harmer, J. (2004). How to teach writing. England: Pearson Education Limited.
Hatch, E. (1978). Discourse analysis and second language acquisition. In E. Hatch (Ed.), Second language acquisition: A book of readings (pp. 401- 435). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Hauptman, P. C., Wesche, M. B., & Ready, D. (1988). Second language acquisition through subject-matter learning: A follow-up study at the University of Ottawa. Language Learning, 3,433-467.
Holten, C. (1997). Literature: A quintessential content. In M. A. Snow & D.M. Brinton (Eds.), The Content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (pp. 377-287). White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. Modern Language Journal, 70, 125-132.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. A. (1991). Foreign language classroom anxiety. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications (pp. 27-36). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Houle, C. (1980). Continuing Learning in the Professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hsu, H. L. (2000). Teaching technical English in a two-year college. In Selected Papers from the Ninth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 628-639). Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Hu, G. (2002). Recent important developments in secondary English language teaching in the People’s Republic of China. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 1, 30-49.
Huang, Y. K. (2003). Easing into e-news: An EAP course for advanced readers. In Selected Papers from the Twelfth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 414-423). Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Hudson, T. (1991). A content comprehension approach to reading English for science and technology. TESOL Quarterly, 25(1), 77-104.
Hutchings, P., & Wutzdorff, A. (1988). Experiential learning across the curriculum: Assumptions and principles. In P. Hutchings & A. Wutzdorff (Eds.), New directions for teaching and learning (pp. 5-10). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hymes, D. H. (1967). Linguistic problems in defining the concept of“tribe”. In J. Helm (Ed.), Essays on the problem of the tribe (pp. 23-48). Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). England: Penguin.
Inoue, Y. (1998). Reading and the ESL student. Retrieved March 20, 2006, from the ERIC database. Jan, L. (2004). Content-based University EAP in Taiwan: A Course Integrating CALL and TBLT. Unpublished master’s thesis, California State University.
Johnson, R.K., & Swain, M. (1997). Immersion education: International perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5-14.
Kasper, L. F. (1994). Improved reading performance for ESL students through academic course pairing. Journal of Reading, 37(5), 376-384.
Kasper, L. F. (1997). The impact of content-based instructional programs on the academic progress of ESL students. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 309-320.
Kasper, L. F. (Ed.) (2000). Content-based college ESL instruction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kaylani, C. (1996). The influence of gender and motivation on EFL learning strategy use in Jordan. In R. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 75-88). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
Kelly, L.G. (1969). 25 centuries of language teaching. NY: Newbury House.
Krapp, A., Hidi, S., & Renninger, K.A. (1992). Interest, learning, and development. In A. Krapp, A. S. Hidi, & K. A. Renninger (Eds.), The Role of interest in learning and development (pp.3-25). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Krashen, S. D. (1976). Formal and informal linguistic environments in language acquisition and learning. TESOL Quarterly, 10, 157-168.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practices in second language acquisition. NY: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1985a). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. NY: Longman.
Krashen, S. D. (1985b). Applications of psycholinguistic research to the classroom. In C. James (Ed.), Practical applications of research in foreign language teaching (pp. 51-66). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Co.
Krashen, S. D. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: additional evidence for input hypothesis. Modern Language Journal, 73, 440-464.
Krashen, S. D. (1994). The input hypothesis and its rivals. In N. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of language (pp. 45-77). London: Academic.
Krashen, S. D., & Biber, D. (1988). On course: Bilingual education’s success in California. Sacramento: California Association for Bilingual Education.
Krashen, S. D., & Terrel, T. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Oxford: Pergamon.
Krueger, M., & Ryan, F. (1993). Language and content: Discipline-and content-based approaches to language study. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
Lafayette, R. C., & Buscaglia, M. (1985). Students learn language via a civilization course—A comparison of second language classroom environments. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18 (3): 323-342.
Lapkin, S., & Swain, M. (2004). What underlies immersion students’production: The case of avoir besoin de. Foreign Language Annals, 37, 349-355.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press
Lee, H. F. (2002). Content-based language course—experiences of the United States, Canada, Hong Kong and Japan. Education Studies, 8, 129-143.
Levitt, E. E. (1980). The psychology of anxiety. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lightbown, P., & Spada, F. (1999). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lin, Chi-Hsiang. (2006). Effects of a creative thinking action research on“A Friendly City-Kaohiusng”on English reading and writing development of gifted students in two junior high schools. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Lin, W. S. (2004). The theory and practice of“literature group”. Journal of Education Research, 126, 33-44.
Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Long, M. (1981). Questions in foreigner talk discourse. Language Learning, 31 (1), 136-157.
Long, M. (1982). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation in the second language classroom. In M. Long & C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A book of readings (pp. 339-354). NY: Newbury House.
Long, M. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4 (2), 126-141.
Long, M. (1985a). Input and second language acquisition theory. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition(pp. 377-393). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Long, M. (1985b). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language training. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modeling and assessing second language acquisition (pp. 77-99). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego, CA: Academic.
Long, M., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom SLA (pp. 15-41). NY: Cambridge University Press.
MacIntyre, P. D. (1994). Towards a social psychological model of strategy use. Foreign Language Annuals, 27, 185-195.
MacIntyre, P. D. (1995). How does anxiety affect second language learning? A reply to Sparks and Ganschow. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 90-99.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R.C. (1994). The subtle effects of language anxiety on cognitive processing in the second language. Language Learning, 44, 283-305
Marsh, D., & Langé, G. (1999). Implementing content and language integrated learning. Jyv?skylá,Finland: UniCOM
Marsh, D., & Langé, G. (2000). Using languages to learn and learning to use languages. Jyv?skylá, Finland: UniCOM
Martin, N. (1976). Writing across the curriculum pamphlets. NJ: Indiana University Press.
Martin, N., D’Arcy. P, Newton. P, & Parker, R. (1976). Writing and Learning across the Curriculum 11-16. London: Ward Lock Educational.
Martinez, A.G. (2002). Authentic Materials: An overview on Karen’s linguistic issues. -http://www3.telus.net/linguisticsissues/authenticmaterials.htm.l
Masih, J. (1999). Learning through a Foreign Language: Models, methods and outcomes. CILT, Londra.
McArthur, T. (1998). The English languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McArthur, T. (2002). The Oxford guide to world English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Met, M. (1991). Learning language through content: learning content through language. Foreign Language Annals, 24, 281-295.
Met, M. (1999). Making Connections. Foreign Language Standards: Linking Research, Theories, and Practices. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Co.
Mitchell, W. (1994). The reconfigured eye: Visual truth in a post photographic era. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Mohan, B. (1986). Language and content. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Mohan, B. (2001). The second language as a medium of learning. In B. Mohan, C. Leung, & C. Davison (Eds.), English as a second language in the mainstream: Teaching, learning and identity (pp. 107-126). London: Longman.
Mohan, B., & Beckett, G. H. (2001). A functional approach to research on content-based language learning: Recasts in causal explanations. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 58(1), 133-155.
Mohan, B., & Huang, J. (2002). Assessing the integration of language and content in a Mandarin as a foreign language classroom. Linguistics and Education, 13 (3), 407-435.
Murphey, T. (1997). Content-based instruction in an EFL setting: Issues and strategies. In A.M. Snow & D.M. Britons (Eds.), The Content-based classroom: Perspectives in integrating language and content (pp. 117-131). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., & Todesco, A. (1975). The good second language learner. TESL Talk, 6 (1), 58-75.
Nelson, G., & Schmid, T. (1989). Reading: Schema theory and standardized tests. TESOL Quarterly, 23 (3), 539-543.
Ni, X. (2005). Krashen’s second language acquisition theory and the teaching of spoken English.US-China Foreign Language, 3, 48-51.
Noels, K. A., Pelletier, L. C., Clément R., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). Why are you learning a second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language Learning, 50 (1), 57-85.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (1992). Collaborative language learning and teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (1999). Foreign and second language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nuttall, C. (1996). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language (New Edition). Oxford: Heinemann.
Okada, M., Oxford, R.L., & Abo, S. (1996) Not all alike: Motivation and learning strategies among students of Japanese and Spanish in an exploratory study. In R. L. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning motivation: Pathways to the new century (pp. 107-119). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A.U., Stewner-Manzanares, G., Kupper L., & Russo, R. P. (1985). Learning strategies used by beginning and intermediate ESL students. Language Learning, 35(1), 21-46.
O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A.U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Owen, H., & Stadler, A. (1999). Open space technology. In P. Holman & T. Devane (Eds.), The change handbook: Group methods for changing the future (pp. 233-244). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Oxford, R.L. (1985). A new taxonomy for second language learning strategies. Washington, DC.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Language and Linguistics.
Oxford, R. L, & Crookall. D. (1988).“Learning Strategies.”You can take it with you: Helping students maintain second language skills. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Oxford, R. L., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choices of language learning strategies by university students. Modern Language Journal, 73, 291-300.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. NY: Newbury House/Harper & Row.
Oxford, R. L. (1996). Language learning strategies around the World: Cross-cultural perspectives. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Oxford. R. L. (1999). Anxiety and language learner: New insights. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L., & Burry-Stock, J. A. (1995). Assessing the use of language learning strategies worldwide with ESL/EFL version of the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). System, 23(2), 153-175.
Oxford, R. L., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students. Modern Language Journal, 73(3), 291-300
Oxford, R.L., Park-Oh, Y., Ito, S., & Sumrall, M. (1993). Learning Japanese by Satellite: What influences student achievement? System, 21, 31-48.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition & Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
Park, G. (1997). Language learning strategies and language proficiency in Korean students, Foreign Language Annals, 30, 197-216.
Peacock, M. (1997). The effect of authentic materials on the motivation of EFL learners. ELT Journal, 51(2), 144-156.
Peregoy, S. & Boyle, O. (1997). Reading, writing, and learning in ESL (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Piaget, J. (1967). Biology and knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Pica, T. (1994). Research on Negotiation: What does it reveal about second language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44(3), 493-527.
Pica, T. (2000). Tradition and transition in English teaching methodology. System, 28, 1-18.
Pica, T., Kanagy, R., & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction and research. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and Language Learning: Integrating theory and practice (9-34). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Prabhu, N.S. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Purpura, J. E. (1998). Investigating the effects of strategy use and second language test performance with high-and low ability test takers: a structural equation modeling approach. Language Testing 1998, 15 (3), 333-379.
Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. NY: Oxford University Press.
Raphan, C., & Moser, J. (1994). Linking language and content: ESL and art history. TESOL Quarterly, 3, 17 -21.
Ready, D., & Wesche, M. (1992). An evaluation of the University of Ottawa's sheltered program: Language teaching strategies that work. In R. Courchêne, J. I. Glidden, J. S. John., & C. Thérien (Eds.), Comprehension-based second language teaching/L'enseignement des langues secondes axésur la comprehension (pp. 389-405). Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
Renninger, A. K., Hidi, S., & Krapp, A. (1992). The role of interest in learning and development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Richards, J., Plat, J., & Platt, H. (1992). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Essex: Longman.
Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Rifkin, B. (2005). A ceiling effect in traditional classroom foreign language instruction: Data from
Russian. Modern Language Journal, 89 (1), 3–18.
Rivers, W. M. (1981). Teaching foreign-language skills (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rosebery, A.S., Warren, B., & Conant, F.R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. Santa Cruz, CA and Washington, DC: National Center for
Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.
Rosenshine, B. (1997). Advances in research on instruction. In J. W. Lloyd , E. J. Kameenui , & D. Chard (Eds.), Issues in educating students with disabilities(pp. 197-220). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Rossi-Le, L. (1989). Perceptual learning style preferences and their relationship to language learning strategies in adult students of English as a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Drake University, Des Moines, IA.
Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: Theoretical assumptions, research history and typology. In A. L. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 15-30). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Rüschoff, B. (1998). Language Learning and the Knowledge Society: Using New Technologies to Enhance Foreign Language Learning. http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/phil/english/chairs/ linguist/real/independent/llc/Conference1998/Papers/Rueschoff/rueschoff.htm.
Sanderson, P. (1999). Using Newspapers in the Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Scovel, T. (1978). The effect of affect on foreign language learning: A review of the anxiety research. Language Learning, 28, 129-142.
Schwarzer, R. (1986). Self-related cognition in anxiety and motivation: An introduction. In R.
Schwarzer (Ed.), Self-related cognition in anxiety and motivation (pp.1-17). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Sheorey, R. (1998). The state of English and English language teaching in India. TESOL Matters, 8 (4), 1, 19.
Singer, M. (1990). Psychology of language: An introduction to sentence and discourse processing. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Singer, H., & Donlon, D. (1980). Reading and learning from text. Boston: Little, Brown.
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second language learning. London: Arnold
Smith, M. K. (2003). Introduction to informal education: The encyclopedia of informal education. http://www.infed.org/i-intro.htm.
Snow, M.A. (1991). Teaching language through content. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign Language (2nd ed.) (pp. 315-327). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Snow, M.A. (1993). Discipline-based foreign language teaching: Implications from ESL/EFL. In M. Krueger & F. Ryan (Eds.), Language and Content: Discipline-and content-based approaches to language study (pp. 37-56). Lexington, MA; D. C. Heath.
Snow, M. A. (1998). Trends and issues in content-based instruction. In W. Grabe et al. (Eds.), Annual Review of Applied Linguistics (pp. 243-267). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Snow, M. A., & Brinton, D. (1988). The adjunct model of language instruction: An ideal EAP framework. In S. Benesch (Ed.), Ending Remediation: Linking ESL and Content in Higher Education (pp. 33-52). Washington, DC: TESOL.
Snow, M. A., Met, M., & Genesee, F. (1989). A conceptual framework for the integration of language and content in second/foreign language instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 201-217.
Spielberger, C. D. (1983). Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory (Form Y). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Spolsky, B. (1978). Approaches to Language Testing. Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics. Srole, C. (1997). Pedagogical responses from content faculty: Teaching content and language in History. In M. A. Snow & D.M. Brinton (Eds.), The Content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (pp. 104-116). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stern, H. H. (1992). Issues and options in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Stryker, S. B. (1997). The Mexico experiment at the Foreign Service Institute. In S.B. Stryker & B.L. Leaver (Eds.), Content-based instruction in foreign language education (pp. 200-218). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Stryker, S. B., & Leaver, B. L. (1993). Content-based instruction in foreign language education. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Stryker, S. B., & Leaver, B. L. (1997). Content-based instruction in foreign language education: Models and methods. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Swain, M. (1981). Early French immersion later on. Journal of Multicultural Development, 2 (1): 1-23. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M. (1988). Manipulating and complementing content teaching to maximize second language learning. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL du Canada, 6(1), 68-84.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In. G. Cook &G. Seidhofer (Eds.), Principles and practices in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (1999). Integrating language and content teaching through collaborative tasks. In C. Ward & W. Renandya (Eds.), Language teaching: New insights for the language teacher (pp.125-147). Singapore: RELC.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 99-118). London: Longman.
Taguchi, E., Takayasu-Maass, M., & Gorsuch, G. J. (2004). Developing reading fluency in EFL: How assisted repeated reading and extensive reading affect fluency development. Reading in a Foreign Language, 16(2), 70-96.
Taylor, W. L. (1953). Cloze procedure: a new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quarterly, 30, 414-438.
Taylor, E. (1998). The theory and practice of transformative learning: A critical review. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education (Information Series No. 374).
Thompson, I., & Rubin, J. (1993). Improving listening comprehension in Russian. Washington, DC: Department of Education, International Research and Studies Program.
Torres, C. I. (2000). The bilingual immersion model compared to the traditional model for teaching English in Puerto Rico. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Dowling College.
Tucker, G. R., & Crandall, J. A. (1989). The integration of language and content instruction for language minority and language majority students. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Language teaching, testing, and technology: Lessons from the past with a view toward the future (pp. 39-50).
Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Ullmann, R., & Geva, E. (1984). Approaches to observation in second language classes. In P. Allen &
M. Swain (Eds.), Language issues and education policies, ELT Documents: 119. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Vann R.J., & Abraham, R.G. (1990). Strategies of unsuccessful language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 177-198.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism a way of knowing. A series in studies in mathematics education. London: Falmer.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wallace, C. (1992). Reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wang, J., Pu, Y., & Sun, C. (2001). CBI and its application in College English Teaching of China,Journal of Chongqing Institute of Technology, 111-115.
Watanabe, Y. (1990). External variables affecting language learning strategies of Japanese EFL learners: Effects of entrance examination, years spent at college/university, and staying overseas. Unpublished master’s thesis. Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Wang, X. (2006). The role of motivation in university learners’language acquisition. China Sino-US English Teaching, 9, 32-34.
Wells, G. (1994). The complementary contributions of Halliday and Vygotsky to a“language-based theory of learning.”Linguistics and Education, 6, 41-90.
Wenden, A. L. (1986). What do second language learners know about their language learning? A second look at retrospective accounts. Applied Linguistics, 7 (2), 186-205.
Wenden, A. L., & Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies in language learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Wenden, A. L. (1991). Learner Strategies for learner autonomy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Wesche, M. B. (1993). Discipline-based approaches to language study: Research issues and outcomes. In M. Krueger & F. Ryan (Eds.), Language and content: Discipline-and content-based approaches to language study. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Wesche, M. B., & Skehan, P. (2002). Communicative, task-based, and content-based language instruction. In R. B. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 207-243). NY: Oxford University Press.
Wharton, C. (2000). Language learning strategy use of bilingual foreign language learners in Singapore. Language Learning, 50, 2, 203-243.
Widdowson, H.G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Widdowson, H.G. (1983). Learning purpose and language use. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Widdowson, H.G. (1993). The relevant conditions of language use and learning. In M. Krueger & F. Ryan (Eds.), Language and content: Discipline-and content-based approaches to language study (pp. 27-36). Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Wilke, R. R., & Straits, W. J. (2001). The effects of discovery learning in a lower-division biology course. Advances in Physiology Education. 25, 62-69.
Wilkins, D. (1976). Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Williams, M., & R. L. Burden. (1997). Psychology for Language Teachers: A Social Constructivist Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wu, Y. A., Liu, R. Q., Jeffery, P., Yang, Y., & Zhou, Y. (1996). Learner factors and learning achievement: A study of the effect of factors affecting English language learning. In G. Xu & R. Liu (Eds.), ELT in China 1992 (pp. 1-38). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Xing, L. (2006). An Experimental Study of Content-based Instruction in Extensive Reading. Unpublished master’s thesis, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Yalden, J. (1983). The communicative syllabus. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Yang, N. D. (1993). Beliefs about language learning and learning strategy use: A study of college students of English in Taiwan. Proceedings of the 10th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the R.O.C (pp. 193-219). Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co. Ltd.
Yang, N. D. (1994). A study of factors affecting college EFL students’use of learning strategies. Papers from the 11th conference on English teaching and learning in R.O.C. (pp. 137-153). Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co. Ltd.
Zhao, Y. (2004). Applying content-based instruction to extensive reading class in senior middle school. Unpublished master’s thesis, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Zhou, Y. (1992). The effect of explicit instruction on the acquisition of English grammatical structures by Chinese learners. In J. Carl & P. Garrett (Eds.), Language Awareness in the Classroom (pp. 254-277). London: Longman.
蔡基刚,2003,外语能力培养与我国外语政策,《外语与外语教学》第5期,29-32。
蔡坚,2005,第二语言习得与CBI教学模式的研究,《北京第二外国语学院学报》第3期, 13-15。
曹贤文, 2005,内容教学法在对外汉语教学中的运用,《云南师范大学学报》第1期,7-11。
《大学英语教学大纲》修订工作组,1986,大学英语教学大纲(文理科),上海:上海外语教育版社。
戴庆宁、吕晔,2004,CBI教学理念及其教学模式,《国外外语教学》第4期,16-20。
戴炜栋,2001a,构建具有中国特色的英语教学“一条龙”体系,《外语教学与研究》第5期, 322-27。
戴炜栋,2001b,“外语教学的费时低效”现象:思考与对策,《外语与外语教学》第7期,1转32。
教育部高等教育司,2004,大学英语课程教学要求(试行),北京:高等教育出版社。
江晓红,2003,成就动机和归因对英语学习策略选择的影响,《解放军外国语学院学报》第2期,69-72。
李炯英,2002,中国学生二语学习策略的观念与运用,《外语教学》第1期,42-49。
李丽生,2002,SCLT教学模式及其对我国大学英语教学改革的启示,《外语界》第4期,36-40。
刘润清,2003,高校英语教学改革笔谈之二(四篇),《外语教学与研究》第3期,221。
刘祥福、蔡芸,1997,浸泡式英语教学实验报告,《现代外语》第3期,44-51。
罗嘉文、简晓明、王月芳, 2004,学习动机、外语学习策略与学习成绩之间的关系研究,《教学研究》第2期,146-151。
司建国、赵继政、贺梦依,2005,中国高职学生英语学习策略调查,《国外外语教学》第1期,23-27。
王春晖、关晓燕,2006,英语学习者学习策略使用的差异,《长春金融高等专科学校学报》第4期,59-61。
王蒙,2006,CBI与大学英语四级后教学,《山东外语教学》第2期,29-32。
王奇民,2002,制约大学英语教学效果的因素及对策,《外语界》第4期,27-35。
文秋芳,2004,学习者可控因素与英语成绩的关系,西安:陕西师范大学出版社。
文秋芳、王立非,2004,影响外语学习策略系统运行的各种因素评述,《外语与外语教学》第9期,28-32。
吴一安,2002,走出英语教学的误区,《外语教学与研究》第6期,407-408。
徐德宽,2006,汉语言专业欧美语言学课程CBI实验报告,《国外外语教学》第1期,29-33。
杨惠中, 1998,大学英语四、六级考试回顾与展望,《外语界》第3期, 27-31。
杨惠中,2003,大学英语四、六级考试十五年回顾,《外国语》第3期,21-29。
杨玉英,2005,内容型教学理论及应用研究,硕士论文,东北师范大学。
俞理明、韩建侠,2003,渥太华依托式课程教学及其启示,《外语教学与研究》第6期,465-466。
张彬、师彦灵,2004,语言学习策略与大学英语四级考试成绩的关系研究,《兰州大学学报》第1期,132-137。
张汾喜、闫玉枝,2001,大学英语教学存在的问题与对策探讨,《中国高等教育》第17期,17-18。
张文霞、罗立胜,2004,关于大学英语教学现状及其发展的几点思考,《外语界》第3期, 2-7。
张尧学,2003,关于大学本科公共英语教学改革的再思考,《中国高等教育》第12期,19-21。
朱浦,2003,论上海中小学双语教学实验,《课程·教材·教法》第6期, 52-58。