摘要
教育信息化是时代发展的必然，也是我国信息化发展的战略重点之一和教育现代化的必经之路。飞速发展的信息技术不断改变着人们的生活、工作和思维方式，同时也改变着教学。特别是近十年来的大学英语教学，已经和现代信息技术紧密联结。基于计算机网络和课堂的大学英语教学模式在全国范围内广泛推广，促使大学英语教学水平整体跃升。然而，在现代信息技术逐渐从辅助教学走向引领教学的过程中，大学英语课堂教学也出现了一些亟待解决的问题。
本研究采用跨学科的研究视角，运用生态学和系统科学的相关理论，按照发现问题、描述问题、分析问题和解决问题的基本思路，对信息化语境下的大学英语课堂生态进行了系统分析和深度探究，最终提出了消解大学英语课堂生态失衡问题的方略和举措。具体地说，就是将大学英语课堂视为一个微观教育生态系统予以研究，重点回答了四个问题：1）大学英语课堂生态具有怎样的结构、功能和特征？2）信息化语境下的大学英语课堂生态存在哪些失衡现象？3）大学英语课堂生态的失衡与现代信息技术的使用有何关联？4）如何在信息化语境下重构大学英语课堂生态？这四个问题属于渐进式问题，关于前一问题的研究构成了后续问题研究的基础。本研究的主要观点如下：
1）大学英语课堂具有生态系统的基本属性，其基本结构可以简化为“人+课堂生态环境”，“人”包括构成课堂生态主体的教师和学生，“课堂生态环境”包括课前生成的环境（教室的物理环境、师生背景、教学媒介等）、课中生成的环境（师生关系、生生关系、师生情感态度等）和课后生成的环境（班风学风、课堂规章制度等），课堂生态主体和课堂生态环境之间相互作用，相互影响，共同决定着课堂生态系统的运行状态。从营养结构来看，教师主要是生态系统里的生产者，将来自系统外部或自身创造的信息（即知识），通过课堂环境传授给作为消费者的学生，学生同时作为分解者消化吸收这些信息（知识），再通过课堂环境给老师一定的反馈，实现着生态系统中信息和智能的流动。需要注意的是，教师和学生虽为生态主体，但也可能成为影响学习者的环境因子。教师、学生、课堂环境之间产生着复杂的交互作用，帮助系统发挥着优化结构、调谐关系、促进演化和生态育人等功能。
2）现代信息技术强力介入大学英语课堂教学以后，长期处于平稳运行状态的大学英语课堂生态受到了极大的扰动，出现了课堂生态结构上的失衡和功能上的失调。结构上的失衡主要体现在系统组分构成比重的失调、系统组分之间交互关系的失谐和系统内部营养结构的失衡，其中构成比重的失谐主要体现为信息技术应用的增多，交互关系的失谐主要表现为生态主体之间的失谐以及教师、学生、教学模式、教材、教室布局、教学内容、教学评估、教学管理等方面与信息技术之间的失谐，营养结构的失衡表现为大学英语教师缺乏专业发展的机会以及学生缺乏足够的自主学习能力和自我建构知识的能力。功能上的失调包括课堂生态系统结构优化功能衰减、关系调谐功能减弱、演化促进功能退化和生态育人功能降低，生态系统的整体功能难以发挥。
3）大学英语课堂生态的失衡和信息技术的应用紧密相关。在信息技术由原先的系统外部环境变为系统内部因子甚至主导因子的过程中，原本相对平衡的课堂生态被迅速带离到远离平衡态的非线性区域，系统进入较严重的失衡状态。在此状态下，信息技术并没有能够如预想地那般强劲地带动系统内部其它因子同步协变而形成合力，各生态因子的联动效应不够，未能较快地帮助系统完成阶段性演化，重新形成生产力大大增强的新的动态平衡结构——耗散结构。在系统失衡的状态下，系统内部各种交互关系出现失谐，课堂生态内部各种矛盾凸现。这些问题汇聚到一起，产生了整体效应，引起了各级教育主管部门的关注，外语教育界开始对大学英语教学目标、教学内容、信息技术的作用、网络自主学习的效果等进行集中反思，导致教改进入一个力度减弱、发展变缓的高原期和迷惘期，课堂生态被带回到线性区域，但仍处于非平衡态。如何重构课堂生态的平衡以提高课堂教学成效，成了摆在广大外语教育工作者面前亟待解决的问题。
4）信息技术运用于外语教学的巨大优势以及信息技术使用的不可逆性，决定了大学英语课堂生态的重构必须坚持以信息化为语境，以科学合理地整合信息技术与外语教学为基本策略，这是重构大学英语课堂生态的前提条件。本研究认为，重构大学英语课堂生态必须坚持生态性、系统性、人本性和有效性原则，通过发挥信息技术作为主导因子的引领作用、控制课堂生态中的限制因子、调整课堂生态因子的生态位、引导系统各组分同步协变、规避课堂环境构建中的花盆效应、重塑互动对话的生态课堂交往、恢复信息化课堂的生态功能、保持课堂生态的活水效应等方法，优化课堂生态结构和功能，促进课堂生态的修复。在实践层面，外语教学工作者尤其要注重创新大学英语教学观念，建立分级分类培养体系和分层分类课程体系，构建多元互动课堂环境，提高师生信息技术素养，提供立体化教学资源，采用因境而变的教学方法，调整师生课堂角色，发展平等和谐的师生关系，构建多元多向评价体系，最终创建和谐高效、师生共生的生态课堂。
本研究拓展了课堂研究的理论空间，开阔了课堂教学问题的研究思路，同时在跨学科理论运用方面进一步推进了教育生态学的发展，具有较好的理论和实践意义，同时在研究视角、研究对象、理论基础和问题解决方案等方面具有一定的创新性。然而，正所谓研前不知深浅，研后方知短长，本研究在研究方法、理论运用和研究内容上还存在一些局限，需要在以后的研究中予以克服。
Educational informationization is one of the major strategic focuses of China’sinformatization development and the main path to the educational modernization ofour country. It is also an inexorable trend of the times. The rapid development ofinformation technology has been constantly changing people’s ways of life, work,thinking, and teaching as well. College English teaching, in particular, has beenclosely connected to modern information technology in the recent decade. Computer-network-and classroom-based College English teaching model has been widelyspread across the country and the overall level of College English teaching has gotgreatly enhanced. However, during the function transformation of modern informationtechnology from an instrumental role to a leading role in College English classroomteaching, there arose some urgent problems to be solved.
From an interdisciplinary perspective, the study applies ecology theories andsystem science theories to a systemic analysis and in-depth exploration of the CollegeEnglish classroom ecology in the context of informationization by following the basicroute map of discovering, describing, analyzing and solving problems, on the basis ofwhich some methods and measures are put forward to reconstruct the ecologicalequilibrium in College English classroom. To be specific, the present study views theCollege English classroom as a microcosmic educational ecosystem and particularlyanswers four questions:1) What are the structure, functions and features of theCollege English classroom ecology?2) What kinds of imbalance and mismatchesexist in College English classroom ecology in the context of informationization?3)What is the relationship between the ecological imbalance of College Englishclassroom and the application of modern information technology?4) How toreconstruct the College English classroom ecology in the context ofinformationization? The four questions above are step-by-step ones and the answer toa former question lays a research foundation for the latter one. The main ideas of thestudy are as follows:
1) The College English classroom has the basic attributes of ecosystem and its basic structure can be simplified to “human beings+ecological classroomenvironment”. Here “human beings” include teachers and students who are theecological classroom subjects;“ecological classroom environment” includes thepre-class environment (physical environment of classroom, backgrounds of teachersand students, teaching media, etc.), in-class environment (teacher-student relationship,student-student relationship, emotions and attitudes of teachers and students, etc.) andafter-class environment (class atmosphere, study style, class rules and regulations,etc.). Classroom subjects and classroom environment interact with each other and thusdetermine the run state of classroom ecosystem. From the perspective of trophicstructure, teachers, as the producers in the ecosystem, impark through classroomenvironment the information (knowledge) that comes from outside of the system orfrom their own creation to students who act as consumers. And at the same time,students also act as the decomposers who digest and absorb the information(knowledge) and give some feedback to teachers through classroom environment. Inthis way, the flow of knowledge and intelligence in the ecosystem gets realized. Itshould be noted that teachers and students, though they’re the ecological subjects, canalso become the environmental factors that affect learners. The complicatedinteraction among teachers, students and classroom environment helps the systemfulfill the functions of optimizing the structure, coordinating the relationships,promoting the evolution, cultivating both learners and teachers ecologically, and thelike.
2) After the strong intervention of modern information technology in the CollegeEnglish classroom teaching, the College English classroom ecology that has enjoyed along-term stable state got greatly disturbed. This disturbance resulted in the structuraland functional imbalance of the classroom ecology. The structural imbalance ismainly reflected in the disproportion of and disharmony between system components,and the imbalance of trophic structure within the system. Among them, thedisproportion is mainly embodied as the intensified application of informationtechnology; the disharmony is mainly embodied as the mismatches betweenecological subjects, and the mismatches between information technology and teachers, students, teaching modes, teaching materials, classroom layout, teaching contents,evaluation of teaching, management of teaching, etc.; the imbalance of trophicstructure is mainly embodied in the problems that College English teachers lackopportunities of professional development and that students lack abilities to self-studyand self-construct knowledge. Functional disorder includes the declining ofstructure-optimizing function, the weakening of relation-coordinating function, theslowing-down of system-evolving and promoting function, and the decreasing oftalent-fostering function, which makes the overall functions of ecosystem ineffective.
3) The imbalance of College English classroom ecology is closely related to theapplication of information technology. With the information technology changingfrom an external environment factor to an internal and even a leading factor, theoriginally balanced classroom ecology is dragged quickly to the nonlinear area andthe system enters a serious non-equilibrium state in which information technologyfails to lead other internal factors to synchronize along with it. Therefore, no resultantforce forms and no chain reactions occur in the ecosystem, which makes it impossiblefor the disturbed ecosystem to complete its periodic evolution into a dynamicallybalanced structure—dissipative structure, which is thought to be more productive. Inthe off-balance ecosystem, the internal interrelationship becomes disharmonious andcontradictions inside the classroom ecology appear. All these problems gather together,leading to the holism effect which attracts the attention of education authorities at alllevels. In the circle of foreign language teaching, many people begin to reflect on theCollege English teaching objectives, teaching contents, the role of informationtechnology, the effect of self-access online learning, and so on. Thus, the teachingreform enters a plateau phase when many English teachers are puzzling over thereform, the push-forward from the government has been reduced and the pace ofreform has been slowed down. The classroom ecology has been brought back to thelinear area, but it still stays in the non-equilibrium state. How to reconstruct thebalance of classroom ecology and increase the efficiency of classroom teaching? Thishas become an urgent problem left for many foreign language educators to solve.
4) In view of the great advantage of applying information technology to foreignlanguage teaching and the irreversibility of its usage, the reconstruction of CollegeEnglish classroom ecology must be conducted in the context of informationalizationand adhere to the basic strategy of integrating information technology into foreignlanguage teaching scientifically, which is the prerequisite condition for thereconstruction. The present study suggests that in order to reconstruct College Englishclassroom ecology, we must stick to the four principles of being ecological, systemic,human-oriented and effective, optimize classroom ecological structure and functionsand promote ecological restoration of classroom ecology by means of makinginformation technology play a leading role as the dominant factor, controlling thelimiting factors in the classroom ecology, adjusting the ecological niches of classroomecological factors, leading the system components to synchronize with each other,avoiding the flowerpots effect in the construction of classroom environment,reshaping the ecological classroom communication and interaction, restoring theecological functions of informatized classroom, maintaining the flowing-water effectof classroom ecology, etc. In practice, foreign language educators should particularlyattach importance to innovating College English teaching notions, establishing aclassified and hierarchical educational system and curriculum system, constructingmulti-dimensional and interaction-friendly environment, improving teachers’ andstudents’ information literacy, providing three-dimensional teaching resources,adopting flexible teaching methods in different situations, adjusting the roles ofteachers and students, developing equal and harmonious teacher-student relationship,building a pluralistic and multi-directional evaluation system, and finally creating theharmonious, efficient and teacher-student symbiotic classroom ecology.
The present study not only extends the development space of classroom research,broadens the research approaches to problems in classroom teaching, but also hasgreat theoretical and practical significance for it promotes the development ofeducational ecology in terms of the application of interdisciplinary theories. The studyis to some extent innovative in such respects as the research perspective, researchobject, theoretical foundation, and the solution to the existing problems. As is known to all, it is impossible for us to be clear about everything to be studied until we havefinished the research. In such respects as research methods, theory application andresearch content, the study still has some limitations that should be noted in futurestudies.
引文
埃利斯，2000，《第二语言习得》。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
蔡基刚，2012,《中国大学英语教学路在何方》。上海：上海交通大学出版社。
陈坚林，2005，从辅助走向主导—计算机外语教学发展的新趋势。《外语电化教学》第4期，9-12页。
陈坚林，2006，大学英语教学新模式下计算机网络与外语课程的有机整合—对计算机“辅助”外语教学概念的生态学考察。《外语电化教学》第6期，3-10页。
陈坚林，2007，大学英语教材的现状与改革—一第五代教材研发构想。《外语教学与研究》第5期，374-378页。
陈坚林，2010，《计算机网络与外语课程的整合—一项基于大学英语教学改革的研究》。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
陈坚林，2000，《现代英语教学组织与管理》。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
陈晓端、Keith.S，2005，当代西方有效教学研究的系统考察与启示。《比较教育研究》第8期，56-60页。
陈毅萍、毛燕辉，2011，ICT与大学英语整合之现状调查。《现代教育技术》第3期，82-85页。
戴炜华，2007，《新编英汉语言学词典》。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
邓志伟，2002，《个性化教学》。上海：上海教育出版社。
窦福良，2003，课堂生态及其管理策略研究。山东师范大学教育管理专业硕士学位论文。
范国睿等，2011，《共生与和谐：生态学视野下的学校发展》。北京：教育科学出版社。
范蔚、叶波，2010，20世纪90年代以来“有效教学”研究述评。《重庆大学学报（社会科学版）》第4期，133-137页。
傅桦、吴雁华、曲利娟，2008，《生态学原理与应用》。北京：中国环境科学出版社。
谷峰，2012，大学英语多媒体网络自主学习现状调查及启示。《辽宁工程技术大学学报（社会科学版）》第6期，43-46页。
管月飞，2007，论生态课堂及其构建。安徽师范大学教育学原理专业硕士学位论文。
规划编制专家组，2012，《教育信息化十年发展规划（2011-2020年）》。北京：人民教育出版社。
何克抗，2005，信息技术与课程深层次整合的理论与方法。《电化教育研究》第1期，7-15页。
何克抗，2008，《信息技术与课程深层次整合理论》。北京：北京师范大学出版社。
胡加圣、冯青来、李艳，2010，信息技术在于外语课程整合中的地位与作用解析。《现代教育技术》第12期，72-77页。
胡涛，2008，《拿什么调动学生——名师生态课堂的情绪管理》。重庆：西南师范大学出版社。
黄远振、陈维振，2010，《中国外语教育：理解与对话—生态哲学视域》。福州：福建教育出版社。
霍凤元，1989，《生态学知识》。上海：上海教育出版社。
姜闽虹，2009，《网络环境下北京高校教师教学状况研究》。北京：北京理工大学出版社。
教育部高等教育司，2007，《大学英语课程教学要求》。北京：清华大学出版社。
李伯黍、燕国材，2001，《教育心理学（第二版）》。上海：华东师范大学出版社。
李其龙、张可创，2003，《研究性学习国际视野》。上海:上海教育出版社。
李森、王牧华、张家军，2011，《课堂生态论——和谐与创造》。北京：人民教育出版社。
李湘虹、庞景安，1998，《信息化浪潮》。北京：京华出版社。
李豫颖，2008，《信息技术教学论》。厦门：厦门大学出版社。
李运萍，2007，接受性学习和研究性学习的差异及原因分析。《教育与职业》第6期，165-166。
李振基，2011，《生态学（第三版）》。北京：科学出版社。
林骧华等，1987，《文艺新学科新方法手册》。上海：上海文艺出版社。
刘长江，2000，大学新生分级测试的性质、设计与实施，见《外语教育（秋季号）》。南京：南京大学出版社。1-4页。
刘长江，2008a，教育人本论与大学英语个性化教学。《教育评论》第4期，85-88页。
刘长江，2008b，主体间性视野下多元评价体系的构建。《教育评论》第5期，57-62页。
刘长江，2008c，基于网络的大学英语研究性学习模式探究。《外语电化教学》第1期，19-23页。
刘长江、吴鼎民，2008a，实施研究性学习，创新英语教学观念。《疯狂英语（教师版）》第1期，46-49页。
刘长江、吴鼎民，2008b，个性化教学观照下的“动态约课”校本研究。《外语与外语教学》第11期，20-24页。
刘贵华、杨清，2011，从标签式趋同到内涵式多样—生态课堂研究的回顾与前瞻。《教育研究》第12期，54-58页。
刘淑华、姜毅超，2009，多媒体环境下大学生英语自主学习能力调查。《沈阳师范大学学报（社会科学版）》第5期，101-103页。
路红霞，2009，低起点大学生英语自主学习能力现状调查分析。《青海大学学报（自然科学版）》第1期，96-99页。
鲁晶晶、曹雪丽,2008，多媒体网络技术下英语教学的问题与对策。《陕西广播电视大学学报》第4期，82-84页。
陆巧玲、周晓玲，2012，《网络环境下大学英语教学改革理论与实践》。上海：上海交通大学出版社。
潘光文，2004，课堂的生态学研究。西南师范大学教学论专业硕士学位论文。
皮连生、吴红耘，2011，两种取向的教学论与有效教学研究。《教育研究》第5期，25-30页。
施良方、崔允漷，1999，《教学理论:课堂教学的原理、策略与研究》。上海：华东师范大学出版社。
束定芳、庄智象，1996，《现代外语教学—理论、实践和方法》。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
孙芙蓉、谢利民，2006a，国外课堂生态研究及启示。《比较教育研究》第6期，87-92页。
孙芙蓉、谢利民，2006b，国外课堂生态研究述评。《外国中小学教育》第6期，12-18页。
孙启美，2010，《现代教育技术与学习模式—走向信息化》。北京：科学出版社。
孙振钧、周东兴，2010，《生态学研究方法》。北京：科学出版社。
谭璐、姜璐，2010[2009]，《系统科学导论》。北京：北京师范大学出版社。
王海啸，2009，大学英语教师与教学情况调查分析。《外语界》第4期，6-13页。
王琦，2006，《信息技术环境下的外语教学研究》。北京：中国社会科学出版社。
王守仁，2008，《高校大学外语教育发展报告（1978-2008）》。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
王守仁，2012，在构建大学英语课程体系过程中建设教师队伍。《外语界》第4期，2-5页。
王守仁、王海啸，2011，我国高校大学英语教学现状调查及大学英语教学改革与发展方向。《中国外语》第9期，4-11页。
王先荣、曹长德，试论我国大学英语自主学习的适切度——基于学习者视角的调查研究。《外国语文》第5期，146-148页。
王晓莉，2009，信息技术环境下学与教方式变革的趋势。《教育与教学研究》第8期，41-43页。
王运武、陈琳，2008，《中外教育信息化比较研究》。北京：电子工业出版社。
温林妹、李雄、曾淑萍，2008，大学英语教师能力结构现状调查。《疯狂英语（教师版）》第2期，54-58页。
吴鼎福、诸文蔚，2000，《教育生态学》。南京：江苏教育出版社。
吴今培、李学伟，2010，《系统科学发展概论》。北京：清华大学出版社。
吴立岗、夏惠贤，2001，《现代教学论基础》。南宁：广西教育出版社。
夏晋祥，2005，论“生命课堂”及其教学模式的建构。《天津师范大学学报（基础教育版）》第1期，62-65页。
谢欣欣，2010，大学英语教学得失谈——基于一份调查问卷的解析和思考。《福建师范大学福清分校学报》第6期，94-98页。
杨治中，2013，从实际出发求实际成效——关于大学英语教学的若干思考。《当代外语研究》第5期，1-6页。
姚梅林、王泽荣、吕红梅，从学习理论的变革看有效教学的发展趋势。《北京师范大学学报（社会科学版）》第5期，22-27页。
余胜泉，2006，构建和谐“信息生态”，突围教育信息化困境。《中国远程教育》第10期，19-24页。
张娟、张晓如，2003，网络研究性学习中的教与学。《泰州职业技术学院学报》第1期，30-33页。
张舒，2009，试析课堂生态的结构与功能。《洛阳理工学院学报（社会科学版）》第3期，91-92页。
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，21-23页。
曾祥跃，2011，《网络远程教育生态学》。广州：中山大学出版社。
赵同森，2006，《解读人本主义教育思想》。广州：广东教育出版社。
中共中央、国务院，2006，《2006-2020年国家信息化发展战略》。北京：中国法制出版社。
中共中央、国务院，2010，《国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要（2010-2020）》。北京：人民出版社。
左焕琪，2007，《英语课堂教学的新发展》。上海：华东师范大学出版社。
Algozzine, K. M.; et al.(1986). Classroom Ecology in Categorical Special EducationClassrooms: And so, They Counted the Teeth in the Horse! Journal of SpecialEducation,2,209-217.
Ashby, E.(1966). Universities: British, Indian, African: a Study in the Ecology ofHigher Education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Barowy, W.&Smith, J. E.(2008). Ecology and Development in ClassroomCommunication. Linguistics and Education,19,149-165.
Becker, F. D., Sommer, R. Bee, J.&Oxley, B.(1973). College Classroom Ecology.Sociometry,4,514-525.
Boylan, M.(2010). Ecologies of Participation in School Classrooms. Teaching andTeacher Education,26,61-70.
Brooks, C. I.&Rebeta, J. L.(1991). College Classroom Ecology-The Relation of Sexof Student to Classroom Performance and Seating Preference. Environment andBehavior,3,305-313.
Cremin, L. A.(1976). Publich Education. New York: Basic Books.
Damico, S.&Watson, K.(1974). Peer Helping Relationships: An Ecological Study ofan Elementary Classroom. Presented at the59thAnnual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.
Doyle, W.(1977). Learning the Classroom Environment: an Ecological Analysis.Journal of Teacher Education,28,51-55.
Doyle, W.&Ponder, G. A.(1975). Classroom Ecology: Some Concerns about aNeglected Dimension of Research on Teaching. Contemporary Education,3,183-188.
Dukes, M.&Saudargas, R. A.(1989). Teacher Evaluation Bias toward LDChildren—Attenuating Effects of the Classroom Ecology. Learning DisabilityQuarterly,2,126-132.
Griffith, C. R.(1921). A Comment upon the Psychology of the Audience.Psychological Monographs,30,36-37.
Guzdial, Mark.(1997). Information Ecology of Collaborations in Educational Settings:Influence of Tool; Published in proceeding CSCL97’ Proceedings of the2ndInternational Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning,Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Hawley, A. H.(1950). Human Ecology: A Theory of Community Structure. New York:Ronald Press.
Holliman, W. B.&Anderson, H. N.(1986). Proximity and Student Density asEcological Variables in a College Classroom. Teaching of Psychology,13,200-203.
Jacobs, N.(1989). Nontraditional Students: The New Ecology of the Classroom.Educational Forum,4,329-336.
Knowles, E. S.(1982). A Comment on the Study of Classroom Ecology: A Lament forthe Good Old Days. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,2,357-361.
Kramsch, C.(2003). Language Acquisition and Language Socialization: EcologicalPerspectives，Continuum, the Tower Building,11York Road, London, SE17NX.
Leather, J.&Dam, J. V.(2003). Ecology of Language Acquisition. Dordrecht: KluwerAcademic Publishers
Leone, P. E.; et al.(1990). Understanding the Social Ecology of Classrooms forAdolescents with Behavioral Disorders: A Preliminary Study of Differences inPerceived Environments. Behavioral Disorders,1,55-65.
Levine, D. W., O'Neal, E. C., Garwood, S. G.&McDonald, P. J.(1980). ClassroomEcology: The Effects of Seating Position on Grades and Participation. Pers SocPsychol Bull,6,409-412.
Muyskens, P.&James, E.(1998). Ysseldyke Student Academic Responding Time as aFunction of Classroom Ecology and Time of Day. The Journal of SpecialEducation Winter,4,411-424.
Pellegrini, A. D.(1984). The Social Cognitive Ecology of Preschool Classrooms:Contextual Relations Revisited. International Journal of BehavioralDevelopment,3,321-332.
Richards, J. C.&Rodgers, T. S.(1986). Approaches and Methods in LanguageTeaching. London: Cambridge University Press.
Rieth, H.; And Others.(1988). An Analysis of the Secondary Special EducationClassroom Ecology with Implications for Teacher Training. Teacher Educationand Special Education,3,113-119.
Sommer, R.(1967). Classroom Ecology. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,3,489-503.
Stires, L.(1980). Classroom Seating Location, Students’ Grades, and Attitudes:Environment or Self-selection. Environment and Behavior,12,241-254.
Tudor, I.(2001). The Dynamics of the Language Classroom. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Tyler, R. M.(1975). An Ecological Study of Freeplay in a Preschool Classroom. PaperPresented at the83rdAnnual Meeting of the American Psychological Association,Chicago, Illinois.
van Lier, L.(2004). The Ecology and Semiotics of Language Learning: ASociocultural Perspective. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
Walker, H. M.(1985). Teacher Social Behavior Standards and Expectations asDeterminants of Classroom Ecology, Teacher Behavior, and Child Outcomes.Final Report. Nationalist of Education (ED), Washington. D. D. US: Oregon.
Waller, W.(1932). The Sociology of Teaching. New York: Russell and Russell.
Wattenberg, W. W.(1977). The Ecology of Classroom Behavior. Theory into Practice,4,256-261.
Whalen, C. K.; et al.(1979). A Social Ecology of Hyperactive Boys: MedicationEffects in Structured Classroom Environments. Journal of Applied BehaviorAnalysis,1,65-81.
Wolery, M&Garfinkle, A. N.(2002).10(5). Measures in Intervention Research withYoung Children Who Have Autism. Journal of Autism and DevelopmentalDisorders,5,463-464.