160

References

ACTFL (1996). National standards for foreign language education. Available www.actfl.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3392

Allwright, D. & Bailey, K. (1991). Focus on the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Anderson, G., Herr, K. & Nihlen, A. (1994). Studying your own school. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Antes, T. A. (1996). Kinesics: The value of gesture in language and in the lan-guage classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 29, 439–448.

Assessment Futures. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.assessmentfutures.comAssessment Reform Group (ARG) (2002). Assessment for learning: 10 principles.

Available www.assessment-reform-group.org/CIE3.pdfBachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. (2010). Language assessment in practice: Developing

language assessments and justifying their use in the real world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bai, H., & Ertmer, P. (2008). Teacher educator’s beliefs and technology uses as predictors of pre-service teachers beliefs and technology attitudes. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(1), 93–112.

Bainbridge, S. & O’Shea, P. (2010). An integrated approach: The techniques for teaching pronunciation skills and communicating in the ESL class-room, TESOL Arabia. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2149/2860

Barrie, S. (2006). Understanding what we mean by the generic attributes of graduates. Higher Education, 51(2), 215–241.

Baskerville, R. L. (1999). Investigating information systems with action research. Communications of the association for information systems, 2(19), 2–31.

Bax, S. (2003). CALL-past, present and future. System, 31, 13–28.Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning.

London: Pearson Education.Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (2007). An introduction to rethinking pedagogy

for a digital age. In H. Beetham, & R. Sharpe (Eds), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age (pp. 1–10). London: Routledge.

Bennett, R.E. (2002). Inexorable and inevitable: The continuing story of technology and assessment. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, ı(ı). Retrieved from http://escholarship.bc.edu/jtla/

Bielawski, L. & Metcalf, D. (2003). Blended e-learning. Amherst, MA: HRD Press.

Blake, R. (2000). Computer mediated communication: A window on L2 Spanish interlanguage. Language learning & technology, 4(1), 120–136.

Blake, R. J. (2007). New trends in using technology in the language curricu-lum. Annual review of applied linguistics, 27, 76–97.

References 161

Blake, R., Wilson, N., Cetto, M., & Pardo-Ballestar, C. (2008). Measuring oral proficiency in distance, face-to-face, and blended classrooms. Language learning & technology, 12(3), 114–127.

Bonk, C. J. & Graham, C. R. (Eds) (2006). Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151–167.

Boud, D. (2007). Reframing assessment as if learning were important. In D. Boud & N. Falchikov (Eds) Rethinking assessment in higher education: Learning for the longer term (pp. 14–26). Oxon: Routledge.

Bowden, J., & Marton, F. (1998). The university of learning: Beyond quality and competence in higher education. London: Kogan Page.

Brindley, G. (2008). Professional development in assessment task design. Sydney: AMEP Research Centre, Macquarie University.

Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy, 3rd edn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

Brown, J. (2000). Growing up digital: How the web changes work, education, and the ways people learn. Change Magazine, March/April, pp. 11–20.

Brown, I., Lockyer, L. & Caputi, P. (2010). Multiliteracies and assessment practice (Chapter 11). In D. R. Cole and D. R. Pullen (Eds) Multiliteracies in motion (pp. 191–206). London: Routledge.

Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative action research for English language teachers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Burns, A. (2005). Action research: An evolving paradigm? Language Teaching, 38(2), 57–74.

Burns, A. (2009). Action research in second language teacher education. In A. Burns and J. Richards (Eds) Second language teacher education (pp. 289–297). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for practitioners. New York: Routledge.

Central Michigan University Assessment Toolkit (2011). Retrieved from http://academicaffairs.cmich.edu/caa/assessment/resources/toolkit.shtml

Chambers, A. & Bax, S. (2006). Making CALL work: Towards normalisation. System, 34, 465–479.

Chapelle, C. (2007). Challenges in the evaluation of innovation: Observations from technology research. Innovation in language learning and teaching, 1(1), 30–45.

Chapelle, C. (2008). Utilizing technology in language assessment. In E. Shohamy and N. Hornberger (Eds) Encyclopedia of Language and Education (2nd edn) (pp. 123–134). New York: Springer.

Chapelle, C. (2010). Research for practice: A look at issues in technology for second language learning. Language learning & technology, 14(3), 27–30.

Chapelle, C. (2010). The spread of computer-assisted language learning. Language teaching, 43(1), 66–74.

Chapelle, C. & Douglas, D. (2006). Assessing language through computer tech-nology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

162 References

Churches, A. (2011). Rubrics for digital assignments. Retrieved from http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/Rubrics+-Bloom%27s+Digital+Taxonomy

Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S. (1993). Inside/Outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press.

Coghlan, D. & Brannick, T. (2001). Doing action research in your own organiza-tion. London: Sage.

Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C. & Leu, D. (Eds) (2008). The handbook of research on new literacies. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Collins, A. & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology. New York: Teachers College Press.

Colpaert, J. (2006). Pedagogy-driven design for online language teaching and learning. CALICO Journal, 23(3), 477–497.

Conole, G., de Laat, M., Dillon, T. & Darby, J. (2008). ‘Disruptive technolo-gies’, ‘pedagogicalal innovation’: What’s new? Findings from an in-depth study of students’ use and perception of technology. Computers & Education, 50, 511–524.

Cook, V. (2008). Second language learning and language teaching, 4th edn. New York: Oxford University Press.

Cope, B & Kalantzis, M. (Eds) (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures. South Yarra, VIC: Palgrave Macmillan.

Corbel, C. (2007). Teachers’ roles in the global hypermedia environment. In J. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds), International handbook of English language teaching, Volume 2 (pp. 1113–1124). New York: Springer Verlag.

Corbel, C. & Gruba, P. (2004). Teaching computer literacy. Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.

Corbel, C., Gruba, P. & Enright, H. (2002). Taking the web to task. Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.

Costello, P. J. M. (2003). Action research. New York: Continuum.Coulter, D. (2002). What counts as action in educational action research?

Educational Action Research, 10(2), 189–206.Council of Europe (2001). Common European framework of reference for

languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Crisp, G. (2007). The e-assessment handbook. London: Continuum.Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since

1920. New York: Teachers College Press.Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Cuban, L. (2009). Hugging the middle: How teachers teach in an era of testing and

accountability. New York: Teachers College Press.Cummings, T. & Worley, C. (2009). Organizational development and change.

Mason, OH: Cengage.Cutrim-Schmid, E. (2006). Investigating the use of interactive whiteboard

technology in the English language classroom through the lens of a critical theory of technology. Computer assisted language learning, 19(1), 47–62.

Dana, N. F., & Yendol-Silva, D. (2003). The reflective educator’s guide to classroom research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

References 163

Davies, G. (2009). ICT ‘can do’ lists and questionnaire. Retrieved from http://www.ict4lt.org/en/ICT_Can_Do_Lists.doc

Debski, R. (2006). Project-oriented language teaching with technology. Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.

Debski, R. & Gruba, P. (1998). Attitudes towards language learning through social and creative computing. In K.C. Cameron (Ed.) Multimedia CALL: Theory and Practice. Proceedings of the Exeter 1997 Conference (pp. 51–56). Exeter: Elm Bank Publications.

Dodds, T. (2007). Information technology: A contributor to innovation in higher education. In T. S. Glickman, & S. C. White (Eds) Managing for innovation (pp. 85–95). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Dooey, P. (2008). Language testing and technology: Problems of transition to a new era. ReCALL, 20(1), 21–34.

Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 50–80.

Douglas, D. (2010). Understanding language testing. London: Hodder Education.Douglas, D. & Hegelheimer, V. (2007). Assessing language using computer

technology. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 27, 115–132.Duff, P. (2004). Foreign language policies, research, and educational policies:

A Western perspective. APEC Educational Summit, Beijing, 12 –14 January 2004. Available: http://hrd.apecwiki.org/images/e/e5/Duff_Language.pdf.

Edge, J. (1992). Cooperative development. Essex: Longman.Edge, J. (2002). Continuing cooperative development: A discourse framework for

individuals as colleagues. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Edge, J. & Richards, K. (1998). Why best practice isn’t good enough. TESOL

Quarterly, 32(3), 569–576.Egbert, J. (2005). CALL essentials: Principles and practices in CALL class-

rooms. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.Egbert, J. & Hanson-Smith, E. (Eds) (2007). CALL environments: Research, prac-

tice, and critical issues, 2nd edn. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.Egbert, J., Hanson-Smith, E. & Chao, C. (2007). Introduction: Foundations

for teaching and learning. In J. Egbert and E. Hanson-Smith (Eds), CALL environments: Research, practice, and critical issues (2nd edn) (pp. 1–14). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Elliot, B. (2007). Assessment 2.0: Assessment in the age of Web 2.0. Scottish Qualifications Authority.

Retrieved from wiki.cetis.ac.uk/images/d/de/Assessment_2_v2.pdfEllis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.Elola, I. & Oskoz, A. (2010). Collaborative writing: Fostering foreign language

and writing conventions development. Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 51–71.

Erben, T., Ban, R., & Castañeda, M. E. (2008). Teaching English language learn-ers through technology. London: Routledge.

Erlandson, D., Harris, E., Skipper, B., & Allen, S. (1993). Doing naturalistic inquiry: A guide to methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

164 References

Ewell, P. T. (1997). Organizing for learning: A new imperative. AAHE Bulletin 50(4), 3–6.

Fallows, S. & Stevens, C. (2000). Integrating key skills in higher education. London: Kogan Page.

Farmer, R.A., & Gruba, P. (2006). Model-driven end-user development in CALL. Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 19(2/3), 149–191.

Felix, U. (2005). E-learning pedagogy in the third millennium: the need for combining social and cognitive constructivist approaches. ReCALL, 17(1), 85–100.

Fotos, S. (2004). Writing as talking: E-mail exchanges for promoting profi-ciency and motivation in the foreign language classroom. In S. Fotos & C. Browne (Eds) New perspectives on CALL for second language classrooms (pp. 109–130). Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Freeman, D. (1998). Doing teacher research: From enquiry to understanding. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.

Fulcher, G. (2010). Practical language testing. London: Hodder Education.Ganem-Gutierrez, G. (2003). Beyond interaction: The study of collaborative

activity in computer-mediated tasks. ReCALL, 15(1), 94–112.Gardner, J., Harlen, W., Hayward, L. & Stobart, G. (2008). Assessment Reform

Group (ARG), Analysis and review of innovations in assessment. Retrieved from http://www.aria.qub.ac.uk

Garrett, N. (2009). Computer-assisted language learning trends and issues revisited: Integrating innovation. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 719–740.

Garrison, R., & Vaughan, H. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles and guidelines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Gillham, B. (2005). Research interviewing: The range of techniques. New York: Open University Press.

Gonzalez-Lloret, M. (2003). Designing task-based CALL to promote interac-tion: En busca de esmeraldes. Language learning & technology, 7(1), 86–104.

Graddol, D. (1994). What is a text? (Chapter 3). In D. Graddol and O. Boyd-Barrett (Eds) Media texts: Authors and readers (pp 40–50). Clevedon, UK; Multilingual Matters.

Graham, C. R., & Dziuban, C. (2008). Blended learning environments. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. van Merrienboer & M. P. Driscoll (Eds). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 270–274). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Graves, K. (1996). Teachers as course developers. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Gray, K., Thompson, C., Sheard, J., Clerehan, R. & Hamilton, M. (2010). Students as Web 2.0 authors: Implications for assessment design and con-duct. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 105–122.

Grose, T., Hinkelman, D., Rian, J. & McGarty, G. (2009). Assessment strate-gies of a university EFL curriculum in Japan. Journal of the Faculty of Humanities, Sapporo Gakuin University, 70(2),1–25.

Gruba, P. (2004). Computer assisted language learning (CALL). In A. Davies & D. Elder (Eds) Handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 623–48). London: Blackwell.

References 165

Gruba, P. (2006). Playing the videotext: A media literacy perspective on video-mediated L2 listening. Language Learning & Technology, 10(2), 77–92.

Gruba, P., Cherubin, L., Lay-Chenchabi, K., Mera, H. & Cardenas-Claros, M. (2009). Perceptions of technologies in the assessment of foreign languages. In Milton, Hall, Lang, Allan & Nomikoudis (Eds) (2009) ATN Assessment Conference 2009: Assessment in Different Dimensions Conference Proceedings (pp. 183–192). Melbourne, Australia: RMIT University.

Gruba, P., Moffat, A., Søndergaard, H. & Zobel, J. (2004). What drives curric-ulum change? In R. Lister and A. Young (Eds) Proceedings of the Australasian Computer Education Conference (pp. 110–118). Dunedin, NZ: University of Otago.

Grunberg & Summers, (1992). Computer innovation in schools: A review of selected research literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 1(2), 255–276.

Hagley, E. (2002). Improving oral communication pedagogy through the use of tape recorders. JALT Hokkaido Journal, 6. Retrieved from http://jalthokkaido.net/jh_journal/2002/Hagley.htm

Handel, G. (1991). Collective time-collective practice. Curriculum Journal, 2, 317–334.

Hanson-Smith, E. (2007). Critical issues: Places and spaces. In J. Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds) CALL environments (pp. 42–58). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Harwood, N. (2010). Issues in materials development and design. In N. Harwood (Ed.) English language teaching materials (p. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Healey, D., Hegelheimer, V., Hubbard, P., Ioannou-Georgiou, S., Kessler, G. & Ware, P. (2009). TESOL technology standards framework. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Herr, K. & Anderson, G. (2005). The action research dissertation: A guide for students and faculty. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Hill, K. (2009). Classroom-based assessment and the issue of continuity between primary and secondary school languages programs. (Doctoral dis-sertation). School of Languages and Linguistics, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Hinkelman, D. (1996). Reliability of a fluency-based oral English test for large low-level classes. Journal of Hokkaido University of Education (1C), 47(1), 151–169.

Hinkelman, D. (2005). Blended learning: Issues driving an end to laboratory-based CALL. JALT Hokkaido Journal, 9, 17–31.

Hinkelman, D. (2009). Revival of paper: Booklets and textbooks in blended language learning. In M. Thomas (Ed.), JALTCALL 2008 conference proceed-ings (pp. 35–40). Nagoya, Japan: JALTCALL.

Hinkelman, D. & Grose, T. (2005). Placement testing and audio quiz-making with open source software. Pacific CALL Journal. 1(1), 59–69.

Hinkelman, D., Okuda, O., Johnson, A., Ishikawa, S., & Grose, T. (2008). Mobile phone technology integration into open source LMS for university

166 References

general education classes in Japan. Journal of the Faculty of Humanities. Sapporo Gakuin University, 69(2), 34–51.

Hislope, K., (2008). Language learning in a virtual world. The International Journal of Learning, 15(11), 51–58.

Hounsell, D. (2007). Towards more sustainable feedback to students. In D. Boud & N. Falchikov (Eds), Rethinking assessment in higher education: Learning for the longer term (pp. 101–113). London: Routledge.

Hubbard, P. (2005). A review of subject characteristics in CALL research. Computer assisted language learning, 18(5), 351–368.

Hubbard, P. (2006). Evaluating CALL Software. In L. Ducate and N. Arnold (Eds) Calling on CALL: From theory and research to new directions in foreign language teaching. San Marcos, TX: CALICO.

Hubbard, P. & Levy, M. (2006). The scope of CALL education. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds) Teacher education in CALL (pp. 3–22). Amsterdam, NL: John Benjamins.

Jamieson, J. & Chapelle, C. (2010). Evaluating CALL across multiple contexts. System, 38, 357–369.

Jamieson, J., Chapelle, C., & Preiss, S. (2004). Putting principles into practice. ReCALL, 16(2), 396–415.

Jewitt, C. (2006). Technology, literacy and learning: A multimodal approach. Milton Park: Routledge.

Jewitt, C. (2009). The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis. London: Routledge.

Jewitt C. & Kress, G. (2003). Multimodal literacy. New York: Peter Lang.Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning together and alone, 5th edn.

Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Johnston, B. (2007). Theory and research: Audience, language use, and lan-

guage learning. In J. Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds) CALL environments: Research, practice, and critical issues ( 2nd edn) (pp. 61–70). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Johnston, B. (2009). Collaborative teacher development. In A. Burns and J. Richards (Eds) Second language teacher education (pp. 241–249). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Jonassen, D. H., Howland, J., Marra, R., & Crismond, D. (2008). Meaningful learning with technology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.

Jones, C. (2007). Designing for practice. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering e-learning (pp. 166–179). London: Routledge.

Kay, W., Gemmell, P., Johnson, A. & Hinkelman, D. (2007). Blended language learning: Using wireless notebooks and a project-based approach. Journal of faculty of humanities, Sapporo Gakuin University, 82, 45–79.

Keddle, J. S. (2004). The CEF and the secondary school syllabus. In Morrow, K. (Ed.) Insights from the common European framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

References 167

Kellner, D., & Share, J. (2007). Critical media literacy, democracy, and the reconstruction of education. In D. Macedo & S. R. Steinberg (Eds) Media literacy: A reader (pp. 3–23). New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (Eds) (1992). The action research planner, 3rd edn. Geelong: Deakin University Press.

Kennedy, C., & Levy, M. (2009). Sustainability and computer-assisted lan-guage learning: Factors for success in a context of change. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(5), 445–463.

Kennewell, S., Parkinson , J., & Tanner, H. (2000). Developing the ICT capable school. London: Routledge Falmer.

Kern R. & Warschauer, M. (2000). Introduction: Theory and practice of net-work-based language teaching. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds) Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 1–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Knobel, M. & Lankshear, C. (Eds) (2007). A New literacies sampler. New York: Peter Lang.

Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kramsch, C. (2002). Introduction: How can we tell the dancer from the dance? In C. Kramsch (Ed.) Language acquisition and language socialization: Ecological perspectives (pp. 1–30). London: Continuum.

Kress, G. (2009). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary com-munication. London: Routledge.

Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. (1996, 2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. London: Routledge.

Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Arnold.

Kukulska-Hulme, A. & Shield, L. (2008). An overview of mobile assisted lan-guage learning: From content delivery to supported collaboration and interaction. ReCALL, 20(3), 271–289.

Lachiver, G. & Tardif, J. (2002). Fostering and managing curriculum change and innovation. In Proceedings of the 32nd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Volume 2, (pp. F2F7–12). Boston: IEEE.

Lafford, B. (2009). Toward an ecological CALL: Update to Garrett (1991). Modern Language Journal, 93, 673–696.

Lamy, M. N. & Hampel, R. (2007). Online communication in language learning and teaching. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Lankshear, C & Knobel, M. (2003). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom learning. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Lankshear, C. & Knobel, M. (2006). New literacies: Everyday practices and class-room learning, 2nd edn. New York: Open University Press.

Lantolf, J. & Thorne, S. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

168 References

Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network the-ory. New York: Oxford University Press.

Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effect-ive use of learning technologies, 2nd edn. London: Routledge Farmer.

Laurillard, D. (2009). The pedagogical challenges to collaborative technol-ogies. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(1), 5–20.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participa-tion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Leaver, B. & Willis, J. (2004). Task-based instruction in foreign language educa-tion. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Lei, J., & Zhao, Y. (2007). Computer uses and student achievement: A longi-tudinal study. Computers & Education, 49(2), 284–296.

Levy, M. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning: Context and conceptuali-zation. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.

Levy, M. (2007). Research and technological innovation in CALL. Innovation in language learning and teaching, 1(1), 180–190.

Levy, M. (2009). Technologies in use for second language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 769–782.

Levy, M. & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL dimensions: Options and issues in Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Lewis, A., & Atzert, S. (2000). Dealing with computer-related anxiety in the project-oriented CALL classroom. Computer assisted language learning, 13(4/5), 377–395.

Lientz, B. P. & Larssen, L. (2006). Risk management for IT projects: How to deal with over 170 issues and risks. Boston: Elsevier / Butterworth-Heinemann.

Lievrouw, L., & Livingstone, S. (Eds) (2006). Handbook of new media: Social shaping and social consequences. London: Sage.

Lotherington, H. (2007). From literacy to multiliteracies in ELT. In C. Davison & J. Cummins (Eds) Handbook of English language teaching (pp. 809–823). Berlin: Springer.

Lynch, B.K. (1996). Language program evaluation: Theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mackenzie, J. (2002). Just in time technology. Bellingham, WA: FNO Press.MacKenzie, D., Promnitz-Hayashi, L., Jenks, D., Geluso, J., Delgado, R.,

Castellano, J. & Hinkelman, D. (2011). Blended learning spaces: Synchronous blending. JALTCALL Journal, 7(1), 43–60.

Markee, N. (2001). The diffusion of innovation in language teaching. In D. Hall & A. Hewings (Eds) Innovation in English language teaching (pp. 118–126). London: Routledge.

Martin-Kniep, G. O. (2008). Communities that learn, lead, and last: Building and sustaining educational expertise. San Francisco: Wiley Jossey-Bass.

Masie, E. (2006). The blended learning imperative. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds) Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 22–26). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing.

References 169

Matzen, N. & Edmunds, J. (2007). Technology as a catalyst for change: The role of professional development. Journal of research on technology in educa-tion, 39(4), 417–430.

Mayer, R. E. (2005). Introduction to multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.) The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 1–16). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McNamara, T. (2007). Language assessment in foreign language education: The struggle over constructs. Modern Language Journal, 91(2), 280–282.

McNamara, T. (2011). Managing learning: Authority and language assess-ment. Language Teaching, First View, 1–16. Retrieved from http://journals.cambridge.org/article_S0261444811000073

McPherson, M. & Nunes, J. (2004). Developing innovation in online learning: An action research framework. London: Routledge Falmer.

Meskill, C. (2007). 20 minutes into the future. In J. Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith CALL Environments, 2nd edn. (pp. 425–436). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Mishan, F. (2005). Designing authenticity into language learning materials. Bristol: Intellect.

Miyazoe, T. & Anderson, T. (2010). Learning outcomes and students’ percep-tions of online writing: Simultaneous implementation of a forum, blog, and wiki in an EFL blended learning setting. System, 38, 185–199.

Moser, F. Z. (2007). Faculty adoption of educational technology. Educause Quarterly, 30(1), 66–69.

Motteram, G. & Sharma, P. (2009). Blending learning in a web 2.0 world. International journal of emerging technologies & society, 7(2), 83–96.

Mumtaz, S. (2000). Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and com-munications technology: A review of the literature. Technology, pedagogy and education, 9(3), 319–324.

Murphey, T. (2001). Exploring conversational shadowing. Language Teaching Research, 5(2), 128.

Myers, M. J. (2002). Computer-assisted second language assessment: To the top of the pyramid. ReCALL, 14(1), 167–181.

Neumeier, P. (2005). A closer look at blended learning—parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL, 17(2), 163–178.

Newton, P. E. (2007). Clarifying the purposes of educational assessment. Assessment in Education, 14(2), 149–170.

Nordkvelle, Y. T., & Olson, J. K. (2005). Visions for ICT, ethics and the prac-tice of teachers. Education and Information Technologies, 12–17. Boston: Springer.

Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Nunan, D. (2001). Action research in language education. In D. Hall & A. Hewings (Eds) Innovation in English language teaching (pp. 197–207). London: Routledge.

Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based teaching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

170 References

Nunan, D. & Bailey, K. M. (2009). Exploring second language classroom research: A comprehensive guide. Boston, MA: Heinle.

O’Dowd, R. (2010). Online foreign language interaction: Moving from the periphery to the core of foreign language education? Language Teaching, 44(3), 368–380.

O’Rourke, B. (2005). Form-focused interation in online tandem learning. CALICO Journal, 22(3), 433–466.

Ockey, G. (2009). Developments and challenges in the use of computer-based testing for assessing second language ability. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 836–847.

Oliver, M. & Trigwell, K. (2005). Can ‘blended learning’ be redeemed? E-Learning, 2(1), 17–26.

Orlando, J. (2009). Understanding changes in teachers’ ICT practices: A lon-gitudinal perspective. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 18(1), 33–45.

Oxford, R. & Jung, S-H. (2007). National guidelines for technology integra-tion in TESOL programs: Factors affecting (non)implementation. In M. Peters, K. Murphy-Judy, R. Z. Lavine & M. A. Kassen (Eds) Preparing and developing technology-proficient L2 teachers (pp. 23–48). San Marcos, TX: Computer Assisted Language Instruction Consortium.

Palmer, S. (2002). A model assessment plan. Retrieved from http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/assessinglearning/05/modelplan.html.

Pilgreen, J. L. (2000). The SSR handbook: How to organize and manage a sus-tained silent reading program. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Plass, J. L. & Jones, L. C., (2005). Multimedia learning in second language acquisition. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.) The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 467–488). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Poehner, M. E. & Lantolf, J. P. (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9, 1–33.

Preece, J. (2000). Online communities: Supporting sociability and designing usabil-ity. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Purpura, J. (2010). The impact of large-scale and classroom-based language assessments on the individual. In L. Taylor and C. Weir (Eds) Language test-ing matters: Investigating the wider social and educational impact of assessment; Proceedings of the ALTE Cambridge Conference, April 2008 (pp. 301–325). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rakes, G., Fields, V. & Cox, K. (2006). The influence of teacher’s technology use on instructional practices. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(4), 409–424.

Rea-Dickins, P. (2004). Understanding teachers as agents of assessment. Language Testing, 21, 249–258.

Rea-Dickins, P. (2008). Classroom-based assessment. In E. Shohamy and N. Hornberger (Eds) Encyclopaedia of Language and Education (pp. 257–272). Springer: London.

Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative inquiry in TESOL. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Richards, L. (2005). Handling qualitative data: A practical guide. London: Sage.

References 171

Robb, T. (1997). The paperless classroom? TESL-EJ, 3(1). Retrieved form http://www.cc.kyoto-su.ac.jp/information/tesl-ej/ej09/int.html

Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations, 5th edn. New York: Free Press.Rossman, G. B. & Rallis, S. F. (2003). Learning in the field: An introduction to

qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Samuda, V. & Bygate, M. (2008). Tasks in second language learning: Research and

practice in applied linguistics. Basingstoke: UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Savin-Baden, M. (2010). The sound of feedback in higher education. Learning,

Media and Technology, 35(1), 53–64.Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is beautiful: Economics as if people mattered.

London: Blond and Briggs.Schwalbach, E. M. (2003). Value and validity in action research: A guidebook for

reflective practitioners. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.Sharma, P. & Barrett, B. (2009). Blended learning: Using technology in and beyond

the language classroom. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Shoemaker, C. L. & Shoemaker, F. F. (1991). Interactive techniques for the ESL

classroom. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Shohamy, E., Inbar-Lourie, O & Poehner, M. (2008). Investigating assessment

perceptions and practices in the advanced foreign language classroom, (Report No 1108). University Park, PA: Center for Advanced language Proficiency Education and Research (CALPER).

Siemens, G. (2003). Evaluating media characteristics: Using multimedia to achieve learning outcomes. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/mediacharacteristics.htm

Skehan, P. (2003). Focus on form, task, and technology. Computer assisted language learning, 16(5), 391–411.

Smith, D. (2006). Institutional ethnography as practice. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Smith, G. & Kurthen, H. (2007). Front-stage and back-stage in hybrid e- learning face-to-face courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(3), 455–474.

Snart, J. A. (2010). Hybrid learning: The perils and promise of blending online and face-to-face instruction in higher education. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.

Somekh, B. (2007). Pedagogy and learning with ICT: Researching the art of inno-vation. London: Routledge.

Sorcinelli, M. D., Austin, A. E., Eddy, P. L., & Beach, A. L. (2006). Creating the future of faculty development: Learning from the past, understanding the present. Hoboken, NJ: Anker.

Spanos, T., Hansen, C. M., Daines, E. (2001). Integrating technology and classroom assessment. Foreign Language Annals, 34(4), 318–324.

Stein, P. (2008). Multimodal pedagogies in diverse classrooms: Representation, rights and resources. London: Routledge.

Sterling, S. (2001). Sustainable education: Re-visioning learning and change. Schumacher Briefing No. 6. Bristol, UK: CREATE Environment Centre.

Sterling, S. (2001). Sustainable education: Revisioning learning and change. Totnes, UK: Green.

172 References

Stevens, D. D. & Levi, A. J. (2005). Introduction to rubrics. Sterling, VA: Stylus.Stringer, E. (1999). Action research, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Sumsion, J., & Goodfellow, J. (2004). Identifying generic skills through cur-

riculum mapping: A critical evaluation. Higher Education Research and Development, 23(3), 329–346.

Suskie, L. (2009). Assessing student learning: A common sense guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Swales, J., Barks, D., Ostermann, A., & Simpson, R. (2001). Between critique and accommodation: Reflections on an EAP course. English for Specific Purposes, 20, 439–458.

Sykes, J. M., Oskoz, A & Thorne, S. L. (2008). Web 2.0, synthetic immersive environments, and mobile resources. CALICO Journal, 25(3), 528–546.

Tatnal, A. & Gilding, A. (1999). Actor-network theory and information sys-tems research. Proceedings of the 10th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Victoria University of Wellington, 8(4), 955–966.

Tavani, H. T. (2007). Ethics and technology: Ethical issues in an age of informa-tion and communication technology, 2nd edn. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

Thomas, M. & Reinders, H. (Eds) (2010). Task-Based language learning and teaching with technology. London: Continuum.

Thorne, K. (2003). Blended learning. London and Sterling, VA: Kogan Page.Thorne, S. L. (2008). Mediating technologies and second language learning.

In Coiro, J., Lankshear, C. Knobel, M. & Leu, D. (Eds) Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 417–449). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Thorne, S. L., & Black, R. (2007). Language and literacy development in computer-mediated contexts and communities. Annual review of applied lin-guistics, 27, 133–160.

Thorne, S. L. & Reinhardt, J. (2008). ‘Bridging Activities,’ New media literacies and advanced foreign language proficiency. CALICO Journal, 25(3), 558–572.

Thorton, P. & Houser, C. (2005). Using mobile phones in English education in Japan. Journal of computer assisted learning, 21(3), 217–228.

Tomal, D. (2003). Action research for educators. Lanham, MA: Scarecrow Press.Tomlinson, B. (2003). Materials evaluation. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.) Developing

materials for language teaching (pp. 15–36). London: Continuum.Transforming Assessment. Available: www.transformingassessment.com/UK Occupational Language Standards (2010). Retrieved from http://www.

cilt.org.uk/home/standards_and_qualifications/uk_occupational_ standards/languages.aspx

Unsworth, L. (2001). Teaching multiliteracies across the curriculum: Changing contexts of text and image in classroom practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Unsworth, L. (2008). Multimodal semiotics: Functional analysis in contexts of education. New York: Continuum.

Valiathan, P. (2002). Blended learning models, learning circuits. Retrieved from http://www.learningcircuits.org/2002/aug2002/valiathan.html

van den Branden, K. (2006). Task-based language education: From theory to prac-tice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

References 173

van Lier, L. (2002). An ecological-semiotic perspective on language and lin-guistics. In C. Kramsch (Ed.) Language acquisition and language socialization: Ecological perspectives (pp. 140–164). London: Continuum.

van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocul-tural perspective. Boston: Kluwer Academic.

van Lier, L. (2007). Action-based teaching, autonomy and identity. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 46–65.

Wagner, E. (2008). Video listening tests: What are they measuring? Language Assessment Quarterly, 5, 218–243.

Wall, D. (2000). The impact of high-stakes testing on teaching and learning. Can this be predicted or controlled? System, 28(4), 499–509.

Wall, D. & Horák, T. (2006). The impact of changes in the TOEFL examination on teaching and learning in Central and Eastern Europe: Phase 1, the baseline study. ETS. Available: www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-06-18.pdf

Wang, F. L., Fong, J. & Kwan, R. C. (Eds) (2010). Research on hybrid learning models: Advanced tools, technologies, and applications. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

Warschauer, M. (1995). E-mail for English teaching. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.Warschauer, M. (1998a). Electronic literacies: Language, culture and power in

online education. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Warschauer, M. (1998b). Researching technology in TESOL: Determinist,

instrumental and critical approaches. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 757–761.Warschauer, M. (2000). On-line learning in second language classrooms. In

M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds) Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 41–58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Warschauer, M. & Meskill, C. (2000). Technology and second language teach-ing and learning. In J. Rosenthal (Ed.) Handbook of undergraduate second language education (pp. 303–318). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Weir, C. J. (2005). Limitations of the common European framework for devel-oping comparable examinations and tests. Language Testing, 22(3), 281–300.

Welker, J., & Berardino, L. (2005). Blended learning: Understanding the mid-dle ground between traditional classroom and fully online instruction. Journal of educational technology systems, 34(1), 33–55.

Westecott, E. M. (2003). Game forms for new outcomes. In B. Laurel (Ed.) Design research: Methods and perspectives (pp. 129–34). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Harlow: Longman.Willis, J. (2004). Perspectives on task-based instruction: Understanding our

practices, acknowledging our differences. In Leaver, B. & Willis J. (Eds) Task-based instruction in foreign language education (pp. 3–46). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Willis, D. & Willis, J. (2007). Doing task-based teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

174 References

Yeh, A. (2007). Critical issues: Blended learning. In J. Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds.) CALL environments: Research, practice and critical issues (2nd edn) (pp. 404–421). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Yin, R. K. (2002). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Yutdhana, S. (2005). Design-based research in CALL. In J. Egbert & G. M. Petrie (Eds.) CALL research perspectives (pp. 169–78). Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Zapata, G. (2004). Second language instructors and CALL: A multidisciplin-ary research framework. Computer assisted language learning, 17(3–4), 339–356.

175

Author Index

ACTFL, 43Alderson, C., 50Allwright, D., 74Anderson, G., 70, 73–80Anderson, T., 53Atzert, S., 38

Bachman, L. F., 46, 54Bai, H., 63Bailey, K., 74Bailey, K. M., 70Bainbridge, S., 21Ban, R., 15Barrett, B., 5, 19, 20Barrie, S., 37Barson, J., 15Baskerville, R. L., 84Bax, S., xiii, xiv, 5–7, 68Beatty, K., 15Beetham, H., 7, 29Bennett, R. E., 66Berardino, L., 2Bielawski, L., 2Black, R., 10Blake, R., 9, 19, 53Bonk, C. J., 3–4Boswood, T., xiiiBoud, D., 52, 68Bowden, J., 2Brannick, T., 71, 77–78Brown, H. D., 19Brown, I., 51, 53, 66, 67Brown, J., 15Burns, A., 70–71, 73, 79–81, 91,

93–94, 143–144Bygate, M., 30, 32

Caputi, P., 51, 53, 66, 67Castaneda, M. E., 15Cetto, M., 53Chambers, A., xiii, xiv, 7, 68

Chao, C., 34Chapelle, C., 6, 9, 15, 34, 46, 50,

52, 67–68, 71, 161, 166Churches, A., 68Clerehan, R., 67Cochran-Smith, M., 76Coghlan, D., 71, 77–78Coiro, J., 11Collins, A., 18Colpaert, J., 15Conole, G., 61Cook, V., 19Cope, B., 10Corbel, C., 22, 32, 34, 63, 68Costello, P. J. M., 71Coulter, D., 71Council of Europe, 41Cox, K., 63Crismond, D., 16Crisp, G., 67Cuban, L., xivCummings, T., 11Cutrim Schmid, E., 25

Daines, E., 67Dana, N. F., 71Darby, J., 61Davies, G., 44de Laat, M., 61Debski, R., 15, 38, 41Dillon, T., 61Dodds, T., 66, xvDooey, P., 50Doughty, C. J., 32–34Douglas, D., 46, 50, 51Duff, P., 43Dziuban, C., 4

Edge, J., 74, 86, 142Edmunds, J., 63Egbert, J., xiii, 14, 15, 22, 34

176 Author Index

Elliot, B., 66–67Ellis, R., 32Elola, I., 67Enright, H., 32Erben, T., 15Erlandson, D., 83, 86Ertmer, P., 63Ewell, P. T., 8

Fallows, S., 37Farmer, R., 26Felix, U., 41Fields, V., 63Fong, J., 5Fotos, S., 21Freeman, D., 70, 143Fulcher, G., 46

Ganem-Gutierrerrez, G., 32Gardner, J., 61Garrett, N., 1, 5–7, 14–15,

20, 154Garrison, R., 2Gemmell, P., 34Gilding, A., 86Gillham, B., 61Gonzalez-Lloret, M., 33Goodfellow, J., 37Graddol, D., 25Graham, C. R., 3–4Graves, K., 99Gray, K., 67Grose, T., 106Gruba, P., 8, 26, 29, 32, 34, 38,

61–62, 64–66, 71Grunberg, J., 1

Hagley, E., 125Halverson, R., 18Hamilton, M., 67Hampel, R., 22Handel, G., 74–75Hansen, C. M., 67Hanson-Smith, E., 34, xiiiHarlen, W., 61Harwood, N., 15, 152Hayward, L., 61

Healey, D., 43Hegelheimer, V., 51Herr, K., 70, 73–80Higgins, J., xiiiHill, K., 47Hinkelman, D., 21, 34, 103, 106,

111, 117Hislope, K., 21Hounsell, D., 60Houser, C., 117Howland, J., 16Hubbard, P., xiv, 9, 44

Inbar-Lourie, O., 47

Jamieson, J., 9, 34Jewitt, C., xvi, 10–11, 51Johns, T., xiiiJohnson, A., 34Johnson, D. W., 24Johnson, R. T., 24Johnston, B., 125, 143Jonassen, D. H., 16Jones, C., 30, 34Jones, L. C., 26Jung, S-H., xiii, 6, 38, 68

Kalantzis, M., 10Kay, W., 34, 106Keddle, J. S., 42Kellner, D., 76Kemmis, S., 74Kennedy, C., 11–12, 140Kennewell, S., 87Kern, R., 5, 84–85Knobel, M., 10–11, 43, 48Kramsch, C., 10, 51Kress, G., 10, 51Kululska-Hulme, A., 41Kurthen, H., 4Kwan, R. C., 5

Lachiver, G., 8Lafford, B., 15Lamy, M. N., 22Lankshear, C., 10–11, 43, 48Lantolf, J., 30

Author Index 177

Larsen-Freeman, D., 20, 100Larssen, L., 38, 66Latour, B., 16Laurillard, D., xvi, 16–21Lave, J., 16Leaver, B., 18, 103Lei, J., 63Leu, D., 11Levi, A. J., 55–56Levy, M., xiii, 5–6, 11–12, 14–15,

19, 29–30, 41, 44, 140Lewis, A., 38Lientz, B. P., 38, 66Lievrouw, L., xviLivingstone, S., xviLockyer, L., 51, 53, 66, 67Long, M., 32–33, 34Lotherington, H., 49Lynch, B., 46Lytle, S., 76

Mackenzie, D., 103Mackenzie, J., 29Markee, N., 12Marra, R., 16Martin-Kniep, G. O., xvMarton, F., 2Masie, E., 1Matzen, N., 63Mayer, R. E., 25McNamara, T. F., 50, 51McPherson, M., 73, 74–75McTaggart, R., 74Meskill, C., 9, 14, 21Metcalf, D., 2Mishan, F., 48Miyazoe, T., 53Moffat, A., 8Moser, F. Z., xiii, xivMotteram, G., 103Mumtaz, S., xivMurphey, T., 21Myers, M. J., 51, 67

Neumeier, P., 5, 25Neumeir, P., 30Newton, P. E., 47

Nihlen, A., 79Nordkvelle, Y. T., 41Nuemeier, P., 154Nunan, D., 32, 70, 74–75, 79Nunes, J., 73, 74–75

O‘Dowd, R., xiiiO‘Rourke, B., 125O‘Shea, P., 21Ockey, G., 50Oliver, M., 2, 33Olson, J. K., 41Orlando, J., xivOskoz, A., 41, 67Oxford, R., xiii, 6, 38, 68

Palmer, A. S., 46, 54Palmer, S., 47Pardo-Ballestar, C., 53Parkinson, J., 87Pilgreen, J. L., 24Plass, J. L., 26Poehner, M., 47Preece, J., 11Preiss, S., 34Purpura, J., 47

Rakes, G., 63Rallis, S. F., 82, 87Rea-Dickens, P., 41, 47Reindeers, H., 32Reinhardt, J., 10, 20, 51Richards, K., 73, 86Robb, T., 106Rogers, E., 12, 78, 86Rossman, G. B., 82, 87

Samuda, V., 30, 32Savin-Baden, M., 60Schwalbach, E. M., 93–94Share, J., 76Sharma, P., 5, 19, 20, 103Sharpe, R., 7, 29Sheard, J., 67Shield, L, 41Shoemaker, C. L., 21Shoemaker, F. F., 21

178 Author Index

Shohamy, E., 47Siemens, G., 26, 53, 68Skehan, P., 32Smith, G., 4Snart, J. A., 5Somekh, B., xvSøndergaard, H., 8Sorcinelli, M. D., 156Spanos, T., 67Stein, P., 10Sterling, S., 11Stevens, C., 37Stevens, D. D., 55–56Stobart, G., 61Stockwell, G., xiii, 14, 15,

29, 30Stringer, E., 77–78Summers, M., 1Sumsion, J., 37Suskie, L., 67Swales, J., 152Sykes, J. M., 41

Tanner, H., 87Tardiff, J., 8Tatnal, A., 86Tavani, H. T., 40Thomas, M., 32Thompson, C., 67Thorne, K., 1Thorne, S. L., 10, 20, 30, 41, 51Thorton, P., 117

Tomal, D., 71, 78Trigwell, K., 2, 33

Unsworth, L., 10

Valianthan, P., 1van den Branden, K., 32van Leeuwen, T., 10van Lier, L., 15, 17, 87Vaughan, H., 2

Wagner, E., 51, 53Wang, F. L., 5Warschauer, M., 5–6, 14, 15, 21, 29,

43, 84–85, 125Wegner, E., 16Weir, C., 42Welker, J., 2Westecott, E. M., 20Willis, D., 19, 32, 34Willis, J., 18, 19, 32, 34, 103Wilson, N., 53Worley, C., 11

Yeh, A., 103Yendol-Silva, D., 71Yin, R. K., 77–78Yutdhana, S., 30

Zapata, G., 84Zhao, Y., 63Zobel, J., 8

179

Subject Index

ACTFL standards, 43action research

criticisms of, 71cycles of, 92definition of, 71discerning worldviews, 83–84dissemination of, 95–96ethical considerations, 88–91evaluating questions for, 94potential blind spots

detachment, 87–88determinism, 86–87objectivism, 86reductionism, 84–86

Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Forum, 43

assessmentand action research, 61–66definition of, 47and modes of delivery, 53–55related metaphors, 52and rubrics, 55–57student developed criteria, 57–59

Assessment 2.0, 67assessment for learning

definition of, 46assessment futures, 66–68assessment literacy

authenticity and value, 48clear aims, 47efficiency and practicality, 49fairness and objectivity, 49

Assessment Reform Group (ARG), 46

association policies, 43Audacity, 60

blended approachesand assessment, 67critiques of, 2

definitions of, xiii, 1–3faculty teams

distributed structure, 140professional development,

143–147infrastructure

flexible facilities, 132legacy facilities, 135–137role of, 137–140

issues for research, 159materials development, 147–152taxonomy of terms, 4types of, 103

blended curriculumlanguage learning aims, 107macro level, 101micro level, 102

blended lessonflow of, 107–112inter-class exchange, 125–129oral communication, 106–121writing, 121–125

blog, 53, 121–124

case study, 77–78Central Michigan University

Assessment Toolkit, 67collaborative curriculum, 140Common European Framework

(CEF), 41–42communities of innovation, xvcomputer-assisted language

learning (CALL)current definition of, 6historical definition of, 5views of, 5

considerationagenda for research, 155–158analysis of, 118–121, 123–124,

128–129appropriateness, 9

180 Subject Index

consideration – continuedmultimodality, 10–11purpose, 7–8sustainability, 11–13

departmental goals, 36designs

of blended lesson plans, 35

definition of, 29lessons, 100macro level, 41–44meso level, 36–41micro level, 31–36‘middle path’, 30questions for, 105and redesigns, 30of tasks, 31

deterministic perspectives, 15digital audio (mp3), 60digital video, 51, 53dimensions of technologies

actionsadaptive, 20–21communicative, 21interactive, 19–20narrative, 17–19productive, 21–22

groupings, 23–24pedagogical applications of,

27, 112–117texts, 25–26timings, 24–25tools, 26–27

e-assessments, 67ecolological perspectives, 15educational variation theory, 2epistemology, 72–76ethical concerns, 40evaluation

of programs, 46

graduate attributes, 37

hybrid learning, 4

International English Language Testing System (IELTS), 46

innovationand failure, xivpro-innovation bias, 78

instrumental perspectives, 15iRubric, 60

Journal of Educational Action Research, 95

learning management system (LMS)

for assessment, 60–61use in pedagogy, 115–117

lessondefinition of, 99

middle ground, xv, 2, 13Moodle, 136

new literaciesand assessment, 51

normalizationimpediments to, 6success factors, 7

NVivo 8.0, 61

paperless classroom, 106positionality, 76–77

acknowledging, 82post-positivist, 71preferred learning style, 33professional development, 156

agenda for research, 157benchmarks of, 44faculty teams, 143–147sustained, 143–147

regional policies, 43Respondus, 54risk management, 38

definition of, 38Rubistar, 60Rubric Builder, 60rubrics, 55–57

Subject Index 181

task-based learning, 88, 129cycle of, 34

tasksblended, 103, 106classroom vs. online, 103definition of, 32, 34, 100design of, 31–33

technologiesand assessment, 51definitions of, 14–16missteps in selection of, 39and proficiencies, 53

technology integrationand barriers, xiii–xivand design, 30and success factors, xii

TESOL standards, 43–44

The Hokkaido Guidebook, 106–121third space, 155Test of English as a Foreign

Language (TOEFL), 46Transforming Assessment, 67

UK Occupational Language Standards, 42

University of Melbourne, 37

validitytactics to increase, 81threats to, 78types of, 79–80

whiteboards, 1, 19, 23, 25wiki, 39, 53, 56, 58