大学英语教师课堂动机策略研究
|
摘要
本研究旨在探究适用于我国大学英语教学情境的教师课堂动机策略。其研究动因主要有四个方面：（1）二十世纪九十年代，学校教育导向的二语动机研究的兴起；（2）国内外相关研究表明，二语学习中，“去动机”现象普遍存在，而教师成为造成学生学习动机减退的一个重要因素；（3）当前二语动机策略研究仍十分薄弱，实证研究在数量和质量上尤显不足；（4）《大学英语课程教学要求》（2007）倡导大学英语教学采用新模式，以“有利于调动教师和学生两个方面的积极性”。我国的大学英语教学正面临从“如何教”到“如何激励”的转变。本研究内容主要涵盖三个方面：（1）心理学领域及二语教学领域的动机理论研究和动机策略方面的理论探讨；（2）大学英语教师课堂动机策略运用的实证研究；（3）大学英语具体教学情境中教师如何有效运用动机策略的应用研究。
本研究首先系统梳理了心理学领域及二语学习情境中动机理论研究的重要成果。心理学动机理论历经了从行为主义的刺激-反应论、人本主义的需求层次论到认知主义的期望价值理论、目标理论、自我决定理论和计划行为理论的发展历程。这些理论各有侧重，对二语教学不乏现实的指导和启发作用，同时推动了二语学习动机研究的开展。当代二语学习动机研究的代表人物，匈牙利学者Dornyei借鉴和吸收了心理学主流动机理论及已有二语学习动机理论的精华，先后构建了三层次二语动机理论、二语动机过程模式和二语动机自我体系，形成了独特的二语学习动机理论体系。该理论体系成为本研究最核心的理论依据。
随着动机理论研究的不断深入，心理学领域及二语教学领域的动机策略研究也逐渐拉开序幕。国内外心理学家们在探讨将心理学主流动机理论运用于教学实践的基础上，提出了一系列激发学习动机的原则和策略建议。在二语教学领域，Dornyei依据其建立的二语动机理论模式，建构了迄今为止最为完备的二语动机策略体系，为大学英语教师课堂动机策略运用的实证研究提供了重要的参照工具。
以理论研究为指导，本研究针对大学英语教师课堂动机策略的实际运用展开了实证探索。研究分两个阶段进行。第一阶段的研究以上海大学、上海师范大学、同济大学、上海外贸学院和上海电机学院5所高校的105名大学英语教师为研究对象，通过问卷和访谈的方法，考察大学英语教师的课堂动机策略使用频率以及教师自我效能感和教师的人口统计学特征变量（教师的性别、学历、教龄、职称）与教师课堂动机策略使用频率的相关性。通过对动机策略使用频率问卷数据进行描述性统计分析，得出教师较常使用的动机策略及较少使用的策略。教师访谈结果显示出与问卷调查结果较高的一致性，同时揭示了教师较少使用某些策略的主客观原因。偏相关分析结果表明教师自我效能感及其动机策略使用频率之间存在正相关关系；而教师的性别、学历、教龄和职称则未对其动机策略使用频率产生显著影响。
为验证大学英语教师常用课堂动机策略的实施效果及学生的不同英语水平是否对动机策略的实施效果产生影响，在实证研究的第二阶段，笔者综合运用问卷、访谈和课堂观察的方法，针对上海电机学院12名大学英语教师和他们的96名大二学生展开了进一步研究。首先对问卷数据进行描述性统计分析，得出了学生认为比较有效的动机策略及不太有效的策略。学生访谈的结果基本证实了这一结论，同时反映出学生认为某些策略未能真正发挥激励作用的主要原因。此外，学生在访谈中提及的其它一些能够有效激发其英语学习动机的做法恰恰涉及了教师很少运用的动机策略。而课堂观察记录所揭示的一些教师做法，虽然在问卷量表中没有包含，但却受到多数学生的欢迎。对高/低水平组学生的问卷数据进行独立样本T检验，发现绝大部分动机策略对两组学生的激励效果存在显著差异，从而验证了Dornyei关于学生的英语水平可能影响动机策略有效性的假设。以上这些研究结果与发现为大学英语教师的教学实践提供了切实的指导和启示。
最后，立足理论研究发现和实证研究结论，笔者结合自身多年的教学教研实践和体验，进一步探讨了适用于我国大学英语具体教学情境的教师课堂动机策略。国内很多高校根据学生的英语水平，对大学英语采用分级分层教学。此外，大学英语教学班人数通常较多，即使在同一个班级里，学生的英语水平仍可能存在较大差异。第二阶段实证研究的相关结论表明，绝大部分动机策略对高低水平学生的激励作用差异显著。大学英语教师应充分考虑高低水平学生的不同心理特征和学习需求，有的放矢地采用相应的动机策略激发、维持和增强其英语学习动机。低水平学生容易产生自卑心理，对英语学习表现出丧失信心或麻木不仁的态度。教师应着重做到：提供机会让他们定期获得成功体验，重建英语学习信心；使英语学习富有意义和趣味，提升其英语学习兴趣；以激励的方式评价学生学习，加大平时成绩的比重，体现对学生的努力和进步的肯定；善用提问和倾听的技巧，表达对学生的重视与关爱；必要时，制定和实施个性化策略方案。高水平学生通常对课堂教学怀有较高期望，如果一直得不到满足，就容易滋生负面情绪，导致学习热情减退。另一方面，他们也可能因为近期学习目标已经达成而产生一种懈怠心理，某种程度上失去了继续努力的动力。教师可从以下几方面着手，维持和强化高水平学生的英语学习动机：融入文化教学，为学生提供丰富的英语文化体验；明示对学生寄予厚望，训练和帮助学生构建理想的英语自我，并实现理想自我和应该自我的和谐统一；教给学生自我激励的方法，鼓励学生在学习过程中不断进行自我激励；设计具有一定挑战性的学习任务，促进学生高阶思维能力的培养。
大班教学和多媒体网络辅助教学是我国当前大学英语教学的两个显著特征。大班教学容易使师生间产生疏离感，影响学生学习积极性。同时也会制约教师对某些动机策略的运用，如教师很难有时间和精力指导学生制定个性化的学习目标与计划。鉴于此，笔者提出，大学英语教师在大班情境下可运用以下策略，最大限度地激励学生学习：调整教学风格，增进师生交流；强化目标导向，凸显任务价值；开展小组学习活动，提高交际真实性；强调纪律和班规。多媒体网络技术的融入为英语教学带来了新的机遇。然而，相关研究结论显示，由于受到软硬件设备状态、教师教学理念与教学方法、师生计算机应用能力等因素的制约，多媒体网络辅助教学似乎并未真正起到优化教学、激励学习的作用。由此笔者指出，要使多媒体网络辅助教学真正有效地激发和维持学生的学习动机，教师应从三个方面进行尝试：利用网络平台，加强师生沟通，实现资源共享；开展CALL课堂任务型学习活动，使技术真正融入教学；促进课外网络自主学习。
第二阶段实证研究证实为比较有效的动机策略中，既有内在动机策略，也有外在动机策略。笔者指出，教师平衡兼顾地运用内外在动机策略，使其同时发挥作用，可取得最佳激励效果。以下策略可用于激发学生的内在学习动机：激发情境兴趣，培养个人兴趣；以自主支持型教学替代控制型教学，促进学生自主学习；设计和学生能力相符的学习任务，满足学生能力需求；建立和谐互助的师生关系和生生关系，满足学生归属需求；强化学生的英语语言文化价值观，催生融合型动机的形成。要激发学生的外在学习动机，教师则应该：使奖励发挥正向的激励作用；使表扬更有效；以温暖善意的批评引领学生进步；“挑起”课堂知识冲突，开展有益的组际竞争和组内合作；让多元互动成为激励学习的外部源泉；强调英语学习的现实意义和价值。教师应综合运用内在动机策略及外在动机策略，以在激发和维护学生学习动力方面实现效益最大化。
第一阶段实证研究的相关结果表明，教师的自我效能感水平及其动机策略的使用频率之间具有显著的正相关关系。提升教师的自我效能感，将有助于增强教师运用动机策略的积极性。教师自我效能感的提升本质上是一种自我提高，具体方法包括：借助合作式发展及同伴观摩，与同事密切合作，实现共同提高；定期撰写教学日志，适时开展行动研究，促进教学反思；恪守职业承诺，加强专业学习，收获自尊，培养自信；建立成就档案，进行自我激励；唤醒健康的情绪和生理状态。
本研究在综合理论和实证研究发现的基础上，对适用于我国大学英语教学情境的教师课堂动机策略进行了深入探讨，为教师在教学过程中成功激发学生学习动机，从根本上改善大学英语教学效果提供了切实的指导。
The present study aims to explore teachers’ motivational strategies that areapplicable to Chinese College English teaching context. The study is mainlymotivated by four factors:(1)the emergence and development of education-orientedapproach in L2motivation research since1990s;(2)the relevant researches home andabroad show that “demotivation” towards L2learning is quite common amongstudents and teachers are held to be a key determinant which leads to students’decreased motivation;(3)current researches on L2motivational strategies,particularly empirical studies, are still inadequate both in quantity and quality;(4)College English Curriculum Requirements (2007) promotes the use of a new modelof College English teaching so as to “facilitate mobilizing the initiative of both teachersand students”, which indicates a shift of College English teaching in China from “how toteach” to “how to motivate”. Three parts are included as the major content of the study:(1)a review and evaluation of theoretical studies on motivation and motivational strategiesin the fields of psychology and L2teaching;(2)an empirical research on College Englishteachers’ use of motivational strategies in class;(3)an exploration into the effective use ofmotivational strategies by College English teachers in specific teaching context.
To begin with, the present study reviews the significant results of theoreticalresearches on motivation both in psychology and in L2learning. Motivational theories inpsychology have developed from the behavioristic theory of stimulus-response, thehumanistic need theory to current cognitive theories among which most prominent ones arethe expectancy-value theory, goal theory, self determination theory and the theory ofplanned behavior. These theories provide realistic guidance and enlightenment for L2teaching from different perspectives. Meanwhile they propel the research on L2learningmotivation. By drawing upon the essence of the existing major motivational theories inpsychology and L2learning, Hungarian scholar Dornyei, the contemporary representativeresearcher in L2learning motivation, has successively constructed a three-level frameworkof L2motivation, a process model of L2motivation and the L2motivational self system,which together constitute his unique theoretical system of L2learning motivation. Thepresent study takes this system as its most essential theoretical basis.
With the advancements of theoretical researches on motivation, researchers havegradually started to carry out studies on motivational strategies in the fields of psychologyand L2teaching. Psychologists home and abroad have put forward a series of principlesand suggestions for motivating learning by exploring the application of motivationaltheories in psychology to classroom teaching. In the field of L2teaching, Dornyei, basedon his L2motivation theories, has developed a most comprehensive system of motivationalstrategies to date. This system serves as an important reference tool for the empiricalresearch on College English teachers’ use of motivational strategies in class.
Under the guidance of theoretical research findings, an empirical study was conductedto examine College English teachers’ actual use of motivational strategies in class. Thestudy consisted of two phases. With one hundred and five College English teachers fromShanghai University, Shanghai Normal University, Tongji University, Shanghai Instituteof Foreign Trade and Shanghai Dianji University as its subjects, the study in the firstphase was done to investigate the frequency of College English teachers' use of motiva-tional strategies in class as well as its correlation with teacher self efficacy and teachers’demographic variables(gender, educational qualifications, teaching seniority and profess-ional title) respectively. Data was collected via questionnaires and interviews. Descriptivestatistics of “frequency” questionnaires suggested most frequently used motivationalstrategies and least frequently used ones. Interview findings showed fairly high consist-ency with the results of questionnaires and revealed the subjective and objective reasonswhy teachers used certain strategies less often. Partial correlation analysis indicated thatteacher self efficacy and the frequency of teachers’ use of motivational strategies werepositively correlated while no significant correlation was found between teachers’ demo-graphic characteristics and the frequency of their use of motivational strategies.
To examine the effectiveness of the motivational strategies most frequently used byCollege English teachers and the effects of students’ English proficiency level on thestrategy effectiveness, a further study was carried out during the second phase withtwelve College English teachers and their ninety-six sophomores from Shanghai DianjiUniversity as its subjects. Data was collected through the instrumentality of question-naires, interviews and class observations. The descriptive statistical analysis of question- naire data revealed that there were some motivational strategies which students consideredquite effective and some others not so effective. What students said in the interviewconfirmed this revelation and also suggested the major reasons why some strategies failedto work on them. Besides, several strategies which students claimed to have motivatedtheir learning successfully were precisely what teachers seldom used in their teaching.Though not included in the questionnaire scale, some teachers’ teaching practice observedin class was affirmed to be fairly popular with most of the students. The independentsample T-test indicated that significant differences existed between effects of the majorityof motivational strategies on high-and low-proficiency groups, thereby verifying Dornyei’shypothesis that the English proficiency level of students may affect the effectiveness of themotivational strategies. The aforementioned research results and findings provide somepractical guidance and enlightenment for improving the efficiency of College Englishteaching.
Finally, based on the findings of the theoretical research and the empirical study, aswell as taking her own years of teaching experience as reference, the researcher furtherdiscussed the motivational strategies that corresponded with the specific contexts ofCollege English teaching in China. In many Chinese universities and colleges, gradeteaching is implemented in College English with students being divided into differentclasses according to their different English proficiency levels. And it’s not uncommon forstudents in the same class to show great differences in their English proficiency since thereare usually a large number of students in each English class. The relevant conclusion ofthe second-phase empirical study suggested that the majority of motivational strategiesexerted distinctively different motivating effects on high-and low-proficiency students.Therefore College English teachers should, upon taking into full account different psycho-logical characteristics and learning needs of high-and low-proficiency students, manage toadopt appropriate strategies accordingly to stimulate, sustain and enhance their motivation.Low-proficiency students are inclined to suffer from the feeling of inferiority and showlack of confidence in or indifferent attitudes towards learning English. To motivate them,teachers ought to focus on: providing opportunities for them to experience success on aregular basis so as to help them rebuild confidence in learning English; making English learning meaningful and fun to arouse their interest; evaluating student achievement in amotivating way by increasing the ratio of formative assessment in total assessment andtaking students’ efforts and progress into consideration when assessing them; using techni-ques of questioning and listening skillfully to show attention to and care for each student;developing and implementing an individualized strategy plan when necessary. High-proficiency students usually have high expectations for classroom teaching. If not satisfied,they are likely to feel frustrated and lose their original passion for learning. They may alsostart to slack themselves and lose the incentive for further learning as their short-termlearning objectives have been realized. Teachers can maintain and enhance the motivationof high-proficiency students for learning English by working on the following aspects:providing students with rich knowledge and experience of English culture by integratingcultural contents into teaching; clearly expressing high expectations for students andtraining students to construct a combination of the ideal English self and the ought-toEnglish self; instructing and encouraging students in the use of self-motivating skills tomotivate their own learning; designing some challenging learning tasks to help cultivatingstudents' higher-rank thinking abilities.
Large class teaching and multimedia-aided teaching are two distinguishing characteri-stics of contemporary College English teaching in China. In large classes, teachers andstudents are likely to become alienated, which can lead to sharp drop in students' enthusi-asm for learning. Teachers may also be discouraged from employing certain motivationalstrategies, for instance, they find it hard to spare time and efforts on instructing students ina large class to draft personalized learning objectives and learning plans. In view of thesedisadvantages of large class teaching, the researcher proposed that teachers, when teachingCollege English in a large class, should try the following strategies to motivate studentlearning to the maximum extent: adapting the teaching style to increase interactions withstudents; highlighting goal-orientation and task value; carrying out group learningactivities and enhancing the authenticity of communication between group members;emphasizing discipline and class rules. Integration of multimedia network technology hasbrought about new opportunities for English teaching. However, some relevant researchfindings showed that, due to the poor conditions of hardwares and softwares, the old-fashi- oned teaching concepts and methods of the teachers, teachers’and students’ lack of suffici-ent computer skills, etc, multimedia-aided teaching seemed to have failed to play its part inoptimizing teaching and stimulate learning. Therefore the researcher pointed out that, inorder to bring the motivating power of multimedia-aided teaching into full play, teachersshould make an attempt to: increase the communication and resource sharing betweenteachers and students by making use of the network platform; integrate technology effe-ctively into teaching by implementing task-based learning activities in CALL classrooms;promote network-based extracurricular autonomous learning.
Those motivational strategies proved effective in the second-phase empirical studycontained both intrinsic strategies and extrinsic ones. The researcher pointed out thatstudents could be best motivated when teachers employed intrinsic and extrinsic strategiesin a balanced and combined way. The following strategies are aimed at working on theintrinsic learning motivation of the students: to stimulate the situational interest andcultivate the individual interest; to promote autonomous learning by replacingteacher-controlled teaching with autonomy-supportive teaching; to design learning taskswhich match the students’ abilities so as to meet their competence needs; to establishharmonious and cooperative teacher-student and student-student relationships to meetstudents’ needs for feeling related; to strengthen students’ English language and culturalvalues to help them develop integrative motivation. In order to arouse students’ extrinsicmotivation, teachers should: make sure rewards exert positive effects on students’motivation for learning; praise students in an effective way; guide students’ progress withwarm and well-meaning criticism;“provoke” knowledge conflicts in class and encourageintergroup competition and intragroup cooperation when carrying out learning activities;use multi-interactions as extrinsic sources for motivating learning; emphasize the realisticsignificance and value of learning English. Teachers ought to combine intrinsic andextrinsic motivational strategies to achieve best possible results in stimulating andmaintaining students’ motivation for learning.
Relevant results of the first-phase empirical study indicated that significant positivecorrelations existed between the level of teachers’ self efficacy and the frequency of theiruse of motivational strategies. Enhancing teachers’ self efficacy will facilitate mobilizing their initiative in employing motivational strategies. The enhancement of teacher selfefficacy is in essence a kind of self-improvement, which can be achieved by: workingclosely with colleagues for mutual progress via cooperative development and peerobservation; promoting reflective teaching through writing teaching journals on a regularbasis and implementing timely action researches; establishing self-esteem and self-confidence through full commitment to the teaching career and professional learning;realizing self-motivation via construction of achievement portfolios; awakening healthyemotional and physical status.
The present study, based on theoretical and empirical research findings, explored indepth the motivational strategies used by teachers in class which applied to the CollegeEnglish teaching context in China. It provides practical guidance for teachers to improvethe effectiveness of College English teaching fundamentally by successfully stimulatingstudents’ motivation for learning.
本研究首先系统梳理了心理学领域及二语学习情境中动机理论研究的重要成果。心理学动机理论历经了从行为主义的刺激-反应论、人本主义的需求层次论到认知主义的期望价值理论、目标理论、自我决定理论和计划行为理论的发展历程。这些理论各有侧重，对二语教学不乏现实的指导和启发作用，同时推动了二语学习动机研究的开展。当代二语学习动机研究的代表人物，匈牙利学者Dornyei借鉴和吸收了心理学主流动机理论及已有二语学习动机理论的精华，先后构建了三层次二语动机理论、二语动机过程模式和二语动机自我体系，形成了独特的二语学习动机理论体系。该理论体系成为本研究最核心的理论依据。
随着动机理论研究的不断深入，心理学领域及二语教学领域的动机策略研究也逐渐拉开序幕。国内外心理学家们在探讨将心理学主流动机理论运用于教学实践的基础上，提出了一系列激发学习动机的原则和策略建议。在二语教学领域，Dornyei依据其建立的二语动机理论模式，建构了迄今为止最为完备的二语动机策略体系，为大学英语教师课堂动机策略运用的实证研究提供了重要的参照工具。
以理论研究为指导，本研究针对大学英语教师课堂动机策略的实际运用展开了实证探索。研究分两个阶段进行。第一阶段的研究以上海大学、上海师范大学、同济大学、上海外贸学院和上海电机学院5所高校的105名大学英语教师为研究对象，通过问卷和访谈的方法，考察大学英语教师的课堂动机策略使用频率以及教师自我效能感和教师的人口统计学特征变量（教师的性别、学历、教龄、职称）与教师课堂动机策略使用频率的相关性。通过对动机策略使用频率问卷数据进行描述性统计分析，得出教师较常使用的动机策略及较少使用的策略。教师访谈结果显示出与问卷调查结果较高的一致性，同时揭示了教师较少使用某些策略的主客观原因。偏相关分析结果表明教师自我效能感及其动机策略使用频率之间存在正相关关系；而教师的性别、学历、教龄和职称则未对其动机策略使用频率产生显著影响。
为验证大学英语教师常用课堂动机策略的实施效果及学生的不同英语水平是否对动机策略的实施效果产生影响，在实证研究的第二阶段，笔者综合运用问卷、访谈和课堂观察的方法，针对上海电机学院12名大学英语教师和他们的96名大二学生展开了进一步研究。首先对问卷数据进行描述性统计分析，得出了学生认为比较有效的动机策略及不太有效的策略。学生访谈的结果基本证实了这一结论，同时反映出学生认为某些策略未能真正发挥激励作用的主要原因。此外，学生在访谈中提及的其它一些能够有效激发其英语学习动机的做法恰恰涉及了教师很少运用的动机策略。而课堂观察记录所揭示的一些教师做法，虽然在问卷量表中没有包含，但却受到多数学生的欢迎。对高/低水平组学生的问卷数据进行独立样本T检验，发现绝大部分动机策略对两组学生的激励效果存在显著差异，从而验证了Dornyei关于学生的英语水平可能影响动机策略有效性的假设。以上这些研究结果与发现为大学英语教师的教学实践提供了切实的指导和启示。
最后，立足理论研究发现和实证研究结论，笔者结合自身多年的教学教研实践和体验，进一步探讨了适用于我国大学英语具体教学情境的教师课堂动机策略。国内很多高校根据学生的英语水平，对大学英语采用分级分层教学。此外，大学英语教学班人数通常较多，即使在同一个班级里，学生的英语水平仍可能存在较大差异。第二阶段实证研究的相关结论表明，绝大部分动机策略对高低水平学生的激励作用差异显著。大学英语教师应充分考虑高低水平学生的不同心理特征和学习需求，有的放矢地采用相应的动机策略激发、维持和增强其英语学习动机。低水平学生容易产生自卑心理，对英语学习表现出丧失信心或麻木不仁的态度。教师应着重做到：提供机会让他们定期获得成功体验，重建英语学习信心；使英语学习富有意义和趣味，提升其英语学习兴趣；以激励的方式评价学生学习，加大平时成绩的比重，体现对学生的努力和进步的肯定；善用提问和倾听的技巧，表达对学生的重视与关爱；必要时，制定和实施个性化策略方案。高水平学生通常对课堂教学怀有较高期望，如果一直得不到满足，就容易滋生负面情绪，导致学习热情减退。另一方面，他们也可能因为近期学习目标已经达成而产生一种懈怠心理，某种程度上失去了继续努力的动力。教师可从以下几方面着手，维持和强化高水平学生的英语学习动机：融入文化教学，为学生提供丰富的英语文化体验；明示对学生寄予厚望，训练和帮助学生构建理想的英语自我，并实现理想自我和应该自我的和谐统一；教给学生自我激励的方法，鼓励学生在学习过程中不断进行自我激励；设计具有一定挑战性的学习任务，促进学生高阶思维能力的培养。
大班教学和多媒体网络辅助教学是我国当前大学英语教学的两个显著特征。大班教学容易使师生间产生疏离感，影响学生学习积极性。同时也会制约教师对某些动机策略的运用，如教师很难有时间和精力指导学生制定个性化的学习目标与计划。鉴于此，笔者提出，大学英语教师在大班情境下可运用以下策略，最大限度地激励学生学习：调整教学风格，增进师生交流；强化目标导向，凸显任务价值；开展小组学习活动，提高交际真实性；强调纪律和班规。多媒体网络技术的融入为英语教学带来了新的机遇。然而，相关研究结论显示，由于受到软硬件设备状态、教师教学理念与教学方法、师生计算机应用能力等因素的制约，多媒体网络辅助教学似乎并未真正起到优化教学、激励学习的作用。由此笔者指出，要使多媒体网络辅助教学真正有效地激发和维持学生的学习动机，教师应从三个方面进行尝试：利用网络平台，加强师生沟通，实现资源共享；开展CALL课堂任务型学习活动，使技术真正融入教学；促进课外网络自主学习。
第二阶段实证研究证实为比较有效的动机策略中，既有内在动机策略，也有外在动机策略。笔者指出，教师平衡兼顾地运用内外在动机策略，使其同时发挥作用，可取得最佳激励效果。以下策略可用于激发学生的内在学习动机：激发情境兴趣，培养个人兴趣；以自主支持型教学替代控制型教学，促进学生自主学习；设计和学生能力相符的学习任务，满足学生能力需求；建立和谐互助的师生关系和生生关系，满足学生归属需求；强化学生的英语语言文化价值观，催生融合型动机的形成。要激发学生的外在学习动机，教师则应该：使奖励发挥正向的激励作用；使表扬更有效；以温暖善意的批评引领学生进步；“挑起”课堂知识冲突，开展有益的组际竞争和组内合作；让多元互动成为激励学习的外部源泉；强调英语学习的现实意义和价值。教师应综合运用内在动机策略及外在动机策略，以在激发和维护学生学习动力方面实现效益最大化。
第一阶段实证研究的相关结果表明，教师的自我效能感水平及其动机策略的使用频率之间具有显著的正相关关系。提升教师的自我效能感，将有助于增强教师运用动机策略的积极性。教师自我效能感的提升本质上是一种自我提高，具体方法包括：借助合作式发展及同伴观摩，与同事密切合作，实现共同提高；定期撰写教学日志，适时开展行动研究，促进教学反思；恪守职业承诺，加强专业学习，收获自尊，培养自信；建立成就档案，进行自我激励；唤醒健康的情绪和生理状态。
本研究在综合理论和实证研究发现的基础上，对适用于我国大学英语教学情境的教师课堂动机策略进行了深入探讨，为教师在教学过程中成功激发学生学习动机，从根本上改善大学英语教学效果提供了切实的指导。
The present study aims to explore teachers’ motivational strategies that areapplicable to Chinese College English teaching context. The study is mainlymotivated by four factors:(1)the emergence and development of education-orientedapproach in L2motivation research since1990s;(2)the relevant researches home andabroad show that “demotivation” towards L2learning is quite common amongstudents and teachers are held to be a key determinant which leads to students’decreased motivation;(3)current researches on L2motivational strategies,particularly empirical studies, are still inadequate both in quantity and quality;(4)College English Curriculum Requirements (2007) promotes the use of a new modelof College English teaching so as to “facilitate mobilizing the initiative of both teachersand students”, which indicates a shift of College English teaching in China from “how toteach” to “how to motivate”. Three parts are included as the major content of the study:(1)a review and evaluation of theoretical studies on motivation and motivational strategiesin the fields of psychology and L2teaching;(2)an empirical research on College Englishteachers’ use of motivational strategies in class;(3)an exploration into the effective use ofmotivational strategies by College English teachers in specific teaching context.
To begin with, the present study reviews the significant results of theoreticalresearches on motivation both in psychology and in L2learning. Motivational theories inpsychology have developed from the behavioristic theory of stimulus-response, thehumanistic need theory to current cognitive theories among which most prominent ones arethe expectancy-value theory, goal theory, self determination theory and the theory ofplanned behavior. These theories provide realistic guidance and enlightenment for L2teaching from different perspectives. Meanwhile they propel the research on L2learningmotivation. By drawing upon the essence of the existing major motivational theories inpsychology and L2learning, Hungarian scholar Dornyei, the contemporary representativeresearcher in L2learning motivation, has successively constructed a three-level frameworkof L2motivation, a process model of L2motivation and the L2motivational self system,which together constitute his unique theoretical system of L2learning motivation. Thepresent study takes this system as its most essential theoretical basis.
With the advancements of theoretical researches on motivation, researchers havegradually started to carry out studies on motivational strategies in the fields of psychologyand L2teaching. Psychologists home and abroad have put forward a series of principlesand suggestions for motivating learning by exploring the application of motivationaltheories in psychology to classroom teaching. In the field of L2teaching, Dornyei, basedon his L2motivation theories, has developed a most comprehensive system of motivationalstrategies to date. This system serves as an important reference tool for the empiricalresearch on College English teachers’ use of motivational strategies in class.
Under the guidance of theoretical research findings, an empirical study was conductedto examine College English teachers’ actual use of motivational strategies in class. Thestudy consisted of two phases. With one hundred and five College English teachers fromShanghai University, Shanghai Normal University, Tongji University, Shanghai Instituteof Foreign Trade and Shanghai Dianji University as its subjects, the study in the firstphase was done to investigate the frequency of College English teachers' use of motiva-tional strategies in class as well as its correlation with teacher self efficacy and teachers’demographic variables(gender, educational qualifications, teaching seniority and profess-ional title) respectively. Data was collected via questionnaires and interviews. Descriptivestatistics of “frequency” questionnaires suggested most frequently used motivationalstrategies and least frequently used ones. Interview findings showed fairly high consist-ency with the results of questionnaires and revealed the subjective and objective reasonswhy teachers used certain strategies less often. Partial correlation analysis indicated thatteacher self efficacy and the frequency of teachers’ use of motivational strategies werepositively correlated while no significant correlation was found between teachers’ demo-graphic characteristics and the frequency of their use of motivational strategies.
To examine the effectiveness of the motivational strategies most frequently used byCollege English teachers and the effects of students’ English proficiency level on thestrategy effectiveness, a further study was carried out during the second phase withtwelve College English teachers and their ninety-six sophomores from Shanghai DianjiUniversity as its subjects. Data was collected through the instrumentality of question-naires, interviews and class observations. The descriptive statistical analysis of question- naire data revealed that there were some motivational strategies which students consideredquite effective and some others not so effective. What students said in the interviewconfirmed this revelation and also suggested the major reasons why some strategies failedto work on them. Besides, several strategies which students claimed to have motivatedtheir learning successfully were precisely what teachers seldom used in their teaching.Though not included in the questionnaire scale, some teachers’ teaching practice observedin class was affirmed to be fairly popular with most of the students. The independentsample T-test indicated that significant differences existed between effects of the majorityof motivational strategies on high-and low-proficiency groups, thereby verifying Dornyei’shypothesis that the English proficiency level of students may affect the effectiveness of themotivational strategies. The aforementioned research results and findings provide somepractical guidance and enlightenment for improving the efficiency of College Englishteaching.
Finally, based on the findings of the theoretical research and the empirical study, aswell as taking her own years of teaching experience as reference, the researcher furtherdiscussed the motivational strategies that corresponded with the specific contexts ofCollege English teaching in China. In many Chinese universities and colleges, gradeteaching is implemented in College English with students being divided into differentclasses according to their different English proficiency levels. And it’s not uncommon forstudents in the same class to show great differences in their English proficiency since thereare usually a large number of students in each English class. The relevant conclusion ofthe second-phase empirical study suggested that the majority of motivational strategiesexerted distinctively different motivating effects on high-and low-proficiency students.Therefore College English teachers should, upon taking into full account different psycho-logical characteristics and learning needs of high-and low-proficiency students, manage toadopt appropriate strategies accordingly to stimulate, sustain and enhance their motivation.Low-proficiency students are inclined to suffer from the feeling of inferiority and showlack of confidence in or indifferent attitudes towards learning English. To motivate them,teachers ought to focus on: providing opportunities for them to experience success on aregular basis so as to help them rebuild confidence in learning English; making English learning meaningful and fun to arouse their interest; evaluating student achievement in amotivating way by increasing the ratio of formative assessment in total assessment andtaking students’ efforts and progress into consideration when assessing them; using techni-ques of questioning and listening skillfully to show attention to and care for each student;developing and implementing an individualized strategy plan when necessary. High-proficiency students usually have high expectations for classroom teaching. If not satisfied,they are likely to feel frustrated and lose their original passion for learning. They may alsostart to slack themselves and lose the incentive for further learning as their short-termlearning objectives have been realized. Teachers can maintain and enhance the motivationof high-proficiency students for learning English by working on the following aspects:providing students with rich knowledge and experience of English culture by integratingcultural contents into teaching; clearly expressing high expectations for students andtraining students to construct a combination of the ideal English self and the ought-toEnglish self; instructing and encouraging students in the use of self-motivating skills tomotivate their own learning; designing some challenging learning tasks to help cultivatingstudents' higher-rank thinking abilities.
Large class teaching and multimedia-aided teaching are two distinguishing characteri-stics of contemporary College English teaching in China. In large classes, teachers andstudents are likely to become alienated, which can lead to sharp drop in students' enthusi-asm for learning. Teachers may also be discouraged from employing certain motivationalstrategies, for instance, they find it hard to spare time and efforts on instructing students ina large class to draft personalized learning objectives and learning plans. In view of thesedisadvantages of large class teaching, the researcher proposed that teachers, when teachingCollege English in a large class, should try the following strategies to motivate studentlearning to the maximum extent: adapting the teaching style to increase interactions withstudents; highlighting goal-orientation and task value; carrying out group learningactivities and enhancing the authenticity of communication between group members;emphasizing discipline and class rules. Integration of multimedia network technology hasbrought about new opportunities for English teaching. However, some relevant researchfindings showed that, due to the poor conditions of hardwares and softwares, the old-fashi- oned teaching concepts and methods of the teachers, teachers’and students’ lack of suffici-ent computer skills, etc, multimedia-aided teaching seemed to have failed to play its part inoptimizing teaching and stimulate learning. Therefore the researcher pointed out that, inorder to bring the motivating power of multimedia-aided teaching into full play, teachersshould make an attempt to: increase the communication and resource sharing betweenteachers and students by making use of the network platform; integrate technology effe-ctively into teaching by implementing task-based learning activities in CALL classrooms;promote network-based extracurricular autonomous learning.
Those motivational strategies proved effective in the second-phase empirical studycontained both intrinsic strategies and extrinsic ones. The researcher pointed out thatstudents could be best motivated when teachers employed intrinsic and extrinsic strategiesin a balanced and combined way. The following strategies are aimed at working on theintrinsic learning motivation of the students: to stimulate the situational interest andcultivate the individual interest; to promote autonomous learning by replacingteacher-controlled teaching with autonomy-supportive teaching; to design learning taskswhich match the students’ abilities so as to meet their competence needs; to establishharmonious and cooperative teacher-student and student-student relationships to meetstudents’ needs for feeling related; to strengthen students’ English language and culturalvalues to help them develop integrative motivation. In order to arouse students’ extrinsicmotivation, teachers should: make sure rewards exert positive effects on students’motivation for learning; praise students in an effective way; guide students’ progress withwarm and well-meaning criticism;“provoke” knowledge conflicts in class and encourageintergroup competition and intragroup cooperation when carrying out learning activities;use multi-interactions as extrinsic sources for motivating learning; emphasize the realisticsignificance and value of learning English. Teachers ought to combine intrinsic andextrinsic motivational strategies to achieve best possible results in stimulating andmaintaining students’ motivation for learning.
Relevant results of the first-phase empirical study indicated that significant positivecorrelations existed between the level of teachers’ self efficacy and the frequency of theiruse of motivational strategies. Enhancing teachers’ self efficacy will facilitate mobilizing their initiative in employing motivational strategies. The enhancement of teacher selfefficacy is in essence a kind of self-improvement, which can be achieved by: workingclosely with colleagues for mutual progress via cooperative development and peerobservation; promoting reflective teaching through writing teaching journals on a regularbasis and implementing timely action researches; establishing self-esteem and self-confidence through full commitment to the teaching career and professional learning;realizing self-motivation via construction of achievement portfolios; awakening healthyemotional and physical status.
The present study, based on theoretical and empirical research findings, explored indepth the motivational strategies used by teachers in class which applied to the CollegeEnglish teaching context in China. It provides practical guidance for teachers to improvethe effectiveness of College English teaching fundamentally by successfully stimulatingstudents’ motivation for learning.
引文
Abdi, S. W.2005., Motivating Elementary&Middle School Students with Selected Physical ScienceActivities[M]. Boston: Pearson.
Ajzen, I.,1988. Attitudes, Personality and Behavior[M]. Chicago: Dorsey Press.
Akbari, R.,2010. L2teacher characteristics as predictors of students’ academic achievement[EB/OL]. http://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume13/ej52/ej52a2/.
Alexander, P. A.,2008. Charting the course for the teaching profession: The energizing and sustainingrole of motivational forces[J]. Learning and Instruction18:483-91.
Ames, C.&Ames, R.,1981. Competitive versus individualistic goal structures: The salience of pastperformance information for causal attributions and affect[J]. Journal of EducationalPsychology73:411-418.
Ames, C.,1992. Classrooms, goals, structures and student motivation[J]. Journal of EducationalPsychology84:267-271.
Anderman, E.&Wolters, C.,2006. Goals, values, and affects: Influences on student motivation[A]. In P.Alexander&P. Winne(Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology(2nd edn.)[C](pp.369-390).Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Arai, K.,2004. What ‘demotivates’ language learners?: Qualitative study on demotivationalfactors and learners’ reactions[J]. Bulletin of Toyo Gakuen University12:39-47.
Argyle, M.,1983. The psychology of interpersonal behavior(4th edn.)[M]. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Ashton, P.,1985. Motivation and the teacher’s sense of efficacy[A]. In Ames, C. and Ames, R.(Eds.),Research on Motivation in Education: The Classroom Milieu[C](pp.141-171). Orlando, FL:Academic Press.
Ashton, P. T.&Webb, R. B.,1986. Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and studentachievement[M]. New York: Longman.
Atkinson, J. W.&Raynor, J. O.(Eds.),1974. Motivation and Achievement[C]. Washington, DC:Winston and Sons.
Awane, N.,2002. A study of good and bad groups[Z]. Unpublished Seminar Paper. School of EnglishStudies, University of Nottingham.
Bandura, A.,1977. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change[J]. PsychologicalBukketuin84:191-215.
Bandura, A.,1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercises of Control[M]. New York: Freeman.
Barson, J.,1997. Space, time and forum in the project-based foreign language classroom[A]. In Debski,R., Gassin, J.&Smith, M.(Eds.), Language learning through social computing[C]. Melbourne:ALAA and the Horwood Language Center.
Bassnett, S&Grundy, P.,1993. Language through literature: Creative language teaching throughliterature[M]. Harlow: Longman.
Beyer, B.,1984. Improving thinking skills——defining the problem[J]. Phi Delta Kappan65:558-560.
Boggiano, A., Barrett, M., Weiher, A., McClelland, G.&Luxk, C.,1987. Use of the maximal
operant procedure to motivate children’s intrinsic interest[J]. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology53:866-879.
Boud, D.,1981. Developing student autonomy in learning(2nd edn.)[M]. London: Kogan Page Limited.
Brindley, G.,1987. Factors affecting task difficulty[A]. In D. Nunan(Ed.), Guidelines for thedevelopment of curriculum resources[C]. Adelaide: National Curriculum Resource Center.
Brock, M., Yu, B.&Wong, M.,1992.‘Journaling’ together: Collaborative diary-keeping and teacherdevelopment[A]. In J. Flowerdew, M. Brock&S. Hsia(Eds.), Second language teachereducation[C](pp.295-307). Hong Kong: City Poly-technic of Hong Kong.
Brophy, J.,2010. Motivating Students to Learn (3rd edn.)[M]. NY: Routledge.
Brown, H. D.,1990. M&Ms for language classrooms? Another look at motivation. In Alatis, J. E.(Ed.)., Georgetown University round table on language and linguistics[C]. Washington, DC:Georgetown University Press:383-393.
Brown, H. D.,1994. Teaching by Principles[C]. Englewood Cliffs: NJ: Prentice Hall.
Butkowsky, I.&Willows, D.,1980. Cognitive motivational characteristics of children varying inreading ability: Evidence for learned helplessness in poor readers[J]. Journal of EducationalPsychology72:408-422.
Butler, R.&Kedar, A.,1990. Effects of intergroup competition and school philosophy on studentperceptions, group processes and performance[J]. Contemporary Educational Psychology15(4):301-18.
Callister,T.&Dunne, F.,1992.The computer as doorstep: Technology as disempowerment[J].Phi Delta Kappan74.
Canale,M.&Swain,M.,1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second languageteaching and testing[J]. Applied Linguistics1:1-47.
Castle, P.&Buckler, S.,2009. How to be a successful teacher: Strategies for personal and professionaldevelopment[M]. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Chacon, C. T.,2005. Teachers’ perceived efficacy among English as a foreign language teachers inmiddle schools in Venezuela[J]. Teaching and Teacher Education21:257-272.
Chambers, G. N.,1993. Talking the ‘de’ out of demotivation[J]. Language Learning Journal7:13-16.
Chambers, G. N.,1999. Motivating Language Learners[M]. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Chan, J.&Lam, S.,2008. Effects of competition on students’ self-efficacy in vicarious learning[J].British Journal of Educational Psychology78:95-108.
Chapman, D.,1997. A comparison of oral and email discourse in Japanese as a second language [J].On-Call11.
Cheng, H. F.&Dornyei, Z.,2007. The use of motivational strategies in language instruction: The caseof EFL teaching in Taiwan[J]. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching1:153-174.
Chiu, M. M.&Khoo, L.,2003. Rudeness and status effects during group problem solving[J]. Journal ofEducational Psychology95:506-523.
Clement, R.,1980. Ethnicity, contact and communicative competence in second language[A]. In H.Giles, W. P. Robinson&P. M. Smith (Eds.), Language: Social Psychological Perspectives[C](pp.147-154).Oxford: Pergamon.
Clement, R.,1986. Second language proficiency and acculturation: An investigation of the effects oflanguage status and individual characteristics[J]. Journal of Language and Social Psychology5:271-90.
Coladarci, T.,1992. Teachers’ sense of efficacy and commitment to teaching[J]. Journal of ExperimentalEducation60:323-337.
Corno, L.&Kanfer, R.,1993. The role of volition in learning and performance[J]. Review ofResearch in Education19:301-341.
Covington, M.,1992. Making the Grade: A Self-Worth Perspective on Motivation and SchoolReform[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Covington,M.V.,1998. The Will to Learn: A Guide for Motivating Young People[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Covington, M. V., Crutchfield, R. S., Davies, L. B.&Olton, R. M.,1974. The productive thinkingprogram: A course in learning to think[M]. Berkeley: University of California.
Crookes, G.&Schmidt, R. W.,1991. Motivation: Reopening the research agenda[J]. LanguageLearning41:469-512.
Csikszentmihalyi, M.,1997. Intrinsic motivation and effective teaching: A flow analysis[A]. In J. L.Bess(Ed.), Teaching well and like it: Motivating faculty to teach effectively[C](pp.72-89).Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Dana, D.,1999. Measuring the financial cost of organizational conflict[M]. Boston: MTI Publications.
Deci E. L., Kasser, T.&Ryan, R. M.,1997. Self-determined teaching: Opportunities and obstacles[A].In Bess, J. L.(Ed.), Teaching well and liking it: Motivating faculty to teacheffectively[C](pp.57-71). Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Deci, E. L.&Ryan, R. M.,1985. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior[M].New York: Plenum.
Deci, E. L.,&Ryan, R. M.,1991. A motivational approach to self: Integration inPersonality[A]. In R. Diensbier (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: Vol.38.Perspectives on motivation[C](pp.237-288). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press
Deci, E. L.,&Ryan, R. M.,1994. Promoting Self-determined Education[J]. Scandinavian Journal ofEducational Research38:3-14.
Demo,M. H.,&Gibson, S.,1985. Teacher’s sense of efficacy: An important factor in schoolimprovement[J]. The Elementary School Journal86:173-184.
Dinham, S., and Scott, C.,2000. Moving into the third, outer domain of teacher satisfaction[J]. Journalof Educational Administration38:379-96.
Dornyei, Z.,1994. Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom[J]. Modern LanguageJournal78:273-284.
Dornyei, Z.,1998. Demotivation in foreign language learning(C). Paper presented at the TESOL1998Congress, Seattle, WA, March.
Dornyei, Z.,2001. Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom[M]. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Dornyei, Z.,2005. The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in SecondLanguage Acquisition[M]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dornyei, Z.,2009. The L2motivation self system[A]. In Z. Dornyei&E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation,Language Identity and the L2Self[C](pp.9-42). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Dornyei, Z.,2011.(3rd edn.). Teaching and Researching Motivation[M]. Harlow: Longman.
Dornyei, Z.&Otto, I.,1998. Motivation in action: A process model of L2motivation[J]. Workingpapers in Applied Linguistics(Thames Valley University, London)4:43-69.
Dornyei, Z.&Csizer, K.,1998. Ten commandments for motivating language learners: Results of anempirical study[M]. Language Teaching Research2:203-229.
Domoney, L&Harris, S.,1993. Justified and ancient: Pop music in EFL classrooms[J]. ELT Journal3,234-241.
Doyle, W.,1990. Themes in teacher education research[A]. In W. R. Houston(Ed.), Handbook ofresearch on teacher education[C]. New York: Macmillan.
Eccles, J. S.&Wigfield, A.,1995. In the mind of the actor: The structure of adolescents’ achievementtask values and expectancy-related beliefs[J]. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin21:215-225.
Edge, J.,1992. Cooperative development: Professional self-development through cooperation withcolleagues[M]. Harlow: Longman.
Edge, J.,2002. Continuing cooperative development[M]. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Elbaz, F.,1983. Teacher thinking: A study of practical knowledge[M]. London: Croom Helm.
Ellis, R.,1986. Understanding Second Language Acquisition[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R.,2003. Task-based Language Learning and Teaching[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Evans, S. M.,1995. Professional portfolios: Documenting and presenting performance excellence[M].Virginia Beach, VA: Teacher’s Little Secrets.
Faerch, C.&Kasper, G.,1983. Strategies of Interlanguage Communication[M]. London: Longman.
Falout, J., Elwood, J.&Hood, M.,2009. Demotivation: Affective states and learning outcomes[J].System37(3):403-417.
Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., Hoffman, M.B.&Miller, R.,1980. Instrumental enrichment: An interventionprogram for cognitive modifiability[M]. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Flink, C., Boggiano, A., Main, D., Barrett, M.&P. Katz.,1992. Children’s achievement-relatedbehaviors: The role of extrinsic and intrinsic motivational orientations[A]. In A. Boogiano&T.Pittman(Eds.), Achievement and motivation: A sociation-developmental perspective[C](pp.189-214). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Freeman, D.,1996. Redefining research and what teachers know[A]. In K. Bailey and D. Nunan（Eds.）,Voices from the language classroom[C](pp.88-115). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Frymier, A.,2002. Making content relevant to students[A].In J. Chesebro&J. McCroskey (Eds.),Communication for Teachers[C](pp.83-92). Boston: Allyn&Bacon.
Gambrell, L. B.,&Marinak, B.,1997. Incentive and intrinsic motivation to read[A]. In J. T. Guthrie&A. Wigfield (Eds.), Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction[C](pp.205-217). Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.
Gardner, R. C.,1979. Social psychological aspects of second language acquisition[A]. In H. Giles and R.St. Clair (Eds.), Language and Social Psychology[C](pp.193-220). Oxford: Blackwell.
Gardner, R. C.,1985. Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes andMotivation[M]. London: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. C.&Lambert,W. E.,1972. Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning[M].Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Gardner, R. C. and MacIntyre, P. D.,1993. A student’s contributions to second language learning[M].Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Gardner, R. C.&Tremblay, P. F.,1994. On motivation, research agendas, and theoretical frameworks[J].Modern Language Journal78:359-368.
Gibson, S.&Dembo, M. H.,1984. Teacher efficacy: A construct validation[J]. Journal of EducationalPsychology76:569-582.
Giles, H.&Byrne, J. L.,1982. An intergroup approach to second language acquisition[J]. Journal ofMultilingual and Multicultural Development3:17-40.
Gonzalez-Loret, M.,2003. Designing task-based CALL to promote interaction: En buscadesmeraldas[J]. Language Learning&Technology(7).
Hackman, J. R.,1991. Work design[A]. In Steers, R.M. and Porter, L. W.(Eds.), Motivation and workBehavior[C](pp.418-444). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hall, G.,2005. Literature in language education[M]. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Harmer, J.,1991. The practice of English language teaching[M]. London: Longman.
Hartman, H.,2001. Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research and practice[M]. Boston:Kluwer.
Harrist, A. W.&Bradley, K.D.,2002. Social exclusion in the classroom: Teachers and students as agentsof change. In J. Aronson(Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological factorson education[C](pp.363-383). San Diago, CA: Academic Press.
Heckhausen, H.,1991. Motivation and Action[M]. New York: Springer.
Hidi, S.&Renninger, K. A.,2006. The four-phase model of interest development[J]. EducationalPsychologist41:111-127.
Holec, H.,1981. Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning [M]. Oxford: Pergamon.
Hoover-Dempsey,K.V.,Bassler,O.C.&Brissie，J.S.,1987. Parent involvement: Contributions of teacherefficacy, school socioeconomic status and other school characteristics[J]. American EducationalResearch Journal24(3):417-435.
Houston, J. P.,1985. Motivation[M]. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Howard, A.,&Bray, D.,1988. Managerial lives in transition[M]. New York: Guilford Press.
Hoy, W. K.&Woolfolk, A. E.,1993. Teachers’ sense of efficacy and the organizational health ofschools[J]. The Elementary School Journal93(4):355-372.
Hubbard, P.,2004. Learner training for effective use of CALL[A]. In: S. Fotos&C. Browne(Eds.), Newperspectives on CALL for second language classrooms[C]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hubbard, P., Jones, H., Thornton, B.&Wheeler, R.,1983. A training course for TEFL[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Hull, C. L.,1943. Principles of Behavior: An Introduction to Behavior Theory. New York:Appleton-Century-Crofts.
James,W.,1890. The Principles of Psychology. New York: H. Holt and Company.
Jarvis, J.,1992. Using diaries for teacher reflection on in-service courses[J]. English Language TeachingJournal46(2),133-142.
Johnson, D.&Johnson, R.,2007. Creative constructive controversy: Intellectual challenge in theclassroom(4th ed.). Edina MN: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D.&Johnson, R.,2009. Energizing Learning: The instructional power of conflict[J].Educational Researcher38:37-51.
Johnson, K.,2009. Second language teacher education: A social cultural perspective[M]. NY:Routledge.
Jonassen, D. H.,2003. The vain quest for a unified theory of learning?[J]. Educational Technology43(4):5-8.
Kang, S. J.,2005. Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a secondlanguage[J]. System33.
Karabenick, S. A.,1998. Strategic help seeking: Implications for learning and teaching[M]. Hillsdale,NJ: Erlbaum.
Keblawi, F.,2005. Demotivation among Arab learners of English as a foreign language[C]//Second international online conference on second and foreign languageteaching and research, September.
Keller, J.,1983. Motivational design of instruction[A]. In Reigeluth(Ed.), Instructional-design theoriesand models: An overview of their current status[C](pp.383-434). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kohn, A.,1993. Punished by Rewards: The trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A’s, praise, andother bribes[M]. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Krapp, A.,2002. An educational-psychological theory of interest and its relation to SDT[A]. In E.Deci&R. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research[C](pp.405-427). Rochester, NY:University of Rochester Press.
Krashen. S. D.,1985. The input hypothesis: Issues and implications[M]. London: Longman.
Kubanyiova, M.,2009. Possible selves in language teacher development[A]. In Z. Dornyei&E.Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, Language Identity and the L2Self[C](pp.314-332). Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Kubota, R.,1999. Word processing and WWW projects in a college Japanese language class[J].Foreign Language Annuals (32).
Latham, G. P., Erez, M.&Locke, E.,1988. Resolving scientific disputes by the joint design of crucialexperiments by the antagonists: Applications to the Erez-Latham dispute regarding participation ingoal setting[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology73:753-772.
Leach, L., Neutze, G.&Zepke, N.,1998. Motivation in assessment[A]. In Brown, S., Armstrong, S.&Thompson, G.(Eds.), Motivating students[C](pp.201-210). London: Kogan Page Limited.
Locke, E. A.&Latham, G. P.,1990. A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance[M]. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Locke, E. A.&Latham, G. P.,2002. Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and taskmotivation: A35-year odyssey[J]. American Psychology57:705-717.
MacIntyre, P. D., Mackinnon&Clement, R.,2009. The baby, the bathwater, and the future of languagelearning motivation research[A]. In Z. Dornyei&E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, LanguageIdentity and the L2Self[C](pp.43-65). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Maehr, M.,&Meyer, H.,1997. Understanding motivation and schooling: Where we’ve been, where weare, and where we need to go[J]. Educational Psychology Review9:371-409.
Malone, T.&Lepper, M.,1987. Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivation forlearning[A]. In Snow., R.&M. Farr(Eds.), Aptitude, learning, and instruction: III. Conative andaffective process analysis[C](pp.223-253). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Marsh, H. W. and Craven, R.G.,1997. Academic self-concept: Beyond the dustbowl[A]. In G. Phye(Ed.), Handbook of classroom assessment: Learning, achievement and adjustment[C]. San Diego:Academic Press.
Maslow, A.,1962. Toward a Psychology of Being[M]. NY: Van Nostrand.
McCombs, B. L.&Pope, J. E.,1994. Motivating hard to reach students[M]. Washington, DC: AmericanPsychological Association.
McCombs, B. L.&Whisler, J. S.,1997. The Learner-Centered Classroom and School: Strategies forIncreasing student motivation and achievement[M]. Michigan: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Mcdougall, W.,1922. An Introduction to Social Psychology[M]. London: Methuen&co.
Menegale, M.,2008. Expanding teacher-student interaction through more effective classroom questions:From traditional teacher-fronted lessons to student-centered lessons in CLIL[EB/OL]. http://lear.unive.it/bitstream/10278/1005/1/05Menegale.pdf.
Midgley, C., Kaplan, A.&Middleton, M.,2001. Performance-approach goals: Good for what, forwhom, under what circumstances, and at what cost?[J]. Journal of Educational Psychology93:77-86.
Mills, S. H.,1995. Stress management for the individual teacher[M]. Lancaster: Framework PressEducational Publishers Ltd.
Murphy, L., Shelley, M., White, C.&Baumann, U.,2006. Language teaching at a distance:Establishing key principles to develop professional practice[C]. Paper presented at the thirdBiennial Conference for Languages in Higher Education. Cardiff, UK.
Murray, D. E.&Christison, M.,2011. What English language teachers need to know[M]. Oxon:Routledge.
Newman, F. M., Rutter, R. A.&Smith, M.S.,1989. Organizational factors that affect school sense ofefficacy, community and expectations[J]. Sociology of Education62:221-238.
Newman, R.S.,1994. Adaptive help seeking: A strategy of self-regulated learning[A]. In D. H. Schunk&B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educationalapplications[C](pp.283-301). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Newman, R. S.,2000. Social influences on the development of children’s adaptive help seeking: Therole of parents, teachers and peers[J]. Developmental Review20:350-404.
Newman, R. S.,2008. The motivational role of adaptive help seeking in self-regulated learning[A]. In D.H. Schunk&B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning[C](pp.315-337). NY:Taylor&Francis Group, LLC.
Noels, K. A., Clement, R.&Pelletier, L. G.,1999. Perceptions of teachers’ communicative style andstudents’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation[J]. Modern Language Journal83.
Nunan, D.,1989. Designing tasks for the communicative classroom[M]. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Oxford, R. L.,1998. The unraveling tapestry: Teacher and course characteristics associated withdemotivation in the language classroom[C]. Paper presented at the TESOL1998Congress,Seattle, WA, March.
Oxford, R. L.&Shearin, J.,1994. Language learning motivation: Expanding the theoreticalframework[J]. Modern Language Journal78:12-28.
Pennington, M. C.,1995. Work satisfaction, motivation and commitment in teaching English as asecond language[Z]. ERIC Document ED404850.
Pierce, W. D., Cameron,J., Banko, K.,&So, S.,2003. Positive Effects of rewards and performancestandards on intrinsic motivation[J]. Psychological Record53:561-579.
Pintrich, P.,2000. The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning[A]. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich&M. Zeidner（Eds.），Handbook of self-regulation[C](pp.451-502). San Diego, CA: AcademicPress.
Pintrich, P. R.&Schunk, D. H.,1996. Motivation in education: Theory, research and applications[M].Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Posner, G. J.,1989. Field experience: Methods of reflective teaching(2nd edn.)[M]. NY: Longman.
Raffini, J. P.,1993. Winners without losers: Structures and strategies for increasing student motivationto learn[M]. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Raffini, J.P.,1996.150Ways to Increase Intrinsic Motivation in the Classroom[M]. NeedhamHeights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Reeve, J.&Deci, E.,1996. Elements of the competitive situation that affect intrinsic motivation[J].Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin22:24-33.
Reeve, J., Nix, G.&Hamm, D.,2003. The experience of self-determination in intrinsicmotivation and the conundrum of choice[J]. Journal of Educational Psychology95.
Reeve, J., Ryan, R., Deci, E. L.&Jang, H.,2008. Understanding and promoting autonomousself-regulation: A self-determination theory perspective[A]. In D. H. Schunk&B. J. Zimmerman(Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning[C](pp.223-244). NY: Taylor&Francis Group, LLC.
Richards, J. C.,1998. Beyond training[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C.&Farrell, T. S. C.,2005. Professional development for language teachers: Strategies forteacher learning[M]. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C.&Lockhart, C.,1994. Reflective teaching in second language classrooms[M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Risager, K.,2007. Language and culture pedagogy: From a national to a transnational paradigm[M].Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.
Romi, S.&Daniel, E.,1999. Integration of students with special needs in the regular classroom:Attitudes of preservice teachers in Israeli colleges(C). Paper presented at the third internationalconference on teacher education “Almost2000: Crisis and changes in the preparation of teachers”,Beit Bert College, Israel, July.
Rosenholtz, S.J.,&Simpson, C.,1990. Workplace conditions and the rise and fall of teachers’commitment[J]. Sociology of Education63:241-257.
Ross, J. A.,1994. Beliefs that make a difference: The origins and impacts of teacher efficacy[C]. Paperpresented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Association for curriculum studies, Calgary,Alberta, Canada, June.
Rotter, J. B.,1966. General expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement[J].Psychological Monographs: General and Applied80:1-28.
Ryan, A.&Patrick, H.,2001. The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivationand engagement during middle school[J]. American Educational Research Journal38:437-460.
Ryan,R. M.&Deci, E. L.,2000. Self-determination theory and facilitation of intrinsicmotivation, social development and well-being[J]. American Psychologist55.
Ryan, S.,2009. Self and identity in L2motivation in Japan: The ideal L2self and Japanese learnersof English[A]. In Z. Dornyei&E. Ushioda (Eds.),Motivation, language identity and the L2self[C](pp.120=143). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Rudnai, Z.,1996. Demotivation in learning English among secondary school students in Budapest[D].Unpublished master thesis. E tv s Loránd University.
Sagor, R.,1992. How to conduct collaborative action research[M]. Alexandria, VA: Association forSupervision and Curriculum Development.
Schraw, G.&S. Lehman, S.,2001. Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions forresearch[J]. Educational Psychological Review13:23-52.
Schulman, L. S.,1987. Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform[J]. HarvardEducational Review57(1):1-22.
Schumann, J. H.,1978. The acculturation model for second language acquisition[A]. In Gingras, R.(Ed.), Second language acquisition and foreign language teaching[C](pp.27-107). Arlington, VA:Center for Applied Linguistics.
Schumann, J. H.,1986. Research on the acculturation model for second language acquisition[J]. Journalof Multilingual and Multicultural Development7:379-92.
Shavelson, R. J.&Stern, P.,1981. Research on teachers’ pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decisionsand behavior[J]. Review of Educational Research51:455-498.
Shoaib, A.,2004. What motivates and demotivates English teachers in Saudi Arabia: A qualitativeperspective[D](unpublished PhD dissertation). Nottingham: University of Nottingham, School ofEnglish Studies.
Short, E. J.&Weissberg-Benchell, J. A.,1989The triple alliance for learning: cognition, metacognition,and motivation[A]. In C. B. McCormick et al(Eds.), Cognitive strategy Research[C]. NY: Springer,Veilaz.
Sivan, E.&Roehler, L.,1986. Motivational statements in explicit teacher explanations and theirrelationship to students’ metacognition in reading[J]. National Reading Conference Yearbook35:178-184.
Skehan, P.,1998. A cognitive approach to language learning[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skinner, B.F.,1957. Verbal Behavior[M]. New York: Appleton.
Slavin, R.E.,2004. Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice(7th edn.)[M]. Beijing: PekingUniversity Press.
Stefanou, C., Perencevich, K., Cintio, M.&Turner, J.,2004. Supporting autonomy in the classroom:Ways teachers encourage student decision making and ownership[J]. Educational Psychologist39:97-110.
Stipek, D. J.,1988. Motivate to learn: From theory to practice[M]. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Stix, A.&Hrbek, F.,2006. Teachers as Classroom Coaches: How to motivate students across thecontent areas[M]. Alexandria: ASCD.
Stockwell, G.&Levy, M.,2001. Sustainability of email interactions between native speakers andnonnative speakers[J]. Computer Assisted Language Learning (14).
Thornsbury, S.,1997. About language[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Toyoda, E.,2000. Arduous but exciting: Web-creation project in Japanese[J]. Computer AssistedLanguage Learning13.
Tremblay, P. F.&Gardner, R. C.,1995. Expanding the motivation construct in language learning[J].Modern Language Journal79:505-20.
Tschannen-Moran, M.&Woolfolk Hoy, A.,2001. Teacher efficacy: Capturing and elusive construct[J].Teaching and Teacher Education17:783-805.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A.&Hoy, W. K.,1998. Teacher efficacy: Its meaning andmeasure[J]. Review of Educational Research68:202-248.
Ushioda, E.1996. Developing a dynamic concept of L2motivation[A]. In Hichey, T. and Williams,J.(Eds.), Language, Education and Society in a Changing World[C](pp.239-245). Clevedon:Multilingual Matters.
Ushioda, E.,1998. Effective motivational thinking: A cognitive theoretical approach to the study oflanguage learning motivation[A]. In Soler, E. A.&Espurz, V. C.(Eds.), Current issues in Englishlanguage methodology[C](pp.77-89). Castello de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I.
Ushioda, E.,2009. A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity[A].In Z. Dornyei&E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2self[C](pp.215-228). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Wallace, M. J.,1991. Training foreign language teachers: A reflective approach[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Wallace, M. J.,1998. Action research for language teachers[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Walsh, S.,2006. Investigating classroom discourse[M]. Oxon: Routledge.
Weiner, B.,1992. Human Motivation: Metaphors, Theories and Research[M]. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Williams, M.&R. Burden.,1997. Psychology for Language Teachers[M]. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Willis, J. A.,1996. Flexible framework for task-based learning[A]. In Willis, J.&Willis,D.(Eds.), Challenge and Change in Language Teaching[C], Oxford: Heinemann.
Wlodknowski, R. J.,1986. Enhancing Adult Motivation to Learn[M]. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wolters, c.,2004. Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structures and goal orientations topredict students’ motivation, cognition, and achievement[J]. Journal of Educational Psychology96:236-250.
Woolfolk, A. E.&Hoy, W. K.,1990. Prospective teachers’ sense of efficacy and beliefs about control[J].Journal of Educational Psychology82:81-91.
Yavuz, S.,2007. Socio-Demographic predictors of EFL teacher efficacy[J]. Journal of Language andLinguistic Studies3:304-324.
Yell, M. Scheurman, G.&Reynolds, K.,2004. The anticipation guide: Motivating students to findout about history[J]. Social Education68:361-363.
Zimmerman, B. J.,2008. Goal setting: A key proactive source of academic self-regulation[A]. In D. H.Schunk&B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning[C]. NY: Taylor&Francis Group, LLC.
Zimmerman, B. J.&Campillo, M.,2003. Motivating self-regulated problem solvers[A]. In Davidson, J.E.&R. J. Sternberg(Eds.), The nature of problem solving[C](pp.233-262). New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Zimmerman, B. J.&Kitsantas, A.,1999. Acquiring writing revision skill: Shifting from process tooutcome self-regulatory goals[J]. Journal of Educational Psychology91:1-10.
陈坚林,2004.大学英语网络化教学的理论内涵及其应用分析[J].外语电化教学(6):46-50.
陈坚林,2010.计算机网络与外语课程的整合———项基于大学英语教学改革的研究[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
程晓堂,岳颖,2011.语言作为心智发展的工具—兼论外语学习的意义[J].中国外语(1):51-57.
邓杰,邓颖玲,2007.网络环境下英语视听说任务型教学研究[J].外语教学(5):45-49.
杜福兴,2003.谈英语学习动机及其激发与保持[J].外语教学(4):51-54.
方芒,2003.论外语学习动机及其激发[J].吉首大学学报（社会科学版）(4):120-123.
方雪晴,2009.非英语专业学生课外网络自主学习情况的调查与分析[J].山东外语教学(5):60-64.
方雪晴,2010.从讲授转向建构——基于学习主体研究的外语学习环境创新[J].保山学院学报(4):65-70.
方雪晴,2010.论英语口语合作学习中的交际真实性[J].外语教学（专刊）:128-129.
方雪晴,2011.基于认知评价理论对CALL课堂任务型学习活动设计的思考[J].外语电化教学(4):16-20.
付晓丽,2007.外语学习动机激发策略[J].教学与管理(6)：94-95.
甘正东,2000.反思性教学：外语教师自身发展的有效途径[J].外语界(4):12-16.
高一虹,赵媛,程英,周燕,2003.中国大学本科生英语学习动机类型[J].现代外语(1):29-38.
高志军,陶玉凤,2009.基于项目的学习(PBL)模式在教学中的应用[J].电化教育研究(2):92-95.
桂诗春,2003.在南京“大学英语教学改革座谈会”上的讲话[Z].
华惠芳,1998.试论英语学习动机与策略的研究[J].外语界(3):44-47.
季明雨,2004.关于英语教师在教学中动机策略运用的调查[J].外语界(6):34-40.
姜飞月,2005.学校变革中的教师效能[D].博士学位论文.南京师范大学.
教育部办公厅,2007.《大学英语课程教学要求》[Z].
李悦娥,范宏雅,2003.话语分析[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
李荣兰,2010.成人之美与助人成材——教师如何激励学生[M].长春:东北师范大学出版社.
梁良,2008.大学英语课堂中的动机减弱初探[J].天津工程师范学院学报(3):75-78.
刘春燕,钟志贤,2004.基于信息技术的任务型外语学习环境设计[J].电化教育研究(7):40-44.
刘东楼,2002.外语教学中动机问题的几点思考[J].外语教学(4):58-62.
刘清华,2004.教师知识的模型建构研究[D].西南师范大学教育科学研究所博士论文.
刘润清,1990.决定语言学习的几个因素[J].外语教学与研究(2):36-42.
刘雅雯,2010.大学英语教师的教学效能感与课堂提问行为关系的研究[J].宁波教育学院学报(2):62-65,76.
罗晓路,2000.专家‐新手型教师教学效能感和教学监控能力研究[J].心理科学(6):741-742.
马冬梅,1999.外语学习动机研究新发展及其对教学的指导意义[J].江苏外语教学研究,(2):65-68.
毛晋平,2005.教师个人教学效能感与成就动机及学习学习归因关系的研究[J].湖南师范大学教育科学学报(1):119-121.
母燕芳,2011.高职高专学生外语学习动机调查[J].长江大学学报（社科版）:128‐129
秦美娟,何广铿,2009.大学英语教师信息素养内涵探讨[J].外语界(5).
秦晓晴,2002.动机理论研究及其对外语学习的意义[J].外语研究(4):74-78.
秦晓晴,2007.中国大学生英语学习动机研究[M].北京：高等教育出版社.
秦晓晴,文秋芳,2002.非英专大学生学习动机内在结构[J].外语教学与研究(1):51-58.
任英杰,戴心来,2004.网络环境下基于项目的协作学习探究[J].电化教育研究(12):57-60.
施惠平,高亚利,2010.大学英语机辅语言教学中教师效能感与教师态度的研究[J].长春大学学报(8):88-92.
束定芳,2004.外语教学改革——问题与对策[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
束定芳,庄智象,1996.现代外语教学－理论、实践与方法[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
王初明,1989.中国学生的外语学习模式[J].外语教学与研究(4):47-52.
王笃勤,2002.大学英语自主学习能力的培养[J].外语界(5).
王静,2010.网络环境下任务型口译教学模式的设计与实践[J].外语电化教学(3):34-37.
王蕾,曾洁,2009.动机衰竭理论研究现状[J].四川教育学院学报(6):91-93.
王觅,钟志贤,2008.论促进知识建构的学习环境设计[J].开放教育研究(4):22‐27.
王天发, Malderez,A,2006.大学生英语学习动机衰竭现象研究[J].澳门理工学报(2).
王晓旻,张文忠,2005.国内外语学习动机研究现状分析[J].外语界(4):58-65.
王振宏,2001.国外教师效能研究述评[J].心理学动态9(2):146-149.
武和平,2001.九十年代外语/二语学习动机研究述略[J].外语教学与研究(2):116-121.
吴增强,1996.论学习困难学生的动机激发[J].中国教育学刊(2):38-40,52.
肖福寿,1999.外语学习中的动机问题[J].西安外国语学院学报(4):54-57.
辛涛,申继亮，林崇德,1994.教师自我效能感与学校因素关系的研究[J].教育研究(10):16-20.
徐锦芬,2007.大学外语自主学习理论与实践[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社.
徐晓霞,2003.谈反思教学实践[J].长春大学学报(5):51-52.
杨丰宁,1993.心理情感因素对外语教学的启示[J].山东外语教学(3):63-73.
杨刚,徐晓东,2009.远程教育中师生网络互动的本质与特征[J].中国电化教育(12):50-55.
杨树芳,2010.基于校本课程开发的英语教师自我效能感培养[J].江苏教育学院学报（社会科学版）(3):21-23，42.
杨云会,魏伟,姜涛,2007.远程学习中成人学习斗殴那估计策略研究[J].现代远程教育研究(2):26-28
殷银芳,苗兴伟,2008.外语课堂环境下口语交际能力的培养模式[J].外语教学(9):42-45,50.
尤陈静,2010.高中英语教师的动机策略研究[J].解放军外国语学院学报(3):72-75,126.
俞国良,罗晓路,教师教学效能感及其相关因素研究[J].北京师范大学学报〔人文社会科学版)(1):72-79.
张德禄,苗兴伟,李学宁,2005.功能语言学与外语教学[M].北京：外语教学与研究出版社.
张卫东,1992.如何激发学生的外语学习动机[J].山东外语教学(1-2):163-166.
张卫红,孙成贵,2010.大学英语新课改背景下教师专业发展路径探析[J].外语学刊(4).
张正东,1985.外语教学的情感因素[J].西南师院学报(2):127-131.
赵丽琴,2010.怎样让学生爱学习:激发学习动机的7种策略[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社.
赵娜,王俊菊,2010.中学英语教师课堂动机策略研究[J].外语教学理论与实践(1):47-54.
衷克定,闫海连,2003.学习动机激发与教学材料组织[J].中国远程教育(21):37-39.
钟志贤,2004.促进学习者高阶思维发展的教学设计假设[J].电化教育研究(12):21‐28.
周晖,2010.基于BBS的网络学习社区建设:教学交互策略及其技术——以北京电大BBS实时交互为例[J].北京广播电视大学学报(5):58-61.
周新富,1991.国民小学教师专业承诺、教师效能信念与学生学业成就关系之研究[D].硕士论文.高雄师范大学教育研究所.
Ajzen, I.,1988. Attitudes, Personality and Behavior[M]. Chicago: Dorsey Press.
Akbari, R.,2010. L2teacher characteristics as predictors of students’ academic achievement[EB/OL]. http://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume13/ej52/ej52a2/.
Alexander, P. A.,2008. Charting the course for the teaching profession: The energizing and sustainingrole of motivational forces[J]. Learning and Instruction18:483-91.
Ames, C.&Ames, R.,1981. Competitive versus individualistic goal structures: The salience of pastperformance information for causal attributions and affect[J]. Journal of EducationalPsychology73:411-418.
Ames, C.,1992. Classrooms, goals, structures and student motivation[J]. Journal of EducationalPsychology84:267-271.
Anderman, E.&Wolters, C.,2006. Goals, values, and affects: Influences on student motivation[A]. In P.Alexander&P. Winne(Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology(2nd edn.)[C](pp.369-390).Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Arai, K.,2004. What ‘demotivates’ language learners?: Qualitative study on demotivationalfactors and learners’ reactions[J]. Bulletin of Toyo Gakuen University12:39-47.
Argyle, M.,1983. The psychology of interpersonal behavior(4th edn.)[M]. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Ashton, P.,1985. Motivation and the teacher’s sense of efficacy[A]. In Ames, C. and Ames, R.(Eds.),Research on Motivation in Education: The Classroom Milieu[C](pp.141-171). Orlando, FL:Academic Press.
Ashton, P. T.&Webb, R. B.,1986. Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and studentachievement[M]. New York: Longman.
Atkinson, J. W.&Raynor, J. O.(Eds.),1974. Motivation and Achievement[C]. Washington, DC:Winston and Sons.
Awane, N.,2002. A study of good and bad groups[Z]. Unpublished Seminar Paper. School of EnglishStudies, University of Nottingham.
Bandura, A.,1977. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change[J]. PsychologicalBukketuin84:191-215.
Bandura, A.,1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercises of Control[M]. New York: Freeman.
Barson, J.,1997. Space, time and forum in the project-based foreign language classroom[A]. In Debski,R., Gassin, J.&Smith, M.(Eds.), Language learning through social computing[C]. Melbourne:ALAA and the Horwood Language Center.
Bassnett, S&Grundy, P.,1993. Language through literature: Creative language teaching throughliterature[M]. Harlow: Longman.
Beyer, B.,1984. Improving thinking skills——defining the problem[J]. Phi Delta Kappan65:558-560.
Boggiano, A., Barrett, M., Weiher, A., McClelland, G.&Luxk, C.,1987. Use of the maximal
operant procedure to motivate children’s intrinsic interest[J]. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology53:866-879.
Boud, D.,1981. Developing student autonomy in learning(2nd edn.)[M]. London: Kogan Page Limited.
Brindley, G.,1987. Factors affecting task difficulty[A]. In D. Nunan(Ed.), Guidelines for thedevelopment of curriculum resources[C]. Adelaide: National Curriculum Resource Center.
Brock, M., Yu, B.&Wong, M.,1992.‘Journaling’ together: Collaborative diary-keeping and teacherdevelopment[A]. In J. Flowerdew, M. Brock&S. Hsia(Eds.), Second language teachereducation[C](pp.295-307). Hong Kong: City Poly-technic of Hong Kong.
Brophy, J.,2010. Motivating Students to Learn (3rd edn.)[M]. NY: Routledge.
Brown, H. D.,1990. M&Ms for language classrooms? Another look at motivation. In Alatis, J. E.(Ed.)., Georgetown University round table on language and linguistics[C]. Washington, DC:Georgetown University Press:383-393.
Brown, H. D.,1994. Teaching by Principles[C]. Englewood Cliffs: NJ: Prentice Hall.
Butkowsky, I.&Willows, D.,1980. Cognitive motivational characteristics of children varying inreading ability: Evidence for learned helplessness in poor readers[J]. Journal of EducationalPsychology72:408-422.
Butler, R.&Kedar, A.,1990. Effects of intergroup competition and school philosophy on studentperceptions, group processes and performance[J]. Contemporary Educational Psychology15(4):301-18.
Callister,T.&Dunne, F.,1992.The computer as doorstep: Technology as disempowerment[J].Phi Delta Kappan74.
Canale,M.&Swain,M.,1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second languageteaching and testing[J]. Applied Linguistics1:1-47.
Castle, P.&Buckler, S.,2009. How to be a successful teacher: Strategies for personal and professionaldevelopment[M]. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Chacon, C. T.,2005. Teachers’ perceived efficacy among English as a foreign language teachers inmiddle schools in Venezuela[J]. Teaching and Teacher Education21:257-272.
Chambers, G. N.,1993. Talking the ‘de’ out of demotivation[J]. Language Learning Journal7:13-16.
Chambers, G. N.,1999. Motivating Language Learners[M]. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Chan, J.&Lam, S.,2008. Effects of competition on students’ self-efficacy in vicarious learning[J].British Journal of Educational Psychology78:95-108.
Chapman, D.,1997. A comparison of oral and email discourse in Japanese as a second language [J].On-Call11.
Cheng, H. F.&Dornyei, Z.,2007. The use of motivational strategies in language instruction: The caseof EFL teaching in Taiwan[J]. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching1:153-174.
Chiu, M. M.&Khoo, L.,2003. Rudeness and status effects during group problem solving[J]. Journal ofEducational Psychology95:506-523.
Clement, R.,1980. Ethnicity, contact and communicative competence in second language[A]. In H.Giles, W. P. Robinson&P. M. Smith (Eds.), Language: Social Psychological Perspectives[C](pp.147-154).Oxford: Pergamon.
Clement, R.,1986. Second language proficiency and acculturation: An investigation of the effects oflanguage status and individual characteristics[J]. Journal of Language and Social Psychology5:271-90.
Coladarci, T.,1992. Teachers’ sense of efficacy and commitment to teaching[J]. Journal of ExperimentalEducation60:323-337.
Corno, L.&Kanfer, R.,1993. The role of volition in learning and performance[J]. Review ofResearch in Education19:301-341.
Covington, M.,1992. Making the Grade: A Self-Worth Perspective on Motivation and SchoolReform[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Covington,M.V.,1998. The Will to Learn: A Guide for Motivating Young People[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Covington, M. V., Crutchfield, R. S., Davies, L. B.&Olton, R. M.,1974. The productive thinkingprogram: A course in learning to think[M]. Berkeley: University of California.
Crookes, G.&Schmidt, R. W.,1991. Motivation: Reopening the research agenda[J]. LanguageLearning41:469-512.
Csikszentmihalyi, M.,1997. Intrinsic motivation and effective teaching: A flow analysis[A]. In J. L.Bess(Ed.), Teaching well and like it: Motivating faculty to teach effectively[C](pp.72-89).Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Dana, D.,1999. Measuring the financial cost of organizational conflict[M]. Boston: MTI Publications.
Deci E. L., Kasser, T.&Ryan, R. M.,1997. Self-determined teaching: Opportunities and obstacles[A].In Bess, J. L.(Ed.), Teaching well and liking it: Motivating faculty to teacheffectively[C](pp.57-71). Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Deci, E. L.&Ryan, R. M.,1985. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior[M].New York: Plenum.
Deci, E. L.,&Ryan, R. M.,1991. A motivational approach to self: Integration inPersonality[A]. In R. Diensbier (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: Vol.38.Perspectives on motivation[C](pp.237-288). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press
Deci, E. L.,&Ryan, R. M.,1994. Promoting Self-determined Education[J]. Scandinavian Journal ofEducational Research38:3-14.
Demo,M. H.,&Gibson, S.,1985. Teacher’s sense of efficacy: An important factor in schoolimprovement[J]. The Elementary School Journal86:173-184.
Dinham, S., and Scott, C.,2000. Moving into the third, outer domain of teacher satisfaction[J]. Journalof Educational Administration38:379-96.
Dornyei, Z.,1994. Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom[J]. Modern LanguageJournal78:273-284.
Dornyei, Z.,1998. Demotivation in foreign language learning(C). Paper presented at the TESOL1998Congress, Seattle, WA, March.
Dornyei, Z.,2001. Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom[M]. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Dornyei, Z.,2005. The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in SecondLanguage Acquisition[M]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dornyei, Z.,2009. The L2motivation self system[A]. In Z. Dornyei&E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation,Language Identity and the L2Self[C](pp.9-42). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Dornyei, Z.,2011.(3rd edn.). Teaching and Researching Motivation[M]. Harlow: Longman.
Dornyei, Z.&Otto, I.,1998. Motivation in action: A process model of L2motivation[J]. Workingpapers in Applied Linguistics(Thames Valley University, London)4:43-69.
Dornyei, Z.&Csizer, K.,1998. Ten commandments for motivating language learners: Results of anempirical study[M]. Language Teaching Research2:203-229.
Domoney, L&Harris, S.,1993. Justified and ancient: Pop music in EFL classrooms[J]. ELT Journal3,234-241.
Doyle, W.,1990. Themes in teacher education research[A]. In W. R. Houston(Ed.), Handbook ofresearch on teacher education[C]. New York: Macmillan.
Eccles, J. S.&Wigfield, A.,1995. In the mind of the actor: The structure of adolescents’ achievementtask values and expectancy-related beliefs[J]. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin21:215-225.
Edge, J.,1992. Cooperative development: Professional self-development through cooperation withcolleagues[M]. Harlow: Longman.
Edge, J.,2002. Continuing cooperative development[M]. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Elbaz, F.,1983. Teacher thinking: A study of practical knowledge[M]. London: Croom Helm.
Ellis, R.,1986. Understanding Second Language Acquisition[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R.,2003. Task-based Language Learning and Teaching[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Evans, S. M.,1995. Professional portfolios: Documenting and presenting performance excellence[M].Virginia Beach, VA: Teacher’s Little Secrets.
Faerch, C.&Kasper, G.,1983. Strategies of Interlanguage Communication[M]. London: Longman.
Falout, J., Elwood, J.&Hood, M.,2009. Demotivation: Affective states and learning outcomes[J].System37(3):403-417.
Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., Hoffman, M.B.&Miller, R.,1980. Instrumental enrichment: An interventionprogram for cognitive modifiability[M]. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Flink, C., Boggiano, A., Main, D., Barrett, M.&P. Katz.,1992. Children’s achievement-relatedbehaviors: The role of extrinsic and intrinsic motivational orientations[A]. In A. Boogiano&T.Pittman(Eds.), Achievement and motivation: A sociation-developmental perspective[C](pp.189-214). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Freeman, D.,1996. Redefining research and what teachers know[A]. In K. Bailey and D. Nunan（Eds.）,Voices from the language classroom[C](pp.88-115). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Frymier, A.,2002. Making content relevant to students[A].In J. Chesebro&J. McCroskey (Eds.),Communication for Teachers[C](pp.83-92). Boston: Allyn&Bacon.
Gambrell, L. B.,&Marinak, B.,1997. Incentive and intrinsic motivation to read[A]. In J. T. Guthrie&A. Wigfield (Eds.), Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction[C](pp.205-217). Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.
Gardner, R. C.,1979. Social psychological aspects of second language acquisition[A]. In H. Giles and R.St. Clair (Eds.), Language and Social Psychology[C](pp.193-220). Oxford: Blackwell.
Gardner, R. C.,1985. Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes andMotivation[M]. London: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. C.&Lambert,W. E.,1972. Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning[M].Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Gardner, R. C. and MacIntyre, P. D.,1993. A student’s contributions to second language learning[M].Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Gardner, R. C.&Tremblay, P. F.,1994. On motivation, research agendas, and theoretical frameworks[J].Modern Language Journal78:359-368.
Gibson, S.&Dembo, M. H.,1984. Teacher efficacy: A construct validation[J]. Journal of EducationalPsychology76:569-582.
Giles, H.&Byrne, J. L.,1982. An intergroup approach to second language acquisition[J]. Journal ofMultilingual and Multicultural Development3:17-40.
Gonzalez-Loret, M.,2003. Designing task-based CALL to promote interaction: En buscadesmeraldas[J]. Language Learning&Technology(7).
Hackman, J. R.,1991. Work design[A]. In Steers, R.M. and Porter, L. W.(Eds.), Motivation and workBehavior[C](pp.418-444). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hall, G.,2005. Literature in language education[M]. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Harmer, J.,1991. The practice of English language teaching[M]. London: Longman.
Hartman, H.,2001. Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research and practice[M]. Boston:Kluwer.
Harrist, A. W.&Bradley, K.D.,2002. Social exclusion in the classroom: Teachers and students as agentsof change. In J. Aronson(Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological factorson education[C](pp.363-383). San Diago, CA: Academic Press.
Heckhausen, H.,1991. Motivation and Action[M]. New York: Springer.
Hidi, S.&Renninger, K. A.,2006. The four-phase model of interest development[J]. EducationalPsychologist41:111-127.
Holec, H.,1981. Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning [M]. Oxford: Pergamon.
Hoover-Dempsey,K.V.,Bassler,O.C.&Brissie，J.S.,1987. Parent involvement: Contributions of teacherefficacy, school socioeconomic status and other school characteristics[J]. American EducationalResearch Journal24(3):417-435.
Houston, J. P.,1985. Motivation[M]. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Howard, A.,&Bray, D.,1988. Managerial lives in transition[M]. New York: Guilford Press.
Hoy, W. K.&Woolfolk, A. E.,1993. Teachers’ sense of efficacy and the organizational health ofschools[J]. The Elementary School Journal93(4):355-372.
Hubbard, P.,2004. Learner training for effective use of CALL[A]. In: S. Fotos&C. Browne(Eds.), Newperspectives on CALL for second language classrooms[C]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hubbard, P., Jones, H., Thornton, B.&Wheeler, R.,1983. A training course for TEFL[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Hull, C. L.,1943. Principles of Behavior: An Introduction to Behavior Theory. New York:Appleton-Century-Crofts.
James,W.,1890. The Principles of Psychology. New York: H. Holt and Company.
Jarvis, J.,1992. Using diaries for teacher reflection on in-service courses[J]. English Language TeachingJournal46(2),133-142.
Johnson, D.&Johnson, R.,2007. Creative constructive controversy: Intellectual challenge in theclassroom(4th ed.). Edina MN: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D.&Johnson, R.,2009. Energizing Learning: The instructional power of conflict[J].Educational Researcher38:37-51.
Johnson, K.,2009. Second language teacher education: A social cultural perspective[M]. NY:Routledge.
Jonassen, D. H.,2003. The vain quest for a unified theory of learning?[J]. Educational Technology43(4):5-8.
Kang, S. J.,2005. Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a secondlanguage[J]. System33.
Karabenick, S. A.,1998. Strategic help seeking: Implications for learning and teaching[M]. Hillsdale,NJ: Erlbaum.
Keblawi, F.,2005. Demotivation among Arab learners of English as a foreign language[C]//Second international online conference on second and foreign languageteaching and research, September.
Keller, J.,1983. Motivational design of instruction[A]. In Reigeluth(Ed.), Instructional-design theoriesand models: An overview of their current status[C](pp.383-434). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kohn, A.,1993. Punished by Rewards: The trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A’s, praise, andother bribes[M]. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Krapp, A.,2002. An educational-psychological theory of interest and its relation to SDT[A]. In E.Deci&R. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research[C](pp.405-427). Rochester, NY:University of Rochester Press.
Krashen. S. D.,1985. The input hypothesis: Issues and implications[M]. London: Longman.
Kubanyiova, M.,2009. Possible selves in language teacher development[A]. In Z. Dornyei&E.Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, Language Identity and the L2Self[C](pp.314-332). Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
Kubota, R.,1999. Word processing and WWW projects in a college Japanese language class[J].Foreign Language Annuals (32).
Latham, G. P., Erez, M.&Locke, E.,1988. Resolving scientific disputes by the joint design of crucialexperiments by the antagonists: Applications to the Erez-Latham dispute regarding participation ingoal setting[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology73:753-772.
Leach, L., Neutze, G.&Zepke, N.,1998. Motivation in assessment[A]. In Brown, S., Armstrong, S.&Thompson, G.(Eds.), Motivating students[C](pp.201-210). London: Kogan Page Limited.
Locke, E. A.&Latham, G. P.,1990. A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance[M]. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Locke, E. A.&Latham, G. P.,2002. Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and taskmotivation: A35-year odyssey[J]. American Psychology57:705-717.
MacIntyre, P. D., Mackinnon&Clement, R.,2009. The baby, the bathwater, and the future of languagelearning motivation research[A]. In Z. Dornyei&E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, LanguageIdentity and the L2Self[C](pp.43-65). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Maehr, M.,&Meyer, H.,1997. Understanding motivation and schooling: Where we’ve been, where weare, and where we need to go[J]. Educational Psychology Review9:371-409.
Malone, T.&Lepper, M.,1987. Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivation forlearning[A]. In Snow., R.&M. Farr(Eds.), Aptitude, learning, and instruction: III. Conative andaffective process analysis[C](pp.223-253). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Marsh, H. W. and Craven, R.G.,1997. Academic self-concept: Beyond the dustbowl[A]. In G. Phye(Ed.), Handbook of classroom assessment: Learning, achievement and adjustment[C]. San Diego:Academic Press.
Maslow, A.,1962. Toward a Psychology of Being[M]. NY: Van Nostrand.
McCombs, B. L.&Pope, J. E.,1994. Motivating hard to reach students[M]. Washington, DC: AmericanPsychological Association.
McCombs, B. L.&Whisler, J. S.,1997. The Learner-Centered Classroom and School: Strategies forIncreasing student motivation and achievement[M]. Michigan: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Mcdougall, W.,1922. An Introduction to Social Psychology[M]. London: Methuen&co.
Menegale, M.,2008. Expanding teacher-student interaction through more effective classroom questions:From traditional teacher-fronted lessons to student-centered lessons in CLIL[EB/OL]. http://lear.unive.it/bitstream/10278/1005/1/05Menegale.pdf.
Midgley, C., Kaplan, A.&Middleton, M.,2001. Performance-approach goals: Good for what, forwhom, under what circumstances, and at what cost?[J]. Journal of Educational Psychology93:77-86.
Mills, S. H.,1995. Stress management for the individual teacher[M]. Lancaster: Framework PressEducational Publishers Ltd.
Murphy, L., Shelley, M., White, C.&Baumann, U.,2006. Language teaching at a distance:Establishing key principles to develop professional practice[C]. Paper presented at the thirdBiennial Conference for Languages in Higher Education. Cardiff, UK.
Murray, D. E.&Christison, M.,2011. What English language teachers need to know[M]. Oxon:Routledge.
Newman, F. M., Rutter, R. A.&Smith, M.S.,1989. Organizational factors that affect school sense ofefficacy, community and expectations[J]. Sociology of Education62:221-238.
Newman, R.S.,1994. Adaptive help seeking: A strategy of self-regulated learning[A]. In D. H. Schunk&B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educationalapplications[C](pp.283-301). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Newman, R. S.,2000. Social influences on the development of children’s adaptive help seeking: Therole of parents, teachers and peers[J]. Developmental Review20:350-404.
Newman, R. S.,2008. The motivational role of adaptive help seeking in self-regulated learning[A]. In D.H. Schunk&B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning[C](pp.315-337). NY:Taylor&Francis Group, LLC.
Noels, K. A., Clement, R.&Pelletier, L. G.,1999. Perceptions of teachers’ communicative style andstudents’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation[J]. Modern Language Journal83.
Nunan, D.,1989. Designing tasks for the communicative classroom[M]. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Oxford, R. L.,1998. The unraveling tapestry: Teacher and course characteristics associated withdemotivation in the language classroom[C]. Paper presented at the TESOL1998Congress,Seattle, WA, March.
Oxford, R. L.&Shearin, J.,1994. Language learning motivation: Expanding the theoreticalframework[J]. Modern Language Journal78:12-28.
Pennington, M. C.,1995. Work satisfaction, motivation and commitment in teaching English as asecond language[Z]. ERIC Document ED404850.
Pierce, W. D., Cameron,J., Banko, K.,&So, S.,2003. Positive Effects of rewards and performancestandards on intrinsic motivation[J]. Psychological Record53:561-579.
Pintrich, P.,2000. The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning[A]. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich&M. Zeidner（Eds.），Handbook of self-regulation[C](pp.451-502). San Diego, CA: AcademicPress.
Pintrich, P. R.&Schunk, D. H.,1996. Motivation in education: Theory, research and applications[M].Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Posner, G. J.,1989. Field experience: Methods of reflective teaching(2nd edn.)[M]. NY: Longman.
Raffini, J. P.,1993. Winners without losers: Structures and strategies for increasing student motivationto learn[M]. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Raffini, J.P.,1996.150Ways to Increase Intrinsic Motivation in the Classroom[M]. NeedhamHeights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Reeve, J.&Deci, E.,1996. Elements of the competitive situation that affect intrinsic motivation[J].Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin22:24-33.
Reeve, J., Nix, G.&Hamm, D.,2003. The experience of self-determination in intrinsicmotivation and the conundrum of choice[J]. Journal of Educational Psychology95.
Reeve, J., Ryan, R., Deci, E. L.&Jang, H.,2008. Understanding and promoting autonomousself-regulation: A self-determination theory perspective[A]. In D. H. Schunk&B. J. Zimmerman(Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning[C](pp.223-244). NY: Taylor&Francis Group, LLC.
Richards, J. C.,1998. Beyond training[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C.&Farrell, T. S. C.,2005. Professional development for language teachers: Strategies forteacher learning[M]. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C.&Lockhart, C.,1994. Reflective teaching in second language classrooms[M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Risager, K.,2007. Language and culture pedagogy: From a national to a transnational paradigm[M].Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.
Romi, S.&Daniel, E.,1999. Integration of students with special needs in the regular classroom:Attitudes of preservice teachers in Israeli colleges(C). Paper presented at the third internationalconference on teacher education “Almost2000: Crisis and changes in the preparation of teachers”,Beit Bert College, Israel, July.
Rosenholtz, S.J.,&Simpson, C.,1990. Workplace conditions and the rise and fall of teachers’commitment[J]. Sociology of Education63:241-257.
Ross, J. A.,1994. Beliefs that make a difference: The origins and impacts of teacher efficacy[C]. Paperpresented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Association for curriculum studies, Calgary,Alberta, Canada, June.
Rotter, J. B.,1966. General expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement[J].Psychological Monographs: General and Applied80:1-28.
Ryan, A.&Patrick, H.,2001. The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivationand engagement during middle school[J]. American Educational Research Journal38:437-460.
Ryan,R. M.&Deci, E. L.,2000. Self-determination theory and facilitation of intrinsicmotivation, social development and well-being[J]. American Psychologist55.
Ryan, S.,2009. Self and identity in L2motivation in Japan: The ideal L2self and Japanese learnersof English[A]. In Z. Dornyei&E. Ushioda (Eds.),Motivation, language identity and the L2self[C](pp.120=143). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Rudnai, Z.,1996. Demotivation in learning English among secondary school students in Budapest[D].Unpublished master thesis. E tv s Loránd University.
Sagor, R.,1992. How to conduct collaborative action research[M]. Alexandria, VA: Association forSupervision and Curriculum Development.
Schraw, G.&S. Lehman, S.,2001. Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions forresearch[J]. Educational Psychological Review13:23-52.
Schulman, L. S.,1987. Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform[J]. HarvardEducational Review57(1):1-22.
Schumann, J. H.,1978. The acculturation model for second language acquisition[A]. In Gingras, R.(Ed.), Second language acquisition and foreign language teaching[C](pp.27-107). Arlington, VA:Center for Applied Linguistics.
Schumann, J. H.,1986. Research on the acculturation model for second language acquisition[J]. Journalof Multilingual and Multicultural Development7:379-92.
Shavelson, R. J.&Stern, P.,1981. Research on teachers’ pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decisionsand behavior[J]. Review of Educational Research51:455-498.
Shoaib, A.,2004. What motivates and demotivates English teachers in Saudi Arabia: A qualitativeperspective[D](unpublished PhD dissertation). Nottingham: University of Nottingham, School ofEnglish Studies.
Short, E. J.&Weissberg-Benchell, J. A.,1989The triple alliance for learning: cognition, metacognition,and motivation[A]. In C. B. McCormick et al(Eds.), Cognitive strategy Research[C]. NY: Springer,Veilaz.
Sivan, E.&Roehler, L.,1986. Motivational statements in explicit teacher explanations and theirrelationship to students’ metacognition in reading[J]. National Reading Conference Yearbook35:178-184.
Skehan, P.,1998. A cognitive approach to language learning[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skinner, B.F.,1957. Verbal Behavior[M]. New York: Appleton.
Slavin, R.E.,2004. Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice(7th edn.)[M]. Beijing: PekingUniversity Press.
Stefanou, C., Perencevich, K., Cintio, M.&Turner, J.,2004. Supporting autonomy in the classroom:Ways teachers encourage student decision making and ownership[J]. Educational Psychologist39:97-110.
Stipek, D. J.,1988. Motivate to learn: From theory to practice[M]. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Stix, A.&Hrbek, F.,2006. Teachers as Classroom Coaches: How to motivate students across thecontent areas[M]. Alexandria: ASCD.
Stockwell, G.&Levy, M.,2001. Sustainability of email interactions between native speakers andnonnative speakers[J]. Computer Assisted Language Learning (14).
Thornsbury, S.,1997. About language[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Toyoda, E.,2000. Arduous but exciting: Web-creation project in Japanese[J]. Computer AssistedLanguage Learning13.
Tremblay, P. F.&Gardner, R. C.,1995. Expanding the motivation construct in language learning[J].Modern Language Journal79:505-20.
Tschannen-Moran, M.&Woolfolk Hoy, A.,2001. Teacher efficacy: Capturing and elusive construct[J].Teaching and Teacher Education17:783-805.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A.&Hoy, W. K.,1998. Teacher efficacy: Its meaning andmeasure[J]. Review of Educational Research68:202-248.
Ushioda, E.1996. Developing a dynamic concept of L2motivation[A]. In Hichey, T. and Williams,J.(Eds.), Language, Education and Society in a Changing World[C](pp.239-245). Clevedon:Multilingual Matters.
Ushioda, E.,1998. Effective motivational thinking: A cognitive theoretical approach to the study oflanguage learning motivation[A]. In Soler, E. A.&Espurz, V. C.(Eds.), Current issues in Englishlanguage methodology[C](pp.77-89). Castello de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I.
Ushioda, E.,2009. A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity[A].In Z. Dornyei&E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2self[C](pp.215-228). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Wallace, M. J.,1991. Training foreign language teachers: A reflective approach[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Wallace, M. J.,1998. Action research for language teachers[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Walsh, S.,2006. Investigating classroom discourse[M]. Oxon: Routledge.
Weiner, B.,1992. Human Motivation: Metaphors, Theories and Research[M]. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Williams, M.&R. Burden.,1997. Psychology for Language Teachers[M]. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Willis, J. A.,1996. Flexible framework for task-based learning[A]. In Willis, J.&Willis,D.(Eds.), Challenge and Change in Language Teaching[C], Oxford: Heinemann.
Wlodknowski, R. J.,1986. Enhancing Adult Motivation to Learn[M]. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wolters, c.,2004. Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structures and goal orientations topredict students’ motivation, cognition, and achievement[J]. Journal of Educational Psychology96:236-250.
Woolfolk, A. E.&Hoy, W. K.,1990. Prospective teachers’ sense of efficacy and beliefs about control[J].Journal of Educational Psychology82:81-91.
Yavuz, S.,2007. Socio-Demographic predictors of EFL teacher efficacy[J]. Journal of Language andLinguistic Studies3:304-324.
Yell, M. Scheurman, G.&Reynolds, K.,2004. The anticipation guide: Motivating students to findout about history[J]. Social Education68:361-363.
Zimmerman, B. J.,2008. Goal setting: A key proactive source of academic self-regulation[A]. In D. H.Schunk&B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning[C]. NY: Taylor&Francis Group, LLC.
Zimmerman, B. J.&Campillo, M.,2003. Motivating self-regulated problem solvers[A]. In Davidson, J.E.&R. J. Sternberg(Eds.), The nature of problem solving[C](pp.233-262). New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Zimmerman, B. J.&Kitsantas, A.,1999. Acquiring writing revision skill: Shifting from process tooutcome self-regulatory goals[J]. Journal of Educational Psychology91:1-10.
陈坚林,2004.大学英语网络化教学的理论内涵及其应用分析[J].外语电化教学(6):46-50.
陈坚林,2010.计算机网络与外语课程的整合———项基于大学英语教学改革的研究[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
程晓堂,岳颖,2011.语言作为心智发展的工具—兼论外语学习的意义[J].中国外语(1):51-57.
邓杰,邓颖玲,2007.网络环境下英语视听说任务型教学研究[J].外语教学(5):45-49.
杜福兴,2003.谈英语学习动机及其激发与保持[J].外语教学(4):51-54.
方芒,2003.论外语学习动机及其激发[J].吉首大学学报（社会科学版）(4):120-123.
方雪晴,2009.非英语专业学生课外网络自主学习情况的调查与分析[J].山东外语教学(5):60-64.
方雪晴,2010.从讲授转向建构——基于学习主体研究的外语学习环境创新[J].保山学院学报(4):65-70.
方雪晴,2010.论英语口语合作学习中的交际真实性[J].外语教学（专刊）:128-129.
方雪晴,2011.基于认知评价理论对CALL课堂任务型学习活动设计的思考[J].外语电化教学(4):16-20.
付晓丽,2007.外语学习动机激发策略[J].教学与管理(6)：94-95.
甘正东,2000.反思性教学：外语教师自身发展的有效途径[J].外语界(4):12-16.
高一虹,赵媛,程英,周燕,2003.中国大学本科生英语学习动机类型[J].现代外语(1):29-38.
高志军,陶玉凤,2009.基于项目的学习(PBL)模式在教学中的应用[J].电化教育研究(2):92-95.
桂诗春,2003.在南京“大学英语教学改革座谈会”上的讲话[Z].
华惠芳,1998.试论英语学习动机与策略的研究[J].外语界(3):44-47.
季明雨,2004.关于英语教师在教学中动机策略运用的调查[J].外语界(6):34-40.
姜飞月,2005.学校变革中的教师效能[D].博士学位论文.南京师范大学.
教育部办公厅,2007.《大学英语课程教学要求》[Z].
李悦娥,范宏雅,2003.话语分析[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
李荣兰,2010.成人之美与助人成材——教师如何激励学生[M].长春:东北师范大学出版社.
梁良,2008.大学英语课堂中的动机减弱初探[J].天津工程师范学院学报(3):75-78.
刘春燕,钟志贤,2004.基于信息技术的任务型外语学习环境设计[J].电化教育研究(7):40-44.
刘东楼,2002.外语教学中动机问题的几点思考[J].外语教学(4):58-62.
刘清华,2004.教师知识的模型建构研究[D].西南师范大学教育科学研究所博士论文.
刘润清,1990.决定语言学习的几个因素[J].外语教学与研究(2):36-42.
刘雅雯,2010.大学英语教师的教学效能感与课堂提问行为关系的研究[J].宁波教育学院学报(2):62-65,76.
罗晓路,2000.专家‐新手型教师教学效能感和教学监控能力研究[J].心理科学(6):741-742.
马冬梅,1999.外语学习动机研究新发展及其对教学的指导意义[J].江苏外语教学研究,(2):65-68.
毛晋平,2005.教师个人教学效能感与成就动机及学习学习归因关系的研究[J].湖南师范大学教育科学学报(1):119-121.
母燕芳,2011.高职高专学生外语学习动机调查[J].长江大学学报（社科版）:128‐129
秦美娟,何广铿,2009.大学英语教师信息素养内涵探讨[J].外语界(5).
秦晓晴,2002.动机理论研究及其对外语学习的意义[J].外语研究(4):74-78.
秦晓晴,2007.中国大学生英语学习动机研究[M].北京：高等教育出版社.
秦晓晴,文秋芳,2002.非英专大学生学习动机内在结构[J].外语教学与研究(1):51-58.
任英杰,戴心来,2004.网络环境下基于项目的协作学习探究[J].电化教育研究(12):57-60.
施惠平,高亚利,2010.大学英语机辅语言教学中教师效能感与教师态度的研究[J].长春大学学报(8):88-92.
束定芳,2004.外语教学改革——问题与对策[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
束定芳,庄智象,1996.现代外语教学－理论、实践与方法[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
王初明,1989.中国学生的外语学习模式[J].外语教学与研究(4):47-52.
王笃勤,2002.大学英语自主学习能力的培养[J].外语界(5).
王静,2010.网络环境下任务型口译教学模式的设计与实践[J].外语电化教学(3):34-37.
王蕾,曾洁,2009.动机衰竭理论研究现状[J].四川教育学院学报(6):91-93.
王觅,钟志贤,2008.论促进知识建构的学习环境设计[J].开放教育研究(4):22‐27.
王天发, Malderez,A,2006.大学生英语学习动机衰竭现象研究[J].澳门理工学报(2).
王晓旻,张文忠,2005.国内外语学习动机研究现状分析[J].外语界(4):58-65.
王振宏,2001.国外教师效能研究述评[J].心理学动态9(2):146-149.
武和平,2001.九十年代外语/二语学习动机研究述略[J].外语教学与研究(2):116-121.
吴增强,1996.论学习困难学生的动机激发[J].中国教育学刊(2):38-40,52.
肖福寿,1999.外语学习中的动机问题[J].西安外国语学院学报(4):54-57.
辛涛,申继亮，林崇德,1994.教师自我效能感与学校因素关系的研究[J].教育研究(10):16-20.
徐锦芬,2007.大学外语自主学习理论与实践[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社.
徐晓霞,2003.谈反思教学实践[J].长春大学学报(5):51-52.
杨丰宁,1993.心理情感因素对外语教学的启示[J].山东外语教学(3):63-73.
杨刚,徐晓东,2009.远程教育中师生网络互动的本质与特征[J].中国电化教育(12):50-55.
杨树芳,2010.基于校本课程开发的英语教师自我效能感培养[J].江苏教育学院学报（社会科学版）(3):21-23，42.
杨云会,魏伟,姜涛,2007.远程学习中成人学习斗殴那估计策略研究[J].现代远程教育研究(2):26-28
殷银芳,苗兴伟,2008.外语课堂环境下口语交际能力的培养模式[J].外语教学(9):42-45,50.
尤陈静,2010.高中英语教师的动机策略研究[J].解放军外国语学院学报(3):72-75,126.
俞国良,罗晓路,教师教学效能感及其相关因素研究[J].北京师范大学学报〔人文社会科学版)(1):72-79.
张德禄,苗兴伟,李学宁,2005.功能语言学与外语教学[M].北京：外语教学与研究出版社.
张卫东,1992.如何激发学生的外语学习动机[J].山东外语教学(1-2):163-166.
张卫红,孙成贵,2010.大学英语新课改背景下教师专业发展路径探析[J].外语学刊(4).
张正东,1985.外语教学的情感因素[J].西南师院学报(2):127-131.
赵丽琴,2010.怎样让学生爱学习:激发学习动机的7种策略[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社.
赵娜,王俊菊,2010.中学英语教师课堂动机策略研究[J].外语教学理论与实践(1):47-54.
衷克定,闫海连,2003.学习动机激发与教学材料组织[J].中国远程教育(21):37-39.
钟志贤,2004.促进学习者高阶思维发展的教学设计假设[J].电化教育研究(12):21‐28.
周晖,2010.基于BBS的网络学习社区建设:教学交互策略及其技术——以北京电大BBS实时交互为例[J].北京广播电视大学学报(5):58-61.
周新富,1991.国民小学教师专业承诺、教师效能信念与学生学业成就关系之研究[D].硕士论文.高雄师范大学教育研究所.