大学英语教师个人通识教育信念研究
|
摘要
进入二十一世纪以来，随着经济全球化的发展和改革开放的深入，我国亟需相当数量的既具有专业知识、又具有跨学科能力的创新型人才，尤其是需要那些熟悉外语并且具有较强的跨文化交际能力的通用人才。在这样的大背景下，我国的外语教育越来越受到全社会的关心和重视。作为一门发展中的学科，我国的大学英语教学为国家的人才培养作出了巨大贡献，但近些年来传统的大学英语教学模式越来越难以适应社会要求，亟需进行大学英语教学改革。2003年，教育部正式启动“高等学校教学质量和教学改革工程”，列入计划的四项工作中，第三项就是大学英语教学改革。随着教育“整体规划、分步推进”的思路，我国各地相继有二百多所高校参与了教改试点。同时，为数众多的其他高校积极创造条件，也进行了类似的教学改革。各地的大外教改在取得显著成效之时，也出现了许多亟待解决的问题和困难，其中最受关注的就是大学英语教学改革的“费时低效”现象。解决这一现象的根本途径，在于教师教学信念的转变，我们必须意识到大学英语不是一门简单的语言基础课，更应该是拓展知识、了解世界文化的素质教育课程，应兼具有工具性和人文性。
深化大学英语教学改革的各种途径都必须是基于对“人”的教育。大学存在的终极理由和根本使命是培养“人”，就是要在受教育者可接受教育的最佳时期，对其进行塑造。通识教育即为“人本”教育，其目的是培养健全的“人”，其“人本”理念早已成为我国高等教育的重要研究内容。当今大学英语教学改革通识教育走向，为广大外语教师提高教学质量提供了有益的启示：教学模式改革有必要转向教学内容改革。
信念是行动的开始。以“信念”为切入点，探索通识教育信念对于大学英语教学实践的影响是我们研究的主题。教师的教学信念和教学行为因人而异，各不相同。教师的信念决定了教师教什么、为什么这么教，以及如何教。我们研究的中心问题是：大学英语教师个人通识教育信念是如何影响其教学实践的？目的在于寻找实现大学英语有效“教”和“学”的可选途径。整个研究由三个层面问题组成：①大学英语教师个人通识教育信念及其实践路径的选择；②通识教育信念与大学英语有效的“教”与“学”；③通识教育信念与教师的个人发展。
研究的理论基础主要涉及三个方面：社会文化理论、“阈值”理论以及建构主义理论。社会文化理论关注的“中介”、“内化”以及“最近发展区”，要求教师充分发挥对学习者的“帮扶”作用，重视社会中的“文化”在人的心理发展的不可替代性。在“最近发展区”开展通识教育有助于学生的认知发展。“阈值”理论提醒我们，处于“后‘阈值效应’”阶段的大学英语教学，应该是从“技能”到“素养”视角的转换。当今刚入学的大学生英语水平今非昔比，入学阶段是实施通识教育的最佳时期。建构主义学习理论强调学习情景对于学习过程的重要影响。通识教育有助于提高外语学习者对学习情景的认知。对特定的学习情景感知能够激发学习者对先有和当前学习经验的认识，从而影响他们学习策略的选则。通识教育对学习者自我知识的意义建构至关重要。
从研究方法上说，这是一次行动研究。选择行动研究方法的理由，在于其具备几个特点：①行动研究是一种系统的反思性的探究活动；②它是由教师针对自己教学中的问题直接参与和开展调查和研究；③行动研究需要一些列的步骤来完成；④其目的是不断改进自己的教学，使教学达到最佳的效果（王蔷2002）。行动研究的这些特点刚好适合在大学英语中开展通识教育的研究。大学英语教学的通识教育走向，在目前还处于探索阶段，甚至还存在不少争论。同时，研究中所采用的基于内容的外语教学法，以及将这种教学法和通识教育相结合的尝试，也具有典型的实验性。而行动研究对新的理念、方法和实践持一种开放的态度，对学生教育和教师个人发展有着积极意义。
本文将行动研究分为两个阶段进行。第一阶段研究的主要内容是：大学英语教师的个人通识教育信念有利于提高学习者的学习兴趣；基于内容的外语教学法是外语通识课的理想选择。在第一阶段中，我们运用问卷调查方法采集教学效果等信息，评估学生对大学英语通识课的认识，以及对一些社会问题的思辨性认识。第二阶段研究主要关注两个方面：一方面是大学英语教师通识教育动机策略和学生英语学习动机的存在关联性；另一方面是，以英语写作为例，讨论通识教育对英语学习者语言技能提高具有促进作用。第二阶段研究主要采用实证研究方法，以具体的数据从微观层面说明外语通识课的有效性。
通过两个阶段的行动研究，我们得到以下结论：①影响外语教师的通识教育信念及其实践的因素，主要有教师主体、教师认识的对象以及与教师教育实践相关联的外部环境。基于内容的外语教学法是大学英语课中开展通识教育的有效路径；②对学生开展通识教育，建立通识类英语核心课程，才能真正实现大学英语由模式改革到教学内容建设的根本转变。这也是大学英语实现有效的“教”与“学”的优先选择；③通识教育的实践，尤其是行动研究使教师认识到，语言习得的关键在于学习者的自我认知。教师学习理论，尤其是教育理论有助于教师的自我发展。
研究创新之处主要表现在三个方面：
（1）在研究内容上，本文以信念研究为出发点，研究通识教育和基于内容教学法在大学英语教学中实施的可行性。目前在我国外语教学研究领域，对外语通识教育和基于内容教学法的研究大多局限在理论介绍上，缺乏可借鉴的实践性研究。本文从教学内容和教学方法两个方面，运用行动研究方法，探索大学英语通识教育和基于内容教学法结合运用的最优路径。
（2）在理论构建上，本文将教育社会学理论运用到外语教学研究当中，以跨学科视野丰富现有的外语教学理论。在全球化背景下，我国的大学英语教学应该注重“完人教育”，本文以通识教育为内容，以基于内容教学法为方法，探索人本主义的外语教学理论框架。
（3）在应用价值上，本文以全新的视角思考我国大学英语教学“费时低效”的根本原因，指出有效的大学英语“教”与“学”的前提是转变教师教学理念，明确我国大学英语教学改革应该由教学形式改革转向教学内容改革。这既是提高外语教学水平和培育人才的需要，也是国家外语发展规划的需要。
Previous research has revealed the influential role teachers’ beliefs play in moldingtheir professional behavior. In education, beliefs determine what ought to be taught, andhow and why it is taught. Teachers’ beliefs not only shape teaching, but also suggestimplications for the implementation of educational innovations and teacher development.
This study documents one college English teacher’s research, in which heincorporates his beliefs about general education into his teaching. Analyzed in this study isthe teacher’s belief system in connection with pedagogical practices in English class andprofessional development. Much attention is focused on the extent to which theintroduction of an innovative teaching approach affects a teacher’s belief and his practicein education. The study centers on the teacher’s personal belief in general education andhis application of content-based instruction in the context of English teaching in auniversity.
The main question of this study is: how does the college English teacher’s belief ingeneral education affect his practice of teaching? The objective is to explore thealternatives of effective teaching and learning. The whole study is designed to addressthree specific questions, each at a different level:
1. The college English teachers’ belief in general education and the practical optionsavailable
2. General education and effective teaching (and learning) of college English
3. General education and teacher's professional development.
The present study is supported by the following three theories: the socio-culturaltheory, the threshold hypothesis and the structuralist theory. The notions of “mediation”,“internalization” and “the zone of proximal development” require the teacher to be anassistant to the students and to value the irreplaceable role played by the “culture” in thesociety in human psychological development. General education in the zone of proximaldevelopment is conducive to the students’ cognitive development of language skills andintercultural awareness. The threshold hypothesis alerts English teachers that collegeEnglish teaching, which is in the post-threshold stage, ought to shift from the developmentof skills to the cultivation of qualities. Nowadays, freshmen have a far better Englishbackground and will respond adequately to an all-round approach. The structuralist theory emphasizes the influence of the learning situation on the actual practice. General educationcan help raise the learner’s awareness of the learning situation. The awareness can awakenthe learner's cognition of their previous and current learning experience, and help prioritizetheir learning strategies in order to improve their critical thinking.
This study is implemented in two phases. Included in the primary tasks of the firstphase are: to examine how helpful the college English teacher’s belief in general educationis to excite student interest; to determine the content-based instruction is the most efficientway for general education. The second phase of the study is empirical, drawing on data toprove the validity of general education.
The research results of these two phases show that a teacher’s beliefs in generaleducation are observed to help students learn English. General education helps studentsperceive their unique learning situations. The practice of content-based instructionincreases teachers’ reflective understanding of their inductive approaches to teaching andeducation. The results verify some effects showing that content-based foreign languageinstruction is able to increase students’ English learning motivation and performance intheir English study. Teachers’ professional development is therefore achieved despitediverse difficulties and impediments in practices. Findings indicate that teachers’ personalbeliefs in general education are likely to bring about a fresh understanding of effectiveteaching and education, and professional development as well.
By combining the major theories of teaching, learning and education, the presentstudy makes an action research into college English classes on the basis of personalexperiences. With much discussion on some issues in actual teaching and someimplications for solutions, this study aims to verify the interconnection of personal beliefand teaching behavior, general education and effective teaching, general education andteacher professional development. In the final conclusion, the dissertation claims thedrawbacks of this study and offers some suggestions for further research.
深化大学英语教学改革的各种途径都必须是基于对“人”的教育。大学存在的终极理由和根本使命是培养“人”，就是要在受教育者可接受教育的最佳时期，对其进行塑造。通识教育即为“人本”教育，其目的是培养健全的“人”，其“人本”理念早已成为我国高等教育的重要研究内容。当今大学英语教学改革通识教育走向，为广大外语教师提高教学质量提供了有益的启示：教学模式改革有必要转向教学内容改革。
信念是行动的开始。以“信念”为切入点，探索通识教育信念对于大学英语教学实践的影响是我们研究的主题。教师的教学信念和教学行为因人而异，各不相同。教师的信念决定了教师教什么、为什么这么教，以及如何教。我们研究的中心问题是：大学英语教师个人通识教育信念是如何影响其教学实践的？目的在于寻找实现大学英语有效“教”和“学”的可选途径。整个研究由三个层面问题组成：①大学英语教师个人通识教育信念及其实践路径的选择；②通识教育信念与大学英语有效的“教”与“学”；③通识教育信念与教师的个人发展。
研究的理论基础主要涉及三个方面：社会文化理论、“阈值”理论以及建构主义理论。社会文化理论关注的“中介”、“内化”以及“最近发展区”，要求教师充分发挥对学习者的“帮扶”作用，重视社会中的“文化”在人的心理发展的不可替代性。在“最近发展区”开展通识教育有助于学生的认知发展。“阈值”理论提醒我们，处于“后‘阈值效应’”阶段的大学英语教学，应该是从“技能”到“素养”视角的转换。当今刚入学的大学生英语水平今非昔比，入学阶段是实施通识教育的最佳时期。建构主义学习理论强调学习情景对于学习过程的重要影响。通识教育有助于提高外语学习者对学习情景的认知。对特定的学习情景感知能够激发学习者对先有和当前学习经验的认识，从而影响他们学习策略的选则。通识教育对学习者自我知识的意义建构至关重要。
从研究方法上说，这是一次行动研究。选择行动研究方法的理由，在于其具备几个特点：①行动研究是一种系统的反思性的探究活动；②它是由教师针对自己教学中的问题直接参与和开展调查和研究；③行动研究需要一些列的步骤来完成；④其目的是不断改进自己的教学，使教学达到最佳的效果（王蔷2002）。行动研究的这些特点刚好适合在大学英语中开展通识教育的研究。大学英语教学的通识教育走向，在目前还处于探索阶段，甚至还存在不少争论。同时，研究中所采用的基于内容的外语教学法，以及将这种教学法和通识教育相结合的尝试，也具有典型的实验性。而行动研究对新的理念、方法和实践持一种开放的态度，对学生教育和教师个人发展有着积极意义。
本文将行动研究分为两个阶段进行。第一阶段研究的主要内容是：大学英语教师的个人通识教育信念有利于提高学习者的学习兴趣；基于内容的外语教学法是外语通识课的理想选择。在第一阶段中，我们运用问卷调查方法采集教学效果等信息，评估学生对大学英语通识课的认识，以及对一些社会问题的思辨性认识。第二阶段研究主要关注两个方面：一方面是大学英语教师通识教育动机策略和学生英语学习动机的存在关联性；另一方面是，以英语写作为例，讨论通识教育对英语学习者语言技能提高具有促进作用。第二阶段研究主要采用实证研究方法，以具体的数据从微观层面说明外语通识课的有效性。
通过两个阶段的行动研究，我们得到以下结论：①影响外语教师的通识教育信念及其实践的因素，主要有教师主体、教师认识的对象以及与教师教育实践相关联的外部环境。基于内容的外语教学法是大学英语课中开展通识教育的有效路径；②对学生开展通识教育，建立通识类英语核心课程，才能真正实现大学英语由模式改革到教学内容建设的根本转变。这也是大学英语实现有效的“教”与“学”的优先选择；③通识教育的实践，尤其是行动研究使教师认识到，语言习得的关键在于学习者的自我认知。教师学习理论，尤其是教育理论有助于教师的自我发展。
研究创新之处主要表现在三个方面：
（1）在研究内容上，本文以信念研究为出发点，研究通识教育和基于内容教学法在大学英语教学中实施的可行性。目前在我国外语教学研究领域，对外语通识教育和基于内容教学法的研究大多局限在理论介绍上，缺乏可借鉴的实践性研究。本文从教学内容和教学方法两个方面，运用行动研究方法，探索大学英语通识教育和基于内容教学法结合运用的最优路径。
（2）在理论构建上，本文将教育社会学理论运用到外语教学研究当中，以跨学科视野丰富现有的外语教学理论。在全球化背景下，我国的大学英语教学应该注重“完人教育”，本文以通识教育为内容，以基于内容教学法为方法，探索人本主义的外语教学理论框架。
（3）在应用价值上，本文以全新的视角思考我国大学英语教学“费时低效”的根本原因，指出有效的大学英语“教”与“学”的前提是转变教师教学理念，明确我国大学英语教学改革应该由教学形式改革转向教学内容改革。这既是提高外语教学水平和培育人才的需要，也是国家外语发展规划的需要。
Previous research has revealed the influential role teachers’ beliefs play in moldingtheir professional behavior. In education, beliefs determine what ought to be taught, andhow and why it is taught. Teachers’ beliefs not only shape teaching, but also suggestimplications for the implementation of educational innovations and teacher development.
This study documents one college English teacher’s research, in which heincorporates his beliefs about general education into his teaching. Analyzed in this study isthe teacher’s belief system in connection with pedagogical practices in English class andprofessional development. Much attention is focused on the extent to which theintroduction of an innovative teaching approach affects a teacher’s belief and his practicein education. The study centers on the teacher’s personal belief in general education andhis application of content-based instruction in the context of English teaching in auniversity.
The main question of this study is: how does the college English teacher’s belief ingeneral education affect his practice of teaching? The objective is to explore thealternatives of effective teaching and learning. The whole study is designed to addressthree specific questions, each at a different level:
1. The college English teachers’ belief in general education and the practical optionsavailable
2. General education and effective teaching (and learning) of college English
3. General education and teacher's professional development.
The present study is supported by the following three theories: the socio-culturaltheory, the threshold hypothesis and the structuralist theory. The notions of “mediation”,“internalization” and “the zone of proximal development” require the teacher to be anassistant to the students and to value the irreplaceable role played by the “culture” in thesociety in human psychological development. General education in the zone of proximaldevelopment is conducive to the students’ cognitive development of language skills andintercultural awareness. The threshold hypothesis alerts English teachers that collegeEnglish teaching, which is in the post-threshold stage, ought to shift from the developmentof skills to the cultivation of qualities. Nowadays, freshmen have a far better Englishbackground and will respond adequately to an all-round approach. The structuralist theory emphasizes the influence of the learning situation on the actual practice. General educationcan help raise the learner’s awareness of the learning situation. The awareness can awakenthe learner's cognition of their previous and current learning experience, and help prioritizetheir learning strategies in order to improve their critical thinking.
This study is implemented in two phases. Included in the primary tasks of the firstphase are: to examine how helpful the college English teacher’s belief in general educationis to excite student interest; to determine the content-based instruction is the most efficientway for general education. The second phase of the study is empirical, drawing on data toprove the validity of general education.
The research results of these two phases show that a teacher’s beliefs in generaleducation are observed to help students learn English. General education helps studentsperceive their unique learning situations. The practice of content-based instructionincreases teachers’ reflective understanding of their inductive approaches to teaching andeducation. The results verify some effects showing that content-based foreign languageinstruction is able to increase students’ English learning motivation and performance intheir English study. Teachers’ professional development is therefore achieved despitediverse difficulties and impediments in practices. Findings indicate that teachers’ personalbeliefs in general education are likely to bring about a fresh understanding of effectiveteaching and education, and professional development as well.
By combining the major theories of teaching, learning and education, the presentstudy makes an action research into college English classes on the basis of personalexperiences. With much discussion on some issues in actual teaching and someimplications for solutions, this study aims to verify the interconnection of personal beliefand teaching behavior, general education and effective teaching, general education andteacher professional development. In the final conclusion, the dissertation claims thedrawbacks of this study and offers some suggestions for further research.
引文
Almarza, G.1996. Student Foreign Language Teachers’ Knowledge Growth. In D. Freeman&J.C.Richards (Eds), Teachers Learning in Language Teaching [C]. New York: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Andrade, M. S.&J. H. Makaafi,2001. Guidelines for establishing adjunct courses at the universitylevel [J]. TESOL Journal,10(Autumn),34-39.
Ausubel, D.P., Novak, J.S. and H. Hanesian.1978. Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View [M].New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Anthony, E. M.1963. Approach, method and technique [J]. English Language Teaching17:63-67.
Bachman, L.1990. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing[M]. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.
Beijaard, D. N. and J, D. Vermunt,2000. Teachers’ perceptions of professional identity: An exploratorystudy from a personal knowledge perspective [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education16:749-764.
Benson, P.2010. Teacher education and teacher autonomy: Creating spaces for experimentation insecondary school English language teaching [J]. Language Teaching Research,14(3),259–275.
Bernaus, M.&R. C. Gardner.2008. Teacher Motivation Strategies, Student Perceptions, StudentMotivation, and English Achievement [J]. The Modern Language Journal92/3:387-401.
Boaler, J&Greeno, J.2000. Identity, agency, and knowing in mathematics worlds. In Boaler, J.(ed.)Multiciple Perspectives on Mathematics Teaching and Learning [C]. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.
Bohl, J. V. and L.R.Zoest2002. Learning through identity: A new unit of analysis for studying teacherdevelopment, Proceeding of the Twenty-sixth Annual Meeting of the international Group for thePsychology of mathematics Education. Norwich, England.
Borg, S.1998. Teachers' pedagogical systems and grammar teaching: a qualitative study [J]. TESOLQuarterly,32(1),9-38.
Borg, S.1999. Teachers’ theories in grammar teaching [J]. ELT Journal,53(3),157-167.
Breen, M. P., Hird, B., Milton, M., Thwaite, A., and Oliver, R.2001. Making sense of language teaching:teachers' principles and classroom practices[J]. Applied Linguistics,22(4),470-501.
Brinton, D., Snow, M., and Wesche, M.1989. Content-based second language instruction[M]. NewYork: Newbury House.
Brinton, D.2003. Content-based Instruction.In Practical English Language Teaching Nunan, D.(ed)New York:The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Brookfield2005The Skillful Teacher: on Technique, Trust and Responsiveness in the Classroom [M].Hang Zhou: Zhejiang University Press
Brown, H. D.2001. Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy[M]. NewYork: Longman.
Burns, A.1996. Starting all over again: from teaching adults to teaching beginners. In D. Freeman&J.C. Richards (Eds.), Teacher learning in language teaching[C]. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Burns, A.2011.Doing Action Research in English Language Teaching: A Guide for Practitioners [M].Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching And Research Press.
Cantoni-Harvey,G.1987.Content-Area Language Instruction: Approaches and Strategies. Reading. A:Addison-Wesley.
Catherine D. Ennis1992. Reconceptualizing Learning As A Dynamical System [J]. Journal ofCurriculum and Supervision.(2):115-130.
Chapple, L.,&A,Curtis.2000. Content-based instruction in Hong Kong: Students responses to film [J].System,28:419-433,188-204.
Clark, C. M., and P. L. Peterson,1986. Teachers' thought processes[C]. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Crandall, J.1987. ESL through Content-Area Language Instruction: Mathematics, science, social studies.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
Crawford, M.2001. Making language meaningful: A content-based approach for teaching generalEnglish courses. Journal of Hokkaido University of Education,52(1),53-63.
Creese, A.2005. Is this content-based language teaching? Linguistics and Education,16,
Crookes, G.&R. W. Schmidt.1991. Motivation: Reopening the Research Agenda [J]. LanguageLearning,41(4):469-512.
Cummins, J.1984. Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. ClevedonEngland: Multilingual Matters.
Dall’Alba, G.1991. Foreshadowing conceptions of teaching[J]. Research and Development in HigherEducation,13,293-297.
Daryl, M. R.2006. Developing content and form: Encouraging evidence from Italian content-basedinstruction. The Modern Language Journal[J],90,373-386.
Dewey, J.1933How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the EducationProcess [M]. Boston: D.C. Health&Company.
Dewey, J.1938/1963. Experience and Education. New York: Collier Books.
Diaz, D. M., Justicia, N. T., and L. Levine,2002. Making content accessible to promote secondlanguage acquisition: The ESL intensive program at Hostos community college (CUNY).[Online]Available: http://www.eduref.org
Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., and P. D. Pearson.1991. Moving from the old to the new:Research on reading comprehension instruction[J]. Review of Educational Research,61(2),139-264.
D rnyei, Z.1994. Motivation and Motivating in the Foreign Language Classroom [J]. The ModernLanguage Journal78(4):515-23.
D rnyei, Z.&Ottó1998. Motivation in action: A process model of L2motivation [J] Working Papers in
Applied Linguistics (Thames Valley University, London)4:43-69.
D rnyei, Z.2001. Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom [M]. Cambridge:
Dubin, F. and E.Olshtain.1986Course Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cambridge University Press.
Echevarria, J. and A.Graves.2003. Sheltered content instruction: Teaching English-language learnerswith diverse abilities. Boston: Allyn&Bacon.
Ekeblad, E., and C. Bond.1994. The nature of a conception: questions of context. Paper presented at thePhenomenography: philosophy and practice conference, Brisbane.
Ennis, R.1987. A Taxonomy of Critical Thinking Skills and Dispositions. In John Boyloff Baron andRobert J. Sternberg (ed.). Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and Practice. New York: Freeman.
Freeman, D.E.andY.S. Freeman.1994. Between worlds: Access to second language acquisition[M].Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Gaffield-Vile, N.1996. Content-based second language instruction at the tertiary level[J]. ELT Journal,50(2),108-114.
Gardner, R. C.1985. Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: the Role of Attitudes andMotivation [M]. Edward Arnold, London.
Gass, S.1988. Integrating research areas: a framework for second language studies [J]. AppliedLinguistics,9,198-217.
Clarke, M.A.1980. The short-circuit hypothesis of ESL reading or when language competenceinterferes with reading performance[J]. Modern Language Journal,64,203-209
Glaser, R., and M. Bassok.1989. Learning theory and the study of instruction [J]. Annual Review ofPsychology,40,631-666.
Glenn, O. M.2005. The development of English literacy and global studies concepts using shelteredinstruction [D]. Dissertation Abstracts International.(UMI No.3166569).
Golombek, P. R.1988. A study of teacher' personal-practical knowledge[J]. TESOL Quarterly,32,447-465.
Guilloteaux, M. J. and Z. D rnyei.2008. Motivating Language Learners: a Classroom-orientedInvestigation of the Effects of Motivational Strategies on Student Motivation [J]. TESOL Quarterly,42,55-77.
Harootunian, B.and G. P. Yarger.1981. Teachers' conceptions of their own success. current issues(Research/Technical400-78-0017).Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teacher Education.
Hohenberger, A.2002. Functional categories in language acquisition: Self-organization of a dynamicalsystem [M](Linguistische Arbeiten456). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Holec, H.1981.Autonomy in Foreign Language Learning[M]. Oxford: Pergamon.
Holland, D. Lachicotte, W. et al,1998. Identity and Agency in Culture Worlds [M]. Cambridge MA:Harvard University Press
Huang, J.2003. Activities as a vehicle for linguistic and sociocultural knowledge at the elementaryschool level[J]. Language Teaching Research,7,3-33.
Kasper, L. F.1994. Improved reading performance for ESL students through academic course pairing[J].Journal of Reading,37,376-384.
Kasper, L. F.1995/96. Using discipline-based texts to boost college ESL reading instruction. Journal ofAdolescent&Adult Literacy,39(4),298-306.
Kasper, L. F.1997a. Assessing long-term effects of content-based ESL instruction. A paper presented atDiscipline-Based ESL Instruction: Benefits and Implementation (a CUNY DevelopmentColloquium).[Online]Available:http://members.aol.com/ht a/Drlfk/long.term.effects.html (August10,2008).
Kasper, L. F.1997b. The impact of content-based instruction programs on the academic progress of ESLstudents [J]. English for Specific Purpose,16,309-320.
Kauffman, Stauart A1993. The origins of order: Self-organization and selection in evolution [M].Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kathleen Graves2004Designing Language Course: A Guide for Teachers [M]. Beijing: ForeignLanguage Teaching and Research Press.
Kember, D. and L. Gow.1994. Orientation to teaching and their effect on the quality of studentlearning[J]. Journal of Higher Education,65,59-74.
Kenny, X. J.and D.Gioia,2006. An introduction to fiction, poetry, and drama [M]. New York: PearsonLongman.
Krashen, S.1982Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition[M].New York: Prentice Hall
Lantolf, L.P.and S.L.Thorne2006. Sociocultural Theory and the Genesis of Second LanguageDevelopment [M].Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D.1985. State of the art on input in Second Language Acquisition[A]. In S. M. Gass&C.G. Madden (Eds.) Input in second language acquisition[C].433-444. Rowley, MA: Newbury.
Little, D.1991. Learner Autonomy1: Definitions, Issues and Problems [M]. Dublin: Authentik.
Marton, F. and S. Booth.1997. Learning and Awareness[M]. New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Marton, F. and R. Saljo,1997Approaches to learning, In F. Marton, D. Houunsell and N.J. Entwise (eds)The Experience of Learning: Implications for Teaching and Studying in Higher Education,[M]2ndedition. Edinburgh, Scottish Academic Press
Met, M.1991. Learning language through content: Learning content through language [J]. ForeignLanguage Annals,24(4),281-295.
Mills, G. E.2010. Action Research: A Guide for the Teacher Researcher (3rdEdition)[M]. Chongqin:Chongqin University Press
Noels, K. A.2001. Learning Spanish as a Second Language: Learners' Orientations and Perceptions oftheir Teachers' Communication Style [J]. Language Learning,51(1),107-144.
Nunan, D2001. The learner-centered curriculum: A study in second language teaching [M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Pajares, M. F.1992. Teachers' beliefs and educational research [J]. Review of Educational Research,62(3),307-332.
Parkinson, J.2000. Acquiring scientific literacy through content and genre: A theme-based languagecourse for science students [J]. English for Specific Purposes,19,369-387.
Pawan, F.2008. Content-area teachers and scaffolded instruction for English language learners [J].Teaching and Teacher Education,24,1450-1462.
Perkin, K. Brutten, S. R., and J.T.Pohlmann.1989. First and second language reading comprehensionskill [J]. RELC Journal,20,1-9.
Pichette, F. and N. Segalowitz.2003. Impact of Maintaining L1Reading Skills in L2Reading SkillDevelopment in Adults: Evidence from Speakers of Serbo-Croatian Learning French. ModernLanguage Journal[J],87,391-403.
Pintrich, P.1990. Implication of psychological research on student learning and college teaching forteacher education. In W. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education [C]. New York:Macmillan.
Prosser, M and K. Trigwell.2007. Understanding Learning and Teaching: The Experience in HigherEducation [M]. Beijing: Peking University Press.
Read, I.2000. Assessing vocabulary [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., Ho, B., and K..Giblin.1996. Learning how to teach in the RSA Cert. In D. Freeman&J.C. Richards (Eds.).Teacher learning in language teaching [C]. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Richards, J.C.1998. Beyond Training [M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Richards, J.C.2004. The Language Teaching Matrix [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign LanguageEducation Press.
Richard, J. C., and T. S. Rogers.2005. Approaches and methods in language teaching [M]. New York:Cambridge University Press.
Scarino. A and A. Liddicoat.2010. Teaching and Learning Languages: A Guide [M]. Beijing: ModernEducation Press.
Sch n.D. A.1987. Educating the Reflective Practitioner [M]. London: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Schulz, R. A.2001. Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role ofgrammar instruction and corrective feedback [J].The Modern Language Journal,85(2),244-258.
Schuman, J. H1998. The Neurobiology of Affect in Language [M]. Oxford: Blackwell.
Slavin, R.E2011. Educational Psychology Beijing: Posts and Telecom Press
Smoke, T. and T. Haas.1995. Ideas in practice: Linking classes to develop students’ academic voices [J].Journal of Developmental Education,19,28-32.
Stevick, E.W2006. Working with Teaching Methods: What’s at Stake? Beijing: Foreign LanguageTeaching and Research Press
Stoller, F.1999. Time for change: a hybrid curriculum for EAP programs [J]. TESOL Journal,8(1),9-13.
Vygotsky, L.S.1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychology Processes[M].Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Wallace, M.1991. Training Foreign Language Teachers: A Reflective Approach [M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press
Wiles, J. and J. Bondi2004. Curriculum Development: A Guide to Practice (6th Edition)[M]. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Willace, M. J.2000. Action Research for Languge Teachers [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language TeachingAnd Research Press
Williams, M and R. L. Burden2011. Psychology for Language Teachers: A Social Constructivist
Approach [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Winter, W. E.2004. The performance of ESL students in a content-linked psychology course [J].Community Review,18,76-82.
Wolfgang, T. and J.P. Dauwalder (eds.).2003. The dynamical systems approach to cognition: Conceptsand empirical paradigms based on self-organization, embodiment and coordination dynamics [J](Studies of Nonlinear Phenomena in Life Science10). Singapore: World Scientific.
Woods, D.1996. Teaching Cognition in Language Teaching [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Ya-Ling Tsai.2010. The Impact of Content-Based Language Instruction on EFL Students’ ReadingPerformance [J]. Asian Social Science,6(3),77-85.
Yero, J. L.2002. Teaching in mind: how teacher thinking shapes education [M](1st MindFlight ed.).Hamilton, MT: MindFlight Publishing.
补爱华.2011.语言测试方法论上海：上海交通大学出版社
布龙菲尔德.2006.论外语教学布龙菲尔德语言学文集[M]熊兵译长沙:湖南教育出版社
蔡基刚.2010a.制约我国大学英语教学方向转移的因素分析[J].外语研究（2）:40-45.
蔡基刚.2010b.关于我国大学英语教学重新定位的思考[J].外语教学与研究（4）:306-307.
蔡基刚.2010c.后大学英语教学改革依据与对策研究[J].外语电化教学（5）:3-12
蔡薇，张文霞.2004.以人为本：英语提高阶段课程体系改革的思考[J].清华大学学报（哲学社会科学版）（19）:82-5
曹德明.2007.以科学发展观为指导培养创新型国际化外语人才[J].外国语（4）:2-5
曹莉.2007.关于文化素质教育与通识教育的辩证思考[J].清华大学教育研究（2）:24-33
常俊跃，刘晓蕖，邓耀臣.2009.内容依托式教学改革对英语专业学生阅读理解能力发展的影响分析[J].中国外语（3）:40-48
程文华.2010.外语教师课堂学习的个案研究[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
陈惠邦.1998.教育行动研究[M].台北：师大书苑有限公司
陈坚林，顾世民.2011.试论大学英语课程在通识教育中的地位和作用[J].外语电化教学（1）:3-8
陈向明.2001.教师如何作质的研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社
陈向明.2003.在行动中学作质的研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社
陈向明.2006.从北大元培计划看通识教育与专业教育的关系[J].北京大学教育评论4（3）:71-85
陈向明.2008.大学通识教育模式的探索----以北京大学元培计划为例[M].北京:教育科学出版社
崔大志,崔晓强.2010.大学英语教师发展困境探析[J]黑龙江高教研究（4）:73-75
董剑桥.2004.高校外语教育技术资源配置的系统观[J].外语电化教学（10）:52-55.
杜殿坤,高文.2005.维果茨基教育思想评介“维果茨基教育论著选”[M].余震球译北京:人民教育出版社
杜培俸.2006.张正东外语教育思想简介《张正东外语教育自选集》[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
冯惠敏.2007.我国内地高校推进通识教育发展的瓶颈及对策[J].复旦教育论坛5（5）:40-43
符碧真.2006.美国与台湾研究型大学普通教育之比较研究[J].复旦教育论坛4（1）:14-19
甘阳.2007.通识教育:美国与中国[J].复旦教育论坛5（5）:22-29
过伟瑜.2011.成为学习者-----教育工作的道德责任载：吴一安张莲（主编）外语教师文化构建与教师发展[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
高一虹,赵媛,程英,周燕.2003.中国大学生本科英语学习动机类型[J].现代外语（1）:29-38
高一虹,周燕.2009.二语习得社会心理研究:心理学派与社会文化学派[J].外语学刊（1）:123-128
高文.1999.维果茨基心理发展理论与社会建构主义[J].外国教育资料（4）:10-14
高燕.2008.从社会文化理论的角度论语言教师的中介作用[J].外语教学理论与实践（3）:93-96
谷振诣,刘壮虎.2006.批判性思维教程[M].北京:北京大学出版社
桂诗春.2005.谈当前的外语教学[J].中国外语（1）:5-8.
桂诗春.2010.关于我国外语教学若干问题的思考[J].外语教学与研究（4）:275-281.
郭为藩.2006.转变中的大学：传统、议题与前景[M].北京:北京大学出版社
韩刚.2011.英语教师学科教学知识的建构[M].上海:海外语教育出版社
韩礼德.2006.语言教育中的“语境”观念韩礼德语言学文集[M]李战子等译长沙:湖南教育出版社
胡显章,李曼丽.2000.文化素质教育与创造性培养[J]高等教育研究,(01)：43-46
胡文仲、孙有中.2008.突出学科特点，加强人文教育——试论当前英语专业教学改革[A]载：孙有中（主编）英语教育与人文通识教育[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
胡壮麟.2009.中国外语教育六十年[J].中国外语（5）:5-9
胡壮麟.2005.外语教学理念的发展[J].基础教育外语教学研究（1）:21-25
黄爱凤等.2011.重温RICH教育故事：在课程改革的探索型实践中孕育学习文化[A].载：吴一安、张莲（主编）外语教师文化构建与教师发展[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
黄俊杰.2006.全球化时代的大学通识教育[M].北京:北京大学出版社
黄坤锦.2006.美国大学的通识教育---美国心灵的攀登[M].北京:北京大学出版社
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
姬建国.2007.对外语教学法实质的探索[A].载姬建国、蒋楠（编）应用语言学[C]北京:中国人民大学出版社
贾冠杰.2010.英语教学基础理论[M]上海:上海外语教育出版社
乐毅.2007.新加坡国立大学通识教育及启示[J].高教探索（4）:76-79
李柏令.2006.《基于内容的第二语言教与学——互动的思路》导读基于内容的第二语言教与学——互动的思路Haley, M. H.&Austin, T.Y.[M].北京:世界图书出版公司
李宇明.2010.中国外语规划的若干思考[J]外国语2010（1）:2-8
林津石.2005.国外外语教学改革新趋势对我国外语教学的几点启示[J].辽宁行政学院学报2005（6）:171-172
林一钢.2005.西方教师信念研究述评[A]“中国教育改革高层论坛——多元视角中的教育质量问题”论文集231-238
刘钧燕.2006.通识教育,抑或专业教育的补充?——对北京大学本科生素质教育通选课的分析[J].复旦教育论坛4（1）:8-13
刘世生，曹金梅.2006.思维风格与语言认知[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版)21（2）105-114
刘鑫.2010.高校英语教师自主专业发展研究[M].昆明:云南大学出版社
罗少茜2003.英语课堂教学形成性评价研究[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
刘学惠.2011.社会文化理论视角下的外语课堂与语言学习课程教材教法（7）:46-51
吕良环.2001.语言和内容相融合---国外外语教学改革趋势[J]全球教育展望（8）:52-55
倪胜利.2011.通识教育:真谛、问题与方法[J].教育研究（9）:94-97
努南.2008.英语语言教学理论与实践[C].南京:译林出版社
马彦.2009.大学英语应该成为通识教育的重要组成部分[J]现代大学教育（4）:103-107
欧阳护华.2011.“能不能”到“愿不愿”、“敢不敢”——探求中国教师发展的本土路径[A].载:吴一安张莲（主编）外语教师文化构建与教师发展[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
濮实吴一安.2011.外语教师教育课程与职前教师职业信念的发展[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
秦秀白.2005.《外语教学改革：问题与对策》简介[J].外语教学与研究（2）:157-158.
秦晓睛.2007.中国大学生外语学习动机研究[M].北京:高等教育出版社
沈骑.2006.通识教育与大学英语课程整合模式探析[J].江苏社会科学教育文化版129-132
史彩计.2007.美国大学通识教育评价的一种方法:课程嵌入式评价法[J].复旦教育论坛5（2）:44-47
束定芳.2008.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
束定芳.2011.高等教育国际化与大学英语教学的目标和定位——德国高校英语授课学位课程及启示[J]外语教学与研究43（1）：137-145
苏子.2004.香港幼儿教师的教学信念:个案研究[D].香港中文大学教育学院博士论文
孙炬.2009.高校外语教师专业化发展的路径——以自己为资源[J].山东外语教学（4）:32-35
孙有中李莉文.2011. CBI和ESP与中国高校英语专业和大学英语教学改革的方向[J]5:1-4
田延期王淑杰.2010.心理认知理论与外语教学研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社
王初明.2008.语言学习与交互[J].外国语（6）:53-60
王初明.2010.从外语学习角度看大学英语教学和考试的改革[J].外语界（1）:17-22
王初明.2011.外语教学三大情节与语言习得语言有效途径[J]外语教学与研究43（4）:540-549
王蔷.2002.英语教师行动研究[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
王蔷.2011.在行动中改善课堂教学，在研究中促进专业成长[A].载吴一安张莲（主编）外语教师文化构建与教师发展[C]北京:外语教学与研究出版社
王才仁.2008.导言语言教学的流派Richards&Rodgers北京:外语教学与研究出版社
王守仁.2011关于高校大学英语教学的几点思考[J]外语教学理论与实践（1）:1-5
王晓华赵春娟周燕.2006.外语教师发展研究：问题与对策——“国内访问学者”模式调查报告[J].北京第二外国语学院学报（外语版）（8）:75-79
王艳.2011.优秀外语教师实践性知识的个案研究[J].外语教学理论与实践2011（1）:68-76
王义遒.2009.文化素质教育与通识教育关系的再认识[J].北京大学教育评论7（3）:100-111
王寅.2007.认知语言学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社
王哲李军军.2010.大学外语通识教育改革探索[J]外语电化教学9::3-7
魏屹东薛平.2010.论语言的认知语境与语境认知模型[J].哲学动态（6）:52-56
文秋芳.2001.英语学习者动机、观念、策略的变化规律与特点[J].外语教学与研究（3）:105-110
文秋芳.2008.《外语教学的流派》导读[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
文秋芳韩少杰.2011.英语教学研究方法与案例分析[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社
吴鼎民.2005.大学英语教学的“三套车”构想与高素质人才培养[J].江苏高教（4）:65-67.
吴刚2011.教育社会学的前沿议题上海：上海教育出版社
吴彤.2001.自组织方法论研究[M].北京:清华大学出版社
武晓燕.2006.试论建构主义理论对英语教学的启示[J].外语界（2）:33-35
邬大光.2010.世界一流大学解读——以美国密西根大学为例[J]高等教育研究31（12）:82-93
吴一安.2005.优秀外语教师专业素质探究[J]外语教学与研究37（3）:199-205
吴一安.2011.导言中国外语教育研究丛书:外语教师教育与发展主编北京:外语教学与研究出版社
吴一安张莲.2011.外语教师文化构建与教师发展[C]北京:外语教学与研究出版社
吴宗杰黄爱凤等.2005外语课程与教师发展——RICH教育视野[M].合肥:安徽教育出版社
严明.2009.大学英语自主学习能力培养模式研究———体验的视角[M].哈尔滨:黑龙江大学出版社,
严明.2010.后教学法时代在职外语教师研究取向述略[J].外语教学理论与实践（2）:23-28
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
夏纪梅.2005.解读《大学英语课程教学要求（试行）》[J].外国语（2）:12-14
许智宏.2008.专家会聚复旦研讨本科教学改革:应大力发展通识教育http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2008-05/12/content_8148500.htm
徐飞.2011.通识教育在认识[J].新华文摘2011（5）:119-122
徐锦芬.2011.我国大学英语教学的问题与对策[J]当代外语研究10:26-31
徐烈炯.2004.外文系怎么办？[J]外国语（1）:52-56
杨波.2011.后大学英语教学时代教材建设的趋向分析[J].阜阳师范学院学报（3）:140-142
杨惠中.2012.关于大学英语教学的几点思考[J].外语教学与研究（2）:293-297
杨金才.2009.当代英语散文：阅读与欣赏[C].上海:上海外语教育出版社
易凌云.2010.教师个人教育观念[M].北京：教育科学出版社
于兰孙启林.2007解析外语教师发展[J].教育科学23（2）:61-65
袁平华.2010.以学科内容为依托的语言教学对学生批判性思维能力影响的实证研究[J].外语界（6）:49-56
袁平华.2010.大学英语教学改革与以学科内容为依托的语言教学模式[J].外语界（3）:7-13
袁平华.2010.CBI教学模式对学生英语学习策略及英语水平的影响[J].当代外语研究（9）:55-60
张冲.2011.大学本科通识教育的他山之石——评哈佛大学与哥伦比亚大学本科通识课程体系之
争[J].复旦教育论坛（1）:43-46
张莲.2011.外语教师个人理论研究[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
张庆宗.2011.外语学与教的心理学原理[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
张绍杰.2010.全球化背景下的外语教学——行动与反思[J].外语与外语教学（1）:9-12.
张晓鹏.2007.通识教育师生谈（13）——从国外经验看我国大学的通识教育http://www.fudan.edu.cn/tsjy/article.php?id=119
张翼星.2011.北京大学通选课的现状、问题和建议[J].现代大学教育（2）:96-101
周谷平,李佳.2007.通识教育视角下的大学公共外语课程---以近代清华大学为个案[J].高等工程教育研究（5）:123-126
周燕.2005.高校英语教师发展需求调查与研究[J].外语教学与研究37（3）:206-209
周燕.2010.教师是外语学习环境下提高英语教学水平的关键[J]外语教学与研究42（4）：294-296
周远清，阎志坚.2004.论文化素质教育北京：高等教育出版社
朱刚.2008.西方思想经典[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社
朱青生.2007.通识教育的本土实践和探索[C].北大讲座第十四辑北京:北京大学出版
朱晓妹.2009.从议论文看英语专业大学生的批判性思维特点[M].北京:光明日报出版社
朱晓燕.2011.英语课堂教学策略---如何有效选择和运用[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社
左崇良,刘愈.2007.中美研究型大学通识课程实践的比较——以哈佛大学与北京大学为例[J].高等教育研究24（3）:40-43
Andrade, M. S.&J. H. Makaafi,2001. Guidelines for establishing adjunct courses at the universitylevel [J]. TESOL Journal,10(Autumn),34-39.
Ausubel, D.P., Novak, J.S. and H. Hanesian.1978. Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View [M].New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Anthony, E. M.1963. Approach, method and technique [J]. English Language Teaching17:63-67.
Bachman, L.1990. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing[M]. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.
Beijaard, D. N. and J, D. Vermunt,2000. Teachers’ perceptions of professional identity: An exploratorystudy from a personal knowledge perspective [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education16:749-764.
Benson, P.2010. Teacher education and teacher autonomy: Creating spaces for experimentation insecondary school English language teaching [J]. Language Teaching Research,14(3),259–275.
Bernaus, M.&R. C. Gardner.2008. Teacher Motivation Strategies, Student Perceptions, StudentMotivation, and English Achievement [J]. The Modern Language Journal92/3:387-401.
Boaler, J&Greeno, J.2000. Identity, agency, and knowing in mathematics worlds. In Boaler, J.(ed.)Multiciple Perspectives on Mathematics Teaching and Learning [C]. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.
Bohl, J. V. and L.R.Zoest2002. Learning through identity: A new unit of analysis for studying teacherdevelopment, Proceeding of the Twenty-sixth Annual Meeting of the international Group for thePsychology of mathematics Education. Norwich, England.
Borg, S.1998. Teachers' pedagogical systems and grammar teaching: a qualitative study [J]. TESOLQuarterly,32(1),9-38.
Borg, S.1999. Teachers’ theories in grammar teaching [J]. ELT Journal,53(3),157-167.
Breen, M. P., Hird, B., Milton, M., Thwaite, A., and Oliver, R.2001. Making sense of language teaching:teachers' principles and classroom practices[J]. Applied Linguistics,22(4),470-501.
Brinton, D., Snow, M., and Wesche, M.1989. Content-based second language instruction[M]. NewYork: Newbury House.
Brinton, D.2003. Content-based Instruction.In Practical English Language Teaching Nunan, D.(ed)New York:The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Brookfield2005The Skillful Teacher: on Technique, Trust and Responsiveness in the Classroom [M].Hang Zhou: Zhejiang University Press
Brown, H. D.2001. Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy[M]. NewYork: Longman.
Burns, A.1996. Starting all over again: from teaching adults to teaching beginners. In D. Freeman&J.C. Richards (Eds.), Teacher learning in language teaching[C]. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Burns, A.2011.Doing Action Research in English Language Teaching: A Guide for Practitioners [M].Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching And Research Press.
Cantoni-Harvey,G.1987.Content-Area Language Instruction: Approaches and Strategies. Reading. A:Addison-Wesley.
Catherine D. Ennis1992. Reconceptualizing Learning As A Dynamical System [J]. Journal ofCurriculum and Supervision.(2):115-130.
Chapple, L.,&A,Curtis.2000. Content-based instruction in Hong Kong: Students responses to film [J].System,28:419-433,188-204.
Clark, C. M., and P. L. Peterson,1986. Teachers' thought processes[C]. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Crandall, J.1987. ESL through Content-Area Language Instruction: Mathematics, science, social studies.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
Crawford, M.2001. Making language meaningful: A content-based approach for teaching generalEnglish courses. Journal of Hokkaido University of Education,52(1),53-63.
Creese, A.2005. Is this content-based language teaching? Linguistics and Education,16,
Crookes, G.&R. W. Schmidt.1991. Motivation: Reopening the Research Agenda [J]. LanguageLearning,41(4):469-512.
Cummins, J.1984. Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. ClevedonEngland: Multilingual Matters.
Dall’Alba, G.1991. Foreshadowing conceptions of teaching[J]. Research and Development in HigherEducation,13,293-297.
Daryl, M. R.2006. Developing content and form: Encouraging evidence from Italian content-basedinstruction. The Modern Language Journal[J],90,373-386.
Dewey, J.1933How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the EducationProcess [M]. Boston: D.C. Health&Company.
Dewey, J.1938/1963. Experience and Education. New York: Collier Books.
Diaz, D. M., Justicia, N. T., and L. Levine,2002. Making content accessible to promote secondlanguage acquisition: The ESL intensive program at Hostos community college (CUNY).[Online]Available: http://www.eduref.org
Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., and P. D. Pearson.1991. Moving from the old to the new:Research on reading comprehension instruction[J]. Review of Educational Research,61(2),139-264.
D rnyei, Z.1994. Motivation and Motivating in the Foreign Language Classroom [J]. The ModernLanguage Journal78(4):515-23.
D rnyei, Z.&Ottó1998. Motivation in action: A process model of L2motivation [J] Working Papers in
Applied Linguistics (Thames Valley University, London)4:43-69.
D rnyei, Z.2001. Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom [M]. Cambridge:
Dubin, F. and E.Olshtain.1986Course Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cambridge University Press.
Echevarria, J. and A.Graves.2003. Sheltered content instruction: Teaching English-language learnerswith diverse abilities. Boston: Allyn&Bacon.
Ekeblad, E., and C. Bond.1994. The nature of a conception: questions of context. Paper presented at thePhenomenography: philosophy and practice conference, Brisbane.
Ennis, R.1987. A Taxonomy of Critical Thinking Skills and Dispositions. In John Boyloff Baron andRobert J. Sternberg (ed.). Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and Practice. New York: Freeman.
Freeman, D.E.andY.S. Freeman.1994. Between worlds: Access to second language acquisition[M].Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Gaffield-Vile, N.1996. Content-based second language instruction at the tertiary level[J]. ELT Journal,50(2),108-114.
Gardner, R. C.1985. Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: the Role of Attitudes andMotivation [M]. Edward Arnold, London.
Gass, S.1988. Integrating research areas: a framework for second language studies [J]. AppliedLinguistics,9,198-217.
Clarke, M.A.1980. The short-circuit hypothesis of ESL reading or when language competenceinterferes with reading performance[J]. Modern Language Journal,64,203-209
Glaser, R., and M. Bassok.1989. Learning theory and the study of instruction [J]. Annual Review ofPsychology,40,631-666.
Glenn, O. M.2005. The development of English literacy and global studies concepts using shelteredinstruction [D]. Dissertation Abstracts International.(UMI No.3166569).
Golombek, P. R.1988. A study of teacher' personal-practical knowledge[J]. TESOL Quarterly,32,447-465.
Guilloteaux, M. J. and Z. D rnyei.2008. Motivating Language Learners: a Classroom-orientedInvestigation of the Effects of Motivational Strategies on Student Motivation [J]. TESOL Quarterly,42,55-77.
Harootunian, B.and G. P. Yarger.1981. Teachers' conceptions of their own success. current issues(Research/Technical400-78-0017).Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teacher Education.
Hohenberger, A.2002. Functional categories in language acquisition: Self-organization of a dynamicalsystem [M](Linguistische Arbeiten456). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Holec, H.1981.Autonomy in Foreign Language Learning[M]. Oxford: Pergamon.
Holland, D. Lachicotte, W. et al,1998. Identity and Agency in Culture Worlds [M]. Cambridge MA:Harvard University Press
Huang, J.2003. Activities as a vehicle for linguistic and sociocultural knowledge at the elementaryschool level[J]. Language Teaching Research,7,3-33.
Kasper, L. F.1994. Improved reading performance for ESL students through academic course pairing[J].Journal of Reading,37,376-384.
Kasper, L. F.1995/96. Using discipline-based texts to boost college ESL reading instruction. Journal ofAdolescent&Adult Literacy,39(4),298-306.
Kasper, L. F.1997a. Assessing long-term effects of content-based ESL instruction. A paper presented atDiscipline-Based ESL Instruction: Benefits and Implementation (a CUNY DevelopmentColloquium).[Online]Available:http://members.aol.com/ht a/Drlfk/long.term.effects.html (August10,2008).
Kasper, L. F.1997b. The impact of content-based instruction programs on the academic progress of ESLstudents [J]. English for Specific Purpose,16,309-320.
Kauffman, Stauart A1993. The origins of order: Self-organization and selection in evolution [M].Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kathleen Graves2004Designing Language Course: A Guide for Teachers [M]. Beijing: ForeignLanguage Teaching and Research Press.
Kember, D. and L. Gow.1994. Orientation to teaching and their effect on the quality of studentlearning[J]. Journal of Higher Education,65,59-74.
Kenny, X. J.and D.Gioia,2006. An introduction to fiction, poetry, and drama [M]. New York: PearsonLongman.
Krashen, S.1982Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition[M].New York: Prentice Hall
Lantolf, L.P.and S.L.Thorne2006. Sociocultural Theory and the Genesis of Second LanguageDevelopment [M].Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D.1985. State of the art on input in Second Language Acquisition[A]. In S. M. Gass&C.G. Madden (Eds.) Input in second language acquisition[C].433-444. Rowley, MA: Newbury.
Little, D.1991. Learner Autonomy1: Definitions, Issues and Problems [M]. Dublin: Authentik.
Marton, F. and S. Booth.1997. Learning and Awareness[M]. New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Marton, F. and R. Saljo,1997Approaches to learning, In F. Marton, D. Houunsell and N.J. Entwise (eds)The Experience of Learning: Implications for Teaching and Studying in Higher Education,[M]2ndedition. Edinburgh, Scottish Academic Press
Met, M.1991. Learning language through content: Learning content through language [J]. ForeignLanguage Annals,24(4),281-295.
Mills, G. E.2010. Action Research: A Guide for the Teacher Researcher (3rdEdition)[M]. Chongqin:Chongqin University Press
Noels, K. A.2001. Learning Spanish as a Second Language: Learners' Orientations and Perceptions oftheir Teachers' Communication Style [J]. Language Learning,51(1),107-144.
Nunan, D2001. The learner-centered curriculum: A study in second language teaching [M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Pajares, M. F.1992. Teachers' beliefs and educational research [J]. Review of Educational Research,62(3),307-332.
Parkinson, J.2000. Acquiring scientific literacy through content and genre: A theme-based languagecourse for science students [J]. English for Specific Purposes,19,369-387.
Pawan, F.2008. Content-area teachers and scaffolded instruction for English language learners [J].Teaching and Teacher Education,24,1450-1462.
Perkin, K. Brutten, S. R., and J.T.Pohlmann.1989. First and second language reading comprehensionskill [J]. RELC Journal,20,1-9.
Pichette, F. and N. Segalowitz.2003. Impact of Maintaining L1Reading Skills in L2Reading SkillDevelopment in Adults: Evidence from Speakers of Serbo-Croatian Learning French. ModernLanguage Journal[J],87,391-403.
Pintrich, P.1990. Implication of psychological research on student learning and college teaching forteacher education. In W. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education [C]. New York:Macmillan.
Prosser, M and K. Trigwell.2007. Understanding Learning and Teaching: The Experience in HigherEducation [M]. Beijing: Peking University Press.
Read, I.2000. Assessing vocabulary [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., Ho, B., and K..Giblin.1996. Learning how to teach in the RSA Cert. In D. Freeman&J.C. Richards (Eds.).Teacher learning in language teaching [C]. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Richards, J.C.1998. Beyond Training [M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Richards, J.C.2004. The Language Teaching Matrix [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign LanguageEducation Press.
Richard, J. C., and T. S. Rogers.2005. Approaches and methods in language teaching [M]. New York:Cambridge University Press.
Scarino. A and A. Liddicoat.2010. Teaching and Learning Languages: A Guide [M]. Beijing: ModernEducation Press.
Sch n.D. A.1987. Educating the Reflective Practitioner [M]. London: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Schulz, R. A.2001. Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role ofgrammar instruction and corrective feedback [J].The Modern Language Journal,85(2),244-258.
Schuman, J. H1998. The Neurobiology of Affect in Language [M]. Oxford: Blackwell.
Slavin, R.E2011. Educational Psychology Beijing: Posts and Telecom Press
Smoke, T. and T. Haas.1995. Ideas in practice: Linking classes to develop students’ academic voices [J].Journal of Developmental Education,19,28-32.
Stevick, E.W2006. Working with Teaching Methods: What’s at Stake? Beijing: Foreign LanguageTeaching and Research Press
Stoller, F.1999. Time for change: a hybrid curriculum for EAP programs [J]. TESOL Journal,8(1),9-13.
Vygotsky, L.S.1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychology Processes[M].Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Wallace, M.1991. Training Foreign Language Teachers: A Reflective Approach [M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press
Wiles, J. and J. Bondi2004. Curriculum Development: A Guide to Practice (6th Edition)[M]. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Willace, M. J.2000. Action Research for Languge Teachers [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language TeachingAnd Research Press
Williams, M and R. L. Burden2011. Psychology for Language Teachers: A Social Constructivist
Approach [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Winter, W. E.2004. The performance of ESL students in a content-linked psychology course [J].Community Review,18,76-82.
Wolfgang, T. and J.P. Dauwalder (eds.).2003. The dynamical systems approach to cognition: Conceptsand empirical paradigms based on self-organization, embodiment and coordination dynamics [J](Studies of Nonlinear Phenomena in Life Science10). Singapore: World Scientific.
Woods, D.1996. Teaching Cognition in Language Teaching [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Ya-Ling Tsai.2010. The Impact of Content-Based Language Instruction on EFL Students’ ReadingPerformance [J]. Asian Social Science,6(3),77-85.
Yero, J. L.2002. Teaching in mind: how teacher thinking shapes education [M](1st MindFlight ed.).Hamilton, MT: MindFlight Publishing.
补爱华.2011.语言测试方法论上海：上海交通大学出版社
布龙菲尔德.2006.论外语教学布龙菲尔德语言学文集[M]熊兵译长沙:湖南教育出版社
蔡基刚.2010a.制约我国大学英语教学方向转移的因素分析[J].外语研究（2）:40-45.
蔡基刚.2010b.关于我国大学英语教学重新定位的思考[J].外语教学与研究（4）:306-307.
蔡基刚.2010c.后大学英语教学改革依据与对策研究[J].外语电化教学（5）:3-12
蔡薇，张文霞.2004.以人为本：英语提高阶段课程体系改革的思考[J].清华大学学报（哲学社会科学版）（19）:82-5
曹德明.2007.以科学发展观为指导培养创新型国际化外语人才[J].外国语（4）:2-5
曹莉.2007.关于文化素质教育与通识教育的辩证思考[J].清华大学教育研究（2）:24-33
常俊跃，刘晓蕖，邓耀臣.2009.内容依托式教学改革对英语专业学生阅读理解能力发展的影响分析[J].中国外语（3）:40-48
程文华.2010.外语教师课堂学习的个案研究[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
陈惠邦.1998.教育行动研究[M].台北：师大书苑有限公司
陈坚林，顾世民.2011.试论大学英语课程在通识教育中的地位和作用[J].外语电化教学（1）:3-8
陈向明.2001.教师如何作质的研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社
陈向明.2003.在行动中学作质的研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社
陈向明.2006.从北大元培计划看通识教育与专业教育的关系[J].北京大学教育评论4（3）:71-85
陈向明.2008.大学通识教育模式的探索----以北京大学元培计划为例[M].北京:教育科学出版社
崔大志,崔晓强.2010.大学英语教师发展困境探析[J]黑龙江高教研究（4）:73-75
董剑桥.2004.高校外语教育技术资源配置的系统观[J].外语电化教学（10）:52-55.
杜殿坤,高文.2005.维果茨基教育思想评介“维果茨基教育论著选”[M].余震球译北京:人民教育出版社
杜培俸.2006.张正东外语教育思想简介《张正东外语教育自选集》[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
冯惠敏.2007.我国内地高校推进通识教育发展的瓶颈及对策[J].复旦教育论坛5（5）:40-43
符碧真.2006.美国与台湾研究型大学普通教育之比较研究[J].复旦教育论坛4（1）:14-19
甘阳.2007.通识教育:美国与中国[J].复旦教育论坛5（5）:22-29
过伟瑜.2011.成为学习者-----教育工作的道德责任载：吴一安张莲（主编）外语教师文化构建与教师发展[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
高一虹,赵媛,程英,周燕.2003.中国大学生本科英语学习动机类型[J].现代外语（1）:29-38
高一虹,周燕.2009.二语习得社会心理研究:心理学派与社会文化学派[J].外语学刊（1）:123-128
高文.1999.维果茨基心理发展理论与社会建构主义[J].外国教育资料（4）:10-14
高燕.2008.从社会文化理论的角度论语言教师的中介作用[J].外语教学理论与实践（3）:93-96
谷振诣,刘壮虎.2006.批判性思维教程[M].北京:北京大学出版社
桂诗春.2005.谈当前的外语教学[J].中国外语（1）:5-8.
桂诗春.2010.关于我国外语教学若干问题的思考[J].外语教学与研究（4）:275-281.
郭为藩.2006.转变中的大学：传统、议题与前景[M].北京:北京大学出版社
韩刚.2011.英语教师学科教学知识的建构[M].上海:海外语教育出版社
韩礼德.2006.语言教育中的“语境”观念韩礼德语言学文集[M]李战子等译长沙:湖南教育出版社
胡显章,李曼丽.2000.文化素质教育与创造性培养[J]高等教育研究,(01)：43-46
胡文仲、孙有中.2008.突出学科特点，加强人文教育——试论当前英语专业教学改革[A]载：孙有中（主编）英语教育与人文通识教育[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
胡壮麟.2009.中国外语教育六十年[J].中国外语（5）:5-9
胡壮麟.2005.外语教学理念的发展[J].基础教育外语教学研究（1）:21-25
黄爱凤等.2011.重温RICH教育故事：在课程改革的探索型实践中孕育学习文化[A].载：吴一安、张莲（主编）外语教师文化构建与教师发展[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
黄俊杰.2006.全球化时代的大学通识教育[M].北京:北京大学出版社
黄坤锦.2006.美国大学的通识教育---美国心灵的攀登[M].北京:北京大学出版社
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
姬建国.2007.对外语教学法实质的探索[A].载姬建国、蒋楠（编）应用语言学[C]北京:中国人民大学出版社
贾冠杰.2010.英语教学基础理论[M]上海:上海外语教育出版社
乐毅.2007.新加坡国立大学通识教育及启示[J].高教探索（4）:76-79
李柏令.2006.《基于内容的第二语言教与学——互动的思路》导读基于内容的第二语言教与学——互动的思路Haley, M. H.&Austin, T.Y.[M].北京:世界图书出版公司
李宇明.2010.中国外语规划的若干思考[J]外国语2010（1）:2-8
林津石.2005.国外外语教学改革新趋势对我国外语教学的几点启示[J].辽宁行政学院学报2005（6）:171-172
林一钢.2005.西方教师信念研究述评[A]“中国教育改革高层论坛——多元视角中的教育质量问题”论文集231-238
刘钧燕.2006.通识教育,抑或专业教育的补充?——对北京大学本科生素质教育通选课的分析[J].复旦教育论坛4（1）:8-13
刘世生，曹金梅.2006.思维风格与语言认知[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版)21（2）105-114
刘鑫.2010.高校英语教师自主专业发展研究[M].昆明:云南大学出版社
罗少茜2003.英语课堂教学形成性评价研究[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
刘学惠.2011.社会文化理论视角下的外语课堂与语言学习课程教材教法（7）:46-51
吕良环.2001.语言和内容相融合---国外外语教学改革趋势[J]全球教育展望（8）:52-55
倪胜利.2011.通识教育:真谛、问题与方法[J].教育研究（9）:94-97
努南.2008.英语语言教学理论与实践[C].南京:译林出版社
马彦.2009.大学英语应该成为通识教育的重要组成部分[J]现代大学教育（4）:103-107
欧阳护华.2011.“能不能”到“愿不愿”、“敢不敢”——探求中国教师发展的本土路径[A].载:吴一安张莲（主编）外语教师文化构建与教师发展[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
濮实吴一安.2011.外语教师教育课程与职前教师职业信念的发展[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
秦秀白.2005.《外语教学改革：问题与对策》简介[J].外语教学与研究（2）:157-158.
秦晓睛.2007.中国大学生外语学习动机研究[M].北京:高等教育出版社
沈骑.2006.通识教育与大学英语课程整合模式探析[J].江苏社会科学教育文化版129-132
史彩计.2007.美国大学通识教育评价的一种方法:课程嵌入式评价法[J].复旦教育论坛5（2）:44-47
束定芳.2008.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
束定芳.2011.高等教育国际化与大学英语教学的目标和定位——德国高校英语授课学位课程及启示[J]外语教学与研究43（1）：137-145
苏子.2004.香港幼儿教师的教学信念:个案研究[D].香港中文大学教育学院博士论文
孙炬.2009.高校外语教师专业化发展的路径——以自己为资源[J].山东外语教学（4）:32-35
孙有中李莉文.2011. CBI和ESP与中国高校英语专业和大学英语教学改革的方向[J]5:1-4
田延期王淑杰.2010.心理认知理论与外语教学研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社
王初明.2008.语言学习与交互[J].外国语（6）:53-60
王初明.2010.从外语学习角度看大学英语教学和考试的改革[J].外语界（1）:17-22
王初明.2011.外语教学三大情节与语言习得语言有效途径[J]外语教学与研究43（4）:540-549
王蔷.2002.英语教师行动研究[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
王蔷.2011.在行动中改善课堂教学，在研究中促进专业成长[A].载吴一安张莲（主编）外语教师文化构建与教师发展[C]北京:外语教学与研究出版社
王才仁.2008.导言语言教学的流派Richards&Rodgers北京:外语教学与研究出版社
王守仁.2011关于高校大学英语教学的几点思考[J]外语教学理论与实践（1）:1-5
王晓华赵春娟周燕.2006.外语教师发展研究：问题与对策——“国内访问学者”模式调查报告[J].北京第二外国语学院学报（外语版）（8）:75-79
王艳.2011.优秀外语教师实践性知识的个案研究[J].外语教学理论与实践2011（1）:68-76
王义遒.2009.文化素质教育与通识教育关系的再认识[J].北京大学教育评论7（3）:100-111
王寅.2007.认知语言学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社
王哲李军军.2010.大学外语通识教育改革探索[J]外语电化教学9::3-7
魏屹东薛平.2010.论语言的认知语境与语境认知模型[J].哲学动态（6）:52-56
文秋芳.2001.英语学习者动机、观念、策略的变化规律与特点[J].外语教学与研究（3）:105-110
文秋芳.2008.《外语教学的流派》导读[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
文秋芳韩少杰.2011.英语教学研究方法与案例分析[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社
吴鼎民.2005.大学英语教学的“三套车”构想与高素质人才培养[J].江苏高教（4）:65-67.
吴刚2011.教育社会学的前沿议题上海：上海教育出版社
吴彤.2001.自组织方法论研究[M].北京:清华大学出版社
武晓燕.2006.试论建构主义理论对英语教学的启示[J].外语界（2）:33-35
邬大光.2010.世界一流大学解读——以美国密西根大学为例[J]高等教育研究31（12）:82-93
吴一安.2005.优秀外语教师专业素质探究[J]外语教学与研究37（3）:199-205
吴一安.2011.导言中国外语教育研究丛书:外语教师教育与发展主编北京:外语教学与研究出版社
吴一安张莲.2011.外语教师文化构建与教师发展[C]北京:外语教学与研究出版社
吴宗杰黄爱凤等.2005外语课程与教师发展——RICH教育视野[M].合肥:安徽教育出版社
严明.2009.大学英语自主学习能力培养模式研究———体验的视角[M].哈尔滨:黑龙江大学出版社,
严明.2010.后教学法时代在职外语教师研究取向述略[J].外语教学理论与实践（2）:23-28
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
夏纪梅.2005.解读《大学英语课程教学要求（试行）》[J].外国语（2）:12-14
许智宏.2008.专家会聚复旦研讨本科教学改革:应大力发展通识教育http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2008-05/12/content_8148500.htm
徐飞.2011.通识教育在认识[J].新华文摘2011（5）:119-122
徐锦芬.2011.我国大学英语教学的问题与对策[J]当代外语研究10:26-31
徐烈炯.2004.外文系怎么办？[J]外国语（1）:52-56
杨波.2011.后大学英语教学时代教材建设的趋向分析[J].阜阳师范学院学报（3）:140-142
杨惠中.2012.关于大学英语教学的几点思考[J].外语教学与研究（2）:293-297
杨金才.2009.当代英语散文：阅读与欣赏[C].上海:上海外语教育出版社
易凌云.2010.教师个人教育观念[M].北京：教育科学出版社
于兰孙启林.2007解析外语教师发展[J].教育科学23（2）:61-65
袁平华.2010.以学科内容为依托的语言教学对学生批判性思维能力影响的实证研究[J].外语界（6）:49-56
袁平华.2010.大学英语教学改革与以学科内容为依托的语言教学模式[J].外语界（3）:7-13
袁平华.2010.CBI教学模式对学生英语学习策略及英语水平的影响[J].当代外语研究（9）:55-60
张冲.2011.大学本科通识教育的他山之石——评哈佛大学与哥伦比亚大学本科通识课程体系之
争[J].复旦教育论坛（1）:43-46
张莲.2011.外语教师个人理论研究[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
张庆宗.2011.外语学与教的心理学原理[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社
张绍杰.2010.全球化背景下的外语教学——行动与反思[J].外语与外语教学（1）:9-12.
张晓鹏.2007.通识教育师生谈（13）——从国外经验看我国大学的通识教育http://www.fudan.edu.cn/tsjy/article.php?id=119
张翼星.2011.北京大学通选课的现状、问题和建议[J].现代大学教育（2）:96-101
周谷平,李佳.2007.通识教育视角下的大学公共外语课程---以近代清华大学为个案[J].高等工程教育研究（5）:123-126
周燕.2005.高校英语教师发展需求调查与研究[J].外语教学与研究37（3）:206-209
周燕.2010.教师是外语学习环境下提高英语教学水平的关键[J]外语教学与研究42（4）：294-296
周远清，阎志坚.2004.论文化素质教育北京：高等教育出版社
朱刚.2008.西方思想经典[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社
朱青生.2007.通识教育的本土实践和探索[C].北大讲座第十四辑北京:北京大学出版
朱晓妹.2009.从议论文看英语专业大学生的批判性思维特点[M].北京:光明日报出版社
朱晓燕.2011.英语课堂教学策略---如何有效选择和运用[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社
左崇良,刘愈.2007.中美研究型大学通识课程实践的比较——以哈佛大学与北京大学为例[J].高等教育研究24（3）:40-43
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |