Arispe, K., & Blake, R. J. (2012). Individual factors and successful learning in a hybrid course. System, 40(4), 449–465.Google Scholar

Beatty, K. (2013). Teaching and researching: Computer-assisted language learning. London, England: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chapelle, C. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Garrison, D. R., & Shale, D. (1987). Mapping the boundaries of distance education: Problems in defining the field. American Journal of Distance Education, 1(1), 7–13.Google Scholar

Gibson, J. J. (1966). The sense considered as perceptual systems. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Holmberg, B. (1983). Guided didactic conversation in distance education. In Stewart, D, Keegan, D, & Holmberg, B (Eds.), Distance education: International perspectives (pp. 114–122). London, England: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Keegan, D. (1986). The foundations of distance education. Kent, England: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Mood, T. A. (1995). Distance education: An annotated bibliography. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar

Simonson, M., & Berg, G. A. (n.d.). Distance learning education. In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved from www.britannica.com/topic/distance-learningGoogle Scholar

Willis, B. (1992). Making distance learning effective: Key roles and responsibilities. Educational Technology, 32(6), 35–37.Google Scholar

Adair-Hauck, B., Willingham-McLain, L., & Youngs, B. E. (1999). Evaluating the integration of technology and second language learning. CALICO Journal, 17(2), 269–306Google Scholar

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2011). Going the distance: Online education in the United States, 2011. Babson Survey Research Group. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/going_distance_2011Google Scholar

Alonso, F., López, G., Manrique, D., & Viñes, J. M. (2005). An instructional model for web‐based e‐learning education with a blended learning process approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 217–235.Google Scholar

Bañados, E. (2006). A blended-learning pedagogical model for teaching and learning EFL successfully through an online interactive multimedia environment. CALICO Journal, 23(3), 533–550.Google Scholar

Barr, D., Leakey, J., & Ranchoux, A. (2005). TOLD like it is! An evaluation of an integrated oral development project. Language Learning & Technology, 9(3), 55–78.Google Scholar

Baumgartner, K. (2015). Strategies for hybrid course design in second‐year German. Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 48(2), 211–228.Google Scholar

Bijeikiene, V., Rasinskiene, S., & Zutkiens, L. (2011). Teachers’ attitudes towards the use of blended learning in general English classroom. Studies About Languages, 18, 122–127.Google Scholar

Blackboard Inc. (n.d.). Wimba voice (Version 6.0) [Computer software]. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from www.wimba.com/products/wimba_voiceGoogle Scholar

Blake, R. (2014). Best practices in online learning: Is it for everyone? In Rubio, F & Thoms, J. J. (Eds.), Hybrid language teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical and curricular issues (pp. 10–26). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

Blake, R., Wilson, N. L., Cetto, M., & Pardo-Ballester, C. (2008). Measuring oral proficiency in distance, face-to-face, and blended classrooms. Language Learning & Technology, 12(3), 114–127.Google Scholar

Blended Learning. (n.d.). The Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation. Retrieved from www.christenseninstitute.org/blended-learning/Google Scholar

Blended Teaching. (2008, January 26). Hybrid vs. blended learning [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://hybridteaching.blogspot.com/2008/01/hybrid-vs-blended-learning.htmlGoogle Scholar

Borg, S. (2006). The distinctive characteristics of foreign language teachers. Language Teaching Research, 10(1), 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carr, M. (2014). The online university classroom: One perspective for effective student engagement and teaching in an online environment. Journal of Effective Teaching, 14(1), 99–110.Google Scholar

Cerezo, L. (2014). Beyond hybrid learning: A synthesis of research on e-tutors under the lens of second language. In Rubio, F & Thoms, J. J. (Eds.), Hybrid language teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical and curricular issues (pp. 50–66). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

CETL. (2014, October 15). Understanding technology-enhanced courses models: Online, hybrid, and blended courses [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://wheel.ucdavis.edu/hybrid-online/Google Scholar

Chapelle, C. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Chenoweth, N. A., & Murday, K. (2003). Measuring student learning in an online French course. CALICO Journal, 20(2), 285–314.Google Scholar

Chenoweth, N. A., Ushida, E., & Murday, K. (2006). Student learning in hybrid French and Spanish courses: An overview of language online. CALICO Journal, 24(1), 115–145.Google Scholar

Comas-Quinn, A. (2011). Learning to teach online or learning to become an online teacher: An exploration of teachers’ experiences in a blended learning course. ReCALL, 23(3), 218–232.Google Scholar

Cubillos, J. (2007, January). A comparative study of hybrid versus traditional instruction in foreign languages. News from Northeast, pp. 20–60.Google Scholar

Daulton, F. E. (2008). Japan’s built-in lexicon of English-based loanwords. Philadelphia, PA: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Z., & Murphey, T. (2003). Group dynamics in the language classroom. Stuttgart, Germany: Ernst Klett Sprachen.Google Scholar

Driscoll, M. (2002). Blended learning: Let’s get beyond the hype. E-learning, 1(4), 1–4.Google Scholar

Dudeney, G., & Hockly, N. (2007). How to teach English with technology. Harlow, England: Pearson.Google Scholar

Dziuban, C. D., Hartman, J. L., Moskal, P. D., Sorg, S., & Truman, B. (2004). Three ALN modalities: An institutional perspective. In Bourne, G & Moore, J. C. (Eds.), Elements of quality online education (pp. 127–148). Newburyport, MA: Sloan Consortium.Google Scholar

Echávez-Solano, N. (2003). A comparison of student outcomes and attitudes in technology-enhanced vs. traditional second-semester Spanish language courses (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 305330859)Google Scholar

Enkin, E., & Mejías‐Bikandi, E. (2017). The effectiveness of online teaching in an advanced Spanish language course. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 176–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Friesen, N. (2012). The questionable promise of social media for education: connective learning and the commercial imperative. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(3), 183–194.Google Scholar

Garrett, N. (1991). Technology in the service of language learning: Trends and issues. The Modern Language Journal, 75(1), 74–101.Google Scholar

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105.Google Scholar

Garrison, D. R., & Shale, D. (1987). Mapping the boundaries of distance education: Problems in defining the field. American Journal of Distance Education, 1(1), 7–13.Google Scholar

Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar

Garrison, D. R., Kanuka, H., & Hawes, D. (2002). Blended learning in a research university. University of Calgary. Retrieved from www.commons.ucalgary.ca/documents/BlendedLearning_1.pdf.Google Scholar

Gascoigne, C., & Parnell, J. (2014). Hybrid language instruction: Finding the right fit. In Dhonau, S (Ed.), Unlock the gateway to communication: Selected papers from the 2014 Central States Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (pp. 53–64). Richmond, VA: Robert M. Terry.Google Scholar

Gilbert, S. D. (2001). How to be a successful online student. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Goertler, S. (2014). Theoretical and empirical foundations for blended language learning. In Rubio, F & Thoms, J. J. (Eds.), Hybrid language teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical and curricular issues (pp. 137–159). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

Gruba, P., & Hinkelman, D. (2012). Blending technologies in second language classrooms. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haworth, T., & Parker, R. (1995). The contribution of a face-to-face component in initial teacher training at a distance. In Howard, R & McGrath, I (Eds.), Distance education for language teachers: A UK perspective (pp. 78–94). Philadelphia, PA: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Henri, J., & Lee, S. (2007). Why Hong Kong students favour more face-to-face classroom time in blended learning. Psicologia Escolar e Educacional, 11(SPE), 103–111.Google Scholar

Hofmann, T. (2001). Unsupervised learning by probabilistic latent semantic analysis. Machine Learning, 42(1), 177–196.Google Scholar

Holden, C. L., & Sykes, J. M. (2011). Leveraging mobile games for place-based language learning. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 1(2), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hong, K. H., & Samimy, K. K. (2010). The influence of L2 teachers’ use of CALL modes on language learners’ reactions to blended learning. CALICO Journal, 27(2), 328–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. A. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125–132.Google Scholar

Isabelli, C. A. (2015) Student learning outcomes in hybrid and face-to-face beginning Spanish language courses. In Pixel (Ed.), Conference proceedings: The Future of Education (pp. 649–654). Padova, Italy: Edizioni Webster.Google Scholar

Larson, D. K., & Sung, C. H. (2009). Comparing student performance: Online versus blended versus face-to-face. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(1), 31–42.Google Scholar

Laster, S., Otte, G., Picciano, A. G., & Sorg, S. (2005, April). Redefining blended learning. Paper presented at the 2005 Sloan-C Workshop on Blended Learning, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar

Lewis, A., & Atzert, S. (2000). Dealing with computer-related anxiety in the project-oriented CALL classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13(4–5), 377–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ligorio, M. B., Cacciamani, S., & Cesareni, D. (2006). Blended learning: Dalla scuola dell’obbligo alla formazione adulta. Rome, Italy: Carocci.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. R. & Bhatia, T. J. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Marsh, D. (2012). Blended learning. Creating learning opportunities for language learners. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Masie, E. (2002). Blended learning: The magic is in the mix. In Rossett, A (Ed.), The ASTD e-learning handbook (pp. 58–63). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

McCracken, J., & Dobson, M. (2004). Blended learning design. In Uskov, V (Ed.), Proceedings of the seventh IASTED International Conference: Computers and Advanced Technology in Education – 2004 (pp. 491–496). Calgary, AB: ACTA Press.Google Scholar

Murday, K., Ushida, E., & Ann Chenoweth, N. (2008). Learners’ and teachers’ perspectives on language online. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(2), 125–142.Google Scholar

Nation, P. (2003). The role of the first language in foreign language learning. Asian EFL Journal, 5(2), 1–8.Google Scholar

Nation, P., Goulden, R., & Read, J. (1990). How large can a receptive vocabulary be? Applied Linguistics, 11(4), 341–363.Google Scholar

Neumeier, P. (2005). A closer look at blended learning. Parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL, 17(02), 163–178.Google Scholar

Nicolson, M., Murphy, L., & Southgate, M. (2011). Language teaching in blended contexts. Edinburgh, Scotland: Dunedin Academic Press.Google Scholar

Novak, G. M., Patterson, E. T., Gavrin, A. D., & Christian, W. (1999). Just-in-time teaching blending active learning with web technology. American Journal of Physics, 67, 937–938.Google Scholar

Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning environments: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227–233.Google Scholar

PBworks Inc. (n.d.). PBworks [Computer software]. San Mateo, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.pbworks.com/wikis.htmlGoogle Scholar

Picciano, A. G. (2006). Blended learning: Implications for growth and access. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10(3), 95–102.Google Scholar

Picciano, A. G., & Dziuban, C. D. (2007). Blended learning: Research perspectives (Vol. 1). Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.Google Scholar

Picciano, A. G., Dziuban, C. D., & Graham, C. R. (Eds.). (2014). Blended learning: Research perspectives (Vol. 2). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Reid, J. M. (Ed.). (1998). Understanding learning styles in the second language classroom. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.Google Scholar

Reid-Young, A. (n.d.). The key to e-learning is b-learning. Retrieved from www.hci.com.au/b-learning/Google Scholar

Ross, B., & Gage, K. (2006). Global perspectives on blending learning. In Bonk, C. J. & Graham, C. R. (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 155–168). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.Google Scholar

Rubio, F. (2014). Blended learning and L2 proficiency. In Rubio, F & Thoms, J. J. (Eds.), Hybrid language teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical and curricular issues (pp. 137–159). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

Rubio, F., & Mizza, D. (2019). High-leverage practices for blended language learning: Towards a successful implementation in the blended language learning path. In Palalas, A (Ed.), Blended language learning: International perspectives on innovative practice (pp. 24–61). Beijing, China: Open University of China Press.Google Scholar

Rubio, F., & Thoms, J. J. (2014). Hybrid language teaching and learning: Looking forward. In Rubio, F & Thoms, J. J. (Eds.), Hybrid language teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical and curricular issues (pp. 1–9). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

Sagarra, N., & Zapata, G. C. (2008). Blending classroom instruction with online homework: A study of student perceptions of computer-assisted L2 learning. ReCALL, 20(02), 208–224.Google Scholar

Schmidt, R. (1992). Psychological mechanisms underlying second language fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14(4), 357–385.Google Scholar

Scida, E. E., & Saury, R. E. (2006). Hybrid courses and their impact on student and classroom performance: A case study at the University of Virginia. CALICO Journal, 23(3), 517–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Seaman, J. E., Allen, E. I., & Seaman, J. (2018). Grade increase: Tracking distance education in the United States. Babson Research Group. Retrieved from https://onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradeincrease.pdfGoogle Scholar

Sharma, P., & Barrett, B. (2007). Blended learning. London, England: Macmillan Books for Teachers.Google Scholar

Singh, H., & Reed, C. (2001). A white paper: Achieving success with blended learning. Centra Software, 1, 1–11.Google Scholar

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

Snyder, T. D., de Brey, C., & Dillow, S. A. (2016). Digest of education statistics (52nd ed.). U.S. Department of Education, Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017094.pdfGoogle Scholar

Stracke, E. (2007). A road to understanding: A qualitative study into why learners dropout of a blended language learning (BLL) environment. ReCALL, 19(01), 57–78.Google Scholar

Swender, E., Conrad, D., & Vicars, R. (2012). ACTFL proficiency guidelines 2012. Alexandria, VA: American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages.Google Scholar

Thoms, B. (2012). Student perceptions of microblogging: Integrating Twitter with blogging to support learning and interaction. The Journal of Information Technology Education, 11, 179–197.Google Scholar

Thoms, J. J. (2014). An ecological view of whole-class discussions in a second language literature classroom: Teacher reformulations as affordances for learning. The Modern Language Journal, 98(3), 724–741.Google Scholar

Thorne, K. (2003). Blended learning: How to integrate online and traditional learning. London, England: Kogan Page.Google Scholar

Twigg, C. A. (2001). Innovations in online learning. Moving beyond no significant difference. Troy, NY: Center for Academic Transformation.Google Scholar

Twigg, C. A. (2003). Improving learning and reducing costs: Lessons learned from round I of the PEW grant program in course redesign. Troy, NY: Center for Academic Transformation.Google Scholar

Valiathan, P. (2002). Blended learning models. Learning Circuits, 3(8), 50–59.Google Scholar

Van Aacken, S. (1996). The efficacy of CALL in Kanji learning. On-Call, 10(2), 2–14.Google Scholar

Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language classroom: Awareness, autonomy and authenticity. London, England: Longman.Google Scholar

Walczynski, S. (2002). Applying the job characteristics model to Mallard web-based classes (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Illinois State University, Normal, IL.Google Scholar

Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer‐mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. The Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 470–481.Google Scholar

Western Cooperative for Educational Technologies. (2016). WCET Distance Education Enrollment Report 2016. Retrieved from https://wcet.wiche.edu/sites/default/files/WCETDistanceEducationEnrollmentReport2016.pdfGoogle Scholar

White, C. (2003). Language learning in distance education (Cambridge Language Teaching Library). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

White, C. (2006). Distance learning of foreign languages. Language Teaching, 39(04), 247–264.Google Scholar

Young, D. J. (2008). An empirical investigation of the effects of blended learning on student outcomes in a redesigned intensive Spanish course. CALICO Journal, 26(1), 160–181.Google Scholar

Young, D. J., & Pettigrew, J. L. (2014). Blended learning in large multisection foreign language programs: An opportunity for reflecting on course content, pedagogy, learning outcomes, and assessment issues. In Rubio, F & Thoms, J. J. (Eds.), Hybrid language teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical and curricular issues (pp. 92–120). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

Young, R. F. (2008). Language and interaction. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

Ziegler, M. F., Paulus, T. M., & Woodside, M. (2006). This course is helping us all arrive at new viewpoints, isn’t it? Making meaning through dialogue in a blended environment. Journal of Transformative Education, 4(4), 302–319.Google Scholar

Alebaikan, R., & Troudi, S. (2010). Blended learning in Saudi universities: Challenges and perspectives. Association for Learning Technology Journal, 18(1), 49–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Al-Mahrooqi, R., & Troudi, S. (Eds.). (2014). Using technology in foreign language teaching. Newcastle upon Tyne, England: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar

American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (2017). Statement on the role of technology in language learning. Retrieved from www.actfl.org/news/position-statements/statement-the-role-technology-language-learningGoogle Scholar

Arispe, K., & Blake, R. J. (2012). Individual factors and successful learning in a hybrid course. System, 40(4), 449–465.Google Scholar

Arvan, L., & Musumeci, D. (2000). Instructor attitudes within the SCALE efficiency projects. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 4(3), 196–215.Google Scholar

Arvan, L., Ory, J. C., Bullock, C. D., Burnaska, K. K., & Hanson, M. (1998). The SCALE efficiency projects. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 2(2), 33–60.Google Scholar

Blake, R. J. (2011). Current trends in online language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 19–35.Google Scholar

Blake, R. J., & Delforge, A. M. (2007). Online language learning: The case of Spanish Without Walls. In Lafford, B & Salaberry, R (Eds.), The art of teaching Spanish: Second language acquisition from research to praxis (pp.127–147). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

Blake, R. J., Wilson, N. L., Cetto, M., & Pardo-Ballester, C. (2008). Measuring oral proficiency in distance, face-to-face, and blended classrooms. Language Learning & Technology, 12(3), 114–127.Google Scholar

Blake, R., Blasco, J., & Hernández, C. (2001). Tesoros CD-ROM: A multi-media-based course [CD-ROM]. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Blanco, J. A., & Redwine Donley, P. (2018). Vistas: Introducción a la lengua española (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Vista Higher Learning.Google Scholar

Branon, R. F., & Essex, C. (2001). Synchronous and asynchronous communication tools in distance education. TechTrends, 45(1), 36–36.Google Scholar

Chenoweth, N. A., Ushida, E., & Murday, K. (2006). Student learning in hybrid French and Spanish courses: An overview of language online. CALICO Journal, 24(1), 115–145.Google Scholar

Condruz-Bacescu, M. (2012). Foreign language teaching methods. In Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference “Strategies XXI”, Bucharest (Vol. 1, pp. 197–202). Bucharest, Romania: Editura Universitara.Google Scholar

D’Halluin, C. (2001). Usages d’un environnement médiatisé pour l’apprentissage coopératif. Les Cahiers d’études du CUEEP, 43.Google Scholar

Echávez-Solano, N. (2003). A comparison of student outcomes and attitudes in technology-enhanced vs. traditional second-semester Spanish language courses (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 305330859)Google Scholar

Esmaili-Sardari, M. T., & Mizza, D. (in press). Persian (Farsi) in international relations and foreign policy. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

Foderaro, L. W. (2010, December 5). Budget-cutting colleges bid some languages adieu. New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/education/05languages.htmlGoogle Scholar

Gazaille, M. (2009). Successful IT integration: The human factor behind it. In EDULEARN09 Proceedings (pp. 454–462). Valencia, Spain: IATED.Google Scholar

Gilbert, S. D. (2001). How to be a successful online student. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Goertler, S. (2011). Blended and open/online learning: Adapting to a changing world of foreign language teaching. In Arnold, N & Ducate, L (Eds.), Present and future promises of CALL: From theory and research to new directions in language teaching (pp. 471–501). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar

Hines, R. A., & Pearl, C. E. (2004). Increasing interaction in web-based instruction: Using synchronous chats and asynchronous discussions. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 23(2), 33.Google Scholar

Hipwell, L., & Melucci, D. (2016). From traditional to hybrid: A comparative study of student performance and perceptions. Teaching Italian Language and Culture Annual, pp. 19–70.Google Scholar

Hiss, A. (2000). Talking the talk: Humor and other forms of online communication. In White, K. W. & Weight, B. H. (Eds.), The online teaching guide (pp. 24–36). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar

Hughes, N., Lo, L., & Xu, S. (2019). Blended Chinese language learning design: An integrative review and synthesis of the literature. The Language Learning Journal, 47(3), 313–331.Google Scholar

Hussar, W. J., & Bailey, T. M. (2011). Projections of education statistics to 2020 (Report No. 2011-026). Washington, DC: US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.Google Scholar

Isabelli, C. A. (2015). Student learning outcomes in hybrid and face-to-face beginning Spanish language courses. In Pixel (Ed.), Conference proceedings: The Future of Education (pp. 649–654). Padova, Italy: Edizioni Webster.Google Scholar

Istrate, O. (2011). Education staff working in elearning environments: Skills and competences. In Roceanu, I (Ed.), The 7th international scientific conference ELearning and Software for Education. Bucharest, Romania: Editura Universitara.Google Scholar

Jaschik, S. (2011, October). Not so foreign languages. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from www.insidehighered.com/news/192011/10/05/colleges_are_replacing_foreign_language_departments_with_world_language_departmentsGoogle Scholar

Johnson, C. P., & Marsh, D. (2014). Blended language learning: An effective solution but not without its challenges. Higher Learning Research Communications, 4(3), 23.Google Scholar

Kraemer, A. (2008). Formats of distance learning. In Goertler, S & Winke, P (Eds.), Opening doors through distance language education: Principles, perspectives, and practices (CALICO Monograph 7, pp. 11–42). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar

Lancashire, I., & Uscinski, I. (2009). Teaching literature and language online. CALICO Journal, 29(1), 173–176.Google Scholar

Lewis, A., & Atzert, S. (2000). Dealing with computer-related anxiety in the project-oriented CALL classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13(4–5), 377–395.Google Scholar

Looney, D., & Lusin, N. (2018, February). Enrollments in languages other than English in United States institutions of higher education, summer and fall, 2016. New York, NY: Modern Language Association.Google Scholar

Marjanovic, O. (1999). Learning and teaching in a synchronous collaborative environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15(2), 129–138.Google Scholar

Mason, J. (2002). Researching your own practice: The discipline of noticing. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 6(1), 77–91.Google Scholar

McAlister, S., Ravenscroft, A., & Scanlon, E. (2004). Combining interaction and context design to support collaborative argumentation using a tool for synchronous CMC. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(3), 194–204.Google Scholar

McGee, P., & Reis, A. (2012). Blended course design: A synthesis of best practices. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(4), 7–22.Google Scholar

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1–47.Google Scholar

Mizza, D., & Esmaili-Sardari, M. T. (2015, May 7). Video testimonial of the pilot blended courses – French and Persian [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/4Al7GtpD0vwGoogle Scholar

Mizza, D., & Esmaili-Sardari, M. T. (2020). The Persian language educator’s role in developing effective blended language learning: From principles to practice. In Shabani-Jadidi, P (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pedagogy of Persian. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

Murphy, L., & Southgate, M. (2011). The nature of the “blend”: Interaction of teaching modes, tools and resources. In Nicolson, M, Murphy, L, & Southgate, M (Eds.), Language teaching in blended contexts (pp. 13–28). Edinburgh, Scotland: Dunedin Academic Press.Google Scholar

Narcy-Combes, M. F., & McAllister, J. (2011). Evaluation of a blended language learning environment in a French university and its effects on second language acquisition. ASp la revue du GERAS, 59, 115–138.Google Scholar

National Center for Academic Transformation. (2014). Redesign a college course using NCAT’s technology. Retrieved from www.thencat.org/Guides/AllDisciplines/How%20to%20Redesign%20A%20College%20Course.pdfGoogle Scholar

Nelson, C. E. (2001). What is the most difficult step we must take to become great teachers? National Teaching and Learning Forum, 10(4), 10–11.Google Scholar

Neumeier, P. (2005). A closer look at blended learning – parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL, 17(02), 163–178.Google Scholar

Newby, D., Matzer, E., & Penz, H. (Eds.). (2009). Languages for social cohesion: Language education in a multilingual and multicultural Europe. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe.Google Scholar

Nicolson, M., Murphy, L., & Southgate, M. (2011). Language teaching in blended contexts. Edinburgh, Scotland: Dunedin Academic Press.Google Scholar

Norberg, A., Dziuban, C. D., & Moskal, P. D. (2011). A time-based blended learning model. On the Horizon, 19(3), 207–216.Google Scholar

Picciano, A. G., Dziuban, C. D., & Graham, C. R. (Eds.). (2014). Blended learning: Research perspectives (Vol. 2). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar

Rubio, F. (2014). The effects of blended learning on second language fluency and proficiency. In Rubio, F & Thoms, J. J. (Eds.), Hybrid language teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical and curricular issues (pp. 137–159). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

Rubio, F., & Cannon, T. (2018). Juntos. Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

Rubio, F., & Thoms, J. J. (2014). Teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical and curricular issues. Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

Scida, E. E., & Saury, R. E. (2006). Hybrid courses and their impact on student and classroom performance: A case study at the University of Virginia. CALICO Journal, 23(3), 517–531.Google Scholar

Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G., & Francis, R. (2006). The undergraduate experience of blended e-learning: A review of UK literature and practice. York, England: The Higher Education Academy.Google Scholar

State Higher Education Executive Officers’ Association. (2014). State higher education finance: FY2013. Retrieved from www.sheeo.org/sites/default/files/publications/SHEF_FY13_04292014.pdfGoogle Scholar

Strambi, A., & Bouvet, E. (2003). Flexibility and interaction at a distance: A mixed mode environment for language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 81102.Google Scholar

Thomas, M., Reinders, H., & Warschauer, M. (Eds.). (2013). Contemporary computer assisted language learning. London, England: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Thoms, J. J. (2014). Analyzing linguistic outcomes of second language learners: Hybrid versus traditional course contexts. In Rubio, F & Thomas, J. J. (Eds.), Hybrid language teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical, and curricular issues (pp. 177–195). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

Vaughan, N. (2007). Perspectives on blended learning in higher education. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(1), 81–94. Retrieved from www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/6310/Google Scholar

Wagner, N., Hassanein, K., & Head, M. (2008). Who is responsible for e-learning success in higher education? A stakeholders’ analysis. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(3), 26–36.Google Scholar

White, S. (2000). Quality assurance and learning technologies: Intersecting agendas in UK higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 8(1), 7–16.Google Scholar

White, S. (2007). Critical success factors for e‐learning and institutional change – some organisational perspectives on campus‐wide e‐learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(5), 840–850.Google Scholar

Young, D. J., & Pettigrew, J. L. (2014). Blended Learning in large multisection foreign language programs: An opportunity for reflecting on course content, pedagogy, learning outcomes, and assessment issues. In Rubio, F & Thoms, J. J. (Eds.), Hybrid language teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical and curricular issues (pp. 92–120). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

Young, J. R. (2002). “Hybrid” teaching seeks to end the divide between traditional and online instruction. Chronicle of Higher Education, 48(28), A33–A34.Google Scholar

Youngs, B. L., & Green, A. (2001). A successful peer writing assistant program. Foreign Language Annals, 34(6), 550–558.Google Scholar

Adair-Hauck, B., Willingham-McLain, L., & Youngs, B. E. (1999). Evaluating the integration of technology and second language learning. CALICO Journal, 17(2), 269–306.Google Scholar

Alderete Diez, M. P. (2008). Reflection in language teaching/learning: Is the European portfolio the answer? In Pérez Ruiz, L, Pizarro Sánchez, I, & González-Cascos Jiménez, E (Eds.), Estudios de metolodogía de la lengua Inglesa [Studies on English language methodology] (Vol. 4). Valladolid, Spain: Ediciones Universidad de Valladolid.Google Scholar

Astin, A. W. (1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 518–529.Google Scholar

Azher, M., Anwar, M. N., & Naz, A. (2010). An investigation of foreign language classroom anxiety and its relationship with students’ achievement. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 7(11), 33.Google Scholar

Baker, C. (2010). The impact of instructor immediacy and presence for online student affective learning, cognition, and motivation. Journal of Educators Online, 7(1), 1–30.Google Scholar

Bañados, E. (2006). A blended-learning pedagogical model for teaching and learning EFL successfully through an online interactive multimedia environment. CALICO Journal, 23(3), 533–550.Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Barr, D., Leakey, J., & Ranchoux, A. (2005). Told like it is! An evaluation of an integrated oral development project. Language Learning & Technology, 9(3), 55–78.Google Scholar

Bell, P., & Davis, E. A. (1996, April 8–14). Designing an activity in the knowledge integration environment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.Google Scholar

Benson, P. (2001) Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. London, England: Longman.Google Scholar

Benson, P. (2007). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 40(1), 21–40.Google Scholar

Benson, P., & Voller, P. (2014). Autonomy and independence in language learning. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bourne, J., Harris, D., & Mayadas, F. (2005). Online engineering education: Learning anywhere, anytime. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 131–146.Google Scholar

Brandl, K. (2008). Communicative language teaching in action: Putting principles to work. Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar

Buckley, C. A., Pitt, E., Norton, B., & Owens, T. (2010). Students’ approaches to study, conceptions of learning and judgements about the value of networked technologies. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(1), 55–65.Google Scholar

Burden, R., & Williams, M. (1998). Language learners’ perceptions of supportive classroom environments. The Language Learning Journal, 17(1), 29–32.Google Scholar

Cavage, C. (2014, January 31). Blending instruction through a flipped model [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://longmanhomeusa.com/blog/blending-instruction-through-a-flipped-model/Google Scholar

Chatfield, K. (n.d.). Content “loading” in hybrid/blended learning. Retrieved from https://secure.onlinelearningconsortium.org/effective_practices/content-quotloadingquot-hybridblended-learningGoogle Scholar

Chenoweth, N. A., & Murday, K. (2003). Measuring student learning in an online French course. CALICO Journal, 20(2), 285–314.Google Scholar

Chenoweth, N. A., Ushida, E., & Murday, K. (2006). Student learning in hybrid French and Spanish courses: An overview of language online. CALICO Journal, 24(1), 115–145.Google Scholar

Chew, E., Jones, N., & Turner, D. (2008). Critical review of the blended learning models based on Maslow’s and Vygotsky’s educational theory. In Fong, J, Kwan, R, & Wang, F. L. (Eds.), Hybrid learning and education ICHL 2008 (pp. 40–53). Berlin, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar

Day, C. (1993). Reflection: A necessary but not sufficient condition for professional development. British Educational Research Journal, 19(1), 83–93.Google Scholar

Dorwick, T., & Glass, W. R. (2003). Language education policies: One publisher’s perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 87(4), 592–594.Google Scholar

Doughty, C., & Pica, T. (1986). “Information gap” tasks: Do they facilitate second language acquisition? TESOL Quarterly, 20(2), 305–325.Google Scholar

Echávez-Solano, N. (2003). A comparison of student outcomes and attitudes in technology-enhanced vs. traditional second-semester Spanish language courses (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 305330859)Google Scholar

Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1(1), 3–18.Google Scholar

Ellis, R. (2014). Investigating language instruction. Language Teaching Research, 3(18), 269–271.Google Scholar

Freeman, D. (1982). Observing teachers: Three approaches to in‐service training and development. TESOL Quarterly, 16(1), 21–28.Google Scholar

Furstenberg, G., & Levet, S. (2010). Integrating telecollaboration into the language classroom: Some insights. Telecollaboration, 2, 305–336.Google Scholar

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

Graham, S. J. (2004). Giving up on modern foreign languages? Students’ perceptions of learning French. The Modern Language Journal, 88(2), 171–191.Google Scholar

Green, A., & Youngs, B. E. (2001). Using the web in elementary French and German courses: Quantitative and qualitative study results. CALICO Journal, 19(1), 89–123.Google Scholar

Hauew, F. (2004). Epistémologie et modèles pédagogiques: des liens cachés. Actualité de la Formation Permanente, 191, 20–23.Google Scholar

Hofmann, J. (2001). Blended learning case study. Learning Circuits, 2(4).Google Scholar

Holec, H. (1979). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe.Google Scholar

Holmberg, B. (1986). Growth and structure of distance education. London, England: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

Holmes, J. L., & Ramos, R. (1992). Talking about learning: Establishing a framework for discussing and changing learning processes. In James, C & Garrett, P (Eds.), Language awareness in the classroom (pp. 198–212). London, England: Longman.Google Scholar

Jackson, S. L., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1998, January). The design of guided learner-adaptable scaffolding in interactive learning environments. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1187–1194). Los Angeles, CA: ACM Press/Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Johnson, C. P., & Marsh, D. (2014). Blended language learning: An effective solution but not without its challenges. Higher Learning Research Communications, 4(3), 23.Google Scholar

Kilpatrick, S., Jones, T., & Barrett, M. (2003). Defining learning communities. Launceston, TAS: Centre for Research and Learning in Regional Australia.Google Scholar

Kuh, G. D. (2009). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2009(141), 5–20.Google Scholar

Ladkin, D., Case, P., Gayá Wicks, P., & Kinsella, K. (2009). Developing leaders in cyber-space: The paradoxical possibilities of on-line learning. Leadership, 5(2), 193–212.Google Scholar

Lee, L. (2001). Online interaction: Negotiation of meaning and strategies used among learners of Spanish. ReCALL, 13(2), 232–244.Google Scholar

Little, D. (1996). Freedom to learn and compulsion to interact: Promoting learner autonomy through the use of information systems and information technologies. In Pemberton, R, Li, E. S. L., Or, W. W. F., & Pierson, H. D. (Eds.), Taking control: Autonomy in language learning (pp. 203–218). Hong Kong, China: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar

Little, D. (2003). Learner autonomy and second/foreign language learning. In The guide to good practice for learning and teaching in languages, linguistics and area studies. Southampton, England: LTSN Subject Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies, University of Southampton.Google Scholar

Little, D., & Perclová, R. (2001). The European language portfolio: Guide for teachers and teacher trainers. Strasbourg, France: Language Policy Division, Council of Europe.Google Scholar

LKCollab. (n.d.). Bubbl.us [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://bubbl.us/Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W & Bhatia, T. K. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Marsh, D. (2012). Blended learning: Creating learning opportunities for language learners. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Marsh, G. E., McFadden, A. C., & Price, B. J. (2003). Blended instruction: Adapting conventional instruction for large classes. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 6(4). Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1068350Google Scholar

Means, B., Shear, L., Novais, G., Gallagher, L., & Langworthy, M. (2010). ITL research design. Retrieved from www.sri.com/sites/default/files/publications/itl_research_design_15_nov_2010.pdfGoogle Scholar

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

Nielson, K., González-Lloret, M., & Pinckney, K. (2008). Learning foreign languages at a distance. Retrieved from www.casl.umd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/LEARNING-FOREIGN-LANGUAGES-AT-A-DISTANCE-tech-report-2009.pdfGoogle Scholar

Nissen, E. (2016). Combining classroom-based learning and online intercultural exchange in blended courses. Online Intercultural Exchange: Policy, Pedagogy, Practice, 4, 173.Google Scholar

Noels, K. A., Clément, R., & Pelletier, L. G. (1999). Perceptions of teachers’ communicative style and students’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The Modern Language Journal, 83(1), 23–34.Google Scholar

Oller, J. W., Jr. (1978). Pragmatics and language testing. In Spolsky, B (Ed.), Advances in language testing series: Approaches to language testing (pp. 39–58). Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar

Omaggio Hadley, A. (1978). Teaching language in context (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar

Orsini-Jones, M., Brick, B., & Pibworth, L. (2013). Practising language interaction via social networking sites: The “expert student’s” perspective on personalized language learning. In Zou, B (Ed.). Computer-assisted language teaching and learning: Technological advances (pp. 40–53). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar

Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning environments: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227–233.Google Scholar

Padlet. (n.d.). Padlet [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://padlet.com/Google Scholar

Pemberton, R., Li, E. S. L., Or, W., & Pierson, H. (Eds.). (1996). Taking control: Autonomy in language learning. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar

Richards, J. C. (2010). Competence and performance in language teaching. RELC Journal, 41(2), 101–122.Google Scholar

Rossomondo, A. (2014). Integrating foundational language and content study through new approaches to hybrid learning and teaching. In Rubio, F & Thoms, J. J. (Eds.), Hybrid language teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical and curricular issues (pp. 219–238). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage.Google Scholar

Rubio, F., & Thoms, J. J. (2014). Hybrid language teaching and learning: Looking forward. In Rubio, F & Thoms, J. J. (Eds.), Hybrid language teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical and curricular issues (pp. 1–9). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage.Google Scholar

Scida, E. E., & Saury, R. E. (2006). Hybrid courses and their impact on student and classroom performance: A case study at the University of Virginia. CALICO Journal, 23(3), 517–531.Google Scholar

Senior, R. (2010). Connectivity: A framework for understanding effective language teaching in face-to-face and online learning communities. RELC Journal, 41(2), 137–147.Google Scholar

Sharma, P., & Barrett, B. (2007). Blended learning: Using technology in and beyond the language classroom. Oxford, England: Macmillan Education.Google Scholar

Shaw, S., & Igneri, N. (2006). Effectively implementing a blended learning approach: Maximizing advantages and eliminating disadvantages. Nashua, NH: Eedo.Google Scholar

Shear, L., Means, B., Gallagher, L., House, A., & Langworthy, M. (2009). ITL research design. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.Google Scholar

Skype Technologies. (n.d.). Skype [Computer software]. Palo Alto, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.skype.com/Google Scholar

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional design (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar

So, H. J., & Bonk, C. J. (2010). Examining the roles of blended learning approaches in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environments: A Delphi study. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 189–200.Google Scholar

Southgate, M., & Murphy, L. (2011). The nature of the “blend”: Interaction of teaching modes, tools and resources. In Nicholson, M, Murphy, L, & Southgate, M (Eds.), Language teaching in blended contexts (pp. 13–28). Edinburgh, Scotland: Dunedin Academic Press.Google Scholar

Stracke, E. (2007). A road to understanding: A qualitative study into why learners drop out of a blended language learning (BLL) environment. ReCALL, 19(1), 57–78.Google Scholar

Strambi, A., & Bouvet, E. (2003). Flexibility and interaction at a distance: A mixed mode environment for language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 81102.Google Scholar

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S & Madden, C (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar

Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In Cook, G & Seidlhofer, B (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125–144). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive process they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 371–391.Google Scholar

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320–337.Google Scholar

Thanasoulas, D. (2000). What is learner autonomy and how can it be fostered? The Internet TESL Journal, 6(11), 37–48.Google Scholar

Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language classroom: Awareness, autonomy, and authenticity. New York, NY: Pearson.Google Scholar

VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction. Theory and practice. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar

VoiceThread. (n.d.). VoiceThread [Computer software]. Boca Raton, FL: Author. Retrieved from https://voicethread.com/Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. (1962). Studies in communication: Thought and language (Hanfmann, E & Vakar, G, Eds.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Wang, J., Spencer, K. A., & Wang, D. (2012). A double-channel model for developing learner autonomy in an EFL context. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 2(3), 1–16.Google Scholar

Watkins, C. (2005). Classrooms as learning communities: What’s in it for schools? London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

Wenden, A. L. (1998). Metacognitive knowledge and language learning. Applied Linguistics, 19(4), 515–537.Google Scholar

Willis, J. (1996). A flexible framework for task-based learning. In Willis, J & Willis, D (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 52–62). Oxford, England: Heinemann.Google Scholar

Young, D. J. (1990). An investigation of students’ perspectives on anxiety and speaking. Foreign Language Annals, 23(6), 539–553.Google Scholar

Young, D. J., & Pettigrew, J. L. (2014). Blended learning in large multisection foreign language programs: An opportunity for reflecting on course content, pedagogy, learning outcomes, and assessment issues. In Rubio, F & Thoms, J. J. (Eds.), Hybrid language teaching and learning: Exploring theoretical, pedagogical and curricular issues (pp. 92–120). Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage.Google Scholar

Zeichner, K. M., & Liston, D. P. (1996). Reflective teaching: An introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166–183.Google Scholar

Adobe Inc. (n.d.). Adobe presenter (Version 11) [Computer software]. San Jose, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.adobe.com/products/presenter.htmlGoogle Scholar

American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (n.d.). Assigning CEFR ratings to ACTFL assessments. Alexandria, VA: Author. Retrieved from www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/reports/Assigning_CEFR_Ratings_To_ACTFL_Assessments.pdfGoogle Scholar

Articulate Inc. (n.d.). Articulate storyline 360 [Computer software]. New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from www.articulate.com/Google Scholar

Fabbian, C., Zanotti Carney, E., & Grgurović, M. (2017). Lessons learned: Design and implementation of Italian blended language courses. Italica, 94(2), 314–353.Google Scholar

Heining-Boynton, A. L., & Cowell, G. S. (2009). ¡Anda! Curso elemental [Come on! Elementary course]. London, England: Pearson.Google Scholar

Hughes, N., Lo, L., & Xu, S. (2019). Blended Chinese language learning design: An integrative review and synthesis of the literature. The Language Learning Journal, 47(3), 313–331.Google Scholar

iSpring Solutions Inc. (n.d.). iSpring suite (Version 9.7) [Computer software]. Alexandria, VA: Author. Retrieved from www.ispringsolutions.com/Google Scholar

LearningApps. (n.d.). LearningApps [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://learningapps.org/Google Scholar

McLoughlin, L. (2018, July 23). Information webinar [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://italianonlinenuig.wordpress.com/Google Scholar

Microsoft Corporation. (n.d.). Sway [Computer software]. Redmond, WA: Author. Retrieved from https://sway.office.com/Google Scholar

Mizza, D., & Esmaili-Sardari, M. T. (2015, May 7). Video testimonial of the pilot blended courses – French and Persian [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/4Al7GtpD0vwGoogle Scholar

Mizza, D., & Esmaili-Sardari, M. T. (2020). The Persian language educator’s role in developing effective blended language learning: From principles to practice. In Shabani-Jadidi, P (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pedagogy of Persian. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

National Center for Academic Transformation. (2008). Colleagues committed to redesign (C2 R). Retrieved from www.thencat.org/RedesignAlliance/C2R/R1/Abstracts/UNCCH_Abstract.htmGoogle Scholar

Pearson. (n.d.). MySpanishLab [Digital learning environment]. London, England: Author. Retrieved from www.myspanishlab.com/Google Scholar

Quizlet. (n.d.). Quizlet [Computer software]. San Francisco, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://quizlet.com/Google Scholar

Branch, R. M., & Kopcha, T. J. (2014). Instructional design models. In Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., van Merriënboer, J, & Driscoll, M. P. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 77–87). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar

Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2005). The systematic design of instruction (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar

Driscoll, M., & Carliner, S. (2005). Advanced web-based training strategies: Unlocking instructionally sound online learning. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.Google Scholar

Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L., & Wager, W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar

Garrison, D. R. (2016). E-learning in the 21st century: A community of inquiry framework for research and practice. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2010). Teaching online: A practical guide. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

Lee, J., & Van Patten, B. (2003). Making communicative language happen. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Ravi, V. (2016). Educational technology. Raleigh, NC: Lulu.Google Scholar

Serhat, K. (2015, December). Instructional design models and theories. Educational Technology [Blog]. Retrieved from http://educationaltechnology.net/instructional-design-models-and-theories/Google Scholar

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional design (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar

Allison, D., Corcos, R., & Lam, A. (1994). Laying down the law? Reflecting on course design in progress. Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching, 17, 1–11.Google Scholar

Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar

Berwick, R. (1989). Needs assessment in language programming: From theory to practice. In Johnson, R. K. (Ed.), The second language curriculum (pp. 48–62). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Brindley, G. (1989). The role of needs analysis in adult ESL program design. In The second language curriculum (pp. 63–78). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning at OU. (2014, November 23). Goals, objectives, and learning outcomes [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/4Al7GtpD0vwGoogle Scholar

Dick, W. (1996). The Dick and Carey model: Will it survive the decade? Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(3), 55–63.Google Scholar

Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1978). The systematic design of instruction. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.Google Scholar

Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Finney, D. (2002). The ELT curriculum: A flexible model for a changing world. In Richards, J. C. & Renandya, W. A. (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 69–79). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning (4th ed.). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar

Gagné, R. M., & Briggs, L. J. (1974). Principles of instructional design. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar

Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: HBJ College Publishers.Google Scholar

García Mayo, M. P. (2000). English for specific purposes: Discourse analysis and course design. Vizcaya, Spain: Universidad del País Vasco, Servicio Editorial.Google Scholar

Garrison, D. R. (2017). E-learning in the 21st century: A community of inquiry framework for research and practice. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

Goertler, S. (2011). Blended and open/online learning: Adapting to a changing world of language teaching. In Arnold, A & Ducate, L (Eds.), Present and future promises of CALL (pp. 470–501). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar

Hamp‐Lyons, L., & Lumley, T. (2001). Assessing language for specific purposes. Language Testing, 18(2), 127–132.Google Scholar

Haseli Songhori, M. (2008). Introduction to needs analysis. English for Specific Purposes World, 4(20), 1–25.Google Scholar

Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Iwai, T., Kondo, K., Lim, D. S. J., Ray, G. E., Shimizu, H., & Brown, J. D. (1999). Japanese language needs analysis 1998–1999 (NFLRC NetWork 13). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai‘i at Manoa, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center. Retrieved from www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW13/Google Scholar

Johns, T. (1991). Should you be persuaded: Two samples of data-driven learning materials. English Language Research, University of Birmingham, 4, 1–16.Google Scholar

Jordan, R. R. (1997). English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kennedy, D., Hyland, A., & Ryan, N. (2006). Writing and using learning outcomes: A practical guide. In Froment, E, Kohler, J, Purser, L, Wilson, L, Davies, H, & Schurings, G (Eds.), EUA Bologna handbook: Implementing Bologna (C 3.4). Berlin, Germany: European University Association.Google Scholar

McKay, S. L. (2006). Researching second language classrooms. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

Mizza, D. (2018). Instructional design for blended language learning: Methodological considerations and course applications guiding the effective design of blended language courses. In Palalas, A, Norman, H, & Pawluk, P (Eds.), Blended learning in the age of social change and innovation (pp. 132–144). Kavala, Greece: International Association for Blended Learning.Google Scholar

Munby, J. (1978). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Nunan, D. (1988). The learner-centered curriculum: A study in second language teaching. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Palacios Martínez, I. (1992). An analysis and appraisal of the English language teaching situation in Spain from the perspectives of teachers and learners (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.Google Scholar

Palacios Martínez, I. M. (1994). La enseñanza del Inglés en España a debate [English teaching open to debate in Spain]. PCSelemliteracy. (n.d.). Revised Bloom’s taxonomy [Online image]. Retrieved from http://pcs2ndgrade.pbworks.com/w/page/46897760/Revised%20Bloom’s%20TaxonomyGoogle Scholar

Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Richterich, R., & Chancerel, J. J. (1987). Identifying the needs of adults learning a foreign language. Oxford, England: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Robinson, M. (1991). Double-level languages and co-operative working. AI & Society, 5(1), 34–60.Google Scholar

Santiago de Compostela, Spain: Servicio de Publicaciones e Intercambio Científico da Universidad de Santiago de Compostela.Google Scholar

Seaman, J. E., Allen, E. I., & Seaman, J. (2018). Grade increase: Tracking distance education in the United States. Retrieved from https://onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradeincrease.pdfGoogle Scholar

Seedhouse, P. (1995). Needs analysis and the general English classroom. ELTjournal, 49(1), 59–65.Google Scholar

Tarone, E., & Yule, G. (1989). Focus on the language learner: Approaches to identifying and meeting the needs of second language learners. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

West, R. (1994). Needs analysis in language teaching. Language Teaching, 27(01), 1–19.Google Scholar

White, R. (1988). The ELT curriculum. Oxford, England: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005a). Three stages of backward design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005b). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Abrams, Z. A. (2003). The effect of synchronous and asynchronous CMC on oral performance in German. The Modern Language Journal, 87(2), 157–167.Google Scholar

Adair-Hauck, B., Willingham-McLain, L., & Youngs, B. E. (1999). Evaluating the integration of technology and second language learning. CALICO Journal, 17(2), 269–306.Google Scholar

Adobe Inc. (n.d.-a). Adobe captivate [Computer software]. San Jose, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.adobe.com/products/captivate.htmGoogle Scholar

Adobe Inc. (n.d.-b). Adobe connect [Computer software]. San Jose, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.adobe.com/products/adobeconnect.htmlGoogle Scholar

Adobe Inc. (n.d.-c). Adobe presenter [Computer software]. San Jose, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.adobe.com/products/presenter.htmlGoogle Scholar

American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (2012). Performance descriptors for language learners. Retrieved from www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/ACTFLPerformance-Descriptors.pdfGoogle Scholar

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. London, England: Longman.Google Scholar

Animoto Inc. (n.d.). Animoto [Computer software]. New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from https://animoto.com/Google Scholar

Articulate Global Inc. (n.d.). Articulate storyline [Computer software]. New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from https://articulate.com/Google Scholar

ATi Studios. (n.d.-a). An example of activity with virtual reality [Online image]. Brasov, Romania: Author. Retrieved from www.mondly.com/Google Scholar

ATi Studios. (n.d.-b). Mondly [Computer software].Brasov, Romania: Author. Retrieved from www.mondly.com/Google Scholar

Automattic Inc. (n.d.). WordPress blog [Computer software]. San Francisco, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://wordpress.com/Google Scholar

Baralt, M. (2014). Task complexity and task sequencing in traditional versus online classes. In Baralt, M, Gilabert, R, & Robinson, P (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning (pp. 95–122). London, England: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Baralt, M., & Morcillo Gómez, J. (2017). Task-based language teaching online: A guide for teachers. Language Learning & Technology, 21(3), 28–43.Google Scholar

Bartalesi-Graf, D. (2017). Com’è nata la Costituzione italiana [The birth of the Italian constitution] [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from www.edx.org/school/wellesleyxGoogle Scholar

Berti, M. (2018). An example of a 360-degree VR video of a “Panificio” (bakery) in Italy. [Screenshot of a 360-degree VR video]. Retrieved from https://italianopeneducation.com/videos/Google Scholar

Berti, M. (2019). Italian open education: Virtual reality immersions for the language classroom. In Beaven, A, Comas-Quinn, A, & Sawhill, B (Eds.), New case studies of openness in and beyond the language classroom (pp. 37–47). Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED596853.pdfGoogle Scholar

Berti, M., Maranzana, S., & Monzingo, J. (2020). Fostering cultural understanding with virtual reality: A look at students’ stereotypes and beliefs. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 47–59.Google Scholar

Brandl, K. (2008). Communicative language teaching in action. Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar

Brown, G., Anderson, A., Shillcock, R., & Yule, G. (1984). Teaching talk: Strategies for production and assessment. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bruce, B. C., & Levin, J. A. (1997). Educational technology: Media for inquiry, communication, construction, and expression. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(1), 79–102.Google Scholar

Burgstahler, S. (2002). Working together: People with disabilities and computer technology. Retrieved from www.washington.edu/doit/working-together-people-disabilities-and-computer-technologyGoogle Scholar

Caladine, R. (2006). A taxonomy of learning technologies: Simplifying online learning for learners, professors, and designers. In Khosrow-Pour, M (Ed.), Emerging trends and challenges in IT management (pp. 247–251). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Inc. Retrieved from www.irma-international.org/searchGoogle Scholar

Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning at OU. (2014, November 23). Goals, objectives, and learning outcomes [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/4Al7GtpD0vwGoogle Scholar

Conole, G., De Laat, M., Dillon, T., & Darby, J. (2008). “Disruptive technologies,” “pedagogical innovation”: What’s new? Findings from an in-depth study of students’ use and perception of technology. Computers & Education, 50(2), 511–524.Google Scholar

Cram. (n.d.). Flashcard exchange [Computer software]. Hollywood, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.cram.com/Google Scholar

Da Rozze, G. (2018, August 20). L’unità d’Italia: date, eventi, protagonisti [The unification of Italy: Dates, events, characters] [Web log comment]. Retrieved from www.focusjunior.it/scuola/storia/storia-lunita-ditalia/Google Scholar

Dodge, B. (n.d.). WebQuests [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://webquest.org/Google Scholar

Edublogs. (n.d.). Edublogs [Computer software]. Austin, TX: Author. Retrieved from https://edublogs.org/Google Scholar

eLearners. (n.d.). Added value in e-learning: 3 valuable benefits of online study. Retrieved from www.elearners.com/education-resources/online-learning/added-value-in-e-learning-3-valuable-benefits-of-online/Google Scholar

Er, E., Özden, M., & Arifoglu, A. (2009). A blended e-learning environment: A model proposition for integration of asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. International Journal Of Learning, 16(2), 449–460.Google Scholar

Esmaili-Sardari, M. T. (2018). Exploring key words. Retrieved from the School of Advanced International Studies of the Johns Hopkins University Advanced Low Persian (Farsi) Course: https://blackboard.jhu.eduGoogle Scholar

Facebook Inc. (n.d.). Facebook group [Computer software]. Menlo Park, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.facebook.com/groupsGoogle Scholar

Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(3), 299–323.Google Scholar

Gillespie, J., & McKee, J. (1999). Does it fit and does it make any difference? Integrating CALL into the curriculum. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 12(5), 441–455.Google Scholar

González-Lloret, M. (2016). A practical guide to integrating technology into task-based language teaching. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

Google. (n.d.-a). Google docs [Computer software]. Mountain View, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/documentGoogle Scholar

Google. (n.d.-b). Google expeditions [Computer software]. Mountain View, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://edu.google.com/expeditionsGoogle Scholar

Google. (n.d.-c). Google hangout [Computer software]. Mountain View, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://gsuite.google.comGoogle Scholar

Google. (n.d.-d). Google maps [Computer software]. Mountain View, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://google.com/mapsGoogle Scholar

Gulikers, J. T. M., Bastiaens, T. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2004). A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 67–86.Google Scholar

Hobbs, D. (2002). Constructivist approach to web course design: A review of the literature. International Journal on E-Learning, 1, 60–65. Retrieved from www.editlib.org/p/10821Google Scholar

Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 31(4), 51.Google Scholar

Hughes, N. (2018). Discusión [Discussion] [Screenshot of online discussion]. Retrieved from University of Nottingham Business & Society in Spain Module Moodle: https://moodle.nottingham.ac.ukGoogle Scholar

Hughes, N., Lo, L., & Xu, S. (2017). Lesson #12: Activity #1 & #2 [Screenshot of Moodle Book learning activities]. Retrieved from University of Nottingham Beginner Chinese Moodle: https://moodle.nottingham.ac.ukGoogle Scholar

Hurley, D. (2017). An example of activity with augmented reality [Online image]. Retrieved from https://medium.com/@denishurley/the-future-of-language-learning-augmented-reality-vs-virtual-reality-679d6668db5bGoogle Scholar

Hurley, D. (2017). The future of language learning: Augmented reality vs virtual reality. Retrieved from https://medium.com/@denishurley/the-future-of-language-learning-augmented-reality-vs-virtual-reality-679d6668db5bGoogle Scholar

Impulse Communications Inc. (n.d.). Digital films [Computer software]. North Kingstown, RI: Author. Retrieved from www.digitalfilms.com/Google Scholar

iSpring Solutions. (n.d.). iSpring [Computer software]. Alexandra, VA: Author. Retrieved from www.ispringsolutions.com/ispring-suiteGoogle Scholar

IXL Learning. (n.d.). Quia [Computer software]. San Mateo, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.quia.com/webGoogle Scholar

Izadpanah, S. (2010). A study on task-based language teaching: From theory to practice. US-China Foreign Language, 8(3), 47–56.Google Scholar

Johnson, M. W., & Sherlock, D. (2014). Beyond the personal learning environment: Attachment and control in the classroom of the future. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(2), 146–164.Google Scholar

Kirschner, P., Strijbos, J., Kreijns, K., & Beers, P. (2004). Designing electronic collaborative learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 47–66.Google Scholar

Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. Oxon, England: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar

Li, L., Finley, J., Pitts, J., & Guo, R. (2011). Which is a better choice for student–faculty interaction: Synchronous or asynchronous communication? Journal of Technology Research, 1(2), 1–12.Google Scholar

Lin, B. (2003). Technology transfer as technological learning: A source of competitive advantage for firms with limited R&D resources. R&D Management, 33(3), 327–341.Google Scholar

LinkedIn Corporation. (n.d.). SlideShare [Computer software]. Sunnyvale, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.slideshare.net/Google Scholar

LogMeIn. (n.d.). GoToMeeting [Computer software]. Boston, MA: Author. Retrieved from www.gotomeeting.com/Google Scholar

Luo, S. (2007). Re-examining factors that affect task difficulty in TBLA (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 304718123)Google Scholar

McLoughlin, L. (2017). Divi di ieri e divi di oggi [The celebrities of today and yesterday] [Screenshot of interactive image]. Retrieved from the National University of Ireland Galway Beginner Italian Course Blackboard: https://nuigalway.blackboard.com/Google Scholar

McLoughlin, L. (2017). Il Grand Tour – Itinerario [The Grand Tour – Itinerary] [Screenshot of interactive image]. Retrieved from the National University of Ireland Galway Beginner Italian Course Blackboard: https://nuigalway.blackboard.comGoogle Scholar

Meloni, J. (2010, January 11). Tools for synchronous and asynchronous classroom discussion [Web log post]. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com/blogs/profhacker/tools-for-synchronousasynchronous-classroom-discussion/22902Google Scholar

Movavi. (n.d.). Movavi [Computer software]. Saint Louis, MO: Author. Retrieved from www.movavi.com/Google Scholar

Nulab Inc. (n.d.). Cacoo [Computer software]. Fukuoka, Japan: Author. Retrieved from https://cacoo.com/Google Scholar

Oddcast Inc. (n.d.). Voki [Computer software]. New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from www.voki.com/Google Scholar

Oguro, Y. (2018a). イントロ [Advance organizer] [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from the School of Advanced International Studies of the Johns Hopkins University Intermediate Low Japanese Course Blackboard: https://blackboard.jhu.edu/Google Scholar

Oguro, Y. (2018b). 前後関係 [Before or after] [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from the School of Advanced International Studies of the Johns Hopkins University Intermediate Low Japanese Course Blackboard: https://blackboard.jhu.edu/Google Scholar

Ohta, A. S. (2000). Re-thinking interaction in SLA: Developmentally appropriate assistance in the zone of proximal development and the acquisition of L2 grammar. In Lantolf, J. P. (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 51–78). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Padlet. (n.d.). Padlet [Computer software]. San Francisco, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://padlet.com/Google Scholar

Papaly. (n.d.). Papaly [Computer software]. Palo Alto, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://papaly.com/Google Scholar

PBworks. (n.d.). PBworks [Computer software]. San Mateo, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.pbworks.com/Google Scholar

Pixton Comics Inc. (n.d.). Pixton [Computer software]. Parksville, Canada: Author. Retrieved from www.pixton.com/Google Scholar

Poll Everywhere. (n.d.). Polleverywhere [Computer software]. San Francisco, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.polleverywhere.com/Google Scholar

Prezi Inc. (n.d.). Prezi [Computer software]. Budapest, Hungary: Author. Retrieved from https://prezi.com/Google Scholar

Quizlet Inc. (n.d.). Quizlet [Computer software]. San Francisco, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://quizlet.com/Google Scholar

Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 84(2), 101–109.Google Scholar

Robinson, P. (1991). ESP today: A practitioner’s guide. London, England: Prentice Hall International.Google Scholar

Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, cognition and second language syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In Robinson, P (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Robinson, P. (2007). Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In García Mayo, M. P. (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 7–26). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Rowntree, D. (1992). Exploring open and distance learning (1st ed.) London, England: Kogan Page.Google Scholar

Russelburg, S. (2015). L’extrémisme politique: Discussion [Political extremism: A discussion] [Screenshot of online discussion]. Retrieved from the School of Advanced International Studies of the Johns Hopkins University Intermediate High French Course Blackboard: https://blackboard.jhu.edu/Google Scholar

Schwienhorst, K. (2002). The state of VR: A meta-analysis of virtual reality tools in second language acquisition. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(3), 221–239.Google Scholar

Screencast-o-matic. (n.d.). Screencast-o-matic [Computer software]. Seattle, WA: Author. Retrieved from https://screencast-o-matic.com/lp/screen-recording-video-editingGoogle Scholar

Seaman, J. E., Allen, E. I., & Seaman, J. (2018). Grade increase: Tracking distance education in the United States. Retrieved from https://onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradeincrease.pdfGoogle Scholar

Sharpe, R., & Oliver, M. (2007). Designing courses for e-learning. In Beetham, H & Sharpe, R (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age (pp. 41–51). London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

Skehan, P. (1998). Task-based instruction. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 268–286.Google Scholar

Skehan, P. (2001). Tasks and language performance assessment. In Bygate, M, Skehan, P, & Swain, M (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching, and testing (pp. 167–185). London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research, 3(3), 185–211.Google Scholar

Skylar, A. A. (2009). A comparison of asynchronous online text-based lectures and synchronous interactive web conferencing lectures. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(2), 69.Google Scholar

Skype Technologies. (n.d.). Skype [Computer software]. Palo Alto, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.skype.com/Google Scholar

SoundCloud. (n.d.). SoundCloud [Computer software]. Berlin, Germany: Author. Retrieved from https://soundcloud.com/Google Scholar

Spotify. (n.d.). Spotify [Computer software]. Stockholm, Sweden: Author. Retrieved from www.spotify.com/Google Scholar

Start.me. (n.d.). Start.me [Computer software]. The Hague, Netherlands: Author. Retrieved from https://start.me/start/us/startpageGoogle Scholar

Sun Associates. (2001). Finding the right tool for the task: Four categories of technology use. Retrieved from https://resources.sun-associates.com/categories.htmlGoogle Scholar

Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In Hinkel, E (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–484). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Symbaloo. (n.d.). Symbaloo [Computer software]. Delft, Netherlands: Author. Retrieved from www.symbaloo.com/welcomeGoogle Scholar

Tactivos Inc. (n.d.). Mural.ly [Computer software]. San Francisco, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://mural.com/Google Scholar

Tavakoli, P., & Skehan, P. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In Ellis, R (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 239–273). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

TechSmith Corporation. (n.d.). Camtasia [Computer software]. Okemos, MI: Author. Retrieved from www.techsmith.com/video-editor.htmlGoogle Scholar

TechSmith Corporation. (n.d.). Snagit [Computer software]. Okemos, MI: Author. Retrieved from www.techsmith.com/screen-capture.htmlGoogle Scholar

Thinglink. (n.d.). Thinglink [Computer software].Palo Alto, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.thinglink.com/Google Scholar

Thomas, M., & Reinders, H. (Eds.). (2012). Task-based language learning and teaching with technology. London, England: Continuum.Google Scholar

Twitter. (n.d.-a). Twitter [Computer software].San Francisco, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/Google Scholar

Twitter. (n.d.-b). Twitter hashtags [Computer software]. San Francisco, CA: Author. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/hashtagsGoogle Scholar

Upton, D. (2006). Online learning in speech and language therapy: Student performance and attitudes. Education for Health, 19, 22–31.Google Scholar

VanPatten, B., & Sanz, C. (1995). From input to output: Processing instruction and communicative tasks. In Eckman, F. R., Highland, D, Lee, P. W., Mileham, J, & Weber, R. R. (Eds.), Second language acquisition theory and pedagogy (pp. 169–185). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

VoiceThread. (n.d.). VoiceThread [Computer software]. Boca Raton, FL: Author. Retrieved from https://voicethread.com/Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. (1962). Studies in communication. Thought and language (Hanfmann, E & Vakar, G, Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Walz, J. (1998). Meeting standards for foreign language learning with World Wide Web activities. Foreign Language Annals, 31(1), 103–114.Google Scholar

Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. The Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 470–481.Google Scholar

WhatsApp Inc. (n.d.). WhatsApp [Computer software]. Menlo Park, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.whatsapp.com/Google Scholar

Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. London, England: Longman.Google Scholar

Wordle. (n.d.). Wordle [Computer software]. Retrieved from www.wordle.net/Google Scholar

XMind. (n.d.). XMind [Computer software]. Hong Kong: Author. Retrieved from www.lucidchart.com/Google Scholar

Yahoo! Inc. (n.d.). Flickr [Computer software]. San Francisco, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.flickr.com/Google Scholar

YouTube. (n.d.). YouTube [Computer software]. San Bruno, CA: Author. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/Google Scholar

Yuan, F., & Ellis, R. (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 1–27.Google Scholar

Zunal. (n.d.). Zunal [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://zunal.com/Google Scholar

Abrami, P. C., & Bernard, R. M. (2006). Research on distance education: in defense of field experiments. Distance Education, 24, 5–26.Google Scholar

Akyol, Z., Garrison, D. R., & Ozden, M. Y. (2009). Online and blended communities of inquiry: Exploring the developmental and perceptional differences. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(6), 65–83.Google Scholar

Allwright, D., & Bailey, K. M. (1991). Focus on the language classroom: An introduction to classroom research for language teachers. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1–17.Google Scholar

Arnold, N., Ducate, L., & Kost, C. (2009). Collaborative writing in wikis: Insights from culture projects in German classes. In Lomicka, L & Lord, G (Eds.), The next generation: Social networking and online collaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 115–144). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar