References
- Ai, H. (2017). Providing graduated corrective feedback in an intelligent computer-assisted language learning environment. ReCALL, 29(3), 313–334. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401700012X
- Blasco-Arcas, L., Buil, I., Hernández-Ortega, B., & Sese, F. J. (2013). Using clickers in class. The role of interactivity, active collaborative learning and engagement in learning performance. Computers & Education, 62, 102–110. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.019
- Bichsel, J. (2012). Analytics in higher education: Benefits, barriers, progress, and recommendations (Research Report). Louisville, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ecar
- Bohman, T. M., Bedore, L. M., Peña, E. D., Mendez-Perez, A., & Gillam, R. B. (2010). What you hear and what you say: Language performance in Spanish–English bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 13(3), 325–344. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050903342019
- Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 9–20. doi:https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.06-12-0205
- Caruso, M., Colombi, A., & Tebbit, S. (2017). Teaching how to listen. Blended Learning for the development and assessment of listening skills in a second language. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 14(1), 1–19. Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol14/iss1/14
- Castillo-Manzano, J. I., Castro-Nuño, M., López-Valpuesta, L., Sanz-Díaz, M. T., & Yñiguez, R. (2016). Measuring the effect of ARS on academic performance: A global meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 96, 109–121. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.007
- Chase, J. A., & Houmanfar, R. (2009). The differential effects of elaborate feedback and basic feedback on student performance in a modified, personalized system of instruction course. Journal of Behavioral Education, 18(3), 245–265. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-009-9089-2
- Chien, Y. T., Chang, Y. H., & Chang, C. Y. (2016). Do we click in the right way? A meta-analytic review of clicker-integrated instruction. Educational Research Review, 17, 1–18. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.10.003
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
- Commission of the European Communities (CoEC). (2012). Europeans and their languages, final report, special Eurobarometer 386, wave EB77.1. TNS Opinion & Social. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_386_en.pdf
- Council of Europe (CE). (2018). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume with new descriptors. Retrieved from www.coe.int/lang-cefr
- Dreyer, C., & Nel, C. (2003). Teaching reading strategies and reading comprehension within a technology-enhanced learning environment. System, 31(3), 349–365. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00047-2
- El Shaban, A. (2017). The use of Socrative in ESL classrooms: Towards active learning. Teaching English with Technology, 17(4), 64–77. Retrieved from http://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.desklight-87cb1955-f44b-454a-b455-4b6d0fbe36c3/c/ARTICLE5.pdf
- Ellis, R. (2005). Instructed second language acquisition: A literature review. Wellington: New Zealand Ministry of Education.
- Ellis, R. (2007). The differential effects of corrective feedback on two grammatical structures. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 339–360). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
- Freeman, A., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., & Hall Giesinger, C. (2017). NMC/CoSN horizon report: 2017 K–12 edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.
- Grabe, W. (1999). Developments in reading research and their implications for computer-adaptive reading assessment. In M. Chalhoub-Deville (Ed.), Issues in computer-adaptive testing of reading proficiency (pp. 11–48). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Graham, C. R., Tripp, T. R., Seawright, L., & Joeckel, G. (2007). Empowering or compelling reluctant participators using audience response systems. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8(3), 233–258. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787407081885
- Han, J. H., & Finkelstein, A. (2013). Understanding the effects of professors’ pedagogical development with Clicker Assessment and Feedback technologies and the impact on students’ engagement and learning in higher education. Computers & Education, 65, 64–76. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.002
- Hannon, B., & Daneman, M. (2001). A new tool for measuring and understanding individual differences in the component processes of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 103–128. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.103
- Hattie, J. (1999). Influences on student learning. Inaugural Lecture. Auckland: University of Auckland.
- Hattie, J., & Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 249–271). New York, NY: Routledge.
- Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. doi:https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
- Heift, T., & Rimrott, A. (2008). Learner responses to corrective feedback for spelling errors in CALL. System, 36(2), 196–213. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.09.007
- Hilton, H. (2008). The link between vocabulary knowledge and spoken L2 fluency. Language Learning Journal, 36(2), 153–166. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09571730802389983
- Hinkel, E. (2006). Current perspectives on teaching the four skills. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 109. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/40264513
- Hsu, S. (2006). The reading strategies used by EFL technical students. Journal of Nanya, 26, 159–174. https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.6989/JN.200612.0159.
- Hunsu, N. J., Adesope, O., & Bayly, D. J. (2016). A meta-analysis of the effects of audience response systems (clicker-based technologies) on cognition and affect. Computers & Education, 94, 102–119. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.013
- Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2019). Feedback in second language writing. Contexts and issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Jang, E. (2005). A validity narrative: Effects of reading skills diagnosis on teaching and learning in the context of NG TOEFL (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
- Field, J. (2013). Cognitive validity. In A. Geranpayeh & L. Taylor (Eds). Examining listening: Research and practice in assessing second language (pp. 77–151). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Kartushina, N., Hervais-Adelman, A., Frauenfelder, U. H., & Golestani, N. (2015). The effect of phonetic production training with visual feedback on the perception and production of foreign speech sounds. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 138(2), 817–832. doi:https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4926561
- Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2–10. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02905780
- Kent, D. (2019). Technique efficacy when using a student response system in the reading classroom. Language Learning & Technology, 23(1), 26–35. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.125/44668.
- Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis. Issues and implications. London: Longman Group UK Ltd.
- Krumsvik, R. (2012). Feedback clickers in plenary lectures: A new tool for formative assessment? In L. Rowan & C. Bigum (eds.), Transformative approaches to new technologies and student diversity in futures oriented classrooms (pp. 191–216). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2642-0_12.
- Kulhavy, R. W., Stock, W. A., Hancock, T. E., Swindell, L. K., & Hammrich, P. L. (1990). Written feedback: Response certitude and durability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 15(4), 319–332. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(90)90028-Y
- Lantz, M. E. (2010). The use of ‘Clickers’ in the classroom: Teaching innovation or merely an amusing novelty? Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 556–561. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.02.014
- Lantz, M. E., & Stawiski, M. (2014). Effectiveness of clickers: Effect of feedback and the timing of questions on learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 280–286. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.009
- Larusson, J. A., & White, B. (2014). Learning analytics. New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3305-7.
- Lavolette, E., Polio, C., & Kahng, J. (2015). The accuracy of computer-assisted feedback and students' responses to it. Language Learning & Technology, 19(2), 50–68. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.125/44417.
- Lee, M.-L. (2012). A study of the selection of reading strategies among genders by EFL college students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 64, 310–319. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.037
- Leucht, M., Retelsdorf, J., Möller, J., & Köller, O. (2010). Zur Dimensionalität rezeptiver englischsprachiger Kompetenzen [On the dimensionality of receptive skills in English as a foreign language]. Zeitschrift Für Pädagogische Psychologie, 24(2), 123–138. doi:https://doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652/a000010
- Long, D. R. (1989). Second language listening comprehension: A schema-theoretic perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 73(1), 32–40. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1989.tb05307.x
- Loorbach, N., Peters, O., Karreman, J., & Steehouder, M. (2015). Validation of the Instructional Materials Motivation Survey (IMMS) in a self-directed instructional setting aimed at working with technology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 204–218. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12138
- Ludvigsen, K., Krumsvik, R., & Furnes, B. (2015). Creating formative feedback spaces in large lectures. Computers & Education, 88, 48–63. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.002
- Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(3), 405–430. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami051
- Manoli, P., & Papadopoulou, M. (2012). Reading strategies versus reading skills: Two faces of the same coin. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 817–821. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.205
- Matsumura, S., & Hann, G. (2004). Computer anxiety and students’ preferred feedback methods in EFL writing. The Modern Language Journal, 88(3), 403–415. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.00237.x
- Miralpeix, I., & Muñoz, C. (2018). Receptive vocabulary size and its relationship to EFL language skills. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 56(1), 1–24. doi:https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2017-0016
- Moreno, R. (2004). Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: Effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia. Instructional Science, 32(1/2), 99–113. doi:https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021811.66966.1d
- Murphy, P. (2007). Reading comprehension exercises online: The effects of feedback, proficiency and interaction. Language Learning & Technology, 11(3), 107–129. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.125/44120.
- Narciss, S. (2008). Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. J. G. van Merriënboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 125–144). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Nunan, D. (2004). Listening in language learning. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in Language Teaching (Vol. 58, pp. 238–241). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667190.032.
- Nyland, R. (2018). A review of tools and techniques for data-enabled formative assessment. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 46(4), 505–526. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239517748936
- Ockert, D. (2018). Using a tablet computer for EFL positive self-review: Increases in self-determination theory-based learning motives. CALICO Journal, 35(2), 182–199. doi:https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.32185
- O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., & Kupper, L. (1989). Listening comprehension strategies in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 10(4), 418–437. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/10.4.418
- Opitz, B., Ferdinand, N. K., & Mecklinger, A. (2011). Timing matters: The impact of immediate and delayed feedback on artificial language learning. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 5, 1–9. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2011.00008
- Paradis, J., Rusk, B., Duncan, T. S., & Govindarajan, K. (2017). Children’s second language acquisition of english complex syntax: The role of age, input, and cognitive factors. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 37, 148–167. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190517000022
- Park, G.-P. (2004). Comparison of L2 listening and reading comprehension by university students learning English in Korea. Foreign Language Annals, 37(3), 448–458. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2004.tb02702.x
- Phakiti, A. (2003). A closer look at gender and strategy use in L2 reading. Language Learning, 53(4), 649–702. doi:https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-9922.2003.00239.x
- Ranalli, J. (2018). Automated written corrective feedback: How well can students make use of it? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(7), 653–674. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1428994
- Rienties, B., Lewis, T., McFarlane, R., Nguyen, Q., & Toetenel, L. (2018). Analytics in online and offline language learning environments: The role of learning design to understand student online engagement. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(3), 273–293. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1401548
- Rost, M. (2013). Teaching and researching listening (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315833705.
- Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431–449. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00039-2
- Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. doi:https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795
- Spector, J.M. (2016). Smart learning environments: Concepts and issues. In G. Chamblee & L. Langub (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2728–2737). Savannah, GA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/172078/
- Taki, S. (2016). Metacognitive online reading strategy use: Readers’ perceptions in L1 and L2. Journal of Research in Reading, 39(4), 409–427. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12048
- Vandergrift, L. (1999). Facilitating second language listening comprehension: Acquiring successful strategies. ELT Journal, 53(3), 168–176. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/53.3.168
- Vandergrift, L., & Goh, C. (2012). Teaching and learning second language listening: Metacognition in action. New York, NY: Routledge.
- Van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C. W., & Eggen, T. J. H. M. (2015). Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students’ learning outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 475–511. doi:https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314564881
- Wang, A. I. (2015). The wear out effect of a game-based student response system. Computers & Education, 82, 217–227. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.004
- Ware, P., & O’Dowd, R. (2008). Peer feedback on language form in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 12, 43–63.
- William, D. (2000). Integrating summative and formative functions of assessment. Keynote address to the European Association for Educational Assessment, Prague, Czech Republic. Retrieved from http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10001151/1/Wiliam2000IntergratingAEA-E_2000_keynoteaddress.pdf
- Woolf, B. P. (2010). A Roadmap for education technology. Washington, DC: The National Science Foundation. Retrieved from http://cra.org/ccc/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2015/08/GROE-Roadmap-for-Education-Technology-Final-Report.pdf
- Xiao, Y., & Yang, M. (2019). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: How formative assessment supports students’ self-regulation in English language learning. System, 81, 39–49. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.01.004
- Yan, R. (2012). Improving English listening self-efficacy of Chinese university students: Influences of learning strategy training with feedback on strategy use and performance (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Durham E-theses: Durham University. Retrieved from http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/3503/1/Thesis_V2.pdf
- Yu, Z., Chen, W., Kong, Y., Sun, X. L., & Zheng, J. (2014). The impact of clickers instruction on cognitive loads and listening and speaking skills in college English class. PLoS One, 9(9), e106626. doi:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106626