برنا، محمد (1392). مقایسۀ اثربخشی روش‌های تدریس یادگیری در حد تسلط، ارتباطی و تلفیقی بر میزان یادگیری زبان انگلیسی، انگیزش ابزاری زبان انگلیسی و خودکارآمدی تحصیلی در دانش‌آموزان پسر پایۀ سوم راهنمایی شهر ساوه، پایان‌نامه، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی ساوه.
حجازی، الهه؛ نامداری، وحیده؛ قاسمی، مجید و مقدم‌زاده، علی (1395). طراحی و ساخت ابزار میزان و نگرش به استفاده از شبکه‌های اجتماعی و بررسی رابطۀ آن با عملکرد تحصیلی. فصلنامه علمی – پژوهشی پژوهش در یادگیری آموزشگاهی و مجازی 4(16)، 38-23.
شیخ‌الاسلامی، راضیه و خیر، محمد (1386). نقش جهت‌گیری‌های انگیزشی دریادگیری زبان انگلیسی به‌عنوان یک زبان خارجی. مجلۀ پژوهش زبان‌های خارجی 39(2)، 94 – 83 .
گشتاسبی، زهرا؛ شکری، امید؛ فتح‌آبادی، جلیل و شریفی، مسعود (1396). تأثیر برنامۀ بازآموزی اسنادی بر هیجانات پیشرفت و مشغولیت تحصیلی دانشجویان. فصلنامه علمی – پژوهشی پژوهش در یادگیری آموزشگاهی و مجازی 4(16)، 38-23.
Anderman, L. H. & Kaplan, A. (2008). The role of interpersonal relationships in student motivation: Introduction to the special issue. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76(2), 115-119.
Basta, .J. 2011. The Role of the Communicative Approach and Cooperative Learning in Higher Education. FactaUniversitatis. Series:Linguistics and Literature 9(2):125 – 143.
Bulger, S. M., Mohr, D. J. & Walls, R.T. (2002). Stack the Deck in Favor of Your Students by Using the Four Aces of Effective Teaching.
Journal of Effective Teaching, 5(2). Retrieved from
http://uncw-.edu/cte/et/articles/bulger/
Chang, S. C. (2011). A contrastive study of grammar translation method and communicative approach in teaching English grammar. ELT, 4(2), 13-24.
Chou, P. M. & Chen, H. H. (2008) Engagement in Online Collaborative Learning: A case study using a web 2.0 tool. Merlot Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(4), 574-582.
Dixson, M. D. (2010). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do students find engaging? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(10), 1-13.
Desselle, S. P. (2017). The use of Twitter to facilitate engagement and reflection in a constructionist learning environment. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 9(2), 185-194.
Downes, S. (2012). Connectivism and Connective Knowledge; Essays on meaning and learning networks. ISBN: 978-1-105-77846-9; Version 1.0 – May 19, 2012. This work is published under a Creative Commons License, Attribution – NonCommercial -ShareAlike CC BY-NC-SA.View Legal Code:
http://creativec-ommons.org/licenses/by-nc.
Fenoglio, P. J. (2006). ‘Pinball’ engagement and connectivism: New understandings of learning in the 21st Century.
Garcia, E. Brown, M. & Elbeltagi, I. (2013). Learning Within a Connectivist Educational Collective Blog Model: A Case Study of UK Higher Education. The Importance of Universal Access and Exposure to Executive-Level Advice” The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 11(3), 253-262.
Goldie, J. G. S. (2017). Connectivism: a knowledge learning theory for the digital age? Medical Teacher, 38(10), 1064-1069.
Gray, T. & Madson, L. (2007). Ten easy ways to engage your students. College Teaching, 55(2), 83-87.
Hargreaves, D. H. (2004). Learning for Life: the Foundations for Lifelong Learning. Bristol: Policy Press.
Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford University Press.
Ibrahim, M. K. & Ibrahim, Y. A. (2017). Communicative English language teaching in Egypt: Classroom practice and challenges. Issues in Educational Research, 27(2), 285-311.
Krause, K. & Coates, H. (2008). Students’ engagement in first-year University. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493-505.
Kuh, G.D. (2005) Putting Student Engagement Results to Use: Lessons from the Field. Assessment Update. 17 (1), 12–13.
Kuh, G.D. & Gonyea, R.M. (2005). Exploring the relationships between spirituality, liberal learning, and college student engagement (A Special Report prepared for the Teagle Foundation). Retrieved from Teagle Foundation.
Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J. & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effectsof student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540-563.
Lester, D. (2013). A Review of the Student Engagement Literature. Focus On Colleges, Universities, and Schools, 7(1), 1-8.
Maronde, D. (2006). The effectiveness of teaching methods designed to improve student engagement and retention of physics subject matter for both science and non-science majors. A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Physics in the College of Sciences at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida
Maryslessor, A. O., Barasa, P. L. & Omulando, C. A. (2014). Challenges teachers face in the use of the communicative language teaching approach in the teaching listening and speaking lessons in Lugrari District, Kenya. International Journal of Science and Research, 3(9), 83-92.
Muhammad, Z. (2016). Pakistani government secondary schools students’ attitudes towards Communicative language teaching and grammar translation in Quetta, Balochistan. Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education English Language Teaching, 9(3), 258-270.
Natsir, M. &Sanjaya, D. (2014). Grammar translation method (GTM) versus communicative language teaching (CLT); A Review of Literature. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies, 2(1), 1-5.
Ozan, O. (2013). Scaffolding in connectivist mobile learning environment: Distance Education-TOJDE, 14(2).
Reeve, J. (2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: the concept of agentic engagement. American Psychological Association, 105(3), 579-595.
Reeve, J. & Tseng, C. (2011). Agency as a forth aspect of student engagement during activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36 (4), 257-267.
Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Today. Cambridge University Press.
Richards J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2003). Approaches and methods in language teaching, 2nd Edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Roberts, J. T. (2004). The Communicative approach to language teaching: The king is dead. Long Live the King, Ijes, 4(1), 1-37.
Russell, V. J., Ainley, M., &Frydenberg, E. (2005). Schooling issues digest: Student motivation and engagement
. http://-www.dest.gov.au.
Sagar, C. (2013). A theoretical perspective on mobile connectivist MOOCs for English language learning. IKASNABAR 2013, Open Education and Tecnology, 431-444.
Savignon, S. J. (2007). Beyond communicative language teaching: What's ahead? Journal of Pragmatics, 39(1), 207-220.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for a digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 1-8.
Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for a digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 1-8.
Tan, Z. X. (2016). An empirical study on the effects of grammar-translation method and task-based language teaching on Chinese college students’ reading comprehension. International Journal of Liberal Arts and Social Science, 4(3), 100-109.
Taylor, L. & Parsons, J. (2011). Improving student engagement. Current Issues in Education,14(1), 1-33.
Veselá, K. (2013). Connectivism in foreign language education. Education and Languages in Europe / Bildung und Sprachen in Europa, 25(17), 320-325.
Walls, R. T. & Cather, W. L. (1987). Principles of instruction. Emittsburg, MD: National Emergency Training Center.
Windham, C. (2005). The Student’s Perspective. In D. Oblinger & J. Oblinger (Eds), EducatingThe Net generation (pp.1-5.16). Boulder, Co: Educause.
Wentzel, K. R. (1994). Relation of social goal pursuit to social acceptance, classroombehavior, and perceived social support. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 173-182.
Zepke, N. & Leach, L. (2010). Improving student engagement: Ten proposals for action. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(3), 167-177.
)