Alderson, J. Charles. 2005. Diagnosing foreign language proficiency: The interface between learning and assessment. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Alderson, J. Charles. 2007. The CEFR and the need for more research. The Modern Language Journal 91(4). 659–663.Google Scholar
Badger, Richard & Malcolm MacDonald. 2010. Making it real: Authenticity, process and pedagogy. Applied Linguistics 31(4). 578–582.Google Scholar
Basturkmen, Helen. 2010. Developing courses in English for specific purposes. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bocanegra-Valle, Ana. 2010. Evaluating and designing materials for the ESP classroom. Utrecht Studies in Language and Communication 22. 141.Google Scholar
Breen, Michael. P. 1985. Authenticity in the language classroom. Applied Linguistics 6(1). 60–70.Google Scholar
Catterall, Miriam & Pauline Maclaran. 1997. Focus group data and qualitative analysis programs: Coding the moving picture as well as the snapshots. Sociological Research Online 2(1). http://www.socresonline.org.uk/2/1/6.html (accessed 10 July 2015).Google Scholar
Council of Europe. 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Council of Europe. 2009. Relating language examinations to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. A Manual. http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/manuel1_en.asp (accessed 10 July 2015).
Dudley-Evans, Tony & Maggie Jo St. John. 1998. Developments in English for specific purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
EURIDICE. 2010. Focus on higher education in Europe 2010: The impact of the Bologna process. Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/thematic_reports/122en.pdf (accessed 10 July 2015).Google Scholar
Faez, Farahnaz, Suzanne Majhanovich, Shelley Taylor, Maureen Smith & Kelly Crowley. 2012. The power of “Can Do” statements: Teachers’ perceptions of CEFR-informed instruction in French as a second language classrooms in Ontario. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique appliquée 14(2). 1–19.Google Scholar
Flowerdew, Lynne. 2013. Needs analysis and curriculum development in ESP. In Brian Paltridge & Sue Starfield (eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes, 325–346. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Fulcher, Glenn, Fred Davidson & Jenny Kemp. 2011. Effective rating scale development for speaking tests: Performance decision trees. Language Testing 28(1). 5–29.Google Scholar
Harsch, Claudia & André Rupp. 2011. Designing and scaling level-specific writing tasks in alignment with the CEFR: A test-centered approach. Language Assessment Quarterly 8(1). 1–33.Google Scholar
Huhta, Marjatta, Karin Vogt, Esko Johnson, Heikki Tulkki & David Hall. 2013. Needs analysis for language course design: A holistic approach to ESP. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2006. English for academic purposes. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Javid, Choudhary. 2013. English for specific purposes: Its definition, characteristics, scope and purpose. European Journal of Scientific Research 112(1). 138–151.Google Scholar
Johns, Ann. M. 2013. The history of English for specific purposes research. In Brian Paltridge & Sue Starfield (eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes, 5–30. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Johns, Ann, & Leketi Makalela. 2011. Needs analysis, critical ethnography, and context: Perspectives from the client – and the consultant. In Diane Belcher, Ann Johns & Brian Paltridge (eds.), New directions in English for specific purposes research, 197–221. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, Keith & Helen Johnson. 1998. English for specific purposes (ESP). In Keith Johnson & Helen Johnson (eds.), Encyclopedic dictionary of applied linguistics, 105–110. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Jones, Neil & Nick Saville. 2009. European language policy: Assessment, learning, and the CEFR. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 29. 51–63.Google Scholar
Luka, Ineta. 2014. ESP competence assessment in tertiary education. Language for International Communication: Linking Interdisciplinary Perspectives 101–115. Riga: University of Latvia.
Little, David. 2007. Language learner autonomy: Some fundamental considerations revisited. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 1(1). 14–29.Google Scholar
Moe, Eli. 2009. Jack of more trades? Could standard-setting serve several functions? In Neus Figueras & José Noijons (eds.), Linking to the CEFR Levels: Research perspectives, 131–38. Arnhem: Cito-EALTA.Google Scholar
Morrow, Keith (ed.). 2004. Insights from the Common European Framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
North, Brian. 2007. The CEFR illustrative descriptor scales. The Modern Language Journal 91(4). 656–659.Google Scholar
Orr, Thomas. 2008. Next generation English for specific purposes (NextGen ESP). In L. M. Huang & L. T. Li (eds.), English Education and English for Specific Purposes, 1–6. Taipei, Taiwan: International Conference on English Education, Crane Publishing, Co.
Papageorgiou, Spiros. 2014. Issues in aligning assessments with the Common European Framework of Reference. Language Value 6. 15–27.Google Scholar
Peacock, Matthew. 1997. The effect of authentic materials on the motivation of EFL learners. ELT Journal 51(2). 144–156.Google Scholar
Richards, Jack. 2001. Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ruiz-Carrido, Miguel, Juan Palmer-Silveira & Inmaculada Fortanet-Gomez (eds.). 2010. English for professional and academic purposes. New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Shuang, Liang. 2014. Authenticity in language teaching. Applied Mechanics and Materials. 543. 4294–4297.Google Scholar
Sülü, Ayfer & Elif Kır. 2014. Language teachers’ views on CEFR. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET) 1(5). 358–364. http://iojet.org/index.php/IOJET/article/view/69/97 (accessed 1 August 2015).Google Scholar
Torregrosa, Benavent & Peñamaría Sánchez-Reyes. 2011. Use of authentic materials in the ESP classroom. Encuentro 20. 89–94. http://dspace.uah.es/dspace/bitstream/handle/10017/10109/use_torregrosa_ENCUENTRO_2011.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed 1 August 2015).Google Scholar
Trim, John L. M. 2001. The work of the Council of Europe in the field of modern languages, 1957–2001 (mimeo). Paper presented at a symposium to mark the European Day of Languages, 26 September 2001, at the European Centre for Modern Languages, Graz.
Vaičiūnienė, Vilhelmina & Daiva Užpalienė. 2012. Authenticity in the context of technologically enriched ESP. Social Technologies 2(1). 189–201.Google Scholar
Velescu, Elena. 2013. The role of authentic materials in the teaching of French for Specific Purposes (FOS) in the field of veterinary medicine. Agronomy Series of Scientific Research 56(2). 277–280.Google Scholar
Comments (0)