本次行動研究的目的是解決在英語語法課程中有效整合混合式學習（BL）的實踐挑戰。這種整合旨在結合線上和線下學習，滿足多樣化的學習偏好，確保學習材料的廣泛獲取，並培養學習者的自主學習能力。最終目標是在英語作為外語（EFL）的背景下，通過混合式學習模式提升英語語法教學品質和整體學習體驗。研究涉及兩輪混合式學習的實施。共有182名英語專業學生參與（第一輪混合式學習實施有92人，第二輪有90人），並接受了兩次課程測試（前測和後測）、開放式問卷調查以及焦點小組訪談以收集數據。基於學生的回饋和我的反思，混合式學習模式經過反复修改，以最大化其對學習者的益處。混合式學習模式包括三個階段：課前階段（線上學習）、課中階段（線下學習）和課後階段（線上學習）。混合式學習方法被證明是靈活且高效的。線上學習平臺提供了多種互動管道，但可以受益於更具人性化的設計。通過這一過程，學習者的自主學習能力得到了增強。應進一步加強線上和線下學習的整合，以保持學生的學習熱情，並促進知識的理解和應用。在實施過程中，教師承擔了多種角色。根據本次行動研究的結果，還討論了對未來混合式學習實施的啟示和建議。

The purpose of this action research was to tackle the practical challenges of effectively integrating blended learning (BL) into my English grammar courses. This integration aimed to combine online and onsite learning, cater to diverse learning preferences, ensure wide access to learning materials, and foster learner autonomy. The ultimate goal was to enhance my instruction quality of English grammar and the overall learning experience within a BL model in an EFL context. The action research involved two rounds of BL implementation in 2019 and 2021. One hundred and eighty two English majors participated (92 for the first BL implementation and 90 for the second BL implementation) and underwent two tests (the pretest and posttest), an open-ended questionnaire, and a focus group interview (only for the first BL implementation) for data collection. Based on students’ feedback and my self-reflection, the BL model was iteratively modified to maximize its benefits for learners. The BL model consists of three stages: the pre-class stage (online learning), the in-class stage (onsite learning) and the post-class stage (online learning). The BL approach proved to benefit EFL grammar learning in terms of learning outcomes, efficiency and flexibility. The online learning platform offered several interaction channels but could benefit from a more humanized design. Learner autonomy was enhanced through this process. The integration of online and offline learning should be further strengthened to keep students’ enthusiasm and facilitate comprehension and application of knowledge. I assumed multiple roles throughout the implementation. Implications and recommendations for the future BL implementation are also discussed based on the results of this action research.

Table of Contents
Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................ I 
Chinese Abstract .......................................................................................................... II
English Abstract ......................................................................................................... III 
Table of Contents ....................................................................................................... VI
List of Figures .............................................................................................................IX
List of Tables ...............................................................................................................X
Chapter 1 Introduction	1
1.1 Research Background	1
1.2 Blended Learning	2
1.2.1 Definitions of BL	2
1.2.2 Dimensions of BL	6
1.3 The National New Standards and Course Reform in China	8
1.4 Research Purpose and Significance	10
1.5 Research Questions	11
Chapter 2 Literature Review	12
2.1 Relative Theories Applied in BL	12
2.1.1 Cognitive Load Theory (CLT)	12
2.1.2 Transactional Distance (TD) Theory	14
2.1.3 Sociocultural Theory	14
2.2 Framework for the Design of Blended Language Learning	15
2.3 Language Teaching Methods Applied in BL Model	17
2.3.1 Rationale of Teaching Methods of English Grammar	18
2.3.2 Cognitive Method	18
2.3.3 Communicative Method	19
2.4 The Effectiveness of BL Model in EFL Contexts	19
2.5 Learner Perceptions of the BL Model	22
2.6 Action Research	27
2.7 Research Gap..................................................................................................29
Chapter 3 Methodology	30
3.1 The Framework for Design of BL of English Grammar in EFL Contexts	30
3.2 Research Context	32
3.3 Action Research Process	33
3.3.1 Four Steps in Action Research Process	33
3.3.2 Research Cycles of the Two BL Implementations	36
3.4 Participants in the First and Second BL Implementations	37
3.5 Data Collection in the First BL Implementation	40
3.5.1 The Stages of Data Collection	40
3.5.2 English Paper-and-Pencil Pretest and Posttest	40
3.5.3 The Open-ended Questionnaire of Student Feedback of the First BL Implementation	43
3.5.4 Focus Group Interview (FGI)	44
3.6 Data Collection in the Second BL Implementation	44
3.7 Data Analysis	47
Chapter 4 The First Grammar BL Implementation	49
4.1 Step 1: The Planning of the First BL Implementation	49
4.1.1 The Online Platform	49
4.1.2 Paper Materials	49
4.1.3 Online Video Lectures	52
4.1.4 Time and Content Arrangement	54
4.2 Step 2: Acting in BL Process	56
4.2.1 Introduction to BL Process	56
4.2.2 The First Step of BL	57
4.2.3 The Second Step of BL	59
4.2.4 The Third Step of BL	59
4.3 Step 3: Observing the Results of the First BL Implementation	60
4.3.1 Quantitative Results	60
4.3.2 Qualitative Results－The Strengths of the BL Model	60
4.3.3 Qualitative Results－The Weaknesses of the BL Model	67
4.4 Step 4: Reflecting on Action Decisions for the Second BL Implementation	73
Chapter 5 The Second Grammar BL Implementation	80
5.1 Step 1: Planning of the Second BL Implementation	80
5.1.1 The Online Learning Platform	80
5.1.2 Time and Content Arrangement	83
5.2 Step 2: Acting in BL Process	84
5.2.1 The First Step of BL	84
5.2.2 The Second Step of BL	87
5.2.3 The Third Step of BL	87
5.3 Step 3: Observing the Results of the Second BL Implementation	89
5.3.1 Quantitative Results	89
5.3.2 Student Feedback of the Second BL Implementation	90
5.4 Step 4: Reflecting on Action Decisions for the Future Third BL Implementation	108
5.4.1 Designing Online Video Lectures	111
5.4.2 Optimizing the Integration of Online and Offline Learning	112
5.4.3 Improving Student Engagement	115
5.4.4 Introducing Differentiated Instruction	117
Chapter 6 Discussion	120
6.1 Quantitative Data	120
6.1.1 BL Model Effectively Improves Learning Outcome	120
6.1.2 The Influence of the Starting Level of Language Knowledge on Learning Outcome	126
6.2 Qualitative Data	129
Chapter 7 Conclusion	135
7.1 Conclusion	135
7.2 Limitations, Classroom Implications, and Suggestions for Future Research	136
References	140
Appendix A Personal Background Information	171
Appendix A Personal Background Information (Chinese version)	172
Appendix B Consent to Participate in an Action Research....................................... 169
Appendix B Consent to Participate in an Action Research (Chinese version)......... 170
Appendix C The Pretest of English Grammar	175
Appendix D The Posttest of English Grammar	181
Appendix E The Open-ended Questionnaire of Student Feedback of the First BL Implementation of English Grammar	187
Appendix E The Open-ended Questionnaire of Student Feedback of the First Grammar BL Implementation (Chinese version)	188
Appendix F The Open-ended Questionnaire of Student Feedback of the Second Grammar BL Implementation	189
Appendix F The Open-ended Questionnaire of Student Feedback of the Second Grammar BL Implementation (Chinese version)	190
Appendix G The Course Guide (Unit 1 as an example)	191
Appendix H The Students’ Scores of the Pretest and Posttest	197
Appendix I Course Syllabus of English Grammar	202


 
List of Figures
Figure 1. Spectrum of Course-delivery Modalities in Higher Education .................... 4
Figure 2. The Structure of Courses of Foreign Language Majors	9
Figure 3. Action Research Process of the BL Implementation	....................................34
Figure 4. Research Cycles of the Two BL Implementations	..36
Figure 5. The Stages of Data Collection in the First BL Implementation	40
Figure 6 The Stages of Data Collection in the Second BL Implementation................45
Figure 7. Website-based and App version of MTEP	50
Figure 8. Online Video Lectures Made by Myself	53
Figure 9. Online Learning Journals	58
Figure 10. The Answers with Explanation to Online Quizzes	76
Figure 11. Website-based and App Version of MOOCs (The Second BL Implementation)	81
Figure 12. Online Video Lectures Made by Professor Zhu	82
Figure 13. Instructional Video Lectures in MOOCs................................................... 85
Figure 14. Online Quizzes in MOOCs	85
Figure 15. The Interaction between the Student and Me Via QQ	86
Figure 16. Discussion Board in MOOCs	88
Figure 17. Student Feedback of the Gains in Grammar Items	105
	 
List of Tables
Table 1. The Clarification of the Framework for Design of BL of English Grammar. 31
Table 2. Participants’ Demographic Information in the First and Second BL Implementation	38
Table 3. Grammar Structures for Each Week	55
Table 4. The Three Steps of the First BL of English Grammar	57
Table 5. Comparison of Students’ Scores on the Pretest and the Posttest in the First BL Implementation...................................................................................................... 60
Table 6. The Strengths and Weaknesses of BL of English Grammar in the First BL Implementation 61
Table 7. Action Decisions for the Second BL Implementation	75
Table 8. Weekly Learning Content of English Grammar	83
Table 9. The Three Steps of the Second BL of English Grammar	84
Table 10. Comparison of Students’ Scores on the Pretest and Posttest in the Second BL Implementation	90
Table 11. The Problems Emerged During the Second BL Implementation and Action Decisions for the Future BL Implementation	109

Abakpa, B. O., & Iji, C. O. (2011). Effect of mastery learning approach on senior secondary school students’ achievement in geometry. Journal of the Science Teachers Association of Nigeria,46, 165-177. 
	https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11460a
Adachi, C., Tai, J. H. M., & Dawson, P. (2018). Academics’ perceptions of the benefits and challenges of self and peer assessment in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 294-306. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1339775
Adiguzel, T., Kaya, M. H., & Cansu, F. K. (2023). Revolutionizing education with AI: 	Exploring the transformative potential of ChatGPT. Contemporary Educational 	Technology, 15(3), ep429. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13152  
Agamba, J. J. (2015). Optimizing blended teaching and learning in brick- 		and-mortar institutions. In J. Keengwe & J. J. Agama (Eds.), Improving and 		optimizing online and BL in higher education (pp. 1-11). IGI Global. 
Akyol, Z., Vaughan, N., & Garrison, R. (2011). The impact of course duration on the development of a community of inquiry. Interactive Learning Environments, 19 (3), 231-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820902809147
Alshahrani, A. (2023). The impact of ChatGPT on blended learning: Current trends and future research directions. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 7(4), 2029–2040. http://dx.doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.6.010 
Altrichter, H., Feldman, A., Posch, P., & Somekh, B. (2008). Teachers investigate their work: An introduction to action research across the professions (2nd ed.). Routledge. 

Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A Taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman. 
Andrade, H., & Du, Y. (2007). Student responses to criteria-referenced self-Assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 159- 181. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600801928
Anju, R., Gretchen, G., Michael, S., & Josh, G. (2006). Do formative assessments promote self assessment accuracy? A study of second year medical students’ predictions about performance. UCLA: Center for Educational Development and Research. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2gk7g47c
Anthony, B., Kamaludin, A., Romli, A. et al. (2019). Exploring the role of blended learning for teaching and learning effectiveness in institutions of higher learning: An empirical investigation. Educ Inf Technol , 24, 3433–3466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09941-z 
Awang, H. R., & Sani, A. M. (2008). A confirmatory factor analysis of a newly integrated multidimensional school engagement scale. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 5, 21-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.32890/mjli.5.2008.7595
Balcıkanlı, C. (2010). Learner autonomy in language learning: Student teachers’ beliefs.
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(1), 90-103. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2010v35n1.8
Banados, 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/cj.v23i3.533-550
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall. 
Bandura, A. (1988). Organizational applications of social cognitive theory. Australian Journal of Management, 13(2), 275-302. https://doi.org/10.1177/031289628801300210
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.  
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1-12. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Baragash, R. S., & Al-Samarraie, H. (2018). BL: Investigating the influence of engagement in multiple learning delivery modes on students’ performance. Telematics and Informatics, 35(7), 2082-2098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.07.010
Bargal, D. (2006). Personal and intellectual influences leading to Lewin’s paradigm of action research. Action Research, 4(4), 367-338. 
Barragan, D. I. (2009). Discussion boards as tools in blended EFL learning programs. Profile Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 11(1), 107-121. 
Bedny, G. Z., & Karwowski, W. (2004). Activity theory as a basis for the study of work. Ergonomics, 47(2), 134-153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00140130310001617921 
Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Longman. 
Berg, B. L., & Lune, H. (2014). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Pearson.  
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Internal Society for Technology in Education.

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An intro- duction to theories and methods. Pearson Education, Inc.
Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017). Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 22, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.06.001  
Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice. 	Bloomsbury Publishing. 
Brown, M. G. (2016). Blended instructional practice: A review of the empirical literature on instructor’s adoption and use of online tools in face-to-face teaching. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 1-10. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.05.001
Bueno-Alastuey, M. C., & Lopez-Perez, M. V. (2014). Evaluation of a BL language course: students’ perceptions of appropriateness for the development of skills and language areas. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(6), 509-527. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2013.770037
Bulut, O., Gorgun, G., Yildirim-Erbasli, S. N., Wongvorachan, T., Daniels, L. M.,  Gao, Y. Z., Lai, K. W., & Shin, J. (2023). Standing on the shoulders of giants: Online formative assessments as the foundation for predictive learning analytics models. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54(1), 19-39. 
	https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13276
Capshew, T. F. (2005). Motivating social work students in statistic courses. Social 
Work Education, 24(8), 857-868. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615470500342207
Cardak, C. S., & Selvi, K. (2016). Increasing teacher candidates’ ways of interaction 	and levels of learning through action research in a blended course. Computers in 	Human Behavior, 61, 488-506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.055
Celce-Murcia, M. (2006). Language teaching approaches: An overview. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 3-11). Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. 
Chan, V. (2003). Autonomous language learning: The teachers’ perspectives. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(1), 33-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/1356251032000052311
Chapelle, C. (2012). Validity argument for language assessment: The framework is simple. Language Testing, 29(1), 19-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265532211417211
Chen, I. J., & Chang, C.C. (2009). Cognitive load theory: An empirical study of anxiety and task performance in language learning. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 7(2), 729-746. 
	http://dx.doi.org/10.25115/ejrep.v7i18.1369
Chen, I. S. (2017). Computer self-efficacy, learning performance, and the mediating role of learning engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 362-370. 
	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.059
Chen, P. S., Lambert, A. D., & Guidry, K. R. (2010). Engaging online learners: The impact of web-based learning technology on college student engagement. Computer & Education, 54(4), 1222-1232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.008
Chen, W. W., & Li, Y. (2008). The connotation and structure of mobile micro-learning. Journal of China Educational Technology, 9, 16-19. 
Chenoweth, N., Eiko, U., & Murday, K. (2013). Student learning in hybrid French and Spanish courses: An overview of language online. CALICO Journal, 24(1), 115-146. https://doi.org/10.1558/CJ.V24I1.115-146
Chuah, C. K. P. (2007). Experience redesign: a conceptual framework for moving teaching and learning into a flexible e-learning environment. In P. Tsang, R. Kwan & R. R. Fox (Eds.), Enhancing learning through technology (pp. 37-50). World Scientific. 
Clark, R. E., & Clark, V. P. (2009). From neo-behaviorism to neuroscience: Perspectives on the origins and future contributions of cognitive load research. In J. Plass, R. Moreno & R. Bruken (Eds.), Cognitive load: Theory and application (pp. 203-208). Cambridge. 
Coates, H. (2006). Student engagement in campus-based and online education: 	University Connections. Routledge. 
Coates, H., Hillman, K., Jackson, D., Tan, L., Daws, A., Rainsford, D., & Murphy, M. (2008). Attracting, engaging and retaining: New Conversations about Learning. Australasian Student Engagement Report (AUSSE). ACER.
Cobin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). The basics of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Sage. 
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum. 
Colakoglu, O., & Akdemir, O. (2010). Motivational measure of the instruction compared: Instruction based on the ARCS motivation theory vs traditional instruction in blended courses. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 11(2), 73-89. 


Cole, M. (1999). Cultural psychology: Some general principles and a concrete example. In Y. Engestrom, R. Miettinen & R. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 87-106). Cambridge University Press. 
Connell, J. P. (1992). Context, self, and action: A motivational analysis of self-system processes across the life span. In D. Cicchetti & M. Beeghly (Eds.), The Self in Transition: Infancy to Childhood (pp. 61-97). University of Chicago Press. 
Cook, V. (2000). Second language learning and language teaching. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press and Edward Arnold (Publishers) Limited. 
Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(3), 402-423. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.57.3.402
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications. 
Dickinson, L. (1987). Self-instruction in language learning. Cambridge University Press.
Dillon, P., Wang, R., & Tearle, P. (2007). Cultural disconnection in virtual education. pedagogy. Culture & Society, 15(2), 153-174. 
	https://doi.org/10.1080/14681360701403565
Dincer, A., Yesilyurt, S., & Noels, K. (2019). Self-determined engagement in language learning: The relations among autonomy-support, psychological needs, and engagement. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 8(4), 1130-1147. http://dx.doi.org/10.30703/cije.586482
Dunn, T. J., & Kennedy, M. (2019). Technology enhanced learning in higher education; motivations, engagement and academic achievement. Computers and Education, 137, 104-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.004
Egbert, J. (2007). Quality analysis of journals in TESOL and applied linguistics. TESOL Quarterly, 41(1), 157-171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00044.x
Ellis, R. (2016). The study of second language acquisition (2nd Edition). Foreign Language Education Press. 
Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. 
Ellis, R. A., Goodyear, P., Calvo, R. A., & Prosser, M. (2008). Engineering students’ conceptions of and approaches to learning through discussions in face-to-face and online contexts. Learning and Instruction, 18(3), 267-282. 
	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.06.001
Falchikov, N. (2007). The place of peers in learning and assessment. In D. Boud & N. Falchikov (Eds.), Rethinking assessment in higher education: Learning for the longer term (pp.128-143). Routledge. 
Falchikov, N. (2013). Improving assessment through student involvement: Practical solutions for aiding learning in higher and further education. Routledge. 
Fani, T., & Ghaemi, F. (2011). Implications of Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development (ZPD) in teacher education: ZPTD and self-scaffolding. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1549-1554.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.396 
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191. 
	https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146
Febrian, I., & Abdullah, M. I. (2018). A systematic review of formative assessment 	tools in the BL environment. International Journal of Engineering and 	Technology, 7(4), 33-39. https://doi.org/10.14419/IJET.V7I4.11.20684
Feldon, D. (2007). Cognitive load and classroom teaching: The double-edged sword of automaticity. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 123-137. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461520701416173
Fidalgo-Blanco, A., Martinez-Nunez, M., Borras-Gene, O., & Sanchez-Medina, J. J. (2017). Micro flip teaching — An innovative model to promote the active involvement of students. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 713-723. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHB.2016.07.060
Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59(2), 	117-142. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543059002117
Fotos, S. (2006). Cognitive approaches to grammar instruction. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 267-283). Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. 
Frank, L. S., & John, E. H. (2015). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Sage Publications. 
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., Friedel, J., & Paris, A. (2005). School engagement. In K. A. Moore & L. Lippman (Eds.), What do children need to flourish?: Conceptualizing and measuring indicators of positive development (pp. 305-321). Springer. 
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. 

Gao, S. (2016). An empirical study on the teacher-supported group peer feedback for EFL writing in the context of blended instruction in a Chinese university.
Foreign Language and Literature Research, 2(2), 98-106. 
Garrison，D. R., & Kanuka，H. (2004). BL: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001 
Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). BL in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. Jossey-Bass. 
George, Y. (2003). Explaining English grammar. Shanghai Foreign Education Press. 
Ghazal, S., Al-Samarraie, H., & Aldowah, A. H. (2018). ‘‘I am still learning’’: Modeling LMS critical success factors for promoting students’ experience and satisfaction in a BL environment. IEEE Access, 6, 179-201. 
	https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2879677 
Gleason, J. (2013). Dilemmas of blended language learning: Learner and teacher experiences. CALICO Journal, 30(3), 323-341. 
Graham, C. R. (2006). BL systems: Definitions, current trends, and future directions. In C. Bonk & C. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of BL: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3-21). Pfeifer. 
Graham, C. R., & Robison, R. (2007). Realizing the transformational potential of BL: Comparing cases of transforming blends and enhancing blends in higher education. In A. G. Picciano & C. D. Dziuban (Eds.), BL: Research Perspectives (pp. 83-110). The Sloan Consortium. 



Graham, C. R., Woodfield, W., & Harrison, J. B. (2013). A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of BL in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 4-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.003   
Graham, S., & Nigel, M. (1999). The role of student learning styles, gender, attitudes and perceptions on information and communication technology assisted learning. Computers & Education, 33(4), 223-234. 
	https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(99)00020-2 
Grgurovic, M. (2011). BL in an ESL class: A case study. CALICO Journal, 29(1), 100-117. 
Grgurovic, M. (2017). Blended language learning: Research and practice. In C. A. Chapelle & S. Sauro (Eds.), Handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning (pp. 149-168). John Wiley & Sons.
Guo, Y. G., Lu, N., Wang, L., & Wang, K. (2023). Integration of online and offline: an all-round education mode with curriculum ideology and politics elements. Region — Educational Research and Reviews, 5(3), 194-201. http://dx.doi.org/10.32629/rerr.v5i3.1344 
Haijun, K., & Gyorke, A. (2008). Rethinking distance learning activities: A comparison of transactional distance theory and activity theory. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 23(2), 203-214. 
	http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680510802420050 
Halaweh, M. (2023). ChatGPT in education: Strategies for responsible implementation. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(2), ep421. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13036 


Halverson, L. R., Spring, K. J., Huyett, S., Henrie, C. R., & Graham, C. R. (2017). BL research in higher education and K-12 settings. In J. M. Spector, B. B. Lockee,  & M. D. Childress (Eds.), Learning, design, and technology (pp. 1-30). Springer. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_31-1 
Han, X. B., Wang, Y. P., & Jiang, L. (2019). Towards a framework for an institution-wide quantitative assessment of teachers’ online participation in BL implementation. The Internet and Higher Education, 42, 1-12. 
	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.03.003 
Han, Y. H., Xu, P. T., & Yu, Y. X. (2022). Development and integration of online and offline teaching in China. Journal of Xinjiang Open University, 1, 1-5. 
Hao, A. M., & Zhang, P. F. (2013). Application of mobile micro-learning theory in elementary English vocabulary learning. Journal of Electronics World, 20, 236-237. 
Heflin, H., Shewmaker, J., & Nguyen, J. (2017). Impact of mobile technology on student attitudes, engagement, and learning. Computers & Education, 107, 91-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.01.006 
Henrie, C. R., Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2015). Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers & Education 90, 36-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.005 
Herbert, C., Velan, G. M., Pryor, W. M., & Kumar, R. K. (2017). A model for the use of BL in large group teaching sessions. BMC Medical Education, 17(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-017-1057-2  
Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2014). Using BL evidence-based practices. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-089-6 

Hinkelman, D., & Gruba, P. (2012). Power within blended language learning programs in Japan. Language Learning & Technology, 16(2), 46-64. 
	http://dx.doi.org/10125/44286  
Ho, D. G. (2006). The focus group interview: Rising to the challenge in qualitative research methodology. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.2104/aral0605 
Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy in foreign language learning. Pergamon. 
Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (2000). The learning styles helper’s guide. Peter Honey Publications Ltd. 
Hong, K. H., & Samimy, K. K. (2010). The Influence of L2 teachers’ use of CALL modes on language learners’ reactions to BL. CALICO Journal, 27(2), 328-348. http://dx.doi.org/10.11139/cj.27.2.328-348 
Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2011). The Rise of K-12 BL. Innosight Institute. https://www.inacol.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/The-Rise-of-K-12-Blended-Learning.pdf. 
Horstmanshof, L., & Brownie, S. (2013). A scaffolded approach to discussion board use for formative assessment of academic writing skills. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(1), 61-73. 
	http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2011.604121 
Hsieh, S. C., Wu, V., & Marek, M. W. (2017). Using the flipped classroom to enhance EFL learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30, 1-25. 
Hu, Y. H., Lo, C. L., & Shih, S. P. (2014). Developing early warning systems to predict students’ online learning performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 469-478. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.002  

Huang, C. H. (2021). Using PLS-SEM model to explore the influencing factors of learning satisfaction in BL. Education Sciences, 11(5), 1-17.  
	http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/educsci11050249 
Huo, C. Q., & Shen, B. G. (2016). Teaching reform of English listening and speaking in China based on mobile micro-Learning. Creative Education, 6, 2221-2226.
Jacqueline, C. (2014) Online formative assessments as predictors of student academic success. [Doctoral Dissertation, Walden University]. 
https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2144&context=dissertations 
Job, M. A., & Ogalo, H. S. (2012). Micro learning as innovative process of knowledge strategy. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 1, 92-96. 
Junco, R., Heiberger, G., & Loken, E. (2011). The effect of twitter on college student engagement and grades. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(2), 119-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00387.x 
Jung, Y., & Lee, J. (2018). Learning engagement and persistence in massive open online courses (MOOCS). Computers & Education, 122, 9-22. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.013 
Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2012). Introduction: Activity theory and the changing 	face of HCI. In M. C. John (Ed.), Synthesis lectures on human-centered
informatics. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-02196-1_1 
Keller, J. (2008). First principles of motivation to learn and E3-learning. Distance Education, 29(2), 175-185. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910802154970 
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner. Deakin University Press. 
Kerres, M. (2007). Microlearning as a challenge for instructional design. Didactics of micro learning. In T. Hug & M. Lindner (Eds.), Didactics of microlearning 
 	 (pp. 3-6). Waxmann. https://learninglab.uni-due.de/sites/default/files/Microlearning-kerres_0.pdf 
Kilickaya, F. (2015). Computer-based grammar instruction in an EFL context: improving the effectiveness of teaching adverbial clauses. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(4), 325-340. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2013.818563 
Kim, T.Y. (2009). The dynamics of L2 self and L2 learning motivation: A qualitative case study of Korean ESL students. English Teaching, 64(3), 133-154. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.15858/engtea.64.3.200909.133 
Kippel, F. (2003). Teaching methods. In M. Byram (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of language teaching and learning (pp. 616-621). Routledge. 
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203219300 
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70. 
https://citejournal.org/volume-9/issue-1-09/general/what-is-technological-pedagogicalcontent-knowledge/ 
Klimova, B., & Toman, J. (2020). Effectiveness of the BL approach in teaching and learning selected EFL grammar structures at a university level–A case study. In K. S. S. Cheung, R. Li, K. Phusavat, & N, Paoprasert (Eds.), BL education in a smart learning environment (pp. 227-236). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51968-1_19

Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Kereluik, K., Shin, T. S., & Graham, C. R. (2014). The 	technological pedagogical content knowledge framework. In J. M. Spector, M. 	D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on 		educational communications and technology (pp. 101-111). Springer. 
Kotsiantis, S. B., Pierrakeas, C. J., & Pintelas, P. E. (2004). Predicting students’ performance in distance learning using machine learning techniques. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 18(5), 411-426. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/08839510490442058 
Krause, K-L. (2005). Engaged, inert or otherwise occupied? Deconstructing the 21st century undergraduate student. Sharing Scholarship in Learning and Teaching: Engaging Students Symposium, James Cook University, Townsville.
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., & Elizabeth, J. W. (2005) Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. Jossey-Bass. 
Lai, I. K., Hg, K., & Fong, J. S. (2017). A blended- experiential learning model: An 	action research case study. In S. K. S. Cheung, L. Kwok, W. W. K. Ma, L. K. Lee, 	& H. Yang (Eds.), Blended learning new challenges and innovative practices (pp. 	129-138). Springer.  	https://doi-org.ezproxy.lib.tku.edu.tw/10.1007/978-3-319-59360-9_12 
Lam, J. (2014). The context of blended learning: The TIPS blended learning model. In S. K. S. Cheung, J. Fong, & J. P. Zhanget (Eds.), Hybrid learning theory and practice (pp. 80-92). Springer. 
Lam, J., Lau, N., Yau, J., & Cheung, K. S. (2009). A survey on the readiness in adopting e-learning among teachers and students. In R. Kwan & F. L . Wang (Eds.), Hybrid learning: The new frontier (pp. 143-158). City University of Hong Kong. 
Lam, Y., & Lawrence, G. (2002). Teacher-student role redefinition during a computer-based second language project: Are computer catalysts for empowering change? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(3), 295-315. 
https://doi.org/10.1076/call.15.3.295.8185 
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1990). Techniques and principles in language teaching. World Publishing Corporation. 
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). Teaching grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 251-266). Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. 
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford University Press.  
Lee, E., Pate, J. A., & Cozart, D. (2015). Autonomy support for online student. Tech Trends, 59(4), 54-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11528-015-0871-9 
Lei, H., Cui, Y. H., & Zhou, W. Y. (2018). Relationships between student engagement and academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Social Behavior and Personality, 46(3), 517-528. http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.7054 
Levy, M. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning: Context and conceptualization. Clarendon Press.   
Li, L. (2022). Students’ academic achievement and satisfaction in a blended learning community of college English in China: A quasi-experimental study. Sage Open, 12(3), 1-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21582440221119485 
Li, R. (2022). Effects of blended language learning on EFL learners’ language performance: An activity theory approach. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(2), 1273-1285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12697 
Li, W. (2007). Sociocultural learning theories and information literacy teaching 	activities in higher education. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 47(2), 	149-158. http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/rusq.47n2.149 
Li, Z. S., & Yang, G. Y. (2018). Modern English teaching theory. Qinghua 	University Publishing House. 
Libbey, H. (2004). Measuring student relationship to school: Attachment, bonding, 	connectedness and engagement. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 274-283. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08284.x 
Lier, L. A. (2007). Action-based teaching, autonomy and identity. International Journal of Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 46-65. 
https://doi.org/10.2167/illt42.0 
Little, D. (1991). Learner autonomy 1: Definitions, issues and problems. Authentik. 
Little, D. (1994). Learner autonomy: A theoretical construct and its practical 
application. Die Neuere Sprache, 93(5), 430-442.
Liu, C. C., & Liu, Z. W. (2016). A creative design and implementation of student-led 	flipped classroom model in English learning. Theory and Practice in Language 	Studies, 6(10), 2036-2043. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0610.21       
Liu, J. X. (2010). Teachers’ code-switching to the L1 in EFL classroom. The Open
Applied Linguistic Journal, 3(1), 10-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874913501003010010 
Liu, M. H. (2016). Blended a class video blog to optimize student learning outcomes in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 30, 44-53. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.03.001 


Llorens, S., Schaufeli, W., Bakker, A., & Salanova, M. (2007). Does a positive gain spiral of resources, efficacy beliefs and engagement exist? Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 825-841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.11.012 
Lockyer, L., Heathcote, E., & Dawson, S. (2013). Informing pedagogical action: Aligning learning analytics with learning design. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1439-1459. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479367   
Manfra, M. M., & Bullock, D. K. (2014). Action research for educational 	communications and technology. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. 	J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and 		technology (pp. 161-172). Springer. 	http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_14 
Mann, S. (2011). A critical review of qualitative interviews in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 32(1), 6-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amq043    
Manwaring, K. C., Larsen, R., Graham, C. R., Henrie, C. R., & Halverson, L. R. 	(2017). Investigating student engagement in BL settings using experience 	sampling and structural equation modeling. The Internet and Higher
Education, 35(4), 21-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.06.002 
Marjanovic, O. (1999). Learning and teaching in a synchronous collaborative environment. Journal of Computer Learning, 15, 129-138. 
McAuley, A., Stewart, B., Siemens, G., & Cormier, D. (2010). The MOOC model for digital practice. University of Prince Edward Island.  http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/MOOC_Final.pdf 



McBrien, J., Jones, P., & Rui, C. (2009). Virtual spaces: Employing a synchronous online classroom to facilitate student engagement in online learning. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 10(3), 1-17.
http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v10i3.605 
McLeod, S. (2024, August 9). Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/zone-of-proximal-development.html 
Meyer, K. A. (2014). Student engagement in online learning: What works and why. ASHE Higher Education Report, 40(6), 1-114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aehe.20018 
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x 
Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Zhao, Y. (2007). Faculty Development by design: Integrating technology in higher education. Information Age Pub. 
Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2010). Learning outcomes and students’ perceptions of online writing: simultaneous implementation of a forum, blog, wiki in an EFL  BL setting. System, 38(2), 185-199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.03.006 
Mohan, B. A. (1986). Language and content. Addison Wesley. 
Moore, M. G. (2018). The theory of transactional distance. In G. M. Micheal, & C. D. William (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 30-45). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315296135 
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A system view. Wadsworth. 
Moran, E., & Gonyea, T. (2003) The influence of academically-focused peer interaction on college students’ development. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED478773.
Moskal, P., Dziuban, C., & Hartman, J. (2013). BL: A dangerous idea? The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 15-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.001  
Motteram, G., & Sharma, P. (2009). BL in a web 2.0 world. International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society, 7(2), 83-96. 
Murday, K., Eiko, U., & Chenoweth, A. N. (2008). Learners’ and teachers’ perspectives on language online. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(2),  125-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588220801943718 
Mutlu-Bayraktar, D., Cosgun, V., & Altan, T. (2019). Cognitive load in multimedia learning environments: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 141, 103618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103618 
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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0958344005000224 
Newman, R. S., & Schwager, M. T. (1993). Students’ perceptions of the teacher and classmates in relation to reported help seeking in math class. The Elementary School Journal, 94(1), 3-17. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1086/461747 
Nissen, E., & Tea, E. (2012). Going blended: New challenges for second generation L2 tutors. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(2), 145-163. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.636052 
Nguyen, L.V. (2010). Computer mediated collaborative learning within a communicative language teaching approach: A sociocultural perspective. Asian EFL Journal, 12, 202-233. http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/  
Nguyen, T. K. A. (2024). Enhancing IELTS speaking skills through blended learning: A pedagogical action research. Education, Language and Sociology Research, 5 (1), 31-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/elsr.v5n1p31 
Norberg, A., Dziuban, C. D., & Moskal, P. D. (2011). A time-based blended learning model. On the Horizon, 19(3), 207-216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10748121111163913 
Owston, R. (2013). Blended learning policy and implementation: Introduction to the special issue. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 1-3. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IHEDUC.2013.03.002 
Owston, R., York, D., & Murtha, S. (2013). Student perceptions and achievement in a university blended learning strategic initiative. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 38-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.003  
Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1 
Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2004). Cognitive load theory: Instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32(1), 1-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021806.17516.d0 
Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2014). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning . In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 19-29). Cambridge University Press. 
Panadero, E., & Brown, G. T. L. (2017). Teachers’ reasons for using peer assessment: positive experience predicts use. European Journal of Psychology Education, 32(1), 133-156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10212-015-0282-5 
Park, Y. J., & Doo, M. Y. (2024). Role of AI in blended learning: A systematic literature review. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 25(1), 165-196. 
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research. Jossey-Bass. 
Patrick, P. J. C. (2003). Action research. Continuum. 
Phan, H. (2010). A theoretical perspective of learning in the Pacific context: A 	sociocultural perspective. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational 	Psychology, 8(1), 411-428. http://dx.doi.org/10.25115/ejrep.v8i20.1374
Powell, A. (2011). A case study of E-learning initiatives in New Zealand’s secondary 	schools. [Doctoral dissertation, Pepperdine University]. 
http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw.ezproxy.lib.tku.edu.tw/cgi-bin2/Libo.cgi?  
Qin, X. Q., & Bi, J. (2015). Quantitative approaches and quantitative data analysis in L2 research. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. 
Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. A. (2020). Challenges in the online 		component of blended learning: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 	144(1), 1-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103701   
Ravenscroft, B., & Luhanga, U. (2018). Enhancing student engagement through an 	institutional blended learning initiative: A case study. Teaching & Learning 	Inquiry, 6(2), 97-144. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.6.2.8 
Roblyer, M. D., Freeman, J., Donaldson, M. B., & Maddox, M. (2007). A comparison 	of outcomes of virtual school courses offered in synchronous and asynchronous 	formats. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(4), 261-268. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.08.003 

Roccoa, S. (2010). Making reflection public: Using interactive online discussion board to enhance student learning. Reflective Practice,11(3), 307-317. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2010.487374 
Rodriguez, M., Ooms, A., & Montanez, M. (2008). Students’ perceptions of online-learning quality given comfort, motivation, and experience. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 7(2), 105-125. 
Rosenthal, R. (1973). The pygmalion effect lives. Psychology Today, 7(4), 56-60. 
Rovai, A. (2009). The Internet and higher education. Chandos Publishing. 
Sarmiento-Campos, N. V., Lazaro-Guillermo, J. C., Silvera-Alarcon, N. V., 
Cuellar-Quispe, S., Huaman-Romani, Y. L., Apaza, O. A., & Sorkheh, A. (2022). A look at Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory (SCT): The effectiveness of scaffolding method on EFL learners’ speaking achievement. Education Research International, 2022, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3514892 
Shen, Y. (2024). Examining the efficacies of instructor-designed instructional videos in flipped classrooms on student engagement and learning outcomes: An empirical study. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(4), 1791-1850. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12987 
Shiffrin, R., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84(2), 127-190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.127 
Siemens, G., & Gasevic, D. (2012). Special issue on learning and knowledge analytics. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 1-163. 


Simonova, I. (2019). Blended approach to learning and practising English grammar 	with technical and foreign language university students: Comparative study. 		Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 31(12), 249-272. 		https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-019-09219-w 
Smith, B., & Lafford, B. A. (2009). The evaluation of scholarly activity in 	computer-assisted language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 93(s1), 		868-883. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00978.x 
Snodin, N. S. (2013). The effects of BL with a CMS on the development of autonomous learning: A case study of different degrees of autonomy achieved by individual learners. Computers & Education, 61, 209-216. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.004 
So, H. J., & Brush, T. A. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a BL environment: Relationships and critical factors. Computers & Education, 51(1), 318-336. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.05.009 
Spring, K. J., Graham, C. R., & Hadlock, C. A. (2016). The current landscape of international BL. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 8(1), 84-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2016.075961 
Stein, J., & Graham, C. R. (2014). Essentials for blended learning a standard-based 
guide. Taylor & Francis. 
Stern, H. H., Allen, P., & Harley, B. (1992). Issues and options in language 	teaching. Oxford University Press. 
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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0958344007000511 
Stringer, E. L. (2007). Action research. Sage. 
Sun, J. C. Y., & Rueda, R. (2012). Situational interest, computer self-efficacy and self-regulation: Their impact on student engagement in distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 191-204. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01157.x 
Sun, Y. P., & Nam, H. K. (2022). University students’ self-regulation, engagement 	and performance in flipped learning. European Journal of Training and 	Development, 46 (1/2), 22-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-08-2020-0129 
Sun, Y. Z., Tang, J. L., & Cai, J. (2017). Promote literal education at universities: A blended modal instruction approach. Technology Enhanced Foreign Language Education, 2, 8-15.  
Suziki, K., Nishibuchi, A., Yamamoto, H., & Keller, J. M. (2004). Development and 	evaluation of a website to check instructional design based on the ARCS 	Motivation Model. Journal of the Japanese Society for Information and Systems 	in Education, 2(1), 63-69. 	http://www.gsis.kumamoto-u.ac.jp/ksuzuki/resume/journals/2004b.pdf 
Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123-138. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5 
Sweller, J., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 261-292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5 



Syukri, N. R. M., Pratiwi, Y., Ariyanto, E. F., Bashari, M. H., Achadiyani, A., Ghozali, M., & Rahman, P. H. (2021). Correlation between weekly formative and summative assessment of medical students in multidisciplinary examination and oral examination reproductive system block. The Indonesia Journal of Medical Education, 10(3), 298-305. http://dx.doi.org/10.22146/jpki.62850 
Tabatabaee-Yazdi, M. (2022). Diagnostic classification modeling of EFL learners’ online learning performances during COVID-19 pandemic: Individual vs. interactive learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(4), 1234-1246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2116053 
Tomlinson, C. A. (2004). How to differentiate instruction in mixed ability classrooms. Prentice Hall. 
Tsai, Y. R. (2015). Applying the technology acceptance model (TEM) to explore the effects of a course management system (CMS)-Assisted EFL writing instruction. CALICO Journal, 32(1), 153-171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/cj.v32i1.153-171 
Turuk, M. (2008). The relevance and implications of Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory 	in the second language classroom. Annual Review of Education, Communication 	& Language Sciences, 5, 244-262. 
Virtanen, P., & Nevgi, A. (2010). Disciplinary and gender differences among higher education students in self-regulated learning strategies. An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 30(3), 323-347. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/01443411003606391 
Vorobel, O., & Kim, D. (2012). Language teaching at a distance: An overview of research. CALICO Journal, 29(3), 548-562. http://dx.doi.org/10.11139/cj.29.3.548-562 

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. 
Wang, S. G., & Vasquez, C. (2012). Web 2.0 and second language learning: What does the research tell us? CALICO Journal, 29(3), 412-430. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.11139/cj.29.3.412-430 
Wanner, T., & Palmer, E. (2018). Formative self-and peer assessment for improved student learning: The crucial factors of design, teacher participation and feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(7), 1032-1047. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1427698 
Warschauer, M. (1998). Research technology in TESOL: Determinist, instrumental, and critical approaches. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 757-761. 
https://doi.org/10.2307/3588010 
Wasoh, F. (2016). Exploring the roles of blended learning as an approach to improve 	teaching and learning English. Proceedings of the Multidisciplinary Academic 	Conference, 165-171. 
Wichadee, S. (2013). Facilitating students’ learning with hybrid instruction: Comparison among four learning styles. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 11(1), 99-116. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.25115/ejrep.v11i29.1559 
Widdowson, H. G. (1991). Aspects of language teaching. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press. 
Williams, K. M ., Stafford, R. E., Corliss, S. B., & Reilly, E. D. (2018). Examining student characteristics, goals, and engagement in massive open online courses. Computer & Education, 126, 433-442. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.08.014 
Wold, K. A. (2011). Blending theories for instructional design: Creating and implementing the structure, environment, experience, and people (SEEP) model. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(4) , 371-382.  
https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.572900 
Xu, D., Glick, D., Rodriguez, F., Cung, B., Li, Q. J., & Warschauer, M. (2020). Does blended instruction enhance English language learning in developing countries? Evidence from Mexico. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(1), 211-227. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12797 
Yang, F., Wei, X., & Zhang, W. X. (2017). An exploration of blended English teaching model. Technology Enhanced Foreign Language Education, 173, 21-28. 
Yang, L. X., Wang, S. E., Chang, H. C., & Sheng, J. (2013). Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. 
Yang, Y. (2024, March 18-20). An action research on blended learning model applied to the course teaching. [Paper Presented]. The 12th International Conference on Information and Education Technology, Yamaguchi, Japan. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIET60671.2024.10542720 
Yang, Y. F. (2012). Blended learning for college students with English reading difficulties. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(5), 393-410.
 https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.597767 
Yang, Y. F. (2014). Preparing language teachers for blended teaching of summary writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(3), 185-206.  
https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.701633 
Young, J. R. (2002). “Hybrid” teaching seeks to end the divide between traditional and online instruction. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 48(28), A33-A34.  http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/recordDetail?\accno=EJ645445  
Yu, H. (2023). Reflection on whether ChatGPT should be banned by academia from the perspective of education and teaching. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1181712. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1181712  
Zainuddin, Z., & Attaran, M. (2016). Malaysian students’ perceptions of flipped classroom: A case study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(6), 660-670. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2015.1102079 
Zepke, N., & Leach, L. (2010). Improving student engagement: Ten proposals for action. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(3), 167-177. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1469787410379680 
Zeqiri, J., Kareva, V., & Alija, S. (2021). Blended learning and student satisfaction: The moderating effect of student performance. Business System Research, 12(2), 79-94. https://doi.org/10.2478/bsrj-2021-0020  
Zhang, Z. B. (2018). A new English grammar coursebook. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press. 
Zhao, Y. (2003). Recent developments in technology and language learning: A literature review and meta-analysis. CALICO Journal, 21(1), 7-27. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/cj.v21i1.7-27 
Zheng, R., McAlack, M., Wilmes, B., Kohler-Evans, P., & Williamson, J. (2009). Effects of multimedia on cognitive load, self-efficacy, and multiple rule-based problem solving. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(5), 790-803.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00859.x 

Žufic, J., & Jurcan, B. (2015, September 23-25). Micro learning and EduPsy LMS. [Paper Presented]. Central European Conference on Information and Intelligent Systems, Varaždin, Croatia. https://www.proquest.com/conference-papers-proceedings/micro-learning-edupsy-lms/docview/1759330913/se-2?accountid=27338