Adiv, E. (1980) Analysis of second language performance in two types of immersion programs. Bulletin of the Canadian Association ofApplied Linguistics2:139-52.
2.
Allen, P., Cummins. J., Harley, B.Lapkin, S. & Swain, M. (1989). Restoring the balance: a response to Hammerly . The Canadian Modem Language Review45, 770-776.
3.
Anderson, J.R. (1980) Cognitive Psychology and its implications. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
4.
d'Anglejan, A., & Renaud, C. (1985). Learner characteristics and second language acquisition . Language Learning, 35, 1-2.
5.
Beretta, A. (1989). Attention to form or meaning? Error treatment in the Bangalore Project. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 283-303.
6.
Beretta, A. (1991). Theory construction in SLA: complementarity and opposition. "Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 493-511.
7.
Beretta, A.( 1992) Evalauation of language education: An overview. In (Eds.) Alderson, J.C., & Beretta, A.Evaluating Second Language Education . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Beretta, A., and Davies, A. (1985). Evaluation of the Bangalore Project, TheEnglish Language Teaching Journal, 39, 121-127.
9.
Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). What is the logical problem of foreign language learning. In (Eds.) Gass, S.M & Schachter, J.Linguistics Perspectives in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Brumfitt, C. (1984). The Bangalore procedural syllabus, The English TeachingLanguage Journal, 38, 233-240.
11.
Bruton, A. & Samuda, V. (1980). Learner and teacher roles in the treatment of error in group work. RELC Journal, 11, 49-63.
12.
Buczowska, E., & Weist, R.M. (1991). The effects of formal instruction on the second-language acquisition of temporal location. Language Learning, 41, 535-554.
13.
Casey, D.J. 91968). The effectiveness of teaching English as a foreign language to some Finnish secondary schools. Unpublished report, University of Helsinki.
14.
Chastain, K. (1971). The development of modem language skills: Theory to practice. Philadelphia: Center for Curriculum Development.
15.
Chastain, K.D. & Woerdehoff, F.J.A. (1968). A methodological study comparing the audio-lingual habit theory and the cognitive code-learning theory - a continuation. Modem Language Journal, 52, 268-279.
16.
Chaudron, C. (1985). Intake: On models and methods for discovering learners' processing of input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7,1-14.
17.
Chaudron, C. (1986). The interaction of quantitative and qualititive approaches to research: A view of the second language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 20,709-717.
18.
Chaudron, C. (1988). Second Language Classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19.
Cohen, A.D. (1974). The Culver City Spanish immersion program: The first two years. Modern Language Journal58, 95-103.
20.
Cohen, A.D. (1976). The acquisition of Spanish grammar through immersion: Some findings after four years. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 32, 562-574.
21.
Collier, V.P. (1992). The Canadian bilingual immersion debate: A synthesis of research findings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition14:87-97.
22.
Day, E.M., & Shapson, S.M. (1991). Integrating formal and functional approaches to language teaching in French immersion: An experimental study. Language Learning, 41,25-58.
23.
Doughty C. & Pica, T., (1986). Information gap tasks: Do they facilitate second language acquisition?TESOL Quarterly20(2), 305-325.
24.
Dulay, H.C., Burt, M.K., & Krashen, S.D. (1982). Language Two. New York: Oxford University Press.
25.
Duskova, L., and Benes, E. (1968). Audiooralni versus Kogntivni metoda. Cizi Jazyky Skole, 12, 362-65.
26.
Ellis, R. (1985) Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27.
Fisiak, J. (Ed.) 1981. Contrastive Linguistics and the Language Teacher. Oxford: Pergamon.
28.
Freedman, E.S. (1975). Experimentation into foreign language teaching methodology. Paper presented at the British Association for Applied Linguistics. York, U.K.
29.
Greenwood, J. (1985). Bangalore revisited: a reluctant complaint, The English Language Teaching Journal39, 268-273.
30.
Gregg, K. (1984). Krashen's monitor and Occam's razor. Applied Linguistics, 5, 79-100.
31.
Griffiths, R.T., and Sheen, R. (1992). Disembedded figures in the landscape: A reappraisal of L2 research on field dependence/ independence. Applied Linguistics, 13, 133-48.
32.
Hammerly, H. (1989a). French Immersion (Does it work?) and the Development of Bilingual Proficiency Report. Canadian Modern Language Review45, 567-578.
33.
Hammerly, H. (1989b) Toward fluency and accuracy: A response to Allen et al. The Canadian Modem Language Review, 45, 776-783.
34.
Hammerly, H. (1989c). French Immersion: Myths and Reality. Calgary, Alberta: Datselig Enterprises.
35.
Harley, B. (1989). Functional grammar in French immersion: A classroom experiment. Applied Lingustics, 10, 331-359.
36.
Harley, B., & Swain, M. (1984). The interlanguage of immersion students and its implicaitons for second language teaching. In Davies, A., Criper, C., & Howatt, A.P.R. (Eds.) Interlanguage. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
37.
Henning, G. (1986). Quantitative methods in language acquisition research . TESOL Quarterly, 20, 710-718.
38.
Ioup, G. (1984). Testing the relationship of formal instruction to the input hypothesis. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 345-350.
39.
Johnson, K. (1988). Mistake correction. English Language Teaching Journal, 42, 89-96.
40.
Krashen, S.D. (1980). The input hypothesis, In (Ed) James E. Alatis, Georgetown Roundtable on Language and Linguistics, 168-80.
41.
Krashen, S.D. (1981). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
42.
Krashen, S.D. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition . New York: Pergamon Press.
43.
Lapkin, SM, & Swain, M. (1983). The Trial Balloon That Flew.(co-sponsored by Canadian Parents for French). Toronto: OISE Press.
44.
Levin, L. (1972). Comparative studies in foreign language teaching . Stockholm: Almquist & Wiksell .
45.
Lightbown, P.M. (1984a) Input and acquisition in second language classrooms . TESL Canada Journal, 2, 55-67.
46.
Lightbown, P. (1984b). The relationship between theory and method in second language acquisition research. In A. Davies, C. Criper & A.P.R. Howatt (Eds.) Interlanguage (pp. 241-252) Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
47.
Lightbown, P.M., Spada, N., & Wallace, R., (1980) Some effects of instruction on child and adolescent ESL learners. In (Eds.) Sarcella, R.C., & Krashen, S.D.Research in Second Language Acquisition. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
48.
Long, M.H. (1980). Inside the "black box": methodological issued in classroom research on language learning. Language Learning , 30, 1-42.
49.
Long, M.H. (1983). Does second language instruction make a difference? A review of research. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 359-382.
50.
Long, M.H. (1988). Process and product in ESL program evaluation . TESOL Quarterly, 18(3), 409-425.
51.
Long. M.H. (1988). Instructed interlanguage development. In Beebe, L.M. (Ed.) Issues in Second Language Acquisition - Multiple Perspectives. New York : Newbury House.
52.
Long, M.H. (1989). Task, group and task group interactions. Plenary given at the RELC Annual Conference in Singapore.
53.
Long, M.H., & Porter, P. (1985). Group work, interlanguage talk, and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19207-228.
54.
Long, M.H., & Crookes, G. (1992). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design . TESOL Quarterly, 24, 27-56.
55.
McKinnon, K.R. (1965). An experimental study of the learning of syntax in second language learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.
56.
McLaughlin, B. (1978). The monitor model: Some methodological considerations . Language Learning, 28, 309-332.
57.
Meisel, H., Clahsen, H., & Pienemann, M. (1981). On determining developmental stages in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition , 3, 109-135.
58.
Mueller, T.H. (1971). The effectiveness of two learning models: the audio lingual theory and the cognitive code-learning theory. In P. Pimsleur and T. Quinn (Eds) The psychology of second language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
59.
Nunan, D. (1991). Language Teaching Methodology. New York: Prentice Hall.
60.
Ochsner, R. (1979). A poetics of second language acquisition. Language Learning, 29, 53-80.
61.
Oskarsson, M. (1972). Comparative method studies in foreign language teaching. Moderna Sprak, 66, 350-366.
62.
Pavesi, M. (1984). Linguistic markedness, discoursal modes, and relative clause formation in a formal and an informal context. Paper presented at the IRAAL-BAAL Seminar on the formal and informal contexts of language learning. Dublin, Ireland.
63.
Pawley, C. (1985). How bilingual are French immersion students. The Canadian Modem Language Review, 41, 856-76.
64.
Pellerin, M., & Hammerly, H. (1986). L'expression orale aprestreize ans d'immersion française. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 42, 592-606.
65.
Pica, T.( 1983). Adult acquisition of English as a second language under different conditions of exposure. Language Learning, 33, 465-497.
66.
Pica, T., and Doughty, C. (1985). Input and interaction in the communicative language classroom: A comparison of teacher-fronted and group activities. In Gass, S., and Madden, C. (Eds.) Input and Second Language Acquisition. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
67.
Pienemann, M. (1989). Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments and hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 10, 52-79.
68.
Porter, P.A. (1983). Variations in the conversations of adult learners. Ph.D. Dissertation. Stanford University.
69.
Prabhu, N.S. (1982). The communication teaching project, South India. Mimeo, Madras: The British Council .
70.
Reid, J. (1990). The dirty laundry of ESL survey research. TESOL Quarterly, 24. 323-38.
71.
Rutherford, W., & Sharwood Smith, M. (Eds.) 1988. Grammar in Second Language Teaching: A Book ofReadings. New York: Harper and Row.
72.
Santos, T. (1989). Replication in applied linguistic research. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 699-702.
73.
Schachter, J. (1988). Second language acquisition and its relationship to universal grammar. Applied Linguistics, 9, 219-235.
74.
Schachter, J., Tyson, A. & Diffley, F. (1976). Learner intuitions of grammaticality, Language Learning, 26, 67-76.
75.
Scherer, G.A.C. & Wertheimer, M.A. (1964). A psycholinguistic experiment in language teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.
76.
Seliger, H.W., & Shohamy, E. (1989). Second Language Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
77.
Sheen, R. (forthcoming) The advantages of exploiting contrastive analysis in teaching and learning a foreign language, IRAL, May, 1994.
78.
Sjoberg, K., & Trope, B. (1969). The value of external direction and individual discovery in learning situations: The learning of a grammatical rule. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 13, 233-240.
79.
Smith. P.D. Jr. (1970). A comparison of the cognitive and audio-lingual approaches to foreign language instruction. The Pennsylvania Foreign Language Project. Philadelphia: The Center for Curriculum Development.
80.
Spilka, I.V. (1976). Assessment of second-language performance in immersion programs. The Canadian Modem Language Review, 32, 543-61.
81.
Spolsky, B. (1989). Conditions for second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
82.
Swaffer, J.K., Arens, K., & Morgan, M. (1982). Teacher classroom practices: Redefining method as task hierarchy. Modem Language Journal, 66, 24-33.
83.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: some roles of comprehensible input and output in its development. In Gass, S., and Madden C. (Eds.) Input and Second Language Acquisition. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
84.
Tucker, G.R., Lambert, W.E., & Rigault, A. (1969). Students' acquisition of French gender distinctions . IRAL, 7, 51-55. Van Patten, B. (1988). How juries get hung: Problems with the evidence for a focus on form in teaching . Language Learning, 38, 243-260.
85.
Van Patten, B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 287-301.
86.
Von Elek, T. & Oskarsson, M. (1973). Teaching Foreign Language Grammar to Adults: A Comparative Study. Almquist & Wiksell:Stockholm.
87.
White, L. (1987). Against comprehensible input: The input hypothesis and the development of second language competence. Applied Linguistics, 8,95-110.
88.
Wolfson, N. (1986). Research methodology and the question of validity . TESOL Quarterly, 20,689-699.
89.
Xiem, N.V. (1969). The role of explanation in the teaching of the grammar of a foreign language: An experimental study of two techniques. Unpublished thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.
