References :

Ahmed, M. K. (1994). Speaking as cognitive regulation: A Vygotskian perspective on dialogic communication. In J. P. Lantolf and G. Appel (Eds). Vygotskian Approaches to Second Language Research, 157–171. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Alderson, J. Charles (2005). Diagnosing Foreign Language Proficiency: The Interface Between Learning and Assessment. Continuum, London.

Aljaafreh, A. and Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. Modern Language Journal 78 (4): 465–483. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02064.x

Antón, M. (2009). Dynamic assessment of advanced language learners. Foreign Language Annals 42 (3): 576–598. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2009.01030.x

Behan, L., Turnbull, M. and Spek, J. (1997). The proficiency gap in late immersion extended French: Language use in collaborative tasks. Le journal de l’immersion 20: 41–42.

Black, P. J. and Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles Policy and Practice 5 (1): 7–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102

Black, P. J. and Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan 80 (2): 139–148.

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B. and Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for Learning: Putting It into Practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Brooks, L. (2009). Interacting in pairs in a test of oral proficiency: Co-constructing a better performance. Language Testing 26 (3): 341–366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265532209104666

Brooks, L., Swain, M., Lapkin, S., and Knouzi, I. (2010). Mediating between scientific and spontaneous concepts through languaging. Language Awareness 19 (2): 89–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09658410903440755

Büchel, F.P. and Scharnhorst, U. (1993). The learning potential assessment device (LPAD): Discussion of theoretical and methodological problems. In J. H. M. Hamers, K. Sijtsma and A. J. J. M. Ruijssenaars (Eds), Learning Potential Assessment: Theoretical, Methodological and Practical Issues, Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.

Chaiklin, S., (2003). The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky’s theory of learning and school instruction. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev and S. M. Miller (Eds), Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context, 39–64. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840975.004

Chen, Y. (2008). Learning to self-assess oral performance in English: A longitudinal case study. Language Teaching Research 12 (2): 235–262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168807086293

Chung, M. K. (2000). The development of self-regulated learning. Asia Pacific Education Review 1 (1): 55–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF03026146

De Guerrero, M.C.M. and Villamil, O. S. (2000). Activating the ZPD: Mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal 84 (1): 51–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00052

Deci, E. L. and Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determinaton in Human Behaviour. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7

Deci, E. and Ryan, R. (Eds), (2002). Handbook of Self-determination Research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

Davydov, V. V. (2004). Problems of Developmental Instruction. A Theoretical and Experimental Psychological Study (translated by Peter Moxhay). Mosow: Akademia Press.

Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding In Second Language Learning . In J. P. Lantolf and G. Appel (Eds), Vygotskyan Approaches To Second Language Research, 33–56. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Donato, R. (2004). Aspects of collaboration in pedagogical discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 24: 284–302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S026719050400011X

Donato, R. and Lantolf, J. P. (1990). The dialogic origins of L2 monitoring. In L. F. Bouton and Y. Kachru (Eds), Pragmatics and Language Learning, 83–97. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois.

Ehrman, M. and Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Interpersonal Dynamics in Second Language Education: The Visible and Invisible Classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gal’perin, P. Ia. (1967). On the notion of internalization. Soviet Psychology 5 (3): 28–33.

Gal’perin, P. Ia (1979). The role of orientation in thought. Soviet Psychology 18 (2): 19–45.

Guterman, E. (2002). Toward dynamic assessment of reading: Applying metacognitive awareness guidance to reading assessment tasks. Journal of Research in Reading 25 (3): 283–298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.00176

Kozulin, A. (1998). Psychological Tools: A Sociocultural Approach to Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kozulin, A. (2003). Psychological tools and mediated learning. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev and S. M. Miller (Eds), Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context, 15–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840975.003

Lantolf, J. P. (Ed.) (2000). Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lantolf, J. P. (2009). Dynamic assessment: The dialectical integration of instruction and assessment. Language Teaching, 42 (3): 355–368. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0261444808005569

Lantolf, J. P. and Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment of L2 development: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1 (1): 49–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/japl.1.1.49.55872

Lantolf, J. P. and Poehner, M. E. (2008). Introduction to sociocultural theory and the teaching of second languages. In J. P Lantolf and M. E. Poehner (Eds) Sociocultural Theory and the Teaching of Second Languages. London: Equinox Press.

Lantolf, J. and Pavlenko, A. (2001) (S)econd (L)anguage (A)ctivity Theory: Understanding Second Language Learners as people. In: M. Breen (Ed.) Learner Contributions to Language Learning: New Directions in Research, 141–158. London: Longman.

Lantolf, J. P. and S. L. Thorne. (2006). Sociocultural Theory and the Genesis of Second Language Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Luoma, S. (2004). Assessing Speaking. Cambridge Language assessment series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733017

Minick, N. (1987). Implications of Vygotsky’s theories for dynamic assessment. In C. S. Lidz (Ed.), Dynamic Assessment: An Interactive Approach to Evaluating Learning Potential. New York: The Guilford Press.

Negueruela, E. and J. P. Lantolf. (2006). A concept-based approach to teaching Spanish grammar. In R. Salaberry and B. Lafford (Eds), Spanish Second Language Acquisition: State of the Art, 79–102. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Newman, D., Griffen, P. and M. Cole. (1989). The Construction Zone: Working for Cognitive Change in School. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Norton, B. (2000). Identity and Language Learning: Gender, Ethnicity and Educational Change. Harlow: Longman/Pearson Education Limited.

Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second Language Acquisition Processes in the Classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Poehner, M. E. (2005). Dynamic assessment of oral proficiency among advanced L2 learners of French (L. S. Vygotsky). PhD dissertation, Pennsylvania State University.

Poehner, M. E. (2009). Group dynamic assessment for foreign language pragmatics. TESOL Quarterly 43: 471–492.

Poehner, M. E. (2012). The zone of proximal development and the genesis of self-assessment. The Modern Language Journal 96 (4): 610–622. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01393.x

Poehner, M. E. and Lantolf, J. P. (2010) Vygotsky’s teaching-assessment dialectic and L2 education: The case for dynamic assessment, Mind, Culture, and Activity 17 (4): 312–330. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10749030903338509

Rea-Dickins, P. M. (2001). Mirror, mirror on the wall: Identifying processes of classroom assessment. Language Testing 18 (4): 429–462. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026553220101800407

Rea-Dickins, P. M. (2007). Classroom-based assessment: possibilities and pitfalls. In J. Cummins and C. Davison (Eds), The International Handbook of English Language Teaching, 1, 505–520. Norwell, MA: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-46301-8_36

Rea-Dickins, P. M. and Gardner, S. (2000). Snares and silver bullets: disentangling the construct of formative assessment. Language Testing 17 (2): 215–243. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026553220001700206

Rico Cruz, M. L. and Ávila Pardo, M. (2014). Self-regulation within language learners’ dialogues. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal 5 (4): 372–388.

Roth, G., Assor, A., Kanat-Maymon, Y., and Kaplan, H. (2007). Autonomous motivation for teaching: How self-determined teaching may lead to self-determined learning. Journal of Educational Psychology 99 (4): 761–774. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.4.761

Siegler, R. S. (2006). Microgenetic analyses of learning. In W. Damon, R. Lerner, D. Kuhn, and R. S. Siegler (Eds) Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol 2. Cognition, Perception, and Language (6th edn), 464–510. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Steiner, J. (2001). Rubric for Assessing Oral Social Interaction. Retrieved from http://cms.education.gov.il/EducationCMS/Units/Mazkirut_Pedagogit/English/ Bagrut/OralExam/Rubrics.htm

Sternberg, R. J. and Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Dynamic Testing: The Nature and Measurement of Learning Potential. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning, 97–114. New York: Oxford University Press.

Swain, M. (2001). Examining dialogue: Another approach to content specification and to validating inferences drawn from test scores. Language Testing 18 (3): 275–302.

Swain, M., Brooks, L., and Tocalli-Beller, A. (2002). Peer-peer dialogue as a means of second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 22: 171–185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0267190502000090

Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. (2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, and M. Swain (Eds), Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning, Teaching and Testing, 99–118. Harlow: Pearson Education.

Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research 37 (3–4): 285–304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00006-5

Swain, M., Lapkin, S., Knousi, I., Susuki, W., and Brooks, L. (2009). Languaging: University students learn the grammatical concept of voice in French. The Modern Language Journal 93 (1): 5–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00825.x

Swain, M., Kinnear, P., and Steinman, L. (2010). Sociocultural Theory in Second Language Education: An Introduction through Narratives. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Textbooks.

Taylor, L. and Wigglesworth, G. (2009). Are two heads better than one? Pair work in L2 assessment contexts. Language Testing 26 (3): 325–339. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265532209104665

Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and Language. Newly revised and edited by A. Kozulin. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Original work published in 1934.

Wells, G. (1999). The zone of proximal development and its implications for learning and teaching. In G. Wells (Ed.) Dialogic Inquiry: Toward a Sociocultural Practice and Theory of Education, 313–334. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511605895.012

Williams, M. J. (2000). Exploring the source of self-regulated learning: The influence of internal and external comparisons. Journal of Instructional Psychology 27 (1): 47–51.

Winne, P. H. and Perry, N. E. (2000) Measuring self-regulated learning. In P. Pintrich, M. Boekaerts, and M. Zeidner (Eds), Handbook of Self-regulation, 532–569. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.