1. Gholipoor, R.,& Aghabozorgi, M. (2005). A report on the Article for Student Selection Program of Iranian’s Universities. Research Center of the Parliament Archive.
2. Hajforoush, A. (2002, May). Negative consequences of entranceexams on instructionalobjectives and a proposal for removing them.Proceedings of Esfahan University Conference on Evaluating the Issues of the Entrance Exams,Esfahan University, 77-125.
3. The Council of Iran’s Expediency (2005). Iran’s 20-year vision. Retrieved from http://www.majma.ir/Contents.aspx?p=67ee04aa-7171-4f72-bdf7-e6f68c3547e5.
4. Supreme Council of Cultural Revolution of Islamic Republic of Iran (2009).Iran’s comprehensivescience roadmap. Retrieved from http://www.iranculture.org/fa/Default.aspx?current=viewDoc¤tID=736
5. Kia, A.,&Bozorgi, K. (2006). Comments on the proposal for student admission to higher education universities. Research Center of the Parliament Report 8247.
6. Kiamanesh, A. R. (2000). Educational evaluation. Tehran: Payam-e Noor Publication.
7. Ministry of Education of Islamic Republic of Iran (2009). Roadmap of the official and general education. Retrieved from http://www.sce.ir/.
8. Shojaee, M.,&Gholipoor, R. (2005). Recommend draft of applying university student system survey and designing acceptance model of university student. Research Center of the Parliament Report 7624.
9. The Parliament of Islamic Republic of Iran (2007).The Act of student admission to universities. Parliament Achieve132730.
10. Ministry of Education of Islamic Republic of Iran (2008).The document of innovations in the ministry of education of Iran. Ministry Archive.
11. The Document of National Curriculum (2010).Ministry of Education of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Ministry Archive.
References (in English)
1. Broadfoot, P. (1996). Education, assessment, and society. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
2. Fredriksen, J., & Collins, A.(1989). A system approach to educational testing. Educational Researcher,18, 27–32.
3. Glenwright, P. (2002). Language proficiency assessment for teachers: The effects of benchmarking on writing assessment in Hong Kong schools. Assessing Writing, 8 (2), 84-109.
4. Hargreaves, A., Earl, L.,& Schmidt, M. (2002). Perspectives on alternative assessment reform, American Educational Research Journal, 39 (1), 69-95.
5. Kennedy, C. (1988). Evaluation of the management of change in ELT projects. Applied Linguistics,9 (4), 329-342.
6. Kiany, GH. R.,&Shayestefar, P. (2011). High school students' perceptions of EFL teacher control orientations and their English academic achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81 (3), 491-508.
7. Markee, N. (1990, March). The diffusion of communicative innovations and classroom culture: An ethnographic Study.Paper presented at the 24th Annual TESOL Convention, San Francisco, Ca.
8. McNamara, T.,&Roever, C. (2006). Language testing: The social dimension. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
9. Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization of focused evaluation: the new century text (3rded.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10. Nagy, P. (2000). The tree roles of assessment: Gate keeping, accountability, and instructional diagnosis. Canadian Journal of Education, 25 (4), 262-279.
11. Popham, W. J. (1987). The merits of measurement-driven instruction. Phi Delta Kappa, 68, 679-682.
12. Rogers, E. M. (1983). The diffusion of innovations (3rd ed.). London: Macmillian.
13. Segers, M., &Dochy, F. (2001). New assessment forms in problem-based learning: The value added of students' perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), 327-343.
14. Shohamy, E. (1998). Critical language testing and beyond. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 24, 331-345.
15. Stake, R. E. (1975). Evaluating the arts in education: A responsive approach. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
16. Stiggins, J. R. (1990). Toward a relevant classroom assessment research agenda. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 36(1), 92–97.
17. Stoller, F. (1994). The diffusion of innovations in intensive ESL programs. Applied Linguistics,15 (30), 300-327.
18. Strauss, J.,& Corbin, A. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
19. Wall, D. (1997). Impact and washback in language testing. In C. Clapham& D. Corson(Eds.), Testing and assessment: the Kluwer encyclopedia of language in education, (pp. 291-302, Vol. 7). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
20. Wall, D.,& Alderson, J. C. (1993). Examining washback: The Sri Lankan impact study, Language Testing, 10, 41-69.
21. Wall, D.,&Horak, T. (2008). The impact of changes in the TOFEL examination on teaching and learning in central and eastern Europe: Phase 2, coping with change. Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service.
Wall, D. (1997). Impact and washback in language testing. In Clapham, C. and Corson, D. editors, Testing and assessment: the Kluwer encyclopedia of language in education, Vol. 7. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic, 291-302.
Wall, D. & Alderson, J. C. (1993). Examining washback: the Sri Lankan impact study, Language Testing, 10: 41-69.
Wall, D. & Horak, T. (2008). The impact of changes in the TOFEL examination on teaching and learning in central and eastern Europe: phase 2, coping with change. ETS, TOEFL.
)
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله