1.
Kumaravadivelu, B.: Beyond Methods: Macrostrategies for Language Teaching : Macro-strategies for Language Teaching. Yale University Press (2003).
2.
Pica, T.: Tradition and transition in English language teaching methodology. System. 28, 1–18 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00057-3.
3.
Richards, J.C., Rodgers, T.S.: Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2014).
4.
Larsen-Freeman, D., Anderson, M.: Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2011).
5.
Spiro, J., MyiLibrary: Changing methodologies in TESOL. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh (2013).
6.
Shaw, P.A.: The Syllabus is Dead, Long Live the Syllabus: Thoughts on the State of Language Curriculum, Content, Language, Tasks, Projects, Materials, Wikis, Blogs and the World Wide Web. Language and Linguistics Compass. 3, 1266–1283 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2009.00154.x.
7.
McDevitt, B.: Negotiating the syllabus: a win-win situation? ELT Journal. 58, 3–9 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/58.1.3.
8.
Richards, J.C.: Curriculum Approaches in Language Teaching: Forward, Central, and Backward Design. RELC Journal. 44, 5–33 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688212473293.
9.
Savignon, S.J.: Beyond communicative language teaching: What’s ahead? Journal of Pragmatics. 39, 207–220 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.09.004.
10.
Feryok, A.: An Armenian English language teacher’s practical theory of communicative language teaching. System. 36, 227–240 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.09.004.
11.
Woods, D., Çakır, H.: Two dimensions of teacher knowledge: The case of communicative language teaching. System. 39, 381–390 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.07.010.
12.
Mikulec, E., Miller, P.C.: Using Project-Based Instruction to Meet Foreign Language Standards. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas. 84, 81–86 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2010.516779.
13.
Ellis, R.: Task-based language teaching: sorting out the misunderstandings. International Journal of Applied Linguistics. 19, 221–246 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2009.00231.x.
14.
Batstone, R.: Language form, task-based language teaching, and the classroom context. ELT Journal. 66, 459–467 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccs058.
15.
Robinson, P.: Task-Based Language Learning: A Review of Issues. Language Learning. 61, 1–36 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00641.x.
16.
Choo, J.P.L, Too, W.K.: Teachers’ Perceptions in Using Task-Based Instruction for the Teaching of Grammar. Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education (JIRE). 2, (2012).
17.
Kumaravadivelu, B.: TESOL Methods: Changing Tracks, Challenging Trends. TESOL Quarterly. 40, (2006). https://doi.org/10.2307/40264511.
18.
Bell, D.M.: Do teachers think that methods are dead? ELT Journal. 61, 135–143 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm006.
19.
Baecher, L., Farnsworth, T., Ediger, A.: The challenges of planning language objectives in content-based ESL instruction. Language Teaching Research. 18, 118–136 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813505381.
20.
Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., Gorter, D.: Critical Analysis of CLIL: Taking Stock and Looking Forward. Applied Linguistics. 35, 243–262 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt011.
21.
Echevarria, J., Richards-Tutor, C., Canges, R., Francis, D.: Using the SIOP Model to Promote the Acquisition of Language and Science Concepts with English Learners. Bilingual Research Journal. 34, 334–351 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2011.623600.
