This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R. (2021). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.Search in Google Scholar
Bejar, I., Douglas, D., Jamieson, J., et al. (2000). TOEFL 2000 listening framework. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Search in Google Scholar
Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., et al. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: Longmans Green.Search in Google Scholar
Brantmeier, C. (2006). Toward a multicomponent model of interest and L2 reading: Sources of interest, perceived situational interest, and comprehension. Reading in a foreign language, 18(2), 89-115.Search in Google Scholar
Curriculum Planning & Development Division. (2010). English language syllabus 2010 primary & secondary (Express/Normal [Academic]).Search in Google Scholar
Bearne, E. (2009). Multimodality, literacy and texts: Developing a discourse. Journal of early childhood literacy, 9(2), 156-187.Search in Google Scholar
Paas, F., Renkl, A., Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 1-4.Search in Google Scholar
Glasgow, J. N. (1994). Teaching visual literacy for the 21st century. Journal of reading, 494-500.Search in Google Scholar
Guichon, N., McLornan, S. (2008). The effects of multimodality on L2 learners: Implications for CALL resource design. System, 36(1), 85-93.Search in Google Scholar
Ginther, A. (2002). Context and content visuals and performance on listening comprehension stimuli. Language Testing, 19(2), 133-167.Search in Google Scholar
Ockey, G. J. (2007). Construct implications of including still image or video in computer-based listening tests. Language Testing, 24(4), 517-537.Search in Google Scholar
Fang, C., Tao, Y., Wang, J., et al. (2021). Research on Leakage Current Waveform Spectrum Characteristics of Artificial Pollution Porcelain Insulator. Frontiers in Energy Research. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2021.798048.Search in Google Scholar
Kress, G., Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse. The modes and media of.Search in Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Steinhoff, K., Bower, G., Mars, R. (1995). A generative theory of textbook design: Using annotated illustrations to foster meaningful learning of science text. Educational technology research and development, 31-43.Search in Google Scholar
Secules, T., Herron, C., Tomasello, M. (1992). The effect of video context on foreign language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 76(4), 480-490.Search in Google Scholar
Sueyoshi, A., Hardison, D. M. (2005). The role of gestures and facial cues in second language listening comprehension. Language learning, 55(4), 661-699.Search in Google Scholar
Serafini, F. (2012). Expanding the four resources model: Reading visual and multi-modal texts. Pedagogies: An international journal, 7(2), 150-164.Search in Google Scholar
Arya, D. J., Hiebert, E. H., Pearson, P. D. (2011). The effects of syntactic and lexical complexity on the comprehension of elementary science texts. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(1), 107-125.Search in Google Scholar
Baba, K. (2009). Aspects of lexical proficiency in writing summaries in a foreign language. Journal of second language writing, 18(3), 191-208.Search in Google Scholar
Gamson, D. A., Lu, X., Eckert, S. A. (2013). Challenging the research base of the Common Core State Standards: A historical reanalysis of text complexity. Educational Researcher, 42(7), 381-391.Search in Google Scholar
Harley, B., King, M. L. (1989). Verb lexis in the written compositions of young L2 learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(4), 415-439.Search in Google Scholar
Hiebert, E. H., Mesmer, H. A. E. (2013). Upping the ante of text complexity in the Common Core State Standards: Examining its potential impact on young readers. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 44-51.Search in Google Scholar
Hsueh-Chao, M. H., Nation, P. (2000). Unknown vocabulary density and reading comprehension.Search in Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. (1988). Lexical characteristics of near -native second -language learners of Swedish. Journal of Multilingual & Multicultural Development, 9(1-2), 67-84.Search in Google Scholar
Kliebard, H. M. (2004). The struggle for the American curriculum, 1893-1958. Psychology Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kyle, K., Crossley, S. A. (2015). Automatically assessing lexical sophistication: Indices, tools, findings, and application. Tesol Quarterly, 49(4), 757-786.Search in Google Scholar
Kyle, K., Crossley, S. (2016). The relationship between lexical sophistication and independent and source-based writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 34, 12-24.Search in Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied linguistics, 27(4), 590-619.Search in Google Scholar
Laufer, B. (1989). 25 What Percentage of Text-Lexis is Essential for Comprehension?. Special language: From humans thinking to thinking machines, 316.Search in Google Scholar
Fang, C., Tao, Y.,Wang, J., et al. (2021). Mapping Relation of Leakage Currents of Polluted Insulators and Discharge Arc Area. Frontiers in Energy Research. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2021.777230.Search in Google Scholar
Laufer, B., Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied linguistics, 16(3), 307-322.Search in Google Scholar
Lu, X. (2012). The relationship of lexical richness to the quality of ESL learners’ oral narratives. The Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 190-208.Search in Google Scholar