Cited by 116EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningEnglish Language Learning and TeachingSecond Language Acquisition and Learning

Integrating large language models into EFL writing instruction: effects on performance, self-regulated learning strategies, and motivation

Liu, Ze-Min, Hwang, Gwo-Jen, Chen, Chuang-Qi, Chen, Xiang-Dong, Ye, Xin-Dong·2026·Computer Assisted Language Learning

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of utilizing large language models (LLMs) to enhance self-regulated learning (SRL) strategy instruction in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing. An LLM-supported Cognitive Academic Language Learning Model (CALLA-LLM) was developed and examined for its potential to improve elementary students’ EFL writing performance, SRL strategy use, and writing motivation. In a randomized controlled trial, 65 elementary school students were divided into an experimental group receiving CALLA-LLM instruction and a control group receiving traditional CALLA instruction. Both groups learned SRL strategies over 5 weeks, with data collected pre-intervention, post-intervention, and at a one-month follow-up. Results showed that the CALLA-LLM group made significant improvements in writing performance, SRL strategy use, and writing motivation, maintained most of the gains at follow-up, and significantly outperformed the control group. Findings provide empirical evidence for the efficacy of the CALLA-LLM model in enhancing EFL writing strategy instruction, lending support for integrating AI technologies such as LLMs into English language teaching. Moreover, the study underscores the importance of the “Humans in the Loop” approach, which emphasizes the essential role of human educators in AI-assisted language instruction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09588221.2024.2389923

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liu, Z.-M., Hwang, G.-J., Chen, C.-Q., Chen, X.-D., & Ye, X.-D.
Affiliations
  • East China Normal University (CN)
  • National Taichung University of Education (TW)
  • Department of Educational Technology, Wenzhou University
  • Faculty of Education, East China Normal University
Venue
Computer Assisted Language Learning
Published
2024-08-12
Volume
39
Issue
3
Pages
466-490
ISSN
  • 0958-8221 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-3210
OpenAlex
W4401515033
Cited by
115
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 55 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 3
FWCI
181.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computer Assisted Language Learning (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Social Science Fund of China (BCA190089)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
Keywords
large language models, EFL writing instruction, self-regulated learning strategies, writing motivation, Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach, elementary school students, AI-assisted language learning, human-in-the-loop, writing performance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review