The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Integrating large language models into EFL writing instruction: effects on performance, self-regulated learning strategies, and motivation
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.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“In the realm of early intervention, positive outcomes on writing performance [5], [6], self-regulated learning and motivation [6] have been reported when LLMs are systematically integrated into instruction”
In the citing paper
“Complementary studies demonstrated performance to vary as a function of model and prompt when using LLMs to evaluate ELL writing [9], non-native Japanese writing [16], and LLMs in general for automated writing evaluation [5].”
In the citing paper
“These studies used AI interventions to address common barriers such as limited teacher feedback, low student motivation for revision, or insufficient opportunities for creative expression [81-87].”
From A Systematic Review of Generative AI in K–12: Mapping Goals, Activities, Roles, and Outcomes via the 3P Model (2025) · cites this paper as [82]
In the citing paper
“Across writing, reading, and mathematics tasks, students repeatedly submit texts, assignments, or answers to AI systems, receive concrete suggestions on error correction, structure, and language use, and then resubmit revised work, creating a cycle of practice, feedback, and renewed practice [75,77,82,83,87,90,110].”
From A Systematic Review of Generative AI in K–12: Mapping Goals, Activities, Roles, and Outcomes via the 3P Model (2025) · cites this paper as [82]
In the citing paper
“Motivation gains are not guaranteed: several studies find no significant effects [109] or only short-lived novelty bumps that taper over time [82,122].”
From A Systematic Review of Generative AI in K–12: Mapping Goals, Activities, Roles, and Outcomes via the 3P Model (2025) · cites this paper as [82]
In the citing paper
“Teacher presence and guidance [82,107], together with personalization in AI tool design [97], are key enabling conditions.”
From A Systematic Review of Generative AI in K–12: Mapping Goals, Activities, Roles, and Outcomes via the 3P Model (2025) · cites this paper as [82]
Citations
Cites
(1978) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 53,488
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control
Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999) · Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy · doi:10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158 · Cited by 46,835
Statistical power analyses using G∗Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/brm.41.4.1149 · Cited by 37,615
Self-efficacy: the exercise of control
(1997) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.35-1826 · Cited by 24,451
Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33 · Cited by 8,332 · cited 1×
“Measurement of writing motivation was adapted from Pintrich and De Groot (1990), comprising nine items, with five used to measure writing self-efficacy and four for writing interest.”
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000) · Handbook of Self-Regulation · doi:10.1016/b978-012109890-2/50031-7 · Cited by 6,069
The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6 · Cited by 5,094
Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4
Bubeck, S., Chandrasekaran, V., Eldan, R., Gehrke, J., Horvitz, E., Kamar, E., Lee, P., Lee, Y. T., Li, Y., Lundberg, S., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.12712 · Cited by 1,526
ChatGPT for Language Teaching and Learning
Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2023) · RELC Journal · doi:10.1177/00336882231162868 · Cited by 1,371 · cited 2×
“LLMs can analyze language patterns and semantics to deliver highly contextualized, individualized learning experiences (Kohnke et al., 2023) and adjust instructional content based on learners’ responses, creating tailored learning pathways (Lin & Chang, 2023).”
Impact of Self-Regulatory Influences on Writing Course Attainment
Zimmerman, B. J., & Bandura, A. (1994) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/00028312031004845 · Cited by 1,333
Hyland, K. (2003) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511667251 · Cited by 1,219
A cognitive process theory of writing
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981) · College Composition & Communication · doi:10.58680/ccc198115885 · Cited by 1,025
The CALLA Handbook: Implementing the Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach
Dicker, C., Chamot, A. U., & O’Malley, J. M. (1994) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3587323 · Cited by 926
LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGY INSTRUCTION: CURRENT ISSUES AND RESEARCH
Chamot, A. U. (2005) · Annual Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0267190505000061 · Cited by 733
Huang, A. Y. Q., Lu, O. H. T., & Yang, S. J. H. (2023) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104684 · Cited by 605
L2 motivation research 2005–2014: Understanding a publication surge and a changing landscape
Boo, Z., Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2015.10.006 · Cited by 589
Handbook of Learning Disabilities
Knapp, P. (2004) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-200405000-00018 · Cited by 574
Impact of AI assistance on student agency
Darvishi, A., Khosravi, H., Sadiq, S., Gašević, D., & Siemens, G. (2024) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104967 · Cited by 548 · cited 2×
“LLMs can conduct sophisticated dialogues, provide explanatory feedback, and dynamically tailor instruction to student needs (Darvishi et al., 2024).”
Should Robots Replace Teachers?: AI and the Future of Education
Selwyn, N. (2019) · Cited by 434
Sun, T., & Wang, C. (2020) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2020.102221 · Cited by 390
(2003) · Cited by 389
The process writing approach: a meta-analysis
Graham, S., & Sandmel, K. (2011) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.2010.488703 · Cited by 374
Teng, L. S., & Zhang, L. J. (2019) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2019.100701 · Cited by 361
Metacognition, strategy use, and instruction
(2010) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.47-5162 · Cited by 269
Effects of Generative Chatbots in Higher Education
Ilieva, G., Yankova, T., Klisarova-Belcheva, S., Dimitrov, A., Bratkov, M., & Angelov, D. (2023) · Information · doi:10.3390/info14090492 · Cited by 258
Troia, G. A., Harbaugh, A. G., Shankland, R. K., Wolbers, K. A., & Lawrence, A. M. (2012) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-012-9379-2 · Cited by 215
Rahimi, M., & Fathi, J. (2021) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2021.1888753 · Cited by 202
Effects of real-time analytics-based personalized scaffolds on students’ self-regulated learning
Lim, L., Bannert, M., van der Graaf, J., Singh, S., Fan, Y., Surendrannair, S., Rakovic, M., Molenaar, I., Moore, J., & Gašević, D. (2023) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2022.107547 · Cited by 198
Modeling students’ perceptions of artificial intelligence assisted language learning
An, X., Chai, C. S., Li, Y., Zhou, Y., & Yang, B. (2023) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2023.2246519 · Cited by 196
Zhang, R., & Zou, D. (2022) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2022.2055081 · Cited by 170
Learning with ChatGPT 3.5 as a more knowledgeable other: an autoethnographic study
Stojanov, A. (2023) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-023-00404-7 · Cited by 169
Lim, L.-A., Gentili, S., Pardo, A., Kovanović, V., Whitelock-Wainwright, A., Gašević, D., & Dawson, S. (2021) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.04.003 · Cited by 159 · cited 3×
“However, existing scaffolds often fail to adequately account for the dynamic nature of SRL processes, lacking adapt-ability and personalization (Lim et al., 2021; Zheng et al., 2023).”
Bai, B., & Wang, J. (2020) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2020.102404 · Cited by 149
A Multicomponent Measure of Writing Motivation With Basic College Writers
MacArthur, C. A., Philippakos, Z. A. T., & Graham, S. (2015) · Learning Disability Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0731948715583115 · Cited by 100
Metacognition and strategies instruction in writing
Harris, K. R., Santangelo, T., & Graham, S. (2010) · Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) · Cited by 86
Interest: A unique affective and cognitive motivational variable that develops
(2022) · Advances in Motivation Science · doi:10.1016/bs.adms.2021.12.004 · Cited by 81
Artificial Intelligence and Future of Teaching and Learning
Elazab, M. (2024) · المجله الدولیه للتعلیم بالانترنت · doi:10.21608/ijie.2024.414601 · Cited by 73
Bai, B., Wang, J., & Zhou, H. (2021) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2020.1871030 · Cited by 72
The Impact of AI Chatbot-Based Learning on Students’ Motivation in English Writing Classroom
Silitonga, L. M., Hawanti, S., Aziez, F., Furqon, M., Zain, D. S. M., Anjarani, S., & Wu, T. (2023) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-40113-8_53 · Cited by 72
Teng, L. S. (2022) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2022.100645 · Cited by 70
Lin, M. P.-C., & Chang, D. (2023) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100167 · Cited by 69
How to design and evaluate personalized scaffolds for self-regulated learning
van der Graaf, J., Raković, M., Fan, Y., Lim, L., Singh, S., Bannert, M., Gašević, D., & Molenaar, I. (2023) · Metacognition and Learning · doi:10.1007/s11409-023-09361-y · Cited by 65
Ou, A. W., Gu, M. M., & Hult, F. M. (2020) · International Journal of Multilingualism · doi:10.1080/14790718.2020.1856113 · Cited by 64
The effects of strategy-based writing instruction in Singapore primary schools
Bai, B. (2015) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2015.05.009 · Cited by 60
Bai, B., Guo, W., & Wang, C. (2022) · Applied Linguistics Review · doi:10.1515/applirev-2020-0131 · Cited by 52
Teacher-Implemented Writing Instruction for Elementary Students: A Literature Review
Finlayson, K., & McCrudden, M. T. (2019) · Reading & Writing Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10573569.2019.1604278 · Cited by 41
Liu, Z., Fan, X., Liu, Y., & Ye, X. (2022) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13237 · Cited by 41
Self-citationFathi, J., & Rahimi, M. (2022) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2022.2097697 · Cited by 37
Effects of computer-mediated collaborative writing on individual EFL writing performance
Jiang, W., & Eslami, Z. R. (2021) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2021.1893753 · Cited by 34
Sun, T., Wang, C., & Wang, Y. (2022) · Reading & Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-022-10297-z · Cited by 24
Ebadijalal, M., & Moradkhani, S. (2023) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2023.2178463 · Cited by 20
Zheng, J., Lajoie, S. P., Wang, T., & Li, S. (2023) · Metacognition and Learning · doi:10.1007/s11409-023-09352-z · Cited by 20
Granado-Peinado, M., Cuevas, I., Olmos, R., Martín, E., Casado-Ledesma, L., & Mateos, M. (2023) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-022-10318-x · Cited by 14
Liu, Z., & Chen, Y. (2022) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-022-01990-6 · Cited by 11
Self-citationOpenAI, Achiam, J., Adler, S., Agarwal, S., Ahmad, L., Akkaya, I., Aleman, F. L., Almeida, D., Altenschmidt, J., Altman, S., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.08774
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- 10.2307/356600 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wang, Y., & Guo, Y. (2026) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1002/jcal.70189 · Cited by 117
Li, B., Tan, Y. L., Wang, C., & Lowell, V. L. (2025) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100445 · Cited by 217
Liu, X., & Zhong, B. (2025) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100741 · Cited by 78
Jin, F., Sun, L., Pan, Y., & Lin, C. (2025) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105248 · Cited by 72
Li, Y., Zhou, X., Yin, H., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2025) · Smart Learning Environments · doi:10.1186/s40561-025-00379-0 · Cited by 102
“In particular, AI chatbots and teachers gave students the information or materials they needed to learn (e.g., Hsu et al., 2021; Jeon, 2022; Liu et al., 2024a, 2024b), assessed students’ work, and gave them feedback on how they were learning (e.g., Chen et al., 2025; Escalante et al., 2023).”
Metadata
- 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
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- 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
- Social Sciences › Education › 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
