Cited by 345EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsWriting and Handwriting Education

A questionnaire-based validation of multidimensional models of self-regulated learning strategies

TENG, LIN SOPHIE, ZHANG, LAWRENCE JUN·2016·The Modern Language Journal

Abstract

This study aimed to validate a newly‐developed instrument, The Writing Strategies for Self‐Regulated Learning (SRL) Questionnaire, with respect to its multifaceted structure of SRL strategies in English as a foreign language (EFL) writing. A total of 790 undergraduate students from 6 universities in Northeast China volunteered to be participants. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) through structural equation modeling (SEM) were applied to evaluate 3 hypothesized models. The results of the CFA validated a 9‐factor correlated model of second language (L2) writing strategies for SRL with satisfactory psychometric characteristics. Model comparisons confirmed a hierarchical, multidimensional structure of SRL as the best model, in which self‐regulation, as a higher order construct, accounted for the correlations of the 9 lower‐order writing strategies, pertaining to cognitive, metacognitive, social–behavioral, and motivational regulation aspects. Multiple regression analysis revealed that 6 out of 9 SRL strategies had significant predictive effects on EFL writing proficiency. The empirical evidence lends preliminary support to a transfer of SRL theory from educational psychology to the field of L2/EFL education, particularly L2/EFL writing. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/modl.12339

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Teachers' or students' skillful regulation of both positive and negative emotions in the language classroom contributes to effective teacher-student interpersonal relationships, students' learning gains, and teachers' successful teaching.

    “Teachers or students' knowing how to skillfully regulate both positive and negative emotions in the language classroom contributes a lot to effective teacher-student interpersonal relationships, students' learning gains, and teachers' successful teaching (Ghanizadeh and Moafian, 2010; Teng and Zhang, 2016).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
TENG, L. S., & ZHANG, L. J.
Affiliations
University of Auckland (NZ)
Corresponding author
  • TENG, LIN SOPHIE
  • ZHANG, LAWRENCE JUN
Venue
The Modern Language Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-05-18
Volume
100
Issue
3
Pages
674-701
ISSN
  • 0026-7902 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-4781
OpenAlex
W2394913823
Cited by
345
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 47 · 2025: 60 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 7
FWCI
84.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Modern Language Journal (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
Keywords
student self-regulation, writing strategies, EFL writing, second language writing, questionnaire validation, psychometric properties, metacognitive regulation, motivational regulation, cognitive regulation, writing skills, undergraduate students

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