Self-regulated learning and its impact on scaffolded feedback effectiveness in EFL learning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although the efficacy of scaffolded feedback (SF) is premised on its role in pushing learners toward self-regulated performance, its relationship with self-regulated learning (SRL) has remained underexplored. This study examines how SRL predicts the effectiveness of SF. Sixty-two intermediate English as a Foreign Language learners were randomly assigned to an experimental group and a control condition. The experimental group received SF in response to their language errors during three treatment sessions, while the control group performed similar tasks without error feedback. Learners’ SRL strategies were measured using a modified version of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire. The target forms were English articles, and learners’ development of those forms was measured before the treatment (pretest), immediately after (post-test), and at a delayed post-test. Learners’ responses to SF were coded and analyzed in terms of unsuccessful, partially successful, and successful uptake. A Chi-square analysis investigated the relationship between learners’ responses to SF and SRL scores. Hierarchical regression analysis examined how well learners’ SRL scores predict the learning of the target structure. Results indicated that the SF group's post-test and delayed post-test scores were significantly predicted by their SRL scores, with large effect sizes. The analysis of learners’ responses to SF indicated that learners with high SRL scores engaged more in negotiated interaction and produced more partially and fully successful uptakes than those with low SRL scores. These findings suggest that L2 learners’ level of self-regulation plays a significant role in the efficacy of SF in L2 learning. Our findings thus imply that highly self-regulated learners are more capable of and likely to participate in classroom interactions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it