Self-regulated learning has been a widely researched subject for decades in educational psychology. Different instruments have been developed to understand learners’ self-regulated learning in a specific subject domain. This study developed a measurement scale to assess English-as-a-foreign-language learners’ self-regulatory capacity in English language learning and further examined the effects of gender on English-as-a-foreign-language learners’ self-regulatory capacity. A series of psychometric analyses including exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and full structural equation modeling were undertaken to answer the research questions raised. The findings suggest that the scale can attain high reliability and strong validity in two different samplings, and the underlying construct of self-regulation in English language learning is shown to be multidimensional with a significant impact by gender. Theoretical and pedagogical implications are further put forward in light of the research findings.
AblardK. E.LipschultzR. E. (1998) Self-regulated learning in high-achieving students: Relations to advanced reasoning, achievement goals, and gender. Journal of Educational Psychology90: 94–101.
2.
AzevedoR.CromleyJ. G. (2004) Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia?Journal of Educational Psychology96: 523–535.
3.
BaarsB.GageN. M. (2010) Cognition, brain, and consciousness: Introduction to cognitive neuroscience, 2nd ed. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Ltd.
4.
BaconS. M. (1992) The relationship between gender, comprehension, processing strategies, and cognitive and affective response in foreign language listening. The Modern Language Journal76: 160–178.
5.
BaxterL.SaykinA.FlashmanL.JohnsonS.GuerinS.BabcockD.WishartH. (2003) Sex differences in semantic language processing: A functional MRI study. Brain Language84: 264–272.
6.
BoekaertsM. (2011) Emotions, emotion regulation, and self-regulation of learning. In: ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. J. (eds) Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 408–425.
7.
BoudD. (2000) Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education22: 151–167.
8.
BusseyK. (2011) The influence of gender on students’ self-regulated learning and performance. In: ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. J. (eds) Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 426–441.
9.
DaherA. M.AhmadS. H.WinnT.SelamatM. I. (2015) Impact of rating scale categories on reliability and fit statistics of the Malay Spiritual Well-Being Scale using Rasch Analysis. The Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences22: 48–55.
10.
DimitrovD. M. (2012) Statistical methods for validation of assessment scale data in counseling and related fields, Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.
11.
DörnyeiZ. (2005) The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition, Oxon: Routledge.
12.
DuckworthA.SeligmanM. (2005) Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science16: 939–944.
13.
DuckworthA.SeligmanM. (2006) Self-discipline gives girls the edge: Gender in self-discipline, grades, and achievement test scores. Journal of Educational Psychology98: 198–208.
14.
EhrmanM.OxfordR. (1989) Effects of sex differences, career choice, and psychological type on adult language learning strategies. The Modern Language Journal73(1): 1–13.
15.
Ehrman, M. & Oxford, R. (1990) Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive training setting. Modern Language Journal, 74, 311–326.
16.
GardnerR. C.TremblayP. F.MasgroetA. M. (1997) Towards a full model of second language learning: An Empirical Investigation. The Modern Language Journal81: 344–362. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1997.tb05495.x.
17.
GreenJ. M.OxfordR. (1995) A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL Quarterly29: 261–297.
18.
GuY.JohnsonR. K. (1996) Vocabulary learning strategies and language learning outcomes. Language Learning46(4): 643–679. doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01355.x.
19.
HardwinA. F.JärveläS.MillerM. (2011) Self-regulated, co-regulated, and socially shared regulation of learning. In: ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. J. (eds) Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 65–84.
20.
HatcherL. (2013) Advanced statistics in research: Reading, understanding, and writing up data analysis results, Saginaw, MI: Shadow Finch Media.
21.
HuL.-T.BentlerP. M. (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structure Equation Modeling6: 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118.
22.
KeithT. (2015) Multiple regression and beyond: An introduction to multiple regression and structural equation modeling, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Routledge.
23.
KochK.PaulyK.KellermannT.SeiferthN. Y.ReskeM.BackesV.HabelU. (2007) Gender differences in the cognitive control of emotion: An fMRI study. Neuropsychologia45: 2744–2754.
24.
LittleT. D.CunninghamW. A.ShaharG.WidamanK. F. (2002) To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling9: 151–173.
25.
MacklemG. L. (2015) Boredom in the classroom: Addressing student motivation, self-regulation and engagement in learning, Manchester, MA: Springer.
26.
MasuiC.de CorteE. (2005) Learning to reflect and to attribute constructively as basic components of self-regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology75: 351–372.
27.
McRaeK.OchsnerK. N.MaussI. B.GabrieliJ. D.GrossJ. J. (2008) Gender differences in emotion regulation: An fMRI study of cognitive reappraisal. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations11: 143–162.
28.
Meade, A. W., & Kroustalis, C. M. (2005). Problems with item parceling for confirmatory factor analysis tests of measurement invariance of factor loadings. Paper presented at the 20th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Los Angeles, CA. Retrieved from http://www4.ncsu.edu/∼awmeade/Links/Papers/Parceling(SIOP05).pdf.
29.
MeeceJ. L.PainterJ. (2008) Gender, self-regulation, and motivation. In: SchunkD. H.ZimmermanB. J. (eds) Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications, New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 339–367.
30.
MuellerR. O.HancockG. R. (2008) Best practices in structural equation modeling. In: OsborneJ. W. (ed.) Best practices in quantitative methods, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 488–508.
31.
MulaikS. A.MillsapR. E. (2000) Doing the four-step right. Structural Equation Modeling7: 36–74.
32.
NassajiH. (2006) The relationship between depth of vocabulary knowledge and L2 learners’lexical inferencing strategy use and success. The Modern Language Journal90(3): 387–401. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00431.x.
33.
OxfordR. L. (2011) Teaching and researching: Language learning strategies, New York, NY: Routledge.
34.
OxfordR. L.NyikosM. (1989) Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students. The Modern Language Journal73(3): 291–300.
35.
ParkG.-P. (1997) Language learning strategies and English proficiency in Korean university students. Foreign Language Annals30(2): 211–221.
36.
PintrichP. R. (1999) The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research31: 459–470.
37.
PintrichP. R. (2002) The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice41: 219–225.
38.
PintrichP.SmithD.GarciaT.McKeachieW. (1991) A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ), Ann Arbor, MI: National Center for Research to Improve Post secondary Teaching and Learning.
39.
PokayP.BlumenfeldP. C. (1990) Predicting achievement early and late in the semester: The role of motivation and use of learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology82: 41–50.
40.
PressleyM.GhatalaE. S. (1990) Self-regulated learning: Monitoring learning from text. Educational Psychologist25: 19–33.
41.
SchumackerR. E.LomaxR. G. (2010) A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling, New York, NY: Routledge.
42.
StoneM. H. (2004) Substantive scale construction. In: SmithE. V.SmithR. M. (eds) Introduction to rasch measurement, Maple Grove, MN: JAM Press, pp. 201–225.
43.
TsengW.-T.DörnyeiZ.SchmittN. (2006) A new approach to assessing strategic learning: The case of self-regulation in vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics27: 78–102.
44.
TsengW.-T.SchmittN. (2008) Toward a model of motivated vocabulary learning: A structural equation modeling approach. Language Learning58: 357–400. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00444.x.
45.
ViswanathanM. (2005) Measurement error and research design, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46.
WeissE. M.KemmlerG.DeisenhammerE. A.FleischhackerW. W.DelazerM. (2003) Sex differences in cognitive functions. Personality and Individual Differences35: 863–875.
47.
ZimmermanB. J. (1994) Dimensions of academic self-regulation: A conceptual framework for education. In: ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. J. (eds) Self-regulation of learning and performance, Hillsdale, NJ: LEA Publishers, pp. 3–21.
48.
ZimmermanB. J. (2011) Motivational sources and outcomes of self-regulated learning and performance. In: ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. J. (eds) Self-regulation of learning and performance, Hillsdale, NJ: LEA Publishers, pp. 49–64.
49.
ZimmermanB. J.BonnerS.KovachR. (1996) Developing self-regulated learners: Beyond achievement to self-efficacy, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
50.
ZimmermanB. J.Martinex-PonsM. (1990) Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology82: 51–59.
51.
ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. H. (2011) Self-regulated learning and performance: An introduction and an overview. In: ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. J. (eds) Handbook of self-regulated learning and performance, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 1–12.
