This study examines the design, implementation, and outcomes of a mobile-assisted Korean language (MAKL) blended course that aims to enhance learning of Korean as a foreign language (KFL) at university level. This course, which is grounded in the attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction (ARCS) motivational framework and a triarchic model of cognition, emotion, and language performance, integrates multimedia resources, LINE-based scaffolding, and culturally immersive peer interactions with the goal of promoting engagement and self-regulated learning. The findings of this research reveal that the participating students achieved significant linguistic growth, improved their emotional resilience, and developed adaptive strategies that enabled them to overcome linguistic, cognitive-affective, technical, and self-regulatory challenges. Collaborative learning and individualized support were particularly effective ways of reducing learners’ anxiety and enhancing their self-efficacy. The course also contributed to the instructor’s professional development through reflective practice and pedagogical innovation. External evaluations by experts in Korean language education validated the instructional effectiveness of the course and its impacts on learner outcomes. This study offers a replicable, theory-informed model for the design of KFL curricula that emphasizes motivational scaffolding, technological responsiveness, and reflective pedagogy. This research thus contributes to broader discussions concerning digital innovation in the context of language learning and the evolving role played by blended environments in efforts to promote sustainable language acquisition.
AbrarM.MukmininA.HabibiA., et al (2018). ‘If our English isn’t a language, what is it?’ Indonesian EFL student teachers’ challenges speaking English. The Qualitative Report, 23, 129–145.
2.
AhnK.D. (2017). Constructions of viewpoint aspect and grammaticalization of negative conditionals in Korean. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 43, 63–86.
3.
AitmuratovaP.YorovaS.EsanovaM. (2023). The role of foreign languages in our life. Theoretical Aspects in the Formation of Pedagogical Sciences, 2, 161–164.
4.
AlbogamiA.AlgethamiG. (2022). Exploring the use of WhatsApp for teaching speaking to English language learners: A case study. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 2nd Special Issue on Covid 19 ChallengesJanuary2022, Article 4036732.
5.
AndujarA.NadifF.Z. (2022). Evaluating an inclusive blended learning environment in EFL: A flipped approach. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35, 1138–1167.
6.
BashoriM.Van HoutR.StrikH.CucchiariniC. (2021). Effects of ASR-based websites on EFL learners’ vocabulary, speaking anxiety, and language enjoyment. System, 99, Article 102496.
7.
BirdK.A.CastlemanB.L.LohnerG. (2022). Negative impacts from the shift to online learning during the COVID-19 crisis: Evidence from a statewide community college system. AERA Open, 8.
8.
CrisianitaS.MandasariB. (2022). The use of small-group discussion to improve students’ speaking skill. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 3, 61–66.
9.
DomingueB.W.KanopkaK.StenhaugB., et al (2021). Interplay between speed and accuracy: Novel empirical insights based on 1/4 billion item responses. [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/r54ec [publisher name needed].
10.
DovchinS. (2021). Translanguaging, emotionality, and English as a second language immigrants: Mongolian background women in Australia. TESOL Quarterly, 55, 839–865.
11.
DuJ.HewK.F.T. (2022). Using recommender systems to promote self-regulated learning in online education settings: Current knowledge gaps and suggestions for future research. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54, 557–580.
12.
DumfordA.D.MillerA.L. (2018). Online learning in higher education: Exploring advantages and disadvantages for engagement. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30, 452–465.
13.
EngeströmY. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14, 133–156.
14.
FosnotC.T. (1996). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. Teachers College Press.
15.
GaniyevnaK.N. (2023). The role of internet in learning foreign language. Horizon: Journal of Humanity and Artificial Intelligence, 2, 12–14.
16.
GeorgiouG.P. (2021). Effects of phonetic training on the discrimination of second language sounds by learners with naturalistic access to the second language. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 50, 707–721.
17.
GrahamC.R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions. In BonkC.J.GrahamC.R. (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3–21). Pfeiffer Publishing.
18.
GubaE.G.LincolnY.S. (1981). Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches. Jossey-Bass.
19.
HamadM.M. (2017). Using WhatsApp to enhance students’ learning of English language ‘experience to share’. Higher Education Studies, 7, 74–87.
20.
HanF.EllisR.A. (2019). Identifying consistent patterns of quality learning discussions in blended learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 40, 12–19.
21.
HuangL.L.HungT.S. (2017). Meaning of learning: Construction, loss, and reconstruction. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 62, 133–162.
22.
HuangY.M.SilitongaL.M.WuT.T. (2022). Applying a business simulation game in a flipped classroom to enhance engagement, learning achievement, and higher-order thinking skills. Computers and Education, 183, Article 104494.
23.
JanesG.EkpenyongM.S.Mbeah-BankasH.SerrantL. (2023). An international exploration of blended learning use in pre-registration nursing and midwifery education. Nurse Education in Practice, 66, Article 103514.
24.
JurayevT.N. (2023). The use of mobile learning applications in higher education institutes. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 3, 610–620.
25.
KangH.Y.KimH.R. (2021). Impact of blended learning on learning outcomes in the public healthcare education course: A review of flipped classroom with team-based learning. BMC Medical Education, 21, Article 78.
26.
KangJ.H.SonS.M.HanS.T. (2020). A study on the experience of non-face-to-face lecture by college freshmen using focus group interview. Journal of the Korea Entertainment Industry Association, 14, 397–408.
27.
KellerJ.M. (1999). Using the ARCS motivational process in computer-based instruction and distance education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 78, 37–47.
28.
KimA. (2019). Influence of flipped classroom model on Korean language learners’ achievement: Focused on beginner level. Innovative Teaching and Learning, 1, 71–78.
29.
KimA. (2022). Mobile-assisted language learning in L2 Korean using WeChat: A case study. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 16, 94–105.
30.
KimJ.B. (2013). Aspectual properties of the Korean imperfective constructions. Language and Linguistics, 14, 1035–1074.
31.
KimJ.B. (2016). Copular constructions and asymmetries in the specificational pseudocleft constructions in Korean. Language and Linguistics, 17, 89–112.
32.
KimS.A. (2007). Making grammar instruction more communicative in high school English classes. Foreign Languages Education, 14, 109–132.
33.
KramschC. (2014). Language and culture. AILA Review, 27, 30–55.
34.
KrashenS.D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon.
35.
KruegerR.A. (2014). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Sage.
36.
Kukulska-HulmeA.TraxlerJ. (2005). Mobile learning: A handbook for educators and trainers. Routledge.
37.
LaiA. (2016). Mobile immersion: An experiment using mobile instant messenger to support second-language learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 24, 277–290.
38.
LaiC.L.HwangG.J. (2015). An interactive peer-assessment criteria development approach to improving students’ art design performance using handheld devices. Computers and Education, 85, 149–159.
39.
LaiY.SaabN.AdmiraalW. (2022). University students’ use of mobile technology in self-directed language learning: Using the integrative model of behavior prediction. Computers and Education, 179, Article 104413.
40.
LiZ.BonkC.J. (2023). Self-directed language learning with Duolingo in an out-of-class context. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 38, 569–591.
41.
MaY. (2022). The triarchy of L2 learners’ emotion, cognition, and language performance: Anxiety, self-efficacy, and speaking skill in lights of the emerging theories in SLA. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1002492.
42.
MartellettiD.M.LuzuriagaM.FurmanM. (2023). ‘What makes you say so?’ Metacognition improves the sustained learning of inferential reading skills in English as a second language. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 33, Article 100213.
43.
MayerR.E. (2014). Incorporating motivation into multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 171–173.
44.
McLureF.I.FraserB.J.KoulR.B. (2022). Structural relationships between classroom emotional climate, teacher–student interpersonal relationships and students’ attitudes to STEM. Social Psychology of Education, 25, 625–648.
45.
MouraA.CarvalhoA.A. (2013). Framework for mobile learning integration into educational contexts. In BergeZ.MuilenburgL. (Eds.), Handbook of mobile learning (pp. 58–69). Routledge.
46.
NaismithL.LonsdaleP.VavoulaG.SharplesM. (2004). Literature review in mobile technologies and learning. Future Lab Report 11. Futurelab. Available at: https://hdl-handle-net.web.bisu.edu.cn/2381/8132 (accessed August 2025).
47.
NamJ. (2015). An empirical study of Korean adjectival predicates that license double nominative constructions. Language and Linguistics, 16, 397–429.
48.
NardiB.A. (1996). Studying context: A comparison of activity theory, situated action models, and distributed cognition. In NardiB.A. (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human–computer interaction (pp. 69–102). MIT Press.
49.
ParkS. H.KimH. S.YoonK. J. (2010). Development of the teaching materials based on the ARCS motivation model in chemistry experiments subject. Journal of Engineering Education Research, 13(3), 87–95.
50.
ParnesM.F.KanchewaS.S.MarksA.K.SchwartzS.E. (2020). Closing the college achievement gap: Impacts and processes of a help-seeking intervention. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 67, Article 101121.
51.
PikhartM.Al-ObaydiL.H. (2023). Potential pitfalls of online foreign language teaching from the perspective of the university teachers. Heliyon, 9, Article e13732.
52.
PriniskiS.J.HechtC.A.HarackiewiczJ.M. (2018). Making learning personally meaningful: A new framework for relevance research. The Journal of Experimental Education, 86, 11–29.
53.
QadachM.SchechterC.Da’asR. (2020). From principals to teachers to students: Exploring an integrative model for predicting students’ achievements. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56, 736–778.
54.
RafiA.S.M.MorganA.M. (2023). Blending translanguaging and CLIL: Pedagogical benefits and ideological challenges in a Bangladeshi classroom. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 20, 20–45.
55.
RobinsonJ.D.PerskyA.M. (2020). Developing self-directed learners. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 84, Article 847512.
56.
RoodenrysS.MillerL.M.GuitardD.NeathI. (2025). Similar phonemes create interference in the serial recall task. Memory, 33, 248–258.
57.
ShihY.E. (2007). Setting the new standard with mobile computing in online learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 8, Article 361.
58.
ShinH.S. (2011). The case studies about communication education, applying problem-based learning. Journal of Educational Research and Implementation, 10, 137–169.
59.
ShulerC. (2009). Pockets of potential using mobile technologies to promote children’s learning. The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.
60.
SnowC.E.BealsD.E. (2006). Mealtime talk that supports literacy development. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 111, 51–66.
61.
TengM.F.WuJ.G. (2024). An investigation of learners’ perceived progress during online education: Do self-efficacy belief, language learning motivation, and metacognitive strategies matter?The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 33, 283–295.
62.
TsegayS.M.AshrafM.A.PerveenS.ZegergishM.Z. (2022). Online teaching during COVID-19 pandemic: Teachers’ experiences from a Chinese university. Sustainability, 14, Article 568.
63.
WolfD.M.PhungL. (2019). Studying in the United States: Language Learning Challenges, Strategies, and support services. Journal of International Students, 9, 211–224.
64.
ZainD.S.M.BowlesF.A. (2021). Mobile-assisted language learning (MALL) for higher education instructional practices in EFL/ESL contexts: A recent review of literature. Computer Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 22, 282–307.
65.
ZakharovW.MaybeeC. (2019). Bridging the gap: Information literacy and learning in online undergraduate courses. Journal of Library and Information Services in Distance Learning, 13, 215–225.
66.
ZhangS.ZhangX. (2020). The relationship between vocabulary knowledge and L2 reading/listening comprehension: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 26, 696–725.
