淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-0301201820214600
中文論文名稱 型塑台灣EFL大學生於第二語言寫作之自我調節學習模型: 運用結構方程模型方法
英文論文名稱 Toward a Model of Taiwanese EFL College Students’ Self-regulated Learning in L2 Writing: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 英文學系博士班
系所名稱(英) Department of English
學年度 106
學期 1
出版年 107
研究生中文姓名 曹睿榮
研究生英文姓名 Jui-Jung Tsao
學號 801110130
學位類別 博士
語文別 英文
口試日期 2017-12-21
論文頁數 161頁
口試委員 指導教授-黃月貴
委員-王兆璋
委員-曾文鐽
委員-王藹玲
委員-蔡瑞敏
中文關鍵字 必須我  理想我  寫作動機  寫作訂正性回饋  寫作能力 
英文關鍵字 Possible L2 selves  writing motivation  written corrective feedback  writing competence 
學科別分類
中文摘要 第二語言寫作技巧之習得,向來被以英語為第二種語言/外語的學生視為艱難的工作。因此,要成為一位有效率的學習者(例如熟練的英文寫作者),他們必須被指導或教導如何監控、掌握與調節寫作過程,而此寫作過程渉及了認知、動機、行為與環境各層面。換言之,他們需要學會如何自我調節學習的技巧。為了深入了解學生完成寫作作業時的自我調節行為,若干影響寫作過程之自我調節學習的重要變數,有必要進一歩加以探究。因此,本文旨在藉由測試一個理論模型,來探討以英語為外語的學生,其自我調節學習變數與寫作能力之多維關係的本質。本研究對象為台灣北部某四所大學433位在學學生(最後取得357有效問卷與寫作試卷)。利用三份問卷收集量化資料,並施予英文段落寫作之測驗。研究結果如下:第一,所有因素結構均被核實,所提出之結構方程模型亦被確立。第二,受測學生具備較多的理想我,而非必須我。第三,只有理想我能有意義地影響學習動機。第四,理想我對外在動機(而非內在動機)有較強的預測力。第五,內、外在動機皆能預測學生對老師寫作訂正性回饋所採取的主動性行動。第六,內、外在動機對學生的寫作能力並無直接效果,但學生對老師寫作訂正性回饋所採取的主動性行動,具有此直接效果。本文亦提出上述研究結果對培養學生自我調節學習技巧之教學意涵。
英文摘要 The acquisition of L2 writing skills has been deemed a daunting task for most students in ESL and EFL contexts. Therefore, to become effective learners, for example, proficient L2 writers, they need to be guided and taught how to monitor, control, and regulate the learning process involving the aspects of cognition, motivation, behavior, and environments. In other words, they need to acquire self-regulated learning (SRL) skills. Several crucial SRL variables that affect self-regulation of the writing processes need to be further explored in order to have a deeper understanding of students’ self-regulated behaviors in writing tasks. Hence, the purpose of this research was to examine, by testing a theoretical model, the multidimensional nature of the relationship between EFL students’ multiple SRL variables and their writing competence. The subjects of this research comprised 357 Taiwanese undergraduate students from four universities in North Taiwan. Quantitative data gleaned through three questionnaires was analyzed; a paragraph writing test was also administered to assess the participants’ current writing competence. The results of the study are as follows: (1) All factor structures were verified and the proposed structural equation model was also specified, respectively with appropriate reliability and validity; (2) The participants developed more ideal L2 selves instead of ought-to L2 selves; (3) Only ideal L2 selves significantly affected students’ motivation; (4) Ideal L2 selves proved to be a much stronger predictor of extrinsic motivation rather than intrinsic motivation; (5) Both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation positively predicted learners’ proactive actions to teacher written corrective feedback (LPATF); and (6) Both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation had no direct effect on the participants’ writing competence, but LPATF did. The findings of this research reveal implications for L2 writing teachers and program designers on the development of students’ self-regulated learning skills.
論文目次 Table of Contents
Acknowledgments i
Chinese Abstract ii
English Abstract iii
Table of Contents v
List of Tables ix
List of Figures x

Chapter One: Introduction 1
Background and Motivation 1
Significance of the Study 6
Organization of the Dissertation 8
Chapter Two: Literature Review ..10
Introduction 10
Written Corrective Feedback 10
Definitions ..10
The Debate on the Effectiveness of Written Corrective Feedback………..………...12
The theoretical arguments against and for corrective feedback………………..12
The empirical findings against and for written corrective feedback…………...17
The Previous Empirical Research on the Effectiveness of Different Types of
WCF…………………………………………………………………………....20
Previous Research on Other WCF's Issues……………………………..…………...22
Teacher-student conferencing...........................................................................22
The comparison and analysis of learners' attitudes and perceptions
towards teacher feedback and peer feedback....................................................24
The comparison and analysis of teachers' and students' perceptions
towards error correction……………………………………………………....26
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….….27
Possible L2 Selves………………………………………………………………………29
Theoretical Shift…………………………………………………………………...29
Possible Selves Theory…………………………………………………………….31
Categories and definitions…………………………………………………………32
Balanced possible selves…………………………………………………………..36
The L2 Motivational Self System (L2MSS)………………………………………….…37
The components of L2MSS………………………………………………………..37
Empirical validation of L2MSS…………………………………………………...38
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………...40
Self-determination Theory: Intrinsic/extrinsic Motivation………………………….….41
Intrinsic Motivation…………………………………………………………….….43
Extrinsic Motivation………………………………………………………….……45
Previous Findings……………………………………………………………….…48
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………...51
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………...52
Chapter Three: Methodology……………………………………………………………..55
Introduction…………………………………………………………………………….55
Research Framework…………………………………………………………………...55
Research Questions…………………………………………………………………….56
Procedure……………………………………………………………………………….58
Pilot Study………………………………………………………………………...58
Formal Study……………………………………………………………………...58
Instruments……………………………………………………………………………..61
The L2 Motivational Self System Scale (L2MSSS)……………………………....62
The Writing Motivation Scale………………………………………………..…....65
The Learners' Proactive Actions to Teacher Written Corrective Feedback Scale....69
The Evaluation of Writing Competence…………………………………………….…...71
Data Analysis……………………………………………………………………….…...72
Preliminary Analyses……………………………………………………………....73
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)……………………………………………...73
Chapter Four: Results.........................................................................................................77
Introduction………………………………………………………………………….….77
Confirmatory Factor Analysis……………………………………………………….….77
Structural Equation Modeling among the Latent Variables……………………….……85
Descriptive Analysis………………………………………………………….…...85
The Final Modified Model of Structural Equation Modeling………………….….86
The Causal Relationships among Latent Variables…………………………….….89
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………...91
Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusion………………………………………………..93
Introduction 93
Summary and Discussion of the Major Findings…………………..…………………...93
Pedagogical Implications………………………………………………………….......101
Limitations of the Study……………………………………………………………….105
Research Scope and Objects……………………………………………………...105
Research Methods……..………………………………………………………….106
Suggestions for Future Studies…………………………………………………….…..106
Research Objects…………………………………………………………………107
Analysis Framework and Methodology………………………………………….108
References...........................................................................................................................109
Appendices………………………………………………………………………………...145
Appendix A: The Formal Study's Self-regulated Learning Variables Questionnaires
(English Version)……………………………………..……..….146
Appendix B: The Formal Study's Self-regulated Learning Questionnaires
(Chinese Version)…………………………………………………...…..150
Appendix C: The Pilot Study's Self-regulated Learning Questionnaires
(Chinese Version)……………………………………………………....154
Appendix D: The Writing Proficiency Test………………………………………….…..158
Appendix E: Scoring Rubric: Paragraphs…………………………………………….… 159
Appendix F: The Correlation Matrix of all Variables…………………………………...161












List of Tables
Table 1. Summaries of the Major Findings of Research on the Effectiveness of Individual
Written Corrective Feedback Techniques…………………………………………21
Table 2. The Descriptions of the Participants for the Pilot Study 58
Table 3. The Descriptions of the Participants for the Formal Study…………………………61
Table 4. The Pilot Study's Results for L2MSS Scale 63
Table 5. The Pilot Study's Results for the Intrinsic Motivation Scale 66
Table 6. The Pilot Study's Results for the Extrinsic Motivation Scale………………………68
Table 7. The Learners' Proactive Actions to Teacher Written Corrective Feedback Scale…..70
Table 8. The inter-rater reliability 72
Table 9. Selected Fit Indexes and Threshold Guidelines…………………………………….74
Table 10. The Goodness of Fit Indices of the Model of Possible L2 Selves………………...78
Table 11. The Possible L2 Selves Scales' Composite Reliability and Average Variance
Explained……………………………………………………………………..…...80
Table 12. The Goodness of Fit Indices of the Model of Intrinsic/extrinsic Motivation……..81
Table 13. The Intrinsic/extrinsic Motivation Scales' Composite Reliability and
Average Variance Explained……………………………………………………..82
Table 14. The Goodness of Fit Indices of the Model of Learners' LPATF…………………...83
Table 15. The LPATF Scales' Composite Reliability and Average Variance Explained……..84
Table 16. Descriptive Analysis of all Participants' SRL Variables…………………………..85
Table 17. The Overall Goodness of Fit Indices of the Final Modified Structural
Equation Model among All Variables…………………………………………...88
Table 18. The Effect Size Estimates for the Structural Model's Latent Endogenous
Variables…………………………………………………………………………89
Table 19. Effect Sizes of Direct and Indirect Paths among the Variables……………………90
List of Figures

Figure 1: A taxonomy of human motivation. Adapted from "Intrinsic and extrinsic
motivations: Classic definitions and new directions……………………………..47
Figure 2: The project's analytical framework 56
Figure 3: The CFA model of possible selves in learning L2 writing 78
Figure 4: The CFA model of intrinsic/extrinsic motivation in learning L2 writing 81
Figure 5: The CFA model of learners' proactive actions to teacher written corrective
feedback 83
Figure 6: The final structural equation model of the causal relationships between SRL
variables and writing competence
參考文獻 Agbayahoun , J. P. (2016). Teacher written feedback on student writing: Teachers’ and
learners’ perspectives. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(10), 1895-1904.
http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0610.01
Alhosani, N. M. (2008). Utilizing the writing process approach with English as a second
language writers: A case study of five fifth grade ESL Arab students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas.
Allwright, R.L. & K. M. Bailey. (1991). Focus on the language classroom: an introduction to
classroom research for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge.
Amador, Y. A. (2008). Learner attitudes toward error correction in a beginners English class.
Revista Comunicacion, 17(29), 18-28.
Amrhein, H. R., & Nassaji, H. (2010). Written corrective feedback: What do students and
teachers prefer and why? Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 95-127.
Anders, K. M. (2014). Sexual possible selves in emerging adulthood (Unpublished master's
Thesis). University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee.
Retrieved from: http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/2787
Avila, H. A. (2015). Creativity in the English class: Activities to promote EFL learning.
HOW, 22(2), 91-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.19183/how.22.2.141

Ayub, N. (2010). Effect of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on academic performance.
Pakistan Business Review, 12, 363-372.
Azarnoosh, M., & Birjandi, P. (2012). Junior high school students' L2 motivational self
system: Any gender differences? World Applied Sciences Journal, 20(4), 577-584.
doi:10.5829/idosi.wasj.2012.20.04.2732
Baghdasaryan, H. (n.d.). The second component of self regulated learning education
essay. Retrieved from: http://www.uniassignment.com/essay-samples/education/
the-second-component-of-self-regulated-learning-education-essay.php
Bagozzi, R.P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Sciences, 16, 74-94.
Bak, W. (2015). Possible selves: Implications for psychotherapy. International Journal of
Mental Health and Addition, 13(5), 650-658. doi:10.1007/s11469-015-9553-2
Barkoukis, V., Tsorbatzouis, H., Grouios.G., & Sideridis, G. (2008). The assessment of
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and amotivation: Validity and reliability of the Greek
Version of the Academic Motivation Scale. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 15(1), 39-55. doi:10.1080/09695940701876128
Beuningen, C. V. (2010). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives,
empirical insights, and future directions. International Journal of English Studies,
10(2), 1-27.
Bidin, S., Jusoff, K., Aziz, N. A., & Taniza, T. (2009). Motivation and attitude in learning
English among UiTM students in the Northern Region of Malaysia. English Language
Teaching, 2(2), 16- 20. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v2n2p16
Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effects of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 191-205.
doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2005.08.001
Boekaerts, M. (1999). Self-regulated learning: Where we are today. International Journal of
Educational Research, 31, 445-457. doi:10.1016/S0883-0355(99)00014-2
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. Wiley, New York.
Burke, D., & Pieterick, J. (2010). Giving students effective written feedback. Maidenhead,
Berks: Open University Press.
Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical
synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245-281.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543065003245
Byrne, B. M. (1984). The general/academic self-concept nomological network: A review of
construct validation research. Review of Educational Research, 54(3), 427-456.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543054003427
Calvo, E. T. (2015). Language learning motivation: The L2 Motivational Self System and its
relationship with learning achievement. Retrieved from:
https://ddd.uab.cat/pub/tfg/2015/137854/TFG_elisabettort.pdf
Carey, J. C., & Martin, I. (2007). What are the implications of possible selves research for
school counseling practice? School Counseling Research Brief, 5(2). Retrieved from:
https://www.umass.edu/schoolcounseling/uploads/brief5.2.pdf
Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese students' perceptions of ESL peer response
group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 1-19.
Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 267-296. doi:10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9
Chang, H. H. (2005). The relationship between extrinsic/intrinsic motivation and language
learning strategies among college students of English in Taiwan (Unpublished master's
thesis). Ming Chuan University, Taoyuan, Taiwan (ROC).
Chen, S. A. (2012). Motivation and possible selves: An interview study of Taiwanese EFL
learners. Language Education in Asia, 3(1), 50-59.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5746/LEiA/12/V3/11/A05/Chen
Child, D. (1990). The essentials of factor analysis (2nd ed.). London, England: Cassel
Academic.
Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2011). Learning by reviewing. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 103(1), 73-84. doi:10.1037/a0021950

Cho, M. H., & Cho, K. S. (2008). Self-monitoring interface to improve self-regulated writing.
In R. Kobayashi (Ed.), New Educational Technology (pp. 1-12). New York: Nova
Science Publishers, Inc.
Chomeya, R. (2010). Quality of psychology test between Likert scale 5 and 6 points. Journal
of Social Sciences, 6(3), 399-403.
Chomsky, N. (1975). Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon.
Chomsky, N. (1983). Things no amount of learning can teach. Retrieved from:
https://chomsky.info/198311__/
Chumney, F. L. (2013). Structural equation models with small samples: A comparative
study of four approaches (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of
Nebraska-Lincoln, Nebraska.
Clement, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1994). Motivation, self-confidence, and group
cohesion in the foreign language classroom. Language learning, 44(3), 417-488.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1994.tb01113.x
Cohen, A. D. (1987). Student processing of feedback on their compositions. In A. L. Wenden
& J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 57–69). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.
doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
Conrad, S., & Goldstein, L. (1999). ESL student revision after teacher written comments: Text, contexts and individuals. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(2), 147-179.
Corpus, V. A. F. (2011). Error correction in second language writing: teachers' beliefs,
practices, and students' preferences (Unpublished master's thesis). Queensland
University of Technology, Queensland.
Cotos, E. (2014). Genre-based automated writing evaluation for L2 research writing: From
design to evaluation and enhancement. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Crookes, G., & Schimidt, R. W. (1991). Motivation: Reopening the research agenda.
Language Learning, 41(4), 469-512.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Rathunde, K. (1993). The measurement of flow in everyday life.
Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 40, 57–97.
Cumming, A. (1990). Metalinguistic and ideational thinking in second language composing.
Written Communication, 7, 482–511. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088390007004003
Dattalo, P. (2013). Analysis of multiple dependent variables. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press.
Deci, E. L. (1992). The relation of interest to the motivation of behavior: A self-determination
theory perspective. In A. Renninger, S. Hidi & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in
learning and development (pp. 43-70). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. New York: Plenum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursuits: Human needs
and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human
motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology, 49(3), 182-185.
doi:10.1037/a0012801
Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., & Williams, G. C. (1996). Need satisfaction and the self-regulation
of learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8(3), 165-183, 1996.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1041-6080(96)90013-8
Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and
education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26(3&4),
325-346.
Diab, R. L. (2005). EFL university students' preferences for error correction and teacher
feedback on writing. TESL Reporter, 38(1), 27-51.
Ding, L., Velicer, W. F., & Harlow, L. L. (1995). Effects of estimation methods, number
of indicators per factor, and improper solutions on structural equation modeling fit
indices. Structural Equation Modeling, 2(2), 119-144.
doi:10.1080/10705519509540000
Donesch-Jezo, E. (2011). The role of output and feedback in second language acquisition: A
classroom-based study of grammar acquisition by adult English language learners.
ESUKA- JEFUL, 2(2), 9-28.
Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom. The Modern
Language Journal, 78(3), 273-284.
Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching,
21, 117-135.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). New themes and approaches in second language motivation research.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 21, 43-59.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The Psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in
second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dörnyei. Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.),
Motivation, language identify and the L2 self (pp. 9-41). Bristol, UK: Multilingual
Matters.
Dörnyei. Z. (2010). Researching motivation: From integrativeness to the ideal L2 self. In S.
Hunston & D. Oakey (Eds), Introducing applied linguistics: Concepts and skills (pp.
74-83). London: Routledge.
Dörnyei, Z., & Csizér, K. (2002). Some dynamics of language attitudes and motivation:
Results of a longitudinal nationwide survey. Applied Linguistics, 23(4), 421-462.
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/23.4.421
Eckstein, G. (2013). Implementing and evaluating a writing conference program for
international L2 writers across language proficiency levels. Journal of Second
Language Writing, 22, 231-239. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2013.03.001
Eisenberger, R., & Shanock, L. (2003). Rewards, intrinsic motivation, and creativity: A case
study of conceptual and methodological isolation. Creativity Research Journal, 15(2 &
3), 121-130.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal Volume,
63(2), 97-107. doi:10.1093/elt/ccn023
Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36(3), 353-371. doi:10.1016/j.system.2008.02.001
Fathman, A., & Whalley, E. (1990). Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form
versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the
classroom (pp. 178–190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ferris, D. R. (1995). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition
classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 33-53. doi:10.2307/3587804

Ferris, D. R. (1999). The case for grammar correction in. L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1-10.
doi:10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80111-6
Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ferris, D. (2004). The ‘‘grammar correction’’ debate in L2 Writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime ...?). Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 49–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.005
Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short-and
long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.),
Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 81-104). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2012).Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 307-329.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.009
Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error correction in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161-184.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with
Unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1),
39–50. doi:10.2307/3151312
Frazier, L. D., & Hooker, K. (2006). Possible selves in adult development: Linking theory
and research. In C. Dunkel & J. Kerpelman (Eds.), Possible selves: Theory, research
and applications (pp. 41-59). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
Froiland, J. M. (2012). Intrinsic motivation to learn: The nexus between psychological health and academic success. Contemporary School Psychology, 1692, 91-100.
Gardner, R. C. (1979). Social psychological aspects of second language acquisition. In H.
Giles & R. St. Clair (Eds.), Language and social psychology (pp. 193-220). Oxford:
Blackwell.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of
attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold Publishers.
Gardner, R. C. (2001). Correlation, causation, motivation, and second language acquisition.
Canadian Psychology, 41(1), 10-24. doi:10.1037/h0086854
Gardner, R. C. (2006). The socio-educational model of second language acquisition.
EUROSLA Yearbook, 6, 237-260. doi:10.1075/eurosla.6.14gar
Gardner, R.C., & Lambert, W.E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second-language
learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1993). A student’s contributions to second-language
learning. Part II: Affective variables. Language teaching, 26, 1-11.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800000045
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2001). SPSS for Windows: A simple guide and reference.
Needham Heights, MA: A Pearson Education Company.
Goldstein, L. M. (2004). Questions and answers about teacher written commentary and student revision: teachers and students working together. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 63-80. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2004.04.006
Goldstein, L. M., & Conrad, S. M. (1990). Student input and negotiation of meaning in ESL writing conferences. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 443-460. doi:10.2307/3587229
Grossnickle, J., & Raskin, O. (2001). Online marketing research. NY: The McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc.
Hadwin, A. F. (2008). Self-regulated learning. In T. L. Good (Ed.), 21st century education: A
reference handbook (pp. 175-183). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1987). Multivariate data analysis (2nd
Edition). New York, NY: Macmillan.
Hamidun, N., Hashim, S. H. M., & Othman, N. F. (2012). Enhancing students’ motivation by providing feedback on writing: The case of international students from Thailand. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 2(6), 591–594.
doi:10.7763/IJSSH.2012.V2.179
Hamouda, A. (2011). A study of students and teachers' preferences and attitudes towards correction of classroom written errors in Saudi EFL context. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 128-141. doi:10.5539/elt.v4n3p128
Han, Z. H. (2002). Rethinking the role of corrective feedback in communicative language
teaching. RELC Journal, 33(1), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368820203300101
Hartshorn, K. J., & Norman, W. E. (2015). The Effects of dynamic written corrective
feedback: A 30-week study. Journal of Response to Writing, 1(2), 6–34.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research,
77(1), 81-112. doi:10.3102/003465430298487
Hendrick, R. (1988). Anaphora in Celtic and universal grammar. London: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Hiền, H. M. (2008). The impact of online peer feedback on EFL learners’ motivation in
writing and writing performance: A case study at Can Tho University (Unpublished
master’s thesis). Can Tho University, Can Tho, Vietnam.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological
Review, 94(3), 319-340.
Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational
principle. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30,
pp. 1-46). New York: Academic Press.
Hinkel, E. (2015). Effective curriculum for teaching L2 writing. New York: Routledge.
Hinkin, T. R., Tracey, J. B., & Enz, C. A. (1997). Scale construction: Developing reliable and
valid measurement instruments. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research,
21(1), 100-120. doi:10.1177/109634809702100108
Holtzman, S. (2014). Confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling of
noncognitive assessments using PROC CALIS. Retrieved from:
http://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings14/1651-2014.pdf
Hoyle, R. H., & Sherrill, M. R. (2006). Future orientation in the self-system: Possible selves,
self-regulation, and behavior. Journal of Personality, 74(6), 1673-1696.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00424.x
Hsieh, C. N. (2009). L2 learners' self-appraisal of motivational changes over time. Issues in
Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 3-26.
Huang, W. C. (2014). Towards an identity-regulated language learning model (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan (ROC).
Hyland, F. (2000). ESL writers and feedback: giving more autonomy to students. Language
Teaching Research, 4(1), 33-54.
Hyland, F. (2011). The language learning potential of form-focused feedback on writing:
students’ and teachers’ perceptions. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), Learning to write and
writing to learn in an additional language (pp. 159-179). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Hyland, F., & Hyland, K. (2001). Sugaring the pill: Praise and criticism in written
feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 185– 212.

Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 148-164. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.005
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students' writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83-101. doi:10.1017/S0261444806003399
Jahin, J. H. (2012). The effect of peer reviewing on writing apprehension and essay writing ability of prospective EFL teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(11), 60-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2012v37n11.3
Jones, B. D., Llacer-Arrastia, S., & Newbill, P. B. (2009). Motivating foreign language
students using self-determination theory. Innovation in Language Learning and
Teaching, 3(2), 171-189. doi:10.1080/17501220802358210
Jun, S. W. (2012). Developing self-regulated learning skills to overcome lexical problems in
writing: Case studies of Korean ESL learners (Unpublished dissertation thesis).
University of Toronto, Ontario.
Kapil, M. E., & Shepard, B. C. (2011). Perceptions of present and future capability among a
sample of rural British Columbia youth. Canadian Journal of Counseling and
Psychotherapy, 45(1), 17-33.
Karageorghis, C., & Terry, P. (2010). Inside sport psychology. Leeds: Human Kinetics Ltd.
Kepner, C. G. (1991). An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback
to the development of second-language writing skills. The Modern Language
Journal, 75(3), 305-313. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1991.tb05359.x
Khan, M. R. (2015). Analyzing the relationship between L2 motivational selves and L2
achievement: A Saudi perspective. International Journal of English Language
Teaching, 2(1), 68-75. doi:10.5430/ijelt.v2n1p68
Kim, J. H. (2004). Issues of corrective feedback in second language acquisition. Working
Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 1-24.
Kim, J. H. (2015). The role of models and error correction in L2 young learners' noticing and
output. English Teaching, 70(2), 3-26. doi:10.15858/engtea.70.2.201506.3
Kim, T. Y. (2009). The sociocultural interface between ideal self and ought-to self: A case
study of two Korean students' ESL motivation. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.),
Motivation, language identify and the L2 self (pp. 274-294). Bristol, UK: Multilingual
Matters.
Kim, T. Y. (2012). The L2 motivational self system of Korean EFL students: Cross-grade
survey analysis. English Teaching, 67(1), 29-56.
Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY:
Guilford.
Komura, K. (1999). Student response to error correction in ESL classrooms (Unpublished
master's thesis). California State University, Sacramento.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford:
Pergamon Press Inc.
Krashen, S. (2002). The comprehension hypothesis and its rivals. In selected papers from the
Eleventh International Symposium on English Teaching/FourthPan-AsianComference
(pp. 395-404). English Teachers Association/ROC
Krashen, S. (2009). The comprehension hypothesis extended. In T. Piske & M.
Young-Scholten (Eds.), Input matters in SLA (pp. 81-94). Bristol: Multilingual
Matters.
Kubincová, Z., Homola, M., & Bejdová, V. (2013). Motivational effect of peer review in
blog-based activities. Paper presented at the 12th International Conference
on Web-based learning (ICWL 2013), Kenting, Taiwan, 6th–9th October, 2013.
Retrieved from: http://dai.fmph.uniba.sk/~homola/papers/icwl2013.pdf
Lai, H. Y. (2013). The motivation of learners of English as a foreign language revisited.
International Education Studies, 6(10), 90-101. doi:10.5539/ies.v6n10p90
Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing composition errors: An experiment. The Modern Language
Journal, 66(2), 140-149. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1982.tb06973.x
Lamb, M. (2004). Integrative motivation in a globalizing world. System, 32(1), 3-19.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2003.04.002
Latifi, M., Ketabi, S., & Mohammadi, E. (2013). The comprehension hypothesis
today: An interview with Stephen Krashen. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language
Teaching, 10(2), 221-233.
Lee, I. (1997). Peer reviews in a Hong Kong tertiary classroom. TESL Canada Journal,
15(1), 58-69. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v15i1.692
Lee, N. S. C. (2009). Written peer feedback by EFL students: praise, criticism, and
suggestion. Komaba Journal of English Education. Retrieved from:
http://park.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/eigo/KJEE/001/129-139.pdf
Lee, S., & Oyserman, D. (2009). Development of possible selves: Individual and contextual
factors. Retrieved from: http://www.education.com/reference/article/possible-selves
-theory/
Lehmann. C. (1982). On some current views of the language. In R. Dirven & G. Radden
(eds.), Issues in the theory of universal grammar. Tübingen: G. Narr (TBL, 196).
75-94.
Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error-correction in college-level writing
classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24, 203-218.
doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.1991.tb00464.x
Lennon, P. (1991). Error: some problems of definition and identification. Applied
Linguistic, 12(2), 180-195. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/12.2.180
Leondari, A., & Gonida, E. N. (2008). Adolescents' possible selves, achievement goal
orientations, and academic achievement. Hellenic Journal of Psychology, 5, 179-198.

Lepper, M. R., Greene, N., & Nisbett, R. E. (1973). Undermining children's intrinsic interest
with extrinsic rewards: A test of the "overjustification" hypothesis. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 28, 129-137.
Levitt, A. J. (2014). A self-regulation model of recovery from psychiatric disability. Retrieved
from: https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/44369/PDF/1/
Li, X. W. (2001). Band 4 writing. Hefei: Chinese Science and Technology University Press.
Liao, M. C., & Wang, H. C. (2009). Perception differences of EFL teachers and students in
grammar instruction and error correction. English Teaching & Learning, 33(1),
101-146.
Liu, Y. L. (2009). ESL students in the college writing conferences: Perception and
participation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Arizona, Tucson,
Arizona.
Lochtman, K. (2005). Negative feedback and learner uptake in analytic foreign language
teaching. In A. Housen & M. Pierrard (Eds.), Investigations in instructed second
language learning (pp. 333-352). Berlin and New York: Monton de Gruyter.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W.
C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.
413-468). San Diego: Academic Press.

Maarof, N., Yamat, H., & Li, L. K. (2011). Role of teacher, peer and teacher-peer feedback in enhancing ESL students' writing. World Applied Sciences Journal, 15, 29-35.
MacIntyre, P. D., & MacKinnon, S. P., & Clément, R. (2009). From integrative motivation to
possible selves: The baby, the bathwater and the future of language learning motivation
research. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, Language Identity and the
L2 Self (pp. 43-65). North York, ON: Multilingual Matters.
Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied
Linguistics, 27, 405-530. doi:10.1093/applin/ami051
Mackay, J. (2016). An ideal L2 self intervention: Implications for self-concept, motivation annd engagement with the target language (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Maehr, M. L., & Archer, J. (1985). Motivation and school achievement. ERIC. Retrieved
from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED265938.pdf
Magid, M. (2014). An application of the L2 motivational self system to motivate elementary
school English learners in Singapore. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 2(1),
228-237. doi:10.11114/jets.v2il.232
Magid, M., & Chan, L. (2011). Motivating English learners by helping them visualise their
ideal L2 self: lessons from two motivational programmes. Innovation in Language
Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 113-125. doi:10.1018/17501229.2011.614693
Markus, H. R. (2006). Foreword. In C. Dunkel & J. Kerpelman (Eds.), Possible selves:
Theory, research and applications (pp. xi–xiv). New York, NY: Nova Science.
Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954-969.
Markus, H., & Ruvolo, A. (1989). Possible selves: Personalized representations of goals. In
L. A. Pervin (Ed.), Goal concepts in personality and social psychology (pp. 211–241).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Martinez, H. (2016). Inspired and effective: The role of the ideal self in employee
engagement, well-being, and positive organizational behaviors (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.
Mhundwa, P. H. (2003). Error treatment in students' written assignments in discourse
analysis. Journal for Language Teaching, 37(2), 224-236.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/tvl.v37i2.53844
Montgomery, J. L., & Baker, W. (2007). Teacher-written feedback: Student perceptions,
teacher self-assessment, and actual teacher performance. Journal of Second Language
Writing, 16(2), 82–99. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.04.002
Nielsen, D. (2015). The Impact of Formative Feedback on Student Motivation to Write in
Eighth Grade English Courses. All Theses, Dissertations, and Other Capstone Projects.
Paper 440. Retrieved from:
http://cornerstone.lib.mnsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1439&context=etds
Noels, K. A. (2001). New orientations in language learning motivation: Towards a model of intrinsic, extrinsic, and integrative orientations and motivation. In Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 43-68). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press.
Noels, K. A. (2003). Learning Spanish as a second language: Learners' orientations and
perceptions of their teachers' communication style. In Z. Dörnyei (ed.), Attitudes,
orientations and motivations in language learning (pp. 97-136). Oxford: Blackwell.
Noels, K. A., Clément, R., & Pelletier, L. G. (2001). Intrinsic, extrinsic, and integrative
orientations of French Canadian learners of English. The Canadian Modern Language
Review, 57(3), 424-442.
Noels, K. A., Pelletier, L. G., Clément, R., & Vallerand, R. J. (2000). Why are you learning a
second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language
Learning, 50(1), 57-85.
Norouzian, R., & Farahani, A. A. K. (2012). Written error feedback from perception to
practice: A feedback on feedback. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(1),
11-22. doi:10.4304/jltr.3.1.11-22
Nowak, M. A., Komarova, N. L., & Niyogi, P. (2001). Evolution of universal grammar.
Science, 291, 114-118. doi:10.1126/science.291.5501.114

Ortega, L. (2009). Studying writing across EFL contexts: Looking back and moving
forward. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), Writing in foreign language contexts: Learning,
teaching, and research (pp. 232-255). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Oxford, R., & Shearin, J. (1994). Language learning motivation: Expanding the theoretical
framework. The Modern Language Journal, 78(i), 12-28.
doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02011.x
Oyserman, D. (2008). Possible selves: Identity-based motivation and school success. In H.
Marsh, R. Craven & D. McInerney (Eds.), Self-processes, learning and enabling
human potential dynamic new approaches (Vol. 3, pp. 269–288). USA: Information
Age Press.
Oyserman, D., Bybee, D., Terry, K., & Hart-Johnson, T. (2004). Possible selves as roadmaps.
Journal of Research in Personality, 38, 130-149. doi:10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00057-6
Oyserman, D., & Fryberg, S. (2006). The possible selves of diverse adolescents: Content and
function across gender, race and national origin. In C. Dunkel & J. Kerpelman (Eds.),
Possible selves: Theory, research, and application. Huntington, NY: Nova.
Oyserman, D., & James, L. (2009). Possible selves: From content to process. In K. D.
Markman, W. M. P. Klein & J. A. Suhr (Eds.), Handbook of imagination and mental
stimulation (pp. 373–394). New York: Psychology Press.

Oyserman, D., & Markus, H. R. (1990a). Possible selves and delinquency. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 59(1), 112-125.
Oyserman, D., & Markus, H. R. (1990b). Possible selves in balance: Implications for
delinquency. Developmental Psychology, 10(2), 764–771.
Papi, M. (2010). The L2 motivational self system, L2 anxiety, and motivated behavior: A
structural equation modeling approach. System, 38, 467-479.
doi:10.1016/j.system.2010.06.011
Papi, M., & Abdollahzadeh, E. (2015). Teacher motivational practice, student motivation,
and possible L2 selves: An examination in the Iranian EFL context. Language
Learning, 62(2), 571-594. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00632.x
Papi, M., & Teimouri, Y. (2002). Dynamics of selves and motivation: a cross-sectional study in the EFL context of Iran. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 22(3), 287-309. doi: 10.1111/j.1473-4192.2012.00312.x
Perry, N. E., & Rahim, A. (2011). Studying self-regulated learning in classrooms. In B. J.
Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and
performance (pp. 122-136). New York: Routledge.
Philip, C. K. (2016). Communicative language teaching revisited: Exploring the
teacher’s role towards developing writing skills with a special focus on
Marakwet District, Kenya. IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science,
Vol 21, 8(1), 55-64. doi:10.9790/0837-2108015564
Pienemann, M. (1985). Learnability and syllabus construction. In K. Hyltenstam & M.
Pienemann (Eds). Modelling and assessing second language development (pp.
23-76). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Pintrich, P. R. (n.d.). Motivation: Self-regulated learning. Retrieved from: http://education.
stateuniversity.com/pages/2249/Motivation-SELF-REGULATED-LEARNING.html
Plass, J. L., & Jones, L. C. (2005). Multimedia learning in second language learning. In R. E.
Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 467-488).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Polio, C. (2012). The relevance of second language acquisition theory to the written error
correction debate. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 375-389.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.004
Polit, D. F., &Yang, F. (2016). Measurement and the measurement of change: A primer for
health professionals. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia.
Qi, D. S., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Exploring the role of noticing in a three-stage second
language writing task. Journal of second language writing, 10, 277-303.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(01)00046-7
Reeve, J. (2002). Self-determination theory applied to educational settings. In E. L. Deci &
R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 183-203). Rochester
press, USA: The University of Rochester Press.
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59(1), 23-30. doi:10.1093/elt/cci003
Rowe, A. D., & Wood, L. (2008). Student perceptions and preferences for feedback. Asian
Social Science, 4(3), 78–88.
Ruan, Z. (2005). A metacognitive perspective on the growth of self-regulated EFL student
writers. Reading Working Papers in Linguistics, 8, 175-202.
Ruiz-Funes, M. (2014). Task complexity and linguistic performance in advanced
college-level foreign language writing. In H. Byrnes & R. M. Manchon (Eds.),
Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 163–192).
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and
new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.
doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Saito, H. (1994). Teachers' practices and students' preferences for feedback on second
language writing: A case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal, 11(2),
46-70. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v11i2.633
Sakai, H. (2004). Roles of outputs and feedback for L2 learners' noticing. JALT Journal,
26(1), 25-54.

Salteh, M. A., & Sadeghi, K. (2012). Teachers' corrective feedback in L2 writing revisited: Concerns against and suggestions for its employment. World Applied Sciences Journal, 17(3), 375-383.
Samila, S. (2006). The students' attitudes to teachers' feedback in writing: A case study of second year students (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Constantine, Constantine, DPRA.
Sarab, M. R. A., & Yousefpoori-Naeim, M. (2013). Comparing teachers' views on the role
of grammar and error correction in language teaching with those of their students.
Retrieved from: http://faculties.sbu.ac.ir/~m_yousefpoori/anani-sarab-yousefpoori
-naeim -comparing-views.pdf
Savignon, S. J. (2001). Communicative language teaching in the twenty-first century. In M.
Celce-Murcia (ed.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Boston:
Heinle & Heinle.
Savignon, S. J. (2002). Communicative competence: theory and classroom practice.
Taipei: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied
Linguistics, 11, 128-158.


Schmidt, R. (2010). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. In
W. M. Chan, S. Chi, K. N. Cin, J. Istanto, M. Nagami, J.W. Sew, T. Suthiwan & I.
Walker (Eds.), Proceedings of CLaSIC 2010, Singapore, December 2-4 (pp. 721-737).
Singapore: National University of Singapore, Centre for Language Studies.
Schmidt, R., Boraie, D., & Kassabgy, O. (1996). Foreign language motivation: Internal
structure and external connections. In R. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning motivation:
Pathways to the new century (Technical Report No. 11, pp. 9-70). Honolulu:
University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
Schulz, R. A. (1996). Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: Students' and teachers' views on error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language Annals, 29, 343-364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1996.tb01247.x
Semke, H. D. (1984). Effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17, 195-202.
doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.1984.tb01727.x
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners' acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 255-283.
doi:10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00059.x
Sheen, Y., Wright, D., & Moldawa, A. (2009). Differential effects of focused and
unfocused written correction on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult
ESL learners. System 37, 556–569. doi:10.1016/j.system.2009.09.002
Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23, 103-110. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368829202300107
Shin, S. J. (2003).The reflective L2 writing teacher. ELT Journal, 57(1), 3-10.
Simpson, J. M. (2006). Feedback on writing: Changing EFL students' attitudes. TESL Canada Journal, 24(1), 96-112. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v24i1.30
Srichanyachon, N. (2012a): Teacher Written Feedback for L2 Learners’ Writing
Development. Journal of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts, 12(1), 7-17.
Srichanyachon, N. (2012b). An investigation of university EFL students’ attitudes toward
peer and teacher feedback. Educational Research and Reviews, 7(26), 558–562.
doi:10.5897/ERR12.060
Stapleton C. D. (1997). Basic concepts and procedures of confirmatory factor analysis. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the Southwest Educational Research Association,
Austin, TX, January. Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED407416.pdf
Stavrou, N. A. (2008). Intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation and amotivation:
Examining self-determination theory from flow theory perspective. In F. M. Olsson
(Ed.), New developments in the psychology of motivation (pp. 1-24). Hauppauge, NY:
Nova Science Publishers.
Straub, R. (1997). Students' reactions to teacher comments: An exploratory study. Research
in the Teaching of English, 31(1), 91-119.
Suhr, Diana D. (2006). Exploratory or Confirmatory Factor Analysis? Presented: San
Francisco, CA, SAS Users Group International Conference (SUGI31), March 2006.
Retrieved from: http://www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi31/200-31.pdf
Swain, M. (1995), Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook &
B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in Honour of H.G. (pp. 125-144). Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (2007). The Output Hypothesis. A keynote speech in the 5th Annual International
Conference on ELT in Beijing. Retrieved from:
www.celea.cn/2007/keynote/ppt/Merill%Swain.pdf.
Syah, A. (2010). Peer Feedback in English as Second Language Writing. Retrieved from:
https://zh.scribd.com/document/45812393/Peer-Feedback-in-English-as-
Second-Language-Writing
Taguchi, M. (2013). Motivation, attitudes and selves in the Japanese context: A mixed
methods approach. In M. T. Apple & D. Da Silva (Eds.), Language learning
motivation in Japan (pp. 169-188). Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
Taguchi, T., Magid, M., & Papi, M. (2009). The L2 motivational self system amongst
Chinese, Japanese, and Iranian learners of English: A comparative study. In Z. Dörnyei
& E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 66–97).
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Tang, G. M., & Tithecott, J. (1999). Peer response in ESL writing. TESL Canada Journal,
16(2), 20-38. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v16i2.716
Tangpermpoon, T. (2008). Integrated approaches to improve students writing skills for
English major students. ABAC Journal, 28(2), 1-9.
Tatawy, M. E. (2002). Corrective feedback in second language acquisition. Working Papers
in TESOL and Applied Linguistics, 2(2), 1-19.
Telçeker, H., & Akcan, S. (2010). The effect of oral and written teacher feedback on
students’ revisions in a process-oriented EFL writing class. TESL Reporter
43(1), 31-49.
Thomas, J. D., & Arnold, R. M. (2011). Giving feedback. Journal of Palliative Medicine,
14(2), 233-239. doi:10.1089/jpm.2010.0093
Tom, A., Morni, A., Metom, L., & Joe, S. (2013). Students’ perception and preferences of
written feedback in academic writing. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 4(11),
72–80. doi:10.5901/mjss.2013.v4n11p72
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review
of Educational Research, 68(3), 249-276. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068003249
Treglia, M. O. (2008). Feedback on feedback: Exploring student responses to teachers’
written commentary. Journal of Basic Writing, 27(1), 105-137.

Tremblay, P. F., & Gardner, R. C. (1995). Expanding the motivation construct in language
learning. The Modern Language Learning, 79(4), 505-519.
doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05451.x
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language
Learning, 46(2), 327–369.
Truscott, J. (2004). Evidence and conjecture on the effects of correction: A response to
Chandler. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 337–343.
doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2004.05.002
Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255–272. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.06.003
Tsao, C. H. (2011). The effect of error correction on EFL student writing. Journal of
Education Studies, 45(1), 89-110.
Tsao, C. T. (2012). Learners’ preferred instructional activities and their English learning
motivation: A study of EFL vocational high school students in Taiwan (Unpublished
master's dissertation). Ming Chuan University, Taoyuan, Taiwan (ROC).
Tsao, J. J., Tseng, W. T., & Wang, C. C. (2017). The effects of writing anxiety and motivation
on EFL college students' self-evaluative judgments of corrective feedback.
Psychological Reports, 120(2), 219-241. doi:10.1177/0033294116687123

Tsui, A. B. M. (2011). Classroom discourse. In J. Simpson (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of
applied linguistics (pp. 274-286). NY & London: Routledge.
Underwood, J. D., & Tregidgo, A. P. (2006). Improving student writing through effective
feedback: Best practices and recommendations. Journal of Teaching Writing, 22(2),
73-97.
Ushioda, E., & Dörnyei.Z. (2009). Motivation, language identities and the L2 self: A
Theoretical Overview. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language
identify and the L2 self (pp. 1-8). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 271-360.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60019-2
Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L., & Koestner, R. (2008). Reflections on self-determination
theory. Canadian Psychology, 49(3), 257-262. doi:10.1037/a0012804
Van Den Berg, B.A.M., Admiraal, W.F., & Pilot, A. (2006). Design principles and
outcomes of peer assessment in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 31(3),
341-356. doi:10.1080/03075070600680836
Vandergrift, L. (2005). Relationships among motivation orientations, metacognitive
awareness and proficiency in L2 listening. Applied Linguistics, 26(1), 70-89.
doi:10.1093/applin/amh039
Varnosfadrani, A. D., & Basturkmen, H. (2009). The effectiveness of implicit and explicit
error correction on learners’ performance. System, 37, 82-98.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.04.004
Wang, H. C. (2009). Taiwanese students' perceptions of writing commentaries: Revisiting
culture. The International Journal of Language Society and Culture, 28, 82-91.
Wang, F. X. (2008). Motivation and English achievement: An exploratory and
confirmatory factor analysis of a new measurement for Chinese. North American
Journal of Psychology, 10, 633-646.
Wen, Y. (2013). Teacher written feedback on L2 student writings. Journal of Language
Teaching and Research, 4(2), 427-431. doi:10.4304/jltr.4.2.427-431
White, L. (1987). Against comprehensible input: The input hypothesis and the development
of second-language competence. Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 95-110.
Wijaya, H. P. S., & Tedjaatmadja, H. M. (n.d.). Using music tostimulate learners in L2
writing. Retrieved from: http://www.academia.edu/795233/Using_Music_to_
Stimulate_Learners_in_L2_Writing
Williams, J. (2012). The potential role(s) of writing in second language development. Journal
of Second Language Writing, 21, 321-331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.007


Wolters, C. A. (1999). The relation between high school students' motivational regulation and
their use of learning strategies, effort, and classroom performance. Learning and
Individual Differences, 11(3), 281-301. Retrieved from:
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.tku.edu.tw/ehost/detail/detail?vid=2&sid
=86c1ea17-2234-4971-91c2-67e26df34a9b%40sessionmgr4007&hid=4214&bdata
=Jmxhbmc9emgtdHcmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl#AN=3911728&db=tfh
Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized aspect of
self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(4), 189-205.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3804_1
Wolters, C. A., Pintrich, P. R., & Karabenick, S. A. (2003). Assessing academic
self-regulated learning. Paper prepared for the Conference on Indicators of Positive
Development: Definitions, Measures, and Prospective Validity. Sponsored by
Child Trends, National Institutes of Health Retrieved from: http://childtrends.org/
wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Child_Trends-2003_03_12_PD_PDConfWPK.pdf
Wu, M. L., & Chang, Y. J. (2010). Structural equation modeling: Tips for practical
application. Taipei: Wu-Nan Book Inc.
Wu, W. (2008). Misunderstanding of communicative language teaching. English Language
Teaching, 1(1), 50-53.

Wu, Y. S., & Lin, C. P. (2009). A study of the relationship among English learning
environment, learning motivation and learning strategies of college students. Journal of
Taipei Municipal University of Education: Education, 40(2), 181-222.
Yashima, T. (2009). International posture and the ideal L2 self in the Japanese EFL context. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 144-163). Bristol Multilingual Matters.
Yastıbaş, G. Ç., & Yastıbaş, A. E. (2015). The effect of peer feedback on writing anxiety
in Turkish EFL (English as a Foreign Language) students. Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 199(3), 530-536.
Zacharias, N. T. (2007). Teacher and student attitudes toward teacher feedback. RELC
Journal, 38(1), 38-52. doi:10.1177/0033688206076157
Zamel, V. (1982). Writing: The process of discovering meaning. TESOL Quarterly, 16(2),
195-209. doi:10.2307/3587297
Zhu, S., & Tse, S. (2015). Possible selves, strategies and perceived likelihood among
adolescents in Hong Kong: Desire and concern. International Journal of Adolescence
and Youth, 20(4), 1-15.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2015.1031683
Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Developing self-fulfilling cycles of academic regulation: An
analysis of exemplary instructional models. In D. H. Schunk& B. J. Zimmerman
(Eds.), Self- regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 1-19).
New York: Guilford Press.
Zimmerman, B. J., Bonner, S., & Kovach, R. (1996). Developing self-regulated learners;
Beyond achievement to self-efficacy. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Campillo, M. (2003). Motivating self-regulated problems solvers. In J.
E. Davidson & R. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of problem solving (pp. 233-262).
New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2018-01-11公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2018-01-11起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2487 或 來信 dss@mail.tku.edu.tw