Longitudinal interactions of L2 learners’ motivations and strategic behavior in strategies-based writing instruction

Abstract

Abstract Strategic behavior for self-regulated learning (SRL) is crucial for academic success in L2 writing. Yet little is known about how learners’ motivation-related factors develop as their strategic behavior progresses during classroom instruction in L2 writing contexts. Informed by SRL theory, this longitudinal case study adopted multiple assessment approaches to explicating the development trajectories of two Chinese L2 writers’ motivational factors relating to expectancy, value, and goal orientation (i.e., self-efficacy, task value, and goal orientations) and strategic behavior in the classroom ecology of self-regulation strategies-based instruction. Participants were one high-proficiency writer and one low-proficiency writer who were enrolled in the self-regulation strategies-based writing course. They voluntarily participated in this study and completed semi-structured interviews and reflective journals at the beginning (T1), the middle (T2), and the end of the instruction (T3). Field notes were used to complement the primary data sources. The qualitative analyses revealed both students’ limited understanding of SRL strategies at the initial stage. Their strategic behavior progressed with the social and metacognitive scaffolding at T2, but only the high-proficiency writer sustained active engagement at T3. With different goal orientations and linguistic self-efficacy at the initial stage, both students reported noticeable increases in their intrinsic goal orientation, task value, and self-efficacy in classroom performance at T2 and T3. Their motivational states were also affected by linguistic proficiency, metacognitive scaffolding, and social interactions during the instruction. This study is expected to provide insights into how L2 writers’ strategic behavior progresses with their changes in motivations.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 15 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.