







































 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 85 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

Theoretical Analysis, Classroom Practice, Opinion Essays 

 

Scaffolding Self-Regulated Learning for  

English as an Additional Language Literacy Learners 

 

Tara L. Penner 

University of Alberta / NorQuest College 

 

Marilyn L. Abbott 

University of Alberta 

 

Kent K. Lee 

University of Alberta 

 

Abstract 

 

Emergent multilingual English as an additional language literacy learners (EALLs) have unique 

learning needs as they are learning to read and write for the first time in any language while they 

are also beginning to develop formal learning strategies that support successful school-based 

learning. Consequently, EALLs require specialized instruction in how to regulate the 

metacognitive, cognitive, behavioural, motivational, and emotional aspects of learning in formal 

classroom environments. Theories of self-regulated learning can inform English as an additional 

language (EAL) literacy programming and guide instructors in the development of EALLs’ 

formal learning strategies. The effective use of formal self-regulated learning strategies for 

planning, monitoring, and evaluating learning is essential for successful school-based learning. 

In this paper, we review three models of self-regulation (Dörnyei, 2005; Oxford, 2017; 

Zimmerman, 2013) that inform an instructional sequence designed to support EALLs’ self-

regulated learning in the classroom. We describe our research-informed instructional sequence 

and provide examples of how instructors can encourage EALLs’ use of self-regulatory strategies 

including commitment, metacognitive, satiation, emotional, and environment control strategies, 

as well as the development of metastrategies that support self-regulated learning. In summary, 

we demonstrate how research on self-regulated learning can inform instructional practices for 

EALLs in EAL literacy classes.  

 

Introduction 

 

Emergent multilingual English as an additional language literacy learners (EALLs) are readers 

who are learning to decode/encode print for the first time in any language and those who have 

either been denied access to formal school-based learning or have few prior experiences with 

formal learning. In British Columbia and elsewhere in Canada, many of these learners attend 

English as an additional language (EAL) literacy classes offered in programs such as Language 

Instruction for Newcomers to Canada (LINC) that are guided by the Canadian Language 

Benchmarks (CLBs) (CCLB, 2012). The goal of LINC programming is to provide newcomer 

immigrants and people with refugee experiences with basic formal language instruction and 

other settlement related knowledge and skills to facilitate their integration into Canadian society 

(IRCC, 2020). In LINC, there are two streams of language instruction: one for literate EAL 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469


 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 86 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

learners who are able to use their first language literacy to support their English language 

learning and the other for EALLs. The CLBs are national standards that describe 12 levels of 

EAL proficiency across three stages: Stage 1/beginner, CLB 1–4; Stage 2/intermediate, CLB 5–

8; Stage 3/advanced, CLB 7–12. In addition to language and pragmatic knowledge, strategic 

competence is an important component in models of additional language proficiency (e.g., 

Bachman & Palmer, 1996, 2010) that inform the CLBs (CCLB, 2015). Current 

conceptualizations of strategic language learning and use are grounded in self-regulation theory, 

as the ability to autonomously deploy language learning and use strategies relies on the learners’ 

capacity to regulate their cognition, emotions, and social behaviours (Oxford, 2017). However, 

the benchmarks and their theoretical framework (CCLB, 2015) do not directly reference any 

models of self-regulation that could inform instruction for EALLs enrolled in pre-benchmark and 

CLB 1–4 literacy classes.  

 

Self-regulation involves the ability to control one’s thoughts, feelings, behaviours, 

motivation, and to some extent the environment to achieve one’s goals (Dörnyei, 2005; Oxford, 

2017; Zimmerman, 2000). Self-regulated learning (SRL) strategies can facilitate language 

learning by promoting the goal directed behaviours involved in planning for, monitoring, and 

evaluating one’s language learning efforts, performance, and outcomes (Oxford, 2017). We 

argue that EALLs, particularly those who were denied access to any formal school-based 

learning, will benefit from self-regulation instruction as they have been reported to struggle with 

the formal strategies required for success in the EAL literacy classroom (Faux & Watson, 2020; 

Wrigley, 2010), such as utilizing print literacy strategies to manage their time and reflect on 

learning (Abbott et al., 2021). By fostering their students’ awareness and control of their self-

regulatory behaviours, instructors can encourage students to transition from being teacher-

regulated strategy users to self-regulated strategy users. 

 

In the ensuing sections, we briefly review three models of self-regulation (Dörnyei, 2005; 

Oxford, 2017; Zimmerman, 2013). Then we present a research-informed instructional sequence 

to guide SRL strategy instruction for EALLs in task-based language classes in which learners are 

taught to complete real-life tasks such as filling out a form at a doctor’s office. We also share an 

SRL strategy observation checklist for instructors to use or adapt for use in their EAL literacy 

classes.  

 

EALLs in LINC 

 

Adult literacy learners, who are developing print literacy for the first time in any language,  

 

were never able to develop the basic reading and writing skills that form the foundation 

for acquiring literacy and for other kinds of learning. They face the dual challenge of 

learning a new language while trying to develop the skills and strategies associated with 

decoding and comprehending print. (Condelli, 2020, p. vii)  

 

LINC providers recognize these challenges; therefore, when numbers permit, EALLs are initially 

placed in specialized LINC literacy classes to assist them in developing “the skills and strategies 

that will help them cope and continue learning in mainstream classes [in the future]” (CCLB, 

2016, p. 11). These skills and strategies extend beyond basic reading and writing in English, and 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469


 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 87 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

encompass how to learn in formal classroom environments that incorporate print-based material 

in most learning activities and tasks. Although adult EAL literacy learners have developed 

significant skills and knowledge through lived experience, expectations of formal learning 

environments are often unfamiliar to them (DeCapua, 2016). For this reason, literacy instructors 

from British Columbia and Ontario have expressed the need to prioritize the development of 

EALLs’ academic skills (Fleming et al., 2015). In British Columbia, organizations such as the 

Affiliation of Multicultural Societies and Service Agencies (AMSSA) have taken on the 

responsibility of supporting LINC service providers (Mudzingwa, 2020) and have produced a 

resource guide (Solnes et al., 2019) that highlights the need to accommodate EAL literacy 

learners in LINC and references the resources developed by Bow Valley College for EALLs. 

Bow Valley College (2018) has created instructional frameworks and guidelines for explicit 

instruction in goal-setting, reflection, and organizational and time management strategies for 

EALLs; however, these resources do not reflect the current reconceptualization of learning 

strategies research through the lens of self-regulation theory (see Oxford, 2017). 

 

Self-Regulation and Learning 

 

Learning in a classroom setting involves self-regulatory processes that have been delineated in 

several models of self-regulation. Three models that are useful for informing instructional 

decisions to develop EALLs’ formal SRL strategies and promote their language learning include 

Zimmerman’s (2000) SRL cycle, Dörnyei’s (2005) conceptual self-regulation model of control 

in second language (L2) learning, and Oxford’s (2017) strategic self-regulation model in L2 

learning. These models are described in the following sections. 

 

The Self-Regulated Learning Cycle 

 

Zimmerman’s (2000) theory of SRL is informed by the work of Vygotsky (1978), who argued 

that cognitive abilities and language develop through social interactions. Consequently, in 

Zimmerman’s theory, self-regulation develops through the mediation/scaffolding of more 

capable others. The more capable other, often a teacher, breaks down the learning task into the 

essential components, so that the learners become aware of the parts and then assists the learners 

in planning for, monitoring, and evaluating their performance as they complete each part of the 

task. This other-regulation by the teacher supports the development of student self-regulation.  

 

Zimmerman (2013) divided the SRL cycle into three phases that occur before, during and 

after task performance, and involve processes such as goal setting, pre-task planning, and 

monitoring, controlling and reflecting on task performance. Experiences incurred throughout the 

phases and processes inform the next SRL cycle. Research suggests that some students are better 

than others at SRL (see Zimmerman, 2013). Zimmerman (2013) explained that “students who set 

superior goals proactively, monitor their learning intentionally, use strategies effectively, and 

respond to personal feedback adaptively not only attain mastery more quickly, but also are more 

motivated to sustain their efforts to learn” (p. 135). Zimmerman (2000) attributed student 

difficulties in self-regulation to not having had the SRL cycle taught and modelled for them in 

school—a typical state of affairs for EALLs, particularly those who have been denied access to 

formal school-based learning. 

 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469


 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 88 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

Conceptual Self-Regulation Model of Control in L2 Learning 

 

Dörnyei’s (2005) conceptualization of self-regulation in L2 learning, which is based on 

Zimmerman’s (2000) idea of task control, includes five categories of control strategies: 

 

1. Commitment control strategies focus on goal attainment by keeping positive incentives or 

rewards in mind.  

2. Metacognitive control strategies maintain attention and reduce unnecessary 

procrastination by focusing on the first step of a task or by identifying distractions. 

3. Satiation control strategies add interest to tasks and eliminate boredom by introducing 

creative variations or challenges into the task.  

4. Emotion control strategies manage disruptive emotions through the use of relaxation and 

meditation techniques and positive self-talk. 

5. Environmental control strategies reduce environmental stressors and make the 

environment more supportive of goal attainment (e.g., moving away from distracting 

sources or using the resources in the classroom to support learning).  

 

By developing additional language learners’ awareness and control of these self-regulatory 

strategies, these learners can improve their task performance (Dörnyei’s, 2005; Tseng et al., 

2006). 

 

The Strategic Self-Regulation Model of Language Learning 

 

Oxford’s (2017) model of strategic self-regulation is also situated in sociocultural theory 

(Vygotsky, 1978). From this perspective, self-regulated language learning is socioculturally 

mediated through interacting with others and with cultural, linguistic, and technological tools and 

resources. In Oxford’s (2017) model, paying attention, planning, organizing learning, 

monitoring, and evaluating are conceptualized as metastrategies that are used to control/regulate 

specific aspects of additional language learning including one’s thoughts, emotions, motivation, 

and social interactions. Oxford also emphasized the influence of self-efficacy on self-regulated 

learning, as learners need to believe in their own ability to achieve their goals by strategically 

overcoming barriers to learning. Teacher mediation (i.e., assistance/scaffolding) plays an 

important role in the development of students’ self-regulation including their ability to use SRL 

strategies to overcome these barriers. 

 

Self-Regulation and the Adult EAL Literacy Learner 

 

In the L2 self-regulation research literature, SRL strategy use has been found to predict EAL 

learning achievement in studies conducted with learners who possess well-developed first 

language literacy skills (Chen et al., 2020; Seker, 2016; Teng & Zhang, 2016), and one recent 

study conducted with EALLs has shown that SRL strategy use is associated with their literacy 

achievement (Abbott et al., 2021). These findings suggest that adult additional language learners 

who have emergent literacy skills will likely benefit from educational experiences that develop 

their strategic self-regulation. Our experience teaching and working with EALLs, however, 

indicates that the development of their formal SRL strategies can be challenging for a number of 

reasons. First, SRL strategies involved in planning for, monitoring, and evaluating one’s own 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469


 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 89 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

learning typically rely on print-based literacy, and EAL learners who are becoming literate for 

the first time are in the process of developing these formal learning strategies that will support 

their additional language classroom learning (e.g., note-taking, utilizing print-based reference 

materials/resources). Second, if EALLs were either denied access to or had few prior experiences 

with formal, school-based learning, this lack of formal schooling reduces the likelihood that they 

have had the SRL cycle modelled for them in a formal learning environment or received other 

forms of teacher mediation to scaffold their formal SRL. Third, many EALLs are unfamiliar with 

expectations of how to regulate their cognition, emotions, and behaviours in a formal classroom 

environment. For example, LINC instructors have reported that self-reflection in English is often 

difficult for EALLs (Abbott et al., 2021), yet self-reflection is a key component of SRL 

(Zimmerman, 2013). We argue that explicit instruction and structured practice in using SRL 

strategies in EAL literacy classes can overcome these challenges and improve EALLs’ ability to 

control their language learning in formal environments. 

 

Self-Regulated Strategy Instruction for EALLs 

 

Explicit instruction throughout the SRL cycle involves teaching learners how to first of all plan 

for effective task completion before attempting a language task; secondly monitor/control 

thoughts, feelings (e.g., self-beliefs), behaviours (e.g., concentration) and motivation to keep 

trying during the task; and finally evaluate/reflect on task performance and strategy use after 

completing the task. In our experience, our 10 step research-informed instructional sequence 

which outlines specific practices and activities has been successfully used to guide and support 

EALLs’ through each phase of the SRL process (i.e., before, during, and after task performance). 

The 10 steps were also designed to develop EALLs’ understanding of the three key words in the 

SRL cycle: plan, monitor, and evaluate. The activities in the steps may need to be 

simplified/scaffolded for EALLs at CLB 1 or extended for those at CLB 4.  

 

Step 1 

 

The first step involves developing a collaborative classroom learning environment where 

students feel comfortable engaging in the social practices of learning in the EAL literacy 

classroom (Santos & Shandor, 2012; Tarone et al., 2009), in communication with one another 

and the instructor, and with the environmental/technological tools available to mediate learning. 

For example, establishing expectations, developing consistent classroom routines, and orienting 

learners to the available resources could increase learners’ comfort. To communicate these 

expectations, routines, and resources to EALLs, students in more advanced classes could create 

videos that explain and demonstrate the expectations, routines, and resources in their first 

languages. An example video about online classroom expectations following this sequence could 

show students logging into an online classroom, verbalizing to themselves, “I should mute my 

microphone,” clicking the mute icon, then reminding themselves, “I should pay attention to the 

person speaking.”  

 

Because literacy practices always occur in a “specific sociocultural context” (Street, 

2016, p. 336), the activities in this first step are intended to socialize EALLs into a collaborative 

classroom context and respect collectivist approaches to goal achievement, which according to 

DeCapua (2016) may be preferred by students who have limited or interrupted formal education. 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469


 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 90 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

Supportive social networks can help students brave challenges that may otherwise feel 

insurmountable (Usher & Schunk, 2018). In addition, the social modelling of more capable peers 

can strengthen students’ feelings of commitment to achieve goals and standards, as well as 

enhance their self-efficacy for self-regulation (Bandura, 1997; Zimmerman, 2013). 

 

Step 2 

 

The second step consists of collecting observational data of EALLs’ self-regulated strategy use 

and using this information to inform strategy instruction (see Figure 1 on the next page for an 

example observation checklist that we developed which is informed by Dörnyei’s [2005] five 

task control categories). A checklist of learners’ observed strategy use can guide students to self-

awareness, self-diagnosis, and control of their strategy use (Cohen, 2014). Ideally, learner self-

reported data of strategy use would also supplement instructor observational data. For example, 

the checklist we developed that is presented in Figure 1 could be adapted for learner self-

reflection/assessment by simplifying the language and changing “Learner can” to “I can.” 

 

Step 3 

 

In the third step, instructors model the iterative SRL cycle (Zimmerman, 2013) during task 

completion through demonstration and thinking-aloud while planning for, monitoring, and 

evaluating/reflecting on the performance of a language task. This type of explicit guidance and 

modelling throughout the phases has been found to enhance students’ SRL (Mak & Wong, 

2018). Teaching EALLs the meaning of “plan,” “monitor,” and “evaluate” is essential. If 

possible, solicit the assistance of interpreters/students who are able to translate these words into 

the students’ first languages. Because these terms are abstract, instructors could explain the 

concepts through a story-telling approach. For example, instructors could tell a story about 

buying groceries which is a task that is likely familiar to learners:  

 

I need to go to the grocery store. First, I plan my shopping trip. I look in my fridge and 

cupboard to see what I need. Then I make a shopping list. At the store, I monitor how I 

am doing by checking items off my list. I see chips. I want to buy them. I check my list. 

Chips are not on it. I do not buy them. Before I leave the store, I evaluate how I did by 

checking the things in my cart with my list. I have everything. My shopping trip is 

successful thanks to my plan and my list. 

 

During subsequent language tasks, instructors can explicitly refer to the phases of the SRL cycle 

during task completion, as awareness of the phases will aid transfer to other learning tasks 

(Schunk & Zimmerman, 1998).  

 

Step 4 

 

The fourth step consists of teaching students how to set clear goals and subgoals or short-term 

goals in relation to specific tasks and the skills/steps required. Instructors could conduct a task 

analysis activity that involves providing EALLs with an illustrated list of subgoals that may or 

may not be relevant to the completion of a specific task, then ask students to identify the relevant 

ones. For example, for the CLB 1 reading task “identify dates and amounts on a pay stub” 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469


 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 91 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

(CCLB, 2012, p. 77), relevant subgoals may be understand what the dollar symbol ($) means 

and understand aspects of the western calendar (month, day, year), whereas an irrelevant 

subgoal may be circle the company’s address. Setting optimal goals and subgoals are important 

SRL strategies that have been found to contribute to sustained motivation and learning mastery 

(Zimmerman, 2013).  

 

Figure 1 

 

Instructor Observation Checklist of Students’ Self-Regulation Strategies  

 

  

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469


 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 92 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

Step 5 

 

The fifth step involves providing students with self-monitoring/tracking tools to help them 

develop awareness of their thoughts, behaviours, attention, emotions, and the learning 

environment. Monitoring activities can optimize performance by promoting the revision of goals, 

plans, and strategies during task completion (Hadwin et al., 2018). For example, to encourage 

students to monitor their attention when completing a language task, students could be provided 

a list of time intervals (e.g., every 10 minutes) and asked to circle whether they are on-task or 

off-task. To keep track of their emotions, instructors could present students with an emotional 

temperature checklist (Figure 2) and have them circle the emoji/word that best captures how they 

are feeling during a task. When students are completing listening and speaking tasks with 

partners or in groups, students could be presented with a checklist and asked to circle whether or 

not they can hear their partners or group members and if they have all the materials needed for 

task completion. To increase students’ awareness of the supports that are available in their 

immediate learning environment (e.g., a word wall), when EALLs ask for teacher assistance, 

instructors could first direct their attention to a pictured list of the resources available in the 

classroom and have students circle the potentially useful one(s). Regular discussions of self-

observation checklists/tracking tools with learners can help them recognize the behaviours, 

thoughts, emotions, and environmental resources that support rather than interfere with their task 

performance (Stoeger & Ziegler, 2011).  

 

Figure 2 

 

Emotional Temperature Checklist 

 

 
 

Step 6 

 

The sixth step involves teaching students strategies to manage/control their thoughts, behaviours, 

attention, emotions, and environment and to deal with defensive self-reactions (e.g., 

procrastination, task withdrawal) that may arise when they encounter obstacles as they engage in 

language learning tasks (see Dörnyei’s [2005] control strategy categories and our examples of 

associated strategies in Figure 1). One way to support students’ strategy development is by 

adding self-regulation strategies to the self-monitoring tools described in Step 5 above. For 

example, to encourage metacognitive control of attention, “good work—keep going” could be 

beside “on-task” and “okay, back to work” could be added beside “off-task.” To promote 

emotion control, instructors could add strategies below the emojis (Figure 3). To foster 

environmental control of the learning environment, on the checklist beside “can’t hear my group 

members,” the directions “move so you can hear them” or “ask them to speak up” could be 

added; to stimulate students’ use of learning resources. On the pictured list instructors could add 

“find it and use it.” Self-monitoring tools that offer strategic actions such as those presented in 

this step can guide learners towards effective SRL by helping them to manage their defensive 

reactions (Stoeger & Ziegler, 2011) through the use of SRL control strategies (see Dörnyei, 2005 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469


 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 93 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

and Figure 1) that “focus on what they can control rather than on what they cannot” (Usher & 

Schunk, 2018, p. 33). 

 

Figure 3 

 

Emotional Temperature Checklist With Strategies 

 

 
 

Step 7 

 

The seventh step involves building EALLs’ self-efficacy (i.e., the belief in their ability to 

achieve goals/accomplish tasks/learn) by providing them with credible praise and encouragement 

(“You can do this”) and ongoing feedback on their effort, the appropriateness of the strategies 

that they employ to meet their goals, and their achievement of goal(s) and subgoals. For each 

task, instructors could demonstrate how to break down the task into a manageable number of 

achievable steps/subgoals, write the steps on the classroom whiteboard, and then provide 

students with a simplified checklist of the steps/subgoals. As students work through the task, 

they could be asked to check off and celebrate their progress as they complete each of the 

steps/subgoals (see example rewards in Step 8 below). Because “students’ capabilities to self-

regulate depend significantly on their self-efficacy beliefs” (Zimmerman et al., 2017, p. 313), 

and teachers’ feedback, encouragement, and modelling of SRL can increase students’ self-

efficacy, effort, and commitment to achieve their goals (Usher & Schunk, 2018), the activities in 

this step have the potential to foster EALLs’ SRL.  

 

Step 8 

 

In the eighth step, instructors could encourage EALLs to reward themselves for their goal 

completion. For example, rewards could range from small gestures such as asking students to 

give themselves a pat on the back or a self high-five, to larger actions such as allowing students 

the freedom to reward themselves with a snack, a walk around the classroom, or a tea/coffee 

break when they achieve a (sub)goal. Self-rewards have been found “to be more effective 

motivators than external rewards” as they help students adhere to their plans for accomplishing 

their goals (Usher & Schunk, 2018, p. 28).  

 

Step 9 

 

In the ninth step, instructors support students to select and coordinate the use of both 

metastrategies and specific language learning strategies in the cognitive, motivational, social, and 

affective domains that are appropriate for each task (Oxford, 2017). For EALLs, instruction in 

metastrategies and cognitive reading strategies is particularly important given their unique 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469


 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 94 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

learning needs. During a task such as reading a COVID-19 poster for information to protect 

oneself and others from getting sick, examples of reading strategies include the following: 

 

● taking a poster walk while paying attention to pictures (e.g., a person sneezing in their 

elbow) and enhanced textual features (e.g., bold/larger font which signify importance)  

● making a prediction (“what is the poster about?”) 

● telling a partner what you know or want to know about COVID-19  

● brainstorming with a partner words related to the pictures or bold print, then trying to find 

and underline those words in the poster  

● circling words or phrases on the poster that you know  

● touching the words as you read  

● searching for unknown words on Google Images  

● trying to sound out words that you don’t recognize  

● underlining do not and don’t 

 

Because literacy learners tend to rely on semantic processing strategies—focusing on 

meaning with little or no attention to form (Bigelow et al., 2006), it would be beneficial to 

emphasize phonological (e.g., recognizing words that begin with the same sound) and 

morphosyntactic strategies (e.g., recognizing the grammatical functions of word parts), as these 

strategies are particularly helpful for learning to read and write in English. Zimmerman et al. 

(2017) suggested that in addition to instruction in how to use strategies appropriately, emergent 

readers require instruction designed to increase their awareness of the value of SRL strategies. It 

is likely that instruction in strategies such as those identified in this step will promote greater 

success in reading and, in turn, increase the value EALLs place on both SRL/metastrategies and 

reading strategies.  

 

Step 10 

 

The tenth step consists of guiding students’ self-reflections on their task-performance and 

SRL/metastrategy use. Then students could be asked to link the reflections back to their initial 

goals and set new goals when their previous goals have been met. For example, after completing 

a task, instructors could assist EALLs with self-reflection by creating a checklist that includes 

specific SRL strategies which instructors modelled/taught/observed students using in class. 

Instructors could also pose some of the following questions to guide students’ self-reflections; 

however, first language support will likely be necessary:  

 

• What can I do now that I couldn’t do before?  

• What is one thing I would change if I were to do the task again?  

• What did I learn? Why is it important?  

• Why was I successful or not? (e.g., I was successful because (a) I followed the 

instructions; (b) I managed my time appropriately by spending enough time completing 

each of the task’s subgoals; (c) I used strategies to help me when I ran into problems; (d) 

I coped with my emotions/frustrations in a positive way).  

 

Other questions that students could reflect upon to compare their task performance to their goals 

include:   

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469


 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 95 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

• Did I achieve any of my English learning goals? If yes, which one(s)?  

• What did I do to achieve my goal(s)?  

• What are my new goals?  

 

Students’ reflections on their strategy use and learning can promote the conscious 

examination of their behaviours (Oxford, 2017), which can then be used to optimize their 

reactions to learning and inform the next SRL cycle (Zimmerman, 2013). Once EALLs become 

familiar with the SRL cycle and are able to use SRL strategies appropriately, to encourage them 

to become self-regulated strategy users, instructors need to gradually remove the teacher-

generated scaffolding and remind the learners to select and use these strategies on their own in 

the future.  

 

Conclusion 

 

The goal of SRL instruction is for students to internalize how to self-regulate their learning 

through the selection and use of appropriate strategies for planning, monitoring and evaluating 

their thoughts, behaviours, emotions, motivation, and their learning environment. SRL strategies 

help students organize their learning and promote greater independence, confidence, and success 

as they learn to complete language tasks in formal learning environments such as those found in 

LINC classes in British Columbia. The research-informed instructional sequence and example 

tools and activities described in this paper can provide EALLs with opportunities to develop 

formal SRL strategies that have the potential to enhance their learning in the EAL literacy 

classroom.  

 

References 

 

Abbott, M. L., Lee, K. K., & Ricioppo, S. (2021). Does Portfolio-Based Language Assessment 

align with Learning-Oriented Assessment? Evidence from Language Instruction for 

Newcomers to Canada literacy students and their instructors. Canadian Journal of 

Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 229–254. https://doi.org/10.37213/cjal.2021.31338 

Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and 

developing useful language tests. Oxford University Press. 

Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. (2010). Language assessment practice: Developing language 

assessments and justifying their use in the real world. Oxford University Press. 

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman. 

Bigelow, M., DelMas, R., Hansen, K., & Tarone, E. (2006). Literacy and the processing of oral 

recasts in SLA. TESOL Quarterly, 40(4), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.2307/40264303  

Bow Valley College. (2018). A practical guide to teaching ESL literacy. 

https://globalaccess.bowvalleycollege.ca/sites/default/files/ESL-Literacy-Book-August-

24-2018-Digital_0.pdf  

Centre for Canadian Language Benchmarks (CCLB). (2012). Canadian Language Benchmarks: 

English as a second language for adults (Rev. ed). 

https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/ircc/migration/ircc/english/pdf/pub/language-

benchmarks.pdf  

Centre for Canadian Language Benchmarks (CCLB). (2015). Theoretical framework for the 

Canadian Language Benchmarks. https://www.language.ca/product/theoretical-

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469
https://doi.org/10.37213/cjal.2021.31338
https://doi.org/10.2307/40264303
https://globalaccess.bowvalleycollege.ca/sites/default/files/ESL-Literacy-Book-August-24-2018-Digital_0.pdf
https://globalaccess.bowvalleycollege.ca/sites/default/files/ESL-Literacy-Book-August-24-2018-Digital_0.pdf
https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/ircc/migration/ircc/english/pdf/pub/language-benchmarks.pdf
https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/ircc/migration/ircc/english/pdf/pub/language-benchmarks.pdf
https://www.language.ca/product/theoretical-framework-for-the-canadian-language-benchmarks-and-niveaux-de-competence-linguistique-canadiens-pdf-e/


 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 96 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

framework-for-the-canadian-language-benchmarks-and-niveaux-de-competence-

linguistique-canadiens-pdf-e/  

Centre for Canadian Language Benchmarks (CCLB). (2016). Canadian Language Benchmarks: 

ESL for adult literacy learners (ALL). https://www.language.ca/product/clb-esl-for-adult-

literacy-learners-all-pdf-e/  

Chen, X., Wang, C., Kim, D. (2020). Self-regulated learning strategy profiles among English as 

a foreign language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 54(1), 234–251. 

https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.540  

Cohen, A. D. (2014). Strategies in learning and using a second language (2nd ed.). Routledge. 

Condelli, L. (2020). Preface. In J. K. Peyton & M. Young-Scholten (Eds.), Teaching adult 

immigrants with limited formal education: Theory, research and practice (pp. vii–x). 

Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/PEYTON6997  

DeCapua, A. (2016). Reaching students with limited or interrupted formal education through 

culturally responsive teaching. Language and Linguistics Compass, 10(5), 225–237. 

https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12183  

Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second 

language acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum.  

Faux, N., & Watson, S. (2020). Teaching and tutoring adult learners with limited education and 

literacy. In J. K. Peyton & M. Young-Scholten (Eds.), Teaching adult immigrants with 

limited formal education: Theory, research and practice (pp. 124–44). Multilingual 

Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/PEYTON6997  

Fleming, D., René, C. P., Bangou, F., & Sarwar, G. S. (2015). The conflation of adult ESL and 

literacy: The views of experienced teachers. TESL-EJ, 19(1). https://www.tesl-

ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume19/ej73/ej73a6/  

Hadwin, A., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2018). Self-regulation, co-regulation, and shared 

regulation in collaborative learning environments. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), 

Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 83–106). Routledge. 

Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC). (2020). Evaluation of language training 

services. https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/reports-

statistics/evaluations/eval-language-training-services.html  

Mak, P., & Wong, K. M. (2018). Self-regulation through portfolio assessment in writing 

classrooms. ELT Journal, 72(1), 49–61. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccx012  

Mudzingwa, C. (2020). The quest for standardization: The Canadian federal government and the 

Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada (LINC) program. BC TEAL Journal, 

5(1), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v5i1.347  

Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching language learning strategies: Self-regulation in 

context (2nd ed.). Routledge. 

Santos, M. G., & Shandor, A. (2012) The role of classroom talk in the creation of ‘safe spaces’ in 

adult ESL classrooms. In P. Vinogradov & M. Bigelow (Eds.), Low educated second 

language and literacy acquisition (LESLLA): Proceedings of the 7th symposium (pp. 

110–134). University of Minnesota. 

Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (1998). Self-regulated learning: From teaching to 

self-reflective practice. Guilford Press. 

Seker, M. (2016). The use of self-regulation strategies by foreign language learners and its role 

in language achievement. Language Teaching Research, 20(5), 600–618. 

https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815578550  

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469
https://www.language.ca/product/theoretical-framework-for-the-canadian-language-benchmarks-and-niveaux-de-competence-linguistique-canadiens-pdf-e/
https://www.language.ca/product/theoretical-framework-for-the-canadian-language-benchmarks-and-niveaux-de-competence-linguistique-canadiens-pdf-e/
https://www.language.ca/product/clb-esl-for-adult-literacy-learners-all-pdf-e/
https://www.language.ca/product/clb-esl-for-adult-literacy-learners-all-pdf-e/
https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.540
https://doi.org/10.21832/PEYTON6997
https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12183
https://doi.org/10.21832/PEYTON6997
https://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume19/ej73/ej73a6/
https://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume19/ej73/ej73a6/
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/reports-statistics/evaluations/eval-language-training-services.html
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/reports-statistics/evaluations/eval-language-training-services.html
https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccx012
https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v5i1.347
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815578550


 Penner, Abbott, & Lee 97 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 7 Number 1 (2022): 85–97 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469 

Solnes, A., Yuen, S., & Wilbur, A. (2019). A principles-based approach to supporting LINC 

learners. AMSSA. https://www.amssa.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/A-Principles-

based-Approach-to-Supporting-LINC-Learners-April-2019.pdf  

Stoeger, H., & Ziegler, A. (2011). Self-regulatory training through elementary-school students’ 

homework completion. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-

regulation of learning and performance (pp. 87–101). Routledge.  

Street, B. (2016). Learning to read from a social practice view: Ethnography, schooling and adult 

learning. Prospects, 46, 335–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-017-9411-z  

Tarone, E., Bigelow, M., & Hansen, K. (2009). Literacy and second language oracy. Oxford 

University Press. 

Teng, L. S., & Zhang, L. J. (2016). A questionnaire-based validation of multidimensional models 

of self-regulated learning strategies. The Modern Language Journal, 100(3), 647–701. 

https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12339  

Tseng, W., Dörnyei, Z., & Schmitt, N. (2006). A new approach to assessing strategic learning: 

The case of self-regulation in vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 78–102. 

https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami046  

Usher, E. L., & Schunk, D. H. (2018). Social cognitive theoretical perspective of self-regulation. 

In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and 

performance (2nd ed., pp. 19–35). Routledge.  

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press.  

Wrigley, H.S. (2010) Serving low literate immigrant and refugee youth: Challenges and 

promising practices. In T. Wall and M. Leong (Eds.), Low-educated adult second 

language and literacy acquisition (LESLLA): Proceedings of the 5th symposium (pp. 25–

41). Bow Valley College. 

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. 

Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). 

Academic Press. 

Zimmerman, B. J. (2013). From cognitive modeling to self-regulation: A social cognitive career 

path. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 135–147. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.794676  

Zimmerman, B. J., Shunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2017). The role of self-efficacy and 

related beliefs in self-regulation of learning and performance. In A. J. Elliott, C. S. 

Dweck, & D. S. Yeager (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (2nd ed., pp. 

313–333). Guilford Press. 

 

 

 
The BC TEAL Journal is licensed under a 

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. 

Copyright rests with the author(s). 

 

 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v7i1.469
https://www.amssa.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/A-Principles-based-Approach-to-Supporting-LINC-Learners-April-2019.pdf
https://www.amssa.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/A-Principles-based-Approach-to-Supporting-LINC-Learners-April-2019.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-017-9411-z
https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12339
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami046
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.794676
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

