Writing Self-Regulation Scale

Abstract

The Writing Self-Regulation Scale (WSRS) is a specialized psychometric instrument developed to measure the degree to which learners, particularly those engaged in second language (L2) tasks, utilize metacognitive and behavioral strategies to manage their writing process. Developed and validated by Khodadady and Yassami (2012), the scale focuses on assessing critical stages of self-management, including planning, monitoring, and revision.

The scale provides a structured framework for understanding individual differences in Self-regulation ability, yielding scores across five distinct factors. Its rigorous Factorial Validation confirms its utility in educational research and practice for diagnosing specific self-regulatory strengths and weaknesses among student populations.

Keywords

Writing Self-Regulation, Self-regulation, Metacognition, L2 learners, Psychometrics, Scale Development, Factorial Validation

Authors

Khodadady, Ebrahim, Yassami, Salim

Purpose

The primary purpose of the WSRS is to quantitatively assess the extent to which students employ effective self-regulatory strategies throughout the complex process of written composition. This assessment is vital for researchers and educators aiming to connect metacognitive awareness and behavioral planning to overall writing proficiency, particularly in non-native language contexts.

By measuring specific self-regulatory behaviors—ranging from seeking clarification on task requirements to engaging in detailed syntactic editing—the scale serves as a diagnostic tool. It helps identify precise areas where learners may require targeted instructional intervention to enhance their autonomy and quality of written output.

Construct

The scale measures the psychological construct of Self-regulation (SRL) as it is applied specifically within the domain of writing (WSR). This construct is understood as a cyclical process where learners actively set goals, monitor their progress, and systematically adjust their strategies based on self-evaluation and feedback received.

The WSRS operationalizes this complex construct through five empirically validated sub-factors derived from the validation study: Instructions (understanding task goals), Accessing Samples (modeling), Semantic Revision (content and idea review), Syntactic Revision (grammar and structure), and Editing (mechanics). This multi-component structure ensures comprehensive measurement of self-management across different stages of writing.

Validity

The scale’s validity was established through rigorous Factorial Validation, as detailed in the authors’ 2012 publication. This procedure confirmed the construct validity by demonstrating that the 20 items successfully load onto the hypothesized five-factor structure, aligning with the theoretical model of self-regulated writing processes.

The validation study specifically addressed the refinement of the scale by analyzing items with acceptable and unacceptable cross-loadings. This refinement process ensured that the resulting factors were distinct and robust, thereby enhancing the scale’s ability to accurately differentiate and measure the intended components of writing Self-regulation independently.

Reliability

While specific internal consistency coefficients (such as Cronbach’s Alpha) are detailed within the original validation study, the successful outcome of the psychometrics procedures confirms that the WSRS possesses adequate reliability. High reliability indicates that the instrument consistently measures the self-regulatory behaviors of learners across various administrations and provides stable scores for research purposes.

Factor Analysis

Exploratory and/or Confirmatory Factor Analysis was utilized to determine the underlying dimensionality of the scale. The analysis confirmed a robust five-factor structure, which maps onto the sequential or iterative phases of self-regulated writing behavior observed among the target population.

The five factors identified through the analysis are:

1. Instructions: Items related to task comprehension, clarity of goals, and understanding expected outcomes.
2. Accessing Samples: Behaviors related to seeking and utilizing model texts or examples.
3. Semantic Revision: Strategies used for reviewing and revising the content, meaning, and flow of ideas.
4. Syntactic Revision: Efforts dedicated to editing and correcting grammar and sentence structure.
5. Editing: Focus on mechanical aspects of writing, such as spelling and punctuation.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire/scale

Format: 20 items rated on a 4-point Likert scale.

Language Available: English (used for validation study).

Population Group: Academic students, specifically L2 learners.

Age Group: Typically tertiary level or advanced secondary students.

Population Details: Students engaged in English as a Second Language (ESL) or English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing coursework.

Test Methodology: Respondents are asked to reflect on a specific writing task and indicate the extent to which they engaged in each self-regulatory behavior listed. The response options are: Not at all, A little, Adequately, To a great extent.

Keywords

L2 writing, Likert scale, Self-monitoring, Revision strategies, Language learning, Academic writing, Psychometrics

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not Available

Affiliation Email addresses: Not Available

Correspondence Address: Not Available

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Writing Self-Regulation Scale was initially published and validated in 2012. Academic researchers are generally permitted to use the instrument for non-commercial research purposes provided they appropriately cite the original Khodadady and Yassami publication. Specific licensing requirements or fees for commercial application should be sought directly from the authors or the publishing journal.

Reference’s

Khodadady, Ebrahim. Yassami, Salim. (2012). Factorial Validation of a Writing Self-regulation Scale: With and without Acceptably Cross Loading Items. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(3): 386-394.

The full instrument and article text are available online. The original PDF can likely be downloaded here: http://ojs.academypublisher.com/index.php/jltr/article/viewFile/jltr0303386394/4807

Items of the Writing Self-Regulation Scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

• 1. Was the overall goal of the task clear and void of ambiguity to you as a learner?
• 2. Was the task appropriate to your current English proficiency level?
• 3. To what extent did the task help you to apply classroom learning to the real world?
• 4. Was the topic of the task stimulating and appropriate to your age and educational level?
• 5. To what extent was the topic familiar to you and related to your background knowledge?
• 6. To what extent were the instructions clear and concise?
• 7. Were the target reader and the features of the expected response (e.g. word/time limits‚ register) clarified in the instructions?
• 8. Were any sample texts provided for you either by the teacher or the textbook?
• 9. Did you spend time on brainstorming‚ gathering information or outlining before starting to write?
• 10. Did the teacher familiarize you with techniques such as listing or clustering the ideas‚ or ask you to share your ideas in groups?
• 11. Did you go through the second stage of putting ideas into sentences or paragraphs without concern for mechanics such as spelling or punctuation?
• 12. Did you revise your jotted down ideas to make sure of their sensibility and accurateness to the reader?
• 13. Did you receive feedback on content from the teacher or perhaps a peer in this stage?
• 14. To what extent did you edit your writing for grammar and structure?
• 15. To what extent did you edit your writing for word spelling?
• 16. To what extent did you edit your writing for punctuation‚ before submitting it?
• 17. Did you receive feedback on form from your teacher in this stage?
• 18. Did you read out your texts finally to the class or your peers?
• 19. Was the teacher’s feedback on the completed piece of writing motivating?
• 20. To what extent did the task performance occur outside classroom environment (e.g. in a library or language lab)?