Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 176 (2015) 3 – 13

IETC 2014

The use of e-portfolio-based assessment to develop students’ self-

regulated learning in English language teaching
Ahmet Erdost Yastibasa*, Gülsah Cinar Yastibasb
a
School of Foreign Languages, Zirve University, Gaziantep, 27260, Turkey
b
School of Foreign Languages, Zirve University, Gaziantep, 27260, Turkey

Abstract

Traditional assessment ways like multiple choice tests have been used to evaluate students’ performance in English language
teaching (ELT) at schools, but these assessment methods are not effective and efficient because they do not show the real
performance of students. On the other hand, student-centeredness is the main focus of many teaching and learning methods and
techniques used in ELT. It emphasizes learning by doing. As the main focus is on learning by doing, assessing this process
requires different assessment methods that take factors, such as students’ understanding and personal difference into
consideration, while evaluating learners’ performance. Therefore, educators need to develop new student-centred assessment
methods to evaluate learners in ELT. One of these ways is the use of e-portfolios. E-portfolios can be used as an assessment in
courses effectively to improve different learning styles of learners. One of them is self-regulated learning, which focuses on
students’ taking responsibility for their learning from the beginning to the end. This process includes setting goals and organizing
learning environments according to their determined goals, but finding research on the use of e-portfolios as an assessment tool
in self-regulated learning in ELT is rare. Therefore, this paper aims to find out whether e-portfolio-based assessment can be used
to improve students’ self-regulated learning through reviewing the literature. The result of the literature review indicates that e-
portfolio-based assessment can develop students’ self-regulated learning in ELT.

© 2015
© 2015 The
TheAuthors.
Authors.Published
Publishedbyby
Elsevier Ltd.Ltd.
Elsevier This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Sakarya University.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Sakarya University.

Keywords: E-portfolio; E-portfolio based assessment; Self-regulated learning

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +90-342-211-6666.

E-mail address: ahmet.yastibas@zirve.edu.tr

1877-0428 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Sakarya University.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.437
4 Ahmet Erdost Yastibas and Gülsah Cinar Yastibas / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 176 (2015) 3 – 13

1. Introduction
For many years, traditional assessment styles like multiple choice tests have been used to evaluate students’
performance at school, but these assessment methods are not effective and efficient because they do not show the
real performance of students and are mainly based on the behaviourist approach, which defines education as “habit
formation.” Therefore, traditional ways of assessment are not enough to measure the skills of learners in different
courses. On the other hand, the constructivist approach, which focuses on students, supports student-centred
activities in classroom and defines education as “learning by doing,” and is the basis of modern education methods
and techniques, such as the problem-solving method or the project-based method. As the main focus is on learning
by doing, assessing this process requires different assessment methods that factor in students’ understanding,
personal differences, and individual performance when evaluating learners’ performance. Unlike traditional
assessment ways, the new assessment ways should be student-centred. Consequently, some new ways, such as e-
portfolios are developed to assess learners. E-portfolios can be defined as electronically collected works and
reflections of students, which are used to show their growth and development during the learning process (Gülbahar
and Tinmaz, 2006, 311). The works and reflections of students are stored in electronic formats, such as graphics or
CDs (Gülbahar & Tinmaz, 2006). Educators, instructors, and teachers know how to use e-portfolios in their courses,
but they cannot use them effectively to improve the different learning styles of students. One of them is self-
regulated learning that focuses on students taking responsibility of their education from the beginning to the end.
This process involves setting goals and maintaining a learning environment according to their determined goals
(Zimmerman, 1990). However, the use of e-portfolios as an assessment tool in self-regulated learning has not been
researched much in the English language-teaching field. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to find out whether e-
portfolio-based assessment can be used to improve students’ self-regulated learning by reviewing the literature about
e-portfolios, e-portfolio-based assessment, and self-regulated learning in English language teaching. The present
paper aims to answer the following question: Can e-portfolio-based assessment be used to develop students’ self-
regulated learning in English language teaching? If so, how does e-portfolio-based assessment develop students’
self-regulated learning in English language teaching?

2. E-portfolio
In order to evaluate the relationship between e-portfolio-based assessment and self-regulated learning, this
section explains what an e-portfolio is, along with its benefits and characteristics. This section starts with the
definition of an e-portfolio. Then the section focuses on benefits of an e-portfolio and ends up with its
characteristics.

2.1. Definition of e-portfolio

Rhodes (2011) mentions, “…ePortfolios might be the biggest thing in technology innovation on campus.
Electronic portfolios have a greater potential to alter higher education at its very core than any other technology
application we’ve known thus far” (p. 7). This emphasizes the importance of the use of e-portfolios in education
because it can make students work digitally and in an organized, searchable, and transportable way, as Rhodes
mentions. The definitions of e-portfolio focus on the features of being digital, organized, searchable, and
transportable. In one definition, Lorenzo and Ittelson (2005) define an e-portfolio as “a digitized collection of
artefacts including demonstrations, resources, and accomplishments that represent an individual, group, or
institution” (p. 2). They also add that e-portfolios are “personalized, Web-based collections of work, responses to
work, and reflections that are used to demonstrate key skills and accomplishment for a variety of contexts and time
periods” (p. 2). In another definition, an e-portfolio is defined as “the product, created by the learner, a collection of
digital artefacts articulating experiences, achievements and learning” and as “a purposeful aggregation of digital
items – ideas, evidence, reflections, feedback, etc., which presents a selected audience with evidence of a person’s
learning and/or ability” (Gray, 2008, pp. 6-7). Consequently, the definitions indicate that e-portfolios include the
artefacts of students that help others understand and observe the learning processes of students.

2.2. Benefits of e-Portfolio

According to Goldsmith (2007), institutions and students can benefit from e-portfolios since they allow them to
understand “how well they are educating their students” and they are able to assess “their educational experiences
and achievements, and how these are linked to their personal goals” (p. 31). They connect students’ coursework to
the outcomes of institutions, so students can “understand these connections as well as the connections between their
own lives and their academic work” (Goldsmith, 2007, p. 37). This stems from a need to evaluate the improvement
of students’ “understanding of the self and the curriculum” (Gray, 2008, p. 9).
 Ahmet Erdost Yastibas and Gülsah Cinar Yastibas / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 176 (2015) 3 – 13 5

According to Goldsmith, e-portfolios can enhance the learning process and assess learners authentically because
of its requirements. They include taking the responsibility of their learning by making students organize their
material for a specific purpose, self-evaluating their work, and reflecting their findings about their learning process,
experiences, and skills. Students, therefore, can be in charge of their own learning and be motivated to study (Akçıl
& Arap, 2009). Also, e-portfolios can assist to facilitate and document learners’ experiences authentically (Reese &
Levy, 2009). Consequently, they require students to be engaged in the process, so they can contribute to the
enhancement of learning process and authentic assessment. Since students are responsible for their own e-portfolio
process, they can individualize and personalize their learning (Schmitz, Whitson, Heest, & Maddaus, 2010; Gray,
2008).
In addition, e-portfolios can save students’ and teachers’ time and energy. Through the use of e-portfolios,
students can store information easily, give easy access for viewing and review purposes, and minimize the any risks
of loss (Goldsmith, 2007). E-portfolios can promote student autonomy. According to Gonzalez (2009), the European
Language Portfolio encourages the use of e-portfolio assessment in language education because e-portfolios can
increase students’ awareness of the “language learning process and its implications” (p. 373). This process can help
students become autonomous. First, they can find out and “become aware of all the important invisible factors,
procedures, and attitudes involved in language learning” (Gonzalez, 2009, p. 382). Second, students can become the
owners of their language learning and recognize that learning has to also occur outside the classroom.
E-portfolios promote feedback, reflection, and self-reflection. They possess digital collections of student
artefacts related to their goals, achievements, experiences, ideas, and so on, and require students to reflect on their
learning processes. Therefore, they can contribute to the assessment of students’ own products and individual
achievement and to the effectiveness of courses, programs, departments, or institutions (Reese & Levy, 2009;
Goldsmith, 2007). They enhance the reflection of students since students understand their learning and have the
“evidence of their capacity for critical thinking, analytic reasoning, and integrative learning” (Rhodes, 2011, p. 5). In
one study, Lin (2008) indicates that reflection helped students revisit their learning experiences and make a change
in the way they viewed their learning. According to Lin, students can develop a sense of purpose and focus through
the use of e-portfolios because upon reflection, students make a comparison between their artefacts and the
standards in order to understand and check first whether their artefacts meet the standards or not, and then how and
why they meet the standards if so. Also, it can assess students formatively in terms of the evaluation of student
learning, and summatively in terms of the evaluation of student progress and achievement as Rhodes mentions
(2011). According to Rhodes, it can help learners to become active in the presentation and representation of their
learning, so this can motivate them to do their best. Also, Goldsmith (2007) mentions that e-portfolios can provide
students with individual feedback about their learning, experiences, achievements, and can provide feedback about
the effectiveness of their work. Therefore, e-portfolios can improve students’ learning through feedback and
reflection, which supports permanent learning (Akçıl & Arap, 2009) and makes them more willing to overcome
problems (Gray, 2008).
In short, e-portfolios can be used effectively and efficiently in teaching, learning, and assessment as they are
learner-centred. They make students responsible for their learning by enabling them to organize and control the
content of their e-portfolios, which helps them to personalize their e-portfolios. This responsibility requires students
to reflect and assess their own learning.

2.3. Characteristics of e-portfolio

In reviewing studies related to the use of e-portfolios, ten common characteristics were noticed. The first
characteristic of e-portfolios is being authentic. It is authentic because students take responsibility for their learning,
so they are supposed to organize their e-portfolios, reflect on their own learning processes and findings, and improve
their learning depending on their reflections (Goldsmith, 2007; Reese & Levy, 2009). Second, it is controllable
since students can organize their e-portfolios, reflect and assess their learning processes, and make necessary
changes to their e-portfolios according to their reflections (Goldsmith, 2007). Third, it is communicative and
interactive because students need to communicate and interact with their peers and teachers to improve their
learning (Bolliger & Shepherd, 2010; Lin, 2008). Fourth, it is dynamic since the structure of e-portfolios is
continuously developing as a result of the organization of content, collection and selection of artefacts, the self-
assessment and self-reflection of the learning process, and improvement made according to self-assessment and self-
reflections. Fifth, it is personalized because students form their e-portfolios on their own (Goldsmith, 2007; Schmitz
et al., 2010; Gray; 2008). Sixth, it is integrative since e-portfolios create connections between students’ lives and
academic work (Goldsmith, 2007, p. 37). Seventh, it is multi-purposed in that it can be used for the assessment of
students’ learning performances and of institutions’ education programs (Goldsmith, 2007), and for gaining
6 Ahmet Erdost Yastibas and Gülsah Cinar Yastibas / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 176 (2015) 3 – 13

employment in the future (Goldsmith, 2007; Lin, 2008; Reese & Levy, 2009; Kocoglu, 2008). Eighth, it is multi-
sourced as it provides students with feedback on their learning, teachers with the assessment of students’
performances, and institutions with the opportunity to assess their programs, courses, or departments (Goldsmith,
2007). Ninth, it is motivational because it gives students ownership of their own learning and leads to the
improvement of their skills (Akçıl & Arap, 2009; Bolliger & Shepherd, 2010; Rhodes, 2011). Finally, it is reflective
because e-portfolios requires reflection of one’s own learning, so students can self-reflect and assess their learning
processes via e-portfolios (Goldsmith, 2007; Reese & Levy, 2009; Lin, 2008).

3. E-portfolio based assessment

Yastıbaş (2013) has carried out a theory on the use of e-portfolios in speaking classes as an assessment tool. The
results of the study show that e-portfolio assessment improved students’ self-assessment skills because they could
monitor their learning process, understand their strengths and weaknesses, and try to overcome their weaknesses. It
also helped them to take responsibility for their learning and be aware of the progress of their learning (Yastıbaş,
2013). This makes the students more self-confident, motivated, and engaged in learning (Yastıbaş, 2013). In
addition, the study suggests that e-portfolio assessment increased active participation because students had control
over the organization, selection, and design of the content of their e-portfolios. In another study, Tonbul (2009) dealt
with developing an e-portfolio model for a university. The study indicates that using e-portfolios in assessment and
learning, students were able to reflect on their own learning and discover their strengths and weaknesses. According
to Tonbul, it also increased collaboration and interaction between teacher and students, so it facilitated learning. It
made students more responsible for their own learning, assisted them in monitoring their own learning by checking
what they learnt, increased their self-assessment skills, and motivated them. In addition, Abbaszad Tehrani (2010)
has used net-folio to improve writing skills. Net folio is another name used instead of e-portfolio. The results of that
study show that net-folio motivated students and helped them to be responsible for their own learning because they
took control of the content of their net-folios. It also improved the self-assessment and peer feedback skills of the
students so that they could learn from each other, understand their strengths and weaknesses, monitor and follow
progress in their own learning (Abbaszad Tehrani, 2010). In another study, Erice (2008) researched the impact of e-
portfolios as assessment and learning tools in writing classes.. According to Erice, e-portfolios enable students to be
owners of their own learning processes, and helped them to reflect on their learning by improving their self-
assessment skills, motivated them, and also allowed them to follow the progress of their own learning.
These studies describe the contributions of e-portfolio based assessment, and these contributions are aligned with
the ones mentioned in “Assessing with ePortfolios” (n.d.) and Chang (2008). The first study, “Assessing with
ePortfolios” (n.d.) explains the contributions of e-portfolio assessment. It supports and encourages independent, self-
directed, and individualized learning. It allows students to plan and compile the content. It enables students to reflect
on their learning, performance, and achievement. It creates connections between students’ learning and assessment
criteria. Students can be responsible for their own learning and assessment and regulate their learning through e-
portfolios in and out of the class. It provides a personalized learning space. It is a kind of sustainable assessment as
it helps students identify their learning, make judgments about it, and be ready for future learning. It is continuous
and evidence-based assessment. It allows learners to connect tacit knowledge with constructed knowledge. It keeps
track of students’ learning process. It enables students to own and direct their own learning as they select and reflect
on their learning. In the second study, Chang (2008) categorized the contributions of e-portfolio assessment.
According to Chang, students organize and develop their e-portfolios. It is the demonstration and reflection of
students’ learning process and achievements. It develops students’ self-learning, self-evaluation, self-assessment,
and self-reflection. It promotes teacher-learner interaction and reader evaluation. Students can participate in e-
portfolio assessment actively. They can take part in the decision-making process actively (Chang, 2008, p.1757). It
enhances the interaction between peers, peer assessment, and learning outcomes in the long run. Students are in
charge of their own learning by planning their learning actively in e-portfolio assessment process. It supports
students’ creativity. It is motivates students to learn and help them evaluate themselves with confidence. It enhances
students’ technological skills.

4. Self-regulated learning
According to Zimmerman (2000), self-regulation is defined as “self-generated thoughts, feelings, and actions
that are planned and cyclically adapted to the attainment of personal goals” (p. 14). In the academic arena, it requires
the planning and managing of time, attention and focus on education, rehearsal, code, and the organization of
information, making working environment productive, and utilizing social resources effectively (Schunk &
Zimmerman, 1997). Also, Pintrich (1995) mentioned that academically it possesses self-directed processes that
 Ahmet Erdost Yastibas and Gülsah Cinar Yastibas / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 176 (2015) 3 – 13 7

require learners to monitor, control and evaluate their effects, cognition, behavior, and certain aspects of the
environment. In addition, according to Bandura (1986), personal, behavioral and environmental processes are
interactive and required in self-regulation. Besides, some psychological components including motivation,
strategies, self-awareness of performance outcomes, and sensitivity to environmental and social settings are required
in self-regulation (Zimmerman & Risemberg, 1997). Depending on the definitions, self-regulated learning motivates
students to set their own goals and decide which plans and strategies should be used to attain those goals, which
increases their self-awareness of their performance and makes them monitor their learning process and control the
social and physical setting (Wang, 2004).
According to Bandura (1986) and Zimmerman (2000), being self-regulated has three important processes or
phases. For Bandura, self-observation, self-judgment, and self-reaction are important in self-regulating one’s own
learning process. Self-observation is the observing of one’s own behavior in an attentional way, self-judgment is
comparing one’s own performances with that of a standard, and self-reaction is responding to self-judgment in an
evaluative way (Bandura, 1986). Similarly, Zimmerman (2000) claimed that there are three phases in self-regulation
that are cyclical and consist of three components: forethought, performance, and self-reflection phases. There are
processes and beliefs such as motivation, self-efficacy, goal setting, and planning that trigger efforts to learn in the
forethought phase, performance phase includes processes like attentional control, keeping records, and monitoring in
which students concentrate on the task to optimize their performance, and self-reflection phase involves processes
like self-evaluation in which learners compare their performance with a goal and evaluate their results (Zimmerman,
2000). To understand these phases better, Zimmerman (1998, 2002) considers some questions. In the forethought
phase, learners can ask when and where they will write, how they will start, and what will help them to write. In the
performance phase, they can try to find answer to the questions whether they accomplished the aim of the
assignment, whether it is taking more time than the planned time, whether they can be encouraged to keep going,
and what will help them. In the self-reflection face, the questions “whether the students did a good job, how they
kept on task, what helped them, whether they gave enough time to complete the assignment, whether they chose the
right study strategies, whether they set rewards and consequences for themselves, and whether the students followed
their plans” are asked.
Depending on the cyclical method of Zimmerman for self-regulated learning, Hirata (2010) mentioned four
components of self-regulated learning: cognitive/metacognitive, affective, behavioral, and environmental
regulations. According to Hirata, cognitive and metacognitive regulation includes perceptions of previous
experience, goal setting, and strategic planning in the forethought phase, implementing strategies, monitoring and
controlling progress in the performance phase, performance evaluation, and strategic adoption in self-reflection
phase. Affective regulation is related to motivational beliefs, perceptions about possible outcomes in forethought
phase, and affective responses in the self-reflection phase, and needs to monitor and control motivation and emotion
in the performance phase (Hirata, 2010). Behavioral regulation involves preparing for behavioral engagement in the
forethought phase, undertaking and controlling planned commitments, noticing behavioral changes in the
performance phase, behavioral adaption, and defensive reactions in the self-reflection phase as Hirata (2010)
mentions. According to Hirata, environmental regulation includes the processes of observations about available
resources and learning contexts in the forethought phase, managing resources, identifying problems, seeking help in
the performance phase, environmental restructuring, and disengagement in the self-reflection phase.
In relation to the phases and components of self-regulated learning, Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons (1986)
found out that there are 14 different self-regulated learning strategies used. They are self-evaluation, organizing and
transforming, goal setting and planning, seeking information, keeping records and monitoring, environmental
structuring, self-consequences, rehearsing and memorizing, seeking peer assistance, seeking teacher assistance,
seeking adult assistance, reviewing tests, reviewing notes, and reviewing texts. While heavily relying on the strategy
list created by Zimmerman and Martinez-Pons, two other scholars, Pape and Wang (2003) developed another 11-
item list of self-regulated learning strategies. They are self-evaluation, organizing and transforming, goal setting and
planning, seeking information, keeping records and monitoring, environmental structuring, self-consequences,
attentional control, rehearsing and memorizing, seeking social assistance, and reviewing records (Pang & Wang,
2003). All of these strategies are based on being self-initiated.
The definitions, phases, components, and strategies of self-regulated learning describe the characteristics of a
self-regulated learner. According to Zimmerman (1990), learners are proactive and reactive during their learning
process. They look for information proactively when they need and are ready to take the necessary steps to master
their skills (Zimmerman, 1990). Also, they establish goals by using appropriate strategies, their self-efficacy beliefs
towards their capabilities are high, and these two affect their goal setting and the level of commitment to attain their
goals (Zimmerman, 1990). This means that self-regulated learners are active in their learning process in terms of
8 Ahmet Erdost Yastibas and Gülsah Cinar Yastibas / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 176 (2015) 3 – 13

motivation, metacognition, and behavior (Zimmerman, 1990). According to Zimmerman, they are self-efficacious
and possess positive attitudes toward learning, so they can act by selecting and structuring action. In addition,
Schunk and Zimmerman (1997) mentioned that self-regulated learners are active participants because they can
control their learning experiences in many different ways efficiently. They can do so by organizing and rehearsing
information to be learned, holding positive beliefs about their capabilities, and putting a high value on learning
(Schunk & Zimmerman, 1997). Consequently, the characteristics show that self-regulated learners initiate their own
learning, use strategies to achieve their self-set goals, monitor their learning by checking what worked and what did
not work. Therefore, they can have the ability to control and influence their own learning processes positively.

4.1. Studies related to self-regulated learning in English language teaching

Studies on self-regulated learning in English language teaching are based on the relationship between self-
regulation and self-efficacy, motivation, academic achievement, and learning strategies. Also, some studies focus on
the effect of self-regulation learning on writing, reading, listening, speaking, and vocabulary learning.
In Wang’s dissertation (2004), the researcher focused on the relationship between self-regulated learning
strategies and self-efficacy beliefs of four Chinese students learning English as a second language. The results of the
dissertation show that self-regulated learning strategies of the students such as seeking social assistance and
information, reviewing records, and environmental structuring affected the students’ self-efficacy beliefs positively
while they used the strategies more in reading than in writing. In addition, the focus of another project is on raising
self-efficacy through self-regulated learning strategies in a secondary EFL classroom (Koehler, 2007). This study
found that self-regulated learning strategies led to higher levels of self-efficacy, which resulted in more engagement
of students in reading activities.
Hirata (2010) concentrated on the relationship between motivation and self-regulated learning in second
language acquisition related to Kanji learning. Hirata found that self-regulated learning has a positive effect on self-
regulated learning. Different aspects of motivation including intrinsic orientation and value, self-efficacy, and self-
concept are predictors of different types of self-regulated learning. To illustrate, intrinsic orientation and value are
indicators of cognitive and metacognitive self-regulated learning, while self-efficacy is related to behavioral
regulation and self-concept is connected to environmental self-regulation (Hirata, 2010). Also, Al-Otaibi (2013) has
studied the relationship between Saudi EFL learners’ vision of future-self and their self-regulated learning behavior.
According to Al-Otaibi, Dörnyei developed a second language motivational self-system in which ideal-self and
ought self are defined. Dörnyei’s system focuses on the discrepancy between a learner’s actual self and his/her ideal
self (Al-Otaibi, 2013). The results of the study indicate that ideal self increases motivation and self-regulated
learning. This makes them be motivationally, meta-cognitively, and behaviourally ready to be active in their
learning (Al-Otaibi, 2013). Also, it makes them self-efficacious and they have positive attitudes toward learning (Al-
Otaibi, 2013).
Mahmoodi, Kalantari, and Ghaslani (2014) have searched the relationship between self-regulated learning,
motivation, and language achievement among Iranian EFL learners. They have found out that self-regulated learning
strategies affect the motivation of the students positively, while there is no connection between self-regulated
learning and second language achievement. Also, the research indicates that the students use cognitive and
metacognitive strategies more than behavioral strategies. Besides this, Garrido-Vargas (2012) studied the
relationship between self-regulated learning and academic achievement among English language learners. This
dissertation indicates that self-regulated learning influenced motivation and self-efficacy in a positive way;
therefore, self-regulated learning contributed to the learners’ academic achievement in reading and writing. Also,
Andrade (2012) states that self-regulated learning can improve learning proficiency, make learners satisfied, and
help them increase their capacity for autonomy.
Bloom (2013) has focused on the place of goal setting and self-monitoring in self-regulated learning. He
mentions that self-regulated learning strategies enables students to make higher academic achievements, make
greater effort to solve problems, overcome obstacles, and motivate them to learn. Goal setting and self-monitoring
are two of these strategies and help them to be aware of their learning, judge their learning ability, and adjust
themselves according to their own evaluation (Bloom, 2013). Self-regulated learning increases self-confidence, self-
efficacy, and motivation, so it results in active participation and increased collaboration (Bloom, 2013).
Çelik, Arkın, and Sabriler (2012) researched EFL’ learners’ use of Information Communication Technologies
(ICT) for self-regulated learning. They have found out that ICT provides learners with opportunities to regulate their
learning outside of the class by reaching their language learning goals and motivating themselves via ICT, making
language learning an enjoyable process. Also, Cheng and Chau (2013) have investigated the relationship between
self-regulated learning ability and e-portfolio achievement. The study shows that cognitive skills, metacognitive
 Ahmet Erdost Yastibas and Gülsah Cinar Yastibas / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 176 (2015) 3 – 13 9

control strategies, and collaboration have a positive effect on students’ e-portfolio achievements.
Lin and Gan (2014) studied Taiwanese college students’ use of English listening strategies and self-regulated
learning. The study finds out that self-regulated learning made students plan and evaluate their own listening
education, give them a desire to acquire the knowledge, motivated them to succeed, and take action to become
proficient (Lin & Gan, 2014). This process helped them to be more active in their learning, discover their strengths
and weaknesses and use effective methods to succeed; therefore, self-regulation made them good listeners (Lin &
Gan, 2014). Aregu (2013) studied the relationship between self-regulated learning and speaking efficacy and
performance among Ethiopian students. As Aregu (2013) states, self-regulation made the Ethiopian learners more
motivated and responsible for their learning. Therefore, self-regulated learning improved their speaking efficacy and
performance.
In Filate’s study (2012), the impact of self-regulated language learning among the reading achievements of grade
9 students was assessed. The results of the study show that cognitive self-regulation strategies were indicators of the
students’ reading performance and contributed to their reading performance. In Zarei and Hatami’s research (2012),
the relationship between self-regulated learning components and L2 vocabulary knowledge and reading
comprehension of Iranian EFL learners was studied. The self-regulated learning components that were examined in
this study were planning, self-check, effort, and self-efficacy. The study indicates that these components do not have
an effect on vocabulary knowledge, while only self-check and effort have a direct and positive effect on reading
comprehension. Pratontep and Chinwonno (2008) have focused on self-regulated learning among Thai university
students in an EFL extensive reading program. The study reveals that self-regulated learning training about the
strategies particularly related to metacognitive and performance improved the students’ reading comprehension. Al
Asmari and Ismail (2012) have searched self-regulated learning strategies as predictors of reading comprehension
among students of English as a foreign language. Their study indicates that self-regulated learning strategies such as
rehearsal, self-talk, and elaboration are indicators of reading comprehension. Mizumoto (2013) has dealt with
enhancing self-efficacy in vocabulary learning through a self-regulated learning approach. According to Mizumoto,
self-regulated learning increased self-efficacy in vocabulary learning. Hence, it helped the participants improve their
vocabulary knowledge. Hamedani (2013) studied the relationship between self-efficacy and self-regulation in
vocabulary acquisition of Iranian EFL learners. Hamedani mentions that there is a strong relationship between self-
efficacy and self-regulation, which results in an increase in vocabulary acquisition.
The study of Soureshjani (n.d.) has focused on the relationship between self-regulation and motivation and
Iranian EFL learners’ writing achievement. The results of the study point out that there is a strong connection
between motivation and self-regulated learning, so it has a positive impact on the learners’ writing performance.
Zhang (n.d.) focused on self-regulated learning in an online ESL writing class. According to Zhang, self-regulated
learning has a positive influence on motivation; therefore, the students could benefit from an online writing course.

4.2. Studies related to self-regulated learning and e-portfolio

There are few studies whose focus is on the enhancement of self-regulated learning through e-portfolios in
different areas rather than English language teaching. In one of these studies, Alexiou and Paraskeva (2010) have
worked on enhancing self-regulated learning skills through the implementation of e-portfolios in a computer science
university. The results of the study show that e-portfolios make students more engaged and enthusiastic about their
learning, and also there was a high correlation between cognitive, motivational, and affective factors. They suggest
that the use of e-portfolios supports and promotes students’ learning, so the structuring of e-portfolios can enhance
self-regulated learning skills. In addition, there are some e-portfolio systems such as the Electronic Portfolio
Encouraging Active Reflective Learning Software (ePEARL) (Abrami, Wade, Pillay, Aslan, Bures, & Bentley,
2008) and MySelf E-portfolio (Alexiou & Paraskeva, 2013) that are developed and used in some studies. Abrami et
al. and Alexiou and Paraskeva mention that their e-portfolio systems are structured according to the phases of self-
regulated learning developed by Zimmerman. Abrami et al. have found out that the efficiency and effectiveness of
e-portfolios depends on the enhancement of self-regulated learning skills, since teachers and students were not
familiar with self-regulated learning, and it was difficult for teachers to teach self-regulated learning strategies.
Alexiou and Paraskeva (2013) emphasize that a self-regulated oriented e-portfolio could increase motivation and
self-efficacy and could be used for professional and academic development. Also, the study shows that students
could acquire some skills of self-regulated learning, and so e-portfolios could be used to improve self-regulated
learning. In another study, Jenson (2011) focused on how to promote self-regulation and critical reflection through
students’ writing e-portfolios. The results of the study have indicated that e-portfolios could develop self-regulation
and critical reflections of students in writing. Similarly, Mackenzie (2014) has studied medical students’ experiences
using an e-portfolio for self-regulated learning. Mackenzie has stressed that e-portfolio helped the students acquire
10 Ahmet Erdost Yastibas and Gülsah Cinar Yastibas / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 176 (2015) 3 – 13

some elements of forethought and reflection phases, but they did not acquire elements of performance phase, so e-
portfolios could enhance students’ self-regulated learning skills, but to make it more effective and efficient, self-
regulated learning instruction should be given more importance. Lou and Blaustein (2014) complied a literature
review study on the relationship between e-portfolios with motivation, self-regulation, and academic achievement.
Their review of the literature indicates that the use of e-portfolios is associated with motivation and reflection, can
increase learners’ strategies, motivation, academic achievement, and technology aptitude, is student-centred, offers
user-control, and needs full commitment and planning. In addition, a review study on self-regulated learning in
technologically enhanced learning environments was carried out in Europe. The review implies that technological
tools can be used to promote and enhance self-regulated learning (Carneiro, Lefrere, & Steffens, 2007).

5. Conclusion
The literature review indicates that e-portfolio-based assessment can be used to develop students’ self-regulated
learning in English language teaching because the focus is primarily on students. This focus has some certain
characteristics that promote and support the conclusion mentioned. First, e-portfolio-based assessment requires
students to be active participants in the learning process because they are in charge of every step of e-portfolio-based
assessment, such as selecting and organizing the content of e-portfolios, setting goals, and evaluating their learning
process. Similarly, self-regulated learning aims to make students active in their learning process by helping them to
take responsibility for their own learning. Being responsible for one’s own education enables them to control their
own learning processes, which is another common thing between e-portfolio-based assessment and self-regulated
learning. Third, e-portfolio-based assessment provides students with artefacts that they can use to monitor their own
learning process. Monitoring one’s own learning can enable one to assess and reflect on one’s own work, which can
help to understand one’s strengths and weaknesses, what worked and what did not work, and improve learning
according to those findings. Like e-portfolio-based assessment, self-regulated learning requires self-reflection that
can allow students to find out their strengths and weakness, and whether the strategies they choose worked or not,
and to improve their learning. In addition, both self-regulated learning and e-portfolio-based assessment can
motivate students since they are individualized learning types and can enable students to monitor the development in
their learning. In e-portfolio-based assessment and self-regulated learning, motivation to study can assist students in
forming positive attitudes toward learning, as they can understand what they can achieve. This feeling can make
students more self-efficacious and self-confident. Hence, both self-regulated learning and e-portfolio-based
assessment can prepare students behaviourally, metacognitively, and motivationally for their learning processes.
Consequently, the aim of this form of assessment is to enable students to individualize and personalize their learning
by supporting and encouraging active participation, taking responsibility of one’s own learning, observation and
reflection of learning by students. This indicates that both of them can be connected to each other, and e-portfolio-
based assessment can promote self-regulated learning.

References
Abbaszad Tehrani, F. (2010). “Using Net-folio to Improve Writing Skills.” PhD Thesis, Gazi University, Institute of Educational Sciences,
Ankara.
Abrami, P. C., Wade, A., Pillay, V., Aslan, O., Bures, E. M., & Bentley, C. (2008). Encouraging self-regulated learning through electronic
portfolio. Retrieved from May 20, 2014, from http://www.ccl-cca.ca/NR/rdonlyres/41FA3A88-49DD-41B4-9D39-
629EE5E1DAFF/0/AbramiFinalReportSL2006doc.pdf
Akçıl, U., & Arap, I. (2009). The opinions of education faculty students on learning process involving e-portfolios. Procedia Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 1, 395-400. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.071.
Al Asmari, A. A., & Ismail, N. M. (2012). Self-regulated learning strategies as predictors of reading comprehension among students of English as
a foreign language. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 2(2), 178-201.
Alexiou, A., & Paraskeva, F. (2010). Enhancing self-regulated learning skills through the implementation of an e-portfolio tool. Procedia Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 3048-3054.
Alexiou, A., & Paraskeva, F. (2013, June 12 - 14). Exploiting motivation and self-efficacy through the implementation of self-regulated oriented
ePortfolio. Paper presented at The International Conference on E-Learning in the Workplace, New York, USA.
Al-Otaibi, S. M. (2013). Investigating Saudi EFL learners’ vision of Future-self and its relationship to their self-regulated learning behavior. Arab
Worl English Journal, 4(4), 112-127.
Andrade, M. S. (2012). Self-regulated learning activities:Supporting success in online course. International Perspectives of Distance Learning in
Higher Education, n.p.
Aregu, B. B. (2013). Enhancing self-regulated learning in teaching spoken communication: Does it affect speaking efficacy and performance?
Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 10(1), 96-109.
 Ahmet Erdost Yastibas and Gülsah Cinar Yastibas / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 176 (2015) 3 – 13 11

Assessing with ePortfolios. (n.d.). Retrieved May 20, 2014, from https://teaching.unsw.edu.au/assessing-eportfolios
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Birgin, O. (2008). Alternatif bir değerlendirme yöntemi olarak portfolio değerlendirme uygulamasına ilişkim öğrenci görüşleri. Türk Eğitim
Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1), 1-24.
Blaustein, C., & Lou, Y. (2014). Electronic portfolios: Motivation, self-regulation, and academic achievement in secondary schools. In M.
Searson & M. Ochoa (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2014
(pp. 1734-1742). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Bloom, M. (July/August 2013). Self-regulated learning: Goal setting and self-monitoring. The Language Teacher – Readers’ Forum, 37(4), 46-
51.
Bolliger, D. U., & Shepherd, C. E. (2010). Student perceptions of e-portfolio integrating in online courses. Distance Education, 31(3), 295-
314.͒ doi: 10.1080/01587919.2010.513955.
Cadd, M. (n.d.). The electronic portfolio as assessment tool and more: The Drake University Model. International Association for Language
Learning Technology, 42(1), n.p. Retrieved May 20, 2014, from
http://www.iallt.org/iallt_journal/the_electronic_portfolio_as_assessment_tool_and_more_the_drake_university_model
Carneiro, R., Lefrere, P., & Steffens, K. (2007). Self-regulated learning in technology enhanced learning environments: A European review.
Retrieved May 20, 2014, from http://www.lmi.ub.es/taconet/documents/srlinteles3.pdf
Çelik, S., Arkın, E., & Sabriler, D. (2012). EFL learners’ use of ICT for self-regulated learning. The Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies,
8(2), 98-118.
Chang, C. (2001). A study on the evaluation and effectiveness analysis of web-based learning portfolio (WBLP). British Journal of Educational
Technology, 23(4), 435-458.
Chang, C. (2008). Enhancing self-perceived effects using Web-based portfolio assessment. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 1753-1771.
Cheng, G., & Chau, J. (2013). Exploring the relationship between students’ self-regulated learning ability and their ePortfolio achievement.
Internet and Higher Education, 17, 9-15.
Filate, A. Y. (2012). The impact of students’ self-regulated language learning on their reading achievement: Grade 9 students in focus.
International Association o Research in Foreign Language Education and Applied Linguistics, 1(3), 175-188.
Garrido-Vargas, M. (2012). “Relationship of Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement among English Language Learners.” PhD
Thesis, The University of Arizona, The Graduate College, Arizona, The United States of America.
Genç, Z., & Tinmaz, H. (2010). A reflection of pre-service teachers on e-portfolio assessment. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1504-
1508.
Goodson, F. T. (2007). The electronic portfolio: Shaping an emerging genre. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 50(6), 432-434. doi:
10.1598/JAAL.50.6.1
Goldsmith, D. J. (2007). Enhancing learning and assessment through e-portfolios: A collaborative effort in Connecticut. New Directions for
Student Services, 119, 31-42. doi: 10.1002/ss.247
Gonzalez, J. A. (2009). Promoting students autonomy through the use of the European Language Portfolio. ELT Journal, 63(4), 373-382.͒ doi:
10.1093/elt/ccno59
Gray, L. (2008). Effective practice with e-portfolios. JISC, 5-40.
Gülbahar, Y., & Tinmaz, H. (2006). Implementing project-based learning and e-portfolio assessment in an undergraduate course. International
Society for Technology in Education, 309-327.
Erice, D. (2008). “The Impact of E-portfolio on the Writing Skills of Foreign Language Learners Studying at Abant Izzet Baysal University Basic
English Program.” PhD Thesis, Gazi University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
Hamedani, S. H. H. (2013). The relationship between self-efficacy and self-regulation in vocabulary acquisition of Iranian EFL learners. Journal
of Academic and Applied Studies, 3(1), 20-31.
Harrison, S., & Prain, V. (2009). Self-regulated learning in junior secondary English. Issues in Educational Research, 19(3), 227-242.
Hirata, A. (2010). “An Exploratory Study of Motivation and Self-regulated Learning in Second Language Acquisition: Kanji Learning as a Task
Focused Approach.” MA Thesis, Massey University, Manawatu, New Zealand.
Jenson, J. D. (2011). Promoting self-regulation and critical reflection through writing students’ use of electronic portfolio. International Journal
of ePortfolio, 1(1), 49-60.
Kocoglu, Z. (2008). Turkish EFL student teachers’ perceptions on the role of electronic portfolios in their professional development. The Turkish
Online Journal of Educational Technology, 7(3), n.p.
Koehler, A. (2007). “Raising Awareness of Self-Efficacy through Self-Regulated Learning Strategies for Reading in a Secondary ESL
Classroom.” MA Thesis, Hamline University, St. Paul, Minnesota, The United States of America.
Lin, C-Y., & Gan, X-N. (2014). Taiwanese college students’ use of English listening strategies and self-regulated learning. International Journal
on Studies in English Language and Literature, 2(5), 57-65.
Lin, Q. (2008). Preservice teachers’ learning experiences of constructing e-portfolios online. Internet and Higher Education, 11, 194-200.͒ doi:
10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.07.002.
12 Ahmet Erdost Yastibas and Gülsah Cinar Yastibas / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 176 (2015) 3 – 13

Lorenzo, G., & Ittelson, J. (2005). An overview of e-portfolios. Educause Learning Initiative, 1-27.
Mackenzie, J. J. (2014). “Medical Students’ Experiences Using an ePortfolio for Self-regulated Learning in the Context of the Intrinsic
CanMEDS Roles.” MA Thesis, Queen’s University, The Graduate Program in the Faculty of Education, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Magno, C. (2009). Self-regulation and approaches to learning in English composition writing. TESOL Journal, 1, 1-16.
Mahmoodi, M. H., Kalantari, B., & Ghaslani, R. (2014). Self-regulated learning (SRL), motivation and academic achievement of Iranian EFL
learners. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1062-1068.
Mezei, G. (2008). Motivation and self-regulated learning: A case study of a pre-intermediate and an upper-intermediate adult student. WoPaLP,
2, 79-104.
Mizumoto, A. (2013). Enhancing self-efficacy in vocabulary learning: A self-regulated learning approach. Vocabulary Learning and Instruction,
2(1), 15-24.
Pape, S. J., & Wang, C. (2003). Middle school children’s strategic behavior: Classification and relation to academic achievement and
mathematical problem-solving, Instructional Science, 31, 419-449.
Peña Dix, B. (2013). Motivation and the concept of self-regulation: Theory and implications for English language teaching and learning in
Colombia. Voces y Silencios: Revista Latinoamericana de Educación, 4(1), 71-85.
Pintrich, P. R. (1995). Understanding self-regulated learning. In P. R. Pintrich (Ed.), Understanding self-regulated learning (pp. 3-12). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Pratontep, C., & Chinwonno, A. (2008). Self-regulated learning by Thai university students in an EFL extensive reading program. Journal of
Humanities, 11(2), 104-124.
Reese, M., & Levy, R. (2009). Assessing the future: E-portfolio trends, uses, and options in higher education. ECAR Research Bulletin, 2009(4),
1-12.
Rhodes, T. L. (2011, January/February). Making learning visible and meaningful through electronic portfolios. Change, 6-13.
Schmitz, C. C., Whitson, B. A., Heest, A. V., & Maddaus, M. A. (2010). Establishing a usable electronic portfolio for surgical residents: Trying
to keep it simple. Journal of Surgical Education, 14-18. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2010.01.001
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Social origins of self-regulatory competence. Educational Psychologist, 32, 195-208.
Soureshjani, K. H. (n.d.). Self-regulation and motivation reconsideration through Persian EFL learners’ writing achievement. Journal of Research
(Humanities), 55-80.
Tasnimi, M., & Maftoon, P. (2014). Application of self-regulation in reading comprehension. Humanising Language Teaching Magazine, 3, n.p.
Tonbul, E. B. (2009). “A Suggested E-portfolio Model for ELT Students at Gazi University.” MA Thesis, Gazi University, Institute of
Educational Sciences, Ankara.
Tran, T. Q., & Duong, T. M. (2013). The attitudes towards English language learning and use of self-regulated learning strategies among college
non-English majors. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 3(7), 1-8.
Üstünel, E., & Deren, E. (2010). The effects of e-portfolio based assessment on students’ perceptions of educational environment. Procedia
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 1477-1481.
Wang, C. (2004). “Self-Regulated Learning Strategies and Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Children Learning English as a Second Language.” PhD
Thesis, The Ohio State University, The Graduate School of the Ohio State University, Ohio, The United States of America.

Wang, C., Kim, D-H., Bong, M., & Ahn, H. S. (2013). Korean college students’ self-regulated learning strategies and self-efficacy beliefs in
learning English as a foreign language. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 15(3), 81-112.
Wang, C., Schwab, G., Fenn, P., & Chang, M. (2013). Self-efficacy and self-regulated learning strategies for English language learners:
Comparison between Chinese and German college students. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 3(1), 173-191.
Yang, W., & Xu, X. (2008). Self assessment in second language learning. US – China Foreign Language, 6(5), 20-24.
Yastıbaş, A. E. (2013). “The Application of E-portfolio in Speaking Assessment and its Contribution to Students’ Attitudes Towards Speaking.”
MA Thesis, Çağ University, Institute of Social Sciences, Mersin.
Yigzaw, A., & Fentie, A. (2013). The impact of students’ self-regulated language learning on their reading achievement in Ethiopian high
schools: Grade 9 in focus. Journal of Media and Communication Studies, 5(5), 44-51.
Zarei, A. A., & Hatami, G. (2012). On the relationship between self-regulated learning components and L2 vocabulary knowledge and reading
comprehension. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(9), 1939-1944.
Zhang, J. (n.d.). Leaners Agency, motivation, and self-regulated learning in an online ESL writing class. International Association for Language
Learning Technology, 43(2), n.p.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3-17.
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, NY:
Guilford Press.
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). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
 Ahmet Erdost Yastibas and Gülsah Cinar Yastibas / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 176 (2015) 3 – 13 13

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 65-70. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning
strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 614-628.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Risemberg, R. (1997). Self-regulato ry dimensions of academic learning and motivation. In G. D. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of
academic learning: Construction of knowledge. (pp. 105-125). New York: Academic Press.