System 81 (2019) 39e49

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

System
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/system

Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: How

formative assessment supports students' self-regulation in
English language learning
Yangyu Xiao a, *, Min Yang b
a
The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, China
b
The Education University of Hong Kong, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t :

Article history: This paper addresses how formative assessment can support secondary students' self-
Received 13 February 2018 regulated learning in English language learning. Self-regulated learning is essential for
Received in revised form 3 January 2019 lifelong learning because it allows students to construct knowledge by identifying their
Accepted 11 January 2019
learning goals, self-managing their learning process and self-evaluating their performance
Available online 16 January 2019
against goals. Although a consensus can be found in the literature that formative assess-
ment has significant potential for supporting self-regulated learning among students, how
Keywords:
such potential can be afforded through teachers' practices of formative assessment in
Formative assessment
Feedback
English language classrooms remains under-explored. In this paper, findings from class-
Self-regulated learning room observations and interviews with two teachers and 16 students in a foreign language
Secondary school students secondary school are reported. The findings reveal that under the guidance of their
English language learning teachers, the participants engaged in formative assessment in a proactive manner and
appeared to be emerging as self-regulated learners. The students perceived the classroom
formative assessment activities that they experienced and the feedback they received to be
helpful in the development of their deep understanding and capability for self-regulation
in English language learning.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Developing students' self-regulation skills is of great importance in education, as a key aim of education is to help them
develop the capacity to guide and improve their own learning (Black & Wiliam, 2009). Self-regulation is such a core capability
of lifelong learners. Self-regulated learners are able to define their goals of learning and pursue actions of knowledge con-
struction on their own initiative (Seker, 2015). Self-regulation studies in related to English language learning reveal that self-
regulation can be conceived as a group of iterative processes. In such a process students can identify their own learning goals,
experiment on their learning strategies to achieve personal learning goals, self-evaluate learning progress, and elicit help and
feedback to improve performance (Lam, 2015; Tseng, Chang, & Cheng, 2015).
Sustained research supports how formative assessment can help students develop their capability for self-regulation.
Formative assessment clarifies assessment criteria and standards for students, helps them set learning goals and facilitates

* Corresponding author. Faculty of Humanities of Social Science, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, China.
E-mail address: shirleyxiao@cuhk.edu.cn (Y. Xiao).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.01.004
0346-251X/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
40 Y. Xiao, M. Yang / System 81 (2019) 39e49

their engagement in self-assessment and peer-assessment (Bulter & Lee, 2010; Lam, 2015). These benefits of formative
assessment, in turn, increase students' self-awareness of their strengths and weaknesses (Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Nicol &
Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). Existing studies have identified how self-regulation of learning can be prioritised in English language
learning, for example, through various classroom assessment activities that inform and scaffold student learning (Purpura,
2016). The amount of research on how formative assessment exerts influence on students' self-regulation of learning is
growing. However, relevant research evidence in English language learning remains scarce (Seker, 2015).
This paper aims to explore how secondary students' self-regulation of their English language learning can be supported
through formative assessment and feedback component in formative assessment in classrooms. The current paper reports
findings from a qualitative study conducted with 16 secondary school students and two teachers at a foreign language
secondary school in China. Through classroom observations and interviews, the participants' experiences of engaging in
formative assessment activities in English language learning were explored. This study documented evidence on how
formative assessment can afford students potential to develop the characteristics and learning behaviours associated with
self-regulation in English language learning.

2. Role of formative assessment in supporting self-regulated learning in English language learning

We propose a framework on the role of formative assessment in supporting students' self-regulated learning in English
language learning. The framework encompasses two integrated key themes: (a) the employment of formative assessment in
helping students enhance their capability for self-regulating English language learning and (b) the incorporation of feedback
at different levels into classroom formative assessment to support self-regulated learning. The literature review starts with an
introduction of the key concepts in this paper.

2.1. Defining formative assessment

Formative assessment is defined as a set of classroom procedures whereby ‘evidence about student achievement is elicited,
interpreted, and used by teachers, students, or their peers, to make decisions about the next steps in instruction that are likely
to be better, or better founded, than the decisions they would have taken in the absence of the evidence that was elicited.’
(Black & Wiliam, 2009, p. 9). This definition supports that formative assessment is a continuum where various classroom
activities, ranging from more learner-centred activities to teacher-directed assessment, can be used for formative purposes
(Carless, 2011; Pryor & Crossouard, 2008). Whether assessment is formative is thus related to how assessment is planned and
implemented, how feedback is provided, and the roles students play in assessments (Purpura, 2016).

2.2. Defining academic self-regulation

Self-regulation has been considered as a major factor that leads to the improved language competence in English language
learning (Oxford, 2011; Bai, 2018). Self-regulated learning is a self-directive learning process where learners transform mental
abilities into academic skills by setting learning goals, and attempting to monitor, regulate and control their cognition,
motivation and behaviour to reach their goals (Zimmerman, 2002). Self-regulated learners bear several distinctive charac-
teristics. Self-regulated learners are adaptive by engaging in self-regulative processes, including (a) setting learning goals, (b)
adopting strategies to achieve goals, (c) managing resources, (d) extending efforts, (e) responding to feedback and (f) pro-
ducing products (Boekaerts & Corno, 2005). Self-regulated learners are positive in developing a deep interest in learning and
demonstrating self-confidence in attaining goals (Boekaerts & Corno, 2005; Zimmerman, 2002). Self-regulated learners are
also proactive in making efforts to learn based on self-awareness of and reflection on strengths and weakness (Zimmerman,
2002). How formative assessment may foster the above mentioned characteristics of self-regulated learners in English
language learning will be explored in this study.
Self-regulation of learning involves three cyclical phases. The first phase is the forethought phase, which includes the
processes of goal setting and strategy planning for task analysis, and self-motivation arising from beliefs about learning, such
as self-efficacy and outcomes expectancy. The second phase performance phase encompasses self-control and self-
observation, where learners deploy planned strategies and self-instruct, self-record and self-experiment to discover causes
of learning events. The last phase self-reflection phase involves self-judgment (comparing performance against standards)
and self-reaction (involving self-satisfaction and responses, which are either defensive or adaptive) (Zimmerman, 2002,
2008). The above mentioned phases will be taken into consideration when we analyse how formative assessment activities
may support students' self-regulation.
Research studies have explored the ways to help students develop self-regulated learning skills, which are depicted as
teachable skills that learners can develop through learning experiences (Andrade & Evan, 2012; Oxford, 2011). Lam (2015)
reported that explicit instruction on self-regulation strategies in a 15-week process-oriented English writing course hel-
ped university students develop self-regulated strategies through planning, organising ideas, and problem-solving tactics in
the composing process. When used in school context, Lam’s (2015) approach to supporting students' self-regulated learning
should be adapted to secondary students' needs, for example, providing explicit guidelines and having diagnostic conver-
sations. At the school level, Tseng et al. (2015) advised that to help students develop self-regulation capacity, English language
teachers should give students appropriate guidance, which include instructing them on learning strategies, activating their
 Y. Xiao, M. Yang / System 81 (2019) 39e49 41

metacognition, and enhancing their self-efficacy. However, more evidence on how teachers' classroom practices can support
learners' self-regulated learning at the school level is still needed.

2.3. Interplay between formative assessment and self-regulation

Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) explicitly explained how formative assessment and feedback have the potential to help
students become self-regulated learners. On the one hand, the way in which students self-regulate their learning to achieve
learning growth parallels with the learning processes that are promoted in formative assessment activities (Black & Wiliam,
2009). More specifically, self-regulation is manifested in learner active involvement in monitoring and regulating a number of
learning processes, including setting learning goals, adopting strategies to achieve goals, managing resources, making efforts,
responding to feedback, and producing products (Nicola & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). On the other hand, formative assessment
studies suggest that enhancing students' capacity to regulate their own learning should be considered to be the ultimate
purpose of formative assessment (Andrade, 2010; Hawe & Dixon, 2017).
One key aspect of employing formative assessment to support self-regulated learning is providing students with op-
portunities to decide on their learning goals, self-evaluate performance against their goals, and make improvement.
(Andrade, 2010; Sadler, 2013). Hawe and Dixon (2017) identified various formative assessment strategies and activities that
promote self-regulation among students. These strategies include setting learning goals, providing exemplars, adopting
activities that elicit evidence of learning, dialogical interaction, peer review, and feedback on the current understanding and
task-related processes. Clark's (2012) review of 199 empirical studies also shows that formative assessment engaged students
in the learning process through clarifying and sharing learning goals, providing feedback and activating themselves as a
resource for learning. These studies support the utility of formative assessment in developing students' capacity to monitor
and regulate their learning.
A much debated issue is whether test-related practices can be regarded as formative assessment activities, and whether
such practices can foster student self-regulation in English language learning. Lam’s (2014) study with a group of 31 uni-
versity students found that when engaged in generating tests on discourse analysis for their peers, the students reported
consolidated understanding of discourse analysis. Lam (2014) explained that the student-generated tests supported self-
regulation through enhancing these students' understanding of assessment criteria and motivating them to study subject-
matter knowledge. Lam's (2014) study has implication for our study in the school context as his study focuses on self-
regulation in relation to test related practice that is common in the Chinese context. Test follow-up activities were also
found to be facilitative for students to become more aware of their strengths and weaknesses, and develop strategies for
tackling future tasks (Black, Harrison, Lee, Marshall, & Wiliam, 2003; Xiao, 2017). In Brookhart’s (2001) study, successful
secondary school students derived learning potential by reflecting on how well they performed in summative tests, and how
such information could be applied to their future learning. The students demonstrated the capacity to reflect and monitor
their own learning, which is a key characteristic of self-regulated learners (Zimmerman, 2002).
Another critical aspect in formative assessment that supports self-regulation is the provision of feedback, which offers
information on how successfully something has been done and what can be done to improve it (Sadler, 2013). Feedback and
self-regulation are two intricately interrelated aspects of a broader learning process. A recurrent major theme in formative
assessment research is the need to orient feedback provision towards developing students' capacity to monitor and regulate
their own learning (Lee, 2007; Sadler, 2013). Meanwhile, self-regulation studies suggest that self-regulated learners are able
to generate feedback, interpret self-generated and externally mediated feedback and use feedback to achieve their own
learning goals (Boekaerts & Corno, 2005; Zimmerman, 2002).
Nicol and Macfarlane (2006) summarise five teacher feedback practices that support students' self-regulation of learning.
First, teachers need to formulate explicit assessment standards and help students form judgments of their own work. Second,
they can create opportunities for students to generate feedback for themselves and peers. Third, they can encourage teacher-
student dialogues so that students can understand and internalise feedback before acting on it. Fourth, they should allow
opportunities for students to take further action; and last they need to promote positive motivation for learning. These
feedback practices echo the three phases of self-regulated learning addressed earlier in the review, thus further supporting
the possible theoretical connection between feedback and self-regulation.
In classrooms, teachers always provide different sorts of feedback. How feedback may support self-regulation can be
explained by the model of four feedback levels by Hattie and Timperley (2007). Hattie and Timperley (2007) believe that
feedback provided at different levels may support self-regulation to a different extent. Feedback on tasks tells students of the
correctness of their responses to tasks, seeking to build students' surface knowledge. Feedback at the process level focuses on
developing students' strategies for tackling tasks, thus potentially leading to deep knowledge. Feedback about self-regulation is
aimed at developing students' capacity to generate and use internal feedback to self-assess and monitor their learning
process. Feedback on the self focuses on students as persons rather than on their work and is therefore irrelevant to the
enhancement of the quality of student learning. In the current study, this model of feedback is adopted to make analysis and
interpretations of feedback arising from formative assessment.
The aforementioned studies support the view that formative assessment is a viable means for acquainting students with
criteria and standards to help them set learning goals and form critical judgments (Black & Wiliam, 2009; Hattie & Timperley,
2007), which are integral to self-regulation. However, existing studies provide limited empirical evidence on the
42 Y. Xiao, M. Yang / System 81 (2019) 39e49

interconnection between formative assessment activities and students' self-regulation of English language learning in the
school context.
In summary, our conceptual framework advances two interconnected core propositions. First, formative assessment ac-
tivities can be used to support their students' self-regulation in English language learning. Second, feedback plays a critical
role in making formative assessment powerful for enhancing students' capability to self-regulate their English language
learning. Two research questions are put forward according:
R.Q. 1. How did formative assessment activities assist in students' self-regulation of English language learning, as perceived
by students?
R.Q.2. How did feedback that was provided through formative assessment support students' self-regulation of English
language learning, as perceived by students?

3. Research methodology

Drawing upon the exploratory nature of the study, we adopted a qualitative approach to explore the above mentioned
research questions. We then analysed and inferred from their responses the extent to which such experience supported their
self-regulation.

3.1. Context of the study

The current study was conducted in a foreign language secondary school in a major city in East China. Foreign language
schools in China emphasise English language teaching as one of their strengths (Hu, 2003). Students' performance in English
is a key criterion for admission. The school promotes a learning culture by offering students various activities in English
language learning while placing less emphasis on test performance.

3.2. Participants

The participants were two English teachers (Terry and Tracy, whose pseudonyms imply they were male and female
teachers), and their students from two classes in their first and second year of secondary school study (equal to Grades 10 and
11 in the USA). Terry and Tracy had 12 years and 8 years of teaching experience, respectively, when the study was conducted.
Terry encouraged students to participate in a wide range of extra-curricular English activities provided by the school because
he believed that learning English through experience was vital. Tracy believed she was only a guide for students, and students
needed to take initiative to learn both inside and outside the classroom. There were 28 students in Terry's class, and 30
students in Tracy's class. We collected data from the two classes to obtain a wider database, with the purpose of identifying
and substantiating different approaches to formative assessment.
After initial classroom observations, 16 students (referred to as S1 to S16) were selected to participate in interviews, with
seven students from Terry's class and nine students from Tracy's class. Participants were selected on the basis of their
willingness to share opinions and agreement to participate in the interviews. We also included students with recent expe-
rience of assessment, for instance, students who had recently completed a presentation or designed a language quiz, so that
they could recall their learning experience easily.

3.3. Data collection

The research site was visited twice in two consecutive years, that is, Stage 1 and Stage 2. Stage 1 was more exploratory and
provided data and ideas (i.e. key formative assessment activities) to investigate in greater depth in Stage 2 (how formative
assessment activities and embedded feedback support students' self-regulated learning). The key formative assessment
activities were selected through a triangulation of assessments that were observed in classrooms and those identified from
interview responses of the teachers and students.
Classroom observations and semi-structured interviews were adopted. The observations were audio taped, with hand-
written field notes taken following an observation protocol. The classroom observations in each stage served to identify
formative assessment activities (R.Q.1), generate probing questions in interviews and assist in interpreting and triangulating
interview data (Merriam, 2009).
The semi-structured interviews elicited the teachers' and the students' perceptions of the Relationship between formative
assessment and self-Regulation, with a focus on if and how formative assessment can support student self-Regulation (R.Q.2)
(See Appendix for the Interview Protocol and the purposes of Respective questions). In particular, the students were asked to
give examples of how they acted upon feedback as well as whether and how such feedback assisted in their improvement. The
interviews were conducted in the participants' first language Mandarin and audio Recorded. The interviews were translated
into English after coding. Selected quotes were translated from Chinese into English by the first author, which were then
checked and confirmed by the second author. Both authors are highly proficient in English and Chinese. Table 1 presents a
summary of the data collection procedure.
 Y. Xiao, M. Yang / System 81 (2019) 39e49 43

Table 1
A summary of data collection procedures.

Lengths of data collection Classes Data collection method

Stage 1 Two weeks Terry's class 10 Observations
Year 10, Semester Two 5 student individual interviews
1 teacher interview
Stage 2 Three weeks Terry's class 15 Observations
Year 11, Semester Two 6 student individual interviews
1 teacher interview
Tracy's class 12 Observations
5 student individual interviews
2 pair interviews
1 teacher interview

3.4. Data analysis

The analysis of classroom observations was done on-site by listening to classroom recordings and reading field notes. The
issues emerging from the analysis of the observations were then explored further through the interviews (see the Data
collection section).
Analysis of interview data was guided by theories on the relationship between formative assessment and self-regulation
(e.g., Clark, 2012; Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006) and Hattie and Timperley’s (2007) model of feedback levels, while specific
themes also emerged from the data itself (Miles, Huberman, & Saldana, 2014). A thematic approach was adopted to analyse
interview data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Codes used to analyse the data were derived by identifying key ideas from an initial set
of six transcripts and by condensing the key ideas into categories of meanings. Each author separately analysed these six
transcripts to derive a set of categories. Both authors discussed the categories that emerged from the initial set of interviews
and settled any disagreement on the categories. The remaining coding was completed mainly by the first author, and the
results were reviewed by the second author. The analysis was iterative in that after the analysis of a second set, the categories
generated from the initial and the second sets of transcripts were compared and revisions were made where necessary
(Creswell, 2007). Subsequently, the categories were used as codes to analyse the remaining transcripts.
The analysis focused on examples of formative assessment activities; how feedback was provided and on what levels the
feedback was focused (Hattie & Timperley, 2007); how such assessment activities engaged students in the self-regulative
processes in terms of setting learning goals, self-assessing, monitoring, reflecting on their own work and modifying their
action as a response to feedback as well as whether and how such feedback led to enhanced capability of self-regulation.

4. Findings

In this section we organised the findings based on the major formative assessment activities identified in the two classes.
When presenting findings regarding each formative assessment activity, we examined two key themes: 1) How formative
assessment activities provided iterative opportunities to facilitate students to develop characteristics of self-regulated
learning. 2) How feedback arising from the formative assessment from different agents (teacher, peer, and students' inter-
nal feedback) and at different levels (on tasks, at the process level and at self-regulation levels) can potential support student
self-regulation. The themes are an elaboration of the two research questions in view of the systematic literature review.

4.1. Oral presentations

In the two selected classes, the students took turns completing a 5-min individual presentation on self-selected topics.
One major benefit arising from oral presentations was the provision of constructive and informative feedback from teachers,
with S6's response below as an example:
Tracy reminded me to manage my time better. Now I would think about what is important and what to talk about first
(S6).
Tracy's feedback was at the process level, which focused on a key strategy of making an effective presentation e time
management. To act on Tracy's advice, S6 reported that he constantly reflected on the most important part in his pre-
sentations that he should focus on; he believed that a mastery of such skills can also be useful for future presentation. S6's
response indicated that the teacher's feedback at the process level encouraged S6 to extend effort and practice by himself.
S13 recalled two useful feedback points he received. The first was on the word choices, and the second was on explicitness
of themes in presentations.
The teacher commented that I had problems with word choices … She also said that the focus of my speech was not
clear. Perhaps I did not express the meaning clearly and explicitly (S13).
44 Y. Xiao, M. Yang / System 81 (2019) 39e49

The feedback above focused on two strategies needed to make an effective presentation. In response to the teacher's
feedback on the language issues, S13 reported that he started to pay attention to the word choices consciously, and checked
the words up in the dictionary and studied the examples in the dictionary, when he was uncertain about any word use. To act
on feedback on the clarity and explicitness, S13 reported that he became more aware that he needed to express the meaning
directly and explicitly in a presentation made in English. S13's response suggests that the teacher's feedback focusing on the
strategies in making a presentation informed him of the learning goals (e.g. use words appropriately in presentations) and he
can manage resources (e.g. checking up dictionary) to achieve the goals. He seemed to be able to apply the feedback to a
relating task.
S3 recalled that Terry reminded her that she needed to plan the presentations using an English mind-set, rather than
translating the whole presentations from Chinese to English. She illustrated the English mind-set with an example:
When making a presentation in English, I need to state the viewpoint first and then support it with examples (S3).
S3's response indicated that Terry's feedback focused on the strategies of organising ideas in presentations. The feedback
was at the process level and could possibly be applied to future presentations. To follow her teacher's advice, S3 chose to read
English books extensively and watched her favouriate movies, so as to study authentic language use.
It seemed that feedback at the process level prompted the students to adopt possible strategies and managing different
learning resources, so as to achieve the learning goals. We infer that teachers' feedback provided after oral presentations
afforded valuable guidance for students in their self-regulation of learning.
Several students also appeared to engage in reflecting on their own performance against other students' performance and
generating internal feedback for themselves. S15, for example, explained how she reflected on her own performance:
I had not engaged actively in the oral presentations until the end of the last semester. I noticed that my classmates who
engaged actively in making presentations and asking questions made great improvement in oral English. That's why I
started to perform more actively in classroom (S15).
S15's response indicated that she was able to compare her performance with that of her peers, and self-reflected on the
possible reasons. Thus S15 appeared to generate internal feedback for herself, which focused on how to improving oral
English. In other words, she reflected on the different learning approaches taken by herself and her classmates. As S15
recalled, by participating actively in classrooms conversations, she gradually became confident when making comments or
asking questions.
To sum up, the oral presentations bear formative features. Oral presentations provided opportunities for teachers to offer
feedback and for students to generate internal feedback at the process level, which focused on strategies of making effective
presentations. The oral presentations and feedback students received seemed to foster the characteristics of self-regulated
learners by assisting them in setting learning goals, adopting strategies, managing resources, and producing product. They
also seemed to be able to reflect on the effectiveness of the action taken.

4.2. Student-generated quizzes for peers

A student-generated quiz on vocabulary and language use was conducted by a pair of students on a weekly basis in the two
classes being researched. The students developed and delivered the quizzes, and marked the answers from their peers, with
their teacher monitoring the entire process. The quiz included a number of fill-in-the-blank questions on the meaning and
usage of words and phrases.
Both Terry and Tracy believed that their students who set quiz questions would benefit from studying the use of words and
phrases in depth. The participants' interview responses echoed their teachers' expectations and affirmed the process of
designing a quiz as being facilitative for vocabulary building, with S7's response below as an example:
I sought different resources to ensure that the sentences were easily understandable by my fellow students and that the
answers were not ambiguous (S7).
S7 explained that to set up a good quiz question, for example, a cloze question where his peers needed to fill in a word, he
would first digest the meanings of the word and select the meaning that he wanted to assess. He would then study the sample
sentences in the dictionary and create a sentence of his own. He also needed to check the context surrounding the blank, so
that it would elicit the intended response. S7's response shows that he searched for an idea of what high-quality questions
looked like by consulting different sources to ensure the questions were set properly. He was also able to generate internal
feedback on the strategies needed to design high quality quizzes. The feedback on the process of designing high quality quiz
questions guided him through designing different questions.
S15 commented on how designing a quiz facilitated his understanding of vocabulary:
I needed to know how words were used and made sentences using these words. I had a better understanding of these
words subsequently (S15).
S15's response shows setting quiz questions helped him become self-aware of basic vocabulary knowledge, and studying
the different uses of the word led to better understanding.
 Y. Xiao, M. Yang / System 81 (2019) 39e49 45

We infer from the above-discussed student responses that these students might be using self-regulation skills, such as
setting a goal (designing quiz questions of high quality), adopting different strategies to achieve such a goal (through
searching for different resources and getting help from their teachers) and self-evaluating performance (evaluating whether
their quiz questions were appropriate or not). Thus, student-generated quizzes might potentially support student self-
regulation because the students approached the task in a planned way; and they could self-instruct and self-evaluate in
the events of designing a quiz question.
However, the students felt that answering a quiz was not as beneficial as designing them. For example, S12 shared:
Answering the quiz is not as useful as developing a dictation. I had a short memory of the words and phrases tested
(S12).
Probably the students felt this way because peers only provided feedback at the task level where correct answers were
being shown and errors were being corrected. It is possible that the students were more engaged cognitively (e.g., under-
standing the usage of a word) and meta-cognitively (e.g., reflecting on how a word can be integrated into a quiz) when
designing a quiz than answering it. Following Nicol's (2007) suggestion, student-generated quizzes can be followed by a small
group discussion where all students can discuss their own answers before the peer assessors release the correct answers. This
step will turn peer-marking into active peer interaction in which students exchange verbal peer feedback by negotiating
which answers were correct and how they came up with the answers (potential peer-feedback focusing at task and process
levels).
To summarise, the process of designing quiz questions appeared to offer opportunities for students to generate internal
feedback at the process level, which guided them through the process of designing high quality quizzes. The participants
reported various strategies for setting quiz questions. These strategies included setting standards for creating good quiz
questions, self-reviewing quiz questions, gaining a deep understanding of vocabulary by using resources and seeking
assistance from teachers. They were able to express the standards for their work through their own words and comment on
the importance of self-evaluation for ensuring the quality of quizzes. These strategies were likely to involve the students in
self-regulating process when acting as peer-assessors.

4.3. Test follow-up lessons using exemplars

This sub-section reports two strategies related to the teachers using test follow-up lessons to address their students' areas
of improvement.
The first strategy that Tracy employed was to use writing exemplars to clarify standards of good work. In one lesson we
observed, Tracy presented three sample writings from the students' test papers: one that was written with redundant ex-
pressions, one written in a concise way and another one with a combination of both concise and redundant expressions. Tracy
guided her students to compare and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the three essays, with a focus on how similar
meanings were expressed using different expressions.
Several students commented on the benefits of evaluating sample essays. For example, S8 commented:
One thing I learned from the sample essay is the use of omission … I wrote all the sentences in full. I was not sure if I
could omit any information. Now I know I can omit the part with similar structures (S8).
It seemed that S8 could generate internal feedback on one feature of good essays (i.e. writing in a concise way) by studying
the sample essays. We can infer that the sample essays informed S8 of the learning goals (e.g. conciseness in writing), and he
was able to compare his performance against learning goals and generate internal feedback (i.e., achieving conciseness
through omission).
S6 mentioned how the writing exemplars provided concrete examples of good writing and visualised learning goals in
achieving good writing:
The sample essays showed the features of good writing and what problems that poor writing are likely to have. Tracy
said we do not need to copy and recite the essay, and we need to think about what successful strategies sample essays
adopted (S6).
The response above shows that the teacher's feedback drew students' attention to the successful strategies used in the
sample essays and expected students to use these strategies in their future writing. S6 further elaborated that after studying
the sample essays, he could integrate the strategies used in the sample essays in his self-initiated attempt to write a new
essay:
I wrote a new essay after digesting what the teacher had mentioned in the follow-up lesson. It was important to learn
and practice how a good essay was constructed (S6).
The use of exemplars stimulated S6 to be proactive and adaptive in self-regulation in his learning. His self-regulative
behaviours were manifested in generating internal feedback when examining the exemplars, using the feedback to set
learning goals, and applying the strategies observed in the exemplars to achieve good writing in a new self-initiated piece of
writing.
46 Y. Xiao, M. Yang / System 81 (2019) 39e49

By comparing the exemplars with their own writing, the students appeared to be able to identify the gap between ex-
pected standards (e.g. accurate/concise wording, coherence between sentences/paragraphs) and their essays, and work out
ways of improvement. They were able to identify appropriate learning goals, generate internal feedback regarding their areas
of improvement, and apply suitable strategies to improve writing. Feedback from teachers also drew students' attention to the
strategies that can be applied to future writings.
The second strategy used in test follow-up lessons was having students complete a new task that was similar to what they
had done in the previous tests. Terry led his students to construct a new essay after reviewing students' own performance.
Terry asked the students about their ideas on the structure of the essay and guided them to develop a new essay, such as
possible organisation and structures, phrases and vocabulary that were suitable for the essays, and how to put phrases into
sentences. Thus Terry cued students to reflect on their writing process.
Several students commented in response to this process, for example:
Terry allowed us to create a new essay. He only acted as a guide (S5).
S5 reflected that Terry treated the test follow-up on writing as an opportunity to learn by focusing on how they can cope
with similar essay questions rather than focusing on the test-take strategy itself. S5's response seemed to support that the
teacher's feedback on the process of constructing an essay helped him developed the capacity to cope with future writing.
S11 specified what she has learned from the teacher's feedback on writing:
I became more aware of how to write in a concise manner after the lesson (S11).
S11 elaborated that students in her class tended to write in a lengthy way. When Terry guided her through the writing
process, she had a better idea about how to organise her language effectively.
The responses above supported that the teacher's feedback focused at the process level. Such feedback helped students
understand the standards of good writing and facilitated the development of abilities that can be transferable to future
learning or other situations.
This section has demonstrated how the two teachers conducted test follow-up lessons by asking their students to evaluate
exemplars or to complete a new task related to the test, which are two well-documented formative assessment strategies
(Carless & Chan (2016); Sadler, 2013). Both strategies involved the participants reflecting actively on the standards of good
performance and making improvement guided by such standards, thereby positioning them as self-regulated learners. These
strategies also adhere to the methods to facilitate self-regulation in second language writing as suggested by Andrade & Evans
(2012), namely, helping students set their own goals, modelling how to respond to feedback, and allowing time to review and
rework. Hence, it can be suggested that test follow-up lessons are viable approaches to using summative tests to attain
formative potential for students' self-regulation in English learning.

4.4. Individualised teacher-student dialogues

Another formative assessment strategy was informal teacher-student dialogues outside class hours to address the stu-
dents' individual needs. In their dialogues, the teacher and the students discussed strategies for improvement:
I asked Terry about the skills of error correction. Terry advised me to work with a peer who was not good at writing. I
checked and circled the mistakes in his writing. In this way, I learned how to correct errors and he improved his writing
(S3).
In S3's example above, the teacher's feedback focused on using peers as a learning resource to achieve the learning goal e
strengthening the error correction ability. The feedback provided by teachers was at the self-regulation level because it
expected the student to select and make use of resources by herself. More specifically, in S3's example, she was encouraged to
provide peer support as a way of learning how to self-correct errors. S3's response also indicates that she responded to her
teacher's feedback in an adaptive way and could self-evaluate the effectiveness of her strategy.
S16 illustrated teacher feedback she received with another example:
Terry asked me to treat English as a language rather than a subject. He suggested that I read more books, listen to music
and find the chance to practise spoken English. I found his advice quite helpful. (S16)
S16's response show that the teacher's feedback expected her to make use authentic language learning resources to
improve her language proficiency.
The teachers mentioned that by giving feedback through dialogues, they intended to facilitate their students' future
learning. Tracy noted that she always suggested her students to ‘conduct meaningful activities such as collaborating with
peers and reading authentic English readings, rather than practising test-like exercises’. The reason for her suggestion was
that it was important for students to acquire knowledge and skills transferable to other situations. Terry similarly mentioned
that students needed to develop skills for their future study and career. By helping students focus on their future use of
language abilities rather than obtaining a high mark in an exam, it was likely students' intrinsic interest in learning English
could be fostered. Intrinsic interest, in turn, is a prerequisite for developing the capability of self-regulation (Boekaerts &
Corno, 2005).
 Y. Xiao, M. Yang / System 81 (2019) 39e49 47

Thus, the teachers' feedback from the individualised teacher-student dialogues focused on the strategies students can
adopt to improve their language proficiency, which expected students to take control over their own learning. The suggested
strategies were aimed at enhancing the students' skills for self-regulation, such as managing resources, and seeking and
responding to feedback. Students' responses also support that they were proactive in learning and adaptive in reacting to
feedback, since they adopted various follow-up actions to move their learning forward through goal setting, strategy plan-
ning, self-instruction and self-evaluation of their actions.

5. Discussion

Drawing on authentic classroom examples, the current study contributes to the understanding of how formative
assessment activities along with feedback could potentially support students to engage in the processes of self-regulation in
English language learning.
With regard to R.Q.1, the study supports that formative assessment activities had the potential to support student self-
regulation by engaging students in the process of goal setting, generating and responding to feedback, managing re-
sources, and taking actions to move learning forwards. The examples shared by the participants show that the ways in which
they responded to formative assessment activities were similar to what self-regulated learners would do when self-
monitoring and self-managing learning.
Participant in the current study adopted adaptive manners of engaging in the formative assessment activities, which
reflected the characteristics of self-regulated learners (Boekaerts & Corno, 2005). Such characteristics included: (a) under-
standing and setting learning goals (e.g., identifying the standards of essays and using the standards as goals), (b) adopting
strategies to achieve goals (e.g., working out strategies to manage the oral presentations), (c) managing resources (e.g.,
seeking different resources to set up quiz questions), (d) extending efforts (e.g., writing up a new essays after digesting
feedback), (e) responding to feedback (e.g., developing a new essay after digesting the teacher's feedback), and (f) producing
products (e.g., improved oral presentations and essays, student-generated quizzes). These diverse aspects of self-regulation
provided empirical support to Boekaerts and Corno’s (2005) theoretical work on the self-regulative process. These students
also appeared to be proactive in seeking help and exerting efforts to act on feedback.
The ways in which the students responded to their assessment activities can be further examined by using the three
cyclical phases of self-regulated learning (Zimmerman, 2002; 2008). In the forethought phase, the students set up learning
goals (e.g., setting quality quizzes or writing a concise essay) and planned learning strategies (e.g., ways to cope with word
choices). In the performance phase, they self-instructed and self-experimented their planned strategies (e.g., working on
different resources to design quality quiz questions). In the self-reflection phase, the students self-evaluated (e.g., evaluating
the actions taken above) and took adaptive self-reaction by modifying their learning to achieve the goal.
With regard to R.Q. 2, the study demonstrates that feedback provided by different agents (i.e., teacher feedback, peer
feedback, and internal feedback) and at different levels (i.e. at the task level, at the process level, and at the self-regulation
level) has the potential to facilitate student self-regulated learning. The findings show that teacher feedback and internal
feedback were at all three levels, whereas peer feedback mainly focused on error correction and thus was at task level.
Compared with internal feedback, teacher feedback seemed to be more focused on the process and the self-regulation levels.
The findings demonstrate the utility of Hattie and Timperley’s (2007) model of feedback in analysing classroom feedback
in English classrooms. Echoing Hattie and Timperley’s (2007) proposition, the findings reveal that the feedback given at the
process and self-regulation levels was likely to enable the students to develop a deeper understanding as well as the skills of
self-regulation. The feedback at the process level (e.g. strategies on making effective presentations and guiding students to
evaluating sample essays) and the feedback at self-regulation level (e.g. asking students to self-correct errors by reviewing
peers' writing) facilitated students to understand the learning goals and encouraged them to take control over their learning.
The current study also shows that the students' opportunities to act on feedback in new tasks were prompted by their
teachers and elicited by themselves, suggesting that teacher guidance and student engagement are equally important in
making feedback effective (Yang & Carless, 2013).
In the current study, feedback enabled the students to take action to improve learning, such as developing an under-
standing of standards, self-diagnosing, planning, reflecting, seeking information from teachers and peers and conducting
remedial learning activities which exemplify the application of Nicol and Macfarlane Dicks' (2006) model of feedback in the
classroom. These actions led to perceived positive learning outcomes (c.f., Andrade, 2010), such as an in-depth understanding
of specific vocabulary knowledge (in the case of student-generated quizzes) and enhanced cognitive skills (such as analysing,
making comparison and summarising). Such skills are important for transferring understanding obtained in current learning
to future situations and are indispensable for self-regulation (Sadler, 2013).
The students' perceptions of the formative assessment and their reported strategies for taking actions on feedback
imply they were emerging self-regulated learners. They reported being engaged in the process of reflecting on feedback
and using feedback to monitor their own learning, which has been suggested by Lam (2015) to be a feature of self-
regulation in English language learning. It was also found that the two teachers acted as facilitators with whom the
students negotiated plans for improving learning, without dictating what and how the students should learn. This can be
considered as an example of the social construction of formative assessment advocated by Pryor and Crossouard (2008)
from a socio-cultural perspective.
48 Y. Xiao, M. Yang / System 81 (2019) 39e49

6. Conclusion

The current study supports that formative assessment can be oriented to fostering student capability of self-regulation by
assisting them to play an active role in learning, for example, through setting learning goals, evaluating their performance
against learning goals, and taking further action for improvements. The study also shows that feedback from different agents
can be oriented to develop students' self-regulation skills, with the feedback at the process level and at the self-regulation
level most effective.
The current study contributes to the understanding of how formative assessment activities and the feedback component
in the formative assessment can be adopted to support students' self-regulation skills in English language learning. The
practical implications on classroom practices lie in that teachers may share with their students the responsibility for man-
aging assessment and learning through classroom formative assessment activities and pay attention to engaging students in
self-regulation processes through the use of feedback at the process and self-regulation levels.
The limitation of the current study lies in that we did not gather direct evidence on the changes in participants' academic
learning results and self-regulation skills before and after their classroom assessment activities. Further studies may inves-
tigate whether student academic learning results and self-regulation skills (Boekaerts & Corno, 2005) can be improved as a
result of engaging in classroom formative assessment activities and/or receiving feedback at the process and self-regulation
levels.

Appendix. Interview protocol e Student Interview

The interview protocol below outlines the major questions the participants were asked in the interview. The exact
questions varied depending on the participants' exact responses.

Interview Questions Purposes

1. Could you please tell me your name and your English learning Warm-up
experiences?
2. What have you or your teachers done in your English language To identify assessments that were perceived by students to be
learning to help you find out your strengths and weaknesses? formative.
Follow up: How did the teacher conduct the assessment? How did To identify how the participants managed the learning process
you copy with your weaknesses? To what extent do you find your and how they were involved in the assessment process.
actions effective? Can you give me some examples?
3. What did your English teacher usually do if you had difficulties in your To identify feedback the participants received and their responses
study? What advice/feedback did your English teacher give you? How do to feedback
you think about the feedback? To what extent do you think the
feedback help? In what way? What actions have you taken?
4. What did you usually do after taking assessments? How did you cope with To identify follow-up actions taken by the participants.
the problems identified in the assessments? Why did you choose [a certain]
strategy? To what extent did you find your actions effective? Can you
give me any examples?

References

Andrade, H. L. (2010). Students as the definitive source of formative assessment: Academic self-assessment and the self-regulation of learning. In H. L.
Andrade, & G. J. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 90e105). New York, NY: Routledge.
Andrade, M. S., & Evans, N. W. (2012). Principles and practices for response in second language writing: Developing self-regulated learners. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Bai, B. (2018). Understanding primary school students' use of self-regulated writing strategies through think-aloud protocols. System, 78, 15e26. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.system.2018.07.003.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 2(1), 5e31. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09695940123775.
Boekaerts, M., & Corno, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: A perspective on assessment and intervention. Applied Psychology, 54(2), 199e231.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00205.x.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77e101. https://doi.org/10.1191/
1478088706qp063oa.
Brookhart, S. M. (2001). Successful students' formative and summative uses of assessment information. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice,
8(2), 153e169. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695940123775.
Butler, Y. G., & Lee, J. (2010). The effects of self-assessment among young learners of English. Language Testing, 27(1), 5e31. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0265532209346370.
Carless, D. (2011). From testing to productive student learning: Implementing formative assessment in Confucian-heritage settings. New York, NY: Routledge.
Carless, D., & Chan, K. K. H. (2016). Managing dialogic use of exemplars. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1e12. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02602938.2016.1211246.
Clark, I. (2012). Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 24(2), 205e249. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10648-011-9191-6.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81e112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.
 Y. Xiao, M. Yang / System 81 (2019) 39e49 49

Hawe, E., & Dixon, H. (2017). Assessment for learning: A catalyst for student self-regulation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(8), 1181e1192.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1236360.
Hu, G. (2003). English language teaching in China: Regional differences and contributing factors. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 24(4),
290e318. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630308666503.
Lam, R. (2014). Can student-generated test materials support learning? Studies In Educational Evaluation, 43(0), 95e108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.
2014.02.003.
Lam, R. (2015). Feedback about self-regulation: Does it remain an “unfinished business” in portfolio assessment of writing? Tesol Quarterly, 49(2), 402e413.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.226.
Lee, I. (2007). Assessment for learning: Integrating assessment, teaching, and learning in the ESL/EFL writing classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review,
64(1), 199e214. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.64.1.199.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies
in Higher Education, 31(2), 199e218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090.
Nicol, D. (2007). E-assessment by design: Using multiple-choice tests to good effect. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31(1), 53e64.
Oxford, R. L. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Harlow: Pearson Longman.
Pryor, J., & Crossouard, B. (2008). A socio-cultural theorisation of formative assessment. Oxford Review of Education, 34(1), 1e20.
Purpura, J. E. (2016). Second and foreign language assessment. The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 190e208. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12308.
Sadler, D. R. (2013). Opening up feedback. In S. Merry, M. Price, D. Carless, & M. Taras (Eds.), Reconceptualising feedback in higher education: Developing
dialogue with students (pp. 54e63). London: Routledge.
Seker, M. (2015). The use of self-regulation strategies by foreign language learners and its role in language achievement. Language Teaching Research, 20(5),
600e618. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815578550.
Tseng, W. T., Chang, Y. J., & Cheng, H. F. (2015). Effects of L2 learning orientations and implementation intentions on self-regulation. Psychological Reports,
117(1), 319e339. https://doi.org/10.2466/11.04.PR0.117c15z2.
Xiao, Y. (2017). Formative assessment in a test-dominated context: How test practice can become more productive. Language Assessment Quarterly, 14(4),
295e311.
Yang, M., & Carless, D. (2013). The feedback triangle and the enhancement of dialogic feedback processes. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(3), 285e297.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64e70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects.
American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166e183. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207312909.