The Impact of AI-Based Learning Feedback on Academic Writing Competence and Learner Autonomy Among English Learners: A Self-Regulated Learning Perspective

AI-based Learning Feedback (AIF) is increasingly used to improve academic writing in higher education; nonetheless, the relationships among AIF, writing competency, and learner autonomy are not yet sufficiently clarified. This study aims to examine the relationship between AI-based Learning Feedback (AIF) and Academic Writing Competence (AWC) and Learner Autonomy (LA) via two mediating processes of self-regulated learning: metacognitive self-regulation (MSR) and strategic motivational regulation (SMR). This study used a cross-sectional, quantitative survey method, involving 350 university students who were enrolled in academic writing courses. Data were collected using a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire, which assessed 27 observable characteristics; the data were then analyzed using the PLS-SEM method. The results showed that AI feedback (AIF) didn't directly affect academic writing competence (AWC) and learning autonomy (LA). In contrast, its effect was indirect, working through metacognitive self-regulation (MSR) and self-motivation regulation (SMR). These findings clarify the role of self-regulated learning as a mediator in the context of AI feedback, which has important implications for the design of AI feedback systems. Furthermore, the key purpose of these systems is to support learners advance as more effective writers and more independent in higher education.

AI-based feedback; self-regulated learning; academic writing; learner autonomy; PLS-SEM.

1. Cheng, Y. S. (2004). A measure of second language writing anxiety. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 313–335. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Feng, S., Chen, Y., & Xie, J. (2023). Artificial intelligence in academic writing instruction: Opportunities and challenges. Computers & Education, 194, 104676. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). Sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based SEM. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Hyland, K. (2019). Academic discourse: English in a global context. Bloomsbury. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Little, D. (1991). Learner autonomy: Definitions, issues and problems. Authentik. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Liu, S., & Kunnan, A. J. (2016). Investigating the effectiveness of automated writing evaluation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 33, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. 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), 199–218. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 422. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Panadero, E., & Alonso-Tapia, J. (2014). How do students self-regulate? Review of Zimmerman’s cyclical model of self-regulated learning. Anales de Psicología, 30(2), 450–462. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Ranalli, J., Link, S., & Chukharev-Hudilainen, E. (2022). Automated writing evaluation for formative assessment of academic writing: A review. Assessing Writing, 52, 100594. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460–475. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized aspect of self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 797–806. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Zhai, X., Wang, M., & Ghani, U. (2021). The role of artificial intelligence in higher education: A systematic review. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(4), 1–15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Evaluating the Impacts of Mind Mapping Strategy on Developing EFL Students’ Critical Reading Skills
• Significance of Reading Instructions for Language Improvement in Children with Down Syndrome
• Prenasalised Consonants in Liangmai
• Metadiscourse Matters: Definitions, Models, and Advantages for ESL/ EFL Writing
• Blank Minds and Stuck Voices: Understanding and Addressing Cognitive Anxiety in High-Stakes ESL Speaking Tests