Digital Scaffolding: Online Learning Software and Knowledge Construction in English Language Learning Classrooms

Authors

  • Luming He

    Faculty of Education and Liberal Arts, INTI International University, Nilai 71800, Malaysia

    Organization Department, Zhejiang Vocational Academy of Art, Hangzhou 310053, China
  • Phawani Vijayaratnam

    Faculty of Education and Liberal Arts, INTI International University, Nilai 71800, Malaysia
  • Norazrina binti Hamdan

    Faculty of Education and Liberal Arts, INTI International University, Nilai 71800, Malaysia
  • Subashini K. Rajanthran

    Lasalle College of Arts, University of Arts, Singapore 227976, Singapore
  • Mehdi Manoochehrzadeh

    Department of Education, Zerodale Inc. Centre for Research in Entrepreneurship Education and Development, Toronto, ON M2K 2H6, Canada

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i12.10374
Received: 6 June 2025 | Revised: 19 August 2025 | Accepted: 21 August 2025 | Published Online: 5 November 2025

Abstract

With the rapid development of science and technology, online learning software has become an important tool for English learning as it provides a large number of learning resources together with interactive functions. But how to help students effectively build a systematic English knowledge framework is still a key issue to be solved. Another major obstacle is making sure that students can translate this disjointed knowledge into effective communication skills. This study aims to explore how online learning software can help students integrate various knowledge points in English learning and improve learning efficiency through knowledge construction. Based on the theories of constructivism, cognitive load and self-regulated learning, this study explores how online learning software can achieve knowledge construction and improve learning efficiency by stimulating students' intrinsic motivation, reducing cognitive load, and promoting self-regulation. By doing this, it aims to offer both theoretical understanding and useful tactics for enhancing online English learning environments. The study's goal is to aid in the creation of learner-centered and more efficient online platforms. The key findings from the study illustrate that online learning tools improve English language proficiency by including fundamental skills, providing individualized learning plans, and giving immediate feedback. Also, these platforms enhance efficiency, develop communicative competence, and build systematic knowledge based on the constructivist, cognitive load, and self-regulated learning theories and ultimately contribute to quality education as per United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 4.

Keywords:

Online Learning Software; Knowledge Construction; Language Learning; Learning Efficiency; Quality Education

References

[1] Zhang, Y., 2023. Interaction and Knowledge Construction in Online English Teaching: A Learning Analytics Perspective. Routledge: London, UK. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003434474

[2] Huang, Y., 2022. Construction of “Interactive” English Translation Teaching Model Based on Data‐Driven Learning. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing. 2022(1), 5315110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5315110

[3] An, Z., Wang, C., Li, S., et al., 2021. Technology-assisted self-regulated English language learning: Associations with English language self-efficacy, English enjoyment, and learning outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology. 11, 558466. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.558466

[4] Ma, L., 2025. Investigation of the impact of cognitive load on EFL learners’ satisfaction with MOOCs: the mediating role of expectation confirmation and perceived usefulness. BMC Psychology. 13(1), 1–2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-02735-8

[5] Tao, Y., Zhang, M., Su, Y., et al., 2022. Exploring college English language learners’ social knowledge construction and socio-emotional interactions during computer-supported collaborative writing activities. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. 31(5), 613–622. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00612-7

[6] Cui, P., Sachan, M., 2023. Adaptive and personalized exercise generation for online language learning. arXiv preprint. arXiv:2306.02457. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.02457

[7] Hashim, S., Omar, M.K., Ab Jalil, H., et al., 2022. Trends on technologies and artificial intelligence in education for personalized learning: Systematic literature. Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development. 12(1), 884–903. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v11-i1/12230

[8] Li, Y., Chen, C.Y., Yu, D., et al., 2022. Using chatbots to teach languages. In Proceedings of the Ninth ACM Conference on Learning@Scale, New York, NY, USA, 1 June 2022; pp. 451–455. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3491140.3528329

[9] Kochmar, E., Vu, D.D., Belfer, R., et al., 2020. Automated personalized feedback improves learning gains in an intelligent tutoring system. In International conference on artificial intelligence in education. Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland. pp. 140–146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52240-7_26

[10] Méndez, D., Méndez, M., Anguita, J.M., 2022. Digital Teaching Competence in Teacher Training as an Element to Attain SDG 4 of the 2030 Agenda. Sustainability. 14(18), 11387. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su141811387

[11] Fateh, S., Ayangbola, O.T., Reid, J.W., et al., 2024. Small group conversations in a POGIL-based class: How English learners engage in a joint knowledge construction process to reach a shared understanding. Journal of Chemical Education, 101(3), 741–752. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c00624

[12] Alsobeh, A., Woodward, B., 2023. AI as a partner in learning: A novel student-in-the-loop framework for enhanced student engagement and outcomes in higher education. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference on Information Technology Education, New York, NY, USA, 11 October 2023; pp. 171–172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3585059.3611405

[13] Sweller, J., Van Merriënboer, J.J., Paas, F., 2019. Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review. 31(2), 261–292. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5

[14] Sweller, J., 1988. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science. 12(2), 257–285. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4

[15] Ayres, P., Paas, F., 2007. Making instructional animations more effective: A cognitive load approach. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. 21(6), 695–700. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1343

[16] Mayer, R.E., Moreno, R., 2003. Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist. 38(1), 43–52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6

[17] Skulmowski, A., Xu, K.M., 2022. Understanding cognitive load in digital and online learning: A new perspective on extraneous cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review. 34(1), 171–196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09624-7

[18] Paas, F., Van Merrienboer, J.J., 2020. Cognitive-load theory: Methods to manage working memory load in the learning of complex tasks. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 29(4), 394–398. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420922183

[19] Sepp, S., Wong, M., Hoogerheide, V., et al., 2022. Shifting online: 12 tips for online teaching derived from contemporary educational psychology research. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(5), 1304–1320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12715

[20] Cho, M.H., Jonassen, D., 2009. Development of the human interaction dimension of the Self‐Regulated Learning Questionnaire in asynchronous online learning environments. Educational Psychology. 29(1), 117–138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410802516934

[21] Zimmerman, B.J., 2000. Attaining self-regulation: a social cognitive perspective. In Handbook of Self-Regulation. Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA. pp. 13–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-012109890-2/50031-7

[22] Mohammadi, S., Zandi, H., 2023. Scaffolding self-regulation in an online English language course: Utility of contract learning. Teaching English as a Second Language Electronic Journal (TESL-EJ). 26(4). DOI: https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.26104a11

[23] Xu, J., 2021. Chinese university students’ L2 writing feedback orientation and self-regulated learning writing strategies in online teaching during COVID-19. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. 30(6), 563–574. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00586-6

[24] Viberg, O., Kukulska-Hulme, A., 2022. Fostering learners' self-regulation and collaboration skills and strategies for mobile language learning beyond the classroom. In: Lai, C., Reinders, H. (eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Language Learning and Teaching Beyond the Classroom. Routledge: London, UK. pp. 142–154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2104.12486

[25] Wang, W., Zhan, J., 2020. The relationship between English language learner characteristics and online self-regulation: A structural equation modeling approach. Sustainability. 12(7), 3009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12073009

[26] Hunutlu, S., 2023. Self-regulation strategies in online EFL/ESL learning: A systematic review. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal. 14(2), 136–166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37237/140203

[27] Jin, S.H., Im, K., Yoo, M., et al., 2023. Supporting students’ self-regulated learning in online learning using artificial intelligence applications. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 20(1), 37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00406-5

[28] Woo, J.H., Choi, H., 2021. Systematic review for AI-based language learning tools. arXiv preprint. arXiv:2111.04455. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9728/dcs.2021.22.11.1783

[29] Zhou, Q., 2021. The Use of Scaffolding Theory in the Teaching of Writing. Journal of Higher Education Research. 2(6), 416–418. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32629/jher.v2i6.583

[30] Moreno, R., Mayer, R., 2007. Interactive multimodal learning environments: Special issue on interactive learning environments: Contemporary issues and trends. Educational Psychology Review. 19(3), 309–326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9047-2

[31] Mayer, R.E., 2002. Multimedia learning. In Psychology of learning and motivation, Vol. 41. Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA. pp. 85–139. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(02)80005-6

[32] Zajda, J., 2021. Constructivist Learning Theory and Creating Effective Learning Environments. In Globalisation and Education Reforms. Globalisation, Comparative Education and Policy Research, vol 25. Springer: Cham, Switzerland. pp 35–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71575-5_3

[33] Chernovaty, L., 2021. Pedagogical grammar as the framework of tefl research. Part 11. The impact of the monitor on the quality of the foreign language acquisition. Teaching Languages at Higher Educational Establishments at the Present Stage. Intersubject Relations. (39), 111–126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/2073-4379-2021-39-08

[34] Wang, L., Shi, L., 2022. Construction of a Multi-Dimensional Evaluation System of English Online Learning Teaching Quality Based on Blended Learning. International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector (IJISSS). 14(3), 1–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/IJISSS.311855

[35] Gray, L.M., Wong-Wylie, G., Rempel, G.R., et al., 2020. Expanding Qualitative Research Interviewing Strategies: Zoom Video Communications. The Qualitative Report. 25(5), 1292–1301. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2020.4212

[36] Vygotsky, L.S., Cole, M., 1978. Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA.

[37] Paas, F., Renkl, A., Sweller, J., 2003. Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational psychologist. 38(1), 1–4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1

[38] Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., et al., 2020. Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing. 25(8), 652–661. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206

[39] Braun, V., Clarke, V., 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 3(2), 77–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

[40] Kiger, M.E., Varpio, L., 2020. Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No. 131. Medical Teacher. 42(8), 846–854. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2020.1755030

[41] Zhang, J., 2020. The construction of college English online learning community under ADDIE Model. English Language Teaching. 13(7), 46–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n7p46

[42] Abdullah, S.I., Arokiyasamy, K., Goh, S.L., et al., 2022. University students’ satisfaction and future outlook towards forced remote learning during a global pandemic. Smart Learning Environments. 9(1), 15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00193-2

Downloads

How to Cite

He, L., Vijayaratnam, P., binti Hamdan, N., Rajanthran, S. K., & Manoochehrzadeh, M. (2025). Digital Scaffolding: Online Learning Software and Knowledge Construction in English Language Learning Classrooms. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(12), 290–302. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i12.10374

Issue

Vol. 7 , Iss. 12 (December 2025): In progress

Article Type

Article

License

Copyright © 2025 Luming He, Phawani Vijayaratnam, Norazrina binti Hamdan, Subashini K. Rajanthran, Mehdi Manoochehrzadeh

Creative Commons License

This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.