[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-494791-105":59,"doc-detail-494791-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","drilling-or-diagnosing-reimagining-syntactic-error-analysis-as-metacognitive-scaffolding-in-efl-test-preparation","Drilling or Diagnosing? Reimagining Syntactic Error Analysis as Metacognitive Scaffolding in EFL Test Preparation","","This study investigates whether diagnostic-driven syntactic training, as opposed to conventional drilling, functions as a metacognitive scaffolding mechanism for 20 EFL learners preparing for the TOEFL ITP Structure and Written Expression subtest. Using a mixed-methods design across four sequential phases, it evaluates performance changes and error patterns through pre/post testing, error mapping, observation logs, and feedback surveys. Results show significant score improvement, with omission errors declining and qualitative themes highlighting increased metacognitive awareness, self-efficacy, and academic motivation.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":20,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/drilling-or-diagnosing-reimagining-syntactic-error-analysis-as-metacognitive-scaffolding-in-efl-test-preparation/494791/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/drilling-or-diagnosing-reimagining-syntactic-error-analysis-as-metacognitive-scaffolding-in-efl-test-preparation/494791.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Connor ","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-03","2026-10-01",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":39},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"How does the study compare diagnostic-driven training with conventional drilling?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It contrasts diagnostic-driven syntactic training against conventional drilling for learners preparing the TOEFL ITP Structure and Written Expression subtest, assessing changes through pre- and post-tests and related evidence.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What quantitative results indicate the effectiveness of diagnostic-driven training?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Scores improved significantly, with a reported t(19)=8.42, p\u003C0.001, and a mean gain of 15.8 points; omission errors decreased by 20 percentage points.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Which error type was most dominant, and what happened to it after the intervention?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Omission was the most dominant error category at 38% and decreased substantially after the intervention, along with declines in misordering, misformation, and addition.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},494791,1791358668,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":19,"category_name":20,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":39,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},687207022233,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","eISSN 3090-7985 & pISSN 3090-5125  \nHomepage [https://ojs.indopublishing.or.id/index.php/ib](https://ojs.indopublishing.or.id/index.php/ib)  \n[doi.org/10.63822/zy5w6722](doi.org/10.63822/zy5w6722)[ ](doi.org/10.63822/zy5w6722)[Vol. 2](Vol. 2), No. 2, Tahun 2026 Hal. 873-887  \nDrilling or Diagnosing? Reimagining Syntactic Error Analysis as  \nMetacognitive Scaffolding in EFL Test Preparation  \nAgung Pranoto Kadiatmaja  \nPendidikan Bahasa Arab, STAI Ali bin abi Thalib, Surabaya, Indonesia  \nEmail Korespodensi: [agungpranotokadiatmaja@stai-ali.ac.id](agungpranotokadiatmaja@stai-ali.ac.id)  \nINFO ARTIKEL  \nHistori Artikel:  \nDiterima  \nDisetujui  \nDiterbitkan  \n25-09-2026  \n29-09-2026 01-102-2026  \nABSTRACT  \nThis study investigates whether diagnostic-driven syntactic training, as opposed to conventional drilling, functions as a metacognitive scaffolding mechanism for 20 EFL learners preparing for the TOEFL ITP Structure and Written Expression subtest. Situated within a multilingual higher education context where English certification serves as a critical gateway for academic mobility, the program adopted a mixed-methods design across four sequential phases: diagnostic baseline testing, instructional strategy workshop, syntactic error analysis and remedial drilling, and post-test evaluation. Data were collected from pre- and post-tests, error mapping sheets, observation logs, and feedback surveys, and analyzed using the Shapiro-Wilk test, paired-sample t-test, N-gain, Dulay et al. 's (1982) Surface Strategy Taxonomy, and Braun and Clarke's (2006) thematic analysis. Findings indicate that diagnostic-driven training significantly improved participants' scores (t(19) = 8.42, p \u003C 0. 001, Cohen's d = 1.89), with a mean gain of 15.8 points and a medium N-gain of 0.62. The most dominant error category was omission (38%), which decreased by 20 percentage points after the intervention, while misordering, misformation, and addition also declined significantly. Qualitative findings identified three interrelated themes: enhanced metacognitive syntactic awareness, enhanced test-taking self-efficacy, and academic communicative motivation. Notably, participants viewed diagnostic training as most effective when paired with structured drilling rather than as a standalone approach, favouring explicit error mapping over passive formula memorization in high-stakes test preparation. The study argues that diagnostic-driven syntactic training in EFL test preparation is best understood as a metacognitive scaffolding mechanism, whose effectiveness shifts according to the epistemic and performance demands of different test-taking activities.  \nKeyword: diagnostic-driven instruction; syntactic error analysis; metacognitive scaffolding  \n.  \n 873  \nHow to cite:  \nKadiatmaja, A. P. (2026) . Drilling or Diagnosing? Reimagining Syntactic Error Analysis as Metacognitive Scaffolding in EFL Test Preparation. Indonesia Berdampak: Jurnal Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat, 2(2), 873-  \n887. [https://doi.org/10.63822/zy5w6722](https://doi.org/10.63822/zy5w6722)  \nINTRODUCTION  \nMastery of the English language and possession of an international standardized certification such as the TOEFL ITP (Test of English as a Foreign Language-Institutional Testing Program) have become vital requirements for university students in the era of academic globalization. This certification serves asa primary qualification for scholarship applications, graduation requirements, and enhancing graduate competitiveness in global competency assessments. Nevertheless, the Structure and Written Expression subtest consistently poses the greatest hurdle for English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. Failure to achieve optimal scores generally stems from students' inability to navigate complex syntactic rules and identify test distractors within strict time constraints. High rates of grammatical errors among EFL learners stem from syntactic complexity and language transfer, yet conventional TOEFL prep","cbCaieLNJpC5vUer","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaieLNJpC5vUer","pdf",908801,15,"English","# Introduction\n## TOEFL ITP structure as a major challenge\n## Error sources and limitations of conventional preparation\n## Focus on complex syntactic patterns and error fossilization\n# Methodology\n## Mixed-methods design and four instructional phases\n## Data sources and analytical procedures\n# Findings\n## Quantitative improvement and dominant error-category changes\n## Qualitative themes and instructional implications","[{\"question\":\"How does the study compare diagnostic-driven training with conventional drilling?\",\"answer\":\"It contrasts diagnostic-driven syntactic training against conventional drilling for learners preparing the TOEFL ITP Structure and Written Expression subtest, assessing changes through pre- and post-tests and related evidence.\"},{\"question\":\"What quantitative results indicate the effectiveness of diagnostic-driven training?\",\"answer\":\"Scores improved significantly, with a reported t(19)=8.42, p\\u003c0.001, and a mean gain of 15.8 points; omission errors decreased by 20 percentage points.\"},{\"question\":\"Which error type was most dominant, and what happened to it after the intervention?\",\"answer\":\"Omission was the most dominant error category at 38% and decreased substantially after the intervention, along with declines in misordering, misformation, and addition.\"}]","Drilling or Diagnosing? Reimagining Syntactic Error Analysis as Metacognitive Scaffolding in EFL Test Preparation | PDF",1790896782,38]