WRITING STRATEGIES, VOCABULARY LEARNING BELIEFS,

READING MOTIVATION: A STRUCTURAL EQUATION

MODEL OF COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE
AMONG STUDENTS

PSYCHOLOGY AND EDUCATION: A MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL

Volume: 31
Issue 10
Pages: 1151-1161
Document ID: 2025PEMJ3037
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.14847518
Manuscript Accepted: 02-03-2025
 Psych Educ, 2025, 31(10): 1151-1161, Document ID:2025PEMJ3037, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14847518, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Writing Strategies, Vocabulary Learning Beliefs, Reading Motivation: A Structural Equation Model
of Communicative Competence among Students
Ivan E. Arendain,* Marilou Y. Limpot
For affiliations and correspondence, see the last page.
Abstract
Communicative competence is influenced by various factors, including the lack of exposure to the studied language,
which affects discourse ability. This study aims to determine the appropriate model of students' communicative
competence using the Structural Equation Model (SEM) to analyze the relationship between writing strategies,
vocabulary learning beliefs, and reading motivation. The research used a non-experimental quantitative, descriptive,
correlational, and SEM design. Four hundred (400) college students from public and private institutions in Region XI
were selected through stratified random sampling. The data were collected from an adapted questionnaire and analyzed
using mean, Pearson moment correlation, linear regression, and SEM. The results showed that writing strategies with
an overall mean score of 3.85 and SD of 0.62 describe as high, belief in vocabulary learning with an overall mean
score of 3.90 and SD of 0.71 describe as high, and reading motivation with an overall mean score of 3.82 and SD of
0.70 describe as high, which means the respondents often notice them. However, the belief in vocabulary (r=0.626, p
< 000) did not show statistical significance as a predictor of communicative competence. However, the model showed
that the three factors are essential in predicting communicative competence.The results found that vocabulary learning
beliefs were the lowest among the three predictors, so it is only appropriate to implement a program such as contextual
understanding and repetition, which will effectively help expand students' vocabulary and develop their
communicative competence.
Keywords: education, communicative competence, writing strategies, vocabulary learning beliefs, reading
motivation, Philippines

Introduction
It is a hard-to-believe fact that college students have low communicative competence (Sasmito, Suciati, & Mariadi, 2017; Choeda et
al., 2020). A study by Exelsis (2022) revealed that students struggle to express their thoughts or ideas due to their low communicative
competence, especially in the written aspect. It was also observed that the students' grammar is often incorrect whenever they write.
Meanwhile, in the study by Bautista and Valle (2023), it was proven that the student's communicative competence in oral
communication is low. Anxiety and lack of exposure to the language are reasons for the decline in their level of communicative
competence whenever communication occurs, whether written or spoken.
Furthermore, according to Tuan (2017), communicative competence is one of many factors that affect the decline in their discourse
competence due to their lack of exposure to the language being studied. Some of the challenges faced by students include having low
communicative competence. It is essential to focus on this issue because it is often observed among college students. The lack of
motivation among students is one of the reasons for the decline in their communicative competence because they prefer to focus on
grammatical accuracy rather than communicative tasks (Alharbi, 2022).
Communication occurs daily both inside and outside the classroom. Therefore, teachers and researchers should pay more attention to
students' communicative competence (Morales & Limpot, 2023). Communicative competence is very important in various fields,
including socio-economics, language study, and especially language teaching and learning. It leads to the ability to effectively use
language in communication, taking into account social conventions, culture, and discourse (Kachak & Blyznyuk 2023; Stakhova &
Stakhova, 2019).
Communicative competence is not limited to linguistic skills but includes knowledge of language standards, rhetorical culture, and
communication skills in various situations (Cao & Meng, 2020). Individual and personal characteristics, life experiences, fields of
activity, interests, and communication culture influence it. Developing communication skills requires objective work and appropriate
educational conditions in educational institutions (Xiuwen, 2021).
This research will use three theories to explain the variables thoroughly. The Communicative Competence theory by Canale and Swane
(1980) refers to the ability to effectively use language, which consists of four components: grammatical competence, sociolinguistic
competence, discourse competence, and strategic competence. Also included is the Cognitive Process Theory of Writing by Flower
and Hayes (1977), which describes the cognitive processes of writing, such as planning, translating, and reviewing, and highlights the
importance of mental study and activity in writing (McCutchen et al., 2023; Brayadi & Manora, 2022). This is further emphasized by
the Self-Determination Theory (SDT) of Deci and Ryan (2012), which describes motivation, personality development, and well-being
based on the psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness, showing how supportive environments help enhance
students' vigor and initiative (Ryan & Vansteenkiste, 2023; Pelletier & Rocchi, 2023; Kirzner & Miserandino, 2023).

Arendain & Limpot 1151/1161

 Psych Educ, 2025, 31(10): 1151-1161, Document ID:2025PEMJ3037, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14847518, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

The role of this research is essential not only for researchers but also for various sectors of society to enhance students' communicative
competence. At the global level, improving communication skills is crucial for obtaining information, participating in negotiations, and
establishing connections with different cultures and countries. Individuals and organizations can address global challenges through the
study of communicative competence. For curriculum planners, this can improve students' communicative competence and provide
more effective teaching skills. It is also essential for administrators and teachers to improve effective teaching, promote the significance
of communicative skills in any classroom activity for successful language learning, and for Filipino teachers to enhance their teaching
methods and students' communicative competence.
Research Questions
This study aims to explore the level of writing strategies, belief in vocabulary learning, reading motivation, and communicative
competence of students, as well as to analyze the relationship of these factors to their communication skills. As a certainty, this study
has questions that serve as a guide:
1. What is the level of writing strategies of students based on: before writing, while writing; and revising;
2. What is the level of belief in vocabulary learning among students based on contextual use; fixed meanings, recording what
they have learned, and repetition;
3. What is the level of reading motivation among students based on personal competence; intrinsic motivation, extrinsic
motivation; and social motivation;
4. What is the student’s communicative competence level based on: the meaning of language learning, linguistic competence,
phonology, vocabulary, structure, discourse, and strategy?
5. Is there a significant relationship between writing strategies and communicative competence, belief in vocabulary learning
and communicative competence, and motivation to read and communicative competence;
6. What is the most appropriate factor that influences students' communication skills?
7. What is the most appropriate model for students' communicative competence?
Literature Review
Writing Strategies
The study conducted by Dozie et al. (2023) on communication methods found that the students' writing strategies significantly
improved, enhancing their communicative ability, grammar, and vocabulary through the implementation of writing strategies. In
writing, the strategic ability of students plays a vital role in producing clear and easily understandable written statements. In meaningful
writing, planning the words to be used in the written statement, correcting the mistakes made in writing, and using various strategies
to ensure effective communication (Exelsis, 2022; Kamil & Anuar, 2022; Skopal, 2019). Teaching students various writing strategies
can help reduce communication failures and significantly improve writing skills (Dorfman & Chernova, 2022; Sacal & Potane, 2023).
Vocabulary Learning Beliefs
Vocabulary is the foundation of communication because it is the language of the mind. If there is a lack of vocabulary, the ability to
read, write, or speak is inhibited, directly affecting their communication skills (Ito & Hilliker, 2019; Tabassum & Naveed, 2024).
Daskalovska (2020) and Qian and Lin (2019) emphasize the importance of the individual's communication skills. In other words, the
capacity to anticipate the actions of those possessing a wealth of knowledge (El Khairat, 2018).
Reading Motivation
Research conducted by Uche et al. (2022) found that students' participation and motivation positively affect teaching language
communication in translation classes. Motivations and emotional factors also influence reading comprehension, where certain emotions
become critical conveyors of meaning (Zolkapli, 2023).
A study by Uche et al. (2022) emphasized the need to increase reading motivation among students, as it drives them to develop new
vocabulary and relate it to their communication. Developing students' vocabulary is crucial for their comprehension of the text being
read. By studying words' meaning, context, and usage, they can deepen their understanding and acquisition of new words (Garcés-
Manzanera, 2023; Kondratieva, 2023). Through this, the students' communicative competence will be further developed, especially
when they are given sufficient opportunities to speak, listen, read, and write. These activities can improve their communicative
competence (Liao et al., 2017).
Communicative Competence
Communicative competence has indicators such as the meaning of language learning, linguistic competence, phonology, vocabulary,
structure, discourse, and strategic competence. First, learning refers to developing students' ability to understand, construct, and
interpret various communicative situations (Ablakulov, 2023). The second indicator is linguistic competence, which refers to the
speaker's proficiency in vocabulary and language rules such as syntax, phonetics, and semantics (Geeslin & Hanson 2022; Nancy,
2022). Third is phonology, which refers to the ability of students to produce sounds that are important for correctly pronouncing words

Arendain & Limpot 1152/1161

 Psych Educ, 2025, 31(10): 1151-1161, Document ID:2025PEMJ3037, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14847518, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

in a specific language (Gurevich & Kim, 2022). Fourth is vocabulary, which refers to students' knowledge and use of words in a
communicative task (Gontsa & Hryhorenko 2023; Daskalovska, 2020; Aslonova, 2020). Fifth is structure, which refers to the ability
of students to understand and form sentences using a specific language (Abdulrahman & Ayyash, 2019). Sixth is the discourse, which
refers to the student's proficiency in understanding and producing texts through listening, speaking, reading, and writing. It also refers
to the coherence and cohesion in various types of texts (Tursunovich, 2023). Lastly, the strategic aspect relates to the methods used to
address deficiencies in grammar, sociolinguistics, or discourse, such as the use of references, lexical interpretation, and vocabulary,
requesting clarification, expressing more slowly, or issues in interacting with others when their social status is uncertain or when
thinking of the appropriate conjunctions (Alharbi, 2022).
Methodology
Research Design
Using the structural equation model (SEM) in this study will enhance the integrity and rigor of this research, which will undergo the
steps of model specification, data collection, model estimation, model evaluation, and potential model modification. The study was
conducted according to descriptive, correlational, and causal-comparative designs. Therefore, an alternative model compatible with the
data must be developed when the hypothesized model is rejected based on the goodness of fit statistics (Mueller & Hancock, 2018).
Respondents
The researcher selected college students from Region XI, which has 257,325 students. Therefore, this study will have 400 respondents.
The researcher used the Raosoft calculator to determine the number of respondents, with a 0.05 margin of error, to obtain the precise
number of research participants. Stratified random sampling was employed to ensure representation from different subgroups within
the population. The respondents were chosen from any public or private institution in Region XI. The sample was taken from one city
and five provinces of the region: Davao City (203), Davao del Sur (41), Davao Occidental (8), Davao del Norte (83), Davao de Oro
(34), and Davao Oriental (31), depending on the size of their population to obtain 400 respondents. Therefore, the research included
only students from any program and year enrolled for the academic year 2024 to 2025 in private and public institutions in Region XI.
Other unmentioned groups, such as different grade levels and other regions, were not included or selected as respondents in this
research. The study was conducted in the first semester of the 2024-2025 academic year in all tertiary institutions, whether private or
public, in Region IX. The researcher chose this region because it is the region to which the researcher belongs. Furthermore, the number
of respondents in this area is sufficient to conduct the research.
Table 1.
Population Sample
Davao City 130,814 203
Davao del Sur 26,229 41
Davao Occidental 5,027 8
Davao del Norte 53,346 83
Davao de Oro 22,126 34
Davao Oriental 19,783 31
Total 257,325 400

Instrument
The study used questionnaires adapted from various studies developed by the researcher using the focused language, which underwent
extensive validation such as correcting appropriate translations, effective contextualization of selected questions, and maintaining the
proper flow of meaning of the statements or questions from the adapted questionnaires of previous studies to ensure that the respondents'
answers to the actual and final survey questions are accurate and meaningful. The research instrument is divided into four parts: first,
the writing strategies adapted from the research of Petric & Czarl (2003), which consists of four parts and 38 items; second, vocabulary
learning beliefs derived from the research of Gao at Ma (2011) with eight parts and 32 items; third, reading motivation based on the
study of Lau (2004) with four parts and 32 items; finally, the communicative competence adapted from the study of Yufrizal, (2017)
which consists of eight aspects and 50 items.
On the other hand, to determine the appropriate and proper measurement of the level of writing strategies, vocabulary learning beliefs,
reading motivation, and communicative competence, the researcher used a 5-point Likert Scale anchored between the semantic
differential pairs "Strongly Agree or Strongly Disagree," which corresponded to the following scale; a mean range of 4.20-5.00 has a
descriptive level of very high, with the interpretation that it is consistently demonstrated. The mean range of 3.40-4.19 indicates a high
level, meaning the assessment is shown often. The 2.50-3.39 mean range corresponds to a descriptive level classified as moderate, with
the interpretation that the evaluation was demonstrated occasionally. Meanwhile, the mean range from 1.80-2.59 indicates a low
assessment, which is rarely shown. Those with a mean range of 1.00-1.79 have a descriptive level classified as very low, with the
interpretation that the assessment was never demonstrated.
Furthermore, the instruments used were reviewed by six experts and received an overall score of 4.6. The pilot testing and reliability
of the instruments were also conducted using the Cronbach Alpha coefficient, which showed in the analysis that writing strategies
Arendain & Limpot 1153/1161
 Psych Educ, 2025, 31(10): 1151-1161, Document ID:2025PEMJ3037, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14847518, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

(0.94), vocabulary learning beliefs (0.91), reading motivation (0.94), and communicative competence (0.97) achieved excellent
reliability.
Procedure
The ethical protocols and guidelines established by the University of Mindanao committee will be taken into account during the
execution of this investigation. The researcher obtained formal consent from the participants involved in the study and evaluated the
appropriateness of the selected participants. Conversely, UMERC issued a certificate of approval to collect data from the designated
respondents with Protocol No. UMERC-2024-362 following the comprehensive validation of the research instruments used. This
indicates that the researcher followed a proper and appropriate process in evaluating the factors involved in utilizing the respondents'
identities through their responses in the study.
Ethical Considerations
Nevertheless, this investigation will follow the ethical protocols and guidelines established by the University of Mindanao committee.
The researcher obtained formal consent from the participants involved in the study and assessed the appropriateness of the selected
participants and the potential hazards they may face, including physical, psychological, and social factors. Emphasis was placed on the
assent and agreement of the study sample, with a particular focus on the significance of data processing and the rights of the respondents.
All participants in the study completed the questionnaire voluntarily, and they were not coerced. Nevertheless, they voluntarily sacrifice
their time and energy to participate in the research without intimidation. Their participation in this research does not justify depriving
their legal rights and freedoms. The identity of each respondent in the study is of the utmost importance to the researcher, and all data
collected from the study participants will be kept confidential. The researcher unconditionally acknowledged the participants' refusal
to participate in the study. The researcher also stated that students who choose not to participate in the survey will not be subject to any
penalties. The researcher also guaranteed that the data collection apparatus, particularly the used ones, was stored in a suitable location.
Consequently, the researcher will maintain the confidentiality of the respondents' data and place a high value on their identities.
Results and Discussion
This study section presents, analyses, and interprets the data obtained from the respondents' completed questionnaires. The presentation
aligned well with the specific questions about the study's objectives.
Writing Strategies
Table 2. Writing Strategies
Indicators Mean SD Descriptive Level
Bago Sumulat 3.82 0.68 High
Habang Sumusulat 4.02 0.68 High
Pagrebisa 3.73 0.71 High
Overall 3.85 0.62 High
Legend: 4.20–5.00 Very High, 3.40–4.19 High, 2.60–3.39 Moderate, 1.80–2.59 Low, 1.00–1.79 Very Low

Table 2 shows students' use of writing strategies in three stages: before writing, during writing, and revising. In general, a mean of 3.85
with an SD of 0.62 and a high descriptive level was achieved, indicating that the students often notice writing strategies. In particular,
the mean of 3.82 with an SD of 0.68 before writing suggests high preparation among students before they start their writing. Meanwhile,
the mean of 4.02 with an SD of 0.68 during writing is the highest among all indicators. Regarding revision, the mean is 3.73 with an
SD of 0.71, which also shows a high level of effort from the students to improve and correct their writings before finalizing them.
Overall, the high mean and consistent SD at each stage of writing demonstrates the active participation and discipline of the students
in improving their writing skills, resulting in higher quality of their academic outputs.
Vocabulary Learning Beliefs
Table 3. Vocabulary Learning Beliefs
Indicators Mean SD Descriptive Level
Contextual Use 4.12 0.72 High
Fixed Meaning 3.72 0.96 High
List Learning 3.85 0.89 High
Repetition 3.93 0.80 High
Overall 3.90 0.71 High
Legend: 4.20–5.00 Very High, 3.40–4.19 High, 2.60–3.39 Moderate, 1.80–2.59 Low, 1.00–1.79 Very Low

Table 3 shows the students' level of belief in the four vocabulary learning strategies: contextual use, fixed meanings, recording what
they learned, and repetition. The overall mean of 3.90, with an SD of 0.71, indicates a high level and means that students consistently
pay attention to the writing strategy. In particular, the contextual use has the highest mean of 4.12 and an SD of 0.72, indicating that
students often use context to understand the meaning of new words. Meanwhile, the strategy of fixed meaning has a mean of 3.72 and
an SD of 0.96, indicating a high level of effectiveness. The average score for recording newly learnt vocabulary is 3.85, with an SD of
0.89, underscoring its significance in aiding the retention of new vocabulary. In the repetition strategy, the mean of 3.93 with an SD of

Arendain & Limpot 1154/1161

 Psych Educ, 2025, 31(10): 1151-1161, Document ID:2025PEMJ3037, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14847518, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

0.80 indicates that this is also an important method for more robust vocabulary learning. Overall, the high mean level and consistent
SD for each strategy indicate that students have a positive outlook and regularly use strategies to expand their vocabulary.
Reading Motivation
Table 4. Reading Motivation
Indicators Mean SD Descriptive Level
Self-efficacy 3.91 0.71 High
Intrinsic Motivation 4.12 0.74 High
Extrinsic Motivation 3.71 0.86 High
Social Motivation 3.55 0.99 High
Overall 3.82 0.70 High
Legend: 4.20–5.00 Very High, 3.40–4.19 High, 2.60–3.39 Moderate, 1.80–2.59 Low, 1.00–1.79 Very Low

Table 4 shows the level of students' motivation in reading across four main aspects: personal competence, intrinsic motivation, extrinsic
motivation, and social motivation. The overall mean of 3.82 with an SD of 0.70 indicates a high descriptive level, meaning that students
often notice motivation in their reading. In particular, intrinsic motivation has the highest mean of 4.12 and an SD of 0.74, indicating
that personal interest and enjoyment in reading are important factors in their motivation. Meanwhile, the mean for self-efficacy is 3.91
with an SD of 0.71, indicating that students' confidence in their reading ability has a positive effect on their desire to read. External
motivation has a mean of 3.71 and an SD of 0.86, indicating that students also gain motivation for reading based on rewards or
recognition from others. On the other hand, social motivation has a mean of 3.55 with a higher SD of 0.99, indicating that although the
encouragement from friends or peers is important for their reading motivation, there is a slight difference in the students' perspectives
on this aspect of motivation.
Communicative Competence
Table 5 shows the level of communicative competence of the students, measured in terms of language learning meaning, linguistic
competence, phonology, vocabulary, structure, sociolinguistics, discourse, and strategic competence. It obtained a total mean of 4.02,
with a total SD of 0.67, indicating a high descriptive level and that the communicative competence of the students is often observed.
Table 5. Communicative Competence
Indicators Mean SD Descriptive Level
Definition of Language Learning 4.36 0.75 Very High
Linguistic Competence 4.01 0.74 High
Phonology 3.84 0.80 High
Phonology 3.94 0.74 High
Structure 3.88 0.78 High
Sociolinguistic 4.14 0.77 High
Discourse 3.96 0.75 High
Strategic 3.97 0.77 High
Overall 4.02 0.67 High
Legend: 4.20–5.00 Very High, 3.40–4.19 High, 2.60–3.39 Moderate, 1.80–2.59 Low, 1.00–1.79 Very Low

This indicates that students place a high value on understanding the purpose and importance of language learning as the foundation of
their communication skills. Meanwhile, phonology has the lowest mean of 3.84, with a high description and an SD of 0.80. Although
still at a high level, this slightly lower mean may indicate that the skill of proper pronunciation and articulation in the language is not
given as much attention compared to other aspects of communicative competence.
Significance on the Relationship between Writing Strategies and Communicative Competence
Table 6.1. Significance on the Relationship between Writing Strategies and Communicative Competence
Writing Communicative Competence
Strategies Definition of Linguistic Phonology Phonology Structure Sociolinguistic Discourse Strategic Overall
Language Competence
Learning
Before .567** .572** .580** .654** .597** .608** .668** .649** .701**
Writing .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
While .605** .595** .546** .634** .594** .667** .664** .664** .711**
Writing .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Revising .474** .502** .520** .554** .544** .488** .583** .555** .605**
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Overall .611** .621** .612** .684** .645** .654** .712** .694** .750**
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

The results of the table show the significant relationship between writing strategies and communicative competence. We measured the
relationship at the 0.05 level of significance in the presented hypothesis. The overall r-value of 0.750 with a p-value of 0.000
(significant), which is much lower than 0.05, indicates that the null hypothesis is rejected, meaning there is a strong relationship between
Arendain & Limpot 1155/1161
 Psych Educ, 2025, 31(10): 1151-1161, Document ID:2025PEMJ3037, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14847518, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

writing strategies and communicative competence. The correlation coefficient r = 0.750 shows a strong association, suggesting that the
use of writing strategies is positively related to the development of students' communicative competence. Moreover, each indicator of
communicative competence has a significant relationship with writing strategies, with p-values less than 0.05.
Significance on the Relationship between Vocabulary Learning Beliefs and Communicative Competence
Table 6.2. Significance on the Relationship between Vocabulary Learning Beliefs and Communicative Competence
Vocabulary Communicative Competence
Learning Definition Linguistic Phonology Phonology Structure Sociolinguistic Discourse Strategic Overall
Beliefs of Language Competence
Learning
Contextual .622** .601** .535** .620** .552** .625** .605** .614** .683**
Use .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Fixed .363** .339** .400** .417** .418** .357** .406** .343** .436**
Meaning .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
List .432** .420** .480** .510** .483** .447** .463** .434** .526**
Learning .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Repetition .454** .440** .433** .477** .464** .397** .430** .439** .506**
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Overall .542** .521** .541** .590** .561** .529** .555** .529** .626**
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

Table 6.2 shows the results of the analysis of the relationship between belief in vocabulary learning and the communicative competence
of students. We analysed the relationship at a significance level of 0.05, in accordance with the presented hypothesis. The overall r-
value of 0.626 with a p-value of 0.000 (significant), which is much lower than 0.05, indicates that the null hypothesis is rejected. This
shows that there is a strong relationship between the belief in vocabulary learning and the communicative competence of the students.
Specifically, the results show that all indicators of belief in vocabulary learning have a significant relationship with communicative
competence, as all p-values are less than 0.05.
Significance on the Relationship between Reading Motivation and Communicative Competence
Table 6.3 shows the importance of the relationship between reading motivation and the communicative competence of students. We
analysed the relationship at a significance level of 0.05, in accordance with the presented hypothesis.
Table 6.3. Significance on the Relationship between Reading Motivation and Communicative Competence
Reading Communicative Competence
Motivation Definition of Linguistic Phonology Phonology Structure Sociolinguistic Discourse Strategic Overall
Language Competence
Learning
Self- .560** .608** .609** .671** .674** .617** .674** .654** .726**
efficacy .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Intrinsic .610** .583** .555** .644** .599** .640** .629** .632** .701**
Motivation .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Extrinsic .465** .507** .505** .546** .549** .433** .549** .497** .580**
Motivation .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Social .369** .373** .437** .468** .500** .418** .502** .458** .506**
Motivation .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Overall .575** .594** .609** .672** .673** .605** .682** .646** .725**
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

The overall r-value of 0.725 with a p-value of 0.000 (significant) much lower than 0.05 indicates that the null hypothesis is rejected,
which means there is a strong relationship between reading motivation and communicative competence. The correlation coefficient (r
= 0.725) indicates a strong association between reading motivation and the communicative competence of the students. Specifically,
the results show that every aspect of reading motivation has a significant relationship with communicative competence, as all p-values
are less than 0.05.
Significance on the influence of Writing Strategies, Vocabulary Learning Beliefs and Reading Motivation on the
Communicative Competence
Table 7 shows the influence of writing strategy, belief in vocabulary learning, and motivation to read on the communicative competence
of students. The F-value of 208.059 with a corresponding p-value of 0.000 indicates that the regression model is significant, thus
rejecting the null hypothesis. This shows that there are variables that can explain the communicative competence of the students. In
addition, the R² value of 0.612 shows that writing strategies, belief in vocabulary learning, and reading motivation can explain 61.2
percent of the variation in communicative competence. The other 38.8 percent may be due to factors other than these three. The analysis
shows that the standard coefficient of the writing strategy has the highest beta of 0.445, indicating that it has the greatest influence on
Arendain & Limpot 1156/1161
 Psych Educ, 2025, 31(10): 1151-1161, Document ID:2025PEMJ3037, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14847518, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

the communicative competence of the students, compared to reading motivation with a beta of 0.333 and belief in vocabulary learning
with a beta of 0.059.
Table 7. Significance on the influence of Writing Strategies, Vocabulary Learning
Beliefs and Reading Motivation on the Communicative Competence
Communicative Competence
(Variables) B β t Sig.
Constant .745 5.529 .000
Writing Strategies .480 .445 8.098 .000
Vocabulary Learning BeliefsPhonology .055 .059 1.195 .233
Reading Motivation .316 .333 6.204 .000
R .782
R2 .612
∆R .609
F 208.059
ρ .000

Overall Results of Goodness of Fit Measures among the Three Models

Table 8. Overall Results of Goodness of Fit Measures among the Three Models
Model P-value CMIN / DF GFI CFI NFI TLI RMSEA P-close
(>0.05) (0<value<2) (>0.95) (>0.95) (>0.95) (>0.95) (<0.05) (>0.05)
1 .000 11.458 .691 .787 .772 .756 .162 .000
2 .000 9.205 .735 .835 .819 .808 .143 .000
3 .299 1.091 .981 .999 .989 .998 .015 .999
Legend: CMIN/DF – Chi-Square/Degrees of Freedom, GFI – Goodness of Fit Index, RMSEA – Root Mean Square Error of Approximation,
CFI – Comparative Fit Index, NFI – Normed Fit Index, TLI – Tucker-Lewis Index

Table 8 shows the results of the goodness-of-fit measures of Generated Model 3. The results show that all model fit values met the
standards of each index: CMIN/DF < 2, GFI, CFI, NFI, and TLI > 0.95, and RMSEA < 0.05 with P-Close > 0.05. The results are
consistent with the standards set by Arbuckle and Wothke (1999), which emphasize that CMIN/DF should be less than 2, and the
Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Normed Fit Index (NFI), and Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) should be greater
than 0.95. Moreover, the values of RMSEA and PCLOSE by Browne and Sugawara (1996) of 0.01, 0.05, and 0.08 are considered
excellent, good, and mediocre fit, respectively, with a P-Close greater than 0.05.
Figure 1 shows Hypothesized Model 1, showed the connection between the outside factors of writing strategies, belief in vocabulary
learning, and reading motivation, as well as their direct connection with the inside factor of communication skills. According to what
is shown in Table 8, the writing strategy has the highest beta (.414), followed by reading motivation (beta = .366) and belief in
vocabulary learning (beta = .003). The goodness of fit results also showed that the values of this model did not meet the established
standards of fit indices: CMIN/DF is greater than 2, GFI, CFI, NFI, and TLI are less than 0.95, RMSEA is greater than 0.05, and P-
Close is less than 0.05. These results show that the model has a very poor fit to the data.

Figure 1. Hypothesized Model 1

Arendain & Limpot 1157/1161

 Psych Educ, 2025, 31(10): 1151-1161, Document ID:2025PEMJ3037, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14847518, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Regression Weights of the 3 Generated Models

Table 9. Regression Weights of the 3 Generated Models
Exogenous Variables to Endogenous Variable
Model Writing Strategies Vocabulary Learning BeliefsTalasalitaan Reading Motivation
1 .414*** .003NS .366***
2 .482*** -.159NS .436***
3 .567*** -.165NS .383***

According to what is shown in Table 9, the writing strategy has the highest beta (.414), followed by reading motivation (beta = .366)
and belief in vocabulary learning (beta = .003). The goodness of fit results also showed that the values of this model did not meet the
established standards of fit indices: CMIN/DF is greater than 2, GFI, CFI, NFI, and TLI are less than 0.95, RMSEA is greater than
0.05, and P-Close is less than 0.05. These results show that the model has a very poor fit to the data.

Figure 2. Hypothesized Model 2

Figure 2 shows Hypothesized Model 2 showed the relationship between the exogenous variables of writing strategies, belief in
vocabulary learning, and reading motivation, as well as their direct relationship with the endogenous variable of communicative
competence. According to what is shown in Table 8, the writing strategy has the highest beta value (.482), followed by reading
motivation (beta = .436) and belief in vocabulary learning (beta = -.059). The goodness of fit results also showed that the values of this
model did not meet the set standards of fit indices: CMIN/DF is greater than 2, GFI, CFI, NFI, and TLI are less than 0.95, RMSEA is
greater than 0.05, and P-Close is less than 0.05. Therefore, this is a weak and inappropriate model.

Figure 3. Hypothesized Model 3

Arendain & Limpot 1158/1161

 Psych Educ, 2025, 31(10): 1151-1161, Document ID:2025PEMJ3037, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14847518, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

On the other hand, model 3 presents the standard estimates for the developed and appropriate model. Based on this model, which is
considered the best fit model, writing strategy, belief in vocabulary learning, and reading motivation are exogenous variables that have
a direct relationship with communicative competence. The model also shows the connection between the exogenous variables, where
both writing strategies and reading motivation contribute to enhancing language communication.
Furthermore, it can be seen in Table 4 that two out of the three indicators of writing strategy, namely pre-writing and revising, remain
significant factors affecting communicative competence. Meanwhile, the belief in vocabulary learning has two significant indicators
out of four, contextual use and repetition, which have been found to influence communication. On the other hand, reading motivation
has two significant indicators out of four, intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation, both of which have a positive effect on
communicative competence.
Conclusions
This research is reinforced using a structural equation model because the analysis aligns with the sequential process in the specific
model. The results demonstrated the students' proficiency in writing strategies, their belief in vocabulary learning, their motivation to
read, and their communicative competence.
Based on the conducted analysis, the study found a significant relationship between writing strategies, belief in vocabulary learning,
and reading motivation with the communicative competence of students. The high level of use of writing strategies, positive beliefs in
vocabulary learning, and high motivation in reading have been proven to contribute to the improvement of their communicative
competence. Model 3 is thought to be the best way to explain how these factors relate to students' communication skills because it has
the highest level of fit indices. The findings show that writing skills and a positive attitude towards vocabulary learning, along with
reading motivation, are essential for enhancing students' ability to communicate effectively.
The research results back up theory of communicative competence, which says that there are four main parts to being able to understand
and use language well for communication: grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence, discourse competence, and strategic
competence. Furthermore, the research emphasises the importance of language production in language learning. Students actively use
language to convey meaning and engage in understanding, a process that manifests communicative competence.
Meanwhile, the theory in the cognitive process theory of writing emphasised the importance of collaborative writing, as it has been
proven to have a positive effect on motivation, self-efficacy, and writing performance among students. This theory has been extensively
studied and revised, with research conducted in various languages to support its cognitive reporting in writing. It was also used as a
framework to develop tools that support writing, which can assist each student in the various cognitive processes involved in writing.
The research results showed that there is a strong correlation between exogenous and endogenous variables. Therefore, it is important
to further develop and enhance programs to better cultivate the communicative abilities of students.
Some of these include developing and teaching students writing strategies, especially before, during, and after writing. We can teach
more detailed methods to further enhance the students' academic writing skills. Aside from this, strategies for vocabulary learning
should also be promoted, such as contextual understanding and repetition, which can effectively help in expanding students' vocabulary
and developing their communicative competence. Furthermore, we suggest introducing educational programs aimed at enhancing
students' intrinsic and extrinsic motivation to read. You can include activities with social and reward-based elements to boost students'
interest in reading. Above all, consideration should also be given to having a program or curriculum that covers aspects of writing
strategies, belief in vocabulary learning, and motivation for reading to guide students in the development of their communicative
competence.
For future researchers, it is recommended to expand the scope of the study to a larger population and different levels of students to
further strengthen the findings. It would also be beneficial to consider additional variables, such as socio-emotional factors, and to use
qualitative methods like interviews to explore students' perspectives more deeply. Moreover, a longitudinal analysis and comparison
across different cultural contexts will help us better understand the influence of culture and the evolution of communicative competence
strategies over time.
References
Abdulrahman, N. C., & Ayyash, E. A. S. A. (2019). Linguistic competence, communicative competence, and interactional competence.
Journal of Advances in Linguistics, 10(1), 1600-1616.
Ablakulov, I. S. (2023). Formation of communicative competence in English language teaching. American Journal Of Philological
Sciences, 3(05), 73-76.
Alharbi, A. O. (2022). Issues with Communicative Language Teaching Implementation in Saudi Arabia Concerning the Government
Policy, Teachers, and Students: Two Decades of Research. Arab World English Journal, 13(2), 412-423.
Aslonova, H. (2020). Defining The Concepts “Competence” And “Communicative Competence”. The American Journal of Social
Science and Education Innovations, 2(8), 490-493.
Arendain & Limpot 1159/1161
 Psych Educ, 2025, 31(10): 1151-1161, Document ID:2025PEMJ3037, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14847518, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Bautista, R. B., & Del Valle, J. Communicative competence and oral language usage of Filipino learners in English. International
Journal of Educational Management and Development Studies, 4(1), 1-23.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of com-municative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied
linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
Cao, C., & Meng, Q. (2020). Exploring personality traits as predictors of English achievement and global competence among Chinese
university students: English learning motivation as the moderator. Learning and Individual Differences, 77, 101814.
Choeda, C., Gyeltshen, T., Daker, S., Gyeltshen, S., Wangmo, W., & Letho, D. (2020). Communicative competence of secondary
school students of Bhutan. Journal of Humanities and Education Development, 2(1), 12-25.
Daskalovska, N. (2020). Vocabulary size at four stages of language development. European Journal of English Language Teaching,
6(2).
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Self-determination theory. Handbook of theories of social psychology, 1(20), 416-436.
Dorfman, O. V., & Chernova, O. E. (2022). Development of communicative competence among students of technical universities as a
strategy for teaching effective communication. Litera, (4), 27-35.
Dozie, C. P., Regis-Onuoha, A., Madu, L. I., Egwim, F. O., Okere, M. C., & Ihejirika, R. C. (2023). IMPACT OF ECLECTICISM ON
NIGERIAN ESL LEARNERS’COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY. European Journal of English
Language Teaching, 8(1).
El Khairat, M. (2018). HAVING LARGER VOCABULARY SIZE INCREASES STUDENTS’COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE
PRODUCING SPOKEN AND WRITTEN BROADCASTING SCRIPT. SNIB.
Exelsis, D. A. (2022). COMMUNICATIVE STRATEGIC COMPETENCE OF GRADE 11 ‘EIM’STUDENTS: UTILIZATION OF
PROCESS-BASED APPROACH ON DEALING UNGRAMMATICALITY IN WRITING. COMMUNICATIVE STRATEGIC
COMPETENCE OF GRADE 11 ‘EIM’STUDENTS: UTILIZATION OF PROCESS-BASED APPROACH ON DEALING
UNGRAMMATICALITY IN WRITING, 109(1), 25-25.
Flower, L. S., & Hayes, H. R. (1977). Problem-solving strategies and the writing process. College English, 39(4), 449-461.
Gao, X., & Ma, Q. (2011). Vocabulary learning and teaching beliefs of pre-service and in-service teachers in Hong Kong and mainland
China. Language Awareness, 20(4), 327-342.
Garcés-Manzanera, A. (2023). Ncidental vocabulary learning and retention in education-oriented l2 communicative tasks:: The effect
of testing conditions. Miscelánea: A journal of english and american studies, (67), 15-40.
Geeslin, K. L., & Hanson, S. (2022). Sociolinguistic approaches to communicative competence. In Communicative Competence in a
Second Language (pp. 40-59). Routledge.
Gontsa, I., & Hryhorenko, T. (2023). Formation of communicative competence in the recipients of higher education using propriative
vocabulary. Молодь і ринок, (4/212), 43-47.
Gurevich, N., & Kim, H. (2022). Phonetics and Phonology: The phonetics and phonology of intelligibility: The functional importance
to intelligibility of speech sounds. In Clinical Applications of Linguistics to Speech-Language Pathology (pp. 111-125). Routledge.
Ito, K., & Hilliker, S. M. (2019). Acquisition of Japanese through translation. B. Loranc-Paszylk (Ed.), Rethinking directions in
language learning and teaching at university level, 53-74.
Kachak, T., & Blyznyuk, T. (2023). Development of communicative competence of future special education teachers. Journal of Vasyl
Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, 10(1), 87-98.
Kamil, M. A., & Anuar, N. (2022). Employers’ Viewpoints on Strategic Competence for Workplace Communication. International
Journal of Education, 14(3).
Kirzner, R. S., & Miserandino, M. (2023). Self-determination theory and social work values. Research on Social Work Practice, 33(6),
656-665.
Kondratieva, O. (2023). FORMATION OF STUDENTS’LEXICAL COMPETENCE WITHIN DISTANSE LEARNING. Collection
of scientific papers «ΛΌГOΣ», (June 23, 2023; Oxford, UK), 201-202.
Lau*, K. L. (2004). Construction and initial validation of the Chinese reading motivation questionnaire. Educational Psychology, 24(6),
845-865.
Liao, T. T., Hsu, P. Y., Lee, C. L., & Yang, K. F. (2017). English for specific purpose for EFL college interns in international tourism
industry in Taiwan: needs analysis and challenges. International Journal of Management and Applied Science, 3(7), 58-63.

Arendain & Limpot 1160/1161

 Psych Educ, 2025, 31(10): 1151-1161, Document ID:2025PEMJ3037, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14847518, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

McCutchen, D. (2023). A cognitive account of the development of writing skill: Cross-language evidence. The Routledge international
handbook of research on writing, 206-224.
Morales, R. O., & Limpot, M. (2023). A Structural Relationship Model of Communicative Competence. Asian Journal of Education
and Social Studies, 47(1), 26-42.
Mueller, R. O., & Hancock, G. R. (2018). Structural equation modeling. In The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in the social
sciences (pp. 445-456). Routledge.
Nancy, W. (2022). The Linguistic Competence of a Trilingual at Age Five. The International Journal of Humanities & Social Studies,
10(7).
Pelletier, L. G., & Rocchi, M. (2023). Organismic integration theory: a theory of regulatory styles, internalization, integration, and
human functioning in society. The Oxford handbook of self-determination theory, 53-83.
Petrić, B., & Czárl, B. (2003). Validating a writing strategy questionnaire. System, 31(2), 187-215.
Qian, D. D., & Lin, L. H. (2019). The relationship between vocabulary knowledge and language proficiency. The Routledge handbook
of vocabulary studies, 66-80.
Ryan, R. M., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2023). Self-determination theory: metatheory, methods, and meaning. The Oxford handbook of
self-determination theory, 3-30.
Sacal, P. G. Y., & Potane, J. D. (2023). Students’ Mastery of English Grammar towards Effective Writing and Speaking Competence.
International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 4(8), 2894-2904.
Sasmito, A., Suciati, S., & Mariadi, M. (2017). Profile of Communication Skills in Biology For XI Grade Students of †œY†Senior
High School in Madiun Regency. Unnes Science Education Journal, 6(2).
Skopal, D. P. (2019). Written communicative expertise: The production of public information documents. Journal of Applied
Linguistics & Professional Practice, 16(2).
Stakhova, M., & Stakhova, O. (2019). FOREIGN LANGUAGE COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE AS THE BASIS OF
STUDYING FOREIGN LANGUAGES. Modern Information Technologies and Innovation Methodologies of Education in
Professional Training Methodology Theory Experience Problems, (54), 81-84.
Tabassum, A., & Naveed, A. (2024). Interactive strategies for Enriching English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Vocabulary: A
Comprehensive Exploration. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 11(1), 1-16.
Tetiana, Kachak., Tetyana, Blyznyuk. "Development of Communicative Competence of Future Special Education Teachers." Journal
of Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, 10 (2023).:87-98. doi: 10.15330/jpnu.10.1.87-98
Tuan, V. V. (2017). Communicative Competence of the Fourth Year Students: Basis for Proposed English Language Program. English
Language Teaching, 10(7), 104-122.
Tursunovich, R. I. (2023). Development of communicative competence in teaching foreign language for professional purposes. In
Proceedings of International Conference on Scientific Research in Natural and Social Sciences (Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 26-33).
Tursunovich, R. I. (2023). Development of communicative competence in teaching foreign language for professional purposes. In
Proceedings of International Conference on Scientific Research in Natural and Social Sciences (Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 26-33).
Uche, E. A., Uzoamaka, E. B., Chinweuba, E. M., & Agwu, S. N. (2022). Promoting Communicative Competence through Extensive
Reading in English language Context. Indiana Journal of Arts & Literature, 3(9), 20-27.
Xiuwen, Z., & Razali, A. B. (2021). An overview of the utilization of TikTok to improve oral English communication competence
among EFL undergraduate students. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 9(7), 1439-1451.
Yufrizal, H. (2017). Teachers and Students' Perceptions of Communicative Competence in English as a Foreign Language in Indonesia.
Educational Research and Reviews, 12(17), 867-883.
Affiliations and Corresponding Information
Ivan E. Arendain
University of Mindanao – Philippines
Marilou Y. Limpot
University of Mindanao – Philippines

Arendain & Limpot 1161/1161