APPLIED LINGUISTICS

BY PETER THAMIN

Assignment Title

Autonomous Learning

Introduction

A common theme in justifications for autonomy, especially in general education but also in language learning, is that autonomous learners become more highly motivated and that autonomy leads to better, more effective work.  Wenden’s (1991) claim is illustrative:  “…”successful” or “expert” or “intelligent” learners have learned how to learn.  They have acquired the learning strategies, the knowledge about learning, and the attitudes that enable them to use these skills and knowledge confidently, flexibly, appropriately and independent of a teacher.  Therefore, they are autonomous” (p. 15).  It would follow from such a position that teachers should encourage or promote students to become more autonomous in their learning.  I have chosen to explore this theme through the selection of the article, “Autonomy: an anatomy and a framework”, which examines the necessary components that make up a successful autonomous learner.  However, as a teacher, understanding the conceptual framework of an autonomous learner, is not enough to promote autonomous learning.  In formal educational contexts, learners do not accept responsibility for their learning – teachers must help them to do so, and they will not necessarily find it easy to reflect critically on their learning process – teachers must provide them with appropriate tools and with opportunities to practice using them.  Thus, my second article, “Developing a course strategy for learner autonomy” addresses these important issues which have been surprisingly neglected over the years.  One final component which concludes the total framework of a learner autonomy environment, is the integral feature of “self-accessibility”, which leads into my last article, “Creating an infrastructure for autonomous learning: the resource catalogue”.  The author argues that while it is true that technological developments such as listening centres, video recorders, fax and e-mail and relevant materials such as newspapers and magazines provide a rich variety of tools and techniques for the implementation of self-directed learning, it is of relevant use if students are not accompanied by the improvements of accessibility (infrastructure) and learner support in order to take advantage of these resources.  Thus, the examination into all of these factors depicts a three-dimensional and interrelated perspective of an autonomous learning situation.  Failure to acknowledge one of these aspects, may result in the stagnation of the learner autonomy process.

Body

In recommending autonomy to learners, teachers are making the assumption that autonomous learners take responsibility by setting their own goals, planning practice opportunities, and assessing their progress.  In the article, “Autonomy: an anatomy and a framework”, Littlewood (1996) suggests that the personal qualities should consist of two main components – ability and willingness, and these two components can each be subdivided into two other components.  In other words, ability depends on possessing both knowledge about the alternatives from which choices have to be made and the necessary skills to carry out the appropriate actions.  On the other hand, willingness depends on having both the motivation and the confidence to take responsibility for the choices required.

Littlewood further goes on to suggest that there are three domains of autonomy in foreign language learning.  These are: (1) autonomy as a communicator, which depends on the ability to use the target language appropriately and the ability to use appropriate strategies for communicating meanings in specific situations; (2) autonomy as a learner, which depends on the ability to engage in self-directed learning and the ability to use appropriate learning strategies in formal or informal situations; and (3) autonomy as a person, which depends on the ability to express personal meanings and the ability to create personal learning situations (p. 431).

It is also important to realise there are hierarchical levels in autonomous learning.  At the bottom of the hierarchy are low-level choices which control the specific operations through which the activity is carried out, while the top are high-level choices which control the overall activity (see p. 429 for further details).  Thus, the most successful autonomous learners will be those who have acquired all three domains of autonomy mentioned above and have the ability to carry out successfully, high levels of decision making.  A summary of components, domains and levels of autonomy can be seen in a diagrammatic form on page 430, while the total framework for developing autonomy in and through foreign language learning can be seen in a circular layout on page 432, with subsequent explanations given thereafter.

Therefore, by understanding the concept or the qualities of an autonomous learner, teachers now can integrate this knowledge into a course strategy which introduces my second article, “Developing a course strategy for learner autonomy” by Cotterall (1995).

Sara Cotterall is one of the teachers teaching at the English Language Institute of the Victoria University of Wellington.  A major concerned raised in the article was the fact that while “many programmes, and most ESL teachers, claim to believe in autonomy… many of the same teachers regularly subvert that goal by excluding learners from decisions about planning, pacing, and evaluating classroom tasks” (p. 220).  As a result, the first half of the article addresses the necessary components of an autonomy-based course, which are subject to continuous revision and evaluation.

According to Cotterall, an autonomy-based course which was designed with the explicit objective of encouraging learners to take more responsibility for their language learning should include:

Leaner/teacher dialogue – every student is interviewed by the class teacher at the beginning, mid-point and end of the course.  This promotes the clarification of learner’s needs and objectives which in turn, encourages students to take more responsibilities for their own learning tasks.

Learning a language study theme – this component presents some key concepts in language learning, introduces the course outline and its relevance for learning it.  Cotterall indicated that “teachers who adopt pedagogic approaches without explaining their reasons for doing so are denying their learners access to valuable information.  A course which aims to promote learner autonomy must incorporate frank discussion of objectives, methodology, roles and expectations” (p. 224).

Classroom tasks and materials – tasks are designed specifically to cater “real world” situations, and to incorporate support by providing preparatory help before classes, and a follow-up discussion afterwards.  The materials are designed to encourage learners to take the initiative in their language learning.

Student record booklet – student’s self-assessment of their learning process throughout the course.  This aim is in harmony with the goals of autonomous learning because it encourages learners to take an active role in formulating their learning objectives and assessing how and to what extent these are met.

Self-access centre – the provision of independent study facilities which provides a selection of self-study reading and vocabulary and grammar practice materials, as well as a collection of self-access listening materials.

Assessment/evaluation:

Leaner/teacher dialogue – the first component is now seen as central to the fostering of autonomy because the results were encouraging.  So encouraging in fact, that they had to extend consultation hours.  I believe this kind of sincere inquiry conveys a positive message which encourages students to deepen their involvement.

Learning a language study theme – “the learning a language study theme has helped encourage leaners assume more initiative in their learning.  This comes about principally because the study theme extends learners’ understanding of what they can and should do to help themselves” (p. 223).  I believe that this component is crucial because the more informed they are about the course structure, assessments and its relevance for future purposes, the more motivated and confident they will become.  Furthermore, this would also helps students to identify their skills and knowledge (or weaknesses) related to the course by actively addressing awareness and attitude in the classroom.

Classroom tasks and materials – This component mainly focuses on making learners aware of the link between classroom practices and learning needs.  The materials are designed to make explicit to learners the aspect of language knowledge or skill being developed.  This type of tasks relied heavily on students’ feedback (eg., interviews, questionnaire sheets, surveys etc).

Student record booklet – It is not surprising to see that the response to this component was disappointing.  From my personal experience, we as learners do not readily see a role for the booklet in our learning.  People do not want to be reminded with which aspects of the language they are deficient of because this discourages us to think positively about our performances.  One of Cotterall’s conclusion for its failure was that the student record booklet represents more a teacher’s rather than a student’s need.  Solution: “to seek a compromise position” (p. 225).

Self-access centre – Cotterall acknowledged some loop-holes in the self-access centre component because students tend to abuse the system by using the centre as the means to test out solutions or to find a “quick fix” solution to their language problems.  Cotterall’s remedy to this was to modify the approach by “shift(ing) away from encouraging general language practice activities in the self-access centre towards promoting individualised problem solving (activities)” (p. 225).  Cotterall also acknowledges the importance of the role of teachers in their commitment to autonomous learning.  She stated, “experience shows that only staff who were seriously committed to the idea of encouraging learner autonomy were able to successfully assist learners in the centre” (p. 226).

This article suggests that a course strategy for learner autonomy is vital to the fostering and nurturing of learner autonomy.  The approach given above has received some attention and support throughout the world in ESL teaching (see Sharkey, 1994).  Teachers who are aware of the autonomous learner concept must be willing to devote more time to help students to become better learners by motivating them to take more responsibility for their own learning.

The last article, “Creating an infrastructure for autonomous learning:  the resource catalogue” by Kenning (1996) actually completes the autonomous learning process.  It is without a doubt that the success in an autonomy-based course needs to be accommodated with the development of self-access facilities and learner support.  This is addressed repeatedly throughout the article: “an emphasis on enriched environments is important yet insufficient.  Unless people can be helped to develop the skills necessary to … (utilise it) … exposure to enrich environments may do little good” (Bransford 1997: 263, cited in Kenning: 224).

A case study of the computerisation of a language resource centre at the University of East Anglia was presented in the article.  The aim of upgrading and computerising the infrastructure was (1) to initiate the exploitation of the resources available at the centre by improving accessibility; (2) to allow students to make more informed choices when selecting materials for self-study; and (3) to identify and locate potential sources of information.

The above goals were achieved through the introduction of “an electronic catalogue allowing fast identification of materials through a range of alternative routes…” (p. 227).  An example of the system is displayed on pp. 228-229, which is in fact, very similar to our own library catalogue system on our campus.

Thus, we can reasonably say that developments in technology have made an undeniable and vital contribution to the spread of autonomy and self-success.  It is important to keep in mind that while a well-stocked multimedia centre is essential in autonomous learning, it only becomes an advantage when combined with appropriate levels of accessibility and learner support.

In my opinion, the three articles presented above displayed a well-informed picture of an autonomous learning situation.  As an autonomous learner myself, I believe that motivation, confidence, knowledge and skills suggested by Littlewood are essential characteristics of an autonomous learner.  These qualities in fact, correlates with the “affective filter” concept in Second Language Acquisition (SLA) first introduced by Dulay and Burt (cited in Krashen 1982).  That is, they all promote a low affective filter which “encourages students to try to get more input, to interact with speakers of the target acquisition” (Krashen 1982: 21).  Thus, learner autonomy is vital because:

• the learner accepts responsibility for his or her learning;
• it promotes a positive attitude to learning and the development of a capacity to reflect on the content and process of learning with a view to bringing them as far as possible under conscious control; and
• learners have the ability to use a series of strategies such as metacognitive, cognitive and social strategies when engaged in a learning task (see O’Malley and Chamot 1990).

However, teachers who support autonomous learning must create an environment to encourage as well as to foster autonomous learning.  In the second article, Cotterall was obviously aware of the qualities which constitute an autonomous learner and as a result, the course strategy was designed to promote these qualities.  Secondly, she was also well aware that the development of a course strategy may or may not work in practice.  Hence, the analysis and evaluation of the course strategy were included in her article.  In my view, the latter step is crucial in language pedagogy because a successful course strategy for developing autonomous learning must always involve the continuous process of teacher’s awareness through analysing, experimenting with new strategies, reflecting, modifying and applying new knowledge.  Thus, autonomous learning schemes have to be planned locally, take into account specific institutional requirements and expectations, and the particular characteristics of the learners and staff.

I am in support of Cotterall’s view that the language/teacher dialogue is central to autonomous based courses because in the promotion of learner autonomy the teacher’s task is to bring learners to the point where they accept equal responsibility for this co-production.  One of the possible arguments against this type of course strategies is that some teachers may have concerns regarding the amount of class time and extra teacher time involved in this type of structure.  Indeed, raising awareness of the learning process does take time initially, but as students and teachers become more familiar with the process, the amount of time decreases.  Furthermore, the time spent on helping students to become better learners while motivating them to take more responsibility for their learning is insignificant compared to the reward it yields.

Finally, self-accessibility and learner support are also important in the promotion of learner autonomy.  The more opportunities that a student may receive to learn more about the target culture – read its literature, look for opportunities for practising the language, the more motivated they will get.  Krashen (1982) calls this instrumental motivation.  Thus, a computer makes possible the cataloguing and retrieval of materials far more numerous than any card-index could provide.  Provided that the classification system is learner-friendly, catalogues of this kind can play an important role in self-access systems, and as a result, promotes autonomous learning.  Other technological developments such as listening centres, video recorders, fax and email services also encourage and promotes autonomous learning.  However, it is vital to take into consideration, in self-directed learning systems, that technology be at the service of the learners and not vice versa.

Conclusion

Viewed as a whole, the three articles presented above depicts a three-dimensional and interrelated perspective of an autonomous learning environment.  In summary, an autonomous learner can be defined as a learner who possesses the ability (knowledge and skills) and willingness (motivation and confidence) to accept responsibility for his own learning over and above responding to classroom instructions.  In a learner autonomy based course, teachers are encouraged to commit and help learners to develop a self-directed learning approach whereby he can eventually set his own needs and objectives; choose materials and resources in accordance with his goals.