Languages
Pages
Legal
بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم
University of Gezira
Faculty of Education - Hasahisa
Department of Foreign Languages
Learner Autonomy in KSA EFL Classes:
A Case Study of Preparatory Year Students at Tabuk University
By
Ali Abdalla Nour Mohammed
17th July, 2016
Learner Autonomy in KSA EFL Classes:
A Case Study of Preparatory Year Students at Tabuk University
By
Ali Abdalla Nour Mohammed
B.A. in English Language
Nile Valley University (1991)
M.A. in English Language
Nile Valley University (2011)
A Thesis
Submitted in Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
in
Applied Linguistics
Department of Foreign Languages
Faculty of Education – Hasahisa
University of Gezira
Main Supervisor Co- Supervisor
Dr. Abdulgadir Mohammed Ali Adam Dr. Ahmed Gasm Asseed Ahmed
17th July, 2016
Learner Autonomy in KSA EFL Classes:
A Case Study of Preparatory Year Students at Tabuk University
By
Ali Abdalla Nour Mohammed
SUPERVISION COMMITTEE:
Name Position Signature
Dr. Abdulgadir Mohammed Ali Adam Main Supervisor
Dr. Ahmed Gasm Assed Ahmed Co-supervisor
Date of Examination: 17/7/2016
Learner Autonomy in KSA EFL Classes:
A Case Study of Preparatory Year Students at Tabuk University
By
Ali Abdalla Nour Mohammed
EXAMINATION COMMITTEE:
Name Position Signature
Dr. Abdulgadir Mohammed Ali Adam Chairman
Prof. Abdul Majeed Atteyib Umer External Examiner
Dr. El Mubarak El Siddig Saeed Internal Examiner
Date of Examination: 17/7 /2016
i
DEDICATION
To the soul of my father and to my mother.
To my sons Mohammed, Wael, Hatim,
Husam and Mohanned. To my wife and my
daughter.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am greatly indebted to my supervisor Dr. Abdulgadir Mohammed Ali for his
guidance, encouragement and his valuable help during this study, without his support this
research might never have been completed.
I am particularly thankful to Dr. Ahmed Gasm Asseed, my Co-supervisor for his
guidance during this study and invaluable support. Dr. Ahmed Khider Ahmed Othman
deserves particular acknowledgment for his generous support, his instrumental role in the
process of the submission of the proposal, and his patience that has been an encouraging
force that kept me moving forward. A special thanks goes to Dr. Srinivasa Rao one of my
colleagues, who spent time proofreading this study and offered me useful constructive
suggestions. I must thank my brother Dr. Mohammed Abdalla Nour for his continuous
encouragement and support all through this thesis work.
I would like to thank Dr. Abulrahman Al Fahadi for his immediate acceptance to
my request to execute the questionnaire and conduct classroom observations at the PYEP
of Tabuk University. Particular regards should go to Dr. Yasser Bilal for his continuous
assistance and quick responses to my queries. I am deeply indebted to my brother Badawi
Abdalla Nour for his help at times of printing, photocopying and carrying the documents to
the statistical experts. I must offer my great appreciation to my family who missed a lot of
their private time that I must reserve for them.
Finally, many thanks are due to all the colleagues for their active participation in
piloting and answering the questionnaire. And I am grateful to my students who
immediately agreed to respond to the questionnaire and supported in developing this work
to fruition.
iii
Learner Autonomy in KSA EFL Classes: A Case Study of Preparatory Year Students at Tabuk University Ali Abdalla Nour Mohammed Doctor of Philosophy in Applied Linguistics (July, 2016) Department of Foreign Languages Faculty of Education- Hasahisa University of Gezira
ABSTRACT
The present study aims at investigating autonomous learning activities of the
Preparatory Year English Program (PYEP) students at University of Tabuk (UT) in the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). It explores the students’ perceptions of their own roles
and of their teachers’, and how the students’ autonomous learning activities are perceived
by their teachers. The study used both quantitative and qualitative methods. The data was
collected through two questionnaires and videos of classroom observation. The sample of
the study from which subjects were drawn can be divided into two categories; students
from PYP (80 students) and teachers who were teaching the students (50 teachers). The
data obtained was analyzed by using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). The
findings showed that most of the students at UT in PYEP are not autonomous English
language learners to take responsibility of their learning English properly. The study also
found out that learners do not recognize their own and their teachers’ responsibility in
learning English. The results also showed that students do not perform the outside
classroom activities well. Concerning their proficiency level, the findings revealed that
students are not motivated language learners. The study is concluded with a set of
recommendations including: authorities should implement learners’ autonomy in PYEP at
UT education and teachers should be trained on how to foster learner autonomy. It is also
important to develop and train students on how to be intrinsically motivated English
language learners. However, the students should depend largely on themselves rather than
on their teachers. The researcher recommends that further research should be conducted to
address the weakness of students’ English at the level of pre-university education. The
researcher also recommends a further study on how culture influences the way students
socially perceive learning English.
iv
: العربیة السعودیةالتعلم الذاتي في فصول اللغة الإنجلیزیة بالمملكة ة تبوكدراسة حالة أنشطة التعلم الذاتي للغة الإنجلیزیة لطلاب السنة التحضیریة في جامع
علي عبد االله نور محمد ).2016، یولیوالدكتوراه في علم اللغة التطبیقي (
قسم اللغات الأجنبیة الحصاحیصا -كلیة التربیة
جامعة الجزیرة
مستخلص البحث
یھدف ھذا البحث إلى دراسة أنشطة التعلم الذاتي للغة الإنجلیزیة لطلاب السنة التحضیریة في جامعة تبوك,
إلى الاساتذة ظروكیف ین استقلالیة المتعلم,تحقیق استطلعت الدراسة مدى إدراك الطلاب لدورھم, ودور أساتذتھم في
لطلاب السنة استبیانوالكیفي, وتمّ جمع المعلومات من خلال استخدم الباحث منھج البحث الكمي. أنشطة الطلاب
للأساتذة الذین یدرّسونھم , إضافة إلى مراقبة بعض المحاضرات وتسجیلھا بـواسطة (كامیرا التحضیریة, وآخر
اني إنَّ مجتمع البحث یتكوّن من نوعین؛ الأول : طلاب السنة التحضیریة (وعددھم ثمانون طالباً), والث فیدیو).
.(SPSS) زمة الإحصائیّة للعلوم الإنسانیةتمّ تحلیل البیانات من خلال برنامج الح الأساتذة وعددھم خمسون أستاذاً.
أوضحت النتائج أنَّ معظم طلاب السنة التحضیریة في جامعة تبوك لیسوا مستقلین ذاتیاً في تحمل مسؤولیّاتھم بشكل
قد توصّلت الدراسة إلى أنّ الطلاب لا یدركون مسؤولیّاتھم, ومسؤولیّات أساتذتھم مناسب تجاه تعلّم اللغة الإنجلیزیّة. و
في تعلّم اللغة الإنجلیزیة, بالإضافة إلى أنَّھم لا یؤدّون الأنشطة اللا صفیة التي تطلّب منھم. وفیما یخص مستوى
ومن تحلیل تحفّزین لتعلّم اللغة الإنجلیزیّة.أوضحت النتائج أنَّ الدارسین لیسوا م - مھارات الطلاب في اللغة الإنجلیزیّة
النتائج, یوصي الباحث الإداریین بالسنة التحضیریة بتطبیق أنشطة التعلم الذاتي لدى طلاب السنة التحضیریة بجامعة
ة على كیفیھم, ومن المھم أیضا تدریب الطلاب تبوك، على أن یتم تدریب الأساتذة على كیفیة تعزیز التعلم الذاتي لدی
وقد أوصى الباحث بإجراء دراسة مماثلة الاعتماد على أنفسھم في عملیة التعلم أكثر من الاعتماد على أساتذتھم.
یر ثتأ عن بإجراء بحثفي المراحل قبل الجامعیة, كما یوصي الباحث للغة الإنجلیزیّةاضعف الطلاب في تتقصى
الإنجلیزیّة.الثقافة المحلیّة في فھم الطلاب لتعلّم اللغة
v
Tables of Contents
Page Content
i Dedication
ii Acknowledgement
iii Abstract
iv مستخلص البحث
v Table of Contents
vii Lists of Tables
ix List of Figures
Chapter One: Introduction
1 1.0 Background
3 1.1 Statement of the Problem
4 1.2 Objectives of the Study
5 1.3 Hypotheses of the Study
5 1.4 Questions of Study
5 1.5 Significance of the Study
5 1.6 Limitation of the study
5 1.7 Method of the Research
6 1.8 Samples of the Study
6 1.9 Tools of Data Collection
6 1.10 Definition of Terms and List of Abbreviations
Chapter Two: Literature Review 8 2.0 Introduction
8 2.1 Etymology of Autonomy
9 2.2 Definitions of Learner Autonomy
14 2.3 What does the teacher do?
15 2.4 Is learner autonomy important?
18 2.5 Learner-centeredness and Learner Autonomy
19 2.6 Fostering Autonomy
25 2.7 Autonomy and Responsibility
28 2.8 Autonomous Learning and Motivation
31 2.9 New Technologies and New Literacy Practices in Language Learning
vi
37 2.10 Self-Access and Autonomy
38 2.11 Reconstructing the Experiment
40 2.12 Learner Autonomy and Vocabulary Learning
44 2.13 Previous Studies
Chapter Three: Methodology of the Study 56 3.0 Introduction
56 3.1 Population of the Study
56 3.2 Samples of the Study
56 3.3 Tools of Data Collection
60 3.4 Reliability and Validity of the Students’ Questionnaire
61 3.5 Procedures for Data Collection
61 3.6 Piloting
Chapter Four: Data Analysis And Discussion
62 4.0 Introduction
62 4.1 Data Analysis and Discussion of Students’ Questionnaire
87 4.2 Testing the Hypotheses for Students’ Questionnaire
88 4.3 Data Analysis and Discussion of the Teachers Questionnaire
89 4.4 Testing Hypotheses for Teachers’ Questionnaire
93 4.5 Data Analysis and Discussion of the Classrooms Observation
96 4.6 Conclusion
Chapter Five: Conclusion Findings and Recommendations
97 5.0 Introduction
97 5.1 Findings
98 5.2 Recommendations
99 5.3 Suggestions for Further Studies
99 5.4 Conclusion
100 References
112 Appendices
vii
List of Tables
Tables Page Table (2.1) Defining learning autonomy
12
Table (3.1) The distribution of Socio-demographic Characteristics of the Study Participants57
Table (4.1.1) Trying to write down every new word or structure that I heard 62
Table (4.1.2) Trying to take part in the activities where and when I can speak English. 64
Table (4.1.3) Trying to find learning aids that match my level to better learn English. 65
Table (4.1.4) Planning English learning process 66
Table (4.1.5) Using free time in learning English 67
Table (4.1.6) Taking notes during lessons 68
Table (4.1.7) Reading extra materials in advance 69
Table (4.1.8) Using the internet and a computer to study and improve English language 70
Table (4.1.9) Responsibility for enabling students to understand English 71
Table (4.1.10) Teachers’ classroom management 72
Table (4.1.11) Transmitting knowledge to students 73
Table (4.1.12) Teachers explain everything to students 74
Table (4.1.13) Students’ feedback 75
Table (4.1.14) Highlighting the items that don’t understand in the classroom 76
Table (4.1.15) Doing speaking activities in pairs and groups 77
Table (4.1.16) Finding out answer to problems wherever possible 78
Table (4.1.17) Rewarding when making progress in learning 79
Table (4.1.18) Participation is valuable for chosen career 80
Table (4.1.19) sometimes doing homework to please teacher 81
Table (4.1.20) Participation in the classroom for the enjoyment of the activity 82
Table (4.1.21) Attending seminars, training courses and conferences for improving
English 83
Table (4.1.22) Using audio-visual materials to improve speaking abilities 84
Table (4.1.23) Going to library for English books 85
Table (4.1.24) Talking to people outside the classroom in English 86
viii
Table (4.2.1) Provides general descriptive information at the item level 88
Table (4.2.2) Hypothesis one components 89
Table (4.2.3) Hypothesis two components 90
Table (4.2.4) Hypothesis three components 91
Table (4.5) Hypothesis four components 92
ix
LIST OF Figures
Figures Page Fig (3.1) Respondents’ distribution due to variable of Experience
58
Fig (3.2) Respondents’ distribution due to variable of Graduation degree 59
Fig (3.3) Respondents’ distribution due to variable of Nationality 59
Fig (4.1.1) Trying to write down every new word or structure that I heard 63
Fig (4.1.2) Trying to take part in the activities where and when I can speak English. 64
Fig (4.1.3) Trying to find learning aids that match my level to better learn English. 65
Fig (4.1.4) Planning English learning process 66
Fig (4.1.5) Using free time in learning English 67
Fig (4.1.6) Taking notes during lessons 68
Fig (4.1.7) Reading extra materials in advance 69
Fig (4.1.8) Using the internet and a computer to study and improve English language 70
Fig (4.1.9) Responsibility for enabling students to understand English 71
Fig (4.1.10) Teachers’ classroom management 72
Fig (4.1.11) Transmitting knowledge to students 73
Fig (4.1.12) Teachers explain everything to students 74
Fig (4.1.13) Students’ feedback 75
Fig (4.1.14) Highlighting the items that don’t understand in the classroom 76
Fig (4.1.15) Doing speaking activities in pairs and groups 77
Fig (4.1.16) Finding out answer to problems wherever possible 78
Fig (4.1.17) Rewarding when making progress in learning 79
Fig (4.1.18) Participation is valuable for chosen career 80
Fig (4.1.19) sometimes doing homework to please teacher 81
Fig (4.1.20) Participation in the classroom for the enjoyment of the activity 82
Fig (4.1.21) Attending seminars, training courses and conferences for improving
English 83
Table (4.1.22) Using audio-visual materials to improve speaking abilities 84
Table (4.1.23) Going to library for English books 85
x
Fig (4.1.24) Talking to people outside the classroom in English 86
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.0 Background
Over the last forty years and as a consequence of the transformational views in the
field of English Language Teaching, a great emphasis has been put on the role of learners
in language learning. That is, language teachers started to put students at the center of
classroom activities, respecting their roles, needs, strategies and styles in contributing to
learning. This resulted in the emergence of the notion of learner-centered teaching that
views language learning as a collaborative process between teachers and learners rather
than a set of rules teachers transfer to learners in what is called teacher-centered teaching.
According to Tudor (1993) learner-centeredness is not a method, nor may it be decreased
to a set of rules. However, it is an approach, which views students to have more active and
participatory roles in the teaching-learning process than in traditional methods.
Additionally, this method requires different classroom activities, the structures of which
are decided by students themselves. This leads to more learner involvement and
motivation. There is also a parallel change in the teacher’s role in the classroom. In this
trend, the teacher is less likely to dominate classroom events as in traditional classrooms
methodology where the most prevailing teaching-learning mode was teacher-centered
teaching and the teacher in this situation is the man of the show who is in tight control of
all learners' behaviors. Learners' roles, however, are rather ignored and teachers are
considered the only source of knowledge.
Autonomous learning can be taken as the ability to think, understand and learn
habitually by oneself. Many people think that autonomous learning is a desirable
development of the students in higher education. Autonomous learning is considered to be
a habit that is to be acquired. However, the acquisition of such a habit needs some training
in case of a majority of learners in spite of the fact that it’s an automatic process in some
learners. Many studies report that autonomy in learning at the HE (Higher Education)
level is crucial in developing important attributes like organized thinking, acting upon the
impulses of curiosity and working over the existent problems in order to create better
substitutes.
2
There were recent reports of research studies on the importance of promoting
learner autonomy by helping the learners identify their goals and supporting them
throughout the process of achieving the goals by creating the social contexts and bringing
about an awareness of those contexts in all the learners. However, in spite of the fact that
the teachers and the learners have responsibilities from their side in achieving the goals of
learner autonomy, whether the teachers and the learners in the classroom context are really
dispensing their responsibilities is a topic of research for many scholars. According to
Benson (2001) and Little (2007) learner autonomy is the outcome of the teachers practices
that can be manifested in their interaction with their learners. Although teachers’
consistent interaction with their learners is desirable in achieving learner autonomy, studies
are required on the kind of interaction that is more effective in achieving learner autonomy.
Urun,D emir & Ankar (2014) note that the learner autonomy is closely related to the
constructivism that encourages the learner to build their own knowledge and act in
accordance with their learning needs and interests. The later concept of communicative
language teaching is considered to be a substitute to the constructivism. In fact the
concepts of constructivism and communicative language teaching have been recognized as
the crucial factors in promoting learner autonomy in EFL context by the ministries of
education and policy makers in many countries. In contrast to the traditional grammar
translation method that lays a greater emphasis on the grammar rules, many scholars
reported that in language teaching focus must be laid much on using a language for
communication rather than on grammar rules. Wikipedia mentions that the
resourcefulness, initiative and persistence are the crucial factors for leaner autonomy in
high school level students. One can’t find a consistent increase of learner autonomy in all
the students from their lower grades to the upper grades; instead researches show a
dramatic progress in achieving learner autonomy after the high school levels. In fact
learner autonomy is an outcome of the research works on the importance of self-driven
learning by adults. Self-driven learning skill is an important skill that can enhance the other
skills quite so naturally. And it is quite a necessity in case of adult learners to keep
updating and upgrading their knowledge in their own way. The relation between self-
driven learning and learner autonomy are so well composed that both of them are
concerned with the way the learners should think, the way they need to learn and the way
that they can have control of their learning. However, autonomous learners can feel
complete responsibility and decision-making in contrast to the self-driven learners who
wouldn’t assume responsibility for their decision-making.
3
Bedoya (2014) notes that the most important contribution on learner autonomy has
been the one by Benson and Voller (1997) who held that learner autonomy can be viewed
from the technical, political and psychological perspectives upon understanding the
connections between the principles, the approaches to learning and the accounts of
autonomy. Furthermore, they think that learner autonomy is more of a psychological
conception since it is concerned with the behaviors and attitudes. From Nunan’s (1997)
point of view learner autonomy is not something that the students can have in quantifiable
measures; instead it is degree that we can observe in every individual. This study will
investigate autonomous learning at University of Tabuk (UT) Preparatory year learners. It
will be carried out at the preparatory year program (PYEP) at Tabuk University Tabuk,
Saudi Arabia. Like many learners in Saudi Arabia, they experienced the process of
learning through traditional educational methods, which reinforced didactic and teacher-
centered modes. English language learners at (PYEP), Tabuk University, believe that
English learning is difficult and complicated. At university level, learners should be
trained to become autonomous and make conscious effort to learn English inside and
outside classrooms simply because exposure to target language inside class room is limited
and not enough for students to acquire good language. To be autonomous learners is very
important to develop and enhance their English learning. These English language learners
prefer learning in which the teacher is in full control of the learning process and they are
left with very little or no choice, and control over the content and method of study. In such
context of the study, the researcher will attempt to find out whether the students of the
preparatory year are autonomous learners or not.
1.1 Statement of the Problem
The researcher, as an English language teacher, observes that some of the Saudi
students at the Preparatory Year Program at University of Tabuk encounter some
difficulties in perceiving their own and their teachers’ role in learning English. It appears
that they are not interacted in doing some activities such as participation in the classroom.
These are not willing to learn English and they lack self-confidence. As a result, they are
unable to do their classroom tasks and develop themselves in learning English properly and
efficiently. So, the researcher is going to investigate the real cause of the problem.
4
1.2 Objectives of the Study
The main objectives of the study are to investigate the autonomous activities of the
students in acquiring English language and explore their beliefs about the role of teachers
and their own role in learning and find out the perspectives of their teachers on learners’
autonomy. Teachers bring their own educational beliefs into the classroom and these
beliefs must be considered and evaluated. It is commonly accepted that the meaning of
learner autonomy may differ from culture to culture and from person to person according
to differences in beliefs. So, the study intends to:
a. define the concept of autonomous learning,
b. find out whether the students of PYEP at UT are autonomous learners or not,
c. measure the level of motivation in learning English for preparatory students at UT,
d. understand whether the preparatory students at UT understand their own and their
teachers’ responsibilities in learning English,
e. investigate the learner's performance in the activities outside and inside the
classroom in learning English, and
f. examine the differences in the learners’ motivation levels in learning English.
1.3 Questions of the Study
This study will be conducted by answering the following questions:
a. What is the level of motivation for learning English among the preparatory students
at UT?
b. How do the learners perceive their own and their teachers’ responsibilities in
learning English?
c. To what extent do the learners perform the outside classroom activities and
English language assignments?
d. Are there any differences in students’ motivation to learn English?
1.4 Hypotheses of the Study
This study will investigate autonomous learning at UT, PYEP. The researcher will
try to find out whether the students are autonomous learners or not, which deemed to be
related to the following hypotheses:
a. The students in PYEP at UT are unwilling to take the responsibility of learning
English properly.
5
b. The students in PYEP at UT do not observe their teachers' responsibilities in
learning English.
c. The students in PYEP at UT do not show any interest in dealing with their own
language learning through doing homework and assignments.
d. There are differences in the learners’ motivation levels in learning English with
regard to their proficiency level.
1.5 Significance of the Study
The findings of this study will be useful and helpful in gaining insight on how
autonomy is important for students to be self-reliant and also it gives an insight into
aspects of learning and teaching that might influence the way in which learners practice
learner autonomy. Also it helps the authorities at PYEP in gaining insight into the learning
contexts that can be selected/created and improved for promoting learners’ independence.
As Nunan (1998: 3) suggests, not everything can be taught in class. Also, findings will be
helpful for English language teachers in designing and developing suitable materials for
their students. Finally, the findings will be useful in identifying the student's needs in
learning English language.
1.6 Limitation of the Study
This study is devoted to investigate learner autonomy at PYEP, Tabuk University.
The population of the study will be Preparatory Year students at Tabuk University and
their teachers as well. The questionnaire will be distributed among the target sample of the
study and answer the questions which reveal whether they are autonomous learners or not.
1.7 Method of the Research
The researcher is going to use two questionnaires as an instrument to collect the
needed data in addition to classroom observation. The questionnaires are going to be
distributed and conducted for students as well as for teachers. All the participants of the
study are preparatory year students studying English at Tabuk University and the teachers
who teach English at the present. The researcher will select the students of the study
randomly and the teachers purposively. After distributing the questionnaire to the students
and the teachers, the researcher will collect the data and analyze it.
6
1.8 Samples of the Study
The researcher has distributed the first questionnaire to 80 students who study English at
PYP of the UT and administered the second questionnaire to 50 teachers who teach the
students at the PYP. He also conducted classroom observations to collect data from real
classroom situation.
1.9 Tools of Data Collection
a. Questionnaire for students
b. Questionnaire for Teachers
c. Classroom Observation
1.10 Definition of Terms and List of Abbreviations
1.10.1 Definition of Terms
Learners’ Responsibility: Responsible learners are the ones who accept the idea that their
own efforts are crucial to progress in learning, and behave
accordingly. Responsible learners consciously monitor their own
progress and make an effort to use available opportunities to their
benefit including classroom activities and assignments.
Learners’ autonomy: Learner autonomy is generally defined as ‘the ability to take charge
of one's own learning’ (Holec, 1981, cited in Field 2007: 30).
Teachers’ beliefs: Teachers’ beliefs can be defined as ‘teachers’ pedagogic beliefs or
those beliefs of relevance to an individual’s teaching’ (Borg 2001:
187). Phipps and Borg (2009: 381) describe it as ‘propositions
about all aspects of their work which teachers hold to be true or
false’.
Teachers’ Roles: Teachers’ Roles in the present study are distinguished as teaching roles
and counseling roles on the basis of teacher discourse. Teaching
roles signify the roles of the teacher as a knower of the language to
be learnt whereas counseling roles are taken by the teacher as an
expert who guides the learner in language learning. The teacher,
used as a neutral term in this study, can assume roles in both
teaching and counseling (Regent, 1993).
7
1.10.2 List of Abbreviations
KSA: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
UT: University of Tabuk
HE: Higher Education
PYEP: Preparatory Year English Program
CALL: Computer Assisted Language Learning
SDT: Self-Determination Theory
SLA: Second Language Acquisition
LA: Learner Autonomy
SILL: Strategy Inventory for Language Learning
ELSACs: English Language Self-Access Centres
ELPE: English Language Preparatory Education
ELC: English Language Centre
GPAs: General Points Averages
DOS: Director of Studies
ESL: English As a Second Language
EAP: English for Academic Purpose
SALL: Self-Access Language Learning
CMC: Computer-Mediated Communication
FTF: Face-to-Face
ICT: Information and Communication Technologies
J-pop: Japanese pop; means Japanese music, like rock music and
pop music
NHPI: New Headway Plus Pre-intermediate
SPSS: Statistical Package for Social Science
8
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Introduction
Learner autonomy becomes a necessity for English language learners at university
levels. Nowadays it plays a prominent role in developing the learners' language
acquisition and achievement. Learners lack knowledge of how to achieve by themselves
and they need their teachers to guide and assist them. Therefore enhancing learner
autonomy is very important to foster learning process. Holec (1981: 3) began by defining
learner autonomy as the “ability to take charge of one’s own learning”, mentioning that
this ability “is not inborn but must be acquired either by ‘natural’ means or (as most
happens) by formal learning, i.e. in a systematic, deliberate way” and noting that “to take
charge of one’s learning is to have […] the responsibility for all the decisions concerning
all aspects of this learning […]”. Holec report is to promote the learner’s freedom “by
developing those abilities which will enable him to act more responsibly in running the
affairs of the society in which he lives” (ibid.:1). This shows that when learner autonomy
is adult education. Learner autonomy in other words means to supply learners with
equipment so as to play an effective role and participate in a democratic way.
2.1 Etymology of Autonomy
As per the New World Encyclopedia, Autonomy “(Greek: Auto-Nomos—nomos
meaning "law:" One who gives oneself his own law) means freedom from external
authority. In moral and political philosophy, autonomy is often used as the basis for
determining moral responsibility for one's actions.” Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), a well-
known philosopher, defined autonomy in the earlier times as the “capacity of a person to
freely assess and endorse or reject moral principles in accordance with his own will”.
Later on many philosophers have come up with their own definitions of ‘autonomy’ (See
New World Encyclopedia). According to the Oxford Dictionary the genesis of the term
‘autonomy’ can be traced back in “the early 17th century: from Greek autonomia, from
autonomos 'having its own laws', from autos 'self' + nomos 'law'”.
The origins of autonomy in language learning, is initiated by the Council of
Europe.
“The concept of autonomy first entered the field of language teaching through the Council of Europe’s Modern Languages Project, established in 1971. One of the outcomes of this
9
project was the establishment of the Centre de Recherchesetd’ Applications en Langues (CRAPEL) at the University of Nancy, France, which rapidly became a focal point for research and practice in the field. Yves Châlon, the founder of CRAPEL, is considered by many to be the father of autonomy in language learning. Châlon died at an early age in 1972 and the leadership of CRAPEL was passed to Henri Holec, who remains a prominent figure within the field of autonomy today. A seminar on self-directed learning and autonomy at the University of Cambridge in December 1976, which included contributions from Philip Riley and Caroline Stanchina of CRAPEL, was also an important foundational event in the field (Harding-Esch, 1977). Holec’s (1981) project report to the Council of Europe is a key early document on autonomy in language learning. The journal Mélanges Pédagogiques, published at CRAPEL, has also played an important role in the dissemination of research on autonomy from 1970 to the present day. Important early papers on autonomy from Mélanges Pédagogiques were distributed internationally in Riley’s (1985) collection on Discourse and learning”.
"Learner autonomy" as a term, was coined in 1981 by Henri Holec and is
considered the father of “learner autonomy”. After that educators fallowed it by many
definitions.
From all the definitions, philosophers hover around three autonomies; Moral
autonomy, personal autonomy, and political autonomy. ‘Moral autonomy’, which was
coined by Kant, was seen as the capacity to deliberate and to give oneself the moral law.
‘Personal autonomy’ is the capacity to take one’s own charge. ‘Political autonomy’ is the
property of having one’s decisions to be respected and regarded.
2.2 Definitions of Learner Autonomy
Holec’s (1981: 3), definition of learner autonomy was “the ability to take charge of
one’s learning … to have, and to hold, the responsibility for all the decisions concerning all
the aspects of his learning”. For the specific decisions he listed the following:
a- determining the objectives
b- defining the contents and progression
c- selecting methods and techniques to be used
d- monitoring the procedure of acquisition
e- evaluating what has been acquired
10
Little, (1991: 4) defines learner autonomy (LA) as a capacity-for detachment,
critical reflection, decision-making, and independent action. He explains further that the
learner develops psychological relation to the process and learning content. His ability to
be autonomy appears in his learning and in transferring his learning to wider contexts.
When the learner is free from external constraints, i.e. As a “capacity”. Dickinson, (1987:
27), takes the same direction, and views autonomy as “a mode of learning; one in which
the individual is responsible for all the decisions connected with his/her learning, and
undertakes the implementation of these decisions”. He thinks that it is complete
responsibility for one’s learning done without the interference of a teacher or pedagogical
constraints. In fact learners are differing in taking responsibility in autonomous learning.
In other words, the way in which they involve in their activities. The above definition of
Dickinson, shows high degree of autonomy, that the learner can chooses what, how and
when he learns without restricted contents. Crabbe, D. (1993: 443) defines LA that “the
individual has the right to be free to exercise his or her own choices as in other areas and
not becomes victim (even an unwitting one) of choices made by social institutions”. The
two definitions look at autonomy as learner is completely free for all his decisions about
his learning.
From all these definitions we can say that autonomy learner is a person who has
capacity to make his decisions and choices of materials and takes his actions
independently. This capacity entails two factors, ability and willingness. A learner may
have the ability to make his or her decisions about learning, but s/he may not have the
willingness to behave autonomously. On the other hand a learner may be willing to be
autonomous but he may have not ability to do so.
Cotterall, (1995: 195), defines LA as “the extent to which learners demonstrate the
ability to use a set of tactics for taking control of their learning”. She describes learners’
behavior as an act of independence. Kenny, (1993: 436), makes a wider definition. He
looks at it as the “opportunity to become a person”, because the learner has to deal with all
his learning process freely. Hedge, (2009: 410) sees autonomy “the ability of the learner to
take responsibility for his or her own learning and to plan, organize, and monitor the
learning process independently of the teacher”. She connected this concept to the formal
classroom instructions.
By considering all definitions above, one can say that, learners are capable for
doing all their learning process independently. Therefore, learner autonomy refers to the
11
capacity of someone who works without interference of anyone. It is the ability to act and
take decisions without being controlled.
Benson, (2006: 40(1), 21-40), writes variants on this definition appear in the literature,
with ‘ability’ sometimes replaced with ‘capacity’ (for example, in little, 1995) and ‘take
responsibility for’ or ‘take control of’ substituting for ‘take charge of’. Some definitions
(e.g. Dam, 1995) also include the notion of ‘willingness’ to stress the point that
irrespective of their capacity, learners will not develop autonomy unless they are willing to
take responsibility for their learning.
The broad understanding of what learner autonomy is, it seems to be well-
established in the literature (also see Benson 1996 for an analysis of the complexities
involved in defining what learner autonomy means); in addition, following Little (1991)
some accounts of learner autonomy start by defining what it is not; Each, (1998: 37), states
that: It is not self-instruction/learning without a teacher … it does not mean that
intervention or initiative on the part of a teacher is banned; … it is not something teachers
do to learners; i.e. a new methodology; … it is not a single easily identifiable behavior; …
it is not a steady state achieved by learners once and for all.
According to Benson and Voller, (1997: 2), the term autonomy has become to be
used in at least five ways:
a- For a situation in which learners study entirely on their own;
b- For a set of skills which can be learned and applied in self-directed learning;
c- For an inborn capacity which is suppressed by institutional education;
d- For the exercise of learners’ responsibility for their own learning;
e- And for the right of learners to determine the direction of their own learning.
In their further definition (ibid), autonomy has been described in terms of control
over learning management, cognitive process and the control of learning. He maintains
that greater control “cannot be achieved by each individual acting alone according to his or
her own preferences.” (ibid, 2) This definition develops the base of Holec’s since it adds
the perspective of necessity of help from others. Here, these kinds of autonomous learning
might range from activities in the classroom which provide students chances to choose
what they want to learn, or let them to participate in out-of-class project work through self-
access centre or by peer-working (c.f. Sinclair, B. 1999: 309-329).
According to Benson’s definitions, Sinclair summarized their opinions into a term
of self-directness. According to her survey review (1999: 310), “one view is that
autonomy in language learning is principally concerned with providing learners with
12
situations and opportunities for exercising a degree of independence”. In other words,
autonomy means self-directed.
Sinclair, (2000) suggests 13 aspects of learner autonomy which ‘appear to have
been recognized and broadly accepted by the language teaching profession’.
Table (2.1) Defining learning autonomy (Sinclair, 2000)
1. Autonomy is a construct of capacity
2. Autonomy involves a willingness on the part of the learner to take responsibility for
their own learning
3. The capacity and willingness of learners to take such responsibility is not
necessarily innate
4. Complete autonomy is an idealistic goal
5. There are degrees of autonomy
6. The degrees of autonomy are unstable and variable
7. Autonomy is not simply a matter of placing learners in situations where they have
to be independent
8. Developing autonomy requires conscious awareness of the learning process – i.e.
conscious reflection and decision-making
9. Promoting autonomy is not simply a matter of teaching strategies
10. Autonomy can take place both inside and outside the classroom
11. Autonomy has a social as well as an individual dimension
12. The promotion of autonomy has a political as well as psychological dimension
13. Autonomy is interpreted differently by different cultures
All the above claims, academics and researchers accept them in the field of learner
autonomy. Some teachers may have opposite opinions about the above claims on learner
autonomy. Benson, (2009: 13-26), for example, notes that misconceptions identified by
Little, (1991) persists, especially that autonomy is synonymous with self-instruction and
that any intervention on the part of the teacher is detrimental to autonomy.
2.2.1 Implication of this Definition of Learner Autonomy
When we speak about the ability to take charge of our own learning, learner should
accept responsibility for the learning process. The success in learning depends more on the
13
learner himself rather than anyone. Learner should set goals “in a systematic, deliberate
way" (Holec, 1981: 3), learner can plan, monitor and evaluate his learning. Autonomous
learners are motivated learners. What can be said, Holec’s definition entails that
autonomous learners can freely gain their knowledge and skills outside classroom context.
2.2.2 The Misconception of Learner Autonomy
Learner autonomy is a complex notion, not only semantically but from several
reasons. It includes language, philosophy, politics..etc. Benson, &Voller, (1997) make
clear distinction between ‘self-directed learning’ and ‘learner autonomy’ according to him,
‘self-directed’ is the wide capacity of a learner to do his learning; whereas ‘autonomous
learning’ is a personal characteristic. It is related to a capacity. But the term learner
autonomy is viewed as synonymous with individualization. According to him, there are a
number of terms related to autonomy. They can be distinguished from it in many ways.
Now many people agree that autonomy and autonomous learning are not synonyms of self-
instruction, self-access; self-study, self-education. Out-of-class learning or distance
learning (Benson, 2001). These terms describe many ways and degrees of learning by
oneself, but autonomy refers to ability or attitudes. So the point is, learning by oneself is
not the same thing as having the capacity to learn-by oneself. At this point the complexity
exists at the semantic level.
As a conclusion, autonomy is a socio-cognitive system, subject to internal and
external restrictions which clearly shows itself in different degrees of independence and
control of one’s own learning process. It involves abilities, capacities, willingness,
attitudes, decision-making, choices, planning, action and assessment either as a language
learner or as a communication inside or outside the classroom.
As a complex system, Joshi, (2011: 15) ‘It is dynamic, chaotic, unpredictable, non-
linear, adaptive, open, self-organizing, and sensitive to initial conditions and feedback’.
There are several misconceptions about the definitions of autonomy language learning
according to this complexity.
For some writers, there are many synonymous terms for it; the terms: learner
autonomy, autonomous learning, learner responsibility, lifelong learning, self-directed
learning, and learning to learn are synonymous.
There are typical many misunderstanding on it. Many teachers believe that learner
autonomy is a synonym of self-discipline or independence. From some aspects, it is true
but not completely true. Self-discipline means learners should be required to govern
14
themselves according to some strict rules, while independence seems to give people the
view that teachers are not needed. Little, (1991) points out four misconceptions of learner
autonomy.
a- it is synonymous with self-instruction; that it is essentially a matter of deciding to
learn without a teacher;
b- it is not a teaching method;
c- it is not a single easily described behavior;
d- and it is not a steady state achieved by certain teachers.
Yang, (2005: 73), States, “Learner autonomy cannot be realized without an
instructor, but at the same time, it is not a new teaching method which can be applied by
teacher”. He further adds, “It is a sequence of actions, without stopping changing, to
positive direction or negative direction, which cannot be described by a single word”.
To have a research on learner autonomy, all the above misconceptions should be
taken into account.
2.2.3 What is Autonomy in Formal Language Learning?
In formal language learning, learner autonomy should involve in planning,
monitoring, implementing and evaluating learning. To learn a language depends on
language use: we learn to read by reading and to speak by speaking..etc. In formal
language learning, the role of learner autonomy is constrained by what the learner can do
in the target language. So in the scope of our autonomy as language learners is partly a
function of the scope of our autonomy as target language users.
The development of autonomy in language learning is governed by three basic
pedagogical principles:
a. Learner involvement – engaging learners to share responsibility for the learning process
(the affective and the metacognitive dimensions);
b. Learner reflection – helping learners to think critically when they plan, monitor and
evaluate their learning (the metacognitive dimensions);
c. Appreciate target language use –using the target language as the principle medium of
language learning (the communicative and the metacognitive dimensions).
2.3. What Does the Teacher Do?
According to these three principles the teacher should:
15
a. use the target language as the preferred medium of classroom communication and
require the same of her/his learners;
b. involve her learners in a non-stop quest for good learning activities, which are
shared, discussed, analysed and evaluated with the whole class – in the target
language, to begin within very simple terms;
c. help her learners to set their own learning targets and choose their own learning
activities, subjecting them to discussion, analysis and evaluation – again, in the
target language;
d. require her learners to identify individual goals but pursue them through
collaborative work in small groups;
e. require her learners to keep a written record of their learning – plans of lessons and
projects, lists of useful vocabulary, whatever texts they themselves produce;
f. engage her learners in regular evaluation of their progress as individual learners and
as a class – in the target language.
2.4 Is Learner Autonomy Important?
According to empirical research in social psychology, autonomy-“feeling free and
volitional in one’s actions” (Deci, 1995: 2). To feel free in doing actions is one of human
needs. It supports intrinsic motivation and interests in the world around us. It shows how
learner autonomy solves the problem of learner motivation. Autonomous learners bring on
their intrinsic motivation when they accept responsibility to learn by themselves and try to
develop the skills of self-management in learning and succeed in how to strength their
intrinsic motivation. Why is this? Because autonomous learners are intrinsically motivated.
Their learning is very efficient and effective. Thus the knowledge and skills gained in the
classroom can be applied to situations outside classrooms.
2.4.1 Autonomy beyond the Classroom
Learner autonomy is not something that happens in classroom situation.
Autonomous learners can practice it in many ways. They can use many ways to enhance
their learning. (Benson, 2007: 26) explains the mode of autonomy beyond the classroom
as follows:
Self-access: For fostering autonomy, many self-access centres have been established
around the world. The centres provide materials for learners to use when they learn on
their own. Self-access is an approach to learn not an approach to teaching.
16
Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL): The internet technology and computer
become very important in learning nowadays. (CALL) as the product of these instruments
has facilitated autonomous learning. Learners can learn independently using computers.
Distance learning: Distance learning is an independent learning without any formal
constraints. It reflects the characteristics of autonomous learning.
Tandem learning: Tandem learning is two people are learning each other’s’ language word
to help one another, also associated with autonomy.
Study abroad: It is a program that students spend time in target language communities.
Many of programs involve classroom instructions but the main purpose is students can
learn independently through interaction with native speakers.
Out-of-class learning: Many studies appreciate that learners tend to engage in out-of-class
learning activities more frequently than depending on their teachers’ knowledge.
Self-instruction: It refers to the use of printed or broadcast self-study materials independent
of teachers and thus becoming itself a factor of autonomy beyond classroom.
These are not the only ways to be autonomous learner. There can be many ways of
practice such as self-study, library study, group learning and so on.
2.4.2 Autonomy in the Classroom
Autonomous learner not only is found beyond classroom, but also in classroom. In
the broad definitions of autonomy, it includes all the decisions, activities, plans, actions
that the learner chooses to promote it. Autonomy inside a class, might involve different
levels of control like, management for learning, cognitive processes and learning content.
It can be reflected in group work, co-operative learning, innovative learning or other
classroom actions and activities. So learner can do many things inside classroom to be
autonomous. Classroom is a place where learner autonomy can practice at least for
learning to learn. Autonomous learning is promoted by different justifications, which
include sociological, pedagogical, psychological, and political contexts. From Bruner's
(1966: 2) point of view that instruction as “a provisional state that has as its objective to
make the learner or problem solver self-sufficient” one can assume, as it was also viewed
by Dickenson (1992: 2), that learners need to develop self sufficiency and become
independent from teacher. In this context teacher's role is to promote autonomous learning
and to keep focusing on the method of teaching rather than on the content of learning.
That means teachers' classroom priorities take a shift from the content of learning to the
process of promoting and facilitating autonomous learning. Allwright (1988a: 35) holds
17
that the basis for such process can already be found in regular classrooms and what
teachers can do is that they observe their students' learning attitudes and support the ones
that are close to their autonomy in learning. Students generally come with their own
personal learning programs through which they experience their own learning style. The
mistakes and errors they make and the questions they come up with can have the potential
to support the process of their autonomous learning. Language classrooms especially are
considered as the greatest places to improve learner autonomy (Nunan, 1997: 201). In
view of Dickinson (1987: 2) the process of carrying students towards autonomous learning
is very slow.
Nunan, (1996: 15) states that
I have found that it is usually well into a course before learners are in a position to make informed choices about what they want to learn and how they want to learn, and it is not uncommon that learners are in such a position only at the end of the course.
According to Little (1995: 176) and Dickinson (1987) learners neither tend to
accept responsibility nor find it easy to reflect on the process of learning in the formal
classroom contexts. It is the duty of the teachers to provide them with the opportunities
and appropriate tools to use and practice learner autonomy. Dickinson (1987) reports that
liberating the classroom to facilitate and promote learner autonomy is the primary
requirement in the process. And this can be done only by providing special opportunities
to assume the responsibility of learning. However, Nunan (1992a) recommends that one
can have the advantage of incorporating two sets of complementary goals, (i. language
content goals; ii. learning process goals), apart from the proposition of five levels that can
encourage learner autonomy. Oxford (1990) writes about the necessity to build teachers'
understanding about the link between theory and practice through a structured step by step
training sessions, which would create opportunities to the participating teachers to develop
learner centered activities. Dickinson (1992) brings forth six ways that teachers can work
towards improving their learners' learning autonomy.
a. legitimizing independence in learning by showing that we, as teachers; approve, and by
encouraging the students to be more independent;
b. convincing learners that they are capable of greater independence in learning - give them
successful experiences of independent learning;
c. giving learners opportunities to exercise their independence;
18
d. helping learners to develop learning techniques (learning strategies), so that they can
exercise their independence;
e. helping learners to become more aware of language as a system so that they can
understand many of the learning techniques available and learn sufficient grammar to
understand simple reference books;
f. sharing with learners something of what we know about language learning so that they
have a greater awareness of what to expect from the language learning task and how they
should react to problems that erect barriers to learning. (From Dickinson 1992: 2)
Ellis & Sinclair (1989) demonstrate the possibility of organizing courses and
training sessions for learners upon the assumption that when students are better aware of
that, it is possible to organize learner-training course systematically based on the
assumption that this will produce the students that can have a greater insight into the
learning process and the different techniques for learning language. On the contrary Esch
(1996: 17) feels that the learning gains can be short term in case the courses of this kind
bring back teacher control in an indirect way and also in view of Chamot, et.al. (1999) the
learners can't reap the benefits of their autonomous status completely. Esch also points out
that autonomous language learning skills are something that don't exist in reality and so
cannot be trained because training itself embodies of the autonomous nature of learners
(Esch, 1996: 165). Almost a similar view is held by Littlewood (1996: 434) that defines
education as a tool that helps people to act, think and learn independently in all walks of
their lives. He also proposes a framework for developing autonomy in foreign language
learning since there is a necessity to develop autonomy as they need to communicate, learn
and be a human being.
2.5 Learner-centeredness and Learner Autonomy
Disadvantages in the traditional teaching practices for language learning and the
increasing awareness of the importance and the ease in autonomous learning and the
increase in the number of the learners that have the tendency to involve more in the self-
directed learning practices lead to the emergence of learner centered teaching practice.
The new learner centered teaching practice enabled the shift of focus from teacher and
teaching to learner and learning that redefined the roles of teacher and learner (Huba, and
Freed, 2000). The shift of focus to learner also shifted the power of decision making from
teacher to learner. One considerable point is the assumption that learning takes place when
19
a learner takes an active participation in the learning process along with due attention to
their requirements, their learning styles and their classroom dispositions (Tudor, (1996).
Another point to be considered is the confusion is in the certainty of the roles and practices
of the teachers and learners. This confusion arises with the shifting control of class from
teachers to learners.
2.6 Fostering Autonomy
2.6.1 How to Foster Learner Autonomy
Developing learner autonomy is a slow process and involves several steps that
undergo a gradual process. It is a process that involves both teacher, and it must move at a
certain compliant pace that both can manage (Camilleri 1997). We can't find any one
approach that fits all in achieving learner autonomy (Smith 2003a: 256). The opinions as
well as the believes of learners about the process of learning vary with those of teachers in
tune with the expectation of differences in the learners' readiness for learner autonomy and
their interpretation of leaner autonomy.
According to Reinders (2010: 40-55) one can scarcely find any practical models
that can guide teachers to effectively carry out autonomy in class rooms. In order to fill the
gap between the existent theories of learner autonomy and the lacking practical models to
develop learner autonomy Cotterall (2000) and Reinders (2010) proposed some learner
autonomy frameworks. Teachers and educational institutions can consider the frameworks
described below to make it easier for them to integrate the principles of learner autonomy
in the classroom.
Cotterall (2000: 111-112) offers five principles for language course design which
aim to foster learner autonomy and support the transfer of responsibility for decision
making from teacher to learner:
a. The course reflects learners’ goals in its language, tasks, and strategies.
b. Course tasks are explicitly linked to a simplified model of the language learning process.
c. Course tasks either replicate real-world communicative tasks or provide rehearsal for
such tasks.
d. The course incorporates discussion and practice with strategies known to facilitate task
performance.
e. The course promotes reflection on learning.
The fifth one, reflection, is the most essential principle amongst all as it works as a
binding component that can hold all the other together.
20
In view of Cotterall [ibid], the potential of the autonomy of a learner increases with
the increase of their learning. Learners can become more self reliant and independent with
the practice of reflection. As an outcome of her study of two short courses her efforts in
integrating the five principles resulted in the following conclusion.
a. learners were able to manage their learning in ways which contributed to task
performance
b. motivation was enhance
c. learners reported using course strategies outside the classroom
d. learners improved their ability to evaluate their performance
e. learners reported increased confidence in adopting strategies to solve new language
problems (from Cotterall, 2000: 115).
Having observed the different ways that teachers can encourage autonomy in the classroom
Reinders (2010: 46-49) brings forth the following stages in the improvement of learner
autonomy:
a. Identifying needs: carry out needs analysis with students and link these needs with
classroom activities.
b. Setting goals: discuss and help learners identify and set realistic learning goals.
c. Planning learning: include learners in decisions on what to learn and pacing of lesson.
d. Selecting resources: provide the opportunity for learners to bring in authentic resources
to share and learn with the rest of the class.
e. Selecting learning strategies: incorporate strategy instruction with classroom activities
and allow time for learners to discuss and reflect on their strategy use.
f. Practice: offer choice, for example, in the types of homework tasks to complete so that
they are using language in ways that are relevant to them.
g. Monitoring progress: students can record, and reflect on their learning experiences in a
learning diary which can be shared with other members of the class or used as private
dialogue between teacher and student.
h. Assessment and revision: provide alternate forms of assessment and reflection
activities such as language checklists (e.g. the European Language Portfolio) and self
and peer assessment worksheets/activities.
It's not mandatory to follow the stages in an order; instead the observance of the stages is
desirable as it is required in a cyclical process under the guidance and supervision of
teacher. The teachers must keep considering the framework always and keep assessing the
best way that the frame work can be used in classroom. Although it's a bit challenging
21
task, the task becomes easier when a teacher deals with it in discussion with other teachers
and in the context of a support structure that is maintained in the educational setting.
The components reflection and the strategic use of dialogue and collaboration are essential
for the development of learner autonomy and since these components are nurtured by the
two frameworks mentioned above they are considered the most important. In the words of
Reinders (2010: 50) reflection ‘is the glue that holds autonomous learning together’.
Little (2004) states that reflection is a process that keeps continuing once a teacher starts
supports and directs. Assessment of the past and plan for the future is not possible without
reflection.
Hedge (2000) holds that the capacity to use a range of learning strategies is
essential in case learners are to assume more accountability for their learning and become
more self-directed and autonomous learners. Wenden (1998: 18, cited in Thanasoulas
2000) defines learning strategies as ‘mental steps or operations that learners use to learn a
new language and to regulate their efforts to do so’. Learning strategies can be categorized
under four main heads: (1) cognitive strategies (e.g. working out meanings of new
vocabulary items), (2) metacognitive strategies (e.g. self-monitoring), (3) communication
strategies (e.g. maintaining a conversation without understanding every word they hear)
and (4) socio-affective strategies (e.g. being able to initiate conversations in English).
Oxford’s Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) (Oxford 1990, cited in
Reinders 2010) is a useful resource. Learners can work through questionnaire (found
online at http://ell.phil.tuchemnitz.de/cing/frontend/questionnaires/oxford_quest.pp) at
various points in the course evaluating to what extent their strategy use is developing.
Further to reflection and strategy use, dialogue is another component considered
important in attempts to encourage more independence in learning. Dialogue between
teacher and learner helps learners to see the link between the learning tasks they do and the
reasons for doing such tasks, thus, helping them to better understand the process of
learning. Dialogue is an important area of learning that should arise naturally out of
classroom tasks (Cotterall 1995). Through learner/teacher dialogue, learners are able to
reflect on what they know and don’t know, gradually gaining the confidence needed to
take necessary actions for their learning.
Learner autonomy cannot be interpreted as someone learning something without
having any interaction with anyone. It doesn't mean that someone can learn something in
isolation and instead learner autonomy is something that should be supported by social
interaction (Little, 2009). A classroom thus can be considered a place the learners can
22
have interactions amongst themselves through their collaboration to learn and through the
acts of exchanging knowledge. ‘It is our condition that we learn from one another’ (Little
and Dam 1998), as collaboration in learning is the most essential resource that can support
independent learning in spite of its group activity nature.
What Finch (2002: 8) called informed learning is in fact a shift towards promoting
learner autonomy. A learner should be aware of learning and as a learner's awareness
increases his learner independence as well as his autonomy keeps increasing. Learner
autonomy is not available to teach as a readymade product. It is instead something that
teachers need to inculcate careful structuring. Teacher have to involve in interaction
encourage interactions in light of the models described above by constantly increasing the
learners' awareness of the models subsequently finding ways to put the inherent
components in practice that is suitable to the existent teaching environment (Reinders
2010).
2.6.2The Teacher’s Role
The nature of the teacher’s role in autonomous learning is like the learners’. This
role varies according to contexts and personalities involved. The teacher in this kind of
learning is a facilitator, an organizer, and as a resource that can encourage learners,
provides feedback, monitors and creates atmosphere and pace for learning. In other words,
his role is as a guide and initiator rather than an authority. (Camilleri, 1999: 36) states that,
the most important role includes “awareness” of self. Moreover, autonomous learning
teacher has the following characteristics: he is aware of his own personal influence on
learning process, know pedagogy, skilled in management. Camilleri [ibid] states three
roles of a teacher: i) the teacher as a manager – is able to map out the most likely paths
available to the students and also the consequences of the following any particular path.
S/he is the manager of activities not the source of facts. ii) The teacher as a resource
person – as a resource person, the teacher optimizes learning conditions by helping
learners be aware of a whole range of alternatives and strategies and by for example
helping, helping them develop an awareness of learning styles. (Camilleri, 1999: 37).
iii) The teacher as a counselor – The teacher as a counselor is able to accompany
individual learning process and to respond meaningfully to learning problems often in
advance of a student perceiving a need (Camilleri, [ibid]. He has to diagnose symptoms of
learning distress.
23
Apart from the cultural influence, motivation, learner training and environmental
factors, many researchers believe that the teacher plays another important role in
facilitating autonomous learning (Breen & Man, 1997; Lee, I. 1998; Thanvenius, 1999;
Scharle&Szabὸ, 2000).
Developing learner autonomy involves a lot more than for the teacher’s role than
most teachers realize. Developing students’ responsible learning attitudes for language
learning entails some deviation from the traditional teacher role. As students begin to
control learning, the teacher needs to take on the role of facilitator (Riley, 1997;
Scharle&Szabὸ, 2000; Wenden, 2002).
Brean, M. and Mann, S. (1997: 145) listed that some important factors required to
be a teacher of autonomous learners: 1) the attributes which the teacher can bring to their
relationship with their students; 2) self-awareness as a learner; 3) belief in each learner’s
capacity to learn and trust in each learner’s capacity to assert their own autonomy; and 4)
the desire to foster learner autonomy. Thanvenius, (1999: 159) says that “although they
(teachers) may be ambitious and even eager to start helping their students developing
autonomy and awareness of the language learning process, they may still be ignorant of
what this means for the teacher role” and suggests that “teacher awareness training is
related with learner awareness training”. Voller, (1997: 99-113) suggests that the
autonomous approach of learning requires a transfer of control to the learner, and
emphasizes as teachers we need to monitor our teaching, to observe and reflect critically.
Aoki, (2002: 110) also mentions that teacher education needs to provide teachers with
opportunities to experience autonomy-oriented learning in order to produce teachers with
the capacity to support learner’s autonomy.
2.6.3 The Learner’s Role
The learner is the one who is responsible for autonomous learning. It is very
necessary for the learner to undertake a new role to be a “good learner”, according to
Holec. (1979), ‘a good learner’ makes decisions regarding choice of objectives; choice of
content and materials; methods and techniques to be used; and how to assess progress and
outcomes. ‘The responsible learner’ is the one, who accepts that his/her own efforts are
crucial for effective learning and co-operates with the teacher monitoring own progress
through the use of opportunities available. The same as ‘the aware learner is the one, who
sees the relationship, to what is to be learnt, how to learn and the resource available in
order to take charge or control of learning. In such cases the learner becomes more active.
24
S/he does a lot of things of teachers. He becomes free for his selections of all aspects that
he needs for his learning and becomes more responsible.
2.6.4 Justifications for Learner Autonomy
One can find a great number of reasons in support of and for the necessity to
develop autonomous learning. The reasons that can justify autonomous learning are like
those of the reflective learning, self-directed learning and the reason of being aware of
one's own learning can support the process of learning itself (Little & Dam, 1998). The
self-learning aspects like choosing one won content, setting the objectives, pacing their
own learning etc. can support in transforming the process of learning more purposeful,
which mean greater prospects for success in learning. In view of Balcikanli (2007a) the
fact that societies and education systems are becoming more open to autonomous learning
due to the consistently increasing trends towards globalization as well as technology and
knowledge based economy is a factor that could justify learner autonomy. Changes over
time and the necessity to create global workforce have necessitated the emergence of
autonomous learner who is considered a responsible thinker (Finch 2002). This situation
has in turn lead the training institutes to reorient their curricula and teaching practices
towards supporting and improving learner autonomy thus getting their learners also focus
much on independent and self-directed learning practices (Benson, 2008: 1-12). Amongst
a number of other points that can justify the development of learner autonomy we jot down
some of them below.
1. Autonomous learning helps learners become critically and socially aware members of
their own lives and of those around them (Benson 1995).
2. Learner autonomy increases motivation which, in turn, increases learning effectiveness
(Dickinson, 1995; Little, 2002).
3. Encouraging and active approach to learning helps develop the ability to think and act
interdependently which will allow learners to ‘play active, participatory roles in a
democratic society’ (Benson, 2006: 31).
4. Learners spend more time outside the classroom than inside and it is important to
prepare learners for the various learning opportunities that exist for them outside the school
walls (Field, 2007).
5. Learner autonomy addresses the differences in learning styles and preferences of
learners (Reinders, 2010).
25
6. Learners need the ability to function independently as they may not always have access
to teacher and institutional support (e.g. academic studies in mainstream university classes)
(Cotterall, 1995; Palfreyman, 2003; Little, 2009).
2.6.5 Limitations to Fostering Learner Autonomy
Although one can find a number of reasons that can justify learner autonomy one
can, on the contrary, find some concerns that both teachers and students have been come
up with frequently that need to be addressed. The teachers who are used to traditional
ways of teaching either through grammar translation method or lecture method can be
reluctant to bring forth learner autonomy and they may find it not an ideal teaching
method. As in the countries like Hong Kong for example, culturally the students as well as
the teachers have a stereotypical images among all of them and thinking about teaching
methods that are beyond that cultural boundaries may not be acceptable. Especially the
both the students and teacher find it difficult to have an initiation towards learner
autonomy (Voller, 2005). More over in these countries the students may mistake the
teachers' supervisory role to be their laziness. Lacey (2007) mentions that the teachers
who are used to the traditional ways of teaching usually don't tend to transfer any
responsibility on their learners for the fear of losing control of the class. In additions
depending on the institute rules and the requirements teachers may have to be confined to a
set curriculum and so may not have the freedom to think in a different way. Another
possibility is that students in many parts of the world may think that the idea of learner
autonomy is a western an outcome of western ideology and so may not be suitable to their
cultures and their educational systems (Smith: 2003). Because of all these reasons the
preparation of a suitable plan for developing and fostering learner autonomy needs to
consider both justifications as well as the concerns during pre-preparation thinking.
2.7 Autonomy and Responsibility
Autonomous learning means students should be responsible for their own learning. To be
dependent on a teacher means a refusal to take responsibility because responsibility is
identified with autonomy.
26
2.7.1 What makes a responsible learner?
Who is a responsible learner? Does he do his homework and fallow the teacher’s
instructions? Is he a good team worker? Or does he volunteer to clean the blackboard? Is
he diligent and obedient? He may not always be like that.
Scharle, &Sazbo, (2000: 3), “We do not think of responsible learners as role
models (or teacher’s pets), but as learners who accept the idea that their own efforts are
crucial to progress in learning, and behave accordingly.” Therefore, when student clean
the board or does his homework, he does not do that to please his teacher or to be rewarded
by marks, he does these things just in order to learn something new. It is not important for
responsible learner to be keen on team work, but in learning group, they are willing to
cooperate with classmates and the teacher for one’s benefits.
When student is cooperative, it does not mean that he obeys instructions; he may
ask about the aim of the activity or suggest about how to improve it. Scharle, &Szabo,
(2000: 3), ‘responsible students may not always do their homework, but whenever they fail
to do it, they are aware of missing an opportunity to expand their knowledge of the foreign
language”. This shows that students monitor their own progress intentionally and work
hard so as to benefit from opportunities they have in classroom activities and homework.
Scharle andSzabo, (2000: 4) cite an example of the complexity of defining
autonomy in terms of a connection with the word, responsibility.
In theory, we may define autonomy as the freedom and ability to manage one’s own affairs, which entails the right to make decisions as well. Responsibility may also be understood as being in charge of something, but with the implication that one has to deal with the consequences of one‟ own actions. Autonomy and responsibility both require active involvement, and they are apparently very much interrelated. In practice, the two concepts are more difficult to distinguish.
In this sense, autonomy may be equivalent in meaning to responsibility on the part
of each learner, which is particularly clear when learners are learning in groups because the
learners need to fulfill their responsibility, in an active way involve themselves in learning
without being influenced by others.
2.7.2What makes an autonomous learner?
As Holec, (1981) defines autonomy as freedom and ability to manage one’s own
learning, the learner has the right to make decisions as well meanwhile responsibility may
be understood as being in charge of something, the learner has to deal with his results of
27
his own actions. Both autonomy and responsibility require active involvement and they
seem to be very interrelated.
In practice, autonomy and responsibility are very difficult to distinguish. Scharle,
&Szabo, (2000: 4), suggests three behaviours of responsible learner:
a. Interrupting the teacher’s explanation to ask about a certain point in the explanation.
b. Looking up a word at home that the teacher used in the class but did not ‘teach’.
c. Paying special attention when the lesson is about something that the learner is not so
good at.
In the three actions, the learner behaves responsibly. He makes an effort in the sack of
promoting his learning. In other words he is autonomous learner in the sense that he
behaves independent of his teacher, not relying on others to direct him.
As a conclusion, to promote learner autonomy, we need to develop responsibility in
learners to become active in making decisions about their learning.
2.7.3 The Importance of Developing Responsibility and Autonomy
The saying from Scharle and Szabö (2000: 4): ‘you can bring the horse to the
water, but you cannot make him drink’. In language teaching, teachers can provide all
necessary circumstances and input, but learning can only happen if learners are willing to
contribute. Their passive presence will not suffice, just as the horse would remain thirsty if
he stood still by the river waiting patiently for his thirst to go away. Therefore, learners in
order to be actively involved in the learning process, they should accept that the success in
learning depends more on the learners as on the teachers. Learners and teachers share
responsibility for outcome. In other words, success in learning depends mainly on learners
having a responsible attitude.
2.7.4 Teachers’ Beliefs
Teachers’ beliefs can be defined as, “Teachers’ pedagogical beliefs or those beliefs
of relevance to an individual’s teaching” Brog, (2001: 187). Philpps and Brog, (2009: 381)
describe it as “propositions about all aspects of their work which teachers hold to be true or
false”. Brog, (2006) defines language teacher cognition as the study of what teachers
think, know and believe. In her review of trends in language teacher education, Johnson,
(2006: 40 (1), 235-257), described teacher cognition as area of research which has made
the most significant contribution in the last 40 years to our understandings of teachers and
28
teaching. In other words, teachers’ beliefs are what they belief about education and
teaching and learning process that make them behaves as teachers.
2.7.5 The Importance of Teachers’ Beliefs
Investigating teachers’ beliefs about learner autonomy is very important because
learner autonomy activities cannot be implemented in the classroom if teachers are not
exposed to the principles of learner autonomy. Autonomous classrooms will be
unsuccessful unless we involve teachers in self-reflection of their own beliefs about
teaching and learning, including their roles and responsibilities as teachers or learners.
2.8 Autonomous Learning and Motivation
Motivation can be defined as “a physical, psychological or social need which
motivates the individual to reach or achieve his goal and fulfill his need and, finally, feel
satisfied owing to achieve his aim” (Mahadi, &Jafari,2012: 233). Many people prefer
success in their lives but success does not come easily. Motivation is very important in
human life. It encourages people to achieve their goals that one sets for his life.
Johnstone, (1999: 146), considers motivation as a stimulant for achieving a specific target.
According to Ryan, and Deci, (2000: 25, 54-67), to be motivated means to progress or to
be in motion to do something. Crump, (1995), believes that excitement, interest, keenness,
and enthusiasm towards learning are the main constituents of motivation. Lightbrown and
Spada, (2001: 33) identify motivation in second language acquisition as “a complex
phenomenon which can be defined in terms of two factors: learners’ communicative needs
and their attitudes towards the second language community”. They belief that when a
learner wants to use the second language with the intension of communicating with others
or accomplishing desired goals, they will be stimulated to obtain expertise and skill in it.
Dickinson, (1995: 165), has discussed whether giving student great freedom might enhance
learning motivation, while Ushioda, (1996: 3) believes that “the establishment of principles
for developing effective motivational thinking as an integral dimension of learner
autonomy”. It appears that, she could not be able to show how to foster critical thinking, it
is clear that she believes that instead of telling students that teachers think, it is very
important to direct them to reflect upon and evaluate their own achievement and learning
experience. Motivation is generally defined as “the force that compels us to action. It
drives us to work hard and pushes us to succeed. Motivation influences our behavior and
29
our ability to accomplish goals”. Retrieved on 15th Oct. 2014 from: http://www.lifehack.
org/articles/productivity/6-types-of-motivation-explained.html
2.8.1 Types of Motivation
Earlier studies of motivation primarily focused on two types of motivation, intrinsic
motivation (internal) and extrinsic motivation (external). The tendency had been to treat
these two types of motivation as a dichotomy (Vallerand, 1997: 29, 71-87).
2.8.1.1 Intrinsic Motivation
Intrinsic motivation focuses on pleasure and satisfaction (Guay, Boggaiano, and
Vallerand, (2001, 27(6), 643). When students are intrinsically motivated, they do the task
simply because they find it interesting and enjoyable. It refers to rewards provided by an
activity itself. It arises from internal factors such as a child natural feeling of curiosity,
exigent, confidence, and satisfaction when performing a task. People who are involved in
a task because of intrinsic motivation appear to be engaged and even consumed, since they
are motivated by the activity itself and not some goal that is achieved at the end or as a
result of activity. E.g. Children play games for no other rewards than the fun they get
from the game itself or students who are intrinsically motivated may study hard for a test
because he or she enjoys the content of the course. Intrinsic motivation is the ultimate goal
in education at every level.
2.8.1.2 Extrinsic Motivation
In the view of Ryan & Deci (2002), extrinsic motivation is related to the factors
that can stimulate someone to perform an action or the factors that can create the desire to
involve in some action, and so can be seen separately from the action. Teachers are
interested in extrinsic motivation because it's the most powerful tool in getting their
learners learn in a specific way or in getting their students tuned to a particular method of
learning. An outcome of an activity that is external, someway useful to the learner, and is
related to the activity that a student is involved in can be an external motivational factor.
An external motivational factor can be operative when a learner can find that useful
outcome when he/she performs an action.
From the point of view of Morris &Maisto (2002) extrinsic motivation is the
reward that someone can obtain as a consequence of an activity and not a direct outcome of
an activity. The rewards can be as simple as a kind of food, a praise, allowance of some
30
free time, a little money or some additional points etc. and they can be seen separately
from the individual and the activity. When students are extrinsically motivated they
perform the actions, do the tasks assigned to them by their teacher because they want to
score well in the exams and obtain good grades in the courses. On the contrary,
intrinsically motivated students perform the tasks and complete their assignment simply
because they enjoy doing such activities. Ryan &Deci (2000: 60) mention that in spite of
the perspectives that consider the extrinsically motivated behaviours to be non-
autonomous, the Self-Determination Theory (SDT) identifies that extrinsic motivation can
be related to autonomous learning at some degree of motivation.
The examples of external motivation as they are presented by Ryan &Deci are like
those of a student who does his homework just to avoid punishment by his parents and of
another student who does the work simply because he believes that the work help in
improving his career. In these examples the action is done for obtaining some instrumental
value out of the work and not for just their personal enjoyment. One can find that extrinsic
motivation is operated by either reward or punishment. In the examples mentioned, one
can identify the degree of variance in the autonomy of involving in the actions.
In support of the view that L2 motivation and learner autonomy are two sides of a
coin Dörnyei (2001) brings forth a number of recent reviews and discussions. Ushioda
(1996), as cited by Dörnyei (2001) states that autonomous language learners are by
definition motivated learners. Dörnyei [ibid] further argues that motivation needs to be
maintained, and protected, otherwise the initial motivation will gradually peter out, and
that creating learner autonomy is one of the most powerful ingredients for doing so:
The relevance of autonomy to motivation in psychology has been best highlighted by the influential “self-determination theory”, according to which the freedom to choose and to have choices, rather than being forced or coerced to behave according to someone else’s desire, is prerequisite to motivation.(Dörnyei, 2001: 71)
Motivation is considered as one of the important factors affecting how successful a
language learner becomes in Second Language Acquisition (SLA), despite different ways
of approaching motivation. With regard to the relation between autonomy and motivation,
some researchers consider that motivation reinforces autonomy, for example Benson,
(2001) claims, “By taking control over learning, learners develop motivational patterns that
lean to some effective learning.” Whilst others believe that autonomy matures motivation
31
((Dörnyei, 2001). Dörnyei, also emphasizes the important role of motivation as one of the
most basic aspects of the human mind in determining success or failure in any learning
situation.
2.9 New Technologies and New Literacy Practices in Language Learning
Technology helps in developing learner autonomy especially in learning English.
Learning English becomes easier with the varied technological sources that are available in
the form of web tools, web applications, blogs and other related software that can be
adapted suitably in learning English. These technological resources can support the
students in creating learning environments out of the class Benson,(2001). The knowledge
that technology and pedagogy are interrelated motivates those who like technology in
developing the methods suitable for fostering learner autonomy. The availability of
multiple devices and the variances in their usefulness can be an advantage to the learners
since they can select and adapt the applications in a specific device that are suitable to their
learning styles and also to their standards in terms of their learning levels and financial
limits. In a different way we can say that a learner can think about a particular pedagogy
that suits well to his/her learning style and choose relevant technological resource Hafner,
and Candlin, (2007: 303–318). A study of the ways different people use these
technological resources for pedagogical purposes and for individual learning purposes can
provide us with the primary insight into their usefulness in learning English.
A case study of Lam (2000) provides us with the experiences of a Chinese teenager
in establishing a website called J-Pop that enabled him in creating different Information
and Communication Technologies (ICTs) that can accommodate multiple chat rooms
where the learners can practice speaking and writing through chatting with other people.
As it was mentioned by Benson and Chik (2010: 11), the websites like Japanese Pop (J-
Pop) are being developed by many software providers and are working as the online
interfaces that can provide wide range of learning opportunities and foster autonomous
learning. This way of learning is self-directed and usually takes place much away from the
traditional classroom learning.
On the contrary the online learning spaces can create an environment that provides
the learner with the freedom of practice without having comparison with other learners
during the practice. And the range of accent styles available online can help the learners in
identifying themselves with the language learning and speaking communities that are very
close to their own capabilities so that they can sustain their interest in learning and can
32
practice the desirable speech patterns. Although many institutes champion the
functionality of the language, the greater disadvantage with learning in the traditional
classroom style is that the learners may not have the teachers that can adapt their pedagogy
suitable to their learners and leave their learners feel some where marginalized and this can
be avoided through the autonomous online learning resources. The case studies similar to
those of the Chinese teenager can deepen our insight into the similar online spaces that
have the potential in creating classroom environments away from real time classrooms and
also in providing varied learning experiences which are all self-directed and autonomous
(Black, 2005).
Of the many possible learning strategies the strategy suggested by Warschauder,
Schetzer and Meloni (2000) is the approach that adopts student centered and project
based learning that could create and make use of the technological environments outside
the traditional class rooms. Many learners who are engaged in the use of technological
resources are generally being able to create and share multimodal texts with the support of
digital images and videos. The scholars like Bull & Bell (2010) view that this capability of
learners to create and share can help them in improving their leaner autonomy in the
context of L1. Many teachers in general considered that these digital compositions can be
used in bridging the gap between the classroom practices and the out of class practices.
Mostly in the traditional educational environments the learners couldn't find a proper
media to practice their English and keep continuing their learning when they are away
from the classes. The beginning of the digital and technological media is providing
opportunities to continue their learning as well as practice even when they are away from
their classes. Consequently many scholars started investing their efforts in showing the
potential of these digital resources that have taken the shape of digital story telling in
engaging language learners. Since digital story telling involves writing, discussions and
narration in the process of making short movies of short stories, learners find it more
interesting to use their language knowledge and also engage in learning and improving the
language.
Lambert (cited in Robin, 2006) finds that some features of digital story telling are a
dramatic question, emotional content, voice modulation and a view point along with the
accompaniment of sound track. The most important and common feature of a digital story
is personnel narrative as it involves personal significance (Kajder and Swenson, 2004: 19-
20). The personal element of digital stories prove to be more engaging to the learners as
they reflect the real life stories that are very closure to the heart of the students. These
33
stories also reflect the perceptions, interpretations and transmissions from the perspective
of the students engaged in making the stories (Gregori Signes, 2008: 45). At the same time
digital stories are not completely confined to personal aspect of the art. As it was
observed by Ohler (2006) they also have the dimension and potential to improve learners'
critical thinking, media literacy and other forms of academic skills. Robin (2008) writes
about a range of digital stories that could inform, instruct and of those that could deal with
historical events apart from the most popular personal narratives. The creation of digital
stories is a multifaceted task that brings out and improves different skill in the practicing
students. The creation of digital stories requires the participant students to bring their
knowledge that they acquired in the traditional way along with their new findings together
in the process of producing their multimodal product. Moreover, the creation of
multimodal product needs the integration of skills that can be continually refined during
the process. Moreover, the composition of a digital story requires the integration of
different roles of a script writer, editor and a director besides providing opportunities to
improve their skills. In addition the process of integration of different roles needs them
employ and improve their research skills as they need to explore, interpret and analyze
information.
Because the creative process requires the production and development of script the
students are subjected to engage in writing that automatically improves their writing skills.
In spite of the small size of the project the digital story creation demands organization of
the different necessities of the project and this requirement helps the students in developing
their organizational and managerial skills. All through the process since the students keep
engaged in using technological resources they tend to look for advanced technological
implements that eventually leads to the exploration and development of their knowledge of
their multimedia skills. After having all the ideas together the digital story creation
prompts the creative people to brainstorm for better presentation of the story, thus
promoting the students' skills for presentation skills and for improvement of their learner
autonomy. Since these projects can't be completed alone, the participating students need to
work in teams, which leads them to identify and coordinate the special skills in each
participant in order to engage them in suitable jobs that improves their interpersonal skills.
As team works tend to have disagreement among its members in some issues, conflicts are
to be addressed and dealt with proper problem solving skills. The organizing members can
develop their decision making skills as well. As it was mentioned by Robin ( 2006) that
once the project is complete the students can compare their work with the works of others
34
and can analyze their strengths and drawbacks and can think about improving their skills in
different areas, which means they will improve their analytical and critical skills.
The entire process of construction is like a game and a so challenging task that is
naturally very interesting especially to young learners. That is why many scholars consider
it more empowering and motivating to learners. Rance-Roney (2008) writes that "deep
language acquisition and meaningful practice" is an integral part of the process in digital
story telling. According to Bull &Kajder (2004) the process of digital story telling
empowers learner autonomy to have the control over the use of technology within the
limits of set learning objectives.
Kajder& Swenson (2004) suggest that in digital story projects language teachers
can focus much on their students' use of language and the development of the story than on
their use of technology and improvement of their technological skills. Creation of
multimodal devices that can resemble the texts that the participating students usually come
across in their daily life through technological media is possible by the use of multimedia
technology. Digital storytelling projects have a number of features that lend themselves to
the promotion of language learner autonomy. Such projects would provide a social context
or learning environment within which learners are able to interact with one another as well
as experiment with a range of digital video technology in order to create personally
meaningful multimodal devices. Furthermore, learners’ ability to use such digital video
technology to capture and play back their own performances as well as the performances of
others would facilitate reflection on their language learning. However, there is as yet little
empirical second language education research examining the offering of digital storytelling
projects to motivate second language learners and foster autonomy in the language learning
classroom.
2.9.1 Materials for the Autonomous Learner
Materials and the way they are composed play an important role in developing
autonomy of learners. Suitable approach in combination of rigorous examination of
available materials and the way they demonstrate learning while using specific materials in
language classes can promote autonomous learning considerably. Most of the discussion
that is available till today on autonomous learning focuses on either learner training or self-
assessment (Allwright, 1981; Blue, 1988) with a scanty attention to the design of the
materials for self-directed or autonomous learning. Moreover, there aren't any
considerable empirical studies on the effectiveness of autonomous learning materials (Lee,
35
1996; Oxford, 1990) in spite of the fact that the sustenance of interest in learning depends
on the usefulness of the materials and the interest that the materials can create in learners
(Frankel, 1982).
Scholars like Sinclair & Ellis (1992) wrote that because of the too many learning
goals incorporated in English course books their potentiality to develop learner autonomy
is kept at stake. The course books that have the potential to improve learner autonomy are
often improperly organized. Dickinson (1987: 69) also mentions about the insufficiency of
the materials in providing complete solution for self-instruction as it requires more than an
answer key along with some notes about the answers. On the contrary Nunan (1997: 203)
finds that the newly emerging instructional materials that are produced commercially are
considering the incorporation of the ideas of autonomous learning. Sinclair (1999: 328)
mentions about the improvement in the situation saying that “The language teaching
profession's concern with developing autonomy of several of quality kinds in language
learners is bearing fruit in terms of the number and publications emerging on related
topics”.
2.9.1.1 Roles: The Learner
According to Kelly (1996: 94) “learners need to undergo a considerable
transformation of their beliefs about language and their role as learners in order to be able
to undertake independent learning effectively." The consequent role-shift in mastering
“the ability to take charge of one’s own learning” (Holec, 1980: 3) can be clearly observed
in the Asian context where the learner is usually “an individual who is conditioned by a
pattern of cultural forces that are not harmonious to learner autonomy, independence or
self-direction” (Pierson, 1996: 52). Thus Pierson [ibid] describes learning in the context of
schools and institutes in Hong Kong as static and differently-directed, with the teacher
trying to transmitting knowledge and students trying to passively absorbing the knowledge.
Responding to this kind of view of education Stevick (1976) mention that the parent child
relationship between teacher and taught results in pushing the process of learning into
defensive state as the learners keep thinking about protecting themselves from being
exposed or embarrassed. Opposed to it, Hofsede's profile of Korean interaction
characteristics reveals that respect between a teacher and their student plays an important
role in promoting learner autonomy. Nunan (1996) and Esch (1996a) view that the
traditional teaching practices have the embedded factors that can promote and enhance
learner autonomy. (cf. Ho, and Crookall, 1995; Pierson, 1996) felt that cultural differences
36
cannot be considered as barriers to the promotion of autonomy in learning especially in the
countries like China where the orientation towards group is more rampant. Littlewood
(2000) talks about the stereotypical learning attitudes of passive Asian students.
Littlewood describes the stereotypical image of Asian students in the way that they are
obedient listeners in spite of the doubt about their actual behaviors in classrooms. Teacher
is not considered an authority that should not to be questioned. The Asian student don't sit
in class rooms just to keep listening to what the teacher says and keep agreeing to what all
the teacher says. They think that they have equal role evaluation their own learning.
Littlewood (2000: 33) mentions that “educational contexts” consider being accountable
more for Asian learning styles than the learners that run along with the author's experience
with Korean university students who are aware of the importance and value of autonomous
learning and always keep welcoming innovative teaching methods.
2.9.1.2 Roles: The Teacher
Teacher’s efficacy to redefine roles can be the basis of the success of all the efforts
invested in obtaining learners active engagement in learning (Hill, 1994). This role of
teachers is viewed by Dickinson (1992) as the greatest compromise on their part. As it was
put by Wright (1987: 45-460) teacher's role involves two functions. One is the related to
the managerial aspect and the other one is related to the instructional aspect. The
managerial aspect is the social side of teaching while the instructional aspect assumes the
task orientation. The basis for this functional part of teacher's role is a set of factors that
keep operating in the interactions between teachers and students. The set of factors
comprises interpersonal and task related goals. While the interpersonal factors
encompasses different roles that teachers' and students' keep taking on like social,
attitudinal, believer, personal, motivational and positional. The task related factors
concerns with the extent to which a particular learning task can activate an individual's
personal goals.
As it was noted by Allwright (1989, cited in Dickinson 1987: 90) the managerial
function of teacher that determines learning goals, makes decisions about materials,
decides on the way the materials will be used, monitors and maintains records, evaluates
progress, allocates time to tasks, chooses the related tasks, dictates who should do them,
controls the groupings the learners will work in, etc., is horrifying and so it is suggested
that the responsibility for at least some of these could be shared with the learners. When it
comes to the instructional function the promotion of autonomous learning also implies that
37
the learner should take on responsibilities previously owned by teacher, and leads to view
teachers as facilitators, counselors, learning advisors and learning resources (Carver 1982;
Little & John 1985: 595). In this view, the teacher becomes a skilled manager of human
beings with access to a body of language and learning knowledge (Hunt, & Barnes, 1989:
211).
Dickinson (1987: 122) points that,
The ideal helper is warm and loving. He accepts and cares about the learner and about his problems, and takes them seriously. He is willing to spend time helping. He is approving, supportive, encouraging and friendly; and he regards the learner as an equal. As a result of these characteristics, the learner feels free to approach him and can talk freely and easily with him in a warm and relaxed atmosphere.
When a teacher undertakes his required role, he bridges the gap between him and his
student which leads to the establishment of an effective environment for learning.
2.10 Self-access and Autonomy
Because of the idea that most of language learning happens outside the classrooms,
the ELSACs (English Language Self-Access Centers) have been developed during the
recent decades (Jones, 1995). The setup of ELSACs can enable the process of learning
keep happening independently. Many scholars like Nunan (1999) and Oxford (1990) hold
that learners have different learning styles and they vary in many ways from learner to
learners besides the common aspects that can be found in many. It's very difficult to say
that a particular teaching method can provide to all the varying learning styles. Autonomy
of the learner, according to Zrinska (2006), is the only method that can cater to the
individual learning styles of all the learners through their own choice of materials that can
enable them with their own pacing schedule with the learners themselves taking
responsibility for their learning. Autonomous leaning can be called the communicative
approach that goes in opposition to the traditional ways and helps the learners access the
leaning components by themselves. Focusing on the learners' interests and their learning
choices the self-directed learning style assumes that learners need not take all the inputs
from teachers and they should get accustomed to learn many things on their own with the
support and supervision of teacher. Moreover the learners also assume the responsibility
of selecting the learning materials that are quite suitable to their learning styles, objectives,
pace and the language level that they need to develop. Teaching, in view of Nunan
38
(1999:52) should be confined to providing the learners with learning skills and linguistic
potential. When the learners are not well aware of the concept of autonomous learning
they find it difficult to become completely autonomous learners, especially during the
beginning stages toward learner autonomy. It would be the responsibility of teachers to
guide them towards achieving complete autonomy.
2.11 Reconstructing the Experiment
Al-Ghazali (2007) had already experienced the positive results of autonomous
learning strategies when they introduced them in the high schools in the United Arab
Emirates, where he worked as an English language teacher for about five years. They had
managed to establish their own English Language Self-Access Centers (ELSAC) and see
considerable improvement in the language proficiency of the students there. In view of the
experiences and the positive results, the Cambodian students didn't show any opposition to
learners autonomy and instead they took an initiation to develop a culture that considers
change as a likely occurrence in any language over a period of time, but the change is
acceptable to the level that it doesn't affect the local cultures and their societal values.
Dickinson (1987:13) mentioned that, in his view, it couldn't be an impossible task to
establish a SAC in Cambodia as its SAC could easily pass through the initial three phases
of implementation of autonomy and also as autonomy shouldn't be compromised for the
reason that self-access and learner autonomy are two sides of the same coin. He tried to
establish below three stages during the process of establishing autonomy in learners.
2.11.1Non-autonomous Phase: Recreation
The first phase the process of achieving learner autonomy is the 'non-autonomous
phase'. In this phase it's advised not to introduce the concept of autonomy so openly that
everyone can notice something that is much away from the regular style of learning. When
a community is used to a particular style of learning it's very hard both to immediately
think about a new approach as well as immediately reject ages old traditional methods of
learning. When something is against a regular phenomenon people tend to reject it out
rightly irrespective of the positive effect that the new thing seems to offer. That is why in
the beginning of the process the autonomy concepts should be given the shape of
recreational activities. The activities include the language games with prizes and rewards
for the winners, role plays, solving puzzles, identifying the synonyms, acronyms and
antonyms along with the traditional activities that the Cambodians are interested in. All
39
these activities can make the center look a place for recreation and entertainment in spite of
its inherent agenda of getting the people used to a different concept of teaching and
learning, to bring all learners away from their beliefs about the new methods, have them
discuss about the importance and relevance of the new methods to their educational goals
and above all bringing popularity to the center. The aim of these centers is thus to engage
the learners in educational activities through entertaining activities that can provide them
the education included in enjoyment. For example, the Cambodians prefer to engage in
collaborative work and so designing a play can be more suitable learning-entertaining
activity for them. The inherent scope for exhibiting individual skills through the
performing characters can engage these students in the activity. The centers can provide
excellent platforms to all the learners to this kind of activities. As Nunan (1999) said this
phase provides the necessary inputs to the psychological domain, which is sometimes
termed the affective domain, something that is required in introducing a new teaching or
learning strategy.
2.11.2 Semi-autonomous Phase: Guided Learning
We can say that this is second phase that follows the non-autonomous phase. Once
the students become familiar with the concept of autonomy, the materials of the center and
they become no longer cautions about the likely change, teachers start guiding the students
toward autonomous learning. In this stage teachers work in collaboration with the entire
staff of the institution. Teachers start assigning independent duties like referring the
dictionaries, completing the incomplete essays, analyzing and reflecting on the famous
plays of Shakespeare etc. As all these materials are made accessible to students, they
become more familiar with the materials, their usefulness and the ways that they can make
effective use of them in improving their language proficiency. In the view of Nunan
(1999) this phase caters to the cognitive domain of the learners.
2.11.3 Autonomous Phase: Learner-centeredness
This is the stage that needs the completion of the previous stages. And based on
the effectiveness of the previous two phases the students become completely away from
the fear of change and they understand that the rules of the society and their cultural
grounds are not disturbed and start noticing the improvement in their language knowledge.
The vehicle of autonomy starts rolling automatically as the students are expected and
started to learn on their own. The teachers' role gets constricted and confined to
40
supervision and guidance when required. They stop intervening into the activities of
learning. After succeeding in carrying their students through all these stages and
transforming the students into autonomous learners the centers need to upgrade themselves
by improving the facilities like providing computers, printers, copiers and scanners and
train the student to use them in their learning process. Each time the centers upgrade, they
need to take the opinions of the students and keep inquiring about their opinions so that the
centers can understand the new things that can be added. Considering the suggestions of
the students in improving the centers can reflect the democratic nature of the centers and
can improve their confidence levels, which in turn takes their learner autonomy to further
heights.
2.12 Learner Autonomy and Vocabulary Learning
At university level, students are expected to make a great effort to learn vocabulary outside
classroom. Vocabulary is very important for students to master English. Therefore
autonomous learning is essential for students to enhance their vocabulary learning.
2.12.1 Why autonomy in vocabulary learning?
Although autonomy in learning implies learning in general in all aspects of
language learning, a particular emphasis is laid on the autonomy of vocabulary learning.
Because vocabulary is crucial for communication and because all the required vocabulary
cannot be learned only through classroom activities learners are finding other means to
learn vocabulary. Autonomous learning is a great opportunity to those who want to learn
fast and at their own pace. Moreover, learner autonomy provides the learners with the
following advantages.
a. Learner autonomy enhances the learner’s motivation and leads to more effective
vocabulary learning.
b. Learner autonomy provides learners with more free opportunities for English
communication in a non-native environment.
c. Learner autonomy caters to the individual needs of learners at all levels.
d. Learner autonomy has a lasting influence
e. Learner autonomy enhances the learner's willingness towards active learning.
41
f. Learner autonomy enables the learner to master the basic skills that are required to
lasting learning.
(Wissam)http://www.qou.edu/english/conferences/firstNationalConference/pdfFiles/wi
samAlShawwa.pdf
Once a learner is accustomed to learning vocabulary in the self-directed
autonomous way they can be said to have acquired a learning skill through which the
learner can become an independent thinker and also a critical and analytical expert, which
is an essential for every student to succeed in their careers after the university.
2.12.2 How to be a good autonomous learner in vocabulary learning?
A good autonomous learner is the one that take on the responsibility of his/her
learning (Boud, 1995). In addition the learner acquires the skills of deciding on what
he/she needs to learn, setting their own learning goals, planning a program for learning and
practicing, predicting the probable obstacles in the learning process, evaluating their own
learning process. The autonomous learners display reflective practices and tend to get
engaged in collaborative and team works with faculty and their fellow students. In view of
Omaggio (1978) one can find some important attributes that can characterize autonomous
learner and the following seven are the most important among all of them.
a. have insights into their learning styles and strategies;
b. take an active approach to the learning task at hand;
c. are willing to take risks, i.e., to communicate in the target language at all costs;
d. are good guessers;
e. attend to form as well as to content;
f. develop the target language into a separate reference system and are willing to
revise and reject hypotheses and rules that do not apply; and
g. have a tolerant and outgoing approach to the target language.
from these attributes suggested by Omaggio (ibid) one can infer that an
autonomous learner can be a great learner of language and one can find these qualities
manifested in an autonomous vocabulary learner.
42
2.12.3 How can leaner autonomy in vocabulary learning be enhanced?
Many students at university level have plenty of opportunities to enhance their
vocabulary knowledge. For example, apart from the resources commonly available
through internet free of cost, the English language program at Al Quds Open University
the activities incorporated in the text books offer a great opportunity to improve the
students vocabulary through the self-directed and autonomous ways. When the
technological advancements are used in a proper way they can prove to be great sources of
learning vocabulary autonomously. Especially the students can make use of computer
networks, English learning blogs and the chat rooms designed from language learning
communities to improve their vocabulary autonomously. In view of Warschauer (1996)
learners can have a great initiation and good control of their learning by using the
mechanics of communication that are specifically supported by computer media. A lot of
examples that include the following were given in support of this argument.
a. the "synchronicity" of e-mail frees students from time and distance limitations,
enabling them to initiate discussions with their teachers or with other students at
any time of day and at a number of places rather than only during class or office
hours
b. when long distance communication is available, students have the independent
opportunity to use the foreign or second language vocabulary for authentic
communication with native speakers
c. many teachers suggest thinking cross-cultural communication through the mail
with task-based learning provides the most fruitful combination for fostering
learner autonomy.
Many students feel it very interesting when they come across with a lot of new
words in their academic texts they need to learn by force. When they have to deal with a
lot of new words in this way they resort to make lists of all the new words they resort to
translate the vocabulary into their own and try different ways of learning them and improve
their vocabulary. Sentence composition needs the knowledge of different words and so the
learners are forced to learn variety of vocabulary since they need to construct a variety of
sentences each time. The composition of sentence variation depends completely on the
student’s acquisition of various words, which are required for the variance in expressions.
The learners need to take the support of their teachers in the evaluation and judgment of
their performance in using different vocabulary and in showing the variation in sentences
43
and expressions. According to some educators depending on translations in learning
vocabulary may reduce the learners' success rate as well as motivational levels.
Translation method in learning vocabulary works as a short time memory test rather than
supporting the learners in improving their long term vocabulary improving exercise.
Moreover, increase in the translation lists can confuse learners’ ability in identifying the
words that the learner has in his/her active knowledge. Often it's too frustrating to the
learners when they realize they have been forgetting many of the new words that they
learnt recently, which remain in their passive vocabulary store and which they realize that
they could use them actively. As a result the learners also become passive learners and
tend to spend less time gradually in learning vocabulary and often find it difficult to
unlearn the wrong acquisition and relearn the proper vocabulary. Learning vocabulary
through translation method can lead to an undesirable habit of translating the sentences
through the translation of each word in the sentences and then translate the entire
sentences. That means the process of translation leads to the frequent interference of the
knowledge of the first language grammar that can make the errors very strong. Another
usual way of improving ones vocabulary is word searching. A repeated encounter with
some selective new words during searching the central vocabulary resources can provide
the learner with a long term opportunity of learning vocabulary autonomously. Through
the surfing method of learning vocabulary the learner learn by doing and by focusing on a
selective list of words that have been set as a priority list. In addition this strategy also
helps in developing good grammatical habits and saves a lot of time in the long run as the
learners keep working and learning with interest and efficiency. This method can help the
learners understand all the meanings and implications in usage of a particular word. To
really understand a new word and its different variations in terms of its meaning the
learners need to start using the words immediately and repeatedly later on as a practice to
transform the vocabulary into their active bank of vocabulary.
It's the responsibility of the language teachers to make sure that their students are
completely aware of the different aspects of the target language like, it's grammar, syntax,
the rules of spelling and vocabulary. When the students are provided with this basic
knowledge of language they can easily become autonomous and start improving their
knowledge of the language by reading the text of further levels. Once they are able to
understand the smaller text will be able to understand bigger texts and start enjoying
reading bigger text. When they can enjoy reading it becomes a habit and then we can call
them completely autonomous. At the same time at this state the learners also start
44
choosing the texts that are suitable to their level of English and so that texts could be more
interesting and so the learners can do for extensive reading. In view of Carrell and Carson
(1997), there are two important things to be considered in extensive reading. One is the
quantity of the chosen reading materials and the other one is the issue of focus that would
be more on meaning rather than on the other aspects of the language. Renandya and
Jacobs (2001) state that extensive reading helps improving the specific genre knowledge
besides strengthening their knowledge of the target language in general. Krashen (2004)
finds extensive reading works out better compared to direct instruction method in acquiring
the knowledge of language in terms of vocabulary, developing reading skills, writing skills
and grammatical insight. Many educators followed Krashen in considering extensive
reading and helped their learners in succeeding in improving their English knowledge.
Also Herrel and Jordan (2004) found that self-directed voluntary and extensive reading
plays an important role in improving the learners’ vocabulary as well as their spelling
awareness, grammatical knowledge apart from improving their writing skills. However, it
is suggested that the learners must have continuous exposure to comprehensible texts in
order to strengthen and reinforce their known and learnt language and also to make their
learning process more effective since the knowledge obtained through a limited number of
attempts can leave temporary memories and repeated and continuous exposure can help
learners in having a long lasting impact of their learning experience.
2.13 Previous Studies
A great deal has been written about learner autonomy (e.g. definitions, teachers'
beliefs, learners' beliefs, teachers' perspectives, justifications ... etc.).
Al Asmari (2013) conducted a study at Taif University on “Practices and Prospects of
Learner Autonomy: Teachers’ Perceptions” Language learning process works through the
learners’ own reflection on how they learn and it makes learners active in the sense that
they learn to analyze their learning strategies. So they start making decisions, e.g., whether
to improve them or not, and in which way. Generally, this trait is missing in traditional
language teaching process and students are not expected to reflect upon their own learning,
analyzing and evaluating their learning experience. Retrospective tasks, such as interviews,
group discussion and structured questionnaires encourage learners to reflect upon learning
and these retrospective activities may help learners to take responsibility for their language
learning processes as autonomous learners and thus making a motivated learner. The role
of the teacher is central to the development of learner autonomy (Hurd, Beaven, & Ortega,
45
2001; Benson, 2009). A teacher is required to create a classroom learning environment that
is supportive of learner autonomy. This may involve the teacher first addressing learners’
past learning experiences, then slowly raising their awareness to the benefits of increased
independence in their learning. Dickinson (1993) adds that learner training should aim to
help learners develop the ability to take more responsibility for their own learning. To do
this, a survey was conducted at Taif University English Language Centre (KSA) to collect
the opinion of teachers regarding the practices and prospects of learner autonomy in their
classrooms. The sample consisted of 60 teachers from different countries teaching English
to Arab students at University level. The study focused on the teachers’ notion of learner
autonomy, its practices and prospects in Saudi Arabian context. Findings stress that it is
important to provide learner training together with the studies and make it an integral part
of the teaching process so as to help learners become autonomous.
Tanyeli and Kuter (2013), tackled a study on "Examining Learner Autonomy in Foreign
Language Learning and Instruction" The purpose of this case study is to examine freshman
Law students’ perceptions as regards their autonomy in writing classes and their teachers’
perceptions of the writing skill area of the curriculum in promoting learner autonomy in the
Foreign Language and English Preparatory School. The investigation of the existing
situation in these classes provided a comprehensive analysis of the instructional processes
in promoting autonomy in writing skills and shed light upon the themes to be reconsidered
in the writing skill area of the curriculum. Two-hundred freshman Law students enrolled
in English I course and six English language teachers teaching these students formed the
study group of the research. As a research method, mixed-method approach was adopted
and data were collected through a questionnaire and interview protocols. The factor
analysis for the questionnaire was done and the Cronbach’s Alpha reliability was measured
as .92. The data gathered via interview protocols were subjected to content analysis
through thematic coding. The findings exhibited that students tend to have positive
attitudes towards language learning, yet they do not perceive themselves as autonomous
learners in both learning and writing skill. As far as teachers’ perceptions are concerned,
instructional environment, materials and strategies were found to be inhibiting students’
autonomy. What is more, students’ problems in language use and their dependence on
teachers were reported to be impeding their autonomy in learning.
46
Nguyen (2012) has tackled a study in higher education in Vietnam on (“Let students take
control!” Fostering learner autonomy in language learning), which aimed at stimulating
students’ interest in learning English and fostering their independent learning through peer-
teaching. However, cultural features and teachers’ misconceptions about their roles have
led to less emphasis on autonomous learning and possibly a lower quality of higher
education in Southeast Asian countries. It is identified that in order to foster learner
autonomy in language learning in such educational contexts, teachers must be seen as a
foremost factor because of the interdependence between teacher and learners (Little, 1995)
and social cultural influences on teaching and learning in Southeast Asian countries. This
research explores actual teaching practices relating to learner autonomy in order to gain a
better understanding of teacher’s roles in fostering learner autonomy in language teaching
and learning in Vietnam. The project’s results indicated that when the teacher gave
students more chance to be involved in class decision making, they were more active and
motivated to learn, which lead to a better and higher quality of teaching and learning.
Ma, Z. and Ma, R. (2012). Conducted a study in DaLian University of Technology,
Dalian, China, on "Motivating Chinese Students by Fostering Learner Autonomy in
Language Learning". The subjects were students who were studying at the English
Department, DaLian University of Technology. This study aimed to investigate the link
between motivation and learner autonomy, especially how motivation and autonomy can
mutually reinforce each other with the emphasis on how the development of learners’
autonomy through developing negotiated syllabus helps to motivate students in language
learning. The researchers have developed their own teaching materials and set up a self-
access center; through the research on the development of process syllabus. They found
out that students are highly motivated through making decisions for themselves and are
more responsible for their learning and motivation is a prerequisite for learning and
responsibility development. The learner is not simply a passive recipient in the process.
They also found out when learners are becoming more autonomous in making decisions
concerning why to learn, what to learn and how to learn, the intrinsic motivation of
learners is stimulated, they are able to identify with the goals of learning and they beome
more willing to take responsibility for the outcome. In turn, a large scope for student
making decisions for themselves and autonomy generates intrinsic motivation.
47
Borg and Al-Busaidi, (2012) analyzed a project on "Learner Autonomy: English
Language Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices". The project addressed the beliefs and reported
practices regarding learner autonomy of 61 teachers of English at a large university
language centre in Oman were studied via questionnaires and interviews. The findings
highlighted a range of ways in which teachers conceptualized learner autonomy, though it
was commonly seen in terms of strategies for independent and individual learning. The
study also shed light on both teachers’ positive theoretical dispositions to learner autonomy
as well as their less optimistic views about the feasibility of promoting it in practice.
Teachers’ views on the factors that hinder the development of learner autonomy were also
explored and most salient among these were what the teachers saw as adverse learner
attributes such as a lack of motivation and limited experience of independent learning.
Institutional factors such as a fixed curriculum were also seen to limit learner autonomy.
In addition to this empirical work, this project involved professional development
workshops on learner autonomy for the participating teachers; these workshops were
informed by the empirical phase of the project and the researcher believes that this model
of linking research and in-service teacher education can be effective in supporting
institutional development in relation to a wide range of issues in foreign language learning.
Rungwaraphong (2012). "Student Readiness for Learner Autonomy": Case Study at a
University in Thailand. This study investigates the extent to which students at a university
in Thailand were ready to exercise autonomy in their learning. The research examined
three aspects related to learner autonomy: learner’s perceptions of teacher’s roles and of
themselves, locus of control and strategies employed by learners in their learning process.
The questionnaire was administered to 91 students enrolled in a writing course of the
university used in this case study. The findings suggest that the majority of the students in
this study were not yet ready for learner autonomy. However, although not yet fully
prepared for learning autonomously, many of the students displayed the potential for being
assisted to become more autonomous. However, to achieve this, the study suggests that
changes in their beliefs regards learning and teaching, as well as changes in the educational
system need to be taken into consideration.
Joshi (2011) has analyzed a topic on "Learner Perceptions and Teacher Beliefs about
Learner Autonomy in Language Learning" The main objectives of this study were to
investigate the autonomous activities of the students in learning English: - to explore their
48
beliefs about the role of a teacher and their own in learning and to find out their teachers’
perceptions of learner autonomy. The population of this study consisted of 80 master’s
level students and 6 teachers from the Department of English Education, University
Campus, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu. They were selected as the
population of the study since the researcher was interested in knowing how they were
conducting teaching/ learning activities in such crowded classes and what they were doing
beyond. So, the study area and the population were selected purposively. Then, the
students were selected randomly through fish-bowl draw; while the teachers were selected
purposively. The tools used in the research were a questionnaire and an interview
schedule. The questionnaire was distributed to the students to collect quantitative data.
Additionally, a semi-structured interview sheet was used to elicit the data from the teachers
so as to get the greater detail of the autonomous learning. It was found that the learners
make a good practice of autonomous activities. They view their role as an important factor
in learning. The teachers have also suggested the learners to be autonomous. The teachers
as well as the learners were found highly positive towards autonomous learning.
Barillaro (2011). Conducted a project on "Teacher perspectives of learner autonomy in
language learning" This project is an investigation into teachers’ perspectives of learner
autonomy in language learning. Research was carried out with English language teachers
and the Director of Studies (DOS) at a private ESL (English as a second language) school
in Vancouver, Canada. The report focuses on teachers’ beliefs in five areas: (1)
teacher/student roles and responsibilities, (2) opinions and evidence of students’
autonomous learning, (3) autonomous learning activities inside and outside the classroom,
(4) interpretations of learner autonomy and (5) learner autonomy and the curriculum. A
mixed methods approach was employed which consisted of a questionnaire survey, in
which all teachers had the opportunity to take part, followed by semi-structured interviews
with a small sample of teachers. Findings show that teachers feel mainly responsible for
most teaching and language-related decisions inside the classroom. Student learning and
progress outside the class is generally believed to be the responsibility of the student. The
majority of teachers do not view their students as very autonomous, a belief also shared by
the DOS. Teachers have very positive attitudes towards autonomous learning activities
both inside and outside the classroom. They believe using English outside the classroom is
essential in the learning process; however, they do feel that many students do not use
opportunities to learn English outside class time. Teachers have a clear understanding of
49
the concept of learner autonomy and feel it is important in language learning. There are
concerns, however, that constraints within the school system such as time pressures,
frequent class changes, and increased class sizes may hinder the development of learner
autonomy. Some teachers feel specific courses within the school curriculum offer more
opportunities for autonomous learning, others feel developing learner autonomy does not
depend on the curriculum but is rather teacher dependent. While discussing the findings of
this study, the implications for professional practice within the school where the researcher
works will also be considered. The final part of this paper will summarise the key findings
and offer recommendations for future research.
Lee (2011), has conducted a study in University of New Hampshire on "Blogging:
Promoting Learner Autonomy and Intercultural Competence Through Study Abroad". The
current study explores closely how using combined modalities of asynchronous computer-
mediated communication (CMC) via blogs and face-to-face (FTF) interaction through
ethnographic interviews with native speakers (L1s) supports autonomous learning as the
result of reflective and social processes. The study involves 16 American undergraduate
students who participated in blogs to develop their intercultural competence over the
course of one-semester study abroad. The results show that blogs afforded students the
opportunity to work independently (e.g., content creation) and reflect upon cross-cultural
issues. Critical reflection, however, relied on the teacher’s guidance and feedback, as most
of the students were cognitively challenged by not being able to clearly articulate different
points of view. It is likely that students were not accustomed to reflecting. The findings
also indicate that task type fostered autonomy in different ways. While free topics gave
students more control of their own learning, teacher-assigned topics required them to
critically think about the readings. Lack of access to Internet at the host institution and
family also contributed to a limited level of social interaction. The study concludes that
well-designed tasks, effective metacognitive and cognitive skills, and the accessibility to
Internet are essential to maximize the potentials of blogs for learner autonomy and
intercultural communication.
Balçıkanlı (2010). "Learner Autonomy In Language Learning: Student Teachers’ Beliefs"
The present study aims to investigate student teachers’ beliefs about learner autonomy in
the Turkish educational context. In a study in the ELT Department, Gazi University, a
questionnaire developed by Camilleri (1997) was administered to 112 student teachers.
Twenty volunteer student teachers were interviewed in groups to identify their further
50
general attitudes towards learner autonomy. The overall study findings indicate that
student teachers are positive towards the adoption of learner autonomy principles. Most
student teachers, however, do not want their future students to take part in the decision
making process concerning the time and place of the course and the textbooks to be
followed. In light of the findings, teacher educators are recommended to encourage their
student teachers to engage in out-of-class tasks; to involve them in decision-making on the
learning/teaching processes and to employ portfolios and teacher logs for the development
of practical knowledge and thinking operations.
Demirtas and Sert (2010). "English Education at University Level: Who is at the Centre
of the Learning Process?”The present study aimed to investigate 1) how the English
Language Preparatory Education (ELPE) at a Private University in Ankara matches with
the learners’ needs, 2) the extent of learner-centred activities to improve learner autonomy,
3) the level of autonomy perceptions of the learners, 4) and its influence on the General
Point Averages (GPAs). The study was conducted in the fall of 2009-2010 academic
years. Population for the study consisted of 173 learners. The study employed both
qualitative and quantitative research techniques to strengthen the design through
triangulation. A ‘Learning Needs Scale’ was developed to identify learners’ perceptions in
view of appropriateness of the ELPE for their learning needs. The data collected through
the scale was supported with semi-structured interviews. An ‘Autonomy Perception Scale’
was developed to measure perceptions of the learners considering their autonomous
learning skills. Data through semi -structured observations were also obtained to support
the data collected by the scale. Findings indicated that: 1) approximately two thirds of the
learners think the ELPE matches with their needs, 2) their perceptions in view of
appropriateness of the ELPE for their needs change according to the schools they
graduated from, 3) learner-centred activities are not practised effectively in the classes, 4)
the level of autonomous skills of the learners is not sufficient to take responsibility for their
own learning, 5) there is no correlation between the ‘Autonomy Perception Scale’ scores
and the GPAs of the learners. In line with the findings, suggestions have been made to
solve the problem.
Tok (2010). Conducted a study on "Autonomous Language Learning: Turkish tertiary
students’ behaviours" The purpose of the study reported here was to investigate
autonomous English language learning activities among the students in an English
preparatory programme at Zirve University in Turkey. The study investigated whether
51
these activities show significant differences according to the motivation level, proficiency
level or gender of the students. The data were collected through the Learner Autonomy
Questionnaire originally developed by Chan, Spratt and Humphreys (2002). The
questionnaire was completed by 218 students and 30 teachers. The results revealed that:
the majority of participants engaged in autonomous learning activities inside and outside
the classroom; there is no significant difference between the autonomous learning activities
of men and women; however, women engaged in more autonomous activities than men;
students with high proficiency in English engaged much more in autonomous learning
activities; students who were motivated and highly motivated participated frequently in
autonomous learning activities.
Fine and Collins (2009). “EFL Learner Autonomy as it emerges in Drama Projects" This
paper outlines the rationale and contents of a drama project recently conducted with
secondary EFL learners in Japan. Assumptions underpinning the project included that
learners should engage in “whole language learning” and real social practice through
authentic, meaningful activities. The teachers supported students through a sequence of
high-, mid-, and low-structured activities, as well as on-going reflection, their stance
shifting from “instructor” to “facilitator” (Little, 1995) and finally to “learner.” Students
ultimately took the initiative in developing their roles and designing, rehearsing, and
performing scenes. This paper offers narrative data and samples of student work
demonstrating that the project not only advanced the students’ L2 proficiency, but
promoted both their creativity and autonomy.
Bayat (2009). "The Effects of Out-of-Class Use of English on Autonomy Perception" In
this study, the effects of out-of-class use of English on the perception of autonomy were
investigated with 34 university students who learn English in preparation classes in the
School of Foreign Languages at DokuzEylül University. An Autonomy Perception Scale
was used before and after a 10-week period in which participants were anonymously
paired and exchanged letters with each other. The activity took place out of class, was on a
voluntary basis and was not included in course assessment. An analysis of the results was
augmented by interviews with participants. Results show that after the letter-writing
activity the participants had higher levels of autonomy perception. The difference was
statistically significant. The participants reported that the activity contributed to their
autonomous learning experiences as well as their language learning.
52
Hozayen (2009). "Egyptian Students’ Readiness for Autonomous Language Learning"
This paper reports on a study to ascertain the readiness for language learning autonomy of
freshmen students enrolled in the College. A questionnaire was distributed to the
participants on their first day of classes. The participants were freshmen students enrolled
in the College of Engineering, Alexandria, Egypt, in the Academy on their first day of the
academic year of 2008/2009, prior to any college teaching. The study shows that more
than two thirds of the participants manifest some degrees of language learning autonomy.
However, more follow up on this group’s language learning progress might reveal more
stimulating and insightful findings.
Conttia (2007) has conducted a research for Master of Arts on "The Influence of Learner
Motivation on Developing Autonomous Learning in an English-for-Specific-Purposes
Course" at the University of Hong Kong. This study adopts both quantitative and
qualitative approaches to identify factors which motivate and hinder the science majors to
take charge of their language learning in a course-based Self-Access Language Learning
SALL program at the University of Hong Kong. The study attempts to find out the
cognitive and psychological factors that differentiate learners’ levels of development of
autonomous learning, and the contextual and social influences surrounding the learners’
participation in course-based SALL. Data were collected by means of questionnaires,
focus group discussions and learners’ written evaluations. A total of 138 students from
eight classes were selected to participate in the questionnaire survey and the SALL
evaluation exercise. Eight focus group discussions were conducted to obtain qualitative
data. The results indicate significant differences exist in identified regulation and self
efficacy between successful and less successful users of SALL. Also, a number of social
and contextual factors are found to have an impact on the learners’ success in SALL.
These include relationships with significant others, social settings, implementation of
SALL into the curriculum, affective factors, mastery of metacognitive skills and the nature
of SALL itself. Based on the findings, a number of recommendations were made for
successful integration of SALL into language courses.
Lai (2007) has analyzed a topic on" In-service Teacher Development for Facilitating
Learner Autonomy in Curriculum-Based Self-Access Language Learning". The subjects
of this study were instructors of a second-year undergraduate English-for-Academic-
Purposes EAP course titled Advanced English for Science Students. This paper aims to
53
identify the challenges in-service language teachers are facing when they are asked to
teach on a course with a self-access language learning (SALL) component, and the support
and training that they perceive necessary to help learners to maximize their SALL
experience. The paper reports the findings of interviews with EAP instructors teaching on
a course with a major SALL component in a university in Hong Kong. Recommendations
on appropriate teacher development regarding the facilitation of SALL within the
curriculum are offered. The study found that most teachers were mainly concerned about
the effectiveness of SALL for students who were not motivated to work independently on
their language learning but, in fact, needed SALL most. Students’ performance in SALL
was the other primary source of frustration for many teachers. Time management,
provision of feedback and level of control, knowledge about SALL facilitation were,
among others, the common challenges that teachers had to overcome.
Reeve and Jang (2006). Tackled a topic in "What Teachers Say and Do to Support
Students’ Autonomy during a Learning Activity" Teachers with autonomy supportive style
relies on different instructional behaviors to motivate their students than do teachers with a
controlling style. Participants were 72 pairs of same-sex preservice teachers into the role
of either teacher or a student (62 pairs of women, 10 pairs of men) enrolled in a teacher
certification program at a large Midwestern university. Most participants were Caucasian
White (86%), 10% were African American, and 4% were Hispanic. Academic
classifications included 40% sophomores, 32% juniors, 25% seniors, and 3% post
baccalaureates. Participants were recruited from an undergraduate educational psychology
course and received extra credit for their participation. In the present investigation, the
authors tested which of these instructional behaviors actually correlated positively or
negatively with students’ autonomy. The authors used Deci, Spiegel, Ryan, Koestner,
&Kauffman’s(1982) teacher–student laboratory paradigm to randomly assign 72 pairs of
same-sex preservice teachers into the role of either teacher or student. From videotapes of
the 10-min instructional episode, raters scored 11 hypothesized autonomy-supportive
behaviors and 10 hypothesized controlling behaviors. Correlational analyses confirmed
that students perceived the functional significance of 8 instructional behaviors as autonomy
supports and 6 instructional behaviors as autonomy thwarts. The discussion focuses on the
interpretation and classroom implications of these data. Results show that students’
perceived autonomy correlated significantly and positively with all three outcomes of
54
interest–enjoyment, engagement, and performance. These correlations show that perceived
autonomy was associated with students’ positive functioning during the learning activity.
Dallow and Hobbs (2005). “Personal Goal-setting and Autonomy in Language Learning".
This paper will discuss the relationship between personal goal-setting based on goal-setting
theory and autonomy in a foreign language learning context. Participants were first and
second year learners of the Japanese language in a BA degree course. The study involved
a comparison between treatment and control groups of first and second year students.
During class sessions, the treatment groups set weekly goals for Japanese learning over a
five-week period, whereas the control groups did not set any goals. The research
instruments included a triangulation of three forms of information: 1. a questionnaire was
administered to all groups before and after the treatment period 2. The treatment group
was asked to evaluate goal-setting as a learning strategy 3. Selected participants were
interviewed. The aim of these interventions was to determine whether goal-setting
influenced participants' attitudes to the level of responsibility they believed they had for
their own learning of Japanese. The descriptive analyses of data showed no statistically
significant difference between treatment and control groups to indicate that personal goal-
setting promoted autonomy while learning Japanese. However, the analysis of qualitative
data suggested that autonomy was promoted through the goal-setting process in some
students.
Chiu (2005), has conducted a study on "Teacher Roles and Autonomous Language
Learners" in The Pennsylvania State University. The Graduate School College of the
Liberal Arts. This study involved a small population of learners in a cyber-pedagogical
context where institutional power was non-existent. The study aimed at investigating the
relationship of teacher roles and learner autonomy in a cyber pedagogical context, a
context where the teacher as well as the learners were L2 users of English with diverse
linguistic and cultural backgrounds and experiences. Data consisted of 362 email
messages generated in a twenty-month period of the cyber English class. A qualitative
data analysis software, NVivo 1.1-3 was used to conduct a content analysis that identified
the teaching and counseling roles of the teacher in 90 email messages, spread equally
among the beginning, middle and end phases of the instructional period. The results
showed that the teacher’s teaching roles became less active as the course progressed
whereas the counseling roles remained active throughout the instructional period. Data
55
analysis also calls into question the universality of established categories of teacher roles,
suggesting that cultural context and experience need to be taken into consideration. Linked
to the content analysis, a follow-up discourse analysis investigated the ensuing learner-
teacher interactions to explore how the learners reacted to the teaching and counseling
roles of the teacher. The results suggested that teaching roles did not provide opportunities
for promoting learner autonomy, but counseling roles created a supportive learning
environment for the learners to develop autonomy in language learning. The results of the
discourse analysis provided additional evidence in support of the working definition of
learner autonomy with particular emphasis on the connection between communication and
autonomy in language learning.
Cotterall (1995), has tackled a topic on "Readiness for Autonomy: Investigating Learner
Beliefs" in English Language Institute, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.
The promotion of autonomous approaches to language learning is justified on ideological,
psychological and economic grounds (Crabbe, 1993:443). This paper argues that before
any intervention occurs, it is necessary to gauge learners' readiness for the changes in
behaviour and beliefs which autonomy implies. Firstly the paper presents data on learner
beliefs collected in a study which involved the development and administration of a
questionnaire on learner beliefs about language learning. Factor analysis of subjects'
responses to the questionnaire revealed the existence of six dimensions underlying the
responses. The paper then discusses each factor in turn, examining the claims that have
been made in the literature about the role that factor plays in language learning and
exploring the hypothesized relationship of each factor to autonomous language learning
behavior. The paper concludes by reiterating the importance of investigating the beliefs
which learners hold. These beliefs are likely to reflect learners' "readiness" for autonomy.
56
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
3.0. Introduction
This chapter attempts to describe the method used to collect data, the population
and the types of materials used as well as the procedures followed to conduct the research.
Moreover, to present the validity and reliability consideration of research instrument will
be discussed.
The method of research which was employed for this study classified as quantitative and
qualitative method. So far, this study investigated Learner Autonomy in KSA EFL classes
and measures autonomy by asking participants to gauge their own perceptions about
students' responsibility in learner autonomy.
The findings may develop guide lines for teacher educators regarding how to
overcome barriers in students' minds about learner autonomy. It provides an opportunity
for teachers, policy makers and the wider community to gain insight into this phenomenon
and reform programs in universities to develop learner autonomy.
3.1 Population of the Study
This study was a survey done among the students and teachers from English
Language Centre ELC, University of Tabuk main campus. The study was conducted
across the second semester in the year 2016. The subjects who participated in this study
were preparatory year students who regularly attend English Language course and ESP in
PYEP. They range in age from 19-21 years old. The teachers are currently teaching
English at ELC.
3.2 Samples of the Study
The subjects of this study were (80) first year students studying English at
University of Tabuk, PYEP who were enrolled in the academic year (2015-2016). 80
students from different Faculties who took the course ESP and 50 instructors who are
currently teaching in ELC classes participated in two questionnaires.
3.3 Tools of Data Collection
In this research, the triangulation design of mixed approach, in which quantitative
and qualitative data collection techniques are utilized. To gather diverse yet
complementary data in the subject matter, in order to fully fathom the research questions,
57
is the objective of this approach (Morse, 1991:122). One of the ways to enhance the study
design is to diversify the data collection techniques (Patton, 1990). The researcher
believes that, using mixed research method in such research helps to obtain more reliable
information than using quantitative or qualitative alone. In this study, the researcher is
going to use:
3.3.1 Questionnaires
This instrument was chosen because, as Burton & Bartlett (2005) note, it is an
appropriate way of obtaining data from a large number of respondents. There are two
questionnaire. One will be administered to freshmen students in their classrooms by their
own class teachers and the other questionnaire will be administered to teachers who are
teaching these students. To enhance the data collected by the questionnaire, the researcher
is going to use the data collection method based on class observations to collect direct
autonomous learning activities.
Table (3.1) the distribution of Socio-demographic Characteristics of the Study Participants
Variables N= 50
Freq. Percent.
Years of Experience :
(1-5) yrs. 7 14%
(6-10) yrs. 12 24%
>10 yrs. 31 62%
Graduation Degree:
Diploma or certificate in ELT 2 4%
Bachelor degree 15 30%
MA in English 30 60%
PhD in English 3 6%
Nationality:
American 6 12%
British 4 8%
Canadian 5 10%
Egyptian 2 4%
58
Indian 1 2%
Jordanian 8 16%
Pakistani 7 14%
South Africa 6 12%
Sudanese 10 20%
Syrian 1 2%
Table (3.1) shows the distribution of Socio-demographic Characteristics of the Study
Participants (Teachers). The population data split by years of experience group shows that
14% of respondents, their teaching experience of (1-5) years, 24% of (6-10) years, and
62% of (> 10). The study sample is characterized by good deal of teaching experience
level as illustrated in figure (3.1).
Fig (3.1) Respondents’ distribution due to variable of Experience
With respect to the graduation degree, table (3.1) describes that 4% of the
respondents had (Diploma or certificate in ELT), 30% had (Bachelor), 60% had (MA in
English) , 6% had ( PhD IN English). That means the majority of the sample had
graduation degree of (MA in English).
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
(1-5) yrs.
(6-10) yrs.
>10 yrs.
Years of Experience :
59
Fig (3.2) Respondents’ distribution due to variable of Graduation degree
Table (3.1) and figure (3.3) show that the sample comprised of (10) Nationalities,
so it is a heterogeneous sample. Sudanese nationality represents 20%, Jordanian 16%,
Pakistani 14%, South African and American 12% each, Canadian 10%, British 8%,
Egyptian 4%, Indian 2% and Syrian also 2%.
Fig (3.3) Respondents’ distribution due to variable of Nationality
The fact that the students are taught by expatriate teachers from different countries with
different experiences and qualifications assures that our choice of data collection from such
faculty is more authentic. This heterogeneous sample of teachers gives us reliable data of
4%
30%
60%
6%
Diploma or certificate in ELT
Bachelor degree
MA in English
PhD in English
20%
16%
14%
12%
12%
10%
8%
4%
2%
2%
Sudanese
Jordanian
Pakistani
American
South African
Canadian
British
Egyptian
Indian
SyrianNationality
60
the students that can be relied upon in analyzing their motivation levels and in judging
whether they are autonomous learners or not.
3.3.2Classroom Observation
This method provides information on what people actually do. It is much quicker and
easier to observe routine behaviour. It provides information on what people actually do,
rather than asking them about what they do. There are many reasons why there might be a
difference between what people actually do and what they say they do. For example, if a
student is asked in a questionnaire “Do you take notes during the classes?" Simply he may
prefer the answer "Yes" although he does not take any notes. So observation method
shows actual practices of autonomous activities in the classroom although some normal
disruptive activities or behaviour cease when subjects understand that they are being
observed.
3.4 Reliability and Validity of the Students’ Questionnaire
The study used the statistical package for social sciences to analysis the data
collected.
3.4.1 Reliability
Reliability refers to whether the research can produce the same or very similar
results if it is conducted again under the same or very similar conditions.
The researcher used Pearson's correlation and the results obtained as follows:
2222 )()()()(
)()(
YYNXXN
YXXYNrXY
Where
r = correlation
R: Reliability of the test
N: number of all items in the test
X: odd scores
Y: even scores
∑: Sum
R = 2*r/1+r
Val = yreliabilit
Correlation = 0.60
61
06.1
1.20
06.01
)06.0(2
1
2
r
rR Reliability = 0.75
3.4.2 Validity
In this study the researcher used Pearson's correlation through spilt half-methods.
According to the equation below it is found that the validity is:
Val = 0.75 Validity = 0.87
It refers to whether the research investigate the problems that it is purported to
investigate. The researcher thinks that this research is of a high validity.
3.5 Procedures for Data Collection
Before the researcher started any procedures, official permission to conduct this research at
University of Tabuk, PYEP was obtained from ELC Administration. See appendix. At
the beginning the researcher gave the questionnaire to some experts like Dr. Aschraf
Abdelhay, Dr. Yasser Bilal, and Robert Tarrega (English language supervisor) for
proofreading, correction and their point of views about the questionnaire and at last
amendment was done,
3.6 Piloting
The main aim of conducting a pilot study was to make sure that the instrument of
the study, the questionnaire, was understandable and contained no difficulties for the
participants to complete. The researcher tried to pilot the questionnaire for the first time
with six students who were enrolled in English in the Faculty of Science, but he found that
the students could not understand the meanings of the items because their English level
proficiency was very low. He was impelled to translate the items in the students' first
language L1. But he found that translation affects respondents' answers. He simplified the
items where necessary but in vain. Eventually he was obliged to translate the entire
questionnaire to the students' L1 for the sake of the validity of the questionnaire. The
researcher piloted the questionnaire after translation and it was very clear for students to
answer. The participants displayed no difficulty in understanding and completing the first
draft of the questionnaire. Then it was finalized so that it was ready to be employed in the
actual study. Therefore, those who participated in piloting were not included in the sample
of the study. The entire process, including the administration, the collection and the
analysis of results, took three weeks.
62
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
4.0 Introduction
This chapter is intended to present analysis and discussion of the data that has been
collected by instruments. It is also intended to test research hypotheses against the results
that have been reached. The findings and recommendations will be discussed in the
following chapter.
4.1 Data Analysis and Discussion of Students’ Questionnaire
By means of using the statistical program (SPSS) which stands for Statistical
Package for Social Science, the analysis results were as follows:
Statement (1): I try to use every opportunity to write down each new
word or structure that I have heard.
Table (4.1.1) Trying to write down every new word or structure that I heard
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 57 71.25
Neutral 18 22.5
Agree 5 6.25
Total 80 100.0
63
Fig (4.1.1) Trying to write down every new word or structure that I heard
According to the statistical results, it is found that (71.25%) of the respondents
disagree with statement “I try to use every opportunity to write down each new word or
structure that I have heard”, whereas (22.5%) of them have neutral with it, and (6.25%)
agreed with this statement. This result has been proved that most of the students don’t try
to use every opportunity to write down each new word or structure that they have heard.
64
Statement (2): I try to use every opportunity to take part in the activities
where and when I can speak English.
Table (4.1.2) Trying to take part in the activities where and when I can speak
English.
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 54 67.5
Neutral 22 27.5
Agree 4 5.0
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.2) Trying to take part in the activities where and when I can speak
English.
The statistical results indicate that (67.5%) of the respondents disagree with
statement “I try to use every opportunity to take part in the activities where and when I can
speak English”, whereas (27.5%) of them have neutral with it, and (5%) agreed with this
65
statement. This result has been proved that most of the students don’t try to use every
opportunity to take part in the activities where and when they can speak English.
Statement (3): I try to find learning aids that well match with my level in
order to better learn English
Table (4.1.3) Trying to find learning aids that match my level to better learn
English.
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 56 70.0
Neutral 10 12.5
Agree 14 17.5
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.3) Trying to find learning aids that match my level to better learn
English.
Table and Fig (4.1.3) show that (70%) of the respondents disagree with statement
“I try to find learning aids that well match with my level in order to better learn English”,
whereas (17.5%) agree with it, and (12.5%) of them have neutral with this statement. This
result has been proved that most of the students don’t try to find learning aids that well
match with their level in order to better learn English.
66
Statement (4): I plan my English learning process
Table (4.1.4) Planning English learning process
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 52 65.0
Neutral 17 21.2
Agree 11 13.8
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.4) Planning English learning process
The statistical results obtain that (65%) of the respondents disagree with statement
“I plan my English learning process”, whereas (21.25%) of them have neutral with it, and
(13.75%) agreed with this statement. This result has been proved that most of the students
don’t plan their English learning process.
67
Statement (5): I make good use of my free time in learning English
Table (4.1.5) Using free time in learning English
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 64 80.0
Neutral 14 17.5
Agree 2 2.5
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.5) Using free time in learning English
According to the statistical results, it is found that (80%) of the respondents
disagree with statement “I make good use of my free time in learning English”, whereas
(17.5%) of them have neutral with it and only (2.5%) agreed with this statement. This
result has been proved that most of the students don’t make good use of their free time in
learning English.
68
Statement (6): I take notes during lessons
Table (4.1.6) Taking notes during lessons
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 53 66.2
Neutral 23 28.8
Agree 4 5.0
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.6) Taking notes during lessons
The statistical results indicate that (66.25%) of the respondents disagree with
statement “I take notes during lessons”, whereas (28.75%) of them have neutral with it and
(5%) agreed with this statement. This result has been proved that most of the students
don’t take notes during lessons.
69
Statement (7): Besides the content prescribed in the course, I read extra
materials in advance
Table (4.1.7) Reading extra materials in advance
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 65 81.2
Neutral 10 12.5
Agree 5 6.2
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.7) Reading extra materials in advance
The table and figure above show that (81.25%) of the respondents disagree with
statement “Besides the content prescribed in the course, I read extra materials in advance”,
whereas (12.5%) of them have neutral with it, and (6.25%) agreed with this statement.
This result has been proved that most of the students don’t read extra materials in advance
besides the content prescribed in the course.
70
Statement (8): I use the internet and a computer to study and improve
my English language
Table (4.1.8) Using the internet and a computer to study and improve English
language
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 56 70.0
Neutral 16 20.0
Agree 8 10.0
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.8) Using the internet and a computer to study and improve English
language
The statistical results obtain that (70%) of the respondents disagree with statement
“I use the internet and a computer to study and improve my English language”, whereas
(20%) of them have neutral with it, and (10%) agreed with this statement. This result has
been proved that most of the students don’t use the internet and a computer to study and
improve their English language.
71
Statement (9): Teachers have to be responsible for enabling students to
understand English
Table (4.1.9) Responsibility for enabling students to understand English
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 8 10.0
Neutral 17 21.2
Agree 55 68.8
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.9) Responsibility for enabling students to understand English
With reference to the results obtained in the above table (68.75%) of the
respondents agree with statement “Teachers have to be responsible for enabling students to
understand English”, whereas (21.25%) of them have neutral with it, and (10%) disagree
with this statement. This result has been proved that the students think that the teachers
have to be responsible for enabling students to understand English.
72
Statement (10): The failure of the students is directly related to the
teachers’ classroom management
Table (4.1.10) Teachers’ classroom management
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 19 23.8
Neutral 15 18.8
Agree 46 57.5
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.10) Teachers’ classroom management
According to the statistical results, it is found that (57.5%) of the respondents agree
with statement “The failure of the students is directly related to the teachers’ classroom
management”, whereas (23.75%) of them have disagreed with it, and (18.75%) neutral
with this statement. This result has been proved that students think that the failure of the
students is directly related to the teachers’ classroom management.
73
Statement (11): Teachers’ role is to transmit knowledge to students
Table (4.1.11) Transmitting knowledge to students
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 6 7.5
Neutral 7 8.8
Agree 67 83.8
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.11) Transmitting knowledge to students
The statistical results indicate that (83.75%) of the respondents agree with
statement “Teachers’ role is to transmit knowledge to students”, whereas (8.75%) of them
have neutral with it, and (7.5%) disagree with this statement. This result has been proved
that students think that the teachers’ role is to transmit knowledge to students.
74
Statement (12): Teachers should explain everything to students
Table (4.1.12) Teachers explain everything to students
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 11 13.8
Neutral 19 23.8
Agree 50 62.5
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.12) Teachers explain everything to students
Table and Fig (4.1.12) show that (62.5%) of the respondents agree with statement
“Teachers should explain everything to students”, whereas (23.75%) of them have neutral
with it, and (13.75%) disagree with this statement. This result has been proved that
students think the teachers should explain everything to students.
75
Statement (13): At the end of a learning activity in the classroom, I give
feedback to my friends and teachers on how well I have learnt
Table (4.1.13) Students’ feedback
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 61 76.2
Neutral 14 17.5
Agree 5 6.2
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.13) Students’ feedback
The statistical results indicate that (76.25%) of the respondents disagree with
statement “At the end of a learning activity in the classroom, I give feedback to my friends
and teachers on how well I have learnt”, whereas (17.5%) of them have neutral with it, and
(6.25%) agree with this statement. This result has been proved that the students don’t give
feedback to their friends and teachers at the end of a learning activity in the classroom.
76
Statement (14): In the classroom, I highlight the items that I don’t
understand, in order to go over them again
Table (4.1.14) Highlighting the items that don’t understand in the classroom
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 58 72.5
Neutral 15 18.8
Agree 7 8.8
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.14) Highlighting the items that don’t understand in the classroom
The statistical results indicate that (72.5%) of the respondents disagree with
statement “In the classroom, I highlight the items that I don’t understand in order to go
over them again”, whereas (18.75%) of them have neutral with it, and (8.75%) agree with
this statement. This result has been proved that in the classroom, the students don’t
highlight the items that don’t understand, in order to go over them again.
77
Statements (15): I do speaking activities in pairs and groups even
without the teacher's help
Table (4.1.15) Doing speaking activities in pairs and groups
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 60 75.0
Neutral 16 20.0
Agree 4 5.0
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.15) Doing speaking activities in pairs and groups
Table and Fig (4.1.15) show that (75%) of the respondents disagree with statement
“I do speaking activities in pairs and groups even without the teacher's help”, whereas
(20%) of them have neutral with it, and (5%) agree with this statement. This result has
been proved that students do not do speaking activities unless teachers help them to do it.
78
Statement (16): I work on finding out answer to problems wherever
possible
Table (4.1.16) Finding out answer to problems wherever possible
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 48 60.0
Neutral 20 25.0
Agree 12 15.0
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.16) Finding out answer to problems wherever possible
The statistical results indicate that (60%) of the respondents disagree with
statement “I work on finding out answer to problems wherever possible”, whereas (25%)
of them have neutral with it, and (15%) agree with this statement. This result has been
proved that the students don’t work on finding out answer to problems wherever possible.
79
Statement (17): When I make progress in learning, I reward myself by
buying new things, celebrating parties…etc.
Table (4.1.17) Rewarding when making progress in learning
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 64 80.0
Neutral 8 10.0
Agree 8 10.0
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.17) Rewarding when making progress in learning
The statistical results indicate that (80%) of the respondents disagree with
statement “When I make progress in learning, I reward myself by buying new things,
celebrating parties…etc.”, whereas both neutral and agree percentage is (10%) to the
statement. This result has been proved that the students don’t reward themselves by
buying new things, celebrating parties…etc. to make progress in learning.
80
Statement (18): When I participate in different classroom activities, I do
that because I believe participation is valuable for my chosen career
Table (4.1.18) Participation is valuable for chosen career
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 52 65.0
Neutral 18 22.5
Agree 10 12.5
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.18) Participation is valuable for chosen career
The statistical results indicate that (65%) of the respondents disagree with
statement “When I participate in different classroom activities, I do that because I believe
participation is valuable for my chosen career”, whereas (22.5%) of them have neutral with
it, and (12.5%) agree with this statement. This result has been proved that when the
students participate in different classroom activities, they do not understand that
participation is valuable for their chosen career.
81
Statement (19): Sometimes when I do homework, I do it to please my
teacher
Table (4.1.19) sometimes doing homework to please teacher
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 23 28.8
Neutral 14 17.5
Agree 43 53.8
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.19) sometimes doing homework to please teacher
According to the statistical results, it is found that (53.75%) of the respondents
agree with statement “Sometimes when I do homework, I do it to please my teacher”,
whereas (28.75%) of them have disagree with it, and (17.5%) neutral with this statement.
This result has been proved that the students sometimes do their homework to please their
teacher.
82
Statement (20): When I participate in classroom, I do it simply for the
enjoyment of the activity
Table (4.1.20) Participation in the classroom for the enjoyment of the activity
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 46 57.5
Neutral 22 27.5
Agree 12 15.0
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.20) Participation in the classroom for the enjoyment of the activity
According to the statistical results, it is found that (57.5%) of the respondents
disagree with statement “When I participate in classroom, I do it simply for the enjoyment
of the activity”, whereas (27.5%) of them have neutral with it, and (15%) agree with this
statement. This result has been proved that students are not intrinsically motivated to
participate for the enjoyment.
83
Statement (21): I attend different seminars, training courses, conferences
to improve my English.
Table (4.1.21) Attending seminars, training courses and conferences for
improving English
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 63 78.8
Neutral 11 13.8
Agree 6 7.5
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.21) Attending seminars, training courses and conferences for
improving English
According to the statistical results, it is found that (78.75%) of the respondents
disagree with statement “I attend different seminars, training courses, conferences to
improve my English”, whereas (13.75%) of them have neutral with it, and (7.5%) agree
with this statement. This result has been proved that most students do not attend different
seminars, training courses and conferences to improve their English.
84
Statement (22): I use audio-visual materials to improve my speaking
abilities such as: listen to BBC, watch English movies, read English
newspapers etc.
Table (4.1.22) Using audio-visual materials to improve speaking abilities
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 59 73.8
Neutral 9 11.2
Agree 12 15.0
Total 80 100.0
Table (4.1.22) Using audio-visual materials to improve speaking abilities
According to the statistical results, it is found that (73.75%) of the respondents
disagree with statement “I use audio-visual materials to improve my speaking abilities such
as: listen to BBC, watch English movies, read English newspapers…etc.”, whereas (15%)
of them have agree with it, and (11.25%) neutral with this statement. This result has been
proved that students do not use audio-visual materials to improve their speaking abilities.
85
Statement (23): I go to the library and look for English books to improve
my English
Table (4.1.23) Going to library for English books
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 68 85.0
Neutral 8 10.0
Agree 4 5.0
Total 80 100.0
Table (4.1.23) Going to library for English books
According to the statistical results, it is found that (85%) of the respondents disagree with
statement “I go to the library and look for English books to improve my English”, whereas
(10%) of them have neutral with it, and (5%) agree with this statement. This result has
been proved that students do not go to the library and look for English books to improve
their English.
86
Statement (24): I talk to people outside the classroom in English
Table (4.1.24) Talking to people outside the classroom in English
Options Frequency Percent
Disagree 56 70.0
Neutral 15 18.8
Agree 9 11.2
Total 80 100.0
Fig (4.1.24) Talking to people outside the classroom in English
According to the statistical results, it is found that (70%) of the respondents
disagree with statement “talk to people outside the classroom in English”, whereas
(18.75%) of them have neutral with it, and (11%) agree with this statement. This result has
been proved that students do not talk to people outside the classroom in English so as to
improve their English.
87
4.2 Testing the Hypotheses for Students’ Questionnaire
Hypothesis One: The first hypothesis of the study stated that: The students in PYP at
UT are unwilling to take charge of their learning English properly.
By investigating the data collected, it is clear that this hypothesis is justified and
made accepted. Most of the respondents do not plan their English learning process. They
are reluctant to write new words, to take part in activities in the classroom and to find
learning aids to help them learn better.
Hypothesis Two: The second hypothesis claimed that: The students in PYP at UT do
not observe their own responsibilities as well as their teachers' responsibilities in learning
English.
With regard to statistical analysis, a lot of respondents do not understand the value of time
and make good use of it. They are careless about revising their lessons, reading additional
material, and using internet and computer to learning English. The students are almost
ignorant of their teachers’ responsibilities. Students are accustomed to spoon fed and they
think that teacher is responsible for everything. He should transmit knowledge, explain
everything, help them to understand English and at the end he is responsible for their
failure. Whereas teachers’ responsibility is a facilitator, conductor and monitoring learning
situations. So it is acceptable hypothesis.
Hypothesis Three: The students in PYP at UT do not show any improvement in the
responsibility for their own language learning through activities where they would set
goals for themselves.
The tables of statistical analysis emphasizes that the majority of the respondents are
hesitant to participate in the speaking activities without teachers’ help and at the end of
learning activities; a few of them give feedback to their partners and teachers about what
they have learnt. They never do highlight unclear items to go over them again and work
for finding answers to their problems.
Hypothesis Four: There are differences in the learners’ motivation levels in learning
English with regard to their proficiency level.
By considering the statistical results, the majority of respondents are not
autonomously motivated learners. Autonomous learner displays his delight when he feels
that his level of English is improved and scores high in exams. A lot of students when they
do work they do it because it is valuable for their chosen career and many of them do it
because the teacher wants the work to be done. This type of students is extrinsically
88
motivated learners and not autonomous learners. Autonomous learners do the activity for
their satisfaction of learning. Thus the hypothesis is justifiable.
4.3 Data Analysis and Discussion of the Teachers Questionnaire
Table (4.2.1) Provides general descriptive information at the item level
(Likert scale:1 = disagree, 2 = neutral, 3 = agree): overall mean (standard deviation);
overall percent
Statements M Sd.
N = 50
Answers
Disagree Neutral Agree
1-Most language learning students are not
motivated enough to achieve learner
autonomy
2.38 0.805 20% 22% 58%
2-Students depend completely on their
teachers to improve on their learning
abilities
2.48 0.789 18% 16% 66%
3-Many students do not complete
homework assigned to them 2.58 0.731 14% 14% 72%
4-Some students do not know how to find
their own ways of practicing English
language skills.
2.78 0.465 2% 18% 80%
5- Nearly all of the students do not take
any notes during English classes. 2.34 0.848 24% 18% 58%
6-Students tend to give answers in Arabic
when they do not find one in English. 2.62 0.635 8% 22% 70%
7-Many students do not review lessons
taught in the classroom. 2.74 0.527 4% 18% 78%
8-Sometimes when students do
homework, they do so to please the
teacher.
2.52 0.614 6% 36% 58%
89
9-Some students when they are requested
to participate in pairs or group work, they
get shy and therefore deters them from
attaining full learner autonomy.
2.60 0.639 8% 24% 68%
10-Some students do not pay attention to
the lesson and play with their mobile
phones during the classes.
2.78 0.507 4% 14% 82%
4.4 Testing the Hypotheses for Teachers’ Questionnaire
The first Hypothesis: The students in PYP at UT, are unwilling to take
charge of their learning English properly.
Table (4.2.2) Hypothesis one components
Statements M Sd. N = 50
Disagree Neutral Agree
2-Students depend completely on their
teachers to improve on their learning
abilities
2.48 0.789 18% 16% 66%
3-Many students do not complete
homework assigned to them 2.58 0.731 14% 14% 72%
5- Nearly all of the students do not take
any notes during English classes. 2.34 0.848 24% 18% 58%
10-Some students do not pay attention to
the lesson and play with their mobile
phones during the classes.
2.78 0.507 4% 14% 82%
From table (4.2.2), 66% of respondents agree with the statement No (2), 16% were
neutral and 18% answered (disagree). This reveals that students depend completely on
their teachers to improve on their learning abilities.
Regarding the statement No. (3), we can see that 72% of answers was (agree), 14%
(neutral), and only 14% were (disagree). This indicates that many students do not
complete homework assigned to them.
90
Responses to statement No (5) showed that 58% (agree), 18% (neutral), 14%
(disagree). This indicates that nearly all of the students do not take any notes during
English classes.
Regarding statement No.(10), we can see that 82% of answers was (agree), 14%
(neutral), and only 4% were (disagree).this indicates that Some students do not pay
attention to the lesson and play with their mobile phones during the classes.
The Second Hypothesis: The students in PYP at UT do not observe their own
responsibilities as well as their teachers' responsibilities in learning English.
Table (4.2.3) Hypothesis two components
Statements M Sd. N = 50
Disagree Neutral Agree
2-Students depend completely on their
teachers to improve on their learning
abilities
2.48 0.789 18% 16% 66%
4-Some students do not know how to find
their own ways of practicing English
language skills.
2.78 0.465 2% 18% 80%
7-Many students do not review lessons
taught in the classroom. 2.74 0.527 4% 18% 78%
10-Some students do not pay attention to
the lesson and play with their mobile
phones during the classes.
2.78 0.507 4% 14% 82%
From table (4.2.3), 66% of respondents agree with the statement No (2), 16% were
neutral and 18% answered (disagree). This reveals that students depend completely on
their teachers to improve on their learning abilities.
Regarding the statement No. (4), we can see that 80% of answers was (agree), 18%
(neutral), and only 2% were (disagree). This indicates that some students do not know
how to find their own ways of practicing English language skills.
91
With respect to the statement No (7) we can see that 78% of the study' sample
(agree) with the statement, 18% were (neutral) and only 4% (disagree). This ensures that
many students do not review lessons taught in the classroom.
Regarding statement No. (10), we can see that 82% of answers was (agree), 14%
(neutral), and only 4% were (disagree). This indicates that some students do not pay
attention to the lesson and play with their mobile phones during the classes.
The third Hypothesis: The students in PYP at UT do not show any
improvement in the responsibility for their own language learning through
activities where they would set goals for themselves.
Table (4.2.4) Hypothesis three components
Statements M Sd. N = 50
Disagree Neutral Agree
6-Students tend to give answers in Arabic
when they do not find one in English. 2.62 0.635 8% 22% 70%
9- Some students, when requested to do
group or pair work with unfamiliar peers,
they get shy and this deters them from
attaining learner autonomy.
2.60 0.639 8% 24% 68%
From table (4.2.4), 70% of respondents (agree) with the statement No (6), 22%
were (neutral) and only 8% answered (disagree). This reveals that Students tend to give
answers in Arabic when they do not find one in English.
With respect to the statement No (9) we can see that 68% of the study sample
(agree) with the statement, 24% were (neutral) and only 8% (disagree). This ensures that,
some students, when requested to do group or pair work with unfamiliar peers, they get shy
and this deters them from attaining learner autonomy.
92
The fourth Hypothesis: There are differences in the learners’ motivation
levels in learning English with regard to their proficiency level.
Table (4.5) Hypothesis four components
Statements M Sd. N = 50
Disagree Neutral Agree
1-Most language learning students are not
motivated enough to achieve learner
autonomy
2.38 0.805 20% 22% 58%
6-Students tend to give answers in Arabic
when they do not find one in English. 2.62 0.635 8% 22% 70%
7-Many students do not review lessons
taught in the classroom. 2.74 0.527 4% 18% 78%
8-Sometimes when students do
homework, they do so to please the
teacher.
2.52 0.614 6% 36% 58%
10-Some students do not pay attention to
the lesson and play with their mobile
phones during the classes.
2.78 0.507 4% 14% 82%
From table (4.2.4), 58% of respondents (agree) with the statement No (1), 22%
were (neutral) and 20% answered (disagree). This reveals that most language learning
students are not motivated enough to achieve learner autonomy.
Regarding statement No (6) it was found that 70% of respondents (agree) with the
statement No (6), 22% were (neutral) and only 8% answered (disagree). This reveals that
Students tend to give answers in Arabic when they do not find one in English.
With respect to the statement No (7) we can see that 78% of the study' sample
(agree) with the statement, 18% were (neutral) and only 4% (disagree). This ensures that
many students do not review lessons taught in the classroom.
Regarding the statement No. (8), we can see that 58% of answers was (agree), 36%
(neutral), and only 6% were (disagree). This indicates that sometimes when students do
homework, they do so to please the teacher.
93
Regarding statement No.(10), we can see that 82% of answers was (agree), 14% (neutral) ,
and only 4% were (disagree).this indicates that Some students do not pay attention to the
lesson and play with their mobile phones during the classes.
4.5 Data Analysis and Discussion of the Classrooms Observation
Classroom observations improve students’ disruptive behaviors. When they feel
that they are going to be observed, they tend to exercise reticence over the misbehaviors
that they usually display like talking to each other, using mobiles, sleeping …etc. It means
that if 10 students are using mobiles without being observed, the number can come down
to 5 when they are observed. On the other hand they get more active and attentive when
they are being observed. The levels of their participation in classroom activities increase
and they would like to be praised by their teachers by having them feel that they are doing
well. The data collected in this circumstance thus does not provide us with the actual
behaviors of the students. But we should accept the results because we cannot observe a
class using video recorder without informing them about the aim of the observation
especially in Saudi Arabian culture. In analysis, Teachers’ names are coded from 1-5.
Teacher 1 (Jordanian)
With this group, there are two videos and the analysis includes both. There were
thirty-seven students in this classroom. All of them were Saudi students except one
Nigerian. As appears in the video, only two students were taking notes during the class.
After the teacher asked them to copy the sentence from the board, there were nineteen
students without notebooks. Fifteen students copied the sentences. Two students had
notebooks but they did not take any notes. Only two students out of thirty-seven were
taking notes on what they had understood from the class, which confirms that most of the
students do not take notes during the classes. The fact that only nineteen out of thirty-
seven students were without notebooks shows that most of them are not motivated learners.
They just come and listen to the teacher. Some students speak in English and around ten
students give answers in Arabic, even the teacher sometimes speaks in Arabic. The teacher
asked a student, (point to the picture) then he said it in Arabic, this is why? Because he
knows his students need translation. The teacher asked his students to work in pairs, but
they did not sit in pairs to do the task. There were 5 students playing with their mobiles
phones during the class. As it is seen in the video I could focus the camcorder on the
student in red jacket at the back of the class, the one with the black hat, another one who
94
sits at the right front of the class, but the two in the middle of the same queue were not in
focus because I was standing at the front of the same queue and I could not focus the
camcorder on them just to stop the students think that the camera was recording their
classroom behaviors.
Teacher 2 (Sudanese)
The number of students in this classroom also was thirty-seven. And twenty of
them were without books or notebooks. Some students had some notebooks for other
subjects as well. Although I informed the teacher a day in advance about my visit to the
class the teacher didn’t come prepared well for his class and he just dabbled with some
time pass activities like finding the page number, for about ten minutes. On the other
hand, four students were using mobile phones and were not paying attention to the teacher.
The fact that twenty students were without books shows that the students were not
motivated and most of them did not take notes because they did not bring their notebooks
and they thought that the teacher’s role was to transmit knowledge to them. The point that
the teacher started reading and he did not give a chance to students to read shows that the
teacher was doing the work of the students as well, while his role was to facilitate the
learning process as a conductor and a counselor. The teacher sometimes uses students’ L1
to clarify some points when he feels that students need translation.
Teacher 3 (Pakistani)
There were twenty-five students in the classroom. All of them were Saudi
nationalities, similar ages and regular students. That was the 4th week of the course.
Eighteen students out of twenty-five were without notebooks. This shows that students
rely completely on their teacher and depend on him to improve their learning abilities.
Autonomous learners bring their books and note books even when the teacher does not ask
them to do so. These students do not find the ways that they can learn English. The video
shows that the teacher explains and translates everything for students. He does so because
he understands his students’ level of English and they need translation. Thus teacher’s role
becomes transmitting knowledge to students and students’ role becomes passive. Two
students are using their mobile phones. Autonomous learners listen attentively to their
teacher. Two students slept after about seven minutes from the start of the lesson. They are
under the focus of the video. These students did not participate and did nothing to learn.
They came only to be marked present and left at the end of the lesson. They are not
95
autonomous learners. The teacher did not give pair or group work because his students
were not motivated enough to achieve learner autonomy.
Teacher 4 (British)
I came to this group before one day and there were five students only, so the
teacher asked me to come next day and he would tell them to come. In such cases students
use WhatsApp Group and they inform themselves to come. It is clear that the students do
not come regularly to their classes. But the next day, the teacher started his class after
fifteen minutes and there were thirteen students out of twenty-five. Students had come
with their books and notebooks. Except two students all the others had books, and the
teacher gave his book to the ones without books. After half an hour four more students
entered the class. This shows that students do not care about punctuality. They do not
come on time and miss a lot of information at the beginning of the class. Autonomous
learner is punctual and hard worker. Most of students had books and when I asked the
teacher about that, he said that he wouldn’t allow the students without books to sit in the
class and send them out of the class so that they would come with the books. This group of
students represents the higher order autonomous learning practitioners.
Teacher 5 (Sudanese)
This group is of multinational students from nine countries. It consists of six
students from Saudi Arabia, one from Yemen, four Palestinians, two Syrians, four
Sudanese, one Bangladeshi, two Jordanians, one Egyptian and one Kuwaiti. The total
number of the students is twenty-two. The heterogeneity of the group imparted by the
diversity of their cultures offers a kind of competition that drives them towards more
autonomous in learning. The video shows that the language level of the students is very
high. Most of the students are well organized with the required books and notebooks.
They bring their books, notebooks, pens and write notes sitting in front of the class and
participate. Their level of participation is very high and it seems that most of the students
are intrinsically ready to learn English.
96
4.6 Conclusion
Concerning the videos of classroom observations and their interpretation, it is
obvious that those students in PYP at UT have a remote understanding about the concept
of learner autonomy. Students were barely qualified in terms of their English proficiency,
which led to the shortcomings of motivation to learn. Teachers sometimes resort to L1 to
translate; so consequently, learner autonomy scarcely exists among such students.
Students who have good background in English are more enthusiastic than others. Most of
the students learn enough to pass exams. The first three teachers in groups one to three
teach the students directly. They follow teacher-centred approach which does not
encourage students to adopt any responsibility for their learning. Half of the students in
group four and five are highly interested and aware of their learning English so their
participation is very high and apply learner autonomy practices.
97
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.0 Introduction
This study aims at investigating learner autonomy of the students at PYP of the
University of Tabuk. In this chapter, the findings of the current study are examined and
discussed with reference to previous studies in the field so as to overcome the barriers,
which hinder students’ learner autonomy. Results from such a study might give rise to a
solution to the inconsistencies between beliefs and practice. This chapter is meant for
explaining the outcome of the discussions, make conclusion and provide some
recommendations for further studies.
5.1 Findings
a- The findings of the study show that most of the learners are unwilling to take
charge of their learning properly. They do not make good use of their free time to
learn English. They do not read extra materials and plan their English learning
process.
b- Learners are not aware of how to arrange the way they learning of English. They
do not do the out-side classroom activities such as listening and watching audio
visual materials in English, use the libraries, listen to BBC, read English
newspapers and talk to people in English outside classroom.
c- It appears that students do not motivate themselves by celebrating or buying gifts
for themselves when they perform well during their learning.
d- Modern technologies like internet and computers are not used much for learning
English.
e- The findings show that students do not perceive their own responsibility such as
planning their learning process, find learning aids, write down new words or
structures and take part in activities where necessary.
f- Learners do not observe their teachers’ responsibilities, they think that it is
teachers’ responsibility to explain everything, transmit knowledge, make them
understand every think, even their failure is directly related to teachers. Whereas
teachers’ role is as a facilitator, conductor, encourager, setting objectives,
98
dominating classroom interaction, monitoring learning situation, and giving
positive or negative feedback.
g- Learners do not tend to attend training courses, seminars, or conferences to
improve their English level.
h- Most of the learners do not know how to motivate themselves by buying things
as a reward or celebrate.
i- Students are not intrinsically motivated learners, an autonomous learners when
they do a task, they do it only for the benefit of it, but not to get marks or praise
from their teacher.
j- Findings show that most students when they do a task they do it to please the
teacher. These students are extrinsically motivated learners. Autonomous learners
should be intrinsically motivated learners. They should do the task for the
enjoyment of their success.
5.2 Recommendations
a- Students should realize and accept that success in learning depends largely on students
themselves rather than on teachers.
b- There is strong need to develop intrinsic motivation in students as the saying goes “you
can bring the horse to the water but you cannot make him drink, Scharel and Szabo, (2000:
4)” can show why autonomous learning is important. So, if they are unwilling to
participate, their passive presence is not enough.
c- Promotion of learner autonomy needs a change in teachers’ beliefs about their own role.
Autonomous actions are an act of learning and not of teaching.
d- Fixed chairs in classrooms causes problems for collaborative work. Physical
environment is important to allow teachers to move chairs and seat students for group and
pair work.
e- Students should opt autonomous learning and collaborate with their friends and try to
find out solutions to their problems themselves and keep contact with their teachers.
f- Students should consult references and search their way to be autonomous learners; they
should be more interactive and help shy students by encouraging them and make them
autonomous.
g- The current research recommends the need to implement learner autonomy in PYEP
education. These policies need to be implemented formally so that teachers can be trained
99
on fostering learner autonomy. In order to help teachers, the authorities need to provide
teacher training through workshops and seminars on how to foster learner autonomy.
h- Knowledge of phonetics and phonology realizes an important step towards autonomy-
learning new words with their correct pronunciation, stress meaning and part of speech.
i- The skillful use of the dictionary necessitates choosing the meaning that suits the
context. This decision making creates an autonomous learner.
5.3 Suggestions for Further Studies
a. Some students, in spite of their studies at the tertiary level, they still carry their low level
of English that is indicated by their inability to identify even some of the letter of English
alphabet. Further study should investigate the weakness of students’ competence in at the
level of pre-university education. It should address that, is it because of the students,
teachers, curriculum, or students’ conception about the importance of learning English?
b. Further studies may consider investigation into the influence of the local cultures and the
way the students socially perceive English language and learning.
5.4 Conclusion
Different qualitative and quantitative methods were combined while conducting
this study during its different stages. Issues related to students’ level of motivation,
students’ perception about their own and their teachers’ responsibility in learning English,
and their performance in practicing the inside and outside classroom activities were
discussed and analyzed to determine their learner autonomy.
The questionnaire method enabled the evaluation of learner autonomy. Classroom
observation helped to evaluate teaching and learning in classroom and to what extent the
students are practicing learner autonomy. Classroom observation, the crucial factor for
every one to watch the video and judge reveals that autonomous learning does not exist in
most of classrooms. The necessity to initiate changes in the educational process is very
important to enable students to be aware of autonomous learning practices. The results of
the study have shown that most of the students are not autonomous learners. However,
some students practice autonomous learning activities.
100
REFERENCES
Al Asmari A. (2013). Practices and Prospects of Learner Autonomy: Teachers’
Perceptions. English Language Teaching; Vol. 6, No. 3; 2013 ISSN 1916-
4742 E-ISSN 1916-4750 Published by Canadian Center of Science and
Education
Al Ghazali, F. (2007). The Relationship between Self-Access Centres and Sociocultural .
The University of Birmingham/The Centre for English Language Studies
(CELS). Elements in Language Learning
Allwright, R.L. (1989). How Important Are Lessons Anyway? Lancaster-Leeds Language
Learning in Large Classes Research Project. Project Report No. 12.
Allwright, R.L. (1988a).Autonomy and individualization in whole-class instruction. In A.
Brookes & P. Grundy (Eds.) Individualization and Autonomy in Language
Learning.ELT Documents, 131. London: Modern English Publications and
the British Council, 35-44.
Allwright, R.L. (1981). What do we want teaching materials for? English Language
Teaching Journal, 36/1.
Aoki, N. (2002). Aspects of teacher autonomy: Capacity, freedom, and responsibility. In P.
Benson,& S. Toogood (Eds.), Learner autonomy 7: Challenges to research
and practice (pp. 110-123, 132-135). Dublin: Authentik.
Balçıkanlı (2010).Learner Autonomy In Language Learning: Student Teachers’ Beliefs.
Balçıkanlı, C. (2010). Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(1). This
Journal Article is posted at Research Online. Vol 35, 1, February 2010
90Gazi University, Turkeyhttp://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2010v35n1.
Barillaro, F. (2011).Teacher perspectives of learner autonomy in language learning, MA
dissertation, TESOL Centre Sheffield Hallam University. 2011
Bayat, Ö. (2009). The Effects of Out-of-Class Use of English on Autonomy Perception:
School of Foreign Languages. DokuzEylul University, Izmir, Turkey.
Bedoya, P. A. (2014). The exercise of learner autonomy in a virtual EFL course in
Colombia/Autonomia del estudiante en uncurso virtual de ingles
comolenguaextranjera en Colombia.HOW - A Colombian Journal for
Teachers of English, 21(1), 82+. Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?
101
Benson, P.&Chik, A. (2010).New Literacies and Autonomy.Foreign Language
Learning.In M. J.
Benson, P. (2009). Making sense of autonomy in language learning. In R. Pemberton, S.
Too good & A. Barfield (Eds.), Maintaining control: Autonomy and
language learning (pp. 13-26). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Benson, P. (2008). Autonomy in and out of class. In P. Benson, L. Dam, &L. Legenhausen
(Eds.), Learner autonomy: What does the future hold?(pp.1-12).
Proceedings of Spain TESOL.
Benson, P. (2007). Autonomy in language teaching and learning.State-of-the art
article.Language teaching, 40 (1), 21-40.
Benson, P. (2006).Autonomy in Language Teaching and Learning. Lan Benson, P. (2001).
Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow, Essex,
England: Pearson Education Limited. Language Teaching, 40(1), 21-40.
Benson, P. (1996). Concepts of autonomy in language learning. In R. Pemberton, E. S. L.
Li, W. W. F. Or & H. D. Pierson (Eds.), Taking Control: Autonomy in
Language Learning (pp. 27-34). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Benson, P. and Voller, P. (1997). Autonomy and independence in language learning.
London: Longman.
Black, R. W. (2005). Access and affiliation: The literacy and composition practices of
English-language learners in an online fanfiction community. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49(2), 11
Blue, G.M. (1988). Self-assessment: the limits of learner independence. In A. Brookes &
P. Grundy (Eds.).Individualization and Autonomy in Language
Learning.ELT Documents, 131. London: Modern English Publications and
the British Council, 100118. 8–128. doi:10.1598/JAAL.49.2.4
Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice.
London: Continuum.
Borg, S. & and Al-Busaidi, S. (2012). Learner Autonomy: English Language Teachers’
Beliefs and Practices. School of Education, University of Leeds. The
Language Centre, Sultan Qaboos University
ISBN 978-0-86355-686-9 © British Council 2012 Brand and Design / B459 10 Spring
Gardens London SW1A 2BN, UK www.britishcouncil.org
Boud, D. (1995).'Moving towards autonomy' in Developing student autonomy in learning,
New York: Nichols Publishing.
102
Breen, M. ,& Man, S. (1997). Shooting arrows at the sun. In P.Benson, & P. Voller (Eds.),
Autonomy and Independence in Language Education(pp. 132-149). London:
Longman.
Bruner, J. (1966b). Toward a Theory of Instruction. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press.
Bull, G., & Bell, L. (Eds.). (2010). Teaching with digital video: Watch, analyze, create.
Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
Bull, G. &Kajder, S. (2004). Digital storytelling in the language arts classroom.Learning &
Leading with Technology, 32(4), 46–49.
Burton, D. & Bartlett, S. (2005). Practitioner research for teachers. London: Paul
Chapman.
Camilleri, G. (1999). Learner autonomy: The teachers’ views. Germany: Council of
Europe.
Camilleri, G. (1997). Learner autonomy: The teachers’ views. Retrieved From
www.ecml.at/documents/pubCamilleriG_E.pdf November 24, 2004.
Carrell, P. & Carson, J.G. (1997). Extensive and intensive reading in an EAP
setting.English for Specific Purpose, 16,47-60.
Carver, D. (1982). Introduction to “The selection and training of helpers”. In W.D. Cousin,
(Ed.) Report of the workshops in the role and training of helpers for self-
access language learning systems. Moray House (mimeo).
cf.Ho, J. &Crookall, D. (1995). Breaking with Chinese cultural traditions: learner
autonomy in English language teaching. System 23/2, 235-243.
Chamot, A. U., Bernhardt, S., Beard El-Dinary, P. & Robbins, J. (1999). The Learning
Strategies Handbook: Longman.
Chan, V., Spratt, M., & Humphreys, G. (2002). Autonomous language learning: Hong
Kong tertiary students' attitudes and behaviours. Evaluation and Research in
Education, 16(1), 1-18 .
Chiu, C. Y. (2005). TEACHER ROLES AND AUTONOMOUS LANGUAGE LEARNERS
The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School College of the
Liberal Arts. © 2005 Chi-Yen Chiu
Conttia, L. M. (2007).The Influence of Learner Motivation on Developing Autonomous
Learning in an English-for-Specific-Purposes Course. The University of
Hong Kong
103
Cotterall, S. (1995). Readiness for autonomy: Investigating learner beliefs. System 23(2),
195-205.
Cotterall, S. (2000). Learner autonomy in language learning - Defining the field and
effecting change http://www.academia.edu/545936/
Cotterall, S. (1995). Readiness for Autonomy: Investigating Learner Beliefs. English
Language Institute, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.
System, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 195-205, 1995 Elsevier Science Ltd Printed in
Great Britain 0346- 251X/95 $9.50 + 0.00
Crabbe, D. (1993).Fostering autonomy from within the classroom: The teacher’s
responsibility. System, 21 (4), 443-52.
Crump, C. A. (1995). Motivating students: A teacher’s challenge .Sooner Communication
Conference, Norman, Oklahoma.
Dallow, T. K. and Hobbs, M. (2005). Personal Goal-setting and Autonomy in Language
Learning. Unitec, Auckland, New Zealand. Supporting Independent English
Language Learning in the 21st Century: Proceedings of the Independent
Learning Association Conference Inaugural – 2005
Dam, L. (1995). From theory to classroom practice. Dublin: Authentik.
Deci, E. (with R. Flaste), (1995, p.2).: Why we do what we do: understanding self-
motivation. New York: Penguin.
Deci, E. L., Spiegel, N. H., Ryan, R. M., Koestner, R., & Kauffman, M. (1982). Effects of
performance standards on teaching styles: Behavior of controlling teachers.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 852–859. Demirtas, I andSert, N.
(2010). English Education At University Level: Who Is At The Centre Of
The Learning Process? Novitas-Royal(Research on Youth and Language),
2010, 4 (2), 159-172.
Dickinson, L. (1995). Autonomy and motivation. System, 23(2), 165-
Dickinson, L. (1992). Learner Autonomy 2: Learner Training for Language Learning.
Dublin: Authentik.174.
Dickinson, L. (1987). Self-Instruction in Language Learning. Cambridge. Cambridge
University Press.
Dörney, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Early 17th century: from Greek autonomia, from autonomos 'having its own laws', from
autos 'self' + nomos‘law’ (See Oxford Dictionary).
104
Ellis, G. & Sinclair, B. (1989).Learning to Learn English: a course in learner training.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Esch, E. (1998). Promoting learner autonomy: Criteria for the selection of appropriate
methods. In R. Pemberton, E. S. L. Li, W. W. F. Or & H. D. Pierson (Eds.),
.Taking control: Autonomy in language learning (pp. 35-48). Hong Kong:
Hong Kong University Press.
Esch, E. (1996). Self-access and the adult language learner. London: CILT
Esch, E. (1996a). Promoting learner autonomy: criteria for the selection of appropriate
methods. In R. Pemberton, S.L. Edward, W.W.F. Or, and H.D. Pierson
(Eds.). Taking Control: Autonomy in Language Learning. Hong Kong:
Hong Kong University Press. 35-48.
Finch, A. (2002).Autonomy: Where are we? Where are we going? .In A.S. Mackenzie &
E. McCafferty (eds.) Developing Autonomy. Proceedings of the JALT CUE
Conference 2001. Tokyo: The Japan Association for Language Teaching
College and University Educators Special Interest Group, pp. 15-42.
Fine, G. S. (2009, February 22 2009 ). Making a scene: A practical approach to drama
activities in the EFL classroom. Paper presented at the 5th Annual
CamTESOL Conference on English Language Teaching, National Institute
of Education, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Frankel, F. (1982). Self-study materials: involving the learner. In M. Geddes, &Sturtridge,
G. (1982).Individualisation. London: Modern English Publications. 52-60.
Gregori, andSignes, C. (2008). Integrating the old and the new: Digital storytelling in the
EFL language classroom. GRETA, 16(1), 43–49.
Guay, F. Boggiano, A. K.&Vallerand, R. J. (2001). Autonomy support, intrinsic
motivation, and perceived competence: Conceptual and empirical linkages.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27 (6), 643.
Hafner, C. A., &Candlin, C. N. (2007). Corpus tools as an affordance to learning in
professional legal education. Journal of English for Academic Purposes,
6(4), 303–318.
Harding-Esch, E. (1977). ‘Of some limits to autonomous programmes in language
learning’.In E.M. Harding-Esch (ed.) Self-Directed Learning and Autonomy.
Report of a Seminar held at Cambridge 13-15 December 1976. University
of Cambridge, Department of Linguistics and CRAPEL, pp. 67-76.
(Mimeo).
105
Harding-Esch, E.M. (1982). 'The open access sound and video library of the University of
Cambridge: progress report and development'. System, 10:1 13-28 .
Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford: OUP
Herrell, A. & Jordan, M. (2004).50 strategies for teaching English language learners.
Upper Sa Hill, B. (1994). Self-managed learning: state of the art. Language Teaching 27,
213-223.ddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Holec, H. (1981).Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon. (First
published 1979, Strasbourg: Council of Europe). P3.
Holec, H. (1980). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Nancy: Centre de
Rechercheset d,Applications Pedagogiques en Langues. Council of Europe.
Holec, H. (1979). Prise en compte des besoinsetapprentissage auto-dirigé. Mélanges
Pédagogiques 10, Université de Nancy 2: CRAPEL.
Hozayen, (2009). Egyptian Students’ Readiness for Autonomous Language Learning.
Institute for Language Studies, Arab Academy for Science, Technology and
Maritime Transport, Alexandria, Egypt.
Huba, M.E. and Freed, J.E. (2000). Learner-centered assessment on college campuses:
Shifting the focus from teaching to learning. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Hunt, J., Gow, L. & Barnes, P. (1989). Learner self-evaluation and assessment - a tool for
autonomy in the language learning classroom, in V. Bickley (Ed.).Language
Teaching and Learning Styles Within and Across Cultures. Hong Kong:
Institute of Language in Education, Education Department, 207-17.
Internet: http://www.lifehack.org/articles/productivity/6-types-of-motivation-
explained.html
Johnson, K. E. (2006). The sociocultural turn and its challenges for second language
teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 235-257.
Johnstone, K. (1999). Research on language learning and teaching: 1997-1998. Language
Learning. London: Routledge.
Jones, J. (1995).Self-access and culture: retreating from autonomy .ELTJ 49/3: 228-34.
Joshi, K. R. (2011). Learner Perceptions and Teacher Beliefs About Autonomy in
Language Learning. (NELTA), ISSN: 2091-0487 Nepal
Kajder, S., & Swenson, J. A. (2004).Digital images in the language arts classroom.
Learning & Leading with Technology, 31(8), 18–46.
Kelly, R. (1996). Language counselling for learner autonomy: the skilled helper in self-
access language learning. In R. Pemberton, S.L. Edward, W.W.F. Or, and
106
H.D. Pierson (Eds.). Taking Control: Autonomy in Language Learning.
Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. 93-114.
Kenny, B. (1993). For more autonomy. System, 21(4), 431-42.
Krashen, S. (2004).The power of reading: Insights from the research. Westport, CT:
Libraries Unlimited.
Lai, M. W. C. (2007). The influence of learner motivation on developing autonomous
learning in an English-for-Specific-Purposes. Course. MA Thesis, The
Centre for Applied English Studies, The University of Hong Kong, Hong
Kong.
Lam, W. S. E. (2000). L2 literacy and the design of the self: A case study of a teenager
writing on the Internet. TESOL Quarterly, 34(3), 457–482.
Lee , L. (2011). Blogging: Promoting Learner Autonomy And Intercultural Competence
Through Study Abroad .Language Learning &Technology. October 2011,
Volume 15, Number 3 pp. 87–109. University of Hampshire.
http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2011/ lee.pdf
Lee, I. (1998). Supporting greater autonomy in language learning.ELT journal, 52(4), 282-
290
Lee, W. (1996).The role of materials in the development of autonomous learning. In R.
Pemberton, S.L. Edward, W.W.F. Or, and H.D. Pierson (Eds.), Taking
Control: Autonomy in Language Learning. Hong Kong: Hong Kong
University Press.
Lightbrown, P. M. &Spada N. (2001).Factors affecting second language learning. In:
Candlin, C.N. & Mercer, N. (Eds.), English language teaching in its social
context. London: Routledge.
Little, D. (2009a).Learner autonomy, the European language portfolio and teacher
development. In R. Pemberton, S. Toogood, & A. Barfield (Eds.),
Maintaining control: autonomy and language learning (pp. 147-174). Hong
Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Little, D. (2007). Language learning autonomy: Some fundamental considerations
revisited. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1 (1), 14-29.
Little, D. (2004).Constructing a theory of learner autonomy: some steps along the way.
Future perspectives in foreign language education, Oulu, Publications of
the Faculty of Education of the University of Oulu, 101, 15-25
107
Little, D. (2002).Learner autonomy and second/foreign language learning. In The Guide to
Good Practice for learning and teaching in Languages, Linguistics and
Area Studies. LTSN Subject Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area
Studies, University of Southampton.
Little, D. (1995). Learning as dialogue: the dependence of learner autonomy on teacher
autonomy. System 23/2, 175-181.
Little, D. (1991).Learner autonomy: Definitions, issues and problems. Dublin: Authentik.
Little, D. Learner autonomy: drawing together the threads of self-assessment, goal-setting
and reflection
Little, D., Dam, L., &Timmer, J. (Eds.). (1998). Focus on Learning Rather than Teaching:
Why and How? Papers from the International Association of Teachers of
English as a Foreign Language (IATEFL) Conference (Krakow, Poland,
May 14-16, 1998) (pp. 38-56). Dublin: Centre for Language and
Communication Studies.
Littlejohn, A. (1985). Learner choice in language study.English Language Teaching
Journal, 39/4, 253-61.
Littlewood, W. (2000). Do Asian students really want to listen and obey? ELT Journal,
54/1.31-35.
Littlewood, W. (1996). “Autonomy”: an anatomy and a framework. System, 24/4, 427-435.
Ma, Z. and Ma, R. (2012). Motivating Chinese Students by Fostering Learner Autonomy
in Language Learning, ISSN 1799-2591 Theory and Practice in Language
Studies, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 838-842, April 2012 © 2012 © 2012 ACADEMY
PUBLISHER Manufactured in Finland. doi:10.4304/tpls.2.4.838-842
DaLian University of Technology, Dalian, China Email:
Mahadi,T.S. &Jafari, S. M. (2012. P233). Motivation, Its Types, and Its Impacts in
Language Learning. International Journal of Business and Social Science.
Malaysia.Mega, A. andUmi Nadirotun, N. Monday, 20 December
2010Types of Motivation in Learning English Posted by English
Department 2009 State University of Malang at 09:07
http://www.leanmanufacturingconcepts.com/
Articles/Miscellaneous/AbrahamMaslowTheory.htm
http://www.arrod.co.uk/
108
Morris, C.G. &Maisto, A.A. (2002).Psychology:An introduction. 11th ed. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.
Morse, J. M. (1991). Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological
triangulation.Nursing Research, 40, 120–123.
New World Encyclopedia. Retrieved from: http://www.newworld
encyclopedia.org/entry/Autonomy on 17th April 2014
Nguyen, N. T. (2012). Let students take control! Fostering learner autonomy in language
learning: An experiment .2012 International Conference on Education and
Management Innovation. IPEDR vol.30 (2012) © (2012)IACSIT Press,
Singapore
Nunan, D. (1999).Second language teaching and learning. Boston, Heinle and Heinle
Publishers.
Nunan, D. (1997). Designing and adapting materials to encourage learner autonomy. In P.
Benson, & P. Voller. Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning.
Harlow: Longman, 192 - 203.
Nunan, D. (1996). Towards autonomous learning: some theoretical, empirical and practical
issues. In R. Pemberton, S.L. Edward, W.W.F. Or, and H.D. Pierson (Eds.),
Taking Control: Autonomy in Language Learning. Hong Kong: Hong Kong
University Press. 13-26.
Nunan, D. (Ed.). (1992a). Collaborative Language Learning and Teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Ohler, J. (2006). The world of digital storytelling. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 44–47.
Omaggio, A. (1978). ‘Successful language learners: What do we know about them?’
ERIC/CLL News Bulletin, May, 2-3.
Oxford, R.L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Newbury House.
Oxford Dictionaries, Language matters; Retrieved from,
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/autonomy
Palfreyman, D. & Smith, R. C., eds. (2003). Learner Autonomy across Cultures: Language
Education Perspectives, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Patton, Q. M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London: Sage.
Phipps, S., & Borg, S. (2009). Exploring tensions between teachers’ grammar teaching
beliefs and practices. System.
109
Pierson, H. D. (1996). Learner culture and learner autonomy in the Hong Kong Chinese
context. In R. Pemberton, S.L. Edward, W.W.F. Or, and H.D. Pierson
(Eds.). Taking Control: Autonomy in Language Learning. Hong Kong:
Hong Kong University Press. 49-58.
Rance-Roney, J. (2008). Digital storytelling for language and culture learning. Essential
Teacher, 5(1), 29–31.
Reeve, J. and Jang, H. (2006).What Teachers Say and Do to Support Students’ Autonomy
During a Learning Activity? Journal of Educational Psychology 2006, Vol.
98, No. 1, 209–218. Copyright 2006 by the American Psychological
Association 0022-0663/06/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.209.
University of Iowa. University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee.
Regent, O. (1993).Communication, strategy and language learning. InOtal, J. L.
&Villanueva, M. L. (eds.) Primeves Jornades Sobre Auto-aprenentage de
Llengues. Castello Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I, pp. 29-39.
Reinders, H. (2010). Towards classroom pedagogy for learner autonomy: a framework of
independent language learning skills. Australian Journal of Teacher
Education, 35(5), 40-55.
Riley, P. (1999). On the social construction of 'the learner'. In S.Cotterall,& D. Crabbe
(Eds.). Learner autonomy in language learning: Defining the field and
effecting change (pp.2-39). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Riley, P. (1997). ‘BATs’ and ‘BALLs’: Beliefs about talk and beliefs about language
learning’. In L. Dickinson (ed.) Autonomy 2000: The Development of
Learning Independence in Language Learning.
Conference Proceedings. Bangkok: King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Thonburi
(Also published in Mélanges Pédagogiques 23).
Riley, P. (1985).Autonomous learning schemes: principles and organization. P. Riley (ed.)
Discourse and Learning. London: Longman, pp. 170-172.
Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century
classroom. Theory into Practice, 47(3),
220.doi:10.1080/00405840802153916
Robin, B. R. (2006). The educational uses of digital storytelling. Retrieved from
http://digitalliteracyintheclassroom.pbworks.com/f/Educ-Uses-DS.pdf
Rungwaraphong, P. (2012).Student Readiness for Learner Autonomy: Case Study at a
University in Thailand. Department of Languages, Prince of Songkla
110
University, Trang Campus, Thailand. As. J. Education & Learning 2012,
3(2), 28-40Asian Journal on Education and Learning ISSN 1906-7151
Available online at www.ajel.info
Ryan, R. M. &Deci, E. L. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic
dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci, & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.), Handbook of
self - determination research (pp. 3−33). Rochester, NY: The University of
Rochester Press.
Ryan, R. M.&Deci, E. L. (2000).Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and
new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, pp. 54-67.
Scharle, A. &Szabo, A. (2000).Learner autonomy: A guide to developing learner
responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Scharle, A. &Szabo, A. (2000).Responsibility and Autonomy. Learner Autonomy: A guide
to Developing Learner Responsibility. Cambridge University Press, UK
Sinclair, B. McGrath, I.& Lamb, T. (Eds.). (2000). Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy:
Future directions. Harlow: Longman.
Sinclair, B. (1999). Survey review: recent publications on autonomy in language learning.
ELT Journal, 53/4, 309-329.
Sinclair, B. & Ellis, G. (1992). Survey review: learner training in EFL course books.
English Language Teaching Journal 46/2, 209-225.
Smith, M. K. (2003). Introduction to informal education. the encyclopedia of informal
education, http://www.infed.org/i-intro.htm
Stevick, E.W. (1976). Memory, Meaning and Method. Rowley, M.A.: Newbury House.
Thanasoulas, D. (2000).Learner Autonomy. ELT Newsletter, Article 32, September 2000.
Thavenius, C. (1990).Learner Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning. Lunds
Universitet (PU-/Reproduktion, ISSN 0349/5728).
Tanyeli, N. and Kuter, S. (2013).Examining Learner Autonomy in Foreign Language
Learning and Instruction. EgitimArastirmalari-Eurasian Journal of
Educational Research, 53/A, 19-36.
Thavenius, C. (1999). Teacher autonomy for learner autonomy. In S. Cotterall, &D.
Crabbe (Eds.).Learner autonomy in language learning: Defining the field
and effecting change (pp.159- 164). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Tok, H. (2010). Autonomous Language Learning: Turkish tertiary students’ behaviours.
This book is hosted by the Faculty of Education at Zirve University,
111
Gaziantep, Turkey. It can be accessed electronically at:
http://ilac2010.zirve.edu.tr
Tudor, I. (1996). Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
TUDOR, I. (1993).Teacher roles in the learner-centred classroom. ELTJourna147, 22-31.
Ürün M.F., Demir, C.E. &Akar, H. (2014). A Study on ELT High School Teachers’
Practices to Foster Learner Autonomy. Journal of Language Teaching and
Research, Academy Publisher, Finland. Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 825-836.
doi:10.4304/jltr.5.4.825-836
Ushioda, E. (1996). Learner autonomy 5: The role of motivation. Dublin: Authentik
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
Advances in experimental social psychology, 29, 271−360.
Learner-centeredness as language education: 1-7.
Voller, P. (1997). Does the teacher have a role in autonomous language learning? In P.
Benson, & P. Voller (Eds.).Autonomy and Independence in language
learning. London: Longman.
Warschauer, M., Schetzer, H., &Meloni, C. (2000).Internet for English Teaching.
Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
Warschauer, M. (1996).Comparing face-to-face and electronic communication in the
second language classroom. CALICO Journal ,13, 7-26.
Wenden, A. L. (2002). Learner development in language learning. Applied linguistics,
23:1, 32-55.
Wenden, A. (1998). Learner training in foreign/second language learning: a curricular
perspective for the 21st century. ERIC Reproduction Services, ED 416 673.
What is autonomy? Retrieved from https://www.google.co.in/#q=etymology
+of+autonomy+pdf on 20th April 2014.
Wright, T. (1987).Roles of Teachers and Learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Yang, T. (2005.P.73).An Overview of Learner. Retrieved from:
Autonomyhttps://www.google.co.in/#q=An+Overview+of+Learner+Autono
my%3A+Definitions%2C+Misconceptions%2C+and+Identifications.
Zrinska, K. (2006).Self-access Centre in the foreign language school. Retrieved from
www.britishcouncil.org.on Feb. 28th, 2006.
112
Appendix (A)
Questionnaire
Dear students:
I would be grateful to receive your answers about the following statements which
are formulated to be used only as a tool for collecting data for PhD research in Applied
Linguistics under the title: Learner Autonomy (In University of Tabuk- PYEP).
Instructions:
Please tick () the box that best represents your point of view.
Agree
Neu
tral
Disagree
Items
1. I try to take every opportunity to write down each new word or structure
that I have heard
2. I try to use every opportunity to take part in the activities where and
when I can speak English.
3. I try to find learning aids that well match with my level in order to better
learn English
4. I plan my English learning process
5. I make good use of my free time in learning English
6. I take notes during lessons
7. In addition to the prescribed content in the course, I read extra materials
in advance
8. I use the internet and a computer to study and improve my English
language
9. Teachers have to be responsible for enabling students to understand
English
10. The failure of the students is directly related to the teachers’ classroom
management
11. Teachers’ role is to transmit knowledge to students
12. Teachers should explain everything to students
113
13. At the end of a learning activity in the classroom, I give feedback to
my friends and teachers on the amount of knowledge I have learnt 14. In the classroom, I highlight the items that I don’t understand, in order
to go over them again
15. I do speaking activities with a colleague or in a group even without the
teacher's help
16. I work on finding out answer to problems wherever possible
17. When I make progress in learning, I reward myself by buying new
things, celebrating parties etc.
18. When I participate in different classroom activities, I do that because I
believe participation is valuable for my chosen career
19. Sometimes when I do homework, I do it to please my teacher
20. When I participate in classroom, I do it simply for the enjoyment of
the activity
21. I attend different seminars, training courses, conferences to improve
my English.
22. I use audio-visual materials to improve my speaking abilities such as:
listen to BBC, watch English movies, read English newspapers etc.
23. I go to the library and look for English books to improve my English
24. I talk to people outside the classroom in English wherever possible.
114
Appendix (B)
بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم
ستبیانا
الطلاب الكرام
هأداة لجمع بعض المعلومات لبحث دكتوراكستخدامھا لااغتھا یتلقى أجوبتكم على الأسئلة أدناه و التي تم صأیسعدني أن
السنة التحضیریة. -في اللغویات التطبیقیة في اللغة الإنجلیزیة بعنوان (التعلم الذاتي) في جامعة تبوك
دات:رشاإ
) داخل الصندوق الذي یمثل وجھة نظرك.أرجو وضع (
الرقم
الفقرات
لا ق
افأو
یدحا
م
قاف
أو
أي فرصة لتدوین و كتابة كل كلمة أو صیغة جدیدة أسمعها أنتهزأنا 1
أنا أنتهز كل فرصة في المشاركة في الأنشطة داخل الفصل لأتحدث بالإنجلیزیّة 2
أحاول أن أجد وسائل التعلم التي تنسجم مع مستواي لكي أتعلم الإنجلیزیة بشكل أفضل 3
أنا أخطط لعملیة تعلّمي للّغة الإنجلیزیة 4
أستغل وقت فراغي في تعلم اللغة الإنجلیزیة 5
أدوّن و أسجل ملاحظات أثناء الدرس 6
أنا أقرأ مواد بالإنجلیزیة خارج المقررر بجانب المقر 7
أستخدم الكمبیوتر والإنترنت لتطویر لغتي الإنجلیزیة 8
عاتق الأستاذ مسؤولیة إفهام الطالب للّغة الإنجلیزیةیقع على 9
فشل الطلاب في التعلم مرتبط بإدارة الأستاذ للعملیة التعلیمیة 10
الطالب إلىدور المعلم هو نقل المعرفة 11
للطلاب ءعلى المعلّم أن یشرح كلّ شي 12
لزملائي و أستاذي حصیلة معرفتينتهاء من التمارین في كل حصة, أعكس بعد الا 13
في الحصة, أحدّد النقاط التي لم أستوعبها لمراجعتها لاحقاُ 14
مع زمیلي حتى إن لم في داخل الفصل, أمارس تحدث اللغة الإنجلیزیة في شكل مجموعة أو 15
أجد مساعدة من الأستاذ
أحاول أن أجد إجابات للمشاكل التي أواجهها في تعلّم اللغة الإنجلیزیة بقدر الإمكان 16
عندما أشعر بالتحسن في تعلمي, أكافئ نفسي بشراء هدیة لي أو احتفل آو ....... 17
عندما أشارك في أنشطة الحصة المختلفة, أفعل ذلك لأنني أؤمن أن المشاركة ذات قیمة 18
لمستقبليفعالة
عندما احلّ الواجب, أفعل ذلك أحیانا لنیل رضاء معلّمي 19
عندما أشارك في أنشطة الفصل, أفعل ذلك لأنّي أستمتع بالنشاط 20
115
أحضر السمنارات والكورسات التدریبیة لتحسین لغتي الإنجلیزیة 21
ل الاستماعأستخدم الوسائل السمعیّة والبصریّة لتطویر مقدراتي في التحدث بالإنجلیزیة مثل 22
بي. بي. سي. , مشاهدة الأفلام, قراءة الجرائد والمجلات ......الخ
أذهب إلى المكتبة و أقرأ بعض الكتب باللغة الإنجلیزیة لتحسین مستواي 23
متى كان ذلك ممكناً خارج الفصل لتطویر مستوايأتحدث الإنجلیزیة مع الناس 24
116
Appendix (C)
Questionnaire
Dear teachers:
I would be grateful to receive your responses about the following statements which are
formulated to be used only as a tool for collecting data for PhD research in Applied
Linguistics under the title: Learner Autonomy (In University of Tabuk - PYP).
Years of experience:
1 to 5 years ( ) 6 to 10 years ( ) More than 10 years ( )
Graduation Degree:
Diploma or certificate in ELT ( ) Bachelor Degree ( )
MA in English ( ) PhD in English ( )
Nationality ( )
Please tick (√) the box that best represents your point of view.
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Items
1. Most language learning students are not motivated enough to achieve learner
autonomy
2. Students depend completely on their teachers to improve on their learning
abilities
3. Many students do not complete homework that teachers assigned them
4. Some students do not know how to find their own ways of practising English
language skills
5. Nearly all of the students do not take any notes during English classes
6. Students tend to give answers in Arabic when they do not find one in English
7. Many students do not review lessons taught in the classroom
8. Sometimes when students do homework, they do so to please the teacher
9. Some students, when requested to do group or pair work with unfamiliar
peers, they get shy and this deters them from attaining learner autonomy
10. Some students do not pay attention to the lesson and play with their mobile
phones during the classes
117
Appendix (D)
University of Tabuk
Preparatory Year Program
Classroom Observation
1.Teacher's name:.....................................................
2. Nationality:............................................................
3. Course book ........................................................
4. Faculty: ................................................................
5. Building: ...............................................................
6. Class number: ......................................................
7. Numbers of Students:................................................
8. Date and time: ...................................................
Frequency of Autonomous Learner activities
A. students' Activities
Activities Frequencies
1. Students take notes during the class
2.Students complete task assigned to them during the lesson
3. Students give answers in Arabic
4. Students discuss tasks in Arabic during pair or group work
5. Students play with mobile phones during the class
6. Students write down new vocabulary
7. Students take notes of new grammatical items
8. Students give answers in English
9. Students ask questions in English
10. Students bring books and pens in classroom
B. Teacher's Activities
1. Teacher explain everything to students
2. Teacher monitors pair and group work
3. Teacher gets feedback after each task
4. Teacher encourages students to participate
5. Teacher selects students randomly to answer questions
6. Teacher involves weak students who do not participate in
118
answering some questions
7. Teacher gives instructions in English
Interpretations of frequencies
1-2 = never
3 = rarely
4 = sometimes
5-6 = frequently
7 + = usually
119
Appendix (E)
Request for conducting the research
Dear Dr. Abdul Rahaman Al Fahadi, Director of English Language
Centre
These days I have been working for my PhD that I have registered at Al Gezira University
in Sudan in 2013. The title of the research for my thesis is “Learner Autonomy”.
As part of the data collection of my work, I want to gather the required information
through questionnaires and some classroom observations.
I want to complete this data collection process at the University of Tabuk with our students
at PYP in different colleges where our ELC teachers teach English.
In this regard, I request you for your consent to permit me to carry on with my research
work at our university campus.
Thanks and Regards
Ali Abdalla Nour
Top Related