the investigation of the instructors' attitudes towards learner autonomy
TRANSCRIPT
THE INVESTIGATION OF THE INSTRUCTORS’ ATTITUDES TOWARDS
LEARNER AUTONOMY AT PREPARATORY SCHOOL
Res. Assist. Cem BALÇIKANLI
Gazi University, Gazi Faculy of Education,
Department of Foreign Languages, Unit of English Language Teaching
phone: 0 90 312 202 84 75
fax: 0 90 312 222 70 37
ABSTRACT
This study aims to investigate the attitudes of the instructors towards learner autonomy
at Preparatory School, Gazi University. The participants are 51 English language instructors.
In order to gather data, a questionnaire consisting of 23 likert-scale statements regarding
learner autonomy was administered to the instructors. Also, the respondents were asked in the
open-ended section: a) to give their opinions with regard to learner autonomy in general, and
b) to make suggestions as to how learner autonomy can be promoted in their own classrooms
more effectively. With the appropriate statistical techniques, namely, one-way ANOVA and
independent sample t-test were utilized for the data analysis and significance level was taken
as 0, 05.
The findings reveal that many of the participating instructors are rather positive
towards learner autonomy in the teaching environment and regard some points of teaching
and learning as more appropriate than others during the implementation of learner autonomy.
What’s more, based on the data gathered by the instructors in the open-ended section, in-
service training and systematic adjustments in the curriculum might be very helpful to
promote of learner autonomy. When we examine the attitudes of the instructors, there is a
meaningful difference (p0, 05) in terms of gender, but no statistical relation can be observed
related to teaching experience and educational degree (p0, 05)
Key words: Learner Autonomy, English Language Instructors, EFL, Preparatory School.
1. INTRODUCTION
Learner autonomy defined as “the ability to take charge of one's own learning” (Holec,
1981:3) has become a very popular issue in language learning/teaching over the last three
decades as a consequence of the innovations such as humanistic approaches, constructivism,
communicative approaches, technology-based approaches and so on. The mentioned
innovations aim to make the learning process more permanent and meaningful. As well as
these innovations, learner autonomy is a precondition for effective learning (Benson, 2001:
7). Based on this striking statement, it is imperative that the educators and foreign language
teachers benefit from the implementation of learner autonomy in their actual teaching
environments so as to help language learners become more successful.
The majority of students are still being taught in ways which promote dependence and leave
them ill-equipped to apply their school-learnt knowledge and skills to the world beyond the
classroom (McGarry, 1995). From this view, it would be so easy to conclude that it is the
teacher who plays the central role to help the learners become more autonomous in the foreign
language classrooms. That is, it is widely accepted that the promotion of learner autonomy in
the foreign language classrooms closely relates to the questions about how the teachers
perceive this term in general, how they approach learner autonomy, what aspects of teaching
or learning they consider more appropriate for the effectiveness of autonomy, and what they
regard as the essential points for autonomy.
As Holec (1981: 1) points out, "insist on the need to develop the individual'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." In addition, as Dam (1995) indicates, teachers train learners
to become gradually more active, reflective and critical thinkers in using learning strategies
for their own learning as well as encouraging them to initiate experimental practice inside and
outside the classroom. As a consequence of these two aspects, fostering learner autonomy is
of significance as it will lead the learners to think, act and learn independently. During this
process, no one can deny the vital role of teachers since the ability to behave autonomously
for students is dependent upon their teacher creating a classroom culture where autonomy is
accepted (Critchley, 2001:3). In this framework, the aim of this study is to investigate the
attitudes of the instructors towards learner autonomy at preparatory school.
2.
METHOD
The participants consist of 51 English language instructors, out of 75, at Gazi University,
Preparatory School. They were of both genders, 38 of whom were female, and 12 of whom
were male, and 1 was not specified, and were in possession of full teaching qualifications.
They had a range of teaching experience from one to 24 years. Many of them hold ELT
bachelor degree, some with MA and only one with a PHD diploma.
The questionnaire was adapted from Camilleri’s study (1997). The original questionnaire
consisted of 13 questions regarding learner autonomy. Based on this questionnaire, the
researcher developed a new questionnaire with 23 statements on autonomy while adding and
removing some statements. Likert-scale was used in the design of the questionnaire items.
Responses range from ‘1’= “Never” to ‘5’= “Very much”. The statements are about the
learner autonomy principles which can be followed in the foreign language classrooms and
are about possible considerations concerning the implementation of these principles.
Following the reliability process, the questionnaire was administered to the instructors to
collect the data. SPSS 10.0 package programme was utilized for data analysis. With the
appropriate statistical techniques, one-way ANOVA and independent sample t-test were
utilized for the data analysis and significance level was taken as 0, 05.
3. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Despite five options provided to the participants during the data collecting procedure, they
were evaluated in the below mentioned way.
Table 1. Categorization of the options
1+2 3 4+5 Missing
Never Partly Much MI
The quantitative analysis of the questionnaire has indicated that there has been a support
towards learner autonomy among the participating instructors in the study. Scrutinizing the
responses gathered by the instructors in detail, we can argue that instructors highly favor most
of the statements regarding learner autonomy with a few exceptions as the pattern of replies
gravitates mainly around answer “much”, which makes the point obvious that the capacity to
think, learn and behave autonomously is often claimed as an outcome for students in higher
education (Stephenson and Laycock, 1993). The significant answers of the instructors are
viewed in more detail as follows.
Table 2. The statement 1 “Learners should be involved in establishing the objectives of a
lesson.”
N P M MI
33% 19 % 48 % -One can easily see that 48 % of the instructors chose “much” answer, which means that they
are quite positive towards sharing the objectives of a lesson with the learners. Whereas 37 %
of the instructors chose answer “partly” for this statement in Camilleri’s study (1997), this
percentage is only 19 % in the present study. Likewise, 47 % of the instructors agree that the
learners should be much involved in this process in Özdere’s research (2005). The reason for
this view might lie in the fact that the learners ought to have the opportunity regarding the
objectives of what they will follow in the course, which signifies that effective learning
process could occur through this sharing. As Benson (2001:42) advocates, in order for
learners to have control of content for their own learning, first and foremost, curriculum may
have to be designed in such a way that teachers and learners have the flexibility to develop
their own capacity to establish the objectives of a lesson.
Table 3. The statement 2 “Learners should be involved in deciding the course content”.
N P M MI
30% 38% 34% -
That 38 % of the instructors are of the opinion that their learners should be partly involved in
deciding the course content is thought-provoking as they are not sure whether they should be
given the chance to comment on the course content or not. However, it is by all odds that the
learning process will be quite more permanent as long as the learners are given the
opportunities to have a say on what to study. One interpretation of this finding may be that the
learners are not capable of choosing the course content properly. On the other hand, we can
easily recognize that the percentage of the instructors considering the same is not far apart as
in Camilleri (1997) and Özdere’s (2005) studies (respectively, 40% and 33%). However,
involving learners in the decisions concerning the course content and giving them a share of
responsibility for planning and conducting teaching –learning activities may lead to better
learning (Dam, 1995).
Table 4. The statement 3 “Learners should be involved in selecting materials.”
N P M MI
22% 52% 26% -
As shown in the table above, 52% of the instructors answered with “partly”. The instructors
who are generally regarded as the authority may believe that the learners are not competent
enough to select the materials to be exploited in the foreign language classrooms. Besides
this, one further interpretation could be that the instructors may lose the control of the
classroom if the materials are selected collectively because the lesson is carried out through
the materials supplied by the learners. In contrast to this finding, learner autonomy posits that
learners can develop an understanding and capacity to decide what materials may assist them
in reaching their learning goals (Little, 1991). For that reason, they should be encouraged to
use learning materials on their own in accordance with their individual needs and interests
(Finch, 2001). As for the other studies carried out by Camilleri (1997) and Özdere (2005), 37
% of the participants in Camilleri’s (1997) study are of the opinion that the learners should be
partly involved in selecting materials whereas the instructors in Özdere’s (2005) research are
negative towards sharing decisions on materials with the learners (42%).
Table 5. The statement 4 “Learners should be involved in decisions on the time, place and
pace of the lesson.”
N P M MI
42% 28% 30% -
To encourage learners to take some of the initiatives that help them shape their own learning
process, they should be considered as equal partners and through the process of interaction
they thus should be given a share for determining the time, place and pace of the lesson
(Dickinson, 1987). Conversely, 42 % of the participating instructors are reluctant to involve
the learners in the decisions on time, place and pace. In the context of Turkish educational
system, it is hardly surprising to come across this finding since it is not so common to
recognize the instructors allowing the learners to decide on the time, place and pace of the
lesson. On the other hand, the participants in Camilleri (1997) and Özdere’s (2005) studies
have the same feelings about this item. They think that the learners should be never involved
in decisions on the time, place and pace of the lesson (36 %, 37 %). Based on all these
findings, we can come to a consensus that it is only because discipline problems may arise
when the learners make decisions on the time, place and pace of the course. Also, where and
when the course takes place brings another trouble since the learners may not be in accord
with a proper place and time.
Table 6. The statement 5 “Learners should be involved in decisions on the methodology of
the lesson.”
N P M MI
30% 28% 42% -
42 % of the participating instructors maintain that the learners should be much involved in
decisions of the methodology of the course. This finding is very important as the learners
ought to be taught the way they learn the best, not the way their instructors like to teach. In
addition, the learners can acquire the knowledge more efficiently if they are involved in
decisions on the methodology of the lesson. As Little (1991) rightly argues, in formal
educational contexts, learners need to be involved as equal partners in the decision making
process regarding the methodology of the lesson if they are expected to take initiatives that
shape their own learning processes and accept control over more aspects of their own learning
. Similarly, the other studies carried out by Camilleri (1997) and Özdere (2005) indicate the
same results as the present study (Respectively 39 % and 38 %). It is essential that the
learners comment on how to be instructed and the instructors not neglect these comments.
Table 7. The statement 6 “Learners should be involved in decisions on classroom
management.”
N P M MI
26% 44% 28% 2%Regarding the decisions on classroom management, the instructors were neutral as 44 % of
them chose answer “partly”. It is believed that the teacher is the main authority who hardly
gives rights to the learners to decide on classroom rules and norms. The instructors may feel
insecure in the classroom if they involve the learners in decisions on classroom management.
As known, it is essential to make a negotiation between the two faces of the learning process,
teacher and learner, on the basis of rules and norms. Otherwise, the learners will feel
miserable and have difficulty in struggling with the problems. In order for the learners to feel
the ownership over their learning contexts, they can be encouraged to formulate classroom
and group rules through negotiation (Dörnyei, 2001). As a result of this necessity, the case
seems to support this statement in other studies carried out by Camilleri (1997) and Özdere
(2005). Whereas 46 % of the instructors think that the learners should be much involved in
decisions on classroom management in the former study, this percentage is only 38 % in the
latter one.
Table 8. The statement 7 “Learners should be involved in decisions on homework
tasks.”N P M MI
30% 33% 37% -
Assignments give the learners the opportunity to exercise and revise what they have acquired
in the process of learning a foreign language. Additionally, they play an important role in the
development of leaner autonomy because learners should use the target language in extended
periods of time in the world for the development of learner autonomy (Little, 1994). As a
consequence, learners should be involved in the process of determining the content of
homework assignments (Little, 1994). It appears from the table above, 37 % of the instructors
think that the learners should be much involved in decisions on homework tasks, which
advocates the statements by Little (1994). On the contrary, 33 % of the instructors believe that
the learners should partly be involved in decisions on homework tasks. Despite the
importance of assignments, the reason why the instructors think so is that the learners, when
given the chance to decide on homework tasks, may not be able to choose the right tasks for
them due to the insufficient knowledge. Nonetheless, learners’ ideas on the homework tasks
should be considered as it is very beneficial for the learners to work on the tasks they favor. In
other studies performed by Camilleri (1997) and Özdere (2005), the findings are different
from each other. Whereas 38 % of the participants chose the answer “partly” in Camilleri’s
(1997) study, 42 % of the instructors believe that the learners should be never involved in
decisions on homework tasks in Özdere’s (2005) research.
Table 9. The statement 12 “Learners should be encouraged to explore their learning
strategies.”
N P M MI
20% 29% 51% -
Learning strategies, the specific actions taken by the learners to make learning easier, faster,
more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, more permanent and more transferable to
new situations, simply exist so as to facilitate the learning process for the learners who aspire
to acquire a foreign language and they also seem to be useful for the promotion of learner
autonomy (Oxford, 1990: 3). Therefore, it is impossible to deny the importance of language
learning strategies in foreign language learning. In this respect, the instructors who claim that
the learners should be much encouraged to explore their learning strategies are many (51%).
As Holmes and Ramos (1991, cited in James and Garrett, 1991:198) explicate, it is essential
to help them become aware of and identify the strategies that they already use or could
potentially use in order to help learners to assume greater control over their own learning.
Likewise, in Camilleri (1997) and Özdere’s (2005) studies, those who believe that the learners
should be much encouraged to explore their learning strategies are many (respectively 84 %
and 79 %), which makes the point very clear that the learners should be trained to explore
their learning strategies as Wenden (1998: 90) observes, “without strategies, learners will
remain trapped in their old patterns of beliefs and behaviors and never be fully autonomous”.
Table 10. The statement 13 “Learners should be informed on how to study English better on
their own.”
N P M MI
18% - 78% 4%
Learner training should aim to help learners develop the ability to take more responsibility for
their own learning (Dickinson, 1993). In order to help students become autonomous, it would
be more effective to provide learner training (Lee, 1998:285). As a result, this process has
gained its importance in order to help the learners identify their learning styles and
appropriate strategies. In the light of this knowledge, that 78 % of the participating instructors
support the idea of learner training is highly crucial as it leads the learners to take more
responsibility for their own learning, which increases the possibility of the successful
language learning. It is merely a fact that the learners will be aware of their strategies, styles
and the information concerning how they can study best through this kind of training.
Table 11. The statement 14 “Learners should be encouraged to keep journals to follow their
own progress.”
N P M MI
12% 10% 76% 2%
It is widely accepted that journals are great of importance in the promotion of learner
autonomy as keeping journals enables the learners to do a lot of vital things on their own.
What’s more, learners gain deeper insights into their learning processes by keeping a written
account of their work and their reflection on it (Gardner and Miller, 1999). Therefore, it
requires that the learners keep journals so as to observe their own progress more consciously.
As seen in the table above, the findings of this statement verifies what has been mentioned in
terms of journals as 76 % of the instructors are quite positive towards keeping journals.
Table 12. The statement 16 “Learners should be assessed through different assessment types
(portfolio assessment).”
N P M MI
16% 4% 76% 4%
Portfolio, which is described as a purposeful collection of a student’s work that provides
evidence of the student’s skills, understandings or attitudes, may promote student
involvement in assessment, responsibility for self-assessment and student ownership of and
responsibility for their own learning (Genesee and Upshur, 1996). Furthermore, the learners
are able to enhance their knowledge of the variety of possible goals in language learning, to
expand the criteria for them to evaluate their needs and affective dimensions of the learning
process, and to stimulate them to consider course content and assessment critically through
self-assessment (Oscarsoon, 1989). When the instructors are asked to think over the different
assessment types such as portfolio assessment, it is obvious that there has been much approval
(78 %) from the instructors since they are aware of the fact that the learners should be
equipped with the portfolios as a consequence of the benefits mentioned above.
Table 13. The statement 23 “Learners are responsible for their own learning."
N P M MI
22% 14% 58% 6%
This statement is closely related to the notion of learner autonomy. In this aspect, how the
English instructors regard learner autonomy relates to how they respond to this statement. The
instructors are in accord with the idea that the learners are much responsible for their own
learning (58%). It can be concluded that the instructors adopt learner autonomy in theory very
much since they are of the opinion that the learners should take charge of their own learning.
Having discussed the quantitative results of the study, it is time to focus on the qualitative
data obtained by means of the open-ended section in which the instructors were asked to
comment on two questions. After the questions were analyzed, the ideas which were common
were chosen and used as the basis for qualitative data for this study. Concerning the first
question “what are your comments on learner autonomy?, there seems to be a consensus that
learner autonomy is essential for better language learning. Since learner autonomy leads the
learners to learn better and spoon-feeding is not the correct way of teaching a foreign
language, it is a common belief that learner autonomy should be promoted in the higher
education as Stephenson and Laycock (1993) state. Unlike these good sides of learner
autonomy, it is possible to observe some troubles which the instructors have pointed out. The
instructors agree that some points are rather difficult to implement due to the educational
system in Turkey. For instance, the learners’ deciding on the classroom objectives is nearly
impossible as the instructors themselves even can not comment on these objectives. Finally,
one of the instructors expressed her feelings through this sentence: “Learning is too vast a
task to be limited to class hours.”, which emphasizes the necessity of life-long learning. As
for the second question “What are your suggestions to promote learner autonomy in your own
classes?”, motivation is the key word which has been repeated many times by the instructors.
They all aware of the fact that the learners should be motivated to participate in the activities,
comment on the classroom rules, the methodology of the lesson. In order to promote learner
autonomy in their own classrooms effectively, they agree on several aspects such as portfolio
assessment, learner training, open-discussions which enable the learners to make decisions on
anything happening in the classrooms and learner-strategy training to make the learners to get
to understand themselves better. Since many adult learners would like to learn how they learn
a language as a result of her/his nature, the learners should be made aware of the nature of
learning.
4. RESULTS AND SUGGESTIONS
The results gathered through the questionnaire in this study indicate that nearly all of the
instructors were rather positive towards learner autonomy, which advocates the point that
learner autonomy leads to better language learning. As mentioned at the very beginning of
this study, the teacher plays a great role in promoting learner autonomy in foreign language
classrooms. When examining the findings, we can observe that the instructors consider the
principles of learner autonomy crucial to foreign language learning. However, some points are
neglected by the instructors due to the educational set-up in Turkey. In the light of these
results, we can make several suggestions.
a. It is a mandatory step to encourage instructors to promote learner autonomy and to enable
learners to become more autonomous and effective language learners.
b. Instructors should be given professional training such as in-service training so as to foster
learner autonomy effectively.
c. Some alterations in the curriculum may create the atmosphere in which learner autonomy is
nurtured.
d. The negotiation between the instructors and the administration is inevitable to be made.
REFERENCES
Benson, P. 2001. Teaching and Researching Autonomy in Language Learning. England:
Longman Pearson Education.
Camilleri, G. 1997. Learner Autonomy: The teachers’ view.
www.ecml.at/documents/pubCamilleriG_E.pdf (2006, April 18)
Critchley, M; Ashwell, T.; Barfield et all. 2001. Exploring and Defining Teacher Autonomy:
A Collaborative Discussion.
http:/www.encounters.jp/mike/professional/publications/tchauto.html
(2006, September 20)
Dam, L. 1995. Learner Autonomy 3: From theory to classroom practice. Dublin. Authentik.
Dickinson, L. 1987. Self-instruction in Language Learning. Cambridge. CUP.
Dickinson, L. 1993. Talking Shop: Aspects of Autonomous Learning. ELT Journal, 47(4), 39-
56.
Dörnyei, Z. 2001. Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: CUP.
Finch, A. E. 2000. A Formative Evaluation of a Task-Based EFL Program for Korean
University Students.: http://www.finchpark.com/arts/autonomy. (2006,
November 14)
Gardner, D and Miller, L. 1999. Establishing Self-Access: from theory to practice.
Cambridge. CUP.
Genesee, F. and Upshur, J. A. 1996. Classroom-Based Evaluation in Second Language
Education.
Cambridge. CUP.
Holec, H. 1981. Autonomy in Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
James, C.V. and Garrett, P. 1991. Language Awareness in the Classroom. London: Longman.
Lee, I. 1998. Supporting Greater Autonomy in Language Learning. ELT Journal, 52(4), 282-
290.
Little, D. 1991. Learner Autonomy: Definitions, issues and problems. Dublin: Authentic
Limited.
Little, D. 1994. Learner Autonomy: A Theoretical Construct and Its Practical Applications.
Die
Neuren Sprachen, 93(5), 430-442.
McGarry, D. 1995. Learner Autonomy 4: The Role of Authentic Texts. Dublin. Authentik.
Oscarsoon, M. 1998. Learner Self-assessment of Language Skills. IATEFL TEA SIC
Newsletter.
Oxford, R.L. 1990. Language Learning Strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston:
Heinle and Heinle.
Özdere, M. 2005. State-supported Provincial University English Language Instructors’
Attitudes
towards Learner Autonomy. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Bilkent University.
Stephenson, J. and Laycock, M. 1993. Using Learner Contracts in Higher Education.
London,
Kogan Page.
Wenden, A. 1998. Learner Strategies for Learner Autonomy. Great Britain: Prentice Hall.