Outline autonomous strategies by efl students at le quy don high school for gifted students in quang tri province

HUE UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES --- NGUYEN THI THUY HANG ONLINE AUTONOMOUS STRATEGIES BY EFL STUDENTS AT LE QUY DON HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIFTED STU

HUE UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

-

NGUYEN THI THUY HANG

ONLINE AUTONOMOUS STRATEGIES

BY EFL STUDENTS AT LE QUY DON HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIFTED STUDENTS IN QUANG TRI PROVINCE

MA THESIS IN THEORY AND METHODOLOGY

OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, University of Foreign Languages and International Studies, Hue University

THUA THIEN HUE, 2022

HUE UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

-

NGUYEN THI THUY HANG

ONLINE AUTONOMOUS STRATEGIES

BY EFL STUDENTS AT LE QUY DON HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIFTED STUDENTS IN QUANG TRI PROVINCE

MA THESIS IN THEORY AND METHODOLOGY

OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING

CODE: 8140111

SUPERVISOR: DR TRUONG BACH LE

THUA THIEN HUE, 2022

ĐẠI HỌC HUẾ TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ

-

NGUYỄN THỊ THÚY HẰNG

CHIẾN LƯỢC TỰ CHỦ TRONG VIỆC HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ TRỰC TUYẾN CỦA HỌC SINH TRƯỜNG TRUNG HỌC PHỔ THÔNG CHUYÊN LÊ QUÝ ĐÔN - TỈNH QUẢNG TRỊ

LUẬN VĂN THẠC SĨ LÝ LUẬN VÀ PHƯƠNG PHÁP

DẠY HỌC BỘ MÔN TIẾNG ANH

MÃ SỐ: 8140111

NGƯỜI HƯỚNG DẪN KHOA HỌC: TS TRƯƠNG BẠCH LÊ

THỪA THIÊN HUẾ, 2022

STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP

The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted for a degree in any university I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, my thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the thesis itself

Signed:

Nguyễn Thị Thúy Hằng Date: 07/ 11 /2022

ABSTRACT

This research was carried out with the aim of investigating autonomous English language learning beyond classroom by the students at Le Quy Don High School for Gifted Students in Quang Tri Province, pertaining to strategies, online resources, affordances, and challenges

The mixed methods design was employed in this research, with the use of questionnaire delivered directly to 200 student participants and semi-structured interviews conducted with ten students The quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0 and thematic analysis, respectively

The results revealed that the student participants adopted autonomous

strategies, namely setting goals, planning learning activities, choosing learning resources, choosing learning methods, monitoring, and evaluating learning activities,

at a medium level of frequency In terms of online learning resources, the highest frequency of use was witnessed by such resources as online dictionaries, You Tube videos, and social media, whereas the lowest utilization frequency belonged to emailing, radio, and discussion forums Besides, the most frequently-reported

affordances included stable Internet connection, ability to find relevant materials, and time available At the same time, the most frequently-reported constraints involved learning methods and strategies, financial resources, and lack of knowledge about sources of technical assistance

From the research findings, certain implications were suggested for both students and teachers with a view to optimizing the use of autonomous strategies and online resources to better English language learning and teaching In addition,

suggestions for further studies were put forward

I would also like to acknowledge Ms Tran Thi Thao Phuong as the second reader of this thesis, and I am gratefully indebted to her for her valuable comments on this thesis

I would like to express my gratitude towards the student participants in the questionnaires and interviews for their significant contributions to the completion of this research project Without their support and participation, the study could not have been successfully conducted

I would also like to express my immense gratitude towards my colleagues at

Le Quy Don High School for Gifted Students in Quang Tri Province for their

intensive support during my course as well as my thesis study

Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to my family and friends for their assistance and encouragement during my master course and my research project

List of Tables

Table 3.1 Themes, subthemes, and items in the questionnaire

Table 3.2 Demographic characteristics of the student respondents to the questionnaire Table 3.3 The interpretations of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient values

Table 3.4 The reliability statistics of the questionnaire

Table 4.1 The interpretation of mean scores

Table 4.2 Frequency of online out of class English learning

Table 4.3 Targeted language elements and skills

Table 4.4 Frequency of overall online autonomous learning strategies

Table 4.5 Setting goals of learning

Table 4.6 Planning learning activities

Table 4.7 Choosing online resources

Table 4.8 Choosing learning methods

Table 4.9 Monitoring learning activities

Table 4.10 Evaluating learning activities

Table 4.11 Used online resources

Table 4.12 Affordances and challenges in online autonomous English learning

Table 4.13 Affordances and challenges: Low frequency and high frequency

List of Figures

Figure 2.1 The dynamic model of learner autonomy

List of Abbreviations

EFL English as a Foreign Language

SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP i

ABSTRACT ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii

List of Tables iv

List of Figures v

List of Abbreviations vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

Chapter 1: Introduction 1

1.1 Background of the study 1

1.2 Rationale of the study 3

1.3 Research objectives 5

1.4 Research questions 5

1.5 Scope of the study 6

1.6 Significance of the study 6

1.7 Structure of the thesis 7

Chapter 2: Literature Review 8

2.1 Learner autonomy in language education 8

2.1.1 Conceptions of learner autonomy 8

2.1.2 Perspectives of learner autonomy 12

2.1.3 Domains of learner autonomy 15

2.2 Online language learning 19

2.2.1 Definition of online language learning 19

2.2.2 Digital affordances of online language learning 20

2.2.3 Online language learning practices 23

2.2.3.1 Structured practices 24

2.2.3.2 Unstructured practices 24

2.2.3.3 Online informal learning of English 26

2.2.4 Online language learning in the current study 27

2.3 Online autonomous strategies 28

2.3.1 Language learning beyond classroom 28

2.3.2 Strategies for autonomous learning 29

2.4 Previous studies 29

2.5 Summary of the chapter 37

Chapter 3: Methodology 38

3.1 Research approach 38

3.2 Research instruments 40

3.2.1 Questionnaire 41

3.2.2 Interviews 43

3.3 Research participants 44

3.4 Data collection procedure 46

3.4.1 Pilot study 46

3.4.2 Main study 46

3.5 Data analysis 47

3.6 Evaluative criteria of the study 48

3.6.1 Quantitative measurement 48

3.6.2 Qualitative measurement 51

3.7 Summary of the chapter 53

Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion 54

4.1 Results of the study 54

4.1.1 Online autonomous language learning strategies 55

4.1.1.1 Targeted language elements and skills in online autonomous learning 56

4.1.1.2 Online autonomous language learning strategies 58

4.1.2 Online resources used for autonomous language learning 76

4.1.3 Affordances and challenges in online autonomous EFL learning 80

4.2 Discussion 87

4.2.1 Online autonomous language learning strategies 87

4.2.2 Online resources used for autonomous language learning 91

4.2.3 Affordances and challenges in online autonomous EFL learning 94

4.3 Summary of the chapter 95

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Implications 97

5.1 Summary of findings 97

5.1.1 What online autonomous strategies do EFL students use for their language learning? 97

5.1.2 What online resources do EFL students use for their autonomous language learning? 98

5.1.3 What affordances and challenges do EFL students have in their online autonomous language learning? 98

5.2 Implications 99

5.2.1 Implications for EFL students 99

5.2.2 Implications for EFL teachers 100

5.3 Limitations of the study 101

5.4 Recommendations for future studies 102

5.5 Summary of the chapter 103

References 104 Appendices 114

Chapter 1: Introduction

This chapter firstly presents the background of the study It then describes the rationale, the objectives of the study and research questions Additionally, it mentions the significance and the scope of the study Finally, a brief outline of this thesis is also provided in the chapter

1.1 Background of the study

The 21st century’s global world has confirmed the increasing importance of English in several sectors such as science, tourism and education, to name but a few Besides, it is the language of international communication with an estimate of two billion users by 2020, as well as the language of the media and the Internet with millions of books, newspapers and websites on nearly every subject available in English or with English versions (Nishanthi, 2018) In other words, a command of English language serves as not only an indispensable and powerful tool to attain personal and professional goals but also a passport to success in securing a place in the job market To have such a command of English, learners’ constant practice and patience is a must because in the ideal learning conditions regarding learners, teachers and educational environment, basic skills for interpersonal communication and

language proficiency for academic purposes require a continuous exposure and active language learning during a period of two to three years and five to seven years,

respectively (Cummins, 2008) In Vietnam, English as a foreign language, hence forth EFL, is a compulsory subject from grade three in primary education to grade twelve at high schools, where students have three separate forty-five-minute lessons per week Accordingly, like in all other high schools in the Vietnamese context, students at Le Quy Don High School for Gifted Students in Quang Tri Province study EFL as a compulsory subject Being members of English-majored classes only entails

additional three periods for fostering English knowledge and skills, which just

increases the English-majored students’ exposure to English language and does not change the nature of EFL This is not enough, at least in terms of time allotted, not to mention other constraints such as the lack of English-speaking environment or the examination orientation, for learners to develop a high command of English

Therefore, in order to acquire practical mastery of English as a foreign language, besides the requirement to make full use of teachers’ instructions and learning

activities during class time, learners need to continue their learning outside classroom

on their own, which pertains to the concept of out-of-class language learning

The Internet and the development of information technology have provided language learners, especially EFL learners, with numerous opportunities to be

exposed to authentic sources of language input and interactions Internet access and advanced technological devices have also blurred the boundary between formally constructed language learning in conventional classrooms and informally

unconstructed language learning out of the classrooms Specifically, with the

availability of the Internet, EFL learners can have access to a wide range of learning apps and authentic materials derived from digital media, and immerse into English speaking communities on social networking sites catering for any topical knowledge

or content The flourishment of research on digital tools for EFL, mobile mediated English learning or technology-mediated English learning, has confirmed the

inevitable trends of integrating technology in education, embracing EFL learning and teaching In contrast to the pre-internet era when EFL teachers and EFL conventional classrooms functioned as nearly the only source of target language exposure and interaction available for EFL learners, today EFL learners can enjoy diverse sources

of authentic materials and language contacts outside classrooms Besides, EFL

learners can bring what they learn beyond classroom into the formal language classes and vice versa, what they have acquired in formal language classes should serves as preparation for the learners’ real life communication These emerging settings and scenarios of EFL education evoke a dire need to get an insightful understanding of the learners’ practices of out-of-class language learning, especially those accompanied by the utilization of resources available online

1.2 Rationale of the study

Out-of-class language learning refers to “non-prescribed activities that

students carry out independently to broaden their knowledge of a subject” (Benson,

2011, p 9) Unlike intentionally structured and hierarchical classroom discourse involving simple and predictable rituals and routines with deliberately displayed language, discourse beyond the classroom is somewhat unstructured with authentic language in multifaceted contexts of use (Nunan, 2014) A large body of related research in a variety of contexts suggests that students’ active engagement in language learning beyond the classroom can obtain improvement in language proficiency, confidence, and motivation (Benson, 2011; Nunan, 2014) Out-of-class language learning is also argued to embrace the potentials for compensating for the limitations

of in-class contexts in terms of the personalization of tasks and activities, material authenticity, and language exposure (Orhon, 2018) Most importantly, out-of-class language learning presents a supportive scenario with abundant opportunities for promoting learner autonomy (Richards, 2015)

Learner autonomy, which is often defined as “the ability to take charge of one’s own learning” (Holec, 1981, p 3), is increasingly taken into consideration as an imperative in foreign language learning The shift from teacher-centered to learner-centered approaches to language teaching, accompanied by recent advancements in

technology-based approaches, makes learner autonomy an increasingly essential factor in foreign language learning In particular, language learners are required to be active and independent in learning due to the availability of authentic materials and resources on the Internet, which entails the fact that teachers and language classes are not the nearly sole language input and language contacts for language learners,

especially in the context of English as a foreign language This necessitates language learners’ ability and willingness to take responsibility for their learning, and

collaborate with teachers and other learners to achieve shared goals (Benson &

Voller, 2014) In this connection, learner autonomy is highly needed for learners to be independent and to exercise control over their own learning in order to reach learning effectiveness and language proficiency Besides, learner autonomy is agreed to be a desirable goal in the teaching and learning of second and foreign languages (Benson, 2013a), and to prepare learners for lifelong learning (Mynard, 2019)

More importantly, according to circular No 32/2018/TT-BGDĐT (Bộ Giáo dục và Đào tạo, 2018) about the new general education curriculum implemented nationwide from the academic year 2021-2022, learner autonomy is identified as one

of the targeted competences Moreover, this circular recognizes the development orientation for specific EFL program in the general education level It also clarifies that EFL learners need to promote learning strategies, both cognitive and

metacognitive ones Besides, this circular explicitly indicates that it is essential to enhance the capability of life-long learning, taking advantage of both formal and informal learning with the integration of information and communication technology

Although out-of-class language learning grasps no less significance than class instructional education, there remains a scarcity of research on what EFL

in-learners do beyond the classroom, especially in digital settings, for the purpose of

language gains (Reinders & Benson, 2017; Richards, 2015) Besides, as mentioned above, though there might be an interrelationship between out-of-class learning

practices and learner autonomy, little has been done to scrutinize the EFL autonomous learning in out-of-class contexts, specifically in digital world (Dincer, 2020; Richards, 2015) This serves as the driving force for the researcher to carry out this study

investigating the EFL learners’ autonomous strategies and digital resources used in their out-of-class language learning

1.3 Research objectives

This research aims to give a close view onto

- upper secondary EFL learners’ online autonomous strategies of language learning beyond the classroom

- online resources that upper secondary EFL learners use for their autonomous

language learning

- affordances and constraints for upper secondary EFL learners’ online autonomous language learning

1.4 Research questions

The study is conducted with a view to finding answers to the following

research questions related to EFL learners’ language learning beyond the classroom at

Le Quy Don High School for Gifted Students in Quang Tri province:

1 What online autonomous strategies do EFL students use for their language learning?

2 What online resources do EFL students use for their autonomous language learning?

3 What affordances and challenges do EFL students have in their online autonomous language learning?

1.5 Scope of the study

The data of the study were collected from 200 EFL learners at Le Quy Don High School for Gifted Students in Quang Tri province, about their online

autonomous strategies, the online resources they use, and affordances they have and difficulties they encounter in their language learning beyond the classroom In

particular, the questionnaire was used to investigate the range of autonomous

strategies and online resources employed by the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth graders at

Le Quy Don High School for Gifted Students in Quang Tri province, as well as the affordances and challenges that they had in their online autonomous learning After that, ten voluntary students took part in semi-structured interviews to elaborate on the quantitative data

Online autonomous language learning in this study targeted at learners’ directed language learning using the online resources Therefore, teacher-directed and teacher-initiated learning activities were not taken into consideration in this research

self-1.6 Significance of the study

This research is carried out with the expectations to make contributions to boosting EFL learning and teaching in the era of modern technology

Firstly, the research will make known the learning potentials of EFL students’ online activities outside the classroom, as well as identify the extent of learner

autonomy in these activities

Secondly, the findings of this study are expected to serve as references for EFL teachers to integrate out-of-class language learning into their instructions in classroom, which can take the most advantage of the abundant digital resources available

In addition, the research results are supposed to be references for material designers to integrate online out-of-class learning tasks and activities so as to help bridge the gap between two dimensions of language learning This also offers

opportunities and preparations for EFL learners for their language use in real life

All things considered, this research is expected to help boost the language learning and teaching quality in our local contexts

1.7 Structure of the thesis

This thesis consists of the following parts:

Chapter 1: Introduction

This chapter will give a brief introduction about the background of the research and explains the reason why the research is chosen The research objectives, research questions, significance of the study, scope of the study as well as the structure of the thesis will also be included

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Chapter 2 will present the concepts and definitions of key items related to the study as well as reviews of previous research

Chapter 3: Methodology

This chapter will present the methods to collect and analyze the data for the study and explain the reason why each method is chosen

Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion

This chapter will analyze the data from the questionnaire and interviews The

discussion of the findings will be included as well

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Implications

The final chapter will summarize the key findings of the study and point out some of implications and suggestions for future studies

Chapter 2: Literature Review

This chapter focuses on the theoretical background of the research This chapter begins with the concepts of learner autonomy in language education together with related perspectives and domains of control Next, the practices of online

language learning are presented, followed by the digital affordances Finally, a

thorough review of previous studies into the field of autonomous learning with

technology is presented, indicating the research gap This chapter provides an

overview about what will be discussed in the findings and discussion

2.1 Learner autonomy in language education

2.1.1 Conceptions of learner autonomy

There is an agreement in the literature that learner autonomy is such a

complex construct that despite a myriad of discussions and arguments by many scholars and practitioners since the 1980s, no specific definition of the term has been provided (Alonazi, 2017) According to Benson (2007), one of the most cited

definitions of learner autonomy is “the ability to take charge of one’s own learning” provided by Holec (1981, p 3), who hereby stated that being an autonomous learner involves being able to take responsibility for making decisions on learning objectives, contents, progressions, methods, techniques; monitoring the learning procedures; and evaluating the learning results “Ability”, “responsibility” and “decision-making” as the main features of learner autonomy can be inferred from this definition, from which many other definitions have been evolved

Little (1991), inspired by Holec’s (1981) work, expands the notion of learner autonomy by adding the dimension of psychology to the development of this

construct He thus defines autonomy as “a capacity for detachment, critical reflection, decision-making, and independent action” (Little, 1991, p 4) This definition

encompasses a level of learner’s control over cognitive processes in learning (Benson, 2001), and indicates that “the capacity to manage one’s own learning depends upon certain underlying psychological capacities” (Benson, 2007, p 23) Little (1991) also emphasizes the inclusion of metacognitive learning strategies, such as planning, monitoring and evaluating of learning activities, in this capacity, which involves both the content and the process of learning

Littlewood (1996) defines learner autonomy as “ability and willingness to make choices independently” (p 427) He states that the two components of ability and willingness are interdependent and divided into subcomponents: ability refers to knowledge about the alternative choices and skills for making appropriate choices; willingness refers to the motivation and confidence the learner must have in order to take responsibility for necessary choices In this model, developing learner autonomy needs to take into consideration the four subcomponents of knowledge, skills,

motivation and confidence

Another definition of learner autonomy is developed by Benson (2001) as “the capacity to take control of one’s learning” (pp 47-50), in which control exerts in learning management, cognitive processes, and learning content (Benson, 2011) This definition is argued to mention metacognitive factors, i.e learning management and learning content, which refers to learner’s involvement in goal setting, defining content, monitoring and evaluating results and progressions (Le, 2013, p 35)

Najeeb (2013) on reviewing learner autonomy points out that learner

autonomy is a multidimensional construct of capacity that can take different forms depending on specific individuals, contexts and times He also stresses that

autonomous learners possess the willingness to learn in collaboration with others and

the capacity for reflection on their own learning which is carried out both in

classrooms and out of classroom settings

In his recent study, when reviewing different definitions of learner autonomy

by many language researchers, Alhaysony (2016, p.46) concludes that most of them have focused on “learners’ ability, capacity, responsibility, control, demonstration, attitude, willingness, and mode of learning” This review along with the variety of abovementioned definitions echoes the core attributes of learner autonomy, i.e ability, responsibility, and cognition

Specifically, the pioneering conception of learner autonomy by Holec (1981) attaches learner autonomy to the term “ability”, which is later replaced with

“capacity” by its very founding father who defines learner autonomy as “a matter of acquiring those capacities which are necessary to carry out a self-directed learning programme” (Holec, 1985, p 180) Paraphrased differently, learner autonomy is the ability to proceed to conscious and independent learning The concept “capacity” instead of “ability” is also used in related studies by other researchers and experts such as Little (1991) who emphasizes the learners’ abilities to detach themselves, reflect, analyze, make decisions, and eventually perform independently Another attempt to clarify the concept of learner autonomy made by Dickinson (1994) details these abilities including recognizing the learning objectives, planning the learning goals, selecting the learning styles and strategies, managing and evaluating the learning performances In addition, Dam (1995) confirms and extends the concept when defining learner autonomy as “a capacity and willingness to acts independently and in co-operation with others as a socially responsible person” (p 1) These two main attributes of learner autonomy are echoed in the topic-related work by

Littlewood (1996), who segments each of them into sub-components as presented

above More recently, Benson (2001) supports Holec’s view and rephrases “ability” and “take charge of” into “capacity” and “take control over”, respectively By and large, that learner autonomy is learners’ ability to take control over their own learning

is perceived as the main factor of all conceptualizations about learner autonomy

Apart from “ability”, “responsibility” as another main factor of the construct

of learner autonomy is commonly recognized in all of the above definitions Holec (1981) emphasizes that autonomous learners take responsibility for all aspects of their learning pertaining to objectives, contents, progressions, methods, techniques,

procedure, and evaluation Dickinson (1987, p 11) depicts learner autonomy as “a situation in which the learner is totally responsible for all of the decisions concerned with his or her learning and the implementation of those decisions” Littlewood (1999) concurs and summarizes two main features of autonomous learners as taking

“responsibility for their own learning” and “taking ownership (partial or total) of many processes such as deciding on learning objectives, selecting learning methods, and evaluating process” (p 71) In more details, certain activities for learners to take responsibility are suggested involving decisions about their learning, goal setting, study planning, evaluating, monitoring, and assessing Furthermore, the interpretation

of the term “learner autonomy” suggested by Benson and Voller (1997) explicitly elucidates that autonomous learners should be directly active and attentive to their learning and perform the duties of determining their learning goals, plans, methods, and evaluation

Learner autonomy is also perceived to embrace the constructs of attitudes and willingness This perception is explicitly supported by researchers in the field such as Dickinson (1995), who presents that learner autonomy “can be seen as an attitude towards learning in which the learner is prepared to take, or does take, responsibility

for his own learning” (p 167); and White (1995), who likens learner autonomy to “an attitude on the part of the learners towards taking control of the language learning process” (p 209) At the same time, Dam (1995) suggests that autonomous learners show “readiness to take charge of one’s own learning in the service of one’s needs and purposes” (p 1) Additionally, both Dam et al (1990, as cited in Alhaysony,

2016, p 46) and Littlewood (1996) agree on the attachment of learner autonomy to learners’ willingness to conduct their independent learning According to Wenden (1998, p 52, as cited in Thanasoulas, 2000, p 6), attitudes are defined as “learned motivations, valued beliefs, evaluations, what one believes is acceptable, or responses oriented towards approaching or avoiding” Attitudes can hence be interpreted to fall into two crucial types: ones about the learners’ role in the learning process, and the others about the learners’ capability as learners In a sense, attitudes are a form of metacognitive knowledge, which is considered as the learners’ understanding of their thinking processes Harris (2003) proposes that metacognition pertains to “guiding the learning process itself and so includes strategies for planning, monitoring and evaluating both language use and language learning” (p 4) In brief, learners’

cognition and attitudes towards their ability and responsibility in their independent learning play important roles in the development of learner autonomy

2.1.2 Perspectives of learner autonomy

Different approaches have been taken to the application of learner autonomy

in language education, which results in the exploration of this construct from various facets and perspectives In an attempt to systematize learner autonomy, Benson (1997) categorizes learner autonomy into three perspectives including technical, psychological, and political One more perspective of socio-cultural has been

identified and added to the field later by Oxford (2003) The resultant model now

seems to be ideal and standard for discussions about learner autonomy in language learning (Nguyen, 2019), with four perspectives, namely technical, psychological, political-critical, and socio-cultural, each with distinct assumptions on the

conceptualization of the notion

The technical perspective is concerned with the physical and situational

conditions for students to develop learner autonomy as they take responsibility for their own learning Learner autonomy from this perspective is “the act of learning a language outside the framework of an educational institution and without the

intervention of a teacher” (Benson, 1997, p 19) In other words, this technical autonomy focuses on the learner-independence supporting conditions and skills that can help learners acquire knowledge through their own learning management and discovery rather than waiting for the direct transmission from the teacher (Fedj & Benaissi, 2018) Adopting this perspective of learner autonomy, researchers conduct studies scrutinizing the attributes of the learning environments embracing authentic materials and personalized learning activities which are perceived to foster learner autonomy Drawn on this perspective, Benson’s (2006) work reviews a number of modes of learner autonomy beyond the classroom, specifically self-access center, computer-assisted language learning, distance learning, and out-of-class learning

While technical perspective takes into account the learner-independence

supporting features of the external learning conditions, psychological perspective

focuses on the learners’ personal characteristics that enable them to take control of their own learning (Benson, 1997; Oxford, 2003) Specifically, psychological

autonomy refers to the learners’ internal mental capabilities, attitudes, and behaviors when they assume responsibilities for their own learning Oxford (2003) postulates that the cornerstones of this psychological autonomy are motivation, self-efficacy,

positive attitudes, self-confidence in capabilities, a sense of agency, a desire to pursue meaning, and a need for achievement In other words, from this psychological

perspective, learner autonomy involves the affective dimension of motivation and learning styles and strategies in which learners acquire the knowledge and then may change it into their own possession This perspective is in line with Little's (2003) conceptions of learner autonomy, detailing the characteristics of autonomous leaners

as possessing full understanding of the learning goals, exercising the learning duties, actively planning and performing the learning and assessing activities.Briefly put, psychological autonomy emphasizes the learners’ positive perceptions, abilities, reflection, and “a readiness to be proactive in self-management and in interaction with others” (Little, 2003, p.1) Therefore, researchers applying this version of learner autonomy conduct investigations into learners’ abilities, motivations, attitudes, and learning strategies

The political-critical perspective addresses learners’ access, control, power,

and ideology in their community (Benson, 1997) Specifically, in language learning, political-critical perspective focuses on learners’ control and power over both the learning process and the learning content in their independent and institutional

learning contexts (Benson, 1997) This means that, when viewed from this

perspective, autonomous learners have the right to manage their own learning

situations, make decisions on their learning activities, and voice their ideologies

The socio-cultural perspective added to Benson’s (1997) three-perspective

model of learner autonomy by Oxford (2003) recognizes that social interaction does play its roles in improving learners’ cognition and language Unlike the

aforementioned three perspectives, this one no longer pays exclusive attention to the learners’ independence in making decisions on their learning Rather, from socio-

cultural perspective, autonomous learning process can be promoted through

interactions and practical integration with the social and cultural contexts (Fedj & Benaissi, 2018) This is in conformity with Sinclair’s (2000, p 11) conception that

“autonomy has a social as well as an individual dimension” (as cited in Nguyen, 2019,

p 21), indicating that autonomous learning takes place through interaction and

collaboration as well as through individual reflection and experimentation Oxford (2003) posits that socio-cultural autonomy involves socially mediated learning, and hence it does not refer to learning in isolation In social mediated learning, learners develop their autonomy thanks to the collaboration and mediation of more capable people who assist them to actively construct new knowledge and “enter the

community of practice” (Oxford, 2003, p 88) Socio-cultural perspective of learner autonomy has often been taken as the underpinning framework in studies scrutinizing learner-autonomy promoting practices by language teachers who could supply

learners with more contextual options, negotiation, and interactive learning activities, which can be of help for learners to approach the contextual mediations and inspire strategic learning behaviors (Humphreys & Wyatt, 2014)

In brief, the four interrelated but differing perspectives of learner autonomy are summarized in Healey's (2007) interpretation, presenting that the technical

perspective focuses on the physical setting and situations, the psychological

perspective focuses on characteristics of the learners, the political-critical perspective focuses on ideologies, access and power structures, and the socio-cultural perspective focuses on mediated learning

2.1.3 Domains of learner autonomy

Although there remains a lack of consensus on the definition of learner

autonomy regarding its main components, a number of researchers have agreed on the

ultimate goals of learner autonomy pertaining to independence in thinking and acting (Lai, 2017) As a result, models of learner autonomy based on domains of control have been proposed

Seeing that all education should pursue the goals of fostering learners’ ability

to think, act, and learn independently in their relevant areas of lives, Littlewood (1996) introduces a model of learner autonomy in foreign language learning including

three domains, namely autonomy as a communicator, autonomy as a learner, and

autonomy as a person Autonomy as a communicator in language learning contexts

refers to the capability to use the language creatively using appropriate and relevant strategies of communication Autonomy as a learner addresses the ability to partake in independent work employing suitable strategies for both inside and outside class learning Autonomy as a person indicates the ability to express personal

situation-meanings as well as to create personal learning contexts On discussing the three areas

of this model, Littlewood (1996) points out the high interrelationship among these three domains, suggesting that the autonomy gained in one domain may

simultaneously enable learners to promote autonomy in other domains

The second model of learner autonomy developed by Macaro (1997) and

elaborated on later by this author (Macaro, 2008) consists of three areas of autonomy

of language competence, autonomy of language learning competence, and autonomy

of choice Autonomy of language competence refers to communicative ability,

regarding such aspects as situational appropriateness, transferring native language strategies to target language, generating their own sentences and utterances (Macaro, 2008) It can be inferred that autonomy of language competence can be exercised with learners’ certain mastery of the target language rules and the capability of performing without the assistance of a more competent speaker Autonomy of language learning

competence refers to the ability to use a range and combination of cognitive and metacognitive strategies to achieve the learning goals, with or without the teachers’ help This indicates that autonomous learners develop the ability to reproduce and transfer the language learning skills to other situations The third domain of autonomy

of choice refers to the ability to specify learning options such as justifying the reasons

to learn a foreign language, identifying short-term and long-term objectives, selecting learning strategies Macaro (2008) adds to this domain the aspect of goal

commitment, entailing the directing and adjusting of attention and effort, encouraging persistence, and developing action plans and strategies It can be seen that each

domain of autonomy is associated with a specific group of skills and behaviors

Benson's (2001) model of learner autonomy focuses on three areas of control,

namely learning management, cognitive processes, and learning content In terms of

learning management, autonomy is related to behaviors in the planning, organization, and evaluation of learning Regarding control over cognitive processes, autonomy is concerned with directing attention, reflection on the learning process, and

constructing metacognitive knowledge Control over learning content is regarded as

an aspect of control over language management, emphasizing the “what” and “why” rather than the “when”, “where” and “how” of language learning Benson (2001) acknowledged that these three areas of control are interdependent and the

development of control in one area does support the promotion of the two others

It is evident that the three models have several features in common For

instance, Littlewood's (1996) autonomy as a learner share the attributes of autonomy

of language learning competence by Macaro (2008) Similarly, several attributes of autonomy of choice (Macaro, 2008) are included in the control over learning

management and learning content by Benson (2001)

Recently, Tassinari (2012) develops a dynamic model for measuring learner autonomy The components of this model are “spheres of competences, skills and actions” (p 28), which are organized into interrelated dimensions of cognitive and metacognitive aspects, action-oriented aspects, affective and motivational aspects, and social aspects, as showed in Figure 2.1

Figure 2.1

The Dynamic Model of Learner Autonomy (Tassinari, 2010, p 203, as cited in

Tassinari, 2012, p 29)

As can be seen in Figure 2.1, there are three dimensions in the dynamic model:

an action-oriented dimension including ‘planning’, ‘choosing materials and methods’,

‘completing tasks’, ‘monitoring’, ‘evaluating’, ‘cooperating’, ‘managing my own learning’; a cognitive and metacognitive dimension pertaining to ‘structuring

knowledge’; and an affective and motivational dimension relating to ‘dealing with my feelings’, ‘motivating myself’ In addition, a social dimension manifested by

‘cooperating’ is integrated into each component Each component of the model

consists of a set of descriptors regarding learners’ individual competences, skills and learning behaviors

Tassinari (2012) contends that this model is “structurally and functionally dynamic” (p 29) in the way that the components are directly related to one another and learners can decide to enter the model from any component and move to another one to suit their own needs and purposes Furthermore, the descriptors cover the main areas of learner autonomy, they thus can constitute a checklist for autonomous

language learning Another important thing that counts is that the components and descriptors in this model can serve as a reference to raise learners’ and educators’ awareness of what could be worth focusing on in promoting and developing learner autonomy (Tassinari, 2012) Though this model is said to be designed for and tested within language learning contexts in higher education, the author of this model

recommends that it be applicable in other situations and languages

2.2 Online language learning

2.2.1 Definition of online language learning

Language learning can be supported and enhanced with many different types

of technologies, of which the most important and popular one is computer assisted language learning, an approach to teaching and learning languages using computers and other technologies to present, reinforce, and assess learning materials, or to create environments that foster the interactions between teachers, learners, and the outside world (Stockwell, 2012) According to Scott & Beadle (2014), computer assisted language learning is the domain that refers to every process in language learning that technology, namely computers, laptops, smartphones, tablets, MP3 players, or

consoles can be used to improve the learners’ language competence Computer

assisted language learning, therefore, provides authentic foreign language materials such as video clips, web-quests, pod-casts, web-casts, and news; and language

learning tools involving online apps or software for phonetics, pronunciation,

vocabulary, grammar, and clause structures, which may have a text-to-speech

function or speech recognition, and often accompanied by interactive and guided exercises Online language learning is also perceived to be significantly prevailing practices in the field of computer assisted language learning

In brief, online language learning concerns the learning of a second or foreign language through the use of digital learning platforms, tools, and applications which provide learning materials and potential online-based interactions with peers and/or instructors (Tzirides, 2022)

2.2.2 Digital affordances of online language learning

The term “affordance” coined by the psychologist James J Gibson has been borrowed by a number of linguists, language educators and practitioners, including Lier (2004), who used it to describe the way in which the learning environment

provides learning opportunities for the learners who play an active role in the process

of establishing relationships with and within the environment, perceiving and acting

on the language around them (Anderson, 2015) The notion of affordance can be perceived as a means to conceptualize how language learning is facilitated through the communicative environments mediated by an array of digital technologies regarded as resources opening up possibilities for engagement and participation (Walker, 2018) Kalantzis and Cope (2015) postulate that new media, namely technologies and

computers, can provide the practical realization of contemporary learning with seven digital affordances, all of which are echoed in Tzirides's (2022) work accompanied by suggestions of their utilizations in online language learning settings as follows

According to Tzirides's (2022), the first affordance refers to ubiquitous

learning, meaning learning anytime, anywhere, and anyhow This affordance is in line

with the notion of informal learning, which can be carried out on every aspect life regardless of the time and the location In online language learning, ubiquitous

learning can be realized as using mobile or web-based applications to learn or practice the language, or to interact with native or fluent target-language speakers, while being

at home or on the way to work This affordance can also supply the language learners with the opportunities to access multimodal and authentic language contents, by listening to music, reading texts or news, or watching movies from real sources in a foreign language

The second affordance lies in recursive feedback, referring to formative

assessment and constructive feedback to learning (Tzirides, 2022) It is advisable for learners to get feedback on their performance while they are still in process of

learning The realization of this affordance in online language learning could be a response from a machine in a game, an intelligent tutor, a comment from peers, a reply in an online discussion, or the immediate check of the answer to a question in online language exercises

The third affordance, multimodal meaning, pertains to the use of a variety of

media such as images, videos, audios, and texts at the same time to enhance the meaning of the related topic This is especially beneficial to language learning

because in the era of technological advancements, interaction with various media is present in real life and necessary for the process of meaning making (Zapata &

Lacorte, 2018, as cited in (Tzirides, 2022) In online language learning, multimodal meaning can be easily implemented through the integration of various types of

communication in the learning process and promoting learners’ interaction with a diversity of media

In the next affordance, active knowledge making, the learners are the

knowledge producers and meaning makers, assuming the active roles of agency in the learning process (Tzirides, 2022) In online settings, language learners are involved in the selection of topics, maybe to suit their interests, in the selection of activities, according to their preferences, or in the creation of learning content through the interaction and collaboration with peers or native speakers

The affordance of collaborative intelligence refers to learners constructing

knowledge that can be made available for the learners themselves and other learners (Kalantzis & Cope, 2015; Tzirides, 2022) This is illustrated in the real-life practices

of sourcing information rather than memorizing it (Kalantzis & Cope, 2015) Thanks

to digital devices, knowledge can be reached with a few clicks, learners, therefore, should be equipped with skills to collaborate in creating knowledge, sharing it to others, and using others’ work, too In online language learning, this notion could be demonstrated by creating multimodal content in target language, providing it to other learners, and using the others’ ready-made materials to enhance the language learning process

Another digital affordance is metacognition, thinking about thinking or

learning how to learn (Bransford et al., 2000) In online language learning,

metacognition may indicate the understanding of the language structures, the

connections with the first language, and the ability to analyze the target language at a deeper level, which in turn helps the learners to use the language appropriately in various situations Practically, metacognition offers learners with opportunities to learn not only the content but also the underpinning theory and processes, to

understand the social interaction in the process of knowledge construction, to engage

in target language community, and thus possess a valuable tool for reflection,

assessment, and developing ways of thinking and enhancing understandings (Tzirides, 2022)

The last affordance, differentiated learning, offers learners with support to

address different learning needs thanks to the adaptability and flexibility of online systems (Kalantzis & Cope, 2015; Tzirides, 2022) Specifically, learners can work at their own pace, deal with content relevant and personalized to their levels, interests, and needs, and be free from restrictions of space and time In an online setting for language learning, differentiated learning can be demonstrated by allowing learners to decide and manage their learning pace, learning content, and learning strategies, to name but a few Besides, available digital tools such as dashboards, learning analytics, alternative navigation paths, and adaptive learning mechanisms can help make known the learners’ levels, then identify their specific learning needs, and recommend

appropriate learning materials and resources (Kalantzis & Cope, 2015) In other words, learners turn out to be active creators of their learning experiences and assume responsibility for their learning process and progress This is in line with the

conceptualization of learner autonomy previously analyzed in this study

2.2.3 Online language learning practices

Both Hockly (2015) and Tzirides (2022) postulate that online language

learning practices range from formal, structured to informal, unstructured ones

regarding how the online language learning tools and platforms are offered and

potentially used

2.2.3.1 Structured practices

Structured learning practices pertain to practices often used in online language courses in educational settings such as schools and universities as part of the formal curriculum (Hockly, 2015; Tzirides, 2022) in which the learners are formally assessed for credits or qualifications These practices typically take place in a virtual learning environment or learning management system which provides online language learning materials produced or pre-packaged by the institutions or publishers The formal language courses usually focus on the language knowledge, namely grammar and vocabulary, as well as the four language skills of reading, writing, listening, and speaking In other words, these courses are designed based on approaches found in contemporary language course books with themed units and related activities or tasks for integrated skill practices These courses are often a combination of the

asynchronous mode of learning using a platform offering “features such as sharing documents and links to websites, posting news to participants, assigning and

correcting homework, and more generally managing the whole course” (Freddi, 2021,

p 284, as cited in Gronchi, 2021, p 119), and synchronous classes via a

videoconferencing tool to support simultaneous connections and interactions between teachers and learners (Gronchi, 2021)

of active knowledge construction which can be presented in the domains of mobile assisted language learning, virtual worlds, online-based games, or language learning social network sites (Tzirides, 2022) In particular, mobile assisted language learning includes a variety of mobile devices and applications available to users to serve the purpose of learning a new language These applications are typically unstructured and bearing a resemblance to social networking or games environments in our daily life Mobile learning apps are argued to demonstrate the potential for not only offering flexible use and timely feedback but also reinforcing personalization and self-directed learning, active participation, interactions, and collaboration, as well as cultural authenticity (Kukulska-Hulme & Viberg, 2018) Language learning in most mobile apps is offered through the formats of adaptive quiz activities focusing on grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, stimulus-response interaction, and text reconstruction, presented in the form of multiple choice, matching, ordering, direct stimulus-response questions (Tzirides, 2022) At the same time, virtual words and games provide online spaces for interactions between peers and fluent speakers or native speakers, and offer learners opportunities to practice the content and the language in real-life discussions and life-like situations (Levak & Son, 2017) Another practice for unstructured online language learning is conducted through language learning social network sites which form interactive online communities to promote language learning with the use of social networking and immersion (Chik & Ho, 2017) Although some of such sites consist of structured activities addressing the four language skills, these are

accompanied by social network features of creating profiles, interacting with peers, and most significantly building target language communities for learners to immerse

in and collaborate towards language learning (Chik & Ho, 2017) In brief,

unstructured online language learning activities possess the potential for offering

seven digital affordances previously analyzed, can be used as out-of-class practices, and especially be an ideal approach to language learning as the learners are masters of their learning process (Tzirides, 2022), which is in conformity with the literature of online informal language learning

2.2.3.3 Online informal learning of English

Online informal learning of English was first deployed by Sockett (2014) to refer to “a complex range of internet-based activities” (p 7) that possess the potential for involving the learning of English This author continues to emphasize the notion

of “complex” as “interconnected” rather than just “complicated and difficult” (p 7)

In other words, according to Sockett (2014), online informal learning of English does involve a diversity of factors in language learning, interconnected and interacting with one another as the learning takes place Specifically, Toffoli & Sockett (2015) posit that online informal learning of English is incidental rather than targeted as the

language users originally aim at leisure rather than language acquisition, through online activities such as social networking, streaming, downloading television series

or films, listening to music, or web browsing Paraphrased differently, online informal learning of English is a process driven by the intention of communication, wherein language learning is a by-product However, Reinders & Benson (2017) postulate that

“informal” is a relative term that can refer to learning motivated by teachers or

institutions, or the initiative of the learners, or a combination of these factors

Learners may choose to use English to communicate via social media, but they might also intentionally plan to acquire new words along the way by using an online

dictionary in this process (Lamb & Arisandy, 2019) It can be seen that when learners recognize the benefits of technology-enhanced English language learning outside the

“bricks and mortar” classrooms, to develop their language knowledge and skills,

“learning stops being a negligible by-product and becomes a deliberate, even if

usually secondary, aim” (Trinder, 2017, p 406) In particular, learners in Trinder’s (2017) study present awareness that technologies have potential for fostering language learning and hence use them in such activities as reading online news for the purpose

of expanding vocabulary, or watching television series and films to improve language skills, though the primary consumption of the content is for acquiring the knowledge and entertainment These results lead to the conclusion that “informal learning

involves an element of language choice and is intentional, rather than implicit”

(Trinder, 2017, p 410)

2.2.4 Online language learning in the current study

As mentioned in the background of the research, in the context of Le Quy Don High school for Gifted Students in Quang Tri Province, EFL is a compulsory subject with lessons delivered in face-to-face mode in traditional classrooms There are three forty-five-minute lessons per week, using the textbooks following the national

curriculum Although in the pandemic of COVID-19 with the policy of lockdown, there are times when the online mode of delivery has been used instead of face-to-face, it is merely the use of a videoconferencing tool such as Zoom or Google Meet to compensate for the lack of teacher-learner direct interactions, because the lessons still have to follow the textbooks, the curriculum, and the formats of a structured

conventional classroom In other words, EFL teaching and learning in the local

context is confined to intentionally structured pre-packaged materials, resources, and delivery mode inside “bricks and mortar” classrooms In this regard, online language learning in this current study explicitly refers to unstructured or informal practices occurring outside the classroom, which is in conformity with the theory of language learning beyond the classroom