A survey on the relationship between learner autonomy and english proficiency of the institute of international studies efl students

LEARNER AUTONOMY AND LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY.... This has resulted in a large n um ber o f students en ro llin g in EFL courses at colleges and universities across the country... Figure 4.1

SUBM ITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILM ENT

OF REQUIREM ENTS FOR THE DEGREE

OF M ASTER IN TESOL

S U P E R V IS O R : Assoc Prof Dr N G U Y E N V A N DO

H anoi

A pril 2010

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I certify that the thesis entitled "A S urvey on the R elationship betw een L earner A utonom y and E nglish P roficiency o f the Institute o f International Studies EFL S tudents’’ and subm itted in partial fulfillm ent o f the req u irem en ts for the degree o f M aster o f A rts in

TE SO L is the result o f m y w ork, ex cep t w here oth erw ise acknow ledged, and that this thesis

o f any part o f the sam e has not been subm itted fo r hig h er degree to any o th er university or institution

The research reported in this thesis w as approved by H anoi U niversity

Signed:

D ated:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S T A T E M E N T O F A U T H O R S H I P I

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S IL

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S IV

A B S T R A C T V

L IS T O F ABB REV I A T I O N S V I

L IS T O F T A B L E S V II

L IS T O F F I G U R E S V III

C H A P T E R I : I N T R O D U C T I O N 1

1.1 B a c k g r o u n d t o t h e s t u d y 1

1.2 A ims a nd re s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s 3

1.3 S cop e of t h e s t u d y 3

1.4 S ignificance of t h e s t u d y 3

1.5 O rgan iz at io n o f th e t h e s i s 4

C H A P T E R 2: L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W 6

2.1 LEARNER AUTONOMY 6

2.1.1 D efinition o f learner autonom y 6

2.1.2 Factors a ffectin g learner a utonom y 10

2.2 L an g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y 15

2.2.1 D efin itio n 15

2.2.2 C lassification 17

2.3 LEARNER AUTONOMY AND LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY 21

2.4 S u m m a r y 25

C H A P T E R 3: M E T H O D O L O G Y 26

3.1 R se ar ch m e t h o d s 26

3.2 re se a rc h q u e st i o n an d d es cri pt io ns of v a r i a b l e s 27

3.2.1 Research qu estio n 2 7 3.2.2 D escription o f va r ia b le s 28

3.3 DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS 28

3.3.1 Q uestionnaire 29

3.3.2 The TOEFL test 31

3.3.3 The In terview 33

3.4 THE SUBJECTS 35

3.5 D a t a co l l e c t io n p r o c e d u r e s 37

3.6 DATA ANALYSIS 38

3.6.1 Q uestionnaire data analysis 38

3.6.2 TOEFL test data a n a ly s is 39

3.6.3 The analysis o f the correlation betw een two variables: ELP a n d L earner autonom y 39

3.7 CODING SCHEME FOR THE QUESTIONNAIRE 41

C H A P T E R 4: R E S U L T S A N D D I S C U S S I O N 42

4 l T he s t u d e n t s ’ b a c k g r o u n d i n f o r m a t i o n 42

4.2 THE LEVEL OF S TU D E N TS ’ A U T O N O M Y 43

4.2.1 The results o f the q u estio n n a ires 43

4.2.2 D iscussion o f the questionnaire r e s u lts 46

4.3 T h e s t u d e n t s ’ E nglish l a n g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y 49

4.3.1 S tu d e n ts’ TOEFL sc o rep s 50

4.3.2 D iscussion o f s tu d e n ts ' E L P 52

4.4 T he s t u d e n t s ’ ELP a n d t h ei r l e a r n e r a u t o n o m y 53

4.4.1 The results o f determ ining the fo rm , direction a n d degree o f the correlation by regression analysis 54

4.4.2 The results o f determ ining the relationship betw een students ' ELP a n d their Learner autonom y w ith P aired S am ples T -te st 56

4.4.3 D iscussion o f the results o f the association betw een students ' learner au to n o m y a n d their E L P ' " 58

4.5 S u m m a r y 59

C H A P T E R 5: I M P L I C A T I O N S A N D C O N C L U S I O N 60

5.1 I m p l ic a t io n s 60

5.2 L imitations of t h e s t u d y 62

5.3 R e c o m m e n d a t io n s f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h 63

5.4 C o n c l u s i o n 63

R E F E R E N C E S 65

A P P E N D I X 1: L E V E L S O F E N G L I S H P R O F I C I E N C Y A N D C O R R E S P O N D I N G S T U D E N T A C T I O N S 74

A P P E N D I X 2: D E S C R I P T I O N S O F S E V E N L E V E L S O F E N G L I S H L A N G U A G E P R O F I C I E N C Y BY W I S C O N S I N A D M I N I S T R A T I V E R U L E 75

A P P E N D I X 3: E N G L I S H P R O F I C I E N C Y L E V E L D E S C R I P T I O N S A D A P T E D F R O M G U I D E L I N E S IS S U E D BY T H E N O R T H C A R O L I N A D E P A R T M E N T O F E D U C A T IO N E R R O R ! B O O K M A R K N O T D E FIN ED 76 A P P E N D I X 4.1: ( E N G L I S H V E R S I O N ) Q U E S T I O N N A I R E 78

A P P E N D I X 4.2: ( V I E T N A M E S E V E R S I O N ) 82

A P P E N D I X 5: T H E T O E F L T E S T 86

A P P E N D I X 6: T A B L E O F T O E F L C O N V E R T E D S C O R E 110

A P P E N D I X 7: I N T E R V I E W Q U E S T I O N S I l l A P P E N D I X 8: C O D I N G S C H E M E F O R T H E Q U E S T I O N N A I R E 112

A P P E N D I X 9: R E S U L T S O F T H E S T U D E N T S ’ B A C K G R O U N D Q U E S T I O N N A I R E 114

A P P E N D I X 10: S T U D E N T S ' T O E F L S C O R E S 115

I w ould like to express my thanks to m any people w ho have assisted m y research work

1 w ish, first o f all, to ex p ress m y deepest g ratitu d e to m y supervisor, A ssoc Prof Dr

N guyen V an Do for his academ ic guidance, en co u rag em en t, insightful com m ents and support throughout m y research W ithout his invaluable assistance, m y th esis w ould not have been com pleted

M y special w ords o f thanks also go to the M anagem ent B oard o f the D epartm ent o f Postgraduate Studies o f the H anoi U n iv ersity for th eir co n sid eratio n and enthusiasm in helping me to pursue the course

M y particular thanks go to M s N g u y en Thai Ha, M E d, for h er useful advice, criticism and support w hile the research w as being done

1 w ould also like to th an k m y co lleag u es and students a t IIS w ho have helped m e to collect data for this study

L ast, but not at all least, I am d eeply indebted to all the love, support, great care and encouragem ent that m y fam ily has alw ays pro v id ed m e in m y professional endeavors

iv

The learning o f E nglish as a foreign language (E F L ) in V ietnam is gaining popularity and

im portance as V ietnam opens its doors eco n om ically and culturally to the w orld at large This has resulted in a large n um ber o f students en ro llin g in EFL courses at colleges and universities across the country T he purpose o f this study w as to explore w hat relationship betw een students" E nglish language proficiency (E L P ) and their learner autonom y w as In order to reach the research purpose, a sam ple o f 50 n o n-E nglish m ajors at IIS w as chosen The data o f the subjects w ere collected by m eans o f the questio n n aire adapted from D afei (2007), designed by Z h an g and Li (2004), a T O E F L test and an in terv iew as supplem entary inform ation T he ad apted q u estionnaire consists o f 27 q u estio n s relating to learning autonom y The T O E F L test used in this study w as taken from Longm an Preparation Course fo r the TOEFL Test - the Paper Test by D eborah Philips T he collected data from

the questionnaire and T O E F L test w ere com puted and analyzed by m ean s o f descriptive analysis and Paired S am ples T -test w ith SPSS 16.0 T he results o f the study revealed that the stu d e n ts7 E L P w as not high w hile their learn er auto n o m y w as at the high degree

F urtherm ore, the results o f the research also indicated that stu d e n ts’ E L P w as significantly and positively related to th eir learn er autonom y T hus, the findings o f the study argues for

an u n derstanding o f language learner autonom y in w hich the d ev elopm ent o f learner autonom y and the grow th o f target language pro ficien cy are m utually su p p o rtin g and fully integrated w ith each other It fu rth er argues that only on the basis o f such an understanding can learner a u to n o m y m ove to the centre o f language teach in g th eo ry and practice

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BICS: B asic Interpersonal C o m m unicative Skills

CA LP: C ognitive A cadem ic L anguage P roficiency

CTBS: C om prehensive T ests o f Basic Skills

EFL: E nglish as a F oreign L anguage

ELL: E nglish L anguage L earners

ELP: E nglish language p ro ficiency

ESL: E nglish as a S econd L anguage

IELTS: International E nglish L anguage T estin g Service

IIS: Institute o f International Studies

LEP: L im ited E nglish P roficient

SLA: Second L anguage A cquisition

SRS: sim ple random sam ple

T O E FL : Test o f E nglish as a F o reign L anguage

TS: T O E FL Score

P: P robability value

PBT: P aper-based test

R: C orrelation co efficient

RFEP: R edesignated F luent E nglish P roficient

W TO: W orld T rade O rg an izatio n

T able 2.1: 1PT Proficiency Levels

T able 3.1: The T O E FL PBT test

T able 3.2: O bserved M inim um and M axim um T O E FL PB T Section and Total scores

T able 3.3: B ackground inform ation o f inform ants o f the survey

T able 4.1 : The R esults o f the questionnaire (Part 2 and Part 3)

T able 4.2: The R esults o f the Individual Item s o f the Q uestionnaire

T able 4.3: IIS S tudents’ ELP

T able 4.4: The R egression o f the C orrelation betw een S tu d en ts’ ELP and T heir Learner

A utonom y

T able 4.5: The Size o f the C oefficient o f the C orrelation betw een S tudents’ ELP and Their

L earner A utonom y

T able 4.6: The C oefficients in the Pattern

Table 4.7: M eans and Standard Deviations o f the students’ ELP and Learner Autonom y

T able 4.8: C orrelation o f ELP and L earner A utonom y

T able 4.9: Paired t-test A nalysis o f the stu d en ts’ ELP and L earner A utonom y

LIST OF TABLES

Figure 4.1: The R esults o f the Individual Item s o f the Q uestionnaire

Figure 4.2: Frequency distribution for English language proficiency levels as measured by TOEFL(N= 50)

Figures 4.3: Percentage distribution for English language proficiency levels as measured by TOEFL(N— 50)

LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

T his c h a p te r in tro d u c es lo u r sections relating to background to the study; the a im s and the research q u e stio n s o f the study; the scope o f the study; the sig n ifican ce o f the study and o rg an izatio n o f the thesis

1.1 B a ck g ro u n d to th e stu dy

F or a long tim e, E F L learning is co n sid ered to be inefficient S tudents are too tea c h e r-

d e p e n d en t w ith o u t th e initiative to learn on th eir ow n But the fact is: no school, o r ev en

u n iv ersity , can p ro v id e its p u p ils w ith all the k n o w led g e and the sk ills they w ill n e e d in

th eir activ e adult lives M cG arry (1995: 1) n o tes that "The m ajo rity o f students are still

b eing tau g h t in w ay s w hich pro m o te d ep e n d en c e and leave them ill-equipped to a p p ly

th eir sc h o o l-learn t k n o w led g e and skills to the w o rld beyond the classroom ", and from this w e m ay re c o g n ise that the role o f the tea c h e r in p ro m o tin g auto n o m y m ay be central to its success It is m ore im p o rtan t for a y o u n g p erson to have an u n d e rsta n d in g

o f h im s e lf or h e rse lf, an aw areness o f the e n v iro n m en t and its w o rk in g s, and to h av e learned h o w to th in k and h o w to learn (T rim , 1988) In this back g ro u n d , lea rn er

a u to n o m y is b e c o m in g a b u z z w o rd w ith in the c o n tex t o f E FL teaching L e a rn e r

a u to n o m y has g ra d u a lly com e into ex iste n ce since the 1970s as a conseq u en ce o f a new shift in interest in stu d ies on lan g u ag e learning: learners have g rad u ally been v iew e d as

p ro d u cers o f lan g u a g e and less as learners o f a system im p o sed on them by society

F o llo w in g H olec (1 9 7 9 ) it m ay be fu rth er assu m ed th at this shift had its o rig in in a

c h a n g in g attitude to w ard s the rela tio n sh ip betw een the in d iv id u al and society:

in d iv id u als have c o m e to be seen m o re and m ore as producers rath er than pro d u cts o f society

A s G rem m o o b se rv e s (1995: 151), the last 25 years have seen an increasin g a m o u n t o f

a tte n tio n to le a rn e r au tonom y, self-d irected learning, se lf-access system s and

in d iv id u alize d /in d e p e n d e n t learn in g in second language learning literature (e.g

H ard in g -E sch [Ed.] 1976; A ltm an & Ja m e s [Eds.] 1980; H olec 1980; 1981; 1985; 1987; 1988; G eddes & S tu rtrid g e 1982; M a so n [Ed.] 1984; R iley 1985; 1988; 1996;

D ic k in so n 1978; 1987; 1988; 1992; 1995; W en d en & R ubin [Eds.] 1987; B ro o k e s &

G ru n d y [eds.] 1988; E llis & S in clair 1989; L ittle 1989; 1991; 1995; Sheerin 1989; 1991; G ath erco le [Ed.] 1990; W en d en 1991b; P age 1992; E sch 1994; 1996a; 1996b;

G a rd n e r & M ille r [Eds.] 1996; D am 1995; D ick in so n & W en d en [Eds.] 1995;

Pem berton el a/ [Fids.] 1996; B enson & V o ller [Eds.] 1997; C otterall 2000; cited in

Finch, 2002)

A cco rd in g to B enson (2000: 1, cited in D afei, 2 007), in the field o f second and fo reign language tea c h in g and learning, as the theo ry and practice o f language teach in g en te rs a new century, the im p o rtan ce o f h elp in g students b ecom e m ore a u to n o m o u s in their learning has b eco m e o ne o f its m ore p ro m in en t them es T here are tw'O general arg u m en ts in fav o r o f try in g to m ake learners m ore autonom ous First, if th ey are reflectively e n g ag ed w ith th e ir learning, it is likely to be m ore efficient and effe c tiv e because w h at is learned in ed u catio n al co n tex ts is m ore likely to serve le a rn e rs’ w id er agendas Second, if learners are p ro activ ely c o m m itted to th eir learning, the p ro b le m o f

m otiv atio n is by d e fin itio n solved; in the p articu lar case o f second and fo reign languages, there is a th ird argum ent E ffectiv e co m m u n icatio n d epends on a c o m p le x set

o f p rocedural sk ills that dev elo p only th ro u g h use; and i f language learning d ep e n d s cru cially on lan g u ag e use, learn ers w ho enjoy a high d egree o f social a u to n o m y in th eir learning e n v iro n m en t sh o u ld find it e asier than otherw ise to m aster the full range o f

d isco u rse roles o n w hich effe c tiv e sp o n tan eo u s co m m u n ic a tio n depends (L ittle, 2000, cited in D afei, 2007) In o th er w ords, learn er au to n o m y is one o f the m ost im p o rtan t

issues that determ ine w hether an individual reaches his/her potential or falls short o f

o f lan g u ag e learn in g and the d ev e lo p m en t o f p ro ficien cy in the targ et lan g u ag e (an

im p o rtan t e x c ep tio n is the w o rk o f D am and L egenhausen: D am & L egen h au sen , 1996, 1997; L e g en h au sen , 1999, 2001, 20 0 3 ) and this relatio n sh ip has largely been ex p lo red

at the level o f th eo ry , and lacks su b stan tial em pirical support A n o th er reaso n is that

w o rld -w id e c o n cern w ith a c c o u n ta b ility in ed u catio n is in creasingly o b liging tea c h e rs to dem o n strate the effe c tiv en e ss o f th eir p ractices in term s o f p ro ficien cy gains F ro m this

th eo retical b ack g ro u n d , the rese a rc h e r o f cu rren t study raised a qu estio n o f w h at the

relatio n sh ip betw een learner a u to n o m y and E nglish p ro ficiency o f the students at the Institute o f International S tudies w as.

O ne o f the m ost serious p roblem s that the EFL stu d en ts at IIS face in their field o f study

is th eir inability to co m m u n icate and h andle E n g lish after g rad u atin g from u n iversity

M o st o f them have little degree o f cap ab ility in language use and its co m p o n e n ts, in

o th er w ords, they have low ab ility or pro ficien cy in E n glish language use and usage

T he term "capability" can refer to the ab ility o f the exam in ee to recognize, co m p re h en d ,

or p ro d u ce language elem en ts, in o th er w ords, " at a given point in tim e the lan g u ag e learn er m ay be a listener, speaker o r both" (F arh ad y et a l , 1994) H aving graduated, IIS

E FL students in general seem not to be as p ro fic ie n t and q u alified in language u se and

co m p o n e n ts as m ig h t be expected In o th er w o rd s, they fail to u n d erstand fu lly the

c o n te x t o f language use - the co n tex ts o f disco u rse and situations

F or b o th p ractical and theoretical reasons, th erefo re, there is a p ressing need for the

rese a rc h e r to carry out this study to ex p lo re w h a t th e rela tio n sh ip betw een le a rn e r

a u to n o m y a n d th e I I S stu d en ts ’ E n g lish p ro fic ie n c y is.

1.2 A im s and research q u estio n s

T he study aim ed to investigate the rela tio n sh ip betw een stu d e n ts’ E L P and their learn er

au to n o m y To achieve this aim , an sw ers to the fo llo w in g research q u estio n s w as sought:

1 H o w au to n o m o u s are the stu d en ts at IIS?

2 W h a t is the E L P level o f the IIS students?

3 W h at is the relatio n sh ip betw een the stu d e n ts’ E L P and th eir learn er auto n o m y ?

1.3 S co p e o f th e study

A s th e title o f the study has in d icated , the focus o f the study is on (1) the stu d e n ts’ E L P

at IIS; (2) stu d e n ts’ learner au to n o m y d egree and (3) the relatio n sh ip b etw een the

s tu d e n ts ’ E L P and th eir lea rn er autonom y

1.4 S ig n ific a n c e o f the stu dy

A s m en tio n ed e arlier in the 'b a c k g ro u n d to the s tu d y ’ section, one o f the m ost serious

p ro b le m s that the EFL students at IIS face in th eir field o f study is th eir in ab ility to

c o m m u n ic a te and h andle E nglish after g rad u a tin g from university H aving g raduated, the IIS students in general seem not to be as pro ficien t and qu alified in language use and

co m p o n e n ts as m ight be expected N o w a d ay s, in the field o f second and fo reign lan g u ag e tea c h in g and learning, h elp in g stu d e n ts becom e m ore au to n o m o u s in their learn in g has b ecom e o ne o f its m ore p ro m in e n t them es (B enson, 2001:1 quoted in

D afei, 2007) and a n u m b er o f ju stific a tio n s for ad v o catin g learn er a u to n o m y in lan g u ag e learning have b een p roposed (F in ch , 2002) M oreover, the d ev e lo p m en t o f

au to n o m y im p lies b etter language learning T h is is one o f the three h y p o th eses w hich alm o st all research in the field o f au to n o m y is based on, and has im p licatio n s for (B en so n , 2001:183) A d d itio n ally , according to the Principles and Guidelines that define the E L P and its functions (C ouncil o f E urope 2000/2004), the ELP “is a tool to prom ote learner autonom y” T h erefore, e x p lo rin g the relatio n sh ip b etw een s tu d e n t's E L P and

th eir learner au to n o m y is particu larly n e c essa ry and helpful

C a rry in g out the study, the research er hop es th at its findings w o uld help her to know the level o f EL P and d eg ree o f learner a u to n o m y o f the IIS stu d en ts and the relatio n sh ip

b e tw e en them K n o w in g th is in form ation w o u ld help the rese a rc h e r and h er co lleag u es

at IIS im prove E n g lish tea c h in g and learn in g pro cess in o rd er to dev elo p stu d e n ts’ EL P

as w ell as foster their learner autonom y.

1.5 O rg a n iz a tio n o f th e th esis

T his th esis is d iv id ed into five chapters

C h a p te r 1, ‘In tro d u c tio n ’, deals w ith th e ratio n ale, specific p u rp o ses, aim s, research

q u e stio n s, scope, sig n ifican ce and o rg an iz atio n o f the study

C h a p te r 2, ‘L iteratu re re v ie w ’, rev iew s th e literatu re rele v an t to learn er au to n o m y ,

L an g u ag e p ro fic ie n c y (L P ) in general and E n g lish language pro ficien cy (E L P ) in particu lar, cla ssifica tio n system s o f LP and E L P It also su m m arizes som e studies on lea rn er a u to n o m y th at h av e been c o n d u c te d so far T he resu lts o f prev io u s stu d ies into facto rs a ffe c tin g learn er au tonom y, and the effect o f learner au to n o m y on successful learn in g are also en c lo se d in this chapter

C h a p te r 3, ‘M e th o d o lo g y ’, p resen ts the rese a rc h m eth o d o lo g y o f the study It p ro v id es

in fo rm a tio n ab o u t the particip an ts, selectio n s o f sam ple, d a ta co llectio n in stru m en ts, data co llectio n p ro ce d u re s and data analysis

C h a p te r 4, 'R e s u lts and d is c u s s io n ', rep o rts and d iscu sses the m ain fin d in g s o b tain ed

fro m the d a ta c o lle c tio n and d a ta a n aly sis w ith the support o f SPS S, v ersio n 16.0 in

c o m p a risio n w ith th e resu lts o f p rev io u s studies

C h a p te r 5 , 'Im p lic a tio n s a n d co n clu sio n ", su m m arises the findings, p rese n ts the

im p licatio n s, p o in ts out lim ita tio n s o f the study and finally gives som e su g g estio n s for

fu rth er rese a rc h and co n c lu sio n

F o llo w in g c h a p te r 5 is a refe re n c e o f bo o k s o r m aterials d irectly or in d irectly q u o ted in the study T h e a p p e n d ic e s in clu d in g S u rface and D eep er levels o f L an g u ag e

p ro ficien cy L e v e ls o f E n g lish P ro fic ie n c y and C o rresp o n d in g S tudent A ctio n s, The

L evels o f E n g lish L a n g u a g e, D esc rip tio n s o f S even L evels o f E n g lish L an g u ag e

P ro ficien cy b y W isc o n sin A d m in istra tiv e R ule, E n g lish P ro ficien cy L evel D e sc rip tio n s

a d ap ted from G u id e lin e s issu e d by the N o rth C aro lin a D epartm ent o f E d u catio n ,

q u e stio n n a ire (E n g lish and V ie tn a m e se versio n s), T O E F L test, T able o f T O E F L

co n v erted S co re, In te rv ie w Q u e stio n s, C o d in g S chem e for the Q u e stio n n a ire and the

S tu d e n ts' T O E F L S co res w ill be fo llo w ed the referen ce section

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

W ith the stated research q u estio n s in m ind, the follow ing literatu re review e x p lo re s key

d e fin itio n s related to the co n cept o f learn er autonom y, factors a ffe c tin g learn er

au to n o m y , and language pro ficien cy (L P) in general and E nglish language p ro fic ie n c y (E L P ) in particular It also su m m aries som e stu d ies on learn er autonom y and lan g u ag e

p ro ficien cy th at have been co nducted so far A ll o f these serve as a b asis for an

in v estig a tio n into the relatio n sh ip betw een stu d e n ts' language pro ficien cy a n d learn er

au to n o m y w h ich is ca rrie d out and presen ted in the next chapter

2.1 L ea rn er a u to n o m y

O v e r the last 20 years, au to n o m y in language learning has b een a topic o f w id e sp re a d discu ssio n Ju st as ‘c o m m u n ic a tiv e ' and ‘a u th e n tic ’ w;ere the buzzw rords o f the 1980s, lea rn er a u to n o m y is fast b ecom ing o f the strategy o f choice in E FL te a c h in g in the 1990s (B roady and K enning, 1996; Little, 1990) G reat p ro g ress has b een m ad e in the

e x p lo ra tio n and im p lem en tatio n o f the c o n cep t o f au tonom y It is u n d e rsta n d ab le

b e cau se au to n o m o u s learners satisfy w hat dem o cratic societies require (H e d g e , 2000: 82) and also m eet the n eed s o f highly tec h n o lo g ic a l societies (K now les, 1976, cited in

W e n d en and R ubin, 1987: 9) T herefore, lea rn er auto n o m y has b een a ttrac ted a n u m b er

o f atten tio n s o f research ers so far and it is a necessity to ex p lo re the b asic c o n c ep ts o f lea rn er a u to n o m y by rev iew in g the m ajo r d efin itio n s and factors a ffe c tin g learn er autonom y

2 1 1 D efin itio n o f lea rn er au to n o m y

T h e term "learner autonom y" w'as first co ined in 1981 by H enri H olec, th e "father" o f lea rn er au tonom y M any d efin itio n s have since b een given to the term , d e p e n d in g on the

w riter, the c o n te x t and the level o f deb ate, ed u cato rs h av e com e to It has been

c o n sid ered as a personal hu m an trait, as a political m easure o r as an ed u catio n al m ove

T h is is because a u to n o m y is seen either (o r both) as a m ean s or as an end in ed ucation

T h e co n cep t o f auto n o m y em erg ed from the ch an g in g so cio -p o litical lan d sc a p e o f the

1 9 7 0 ’s, w h ich gave rise to an increase in social aw areness, and is based o n the c o n cep t

o f resp ect for the individual in society (H olec, 1979) W hile it is generally a g re e d th at lea rn er a u to n o m y is an im p o rtan t and w o rth y goal, defin in g learn er a u to n o m y can be

p ro b lem atic T here are differin g view's as to w h at learner a u to n o m y is and co n seq u e n tly

a n u m b er o f d ifferen t v iew s on its im p lic a tio n for language ed u catio n (B enson and

V oller 1997)

For a d efin itio n o f au tonom y, D im itrios T h a n a so u la s quotes H olec (1981: 3, cited in

B enson & V oller, 1997: 1) w ho describ es it as “the ability to take c h a rg e o f one's learn in g ", n o tin g that this ability “ is not in b o rn bu t m ust be acquired e ith e r by ‘n a tu ra l’

m eans or (as m o st often h appens) by form al learning, i.e in a sy ste m atic , deliberate

w ay", and p o in tin g out th at “to take ch arge o f o n e 's learning is to have and to hold, the

re sp o n sib ility for all the decisio n s c o n c ern in g all aspects o f this learning: (a)

d e te rm in in g the objectives; (b) defin in g the co n ten ts and p rogressions; (c) selecting

m eth o d s and tec h n iq u es to be used; (d) m o n ito rin g the pro ced u res o f a c q u isitio n ; (e)

e v a lu a tin g w h at has been acquired (H olec, 1 9 8 1 :3)

A d d itio n a lly , L ittle (1991:4) considers it essen tially as a cap acity for “ detachm ent, critical reflectio n , d ecisio n -m ak in g and in d ep en d en t a c tio n ” , w hich m ea n s that the learn er n eeds to develop the aw aren ess ab o u t w h at and h o w he learns E ven in this sim ple d e fin itio n it is clear that "autonom y" is not any o ne specific th in g - it is a

c ap acity , and like any o th er capacity, it w ill g ro w w ith p ractice, or be lost through inactivity A s L ittle (1991: 4) e x p lain ed , cast in a new p e rsp ectiv e and regarded as

u n d e rsta n d in g the pu rp o se o f th eir lea rn in g p rogram m e, ex p lic itly accepting

re sp o n sib ility fo r th eir learning, sh arin g in the setting o f learning g oals, taking

in itia tiv e s in p lan n in g and ex e cu tin g lea rn in g activ ities, and regularly rev ie w in g their lea rn in g and ev alu a tin g its effectiv en ess, learn ers, au to n o m o u s learners, th at is, are

e x p e cte d to critically reflec t on and tak e c h arg e o f th eir ow n learning T o Little, the

a u to n o m o u s learn er tak e s a (pro-) active ro le in the learning p ro cess, g e n e ra tin g ideas and a v a ilin g h im s e lf o f learning o p p o rtu n itie s, rath e r than sim p ly re a c tin g to various stim uli o f the teacher In o ther w ords, the au to n o m o u s learner is a se lf-a c tiv a te d m aker

o f m ea n in g , an active agent in his ow n learn in g process H e is no t one to w h o m things

m erely hap p en ; he is the one w ho, by his o w n v o lition, causes th in g s to happen (R ath b o n e, 1971: 100 cited in C andy, 1991: 271) H ow ever, lea rn er au to n o m y does not

m ean th at the tea c h e r b ecom es red u n d a n t a b d icatin g h is/h e r control o v e r w hat is tra n sp irin g in the language learn in g p ro cess Instead, learn er au to n o m y in v o lv es a

d y n am ic p ro ce ss learned at least p a rtly th ro u g h edu catio n al e x p erien ces and

in te rv en tio n s (C andy, 1991 cited in T h a n a so u la s, 2000: 115)

T h e co n cept o f auto n o m y is ex p lained by L ittlew o o d (1996: 97) as "‘le a rn e rs' ab ility and

w illin g n ess to m ake ch o ices in d ep en d en tly " He goes on to elaborate by su g g e stin g that

ab ility d epends on p o ssessin g both k n o w led g e about the altern ativ es from w h ic h choice

h av e to be m ade and necessary skills for carry in g out w h atev er ch o ices seem m ost app ro p riate W illingness d epends on h a v in g b o th the m otiv atio n and co n fid en ce to take resp o n sib ility for the ch o ices required

W e n d en (1 991:15), how ever, takes it as sk ills and describes au to n o m o u s learn ers as

th o se “ w ho have acq u ired the learning strateg ies, the know ledge about learn in g , an d the

a ttitu d e s that en ab le them to use these sk ills and k n o w ledge co n fid e n tly , flexibly,

a p p ro p riate ly and in d ep en d en tly o f a teach er"

A s B enson (1997) rig h tly argues, a u to n o m y should be v iew ed fro m m u ltiple

p ersp e c tiv e s, e.g., tech n ical, p sy ch o lo g ical, socio-cultural and p o litic a l-c ritic a l and

a u to n o m y is a m u ltid im en sio n al con stru ct o f cap acity th at w ill tak e d iffe re n t form s for

d iffe re n t in d iv id u als, and even for the sam e individual in differen t c o n te x ts o r at

d iffe re n t tim es” (B en so n , 2 0 0 1 :47)

B e n so n and V o ller (1997) conclude th at lea rn er autonom y has b een u sed in at least five

w ay s in language education: (a) for situ a tio n s in w hich learners study e n tirely on their

ow n; (b) for a set o f skills w hich can be lea rn ed and applied in self-d irected learn in g ; (c)

fo r an inborn cap acity w hich is su p p ressed by in stitutional ed u cation; (d) fo r the

e x e rc ise o f lea rn ers' resp o n sib ility for th e ir o w n learning; (e) fo r the right o f learn ers to

d e te rm in e the d irectio n o f th eir ow n learn in g (B en so n and V oller, 1997:1-2)

N o m atte r how p eo p le view learner au to n o m y , its essence is that learn ers take

re sp o n sib ility for th eir o w n learning and e n jo y the freedom o f choice H o w e v er, the freed o m is never ab so lu te, bu t alw ays co n d itio n a l and con strain ed (L ittle, 1991), so that

a u to n o m o u s learners are in terdependent (B o u d 1988), w hich indicates th at th ere ex ists

a co n tin u u m o f d egrees in learn er au to n o m y T his is due to the fact th at the e x te n t to

w h ic h learners achieve a u to n o m y d ep en d s on a variety o f factors, such as th e le a rn e rs ’

ab ility to take resp o n sib ility , perso n al co n stru cts, tea c h e r support, p e e r su p p o rt,

a v a ilab ility and flexibility in learning en v iro n m en t (L ittle, 1991; N u n a n , 1996;

M c D e v itt, 1997) T h ese factors, indeed, h av e co n tin u a in them selves F o r ex am p le,

H iggs (1988:42) agrees that “ som e learn ers are m ore ready for in d ep en d en t learn in g

th an others"

From the ab o v e w e can c le a rly see th at autonom y d o e s n 't im ply learn in g in isolation, learning w ith o u t a te a c h e r o r lea rn in g o u tsid e the classroom N o r does a u to n o m y im ply

p articu lar sk ills and b e h a v io rs and p a rticu la r m eth o d s o f o rg an izin g the te a c h in g and learning pro cess L e a rn e r a u to n o m y is ch ara c te riz e d by a read in ess and ca p ac ity to take charge o f o n e ’s o w n le a rn in g in the service o f o n e 's need and purposes F rom th is point

o f view , a u to n o m y in v o lv e s a b ilities and attitu d es that people possess, and can dev elo p

to vario u s degrees

A cco rd in g to T h a n a so u la s (2 0 0 0 ), the relev an t literature is riddled w'ith in n u m erab le defin itio n s o f a u to n o m y a n d o th er sy n o n y m s for it, such as 'in d ep en d en ce' (S heerin, 1991), 'lan g u a g e a w a re n e ss' (L ier, 1996), 'self-direction' (C andy, 1991), 'andragogy' (K now les, 1980; 1983) e tc , w h ic h testifie s to the im portance attached to it by scholars

M any p rac titio n e rs v ie w th e c o n stru c t o f lea rn er autonom y as b ein g sy n o n y m o u s w ith self-access and e sp e c ia lly w ith tec h n o lo g y -b a se d learning E ven n o w a d a y s au to n o m y is

o ften a sso c ia te d w ith le a rn in g in iso latio n , o u tsid e the classro o m and w 'ithout a teacher

T his is a very p a rtia l v iew S ince the c ap acity o f taking ch arge o f o n e ’s o w n lea rn in g is not innate but m u st be learn ed and d ev elo p ed , there is m uch need fo r guidance

A u to n o m y and a u to n o m o u s lea rn in g are no t synonym s w ith ‘se lf-in stru c tio n 1, 's e lf access', 'se lf-stu d y ', 'o u t-o f-c la ss learn in g ' or 'distance learning' These te rm s basically describe v ario u s w a y s and d e g re e s o f learn in g by o n e ’s self, w h ereas a u to n o m y refers to the a b ilities and a ttitu d e s (o r w h a te v e r w e th in k the cap acity to control o n e 's ow n learning co n sists of) T h e p o in t is, th en , th at learning in iso latio n is n o t th e sam e as

h av in g the c a p a c ity to d ire c t o n e 's o w n learning A lso, a u to n o m o u s learn ers m ay w ell

be b etter th an o th e rs at le a rn in g by th em se lv e s (hence the co n n ectio n ), b u t th ey do not

n ecessarily h av e to learn by th em se lv e s T hese tw'o concepts, how ever, do n o t have to

e x ist co m p le te ly in d e p e n d e n tly , as th e ab ility to be able to w'ork in iso latio n can play a role in au to n o m o u s learning

A s m en tio n e d a b o v e , th e re h a v e b een m an y differen t d efin itio n s o f lea rn er autonom y

H o le c 's d efin itio n is c h o se n as th e b a sis in th is study T he reaso n for th is ch o ic e is that

au to n o m o u s lea rn in g is seen by H olec as a do u b le process O n the one h an d , it entails learning the fo re ig n lan g u a g e ; o n the o ther, learning h o w to learn T h u s au to n o m o u s learning reach es b e y o n d a sch o o l co n tex t: it is a life-long pro cess o f co n stan tly

d ev elo p in g a w a ren e ss It is o f c o n seq u e n c e to note that a u to n o m y is a p ro ce ss, not a

product O ne d o e s not becom e a u to n o m o u s; one only w o rk s to w a rd s au to n o m y It is

n ecessary to e m p h a siz e that no learner can be said to be c o m p le te ly a u to n o m o u s or

co m p letely d e p e n d en t N am in g som eone an au to n o m o u s learn er m ay not be v alid at all tim es E ven th o u g h o ne displays som e a u to n o m o u s d isp o sitio n s at a certain su b ject, s/he

m ay not be as a u to n o m o u s as at an o th er subject The p rem ise b e h in d ‘‘c a p a c ity ” is that

ev en a u to n o m o u s learners are not a u to n o m o u s all o f the tim e T h e refo re, w e can p o rtray learner a u to n o m y a c ro ss a continuum A t one end o f the c o n tin u u m w e h a v e d e p e n d en t learners w ho do n ot have the o p p o rtu n ity to d e v elo p lea rn er in d ep e n d e n c e O n the o th er end w e have th e learners w ho have all the c h a ra c te ristic s n eed ed fo r au to n o m y

R esearch states th a t m ost o f the stu d e n ts are so m e w h ere b e tw e en th e co n tin u u m (B enson and V o ller, 1997; S inclair 2000, cited in K Ó se, 2 0 06)

H ow ever, for th e p u rp o se o f this study is to inv estig ate the re la tio n sh ip b e tw e en learn er auto n o m y and lan g u a g e proficiency, the w o rk in g d e fin itio n in th is th esis, w h ich is

d ev elo p ed on the b asis o f H o le c 's d e fin itio n , is: a construct o f capacity f o r m aking inform ed decisions about o n e ’s own learning; a p rocess that enables learners to take responsibility fo r their own learning: to choose and apply their ow n learning strategies

or styles eventually leading to the effective m anagem ent o f learning: to evaluate and assess their own work; to learn how to learn fi-om their ow n successes a n d failures and can use this know ledge in any learning situation she/he m ay encounter at any stage in

h er/ his life; h o ld positive attitude; be w illing to learn in collaboration with others

N e v e rth e le ss, to g e t a b etter insight into learn er a u to n o m y , fac to rs a ffe c tin g learn er

au to n o m y from p rev io u s studies w ill be a d d ressed in th e n e x t section

2.1.2 F a cto rs a ffe c tin g lea rn er a u to n o m y

B ecause o f the p u rp o se o f th is study is to in v estig a te th e lin k b e tw e en lea rn er a u to n o m y and E L P , the p rev io u s research es on facto rs affe c tin g lea rn er a u to n o m y sh o u ld be review ed D ue to th e lack o f space, th is sectio n w ill n o t re p e a t the fac to rs such as lea rn ers' ages, lea rn in g ex p erien ces, c o n fid e n ce , so c ie ty and ed u c atio n , le a rn e r’s interests, and lea rn er belief, etc., w h ich h av e been b o o ste d in th e literatu re on th is subject It w ill o n ly discuss the m o st crucial facto rs like m o tiv atio n , le a rn e r’s

m eta co g n itiv e k n o w le d g e , teach er role and so cio -cu ltu ral factor

M o tiv atio n is p ro b a b ly the m ost im p o rta n t c h a ra c te ristic th at stu d e n ts b rin g to a learning task C o rd e r (1967) said, "given m o tiv atio n , an y o n e can learn a lan g u ag e" T he

p hrase b rin g s o u t the im portance o f m o tiv atio n a n d th e w a y it c an o v e rc o m e

unfavorable c ircu m stan ces in o th er asp ects o f lan g u ag e learning C h o m sk y (1998) points out the im p ortance o f activ atin g le a rn e rs ’ m o tiv atio n , “the tru th o f the m atter is

th at about 99 percent o f teach in g is m ak in g the students feel in terested in the m aterial” (C hom sky, 1998:181) But the rela tio n sh ip b etw een m o tiv a tio n and au to n o m y in language learning has b een a very con tro v ersial issue, th e c o n tro v e rsy b eing on w heth er

it is auto n o m y that en hances m otiv atio n o r it is m o tiv a tio n th at p ro d u ce s autonom y

D ickinson (1995) su g g ests th at “a u to n o m o u s learners b e c o m e m ore hig h ly m otivated and w ork m o re e ffe c tiv ely ” A lso by m ak in g a survey o f the rele v an t literatu re and

m eanw hile carry in g out a large-scale study o f H ong K o n g tertia ry lev el stu d en ts, M ary Spratt and her asso ciates argue that ‘'m o tiv a tio n m ay lead to a u to n o m y or be a

p reco n d itio n for it” (S pratt, H um hreys & C han, 2002), w h ic h is sig n ific a n t for the task

o f language le a rn e rs’ training, as it in d icates w h ere tea c h e rs sh ould ch o o se to place their teach in g priorities

B ased on the early w ork o f G ard n er and L am b ert (1972), G a rd n e r (1 9 8 5 ) and o th er SLA researchers further elab o rated the c la ssifica tio n o f m o tiv a tio n in lan g u ag e learning It has been ag reed that lan g u ag e-learn in g m o tiv atio n can fall into extrin sic and intrinsic

m o tivation E xtrinsic m o tiv atio n com es from the d e sire to get a rew ard o r avoid

pu n ish m en t; the focus is on som eth in g ex tern al to the le a rn in g a c tiv ity itself Intrinsic

m o tiv atio n sees the learning ex p erien ce as its o w n rew a rd , “ in trin sic m o tiv atio n is in evidence w h e n e v e r stu d e n ts’ natural c u rio sity and in terest e n e rg ize th e ir lea rn in g ” (D eci

& R yan, 1985: 245) R esearch in d icates that, w hile e x trin sic m o tiv atio n can also be

b en eficial, learn in g is m o st favorably in flu e n ce d by in trin sic m o tiv atio n , e sp ec ially for long-term reten tio n (A rnold, J & H D B row n, 1999) T h e b o tto m line is that

m otiv atio n is “a central m ed ia to r in the p re d ic tio n o f la n g u a g e a c h ie v e m e n t” (G ard n er

E rd o g a n 's (2003) study into student a u to n o m y at a T u rk ish se co n d a ry school co n clu d ed

that teach er factors h in d ere d the d e v e lo p m en t o f learner auto n o m y b e c au se the teachers

th em selv es had b een tra in ed w ith in the sam e ed ucation system , and w e re u n able to change th eir h a b its (re v iew e d in Sert, 2006) S tiller and R yan (1992), and C lem en te(2001) likew ise su g g e ste d th at tea c h e r a u to n o m y support and in v o lv e m e n t (and parental support for a u to n o m y and in v o lv e m e n t) had direct links w ith s tu d e n ts' a ssim ilatio n o f

th eir classro o m c o n te x t and su b seq u e n t a cad em ic outcom es O n th e sam e path w ith these rese a rc h e rs, S h e e rin (1 9 9 7 , cited in B en so n & V oller 1997: 6 3 ) su ccin ctly pu t it,

" T e a c h e rs h a v e a cru c ial role to p lay in launching learners into se lf-a c c ess and in lending them a re g u la r h e lp in g h an d to stay afloat" Thus, a u to n o m o u s lea rn in g is by no

m eans tea c h e rle ss lea rn in g and th e tea c h e r's role is to create and m a in ta in a learning

en v iro n m en t in w h ic h lea rn ers can be a u to n o m o u s in o rd er to b e c o m e m ore

au to nom ous A d d itio n a lly , in the rese a rc h o n b u ilding lan g u ag e lea rn in g e n v iro n m en ts

to help te c h n o lo g y u n iv ersity stu d e n ts d e v e lo p E nglish in d ep e n d e n t learning, H su (2005) e m p h a size d the role o f teach ers A s for the research er, lea rn er au to n o m y or learner in d ep e n d e n c e d o e s n o t m ea n the tea c h e r becom e red u n d an t O n the contrary, teachers play a c ru cial ro le in c re a tin g e n v iro n m en ts to facilitate and m o tiv ate learners

to take resp o n sib ility fo r th e ir learn in g , d e v e lo p good learning h ab its, and becom e ind ep en d en t learners

F urth erm o re, le a rn e rs ’ m e ta c o g n itiv e k n o w le d g e is also an im p o rta n t fac to r im p actin g learn er au to n o m y T h e term in e ta c o g n itio n as used by F lavell (1979; 1987) refers to an

in d iv id u a l's a w a ren e ss o f his o r h e r c o g n itiv e p ro cesses and strateg ies In atte m p tin g to

u n d erstand h o w in d iv id u a ls learn , he su g g ested th at an in d iv id u a l's u n d e rsta n d in g o f his

or h er th in k in g is ju s t as im p o rta n t to lea rn in g as the in fo rm a tio n th a t is learned

A cco rd in g to F la v ell, a lea rn er d e v e lo p s m eta co g n itiv e a w aren ess w h e n he or she is aw'are o f o n e ’s k n o w le d g e b u t also o f w h a t one does not know : no tin g th at o ne type o f

p ro b lem is h a rd e r to lea rn th a n a n o th e r, rea lisin g that a p iece o f in fo rm a tio n m u st be

ch ecked befo re it c a n be a c ce p ted as fact, a n d b ein g open to c o n fu sio n a n d u n certain ty

w hile so lv in g p ro b lem s H e says, “ M e ta c o g n itio n refers, am o n g o th er th in g s, to the active m o n ito rin g and c o n s e q u e n t re g u la tio n and orch estratio n o f p ro c e sse s in relatio n

to the c o g n itiv e o b je c ts or d a ta on w'hich th ey bear, u su ally in th e service o f som e concrete goal or o b je c tiv e ” (1976: 231) M o reo v er, acco rd in g to H acker, D u n lo sk y and

G raesser (1 9 9 8 ), m e ta c o g n itiv e a w a ren e ss co n sists o f three parts: th in k in g o f w h a t one know s (m e ta c o g n itiv e k n o w le d g e ), th in k in g o f w hat o ne is c u rre n tly d o ing (m etaco g n itiv e sk ill), and th in k in g o f w tiat o n e ’s current c o g n itiv e or a ffe c tiv e state is

(m etaco g n itiv e e x p e rie n c e ) W h at is im p o rtan t that w ere d iscu ssed ab o v e is that all the beliefs and p e rc e p tio n s are related to learn er a u to n o m y in th at they are n eed ed to m ake inform ed d e c isio n s a b o u t o n e 's learning I f it is the aim o f ed u c atio n to let learners take charge o f th eir o w n learn in g , then th ey need to be ab le to p lan , m o n ito r and evalu ate

th eir learning A n d in o rd e r to do so, th ey need to be m e ta co g n itiv e ly aw are As

O 'M a lle y et al (1 9 8 5 ) su m m a riz e s, “ S tu d en ts w ith o u t m eta co g n itiv e ap p ro a c h e s are essen tially learn ers w ith o u t d ire c tio n and a b ility to rev iew th eir p ro gress,

a c co m p lish m e n ts and fu tu re le a rn in g d ire c tio n s" (1985: 24) In C hina, Y an g X iao h u and

Z hang W e n p en g (2 0 0 2 ) reach ed the co n c lu sio n after th e ir em pirical stu d y th at the stu d e n ts' m eta c o g n itio n status is tig h tly and p o sitiv ely related to th e ir E FL read in g

p erfo rm an ce and also th e ir E F L p ro fic ie n c y S tu d en ts w ho h o ld insightful b eliefs about language lea rn in g p ro c e sse s, and w h o regard th e m se lv e s as in itiato rs o f th eir ow n learning and d e p e n d on th eir p erso n al p o tential as good language learn ers “tend to dev elo p a m ore ac tiv e an d th u s, a u to n o m o u s attitu d e th at allo w s them to tak e ch arg e o f their lea rn in g w h a te v e r th e situ a tio n m ay b e ” (V icto ri & L ockhart, 1995) I f students hold is c o n c e p tio n s a b o u t th eir o w n learn in g , they attrib u te u n d u e im p o rtan ce to factors

e xternal to th eir o w n a c tio n and c o n se q u e n tly fail to reg ard th em se lv e s as ca u se s o f their

ow n learning, th e y are u n lik e ly to “a d o p t a re sp o n sib le and active attitu d e in th eir

a p p ro ach to lea rn in g and m ay n e v e r b e c o m e a u to n o m o u s”(ibid) T each ers sh ould assist learners in m o d ify in g a n d re c o n stru c tin g th eir m e ta c o g n itiv e k n o w led g e i f it is p o ssib ly

o b stru c tin g th eir le a rn in g and th eir p o ten tia l for a u to n o m y B ecause lea rn er beliefs are

m o d ifiab le, tea c h e rs ca n ask stu d e n ts to talk o v e r th eir b e lie fs and e x p e c ta tio n s about language lea rn in g and can use p e rsu a siv e c o m m u n ic a tio n to rem o v e stu d e n ts ’

m isc o n c ep tio n s, w h ic h in retu rn can “ facilitate the d e v e lo p m e n t o f le a rn e r a u to n o m y ” (Y ang, 1999) T o get o u r learn ers rea d y and w illin g fo r p u rsu in g th e ir learning

a u tonom y, te a c h e rs sh o u ld im p ro v e th e ir m e ta c o g n itio n su ch as th eir a ttitu d e tow ard

a u to n o m y , b e lie fs and e x p e c ta tio n s a b o u t lan g u ag e le a rn in g and tea c h in g , personal

n eeds and o b jec tiv e s, th e ir c o n sc io u sn e ss o f th eir o w n w e a k n e sse s and stren g th s, and their task and stra te g ic k n o w le d g e

B esides, lea rn er a u to n o m y c o u ld be in flu e n ce d by so c io -c u ltu ra l facto rs F rom birth onw ards, the m em b e rs o f a c u ltu re are b o m b ard e d by th e ir g ro u p 's p u b lic and cultural rep re sen ta tio n s c o n c e rn in g v a lu e s, tra d itio n s, w ays o f b e h a v in g , and so on A s a result,

it is no t su rp risin g if, w h e n th e y e n te r fo rm al e d u catio n , th e ir values and p e rc e p tio n s o f learning h a v e b e e n in flu e n ce d to a c o n sid e rab le e x te n t by th e values and p ercep tio n s

th at they have c o m m o n ly experienced w ith in th eir so cio-cultural group T his does not

m ean, how ever, that they have been p assiv ely m oulded o r that all in d iv id u als will

co n fo rm to the co m m o n pattern M ing and A lias (2007) from U n iv ersities K eban g saan ,

M alaysia, in v estig ated the read in ess for auto n o m y and com pared the lea rn in g characteristics from M alaysian E SL u n d e rg ra d u a te s o f three public u n iv ersitie s in

M alaysia, nam ely the N atio n al U n iv ersity o f M alay sia (U K M ), T he Putra U n iv e rsity o f

M alay sia (U P M ) and T he O pen U n iv ersity o f M alay sia (O U M ) The u ltim ate goal o f this study w as to determ in e the extent o f auto n o m y am o n g M alaysian u n d e rg ra d u a te s in public u n iv ersities T he study revealed th at a m ajo rity o f the students from all three

u n iv ersities p referred a teach er-cen tered ap p ro ach to learning H ow ever, this did not

m ean that the learners w ere not capable o f b eing au to n o m o u s as th ey did p o ssess

au to n o m o u s learning ch aracteristics such as aw aren ess o f the im p ortance o f rea d in g

w idely and ac q u irin g a p p ro p riate learning strateg ies T he learners m ay h av e the ca p ac ity

to be au to n o m o u s, but th is quality w as not rev ealed pro b ab ly because o f the in flu en ce o f

so cio-cultural factors T he authors pro p o sed that in in terp retin g auto n o m y in the

M alay sian co n tex t, socio-cultural factors should also be taken into co n sid eratio n

M oreover, for the past few years, studies on H ong K ong learners have su g g ested a general p a tte rn o f typical H ong K ong C hin ese learner H ong K ong learn ers w ere reported to fav o u r rote learning over c reativ e learning, d ep endent on the syllabus, lacking in in tellectu al in itiative, p assive, reticen t, and relu c ta n t to openly c h allen g e

au th o rity esp ecially teach ers (P ierson, 1996) M urphy (1987) pointed ou t th at H ong

K ong students d isp lay ed an u n q u estio n in g accep tan ce o f the k n o w ledge o f the te a c h e r

o r lec tu re r instead o f an e x p ressio n o f op in io n , ind ep en d en ce, self-m astery, c re a tiv ity and a ll-aro u n d perso n al developm ent In ad d itio n , an inv estig atio n o f H o n g K ong

im m ig ran t c h ild ren in C an ad ian sch o o ls by C h an and H ui (1974) in dicated th a t the

C hinese students w ere very p olite, but m ore qu iet and shy th an o ther students P ie rso n (1996) fu rth e r found th em to be su b m issiv e to th eir teach er and that they d id not

c h allenge h im /h er su fficiently A n o th e r p e rso n a lity o f C hinese students is th at C h in ese students ten d to be co o p erativ e and h av e m ore faith in team w ork For ex am p le, w h en they are asked to d iscuss the answ ers in groups, the students are m ore w illin g to speak

T hey k n o w that the h u m iliatio n and e m b arrassm en t th at result from the in co rrect answ ers c o u ld be shared by all the m em b ers in the group In short, so cio -cu ltu ral facto r can affect the p o tential ro les o f teachers and learners

T o sum up as d iscu ssed above, there are m any factors im p actin g learner au tonom y A s related to the learn er him self, the factors that exert influence on the d e v elo p m en t o f learner a u to n o m y can be intrinsic or e x trin sic or both, and are m ore or less interrelated

A nd few w o u ld d o ubt that learner au to n o m y in language learning is a po sitiv e th in g and

m ay lead to learners w ho are m ore p ro ficien t in the target language T he im portant issue

o f LP w ill be ad d ressed in the fo llo w in g section

2.2 L a n g u a g e P roficien cy

T h is se ctio n aim s to provide readers a variety o f term in o lo g ical d efin itio n s and

c la ssifica tio n s o f language pro ficien cy in general and E n g lish language p ro fic ie n c y in

p a rticu la r pro p o sed by d ifferen t authors

2.2 1 D efin itio n o f L a n g u a g e P ro ficien cy

In spite o f v ario u s d efin itio n s provided for it, language p ro ficien cy has been alw ay s a

d ifficu lt c o n cep t to d efin e and realize T he W isco n sin L iteracy E d u catio n and R e a d in g

N e tw o rk S ource (2003) d efines LP as "the ability to speak, read, w rite and un d erstan d

th at lan g u ag e w ell e n o u g h to be able to th riv e in a m o n o lin g u al society" and "com pete

w ith native language speakers in the classroom " H ow ever, Briere (1972) points out that

the p a ra m ete rs o f LP are not easy to identify A c k n o w led g in g the c o m p le x itie s in volved

in the co n c ep t o f LP, B riere states th at the term ‘p ro fic ie n c y ’ m ay be defined as the degree o f c o m p eten ce o r the cap ab ility in a g iven language d e m o n strated by an

in dividual at a given p oint in tim e in d ep en d en t o f a specific tex tb o o k , chap ter in the book, or p ed ag o g ical m ethod

F arhady (1 9 8 2 ) objects the idea by p o in tin g out the am b ig u ities o f B rié re ’s defin itio n and m ain ta in s that such a co m p lic a ted defin itio n could very w ell result in vague

h y p o th ese s about LP and LP tests T h ey could be vague w ith resp e c t to u n sp ecified term s such as “ c o m p e ten c e ,” “c a p a b ility ,” “d em o n stra ted ,” and “ in d iv id u al.” T he term

c o m p eten ce could refer to linguistic, so cio -cu ltu ral, o r o th er ty p es o f co m petence The term c a p ab ility could refe r to the ab ility o f the learn er to reco g n ize, co m p reh en d , or

p roduce lan g u ag e elem en ts (or a co m b in a tio n o f them ) D em o n stratio n o f k n o w led g e could be in either w ritten or the oral m ode F inally, the ex p re ssio n ind iv id u al could refe r

to a lan g u ag e learn er as listener, speaker, o r both T hese co n cep ts should be clarified and th eir ch a ra c te ristic s sh o u ld be iden tified in o rd er to dev elo p ex p lic it hypotheses

A cco rd in g to Stern (1983), p ro ficiency can be looked at as a goal and thus be defined in term s o f o b jec tiv e s or standards T hese can then serve as criteria by w hich to assess

p ro fic ie n c y as an em p irical fact, that is, the actual perfo rm an ce o f given individual learners or g roups o f learners P ro ficien cy in v o lv es the m astery o f (a) the form s, (b) the linguistic, co g n itiv e, affectiv e and socio cu ltu ral m ean in g s o f those form s, (c) the cap acity to use the lan g u ag e w ith focus m ainly on co m m u n icatio n and m inim um atte n tio n to form , and (d) the creativ ity in language use He states that “ pro ficien cy ranges from zero to n ative - like p ro ficiency T he zero is not ab so lu te because the second lan g u ag e learn er as sp eak er o f at least one o ther language, his first language,

k now s lan g u ag e and h o w it functions C o m p lete c o m p eten ce is hardly ever reached by second lan g u ag e lea rn ers” (p.341)

L ater, the term “p ro fic ie n c y ” can be in terpreted in its trad itio n al sense as m entioned by

B achm an (1990: 16) “to refer in general to kno w led g e, co m p eten ce or ability in the use

o f a lan g u ag e, irresp ectiv e o f how , w h ere, o r u n d er w hat co n d itio n s it has been

a c q u ire d ” In the sam e vein w ith B ach m an , C lark (1972) d efines LP as the language

le a rn e r's ab ility to use language for real-life p u rp o ses w ith o u t regard to the m an n er in

w h ich th at c o m p eten ce w as acquired In this d efin itio n , an o th e r p a ra m ete r is added to

LP nam ely, the use o f language in real-life situations T hat is, the definition includes all

the c o m p le x itie s o f p rev io u s d efin itio n s in ad d itio n to one m ore general concept, a

“real-life situ a tio n ”

F u rth e rm o re , in the area o f language tea c h in g m eth o d o lo g y , the p red o m in an t em p h asis until rec e n tly has b e e n o n the teach in g o f gram m ar T he im plicit co n cep tio n o f LP, as it has b een o p e ra tio n a liz e d in second lan g u ag e classro o m , has en tailed v iew in g

p ro fic ie n c y as little m ore th an g ram m ar and lexis T he recent m o v em en t tow ard

c o m m u n ic a tiv e language teach in g has b e e n asso ciated w ith a b roader v iew o f language that in clu d e s not ju s t its g ram m atical asp ects, bu t also the ab ility to use language

a p p ro p riate ly in d iffe re n t contexts and the ab ility to org an ize o n e ’s th o u g h ts th ro u g h language T h at is to say, the recent e m p h a sis on c o m m u n ic a tio n in language teach in g is

ex p ressed in attem p ts to develop stu d e n ts ’ so cio lin g u istic and d isco u rse com p eten cies

in a d d itio n to th eir gram m atical co m p eten ce In short, the co n cep tio n o f w hat it m eans

to be p ro fic ie n t in a lan g u ag e has e x p an d ed significantly

A cco rd in g to C anale & S w ain (1 9 8 0 ), L P in d ic a te s a p e rs o n 's g en eral c o m m u n ic a tiv e

c o m p eten ce in the targ et lan g u a g e e n v iro n m e n t A n a ly tic ally , th is p ro fic ie n c y can be broken d ow n into m u ltip le c o m p o n e n ts F ro m c u rric u la r and fu n ctio n al p e rsp e c tiv e s, it can be sep arated into listen in g , s p e a k in g , rea d in g , and w ritin g sk ills F rom a th eo re tic al persp ectiv e B ach m an and P a lm e r (1 9 9 6 ) p ro v id e a tw o -tie r h ie ra rc h ic a l stru c tu re o f LP

In the first tier is the o rg a n iz a tio n a l k n o w le d g e , w h ic h c a n be fu rth e r d iv id e d into gram m atical and textual k n o w le d g e In the se co n d tie r is p rag m a tic k n o w le d g e , w hich

in cludes lexical, fu n ctio n al, and so c io lin g u istic c o m p e ten c e s T h is stru c tu re p resc rib e s

th at a p ro fic ie n t lan g u ag e sp e a k e r sh o u ld n o t o n ly d e m o n stra te stru c tu ra l k n o w le d g e but also im p lem en t that k n o w le d g e e ffe c tiv e ly in ac tu a l use

A d d itio n ally , O iler (1 9 8 3 ) states th a t L P is no t a sin g le u n ita ry a b ility , but th at it

c o n sists o f several d istin ct b u t rela te d c o n stru c ts in a d d itio n to a g en eral c o n stru c t o f

LP In a g reem en t w ith O iler, F a rh ad y , et al (1 9 8 3 ) state th at th e term 'p ro fic ie n c y 1 refers to the e x a m in e e 's a b ility in a p a rtic u la r are a o f c o m p e te n c y in o rd e r to d e te rm in e the ex ten t to w h ich they c an fu n ctio n in a real lan g u a g e use situ a tio n H e also said that

LP is one o f the m ost p o o rly d e fin e d c o n c e p ts in th e field o f lan g u a g e testing

O b v io u sly , F a rh a d y 's d e fin itio n is ev e n m o re sp ecific th an oth ers In this study,

F a rh a d y ’s d efin itio n o f L P is used b e c au se it is m ore concrete and e a sie r to u n d erstan d

th an the oth ers m en tio n e d above

N e v e rth e le ss, in spite o f d iffe rin g th e o re tic a l v iew s as to its d e fin itio n , a g en eral issue

on w hich m an y scholars seem to ag ree is th a t L P is th e lan g u a g e le a r n e r 's ab ility to use language in rea l-life situ a tio n and the fo cu s o f p ro fic ie n c y te sts is on the stu d e n ts ' ability to use language N o n e th e le ss, so as to get a m o re o v e ra ll v ie w o f LP,

c la ssifica tio n s o f LP and E L P sh o u ld be c o n sid e re d w h ic h w ill be p re se n te d in the n e x t section o f this chapter

2.2.2 C la ssifica tio n

P ro fic ie n c y c la ssifica tio n has p lay e d a vital ro le in se co n d lan g u a g e te stin g b e cau se

d e te rm in in g w h e th e r or n o t e x a m in e e s are p ro fic ie n t is o n e o f the m o st im p o rtan t

fu nctions o f testin g It is o n e o f th e m a jo r, i f no t the o n ly, re a so n s m an y lan g u ag e learners tak e lan g u ag e tests M o st la rg e -sc a le s ta n d a rd iz e d te sts o f E n g lish as a second language, such as the T e st o f E n g lish as a F o re ig n L a n g u a g e (T O E F L ), th e In te rn atio n a l

E nglish L an g u ag e T e stin g S erv ic e (IE L T S ), and th e M ic h ig a n E n g lish L an g u ag e

A sse ssm e n t B attery (M E L A B ), serve to classify e x am in ees to som e degree In using sco res from these tests, u n iv ersities and co lleg es usually classify ap p lican ts into m asters and n o n m a ste rs in ev alu a tin g language skills T he value o f p ro ficiency c lassificatio n can

be seen from the increasin g use o f test resu lts for licensure, certificatio n , and selection

in m any fields P ro ficien cy classificatio n varies acco rd in g to edu cato rs and u n iv ersities

in d iffe re n t states or countries This m eans there are d ifferen t w ays o f classify in g LP and E n g lish p ro fic ie n c y levels

A c c o rd in g to C u m m in s (1980), there are tw o levels o f LP: the basic interpersonal

c o m m u n ic a tiv e sk ills (B IC S ) and the c o g n itiv e academ ic language p ro ficien cy (C A L P)

T he B IC S c o n c e p t rep resen ts the language o f natural, inform al con v ersatio n T hey are

u sed by stu d e n ts w h e n talk in g about ev ery d ay things in concrete situations, th at is, situ a tio n s in w h ic h the co n tex t pro v id es cues that m ake u n d erstan d in g not to tally

d e p e n d en t o n v erbal in teraction alone (C u m m in s, 1980, 1992; S k u tnabb-K angus, 1981)

C u m m in s (1 9 8 0 ) refers to this ev ery d ay co n v ersatio n al ab ility as c o n tex t em b edded or

c o n te x tu a liz e d In C u m m in s ’ opinion, c o m p eten ce in B IC S is d ev elo p ed betw een tw o and five y e a rs o f e x p o su re to a second language In co n trast, C A L P is co n sid ered m ore

d eep ly d e v e lo p e d a n d less reliant on c o n tex t and situational cues C A L P is considered

e ssen tial fo r su c ce ss on academ ic tasks T he d e v elo p m en t o f C A L P skills is thought to

be a c h ie v e d b e tw e e n five and seven years o f e x p o su re to a second language (C um nins, 1984) A c c o rd in g to C u m m in s (1980, 1981), K rashen and B iber (1987), R osenthal (1 9 9 6 ) and S p u rlin (1995), C A L P is the ty p e o f LP n eed ed to read tex tb o o k s, to

p a rticip a te in d ialo g u e and debate, and to p ro v id e w ritten resp o n ses to tests C A L P

e n a b le s th e stu d e n t to learn in a co n tex t, w hich relies h eav ily on oral ex p la n a tio n o f

ab stra ct or d e c o n te x tu a liz e d ideas T he im p licatio n s o f B IC S and C A L P for seco n d lan g u ag e a c q u isitio n are m any W ith su fficien t skills in basic language (B IC S ), a stu d e n t m ay a p p e a r to be su ccessfully p ro fic ie n t in social contexts; how ever, the student

m ay p e rfo rm p o o rly in academ ic areas C u m m in s’ (1981) co n tends th a t all ch ildren

d e v e lo p B IC S and learn to co m m u n icate in th eir native or first language and that C A L P reflec ts a c o m b in a tio n o f LP and c o g n itiv e p ro ce sse s th at d eterm in es a s tu d e n t's success

in school

A d d itio n a lly , in a rese a rc h by K enji H akuta, Y uko G oto B u tler and D aria W itt (2000)

EL P is c la ssifie d in to O ral E nglish P ro ficien cy and A cadem ic E nglish P roficiency O ral

E n g lish P ro fic ie n c y is d eterm ined th ro u g h stan d ard ized p ro ficien cy tests T able 2.1

sh ow s an illu strativ e exam ple o f pro ficien cy levels from a c o m m o n ly used test, the Idea

P roficiency Test or IPT (proficiency levels are designated as A through F, w ith F being

considered " F lu e n t” ) O ther co m m o n ly used tests o f oral E nglish p ro ficien cy are the

Language A ssessm ent Scales (LA S) and the Bilingual Syntax M easure (B S M ) O nce

students attain m aste ry o f the test, they are classified as fluent E nglish speaking

T A B L E 2.1 _ IP T P ro ficien cy L evels

D

(lim ited

English

speaking)

Identify m odes o f transportation and household items; nam e the days o f the

w eek; describe com m on w eather conditions; use possessive pronouns; ask sim ple future tense questions; understand, express com parative and quantitative concepts; repeat com plex sentences; express creative thoughts

in com plete sentencesE

F

(fluent

English

speaking)

Use conditional tense verbs; discrim inate fine differences in closely paired

w ords; com prehend and predict the outcom e o f a story; recall and retell the

m ain facts o f a story; share m eaningful personal experiences

T h e academ ic E n g lish c riterio n is m ore co m p licated , and is u sually m ea su red w ith a stan d ard ized E n g lish re a d in g a c h ie v e m e n t test, such as the SA T -9 or C T B S T hese tests are m n n -re fe re n c e d to a natio n al sam ple o f largely E n g lish speakers, and ty p ically , a

c rite n o n aro u n d the 36 th p ercen tile ran k is used for red e sig n atio n as R -F E P , a status

ta k e n to in d icate th at th e stu d e n t is no lon g er in need o f special lan g u ag e support services C ritics have rallie d around bo th sides o f this criterion O p p o n en ts o f bilingual education say th at this is a m ea n in g le ss criterio n because ev en in a n a tiv e E nglish

p o p u a tio n , 36 p ercen t o f th e stu d en ts by d efin itio n w o uld never be able to m eet the criterion for red esig n atio n A d v o c a tes for lan g u ag e m in o rity students claim that it is

b etter to en" on the side o f caution, and that even the 36th percent is h o lding stu d e n ts to

lo w ex p ectations

A c c o rd in g to Indiana D ep artm en t o f E d u catio n , there are five levels o f ELP T h ey are

B eg in n er, E arly Interm ediate, In term ed iate A d v an ced and Fluent E nglish P ro ficien t (S ee a p p e n d ix 1 for m ore details) T he W isco n sin A dm in istrativ e R ule also classified

E L P into five levels from 1, E n terin g to 5, B rid g in g as stepping- stones alo n g the

p a th w a y to academ ic success EL P c la ssifica tio n s o f 1-5 are co n sid ered L im ited E n g lish

P ro fic ie n t (L E P) S tudents w ith lim ited E n glish pro ficien cy are also called E n g lish

L an g u ag e L earners (E L L ) T here are tw o m ore levels o f E L P classified by the

W isc o n sin A d m in istrativ e R ule L evel 6 is used only for stu d en ts w ho w ere p rev io u sly

id en tified as E L L /L E P and is now fully E nglish proficient L evel 7 is exp ected fo r any stu d e n t determ in ed to be fully E n g lish p ro fic ie n t and w ho had n ev er p rev io u sly b een

id en tified as ELP 1-5 T he d e fin itio n s o f th e five lim ited -E n g lish language p ro fic ie n c y levels, as w ell as L evel 6, one o f tw o fully -E n g lish language p ro ficien cy levels, are from PI 13.08(3)(1 )-(6), W isco n sin A d m in istra tiv e R ule L evel 7, the o th er fully-

E n g lish language p ro fic ie n c y level, is used for p u rp o ses o f state rep o rtin g /state testin g , (see A p p e n d ix 2 for the detailed d escrip tio n s o f seven levels o f E L P by W isc o n sin

A m o n g th em is the rec o g n itio n th at in d iv id u al language learn ers vary in th eir

p ro d u c tiv e and recep tiv e skills, w ith receptive language (listen in g and rea d in g )

g en e ra lly d ev e lo p in g prio r to and to a h ig h er level th an p ro d u ctiv e language (sp eak in g and w ritin g ) T hus, E n g lish language learn ers m ay n o t be at a uniform level o f E L P

a cro ss th e four dom ains, (see A p p en d ix 3 for the detailed descrip tio n s o f E n g lish

p ro fic ie n c y level ad apted from g u id elin es issued by the N o rth C aro lin a D e p a rtm en t o f

E d u cation)

To sum up, different research ers use d iffe re n t c riteria to classify LP H o w ev er th ey are cla ssified , it is quite clear th at at least stu d en ts stand at p a rticu la r levels o f LP and th at

th ese levels can be identified, classified and d escribed in order to help students k n o w

■‘w here they a re ” in the process o f second language learning D espite the d ifferen t

c la ssifica tio n s o f LP the E nglish p ro fic ie n c y level descrip tio n adapted from gu id elin es issu ed by the N o rth C aro lin a D ep artm en t o f E d ucation is the one favored in this study

b e c au se it g iv es d etailed descrip tio n on E L P not only at d ifferent levels (B eginner,

In te rm e d ia te and A d v an ced ) but also at d ifferen t skills (S peaking, L istening, R e a d in g

a nd W riting)

2 3 L ea rn er a u to n o m y and L a n g u a g e P ro ficien cy

F ew w o uld d o u b t th at learner auto n o m y in language learning is a positive thing and can lead to p o sitive lea rn in g o u tcom es, such as in creased pro ficien cy in the target lan g u ag e

a n d the d e v e lo p m en t o f life-long learners In o th er w ords, the dev elo p m en t o f a u to n o m y

im p lies b etter lan g u a g e learning T his is o ne o f the three hyp o th eses w hich a lm o st all rese a rc h in the field o f auto n o m y is based on, and has im p lications for (B en so n ,

2 0 0 1 :1 8 3 ) A cco rd in g to the Principles and Guidelines that define the ELP and its

functions (C ouncil o f Europe 2000/2004), the ELP “is a tool to prom ote learner autonom y” The Principles and Guidelines insist that the ELP is the property o f the

individual learner, w hich in itself im plies learner autonom y Learners exercise their

ow nership not sim ply through physical possession, but by using the ELP to plan, m onitor

and evaluate their learning Indeed, the c h a n g in g needs o f lan g u ag e learners w ill req u ire

th em to go b a c k to learning several tim es in th eir lives and the best w ay to prep are th em for th is task is to h elp them b ecom e m ore a u to n o m o u s (S charle & S zabo, 2000)

In rec e n t years, the co n trib u tio n o f p ractices a sso ciated w ith auto n o m y to L P has

b e c o m e a critical issu e for tw o reasons O ne reason is th at researchers are in creasin g ly

b e g in n in g to u n d e rsta n d th at there is an in tim ate relatio n sh ip betw een au to n o m y and

e ffe c tiv e learning A n o th e r reason is th at w o rld -w id e co n cern w ith a c c o u n ta b ility in

e d u c atio n is in cre asin g ly o b lig in g tea c h e rs to dem o n strate the effectiv en ess o f th eir

p rac tic e s in term s o f p ro fic ie n c y gains T h erefo re, m ore and m ore research has fo cu sed

on th e effect o f lea rn er auto n o m y on LP C o m o and M an d in ach (1983: 89) in itia lly

p ro p o sed that le a rn e r au to n o m y could h elp to im prove the LP o f learners and c o n clu d ed

th at a u to n o m o u s lea rn ers w ere the learn ers o f h ig h LP A b lard and L ip sch u ltz (1998: 97) also fo u n d out that differen t h ig h -a c h ie v e m e n t students applied d iffe re n t

a u to n o m o u s strateg ies R isen b erg and Z im m e rm a n (1992: 120) further po in ted ou t that

a high d egree o f lea rn er auto n o m y a m o n g the h ig h -a c h ie v in g students w ould ach iev e

high sco res and the learner w ith low deg rees o f learner auto n o m y w as likely to risk

a c h ie v in g the lo w sco res if learner a u to n o m y c o u ld augm ent the a cad em ic scores

Z h an g and Li (2004: 21) concluded th at learn er au to n o m y w as closely related w ith the lan g u ag e lev els and its P earson C o efficien t am o u n ted to 0.6088 based on the

c o m p a riso n b e tw e e n the subjects in C h in a and E urope

F u rth e rm o re , th e resu lts o f the recent stu d ies have show n that learner au to n o m y not only h e lp s u n su c ce ssfu l learners be m ore su ccessful bu t also im proves language learn in g p ro ce ss in four m ain skills listening, speaking, reading, w ritin g and se lf­

c o rre c tio n as w ell

F irst, lea rn er a u to n o m y helps u n successful learners b eco m e successful T his has been

d e m o n stra ted in L ouis and P e reira ’s (2003) study T he study w as co n d u cted am ong rem edial E FL stu d e n ts in an E ST (E n g lish for S cience and T ech n o lo g y ) read in g course

at the S im ó n B o lív a r U n iv ersity in C aracas, V enezuela M ost o f their students have failed th e re g u la r c o u rse s and m any su ffer from low self-esteem w ith regard to their

ab ility to read in the foreign language In an attem p t to m o tivate their students and help them find th e ir o w n inner p otential, they tu rn ed to the research done in m o tiv atio n , learn er a u to n o m y , and learning styles A s th ey believ ed students played a decisiv e role

in th e ir o w n le a rn in g pro cess, students w ere a llo w ed to choose the read in g activ ities they c o n sid e re d m o st beneficial and as fear o f traditional type read in g tests w as high

a m o n g th em , p o rtfo lio s and co n tracts w ere also o ffered as an altern ativ e form o f

a ssessm en t W ith reg ard to the feedback obtain ed from th eir students, 96% th o u g h t that the a lte rn a tiv e a sse ssm e n t used to ev a lu a te th eir acad em ic a c h ie v e m e n t in read in g

c o m p re h e n sio n d u rin g the parallel rem ed ial co u rses had had a positive in flu en ce on them T he m a jo rity o f the students (7 8 % ) said th at they w ere u nder less pressu re and could w o rk b e tte r in class O bviously, th an k s to au to n o m o u s learning strateg ies, the stu d en ts su ffe rin g fro m low self-esteem in read in g b e c am e m ore co n fid en t and studied better

Second, le a rn e r au to n o m y im proves lan g u ag e learning process in general and fo u r m ain skills: listen in g , sp eak in g , reading, w ritin g and self-co rrectio n in particular

T he e ffe c t o f lea rn er au to n o m y on lan g u ag e learning w as ex am in ed by Y an lin g (n.d)

T he a u th o r in v estig a ted into the b e n e fit o f d ev e lo p in g learner au to n o m y and

im p lem e n tin g au to n o m o u s learning strateg ies co n d u cted by the Shanxi U n iv e rsity o f

F in an ce and E conom ics The reason o f this study is that after stu d y in g E n g lish for over ten y ears, m o st tertiary stu d en ts c o n tin u e to find read in g E nglish books a d ifficu lt task

U n d e rsta n d in g oral E nglish, esp ecially E n g lish sp o k en by native speakers, is co n sid ered

an ev en to u g h er task than read in g aloud But, even m ore d ifficu lt, is the jo b o f

e x p re ssin g th em selv es clearly and flu ently in spoken E nglish T his in v estig atio n

co m p ared the resu lts o btained using eith er trad itio n al or au to n o m o u s tea c h in g

ap p ro a c h e s w ith four g roups o f n o n -E n g lish m ajo r u n d erg rad u ate tertiary stu d en ts stu d y in g E F L at the U niversity T he resu lts o f this in v estig atio n show ed au to n o m o u s learn in g strateg ies resu lted in im p ro v ed E FL o u tco m es for this gro u p o f stu d e n ts in

C hin ese tertia ry ed u catio n S tu d e n ts' m o tiv atio n to study w as aro used and m ost o f th em

v o lu n teered to find a p p ro p riate read in g m aterials to read and to p e rsist in listening to the radio statio n in th eir spare tim e every day T hey c o u ld take an active part in all k in d s o f activ ities o u tsid e class, such as E nglish sp eech c o n tests and E nglish sin g in g co n tests at the u n iv ersity S tudents have b ecom e used to som e learn in g strategies Every body m ade his/h er o w n d etailed e v e ry d a y tim eta b le fo r study and activities S tudents realized that,

in the a re a o f foreign lan g u ag e learning, an in creased aw aren ess o f the learning p ro cess

is very im p o rta n t so they p aid m ore atte n tio n to process th an pro d u ct o f study and to o k

an activ e ro le in class a c tiv itie s such as in pairs and sm all groups

The e ffe c t o f learn er a u to n o m y on stu d e n ts ’ sp eak in g c o m p eten ce w as e x a m in ed by Jin g -y u an (2007) The rese a rc h e r carried ou t an em p irical study on the im pact o f lea rn er

au to n o m y on oral language on the base o f e m e rg en t m etaco g n itio n a m o n g 466 first-y e ar sem ester d ip lo m a stu d en ts o f W e n zh o u U n iv ersity in C hina B ased on the results o f the study, the re se a rc h e r p ro v o k ed a d ep th research on h eig h te n in g le a rn e rs’ se lf-a u to n o m y for oral lan g u a g e by effectiv ely u tiliz in g m eta co g n itiv e k n o w ledge, m e ta co g n itiv e

ex p erien ce and m eta co g n itiv e m o n ito rin g , in tro d u ced p ractical use o f m eta co g n itio n ,

ex p lo red h o w learn er au to n o m y is greatly im p ro v in g le a rn e rs’ oral lan g u ag e and inquired into the relatio n sh ip b etw een m e ta co g n itio n and au tonom y, b etw een e ffica c y and a w a ren e ss, b e tw e en m etaco g n itiv e kn o w led g e, ex p erien ce and m o n ito rin g

A d d itio n ally , Jin g -y u a n ’s p ap er has d e m o n stra ted h o w lea rn er a u to n o m y and

m e ta co g n itiv e strateg ies are in ex tricab ly lin k ed to m ake lan g u ag e learn in g and tea c h in g successful F inally, the p ap er has d raw n a c o n c lu sio n that learner auto n o m y is a c ritical elem en t in im p ro v in g le a rn e rs ’ oral language

T he effect o f le a rn e r auto n o m y on stu d e n ts' sp eak in g co m p eten ce w as also ex am ined by

Le (2006) H e r rese a rc h focused on im p ro v in g the e ffectiv en ess o f sp eak in g lessons by help in g learn ers b e c o m e m ore active, resp o n sib le and ind ep en d en t in their learning The stu d y w as c o n d u c te d in the form o f an action research w ith the subjects o f studying

b e in g the th irty stu d e n ts o f class 1072B, E n glish D epartm ent, P h u o n g D ong U niversity

T he resu lts sh o w th at w hen students b ecom e au to n o m o u s, they w ill be m o tiv ated to use

E n g lish to a c h ie v e the c o m m u n icativ e go als in the classro o m activities

F o llo w in g the sam e line as the p rev io u s studies, N g u y e n (2006) carried ou t a study on how7 learn er a u to n o m y had an effect on the first year stu d e n ts' w ritin g skills at the

N a tio n a l E c o n o m ic s U n iv e rsity th ro u g h using p o rtfo lio w riting activities A d o p tin g the

e x p e rim e n ta l m eth o d , she found that stu d en ts tak in g part in the p o rtfo lio w ritin g becam e

m ore in te rested and m o tiv ated in w ritin g th an before the experim ent M oreover, their

k n o w le d g e o f g ra m m a r, v o cabulary in clu d in g linguistic term s as w ell as th eir w riting

sk ills w ere m u ch im p ro v ed th an k s to frequent p ractice and exp o su re to the language In short, a u to n o m o u s lea rn in g su p p o rted by the p o rtfo lio w riting activity h elp ed students

b e c o m e m o re se lf-c o n fid e n t, resp o n sib le and successful

V ick ers and E ne (2 0 0 6 ) explored a d v an ced E S L le a rn e rs' ability to m ake im p rovem ents

in g ra m m a tic a l a c cu ra cy by au to n o m o u sly n o tic in g and c o rrectin g th eir ow n

g ram m atical errors W o rk in g w ith 13 a d v an ced E SL co m p o sitio n students, the rese a rc h e rs e n g a g ed th e subjects in an ex p lic it task in w h ich they co m p a red th eir ow n use o f g ram m atic a l form in th eir o w n w ritte n o u tp u t to the use o f gram m atical form as used in a te x t w ritte n by a n ative speaker B ased on the co m p ariso n b e tw e en th eir ow n

w ritte n o u tp u t and th e native sp e ak e r text, subjects su b seq u en tly co rrected their

g ram m atic a l erro rs T h e learning b en efit resu ltin g from en g ag in g in ex p licit self­

c o rre c tio n su g g e sts th a t learner au to n o m y is v iab le at least for a d v an ced E S L learners It seem s th at e n c o u ra g in g learner a u to n o m y is in creasin g ly reco g n ized as a beneficial

p ractice to p ro m o te lan g u ag e learning T h erefo re, it is necessary to ex p lo re language lea rn in g task s th at e n c o u ra g e learn er au to n o m y and th at also lead to gains in accuracy in the se co n d lan g u ag e

M ore rec e n tly , D afei (2007) d e m o n stra tes that stu d e n ts' LP has b een show n to be

in flu e n ce d by lea rn er autonom y T h e rese a rc h e r in v estig ated the relatio n sh ip betw een lea rn er a u to n o m y and E nglish p ro fic ie n c y in a sam ple o f 129 n o n -E n g lish m ajors in a

te a c h e r co llege in C h in a by m eans o f a q u estio n n aire and an interview T he data o f the sub jects w ere a n a ly z e d by T -test and F-test w ith SPSS 11.0 T he results o f the study

in d icate that the s tu d e n ts ' E nglish p ro ficien cy w as sig n ifican tly and positively rela te d to

th eir lea rn er a u to n o m y , and there are no sig n ifican t differen ces am ong the s tu d e n ts ' lea rn er a u to n o m y w h e n their E nglish p ro ficien cy is not sig n ifican tly d ifferent B ut there are sig n ifican t d iffe re n c es am o n g the stu d e n ts' learner auto n o m y w hen th eir E n g lish

p ro fic ie n c y is sig n ific a n tly different

T o sum up all o f th e studies m en tio n e d above m ore o r less relate to the im p act o f lea rn er a u to n o m y on m ak in g su ccessful learning A lth o u g h th ese studies w ere c arried out in d ifferen t c o n te x ts w ith d ifferent pu rp o ses, w'hat they have in com m on is th at they all used c la ssro o m - based research m eth o d in th eir studies and they all tried to find out the best w a y to d e v e lo p learner a u to n o m y as w ell as learn er language learning B ased

on the fin d in g s o f th ese research ers, it can be co n clu d ed that learner a u to n o m y h as a tre m en d o u s e ffe c t on stu d e n ts' LP and language learning

2.4 S u m m a ry

T h is c h a p te r has rev ie w e d related th eo ries on tw o m ajo r issues, learner au to n o m y , and

LP in general and E L P in particular Som e o f the m ain points can be sum m arized as

follow s

C o n c e rn in g the le a rn e r au tonom y, d e fin itio n s o f learn er a u to n o m y p roposed by d iffe re n t rese a rc h e rs h a v e b e e n d escribed and an aly zed w ith critical ey es to form c riteria to

m ea su re levels o f stu d e n ts’ learn er au to n o m y and en co u rag e them to b e c o m e

a u to n o m o u s lan g u a g e learners In refe re n c e to the defin itio n and classificatio n o f LP and E L P , th ere h a v e b e e n quite d ifferen t p o in ts o f v iew s by d ifferen t scholars H o w e v er,

F a rh a d y ’s (1983) d e fin itio n o f LP and c la ssifica tio n o f E L P pro p o sed by the N o rth

C a ro lin a D e p a rtm en t o f E ducation h av e been a d o p ted for the e x p lo ratio n o f EL P fo r this study M o reo v er, the factors in flu e n ce lea rn er autonom y; the effects o f lea rn er

a u to n o m y on e ffe c tiv e learning from p rev io u s stu d ies have b een also rev iew ed in this

ch apter A ll o f th e se serve as a b a sic for an in v estig a tio n into the relatio n sh ip b e tw e en stu d e n ts' learn er a u to n o m y and th eir E L P in this research In short, th is L ite ratu re

R e v ie w has p ro v id e d a n ecessary th eo re tic al b ack g ro u n d , in the light o f w h ic h the

p resen t study h as b e e n co nducted T h is w ill be fu rth er presen ted in the next chapters

Survey is a classic m eth o d for data collection It is flexible, easy to im p lem en t, and offer a n e a rly lim itless range o f d a ta w ith reliab le results S urveys have been w id ely used to c o lle ct data in fo rm a tio n in m o st areas such as social inquiry, politics, e d u c atio n about p e o p le 's attitu d es, op in io n s, m otiv atio n S urveys can be u tiliz e d in a

nu m b er o f w ays S urveys are u sually co n d u cted in the form o f q u e stio n n a ire or interview , o r a co m b in a tio n o f the tw o Q uestio n n aires and in terview s share m an y o f the sam e c h a ra c te ristic s (fo r instance, can m easure m any d ifferen t kinds o f ch ara c te ristic s; rely on d ire c tly ask in g p eo p le q u e stio n s to get inform ation) H ow ever, there are also som e d iffe re n c es b etw een the tw o in stru m en ts, w h ich have been d iscu ssed by m any research ers such as F in & K o s e c o ff (1985), S eliger & S h oham y (1989) and N u n a n (1992) A c c o rd in g to S elig er & S h o h am y (1989),

in terv iew s are p e rso n a liz e d and th erefo re p e rm it a level o f in -d ep th

in fo rm a tio n -g a th e rin g free response, and flex ib ility th at c a n n o t be

o b tain ed by o th er p ro ced u res T he in terv iew er can p robe for in fo rm a tio n and o b tain data th at h av e not o ften b een foreseen M u ch o f the

in fo rm a tio n o b tain ed d u rin g an o p e n /u n stru ctu red in terv iew is in cidental and co m es o ut as the in terv iew proceeds T here are d isad v an tag es, how ev er In terv iew can be costly, tim e-co n su m in g , and o fte n d iffic u lt to

ad m in ister T hey d ep en d on good in terv iew in g sk ills that m ig h t req u ire

ex ten siv e training T h e y m ay in tro d u ce ele m en ts o f su b je c tiv ity and personal bias, and rap p o rt m ay cause the interv iew ee to resp o n d in a certain w7ay to please th e interview er

W h ile q u estio n n aires, acco rd in g to S elig er & S ho h am y (1989),

a) are self-a d m in iste red and can be given to large groups o f subjects at the sam e tim e T hey are therefo re less e x p en siv e to a d m in ister than o th er

p ro cedures such as interview s, b) W hen an o n y m ity is assured, sub jects ten d to share in fo rm atio n o f sensitive nature m ore easily, c) Since the sam e

q u estio n n aire is given to all subjects, the data are m ore uniform and standard, d) Since they are usually g iven to all subjects o f the research at e x a ctly the sam e tim e, the data are m ore accurate

H o w e v er, one o f the m ain pro b lem s w ith q u estio n n aires is the relativ ely lo w resp o n se rate (esp ecially w ith m ailed q u estio n n aires), w hich poses q u estio n s about the reaso n s

w h y certain subjects resp o n d and o th er do not A low return rate m ay th ere fo re

in flu e n ce th e validity o f the findings A n o th e r p roblem w ith questio n n aires is th at they are n ot app ro p riate for su b jects w ho can n o t read and w rite T his is esp ecially rele v an t to rese a rc h in second lan g u ag e, as sub jects very o ften have pro b lem s rea d in g and

p ro v id in g answ ers in seco n d language T hus there is no assu ran ce th at the q u e stio n s used in a q u estio n n aire have been p ro p erly u n d ersto o d by the sub jects and an sw ered

T he stu d y aim s to inv estig ate the relatio n sh ip b etw een stu d e n ts' E n g lish lan g u ag e

p ro fic ie n c y and th eir lea rn er autonom y T o ach ie v e the above m en tio n ed aim , a n sw ers

to the fo llo w in g rese a rc h q u estio n s w ere sought:

1 H o w au to n o m o u s are the stu d en ts at IIS?

2 W h at is th e EL P level o f th e IIS stu d en ts?

3 W 'hat is the rela tio n sh ip betw een the stu d e n ts' EL P and their learn er au to n o m y ?

3 2 2 D e sc r ip tio n o f va ria b les

d e p e n d en t v a ria b le in the study

H o w e v er, th ere are also o th er variab les affectin g the level o f learn er au to n o m y such as lea rn er ag e, g en d er, p e rso n ality , prev io u s learning, m o tiv atio n and attitudes, b e lie f and lea rn in g stra te g ies, society a n d ed u catio n , and teachers So as to prevent their in flu en ce

o n the e ffe c t o f th e in d ep en d en t variab le on the d ep endent v ariab le, it is n e c e ssa ry to select th e in d iv id u als random ly T h erefo re, a pro b ab ility sam ple w as ch o sen as

c o n tro llin g v a ria b le to control o ther variab les affectin g the level o f learn er au to n o m y listed abo v e T h ere are four reasons for th is choice First, the p ro b ab ility sam ple draw s ran d o m ly from th e w id e r p o p u latio n Second, it seeks rep re sen ta tiv e n ess o f the w id er

p o p u latio n T hird, it w ill have less risk o f bias th an non- p ro b ab ility sam ple F o u rth , it also p e rm its tw o -ta ile d tests to be ad m in iste re d in statistical analy sis o f q u a n tita tiv e data (C o h e n , L o u is, M a n io n , L aw rence, M orrisio n , & K eith, 2007: 110) A d d itio n a lly ,

C re sw e ll (2005: 3 79) affirm s th at “ Ideally, the rese a rc h e r should ran d o m ly select the

in d iv id u a ls so th at the resu lts m ig h t be g en eralized to a p o p u la tio n ” In fav o r o f this,

B ro w n (1992: 6 3 2 ) co n te n d s “ O ne efficien t w ay to sim u ltan eo u sly control m any

v a ria b le s is by u sin g random se le c tio n ”

3 3 D a ta co lle ctio n in stru m en ts

T he decision to use a m ulti-m ethod approach to data collection w as inform ed

b y current literature w hich posits that ‘good research practice obligates the researcher

to tr ia n g u la te , th a t is, to u s e m u ltip le m e th o d s , d a ta s o u rc e s a n d r e s e a r c h e r to

en h a n ce th e v alid ity research fin d in g s’ (M athison, 1 9 8 8 :1 3 ) T h u s , th re e instrum ents for data collection w ere utilised in this investigation: a questionnaire, an interview and a standard test T his m ethodological a p p ro a c h is a im e d a t e n s u rin g th e d a ta c o lle c tio n

w ill p r o v id e m o re a n d b e tte r e v id e n c e fro m w h ic h th e re s e a rc h e r c an c o n s tru c t

m e a n in g fu l p ro p o s itio n s (M a th is o n , 1988)

T he fo llo w in g d ata co llectio n instru m en ts w ere em p lo y ed in this study to seek the

an sw es to the research questions

• Q u e stio n n a ire w as used to co llect d ata to an sw er the first

research q uestion: “H o w a u to n o m o u s are the students at IIS ?”

• T h e T O E F L test w as used to co llect d ata to an sw er the second

research q uestion: “ W hat is the E L P level o f the IIS students?

• T h e in terv iew w ith the teach ers is to un d erstan d h o w the

teach ers ev alu ate the stu d e n ts ’ learn er a u to n o m y and its reasons

• T h e co llected resu lts from q u e stio n n a ir e and the T O E F L test

w ere co m p u ted and an aly zed to an sw er the third question: “ W hat is the

re la tio n sh ip betw een the stu d e n ts’ EL P and th eir learn er autonom y?

3 3 1 Q u estio n n a ire

In C re s w e ll’s (2005: 4 02) o pinion, “A q u e stio n n a ire is a form used in a survey design

th at p a rticip a n ts in a study co m plete and retu rn to the researcher T he p articip an t m arks

ch o ices to q u estio n s and supplies basic perso n al or d em o g rap h ic in fo rm a tio n ” D espite som e d isad v an tag es o f the q u estio n n a ire such as req u irin g sim ple q u estions, no

o p p o rtu n ity to p ro v id e ad d itio n al in fo rm atio n , no control o v er w ho fill out the

q u estio n n aires ( N a c h m ia s, 1996), a q u e stio n n a ire is said to be w o rth w h ile w hen the rese a rc h in v o lv es co llectin g d a ta from a large n u m b er o f people “T he greater the

n u m b e r o f in fo rm an ts, the m ore eco n o m ical o f tim e it is to use a q u e stio n n a ire ” (J.W allace, 1998:130) It can save tim e and offer the research er several advan tag es such

as lo w cost, red u c tio n o f bias and greater a n o n y m ity (N achm ias, 1996) M oreover,

q u e stio n n a ires can be u sed on a sm all scale, in -h o u se, and on a large scale, req u irin g a little m ore e x tra effort th a n p h o to co p y in g and po stag e, d a ta can be g athered in several

d ifferen t tim e slots (at once in class, in the re sp o n d e n ts’ ow n tim e) and in different locations (D o n o u g h , 1997) T hese are the reaso n s w hy the q u estio n n aire is ch o sen in this study

T he q u estio n n a ire w h ic h w as used in th is study w as ap p lied from th at used by D afei (2 0 0 7 ), designed by Z h a n g and Li (2004); h o w ev er, the rese a rc h e r m ade som e additions and changes T here w e re three rea so n s for th is choice F irst, the questio n n aire w as

de sig n e d by Z hang and Li (2 0 0 4 ) w h ic h c o v e re d 21 q u e stio n s in tw o parts a lte r they

w ere revised and p red icted on th e b a sis o f th e lea rn in g stra te g ie s c la ssifie d by O xford (1990) W enden (1998) and O 'M a lle y and C h a m o t (1990) T h e q u e stio n n a ire has been pro v ed to have high c o n te n t v a lid ity and h ig h reliab ility S eco n d , the q u e stio n n a ire used

in D a fe i's (2007) w as su ita b le to th e p u rp o se to in v estig a te th e lea rn er a u to n o m y o f IIS stu d en ts Finally, the q u e stio n n a ire w as used as an e ffe c tiv e d a ta c o lle c tio n in stru m en t lead in g to the success o f D a f e i's (2 0 0 7 ) stu d y H o w ev er, fo r the p u rp o se o f th is study, 6

q u e stio n s w ere added to the q u e stio n n a ire aim ed at o b ta in in g the in fo rm a n ts’

ba c k g ro u n d in fo rm atio n , such as age, g e n d e r (q u e stio n 1), an d th e ir E n g lish b a c k g ro u n d (q u estio n s 2 - 6) In o rd er to c o lle ct th e d a ta e a sily the 6 ad d ed q u e stio n s w ere put into a

se p ara te part F o llo w in g s are th e d e ta ils o f th e a d a p te d q u e stio n n a ire w h ic h has b een used in th is study

A s N a c h m ia s (1 9 9 6 :2 5 0 ) sta te s, “th e fo u n d a tio n o f all q u e stio n n a ire s is th e question

T he q u e stio n n a ire m u st tra n sla te the re se a rc h o b je c tiv e s into sp e cific q u e stio n s; the

an sw e rs to such q u e stio n s w ill p ro v id e th e d a ta for h y p o th e sis te s tin g '’ T he survey

qu e stio n s w ill be c o n cern ed w7ith th e facts, o p in io n s, a ttitu d e s, re s p o n d e n ts ’ m o tiv atio n , and th eir level o f fam iliarity w ith th e c e rta in su b ject In the q u e stio n n a ire s o f this study the q u e stio n s are o f the m u ltip le c h o ic e ty p e (p art 1, 2) and a L ik ert scale (p art 3)

M u ltip le -c h o ic e q u estio n s are c re d ite d w ith a n u m b e r o f a d v a n ta g e s T h ey are o b jectiv e,

so v a ria tio n s in m ark in g d ue to s u b je c tiv e fac to rs are e lim in a te d (a lth o u g h the q u estio n s

th em se lv e s still have to be sc ru tin ise d to e n su re th at th ey are n o t b iase d ) and this also

m ak e s th em easy to m ark (an d th e y do no t n e c e ssa rily req u ire an e x p e rie n c e d tu to r to

m ark them ) M o reo v er, th ey are e ffic ie n t b e c a u se q u e stio n s tak e less tim e to com plete

F u rth e rm o re , an effe c tiv e m e th o d fo r o b ta in in g c o n siste n t su rv ey resp o n se s is to use a

L ik ert scale A L ikert S cale a llo w s a p a rtic ip a n t to p ro v id e fe e d b a c k th at is slightly

m ore ex p a n siv e than a sim p le c lo s e -e n d e d q u e stio n , b u t th at is m u c h e a sie r to quantify

th an a co m p le te ly o p e n -e n d e d re sp o n se It is also an a d v a n ta g e o v e r a sim p le y e s-o r-n o

q u estio n b e cau se it does n o t fo rc e th e p a rtic ip a n t to tak e a stan d on th e issue

T he q u estio n n aire, w h ich c o n sists o f th re e p a rts, is m ad e o f 27 q u e stio n s d e sig n e d to investig ate the learn er a u to n o m y o f th e su b je c ts T h e first p art o f th e q u e stio n n a ire is

co m p o sed o f 6 q u estio n s in th e m u ltip le c h o ic e ty p e w h ic h stu d e n ts w o u ld tic k (V) in