Autonomy, new technologies and EAP (3)

Hiya,

the posts continue ... covering these two points:
1. Define autonomy;
2. Explore some of the major issues in defining autonomy;

if you prefer to download this post as a pdf - click here

Define Autonomy

Autonomy, judging from the quantity of publications, would appear to be of growing interest and importance to foreign/second language teachers and researchers (Click here for a list of recent publications and click here for a comprehensive list of publications relating to autonomy). Articles concerning autonomy have appeared in many journals such as System and ELT Journal. International conferences on autonomy have been organised e.g. Learner Autonomy, Teacher Autonomy: Future Directions at Nottingham University, April 1998; Autonomy 2000: The Independent Learning Associtaion Conferences). There is an international newsletter (Newsletter of the AILA Scientific Commission on Learner Autonomy) and an electronic discussion forum with over three hundred subscribers (AUTO-L).

Growing interest in autonomy should not be taken to mean that the concept of autonomy and promotion of learner autonomy are unproblematic (Benson and Voller, 1997: 1), nor should it be taken to mean that promoting learner autonomy has entered into mainstream language education practices (Little, 1999; 12). In fact, there is some debate as to whether autonomy has become central to pedagogical thinking or is a maginal interest. In addition, there is also debate as to whether autonomy has lost its radical edge and has become mainstream (and whether this is a good thing or not!)

Definitions

Henri Holec provided the first definition of learner autonomy in language teaching. He defined autonomy as the 'ability to take charge of one's own learning'. For Holec to take charge of one's own learning is to

‘…have, and to hold, the responsibility for all the decisions concerning all aspects of this learning, i.e.
determining the objectives;
defining the contents and progressions;
selecting methods and techniques to be used;
monitoring the procedure of acquisition properly speaking (rhythm, time, place, etc.
evaluating what has been acquired.
The autonomous learner is himself capable of making all these decisions concerning the learning with which he is or wishes to be involved.’
Holec, 1981: 3.

The importance of Holec's definition lies in his conception of learner autonomy as being an individual learner capacity to direct and control his/her learning. Although much has been written on autonomy since then, it is true to say that Holec’s definition remains the most cited and, indeed, most of the literature accepts Holec’s assumption that autonomy is an individual capacity to direct learning. Holec’s definition brings to light the importance of learners being able to manage their learning.

Over the years there have been a number of additions to Holec’s definition of autonomy. The three most notable additions are:

1. Dam (1995: 1) builds on Holec's definition by adding a social dimension to autonomy, claiming that autonomy also 'entails a capacity to act ... in co-operation with others, as a socially responsible person'.
2. Sheerin (1997: 57) and Littlewood (1997: 82) expand on Holec's definition of autonomy by claiming that the exercise of autonomy depends on both the learners' willingness or disposition and ability to do so.
3. Little (1991) has developed Holec's definition of management of learning by emphasising the importance of psychological and cognitive management of learning in determining the ability to learn autonomously.

The picture to emerge is that Holec’s definition (although basically uncontested) has expanded to include collaboration, willingness to take responsibility to manage learning, and an increased emphasis on the cognitive processes that support learning. However, there remains a number of issues around autonomy that remain unresolved.

Problems of Definitions

The literature on autonomy in language teaching can be characterised by widespread confusion at to the definition of autonomy.

There are two main problems:

1. confusion and profusion of terms (e.g. ‘autonomy’, ‘independence’, ‘empowerment’, and ‘self-directed learning’) demonstrates the complexity of issues involved in promoting autonomy.
2. autonomy can be understood as a ‘movement’ (Crabbe, 1999:3) which contains 'concepts in transition' (Benson & Voller, 1997: 12) therefore it is perhaps not surprising that there are different interpretations and versions of autonomy. This means that autonomy can be understood as a 'broad church' with many different ideological, practical, and pedagogical motivations for supporting learner autonomy. Although versions compete, there is general acceptance that autonomy is a multifaceted term open to multiple interpretations (see Sinclair, B. (2000). Learner autonomy: The next phase. In B. Sinclair, et al (Ed.), Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy: Future directions (15-23). London: Longman. and Oxford, R. L. (2003). Toward a more systematic model of L2 learner autonomy. In D. Palfreyman & R. C. Smith (Eds.), Learner autonomy across cultures: Language education perspectives (75-91). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan for more on incorporating versions of autonomy into a comprehensive multifaceted theory).

There is widespread agreement in the literature that terminology concerning autonomy is confusing. The confusion and profusion of terms can be seen as demonstrating the complexity of issues involved in promoting autonomy. Pemberton (1996: 1) outlines two terminological problems; firstly, a single term is understood in different ways; and secondly, two terms are used to mean the same thing. The major terminological problems concern the following terms: independence; autonomy; counsellor; self-direction, and empowerment. Each of these terms will be discussed briefly in the paragraphs below.

Although autonomy is the most used term in the literature its meaning has been interpreted differently by a number of writers. For Holec autonomy refers to 'the ability to take charge of one's own learning' (Holec, 1981:3) and self-direction refers to learning which takes place outside of the classroom context and learners exercise total responsibility over all aspects of learning. Dickinson (1987:11), on the other hand, inverts these terms so that autonomy refers to situations in which learners are responsible for all of the decisions concerning their learning (and the implementation of these decisions). Self-direction refers to learners' attitudes towards taking charge of their own learning. Although in close agreement with Holec on the definition of autonomy both Sheerin (1997) and Littlewood (1997) similarly claim that autonomy refers not only to the ability to take charge of one's own learning but also to the disposition (Sheerin, 1997: 57) or willingness (Littlewood, 1997: 82) of learners to do so.

Independence appears in the literature as a synonym of autonomy (Farmer, 1994; Sheerin, 1997), as an ideological construct of freedom from constraints (Sturtridge, 1999), as a stage in becoming autonomous (Gardner and Miller, 1999:8), and, finally, as an isolated mode of study (Tudor, 1996: 27). It should be clear that despite justified criticisms of definitions of autonomy, independence as an alternative suffers from at least as much confusion.

Learner centredness is perceived as leading to learner empowerment not autonomy (Tudor (1996). Autonomy is 'avoided because of the ambiguities which surround its use in the literature' (Tudor, 1996: 27). Tudor defines empowerment as follows;

'Learner empowerment is the result and practical realisation of language education. It relates to learners ability to assume an active and informed role in their language study and, ultimately, to pursue those of their life-goals which pertain to language use and learning in a self-directed manner.'
Tudor, 1996: 28.

The definition he gives of empowerment could easily be given to autonomy. It is difficult to see what advantages and clarifications there are in adopting the term empowerment rather than autonomy.

Terminological confusion manifests itself in an acute manner concerning the role(s) of teachers in fostering autonomy. Fostering learner autonomy involves reconsidering the roles of both learners and teachers. Part of the attempts to capture the new roles of teachers has involved renaming 'teacher' in order to find a term which more closely resembles the skills, attitudes and roles which teachers need to adopt in order to foster learner autonomy. In the literature one can find a number of competing terms for teacher each of which carries (slightly) different visions of the roles of teachers:
'facilitator' (Brookfield, 1986; Knowles, 1975; Sheerin, 1991; Hammond and Collins, 1991), 'animator' (Boud and Miller, 1998),
'co-ordinator' (Nunan, 1989),
'helper' (Tough, 1971; Dickinson, 1987; Strutridge, 1982),
'advisor' (Strutridge, 1992),
and 'counsellor' (Riley, 1997; Gardner and Miller, 1999, Kelly, 1996; Tudor, 1993; Bloor and Bloor, 1988).
'model', 'mentor', 'consultant', and 'guide' as examples of new terms for teachers given by Voller (1997: 99).

The most common term in the literature is counsellor. The term counsellor presents a number of problems. In the literature counselling (and learner training) objectives are to 'decondition' learners (Ma 1994: 142), to 'make them adopt different behaviour and shift attitudes towards language learning' (Abé, 1994: 109), within the context of a 'therapeutic dialogue ... that enables an individual to manage a problem' (Kelly, 1996: 94). Counselling would appear to redefine teachers' roles in a confused manner in that the adoption of the terms 'deconditioning' and 'therapeutic dialogue' come from very different psychological schools. Conditioning is a widely used term in Pavlovian behaviourism involving deliberate and systematic attempts to control aspects of human behaviour. This implies an attempt on the part of the counsellor to make learners unlearn certain attitudes and aspects of their behaviour towards learning. Therapeutic dialogue belongs very much to the Rogerean humanistic psychology tradition. Given the very different views of behaviourism and Rogerean therapy it is very difficult to imagine how they could be coherently and usefully combined.

Crabbe (1999:3) describes autonomy as a 'movement' and as a 'flag for change' (Crabbe, 1999:6). If autonomy is understood as a broad movement which contains 'concepts in transition' (Benson and Voller, 1997: 12) then it is perhaps not surprising - though unfortunate - that there have been different interpretations of the same terms and different terms used to express the same concepts.
I have referred to a wide range of sources so far. I haven’t referenced them all– you can get the full references from:
http://www.autonomybibliography.info/

Autonomy, new technologies and EAP. Introduction (2)

The first topic we're going to examine in this module is the relationship between autonomy, new technologies and EAP. This might appear a strange way to begin the module. So, perhaps a little explanation is in order. (If you prefer to download this post rather than screen read click here)
There are a number of reason why I have chosen to start with autonomy. Firstly, (see Motteram, 1997 for more on this) there has always been a preceived link between the use of new technologies for language learning and autonomy:

New educational technologies are often perceived simultaneously as both a promise and a threat. The new technologies of language learning have tended to latch on to autonomy as one justification for their existence. Computer software for language learning is an example of a technology which claims to promote autonomy simply by offering the possibility of self-study. Such claims are often dubious, because of the limited range of options and roles offered to the learner. Nevertheless, technologies of education in the broadest sense (from the textbook to the computer) can be considered to be either more or less supportive of autonomy.
Benson and Voller (1997: 10)

What is interesting in the literature is the ambiguity regarding whether the use of technology develops autonomy in learners or whether learners have to have developed their autonomy in order to be able to use and exploit new technologies effectively.

The second reason for starting with autonomy is that the use of new technologies in EAP requires some kind of meta-reason for its use. By this I mean there has to be some underlying reason or reasons for the use of any tool, text, methodology, technology, assessment (the list could go on!) in teaching EAP. Our beliefs, attitudes, knowledge, ideologies, experiences, roles, and identities (for example) define our approach to teaching and inform the choices we make as teachers and learners (and for our students). Pedagogies for autonomy offers, I believe, strong theoretical foundations for teaching EAP, the use of technologies in EAP and also for evaluating the effectiveness of technologies in EAP. We could have started with SLA as providing foundational reasons for analysing the use of technologies (we will be looking at this later on the module) however, I think SLA provides only partial support for the use of particular technologies in EAP.

The third reason is that EAP has always been closely associated with critical thinking (the development of generic and transferable intellectual skills and dispositions). Autonomy too has long been associated with critical thinking (in terms of developing metacognitive strategies for example) and it could be argued that the key objective in teaching EAP is to develop, foster, model, promote (choose the verb you prefer!) student autonomy.

This topic is organised as follows:

1. Define autonomy;
2. Explore some of the major issues in defining autonomy;
3. Investigate ways of promoting student autonomy;
4. Develop an understanding of the relationship between autonomy and new technologies;
5. Analyse the theoretical arguments that promote the use of new technologies to facilitate student autonomy;
6. Look at three types of technology and the ways in which these technologies support autonomy
a. Asynchronous Communication
b. Synchronous Communication
c. The World Wide Web;
7. Assess the obstacles to promoting student autonomy using new technology from two perspectives
a. Students
b. Teachers;
8. Develop a tutor profile to promote student autonomy in on-line environments;
9. Examine ways in which on-line environments can be evaluated in terms of supporting students’ autonomy,
10. and critically examine some of the most popular EAP websites

The next post will look at definitions.
Alex

EAP, Autonomy and new technologies (1)

Hiya,
thanks to everyone who has posted a profile. Very interesting and such varied international backgrounds and experience!
This afternoon [apologies ... tomorrow afternoon] I will start posting materials related to EAP, autonomy and new technologies. Keep an eye out for posts this week - as there'll be one or two a day.
You might be thinking about why I've chosen this as the first topic ... all will be revealed this afternoon.
Hope you're all well.
Alex

Hi from Julie

Hi everyone,

Most of you know me, but for those of you who don't, I'm Julie and I teach on 3 of the 4 modules of the PGCTEAP.

I am not very technology minded (as you can probably tell) and the only photo I have is of me and a friend on the beach at Robin Hood's Bay (taken 2 weeks ago) - I'm the one on the right, if that helps.

I have taught EAP for a long time now, both here at Nottingham and previously at Durham University - and I think I finally understand what it is we are supposed to be doing! I am largely responsible for the Presessional and Insessional programmes here at CELE, and I am also very interested in teacher training in EAP - hence my involvement in this PGCTEAP.

I was a member of the working party that produced the BALEAP Competency Framework for Teachers of English for Academic Purposes - this was the first attempt anyone had ever made at writing down exactly what it is that we EAP teachers actually do - a must read for anyone therefore on this course!

I am also a senior IELTS examiner and have responsibility for the Speaking Exam - mainly in terms of the production of standardisation materials for examiner training and examiner recertification and any changes to the assessment criteria.

My PhD was in lecture discourse (a good read for insomniacs) - but I am also very interested in metaphor and EAP, academic speaking, academic vocabulary and assessment.

That's about it really. As for spare time (what spare time??), I like watching odd foreign films, eating lentils, doing yoga and getting Alex to buy me cups of coffee

Hi all,

Sorry that I'm a bit tardy in getting this out- have just spent 4 soggy days in a field in Shropshire. The bliss of an English summer!

Actually, it's been quite good to read the other posts first to put myself a bit more in the picture. Am I right in thinking that all of you teach at/ have taught at CELE?

Enough sidetracking: a ramble through my past....

I spent most my twenties and early thirties in various EFL jobs in Spain, the UK and Italy, plus a year's voluntary work in Indonesia (Klaus, I'm fascinated by your SE Asian connections).

Mid-thirties moved to the Midlands with my partner- I did an MA in Language and Lexicography at Birmingham University and started to have children. The twins put paid to any serious thought of pursuing the interest in dictionaries further!

Whilst the children were tiny I did some part-time literacy and ESOL work in local prisons, but was then offered term-time EAP teaching at Harper Adams University College, an agricultural college in Shropshire. The college has a joint programme with Beijing College of Agriculture and I work predominantly with Chinese undergraduates teaching subject specific EAP. I enjoy the work hugely, recently visited Beijing for the first time and am rapidly becoming in thrall to the country's complexities- language, history, possible future developments (and food, of course).

My reasons for doing the PGCTEAP....whilst I enjoy my work greatly, I feel as though I'm operating in a vacuum in terms of the ideas and theory of EAP and also have little contact with a wider EAP community. Basically, I'm sure I could be doing this all so much better if I could engage with it at a deeper level! I'm very excited at the prospect of studying with the rest of you, but, like Anne feel it will be a steep learning curve in some areas and a great deal of hard work. Onwards and upwards, eh?

Spare time and hobbies- not much of it with 3 small children, but growing vegetables (great pumpkin, Alex!), cycling and reading help restore the equilibrium.

Hi there!

Hi everyone!

Many of you already know me a little, but to introduce myself properly, I might have to go back to my life before English teaching.

I was born in Cologne, Germany and partly grew up in Belgium. I have lived, learned and worked in eight different countries in Europe and Asia.

My educational background has nothing to do with ELT.
I studied at the Universiy of Bonn in Germany and got my "Vordiplom" (about the equvialent to a BA) in Translation for Korean and Indonesian. I still wonder how I mananged to pull this off, as my Korean was rather poor and has by now, safe for a few phrases, entirely vanished from my memory.
I then proceeded to study towards and graduate with a "Diplom" (i.e. MA) in Southeast Asian Studies with a focus on poverty alleviation (I also wrote my thesis on that).
During my studies, I spent some time in China working at the German School in Shanghai, tutoring Chinese children in German - a thoroughly enjoyable and rewarding experience.

After graduation, I moved to first Singapore and later Thailand to work in strategic planning and project development, often with colleges, ministries and universities. All this led to myself and some friends registering a non-profit organisation in Thailand to provide a variety of training programmes for those who felt they needed advice. In the course of those activities it became clear that there was an incredible demand for English language training programmes. It was this demand that had me get some training myself to become an EFL teacher.

Much later, wanderlust caught up with me and led me to Portugal, where I worked as an English teacher for two years before joining CELE here in Nottingham in July 2008, where I have so far worked on both the General and Academic English programmes.

In my free time, I enjoy cooking, music and reading and writing speculative fiction, which I occasionally manage to get published. I love languages and speak a few, some better, some only in a very rudimentary way. But I guess it helps me understand some issues learners experience while trying to become proficient in a foreign language.

hello from Anne

Hi there! Most of you know quite a bit about me, but for Sarah's sake I'm the one on the left. I don't have many photos of myself, but this is the most recent with my twin sister. My working life seems scarily long now as I try to write a potted history! I started out as a primary school teacher with responsibility for music, having studied geography. When I got married and moved to Scotland I did various jobs (and got some training) in outdoor education - from countryside ranger to outdoor pursuits instructor - before moving into TEFL in 1991.

Most of my life since then has been spent in China (13 years) teaching and working with Chinese teachers in teacher training colleges and I returned from there just one year ago to start working at CELE on presessional courses where I've taught a variety of modules at 3 different levels in an attempt to get a feel for the whole scope of EAP input here. I've also taught in Thailand, Macedonia, Edinburgh and Hastings for a range of organisations.

Much of my work in China was focussed on modelling good practice to Chinese colleagues for whom the communicative approach was new and thought to be unworkable in classes of 30 to 60 students, and where integration of skills and language knowledge was rare. Equally important was building confidence and self-esteem amongst students and teachers working in very difficult circumstances.

The longer I teach, the more I realise there is to learn about language teaching and learning, and the last year has proved to be a particularly steep learning curve - one which I'm still on! I am particularly interested in pronunciation, teacher development and teacher training; I'm terrified of technology, and scared of academic study after years away from it, but determined to face my fears. I hope to reach the end of the PGCTEAP able to say, "It was tough, but well worth the effort."

Interests outside work: I enjoy photography, music, badminton and swimming, and most things Chinese (especially the food and the language). As a Christian, living out my faith is very important to me. I hope that doesn't put you all off and promise not to ram it down your throats.