Task 1

In the context of language learning, learner autonomy consists of the capacity to take control of one's own learning. It may take a variety of forms according to the stage of learning that one is at. However, the basic premise is that, if students have a stake in their language learning and can decide for themselves what they need to learn and how they would like to learn it, the language learning itself is likely to be more personalized and more successful.

Holec (1988) was one of the first people to write about learner autonomy in language learning. For him, the ideal learning situation is one where the student takes charge of his or her own learning, and is responsible for:

• determining the objectives of the programme;
• defining the content and progressions;
• selecting methods and techniques to be used;
• monitoring the procedure of acquisition;
• evaluating what has been acquired.

Clearly, in many language-learning contexts, this is a little too ambitious. A more useful way of perceiving autonomy is as the capacity to take charge of one's own learning. Ideally, a student should be able to approach a language learning situation with a clear idea of what he or she wants to learn, and of how he or she best goes about learning. When this is the case, that student is likely to make the most of the learning situation, attending to those aspects that seem to be the most useful, and making a greater effort to learn. This makes the student a key agent in the learning process, as opposed to an empty vessel, into which information is poured. Such an approach is likely to result in deeper learning.

This view is expressed succinctly by David Little, one of the most prominent researchers into learner autonomy. He describes learner autonomy as:

A capacity for detachment, critical reflection, and independent action. It presupposes that the learner will develop a strong psychological relationship with the process and content of his/her learning. (Little, 1991: 2).

What is particularly interesting about Little's perspective is his view of what learner autonomy is not:

• It is not the same as self-instruction, i.e. it does not involve working without a tutor.
• It is not an excuse for the tutor to relinquish all control in the classroom.
• It is not a new methodology.
• It is not a steady state.
• It is not a single, easily described behaviour.

Little also makes the point that learner autonomy is something that can only be acquired through practice (Little, 2000: 4). Language learners cannot simply be 'told' by the tutor to be autonomous but need to be presented with opportunities to develop their own autonomy. In this module, we will be looking at some of the ways in which this can be done.

It must be borne in mind that different degrees are suitable for different situations, and that tutors should add and withdraw layers of support as and when they are necessary (Page, 1992: 2). According to Benson (2001: 79-103), learner autonomy involves three interdependent levels of control. For him effective learning requires that the student has some degree of control over:

• the psychology of learning;
• learning behaviour;
• the learning situation.

When he talks about the psychology of learning, he is referring to the cognitive processes, or strategies, involved in learning. These include strategies that students use to help them understand and remember aspects of the language being learned. They are discussed in more depth in section 12.2. For a student to exert control over these processes or strategies he or she must be aware of what they are, which ones are most applicable to which aspects of learning, and which ones he or she tends to favour because of his or her learning style (see 12.3).

Control over learning behaviour refers to students' ability to manage their own learning process. In other words, students should be able to decide how much time they need to devote to their learning each week, and how they are going to learn (by writing essays, learning vocabulary, listening to tape recordings, and so on).

Having control over the learning situation means making decisions concerning the content of the course and prioritizing those aspects of the language that students feel to be most important. For example, one student may want to increase conversational fluency, whereas another may prefer to concentrate on grammar and course-related vocabulary, with a view to writing essays in the target language.

Although there are some clear overlaps between Benson's levels of control, his categorization is useful in that it highlights the three main areas in which autonomy can be exercised.

The amount of control that a student is able and/or is allowed to exercise will obviously vary according to his or her language-learning situation. For example, school students who are working towards a national exam will have very little control over the learning situation, but should, in theory, be able to exert some control over their psychology of learning and learning behaviour. However, lack of knowledge about their own language learning processes may limit their ability to do so. A tutor can do much to empower such students by encouraging them to discuss their learning goals, approaches to learning and ways of managing the learning process. In order to do so, he or she would need to introduce them to concepts such as language learning strategies (12.2) and learning styles (12.3). University students, on the other hand, may be in a position to exert more control over the learning situation. One might envisage situations where they are able to collaborate with their course tutor in order to set some of the course goals, therefore influencing course content and mode of delivery. Before they can do this, learner training may well be required to alert learners to the various possibilities that are available to them, and the rationale behind the teaching methods adopted.

Finally, it is important to mention that different types of learner autonomy are likely to be appropriate in different cultural contexts (Sinclair, 2000: 14). For example, Littlewood (1999: 89) suggests that, for cultural reasons, East Asian learners are more likely to see themselves as interdependent with other students. This means that they may well have a strong inclination to work in groups and work towards common goals. Such students are perhaps more likely than their western counterparts to develop a certain 'group autonomy' in which the students devise appropriate goals and working methods for the group as a whole. Littlewood's suggestions have received support from Hart (2002: 40), who found that his Japanese learners responded particularly well to a group task in which they were asked to use Internet-based resources to prepare poster presentations on a chosen topic.