Learner autonomy as perceived by teachers and students at Nguyen Van Linh high school

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

------------------------------------------

TRAN THI MINH TRI

LEARNER AUTONOMY AS PERCEIVED BY TEACHERS AND

STUDENTS AT NGUYEN VAN LINH HIGH SCHOOL

Major: TEACHING ENGLISH TO SPEAKERS OF OTHER LANGUAGES

Major code: 60 14 01 11

MASTER OF ARTS IN TESOL

Supervisor: Dr. NGUYEN DINH THU

HO CHI MINH City, 2016

i

STATEMENT OF THE AUTHORSHIP

I certify that this thesis, entitled “Learner Autonomy as Perceived by Teachers and

Students at Nguyen Van Linh High School”, is my own work.

Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis contains no material published

elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which I have qualified for or been

awarded another degree or diploma.

No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the main text of the

thesis.

This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma in any other

tertiary institution.

Ho Chi Minh City, September, 2016

TRAN THI MINH TRI

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my deep gratitude to those who have greatly helped and

encouraged me to complete my research. Without their support, it would be very difficult for me to

complete this study. Accordingly, I would like to acknowledge with profound gratitude for the

significant contribution they made.

I would like to express my whole-hearted appreciation and deepest thanks to my

supervisor, Dr. Nguyen Dinh Thu for his enthusiastic help, and dedicated support during the time

of carrying out this research. From the starting point, he has guided and shaped my research

ideas, given me valuable advice and useful materials, especially valuable feedback on every draft

that I wrote. Without his help and guidance, I could not have completed my research paper.

In addition, I own a great debt to five of my colleagues and 133 grade twelfth students

for their contribution to the completion of data collection. Without their willingness, my research

could not have been accomplished.

I am also very glad to acknowledge with gratitude to all of the teachers who have raised me

up with their knowledge.

I am deeply grateful to my parents, sisters and friends for the love and encouragement

they gave me while I was doing my thesis. Especially, my special thanks also go to my husband for

his mental support and sharing of feelings.

iii

ABSTRACT

Learner autonomy has been considered the expected goal of learning and teaching.

The context of Vietnamese high schools, however, may hinder its development. The present study

aims to investigate what learner autonomy is perceived by 133 grade twelve students and five

English teachers at Nguyen Van Linh high school. In this research, questionnaires for students and

teachers are triangulated by interviews with 9 learners randomly invited and all of the teachers. The

findings suggest that either the students or their English teachers perceive that teachers should take

the most of the responsibilities in the classroom although they see that learners have some abilities

to decide many of the activities relating to their learning. Besides, the activities reported by these

two groups of participants show that the students conducted little autonomous learning in their last

semester. Understanding learner autonomy perception from the perspectives of learners and

teachers at high school contexts may assist EFL instructors in this context to achieve the ultimate

goal in teaching a foreign language.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF THE AUTHORSHIP.................................................................................. i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................................... ii

ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................... iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... iv

LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................... vii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................ viii

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................1

1. 1 Rationale of the study ............................................................................................................1

1. 2 Statement of the problem.......................................................................................................3

1. 3 Purposes of the study .............................................................................................................4

1. 4 Research questions.................................................................................................................4

1. 5 Significance of the study........................................................................................................5

1. 6 Limitations of the study .........................................................................................................6

1. 7 Overview of the chapters.......................................................................................................7

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................8

2. 1 Historical background of learner autonomy ..........................................................................8

2. 2 Definitions of learner autonomy ..........................................................................................11

2. 3 Learner autonomy in Asian contexts...................................................................................13

2. 4 Learner autonomy in Vietnam .............................................................................................16

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY........................................................................................22

3. 1 Site of research and Participants..........................................................................................22

3. 1. 1 Site of research...........................................................................................................22

3. 1. 2 Participants.................................................................................................................23

v

3. 2 Research design ...................................................................................................................25

3. 3 Data collection instruments..................................................................................................26

3. 3. 1 Questionnaires............................................................................................................26

3. 3. 2 Interviews ..................................................................................................................30

3. 4 Data collection procedure ....................................................................................................31

3. 5 Data analysis........................................................................................................................33

CHAPTER IV: RESULTS.......................................................................................................35

4. 1 Students’ and teachers’ perception of responsibility in language learning process.............35

4. 2 Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of abilities in language learning process................... 39

4. 3 Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of activities in language learning process ..................41

4. 4 Insights into learner autonomy perceived by the students and their teachers......................46

4.4.1 Responsibilities perceived by the students and their teachers....................................46

4.4.2 Abilities for learner autonomy perceived by the students and their teachers.............49

4.4.3 Last semester’s autonomous activities reported by the students and their teachers...50

CHAPTER V: DISCUSSIONS................................................................................................53

5.1 Twelfth graders at Nguyen Van Linh high school’s perceptions about learner autonomy in

terms of responsibilities, abilities and activities..................................................................53

5. 2 Twelfth graders’ English teachers at Nguyen Van Linh high school’s perceptions about

their learners’ autonomy in terms of responsibilities, abilities and activities.....................57

5. 3 Comparisons on learner autonomy perceived by twelfth graders and their English

teachers at Nguyen Van Linh high school...........................................................................60

CHAPTER VI: CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................64

6.1 Conclusions...........................................................................................................................64

6. 2 Pedagogical implications ..................................................................................................66

6. 3 Recommendations................................................................................................................67

REFERENCES..........................................................................................................................69

vi

APPENDICES...........................................................................................................................81

APPENDIX 1a: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

(ENGLISH VERSION) ...................................................................................81

APPENDIX 1b: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

(VIETNAMESE VERSION)...........................................................................84

APPENDIX 2a: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS

(ENGLISH VERSION) ...................................................................................87

APPENDIX 2b: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS

(VIETNAMESE VERSION)...........................................................................90

APPENDIX 3a: INTERVIEW FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

(ENGLISH VERSION) ...................................................................................92

APPENDIX 3b: INTERVIEW FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

(VIETNAMESE VERSION)...........................................................................93

APPENDIX 4a: INTERVIEW FOR HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS

(ENGLISH VERSION) ...................................................................................94

APPENDIX 4b: INTERVIEW FOR HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS

(VIETNAMESE VERSION)...........................................................................95

APPENDIX 5a: INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT WITH STUDENT 3

(ENGLISH VERSION) ...................................................................................96

APPENDIX 5b: INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT WITH STUDENT 3

(VIETNAMESE VERSION).........................................................................100

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Glenn’s (1992) table for sample size at ± 5% and ± 10% Precision Levels where

Confidence Level is 95% and p=0.5 .............................................................................23

Table 3.2: Sample details in terms of gender.................................................................................25

Table 3.3: Time Framework ..........................................................................................................34

Table 4.1: Students’ and teachers’ perception of responsibility in language learning ..................36

Table 4.2: Overall mean scores of the students and teachers of their perceived ability of

learners ....................................................................................................................... 39

Table 4.3: Independent Samples Test of Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of abilities............39

Table 4.4: Percentages of students’ and teachers’ perceptions of students’ abilities in terms of

each duty .....................................................................................................................40

Table 4.5: Percentages of students’ and teachers’ perceptions of students’ activities in terms of

each duty .......................................................................................................................42

Table 4.6: Independent Samples Test of Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of activities..........45

Table 4.7: Independent Samples Test of Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of asked the teacher

questions when they didn’t understand (item 17, section III) .....................................46

viii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

B.A: Bachelor of Arts

CRAPEL: Centre de Reserches et d’Applications en Langues

EFL: English as a Foreign Language

ESL: English as a Second Language

ILTP: Integrated Learner Training Programme

ITC: Information and Communication Technologies

LA: Language Acquisition or SLA: Second Language Acquisition

LMS: Learning Management System

TEFL: Teaching English as a Foreign Language

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Rationale of the study

In the past few decades, there has been a dramatic surge in the field of language teaching.

In traditional classes, where teachers try to tell their learners what to do for grasping knowledge

and how to apply such knowledge into their future, the power was consistent with teachers

(Estes, 2004). What teachers transfer; however, is limited but what students explore by

themselves is unlimited. Luckily, the new millennium provides them with new technology, with

which students can easily access information that teachers can not satisfy (Brown 2003). Diverse

student populations and learning styles in a mixed-ability class, where learners’ needs are in the

heart of the learning process (Dudley, 2016), require a revolutionary approach so that the

problems of the new century could be solved. A new model for those challenges known as

learner-centered teaching has been valued by many researchers (Brown, 2003; Estes, 2004). In

this kind of approach, learners do not passively receive knowledge any more but they are more

responsible for their own learning process (Brandes and Ginnis, 1996). They have to brainstorm

ideas and take advantages of their learning opportunities, rather than simply response to teachers

(Knowles, 1975). Then taking responsibility for their own learning and self-directing, which has

been defined as autonomy, seems to become the expected goal of teaching and learning

(Areglado 1996, cited in Benson and Huang 2008). This fact has been realized by numerous

researchers and educators (Holec 1981; Cotterall 1995; Zhe 2009; Joshi 2011); therefore, more

and more papers tend to explore issues related to learner autonomy worthwhile.

Holec (1981) was the pioneer in the field of learner autonomy. His work has been seen

as putting the starting point with the definition of leaner autonomy “the ability to take charge of

one’s own learning” (p.3). In his view, this “ability” is not inborn but acquired through a learning

process. Also, it should not be considered as a complete separation from teachers and other

students. In other words, learner autonomy is a term used for a cooperative learning environment

rather than an isolated learning, a learning process rather than an innate skill. Due to the

2

influential attribute, more researchers (Cotterall 1995; Benson and Huang 2008, Zhe 2009; Joshi

2011) have been attracted to different aspects of this issue from theories to practices.

To raise the importance of language learner autonomy, Ellis and Sinclair published a

book in 1989, which aims to help learners take the responsibility for their own learning due to

the following reasons. Firstly, they emphasize that when learners take control of their own

learning, their learning will be more effective due to the fact that they learn what they are ready

to learn. Secondly, they tend to conduct more learning outside the classroom, which helps

improve their language learning. Finally, learners can explore a wide range of learning strategies

to elect the most appropriate one for themselves that assists to organize and monitor their

learning effectively.

Among a great number of other research workers, Little (2007) emphasizes the

fundamental role of learner autonomy when stating that it can “move to the central of language

teaching theory and practice” (p.14). In his view, the growth of learner autonomy and the

development of language proficiency are closely connected. His idea has been supported by

many practical research papers. Dafei’s (2007) investigation of 129 non-English majors at a

teacher college in China showed the significant and positive connection between learner

autonomy and language proficiency. The analysis of the results from the questionnaires for

learner autonomy and the score of the participants indicated that when students were not

significantly different in their proficiency, their learner autonomy was not statistically different.

In other words, their language proficiency’s differences entail their autonomy’s differences.

Furthermore, Hrochová (2012) who investigated 75 secondary students’ out-of-class activities

(which are perceived as a signal of learner autonomy) and their school grade together with their

achievement perception pinpoints the strong and positive relationship. The correlation between

the level of learner autonomy and language proficiency of college students is reported to be

significant by Myartawan & Latief (2013). They selected 120 among 171 English-majored

students in their first semester at a state university in Indonesia for their study. Data were

gathered from available documents indicating the students’ English proficiency and two

questionnaires. The first questionnaire was used for determining behavioral intentions to do