Learner autonomy

Definition

What is Learner Autonomy?

Learner autonomy, the term was first coined in 1981 by Henri Holec, the "father" of learner autonomy. Many definitions have since been given to the term, depending on the writer, the context and the level of debate, educators have come to. It has been considered as a personal human trait, as a political measure or as an educational move. This is due to the fact that autonomy is seen either (or both) as a means or as an end in education.

For a definition of autonomy, Dimitrios Thanasoulas quotes Holec (1981: 3, cited in Benson & Voller, 1997: 1) who describes it as 'the ability to take charge of one's learning'. On a general note, the term autonomy has come to be used in at least five ways (see Benson & Voller, 1997: 2):

for situations in which learners study entirely on their own;
for a set of skills which can be learned and applied in self-directed learning;
for an inborn capacity which is suppressed by institutional education;
for the exercise of learners' responsibility for their own learning;
for the right of learners to determine the direction of their own learning.

See also self-regulation and self-regulated learning

Students take responsibility for their learning and work in partnership with tutors and other students. It involves risk taking by all concerned. Learner Autonomy is about learning to learn and developing assessment for learning (seelearner assessment). Students reflect on their experiences and are able to create their own meanings and challenge ideas/theories. It requires tutors to trust students' abilities and to promote the use of student-directed learning.

Characteristics of an autonomous learner include

Critical reflection and thinking
Self-awareness
Taking responsibility for own learning
Working creatively with complex situations
The ability to create own meanings and challenge ideas/theories.

Learner Autonomy Video. It is hard to define what Learner Autonomy is in words so the researchers in Sheffield Hallam University have interviewed members of their CETL team and asked them what Learner Autonomy means to them.

what caracterise autonomous learners?

Rousseau ([1762] 1911, cited in Candy, 1991: 102) regards the autonomous learner as someone who 'is obedient to a law that he prescribes to himself'. Within the context of education, though, there seem to be seven main attributes characterising autonomous learners (see Omaggio, 1978, cited in Wenden, 1998: 41-42):

Autonomous learners have insights into their learning styles and strategies;
take an active approach to the learning task at hand;
are willing to take risks;
are good guessers;
attend to form as well as to content, that is, place importance on accuracy as well as appropriacy;
develop the target language into a separate reference system and are willing to revise and reject hypotheses and rules that do not apply; and
have a tolerant and outgoing approach to the target language.

Related concepts

Many terms have been coined to refer to a concept to which we referred to as learner autonomy. Practically, all these synonymous terms such as learner independence, self-access learning, self-paced learning and distant learning emphasize a shift of attention to learner-oriented approach to language learning. In this approach, learners take the responsibility of their own learning, learn at their own pace and use their own strategies. According to the (CIEL Handbook, 2000, p. 5): “Learner autonomy indicates a number of dimensions in which learners move away from dependence on the teacher and:

Take responsibility for their own learning and learn to learn;

Develop key transferable skills (e.g., study, time-management, IT, interpersonal skills etc.);

Actively manage their learning; seeking out learning opportunities and using appropriate learning strategies;

Involve themselves in an interactive process in which they set short and long term learning objectives, reflect on and evaluate progress.”

In addition, autonomy for the language learners has been described as “a process that enables learners to recognize and assess their own needs, to choose and apply their own learning strategies or styles eventually leading to the effective management of learning” (Penaflorida 2002, p. 346).

MSLQ

MSLQ (the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire)

a self-report Likert-scaled instrument designed to assess the motivational orientation and learning strategy use of college students and based on a social-cognitive view, has been under development since 1986 at the National Center for Research on Improving Postsecondary Teaching and Learning at the University of Michigan. Pilot testing resulted in refinements incorporated into a final version of the MSLQ designed to be given in class in 20 to 30 minutes. To test the utility of the theoretical model and its operationalization, MSLQ responses were gathered from 380 midwestern college students over 14 subjects and 5 disciplines. Results suggest that the MSLQ has relatively good reliability, and confirmatory factor analysis supports the validity of the general theoretical framework and the scales that measure it. Three general factors of student motivation are identified. In addition, the predictive validity seems reasonably good. The MSLQ seems to be a useful, reliable, and valid way to assess motivation and learning strategies in the classroom.
The motivation scales tap in consist of three broad areas:

value(intrinsic and extrinsic goal orientation, task value)
expectancy (control beliefs about learning, self-efficacay)
affect (test anxiety)

The learning strategies sections consist of nice scales which can be distinguished as cognitive, metacognitive, and resource management strategies:

cognitive strategies: rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical thinking
metacognitive strategies: planning, monitoring, and regulating
resource management: managing time and study environment, effort management, managing time and study environment, help-seeking

MSLQ in on-line learning environment

As an instrument designed to ascertain classroom self-regulation skills, MSLQ has limitations to assess online self-regulated learning . Because the instrument was design to reflect self-regulation in traditional classrooms, it does not relate well to online self-regulated strategies. Whip and Chiarelli (2004) found that students’ online and face-to-face learning strategies are different. Researchers have been carrying on a research in University of Missouri. They intend to predict what extent each MSLQ factor predicts students’ achievements and they will identify each MSLQ factor’s internal validity. This study is a preliminary step to developing an online self-regulated learning instrument-under construction.