7/29/2019 08_ELTJ_keyconcept

1/3

k e y c o n c e pt s i n e l t

Learner autonomyRichard Smith

The idea of learner autonomy is not new, but it has been widely referredto inthe field ofELT only over the last decade. Previously, terms referring moredirectly to practical interventions or situationsof learning were morefavoured within ELT: individualization, then learner independence forexample. One sign of the shift to learner autonomy as a preferred term hasbeen the recent name change of the IATEFL Learner IndependenceSpecial Interest Group (SIG) to Learner Autonomy SIG.

Imported originally from the fields of politics and moral philosophy,autonomy is a multifaceted conceptwhose meaning has been discussedinthespecialist language learning literaturefrommany perspectives andin anincreasingly academic fashion (see Benson2001, 2007 foroverviews).HereI take a few relatively standard definitions at face value and highlight theirpractical provenance and significance both as a way in to the specialistliterature and as a kind of antidote to its developing theology.

Though seemingly abstract, the notion of learner autonomy was first

developed out of practicethat of teacher-researchers at the Centre deRecherches et dApplications Pedagogiques en Langues (CRAPEL),University of Nancy, France, in the early 1970s. According to the formerDirector ofCRAPEL, Henri Holec (personal communication), the need fora term to describe peoples abilityto take charge of their own learning (forthis is how he and his colleaguescameto conceptualize learner autonomy:see Holec 1979/1981) arose for practical, though idealistic reasons. In theinterests of widening access to education and promoting lifelong learning,CRAPEL began to offer adultstheopportunity to learn a foreignlanguage ina resources centre, free from teacher direction. However, it soon becameclear that participants did not necessarilyinitially, at leasthave the fullcapacity(competence) to take charge of decision-making in all the areas

normally determined by an institution, teacher, or textbook, namely:n objectivesn contents (including materials)n stages (syllabus)n methods and techniquesn pace, time, and placen evaluation procedures.

CRAPEL put in place various kinds of support measures, including learnercounselling and training, to assist in the autonomization processthe

ELT Journal Volume 62/4 October 2008; doi:10.1093/elt/ccn038 395 The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.

a

tSendaDelReyLibonJuly23,2012

http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/

Downloadedfrom

7/29/2019 08_ELTJ_keyconcept

2/3

development of learners abilities to work more effectively in a self-directedfashion.

Holecs distinction between a desirable learning situation or behaviour(self-directed learning) and the capacityfor such learning (learner autonomy)has been generally accepted in the specialist literature (as summarized inBenson 2001, 2007; see also Little 1991). This distinction enables us to seethat learner autonomy may only be involved in arrangements which areoften associated with the termCALL, self-access, and distance learning,for exampleto the extent that decision-making in the areas identified byHolec (above) is genuinely in the hands of the learner. Additionally, suchforms of learning may requirethe exercise of autonomy, but they do notnecessarily develop this capacity.

This highlights an important continuing role for teachers in promoting thepsychological attributes and practical abilities involved in learner autonomyand in engaging students existing autonomy within classroom practice(see Benson2001,for a usefuloverview ofdifferent pedagogical approaches,and Dam 1995, for an account of innovative classroom practice). Indeed,a belief in the value ofinterdependent learning in classrooms andbeyondcombined with a desire to counter prevalent individualisticinterpretations of the notion of autonomyled leading practitioners todevelop the so-called Bergen definition. This views learner autonomy asa capacity and willingness to act independently andin cooperation withothers, as a social, responsible person (Dam et al. 1990: 102).

There persists a tension, however, between pedagogical approaches whichconstrue autonomy primarily as something learners lack and so need to betrained towards and those which take as a starting point the idea thatlearnersof whatever background cultureare already able, at least tosome degree, to exercise control over their own learning (Smith 2003).Supportive engagementof learners existing autonomy (by the teacher) can beseen as an important basis for its progressive development; indeed, thenotion that learners have the power and right to learn for themselves is seenby many proponents as a fundamental tenet. On the other hand, learnertraining and other approaches which attempt to fit learners intopreconceived models of the ideal autonomous learner may lend support tothe criticism that autonomy is a western concept inappropriate for non-western students (ibid.).

However, as Little (1991) has emphasized, learner autonomy is nota particular method, nor need it be conflated with individualism. From this

perspective, the exercise and development of learner autonomy can be seenas an educational goalwhich is cross-culturally valideventhoughworkingwith it as a guiding concept requires different forms of pedagogy andmeets with different kinds of constraint according to context (Palfreymanand Smith 2003; Barfield and Brown 2007).

References

Barfield, A. and S. Brown. (eds.). 2007.Reconstructing Autonomy in Language Education:Inquiry and Innovation. Basingstoke: PalgraveMacmillan.

Benson, P. 2001. Teaching and Researching Autonomyin Language Learning. Harlow: Longman.Benson, P. 2007. Autonomy in language teachingand learning. Language Teaching40: 2140.

396 Richard Smith

a

tSendaDelReyLibonJuly23,2012

http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/

Downloadedfrom

7/29/2019 08_ELTJ_keyconcept

3/3

Dam, L. 1995. Learner Autonomy 3: From Theory toClassroom Practice. Dublin: Authentik.Dam, L., R. Eriksson, D. Little, J. Miliander, and

T. Trebbi. 1990. Towards a definition of autonomyin T. Trebbi (ed.). Third Nordic Workshop onDeveloping Autonomous Learning in the FL Classroom.Bergen: University of Bergen. http://www.warwick.ac.uk/go/dahla/archive/trebbi_1990.Holec, H. 1979/1981. Autonomie et apprentissage deslangues etrange`res. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.(English translation published in 1981 as Autonomyin Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.).Little, D. 1991. Learner Autonomy 1: Definitions, Issuesand Problems. Dublin: Authentik.

Palfreyman, D. and R. C. Smith. (eds.). 2003. LearnerAutonomy across Cultures: Language EducationPerspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Smith, R. C. 2003. Pedagogy for autonomy as(becoming-)appropriate methodology inD. Palfreyman and R. C. Smith (eds.).

The author

Richard Smith is an associate professor ofELT/Applied Linguistics at the University of Warwick. Hemainly researches in the field of history of languageteaching and also has professional and researchinterestsin theareasof autonomy-oriented pedagogy,teacher education, and ELT capacity building.Email: R.C.Smith@warwick.ac.uk

Learner autonomy 397

a

tSendaDelReyLibonJuly23,2012

http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/

Downloadedfrom