LANGUAGE LEARNER AUTONOMY

AND LANGUAGE LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES

INSIDE AND OUTSIDE CLASSROOM

Hoang Nguyen Thu Trang*

VNU University of Languages and International Studies,
Pham Van Dong, Cau Giay, Hanoi, Vietnam

Received 19 April 2019

Revised 30 May 2019; Accepted 3 June 2019

Abstract: This study aims at investigating the degree of control that non-English major first-year
students exercise over their learning processes, resources and contexts in and out of the classroom. Data
were obtained from questionnaires with 63 students, 30-to-60-minute interviews with three students, and
the researcher’s notes of her observation during classroom lessons. The results from quantitative analysis
for Mean and frequency and content analysis for emerging themes of the data reveal variation among
the learners and withing each learner regarding the degree of their control over their language learning
processes and resources in different contexts of learning and using the language. This suggests the need of
helping learners to create learning opportunities both inside and outside the classrooms.
Keywords: autonomy, language learning processes, resources, contexts

1. Introduction 1
In practice, teaching a “new” honor
programme, in which the language learners of
Theoretically speaking, learner autonomy
whatever language level are expected to show
has been a “hot” topic since the appearance
their high employability to difficult employers
of learner centered approach in second
when graduating from university. This means
language acquisition. Recently, scholars
that in order to be competitive in the severe
such as Palfreyman and Smith (2003),
job markets for big-salary positions, the
Benson (1997, 2003), Benson, Chik and
learners must have the ability to self-direct
Lim (2003), Norton (1995), Norton and
and control their own learning processes,
Toohey (2002), Toohey and Norton (2003)
i.e. they must show a high level of “learner
appear to shift their focuses from technical
autonomy” (Holec, 1981: 3).
and psychological aspects onto the cultural,
social and political aspects of this concept.
2. Literature review
However, there are still quite few studies
investigating the changes in learners’ levels Learner autonomy is also termed as
of autonomy across learning contexts. This “learner independence”, “self-direction”,
research is a modest attempt to fill in this gap. “autonomous learning” or “independent
learning” (Palfreyman & Smith, 2003: 3). For
those who follow a learner-centered approach
*
Tel.: 84-985526828
to language learning, the term “autonomy”,
Email: tranghnpearl@[Link]
188 [Link]/ VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200

originating in the late 1970s in the West (Lewis Technically, autonomy is used “for
& Vialleton, 2011: 206), is synonymous to situations in which learners study entirely on
“independence” (Palfreyman & Smith, 2003: their own” (Benson & Voller, 1997, 1-2); it
4). For others (e.g. Boud, 1981; Brookfield, refers to “the situation in which the learner is
1986) who take the sociocultural viewpoints totally responsible for the decisions concerned
inspired by Vygotsky (1978) highlight with his/her learning and the implementation
the collaboration of language learners in of these decisions” (Dickinson, 1987: 11,
their learning process for mutual benefits quoted in Oxford, 2003: 81). This can be seen
by suggesting the term “interdependence” in the introduction of Farivar and Rahimi’s
instead (Palfreyman & Smith, 2003: 4). (2015) study about Computer Assisted
Nevertheless, emphasizing the social aspect Language Learning which helps to develop
of language learning, researchers like Norton learner autonomy among Iranian students. In
(1995), Toohey and Norton (2003) prefer the traditional classroom conditions, in order to
term “agency” to “autonomy” to show that nurture learners’ autonomy, Nguyễn Thị Hằng
language learners’ investment is part of their Nga and Nguyễn Ngọc Toàn’s (2017) help 30
self-defining. learners build their intrinsic motivation by
letting them choose the topics and develop
Accordingly, there are three broad their own presentations. These two researchers
ways of talking about learner autonomy and Nguyễn Thị Hợp (2018) also introduce
in language education: (1) a ‘technical’ the economic concept of goal management to
perspective, emphasizing skills or strategies a writing class of 21 second-year non-English
for unsupervised learning: specific major learners. The result of their study
kinds of activity or process such as the reveals that by specifying the learning goal of
‘metacognitive’, ‘cognitive’, ‘social’ and each language lesson, the teacher can reduce
other strategies identified by Oxford (1990); the learning stress, create a favourable and
(2) a ‘psychological’ perspective, emphasizing active learning environment and help learners
broader attitudes and cognitive abilities which build their goal management skills. Thus,
enable the learner to take responsibility for the teacher plays a vital role in creating the
his/her own learning; and (3) a ‘political’ physical learning conditions which promote
perspective, emphasizing empowerment or learners’ initiation and responsibilities for
emancipation of learners by giving them their own language learning. However, such
control over the content and processes of their abilities are more thoroughly analysed in the
learning” (Benson, 1997, cited in Palfreyman psychological field.
& Smith, 2003: 3). Similarly, Oxford (2003) Psychologically, autonomy refers to “a
proposes a model of learner autonomy set of skills which can be learned and applied
consisting of four perspectives, namely in self-directed learning” (Benson & Voller,
technical perspective focussing on the physical 1997). “Autonomous learners are cast in a new
situation; psychological perspective focussing perspective, have a capacity for detachment,
on characteristics of learners; sociocultural critical reflection, and decision-making,
perspective focussing on mediated learning; take independent actions and are expected
and political-critical perspective focussing on to assume greater responsibility for and take
ideologies, access, and power structures (pp. charge of their own learning” (Little, 1991:
76-80). 4, cited in Xhaferi & Xhaferi, 2011: 150).
VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200 189

That is, they are well aware of their learning While psychological perspectives
styles and strategies, adventurous, tolerant focus on individual learners, “sociocultural
of ambiguity, and outgoing (Thanasoulas, perspectives on learner autonomy focus on
2000, cited in Xhaferi & Xhaferi, 2011: 150). mediated learning” (Oxford, 2003: 85). For
In other words, autonomy refers to learners’ instance, Ismail and Yosof’s (2012) study on
capacity to self-plan, monitor and self- the use of language learning contracts among
evaluate their language learning (Benson, 141 first year English as a second language
2001: 47; Benson, 2003: 290; Nunan, 2003: learners highlights the social support in such
194; Sinclair, 2000). For instance, a study by classroom tasks in creating “a multiplier effect
Ceylan (2015) shows that the more strategies especially on fledgling autonomous learners”
the students employ, the more autonomous (p. 478). Similarly, Benson, Chik and Lim
they might become as they start to shoulder (2003) see autonomy as a sociocultural
the responsibility of their own learning process through the stories of two successful
process. Specifically, Xhaferi & Xhaferi English learners in Asia. These authors argue
(2011) identify such common autonomy- that taking culture into consideration, the
development techniques used by teachers and concept of autonomy should be understood
students of higher education in Macedonia as as ‘autonomous interdependence’ since the
portfolios and learner diaries. Similarly, the language learning process is shaped by the
effectiveness of using vocabulary notebooks learner’s strong sense of both individual
in boosting learner’s control over their study identity and cultural identity (Benson, Chik &
processes is confirmed by Vela and Rushidi Lim 2003). When autonomy is seen as closely
(2016) in a group of 90 non-English major related to identity, political perspectives also
students at a university English center. In emerge.
Vietnam, Đinh Thị Hồng Thu’s (2017) survey
Politically, autonomy can be used “for
on the autonomy of students of Chinese major
an inborn capacity which is suppressed by
shows that although most of the first year
institutional education and for the right of
students of Chinese major at the University
learners to determine the direction of their own
of Languages and International Studies -
learning” (Benson & Voller, 1997: 1-2, quoted
Vietnam National University Hanoi (ULIS
in Nunan, 2003: 193-194). That is, political-
– VNU) are well aware of the necessity of
critical perspectives on learner autonomy
learner autonomy, and although some may
focus on power, access, and ideology (Oxford,
plan their own learning, a large majority of
2003: 88). A typical example is Toohey and
the learners cannot set their goals clearly.
Norton’s (2003) case study on the success of
As to strategies to boost learner autonomy,
an adult and a child language learners. These
Lưu Ngọc Lan’s (2014) comparison of the
authors claim that “learning to use the tool of
viewpoints of 9 teachers and 223 students at
language […] is primarily a matter of access
ULIS shows a mismatch between the most
to skilled performance, practice and access to
frequently and effectively used strategies by
identities of competence” (p. 71).
teachers and those perceived by students.
Nevertheless, since language is a means of Highly aware of the social constraints
communication, language learning cannot be as well as potential affordances to the
regarded as a pure psychological activity. Its language learning process of students inside
social aspect must also be considered. and outside the classroom, we would like to
190 [Link]/ VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200

investigate learners’ willingness and exercise questionnaires, a common data collection

of control over the learning goals, materials method (Nunan, 2001), were used because of
and conditions. Specifically, this study aims to their advantages in time and money saving,
answer the two questions below. objectiveness and “straightforward analysis
of answers to closed questions” (Gillham,
(1) To what extent do the non-English
2000: 6). The first questionnaire (at the end
major learners in the honor programme
of the first semester, answered by 63 students)
exercise their control over the learning
mainly focused on students’ reflection on
processes, resources and classroom language
their own classroom learning like their
learning contexts?
needs for language knowledge and skills.
(2) To what extent do these learners The second questionnaire (at the end of the
exercise their control over the language second semester, delivered to 20 students)
learning processes, resources and out-of-class focused on their reflection on their language
language using contexts? learning process and their expectations for the
future use of the target language. This time,
3. Methodology all the questions were open-ended in order to
reach “a greater level of discovery” (Gillham,
3.1. Participants 2000a: 5).
This study was carried out in one After that, three semi-structured
academic year, with the participation of 63 interviews were carried out to detect and
first-year students majoring in Finance and correct any possible misunderstandings
Banking and Business Administration in the (Gillham, 2000b: 10). The first interview
first semester and 20 students of the latter with Kim was carried out in Vietnamese over
major in the second semester. Though they lunch in a public, but not too noisy, place to
were at different levels of English proficiency, make her comfortable. The next one with Tan
they were all expected to get CEFR B2 was conducted after a speaking test as Tan
levels in order to learn some of their majors was the last person to sit the test, and he was
in English in the following academic years. willing to answer the interview in English for
Their English courses are IELTS-oriented. 30 minutes. The last one, lasting nearly 30
minutes, was initiated by Anh in a revision
3.2. Data and data collection
session while the students were asked to
The data were obtained from two look through the course themselves and raise
questionnaires basing on our interpretation their questions for the teacher. The teacher
of the term learner autonomy as mentioned took notes during the interviews to make the
above as well as Brookfield’s (1990: 32) interviewees relaxed and feel free to speak
experiencing learning questionnaire and Wen’s out their memories, thoughts, and opinions
(2004: 360-363) language learner factors (Richards, 2003).
questionnaire, and in-depth semi-structured
3.3. Data analysis
interviews lasting from 30 to 60 minutes
with three students (whose pseudonyms are The students’ answers to closed-ended
Kim, Anh, Tan), and teacher observation and questions in the first questionnaire were
reflection during one academic year. The counted and summarised in tables and charts.
VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200 191

Their answers to open-ended questions and in consisting of 4 questions, aims at finding

the interviews as well as the teacher’s notes out learners’ evaluation on their language
were examined for “emergent patterns and learning in class during the foundation phase.
theme, by looking for anything pertinent to These questions were built on the basis of our
the research question” (Mackey & Gass, interpretation of the term autonomy as “the
2005, 241). The repetition of such themes is exercise of learners’ responsibility for their
also counted for frequency. own learning” (Benson & Voller, 1997: 1 - 2,
quoted in Nunan, 2003: 193-194).
4. Results
As the students were required to get
4.1. Learner control of language learning quite a high level of language learning at
processes, resources and classroom language the end of the first academic year, they were
learning contexts expected to invest time and effort in some
aspects of language learning more than others.
4.1.1. Learner self-assessment of their The students’ judgment on different aspects of
learning processes
knowledge and skills are presented in Table 1
The first part of the first questionnaire, below.
Table 1: Learners’ priority of language aspects
(most => least prioritized : 1-6) Vocabulary Grammar Listening Speaking Reading Writing
Mean 3.7 4.5 3.4 2.6 4.2 3.0

As can be seen in Table 1, productive skills tended to receive the most students’ attention,
with the Means of 2.6 and 3.0 respectively. On the other hand, the students seemed not to pay
much attention to studying grammar whose Mean was 4.5. This was confirmed by Kim’s answer
to the interview: “at secondary school we learned a lot about grammar in the extra courses and
I’m quite good at it so at high school we just focus on practising tests” (Interview 1). Similarly,
reading also ranked as the second least urgent to most of them with the Mean of 4.2.
However much they tried to produce the language, a considerable number of students were
possibly disappointed with the results they received. This can be interpreted from the students’
ranking of their progress in language learning in Table 2 below.
Table 2: Student’s evaluation of their language learning progress
(most => least progress: 1-6) Vocabulary Grammar Listening Speaking Reading Writing
Mean 3.4 3.3 2.9 3.4 2.5 4.4
As we can see, receptive language skills with their feedback on the effectiveness of the
like listening and reading (whose Means classroom activities as presented in Chart 1
of progress were 2.9 and 2.5 respectively) hereafter.
appeared to be perceived as marking the most
progress in classroom practices. In contrast,
writing was generally regarded as the most
difficult skill to master as it was almost ranked
as the second least progress the students could
make. This perception tends to go in lines
192 [Link]/ VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200

Chart 1: Students’ evaluation of the most effective classroom activities

Chart 1 shows that students found they get used to the intonation of native speakers and
gained the best in speaking activities like increase their vocabulary. A student specifically
discussing with classmates and the teacher in mentioned her preference for English songs as
pairs/groups, as they answered Questionnaire 2 this was the time she paid the greatest attention
“this shows solidarity and chances to help one to the matter.
another; helps me to improve my weak skills;
By contrast, only a small number of
improves both my listening and speaking
students (6) found their autonomy in self-study
skills; gives me chances to get knowledge
or doing the exercises in the coursebooks,
from friends; urges me to catch up with friends
reasoning that this helps them “improve
and work more seriously; reduces my inferior
their language easily and increase their self-
complexity and makes me more confident”.
regulation.”
As to listening, 12 students explicitly
The most effective activities to the students
stated that they saw listening activities the
were also the most difficult as presented in
most effective because they help improve their
Chart 2.
listening skills and the content of the talks is
interesting. They also take the opportunities to

Chart 2: Students’ evaluation of the most difficult classroom activities

VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200 193

This chart reveals that while a large wrote, “I can hear just a little bit, feeling not
number of students (19) found speaking the wanting to learn.”
most effective, an equally considerable number
4.1.2. Learner expectation to control their
(15) said that they had trouble practicing it in
learning processes and resources in class
class due to their “lack of vocabulary, poor
pronunciation, being unconfident, and lack The second part of the questionnaires
of sub-skills” (Questionnaire 2). Similarly, 7 highlights the learners’ desire to be involved
students believed that writing was the most in planning and managing their language
difficult for them due to their insufficient learning processes, materials and classroom
vocabulary and grammar knowledge. An environment. These questions highlight “the
equal number of students also found listening right of learners to determine the direction of
(including listening to the teacher) troublesome their own learning” (Benson & Voller, 1997:
for the same reasons. Particularly, one student 1 - 2, quoted in Nunan, 2003: 193-194).

Chart 3: Learners’ desire to follow their personal study plans

When asked whether they wanted to said that they wanted to study with others (of
keep following the institution’s language either lower or higher levels) and nearly half
learning curriculum or pursuing their personal (41%) wanted to completely taking charge of
study plans, over half of the students (59%) their study.

Chart 4: Learners’ preference for self-study programmes

194 [Link]/ VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200

Chart 4 presents the number of four skills with 2-3 reading passages and 1
students showing preference for self-study Business English text, writing an essay or
programmes. They wanted to strengthen their a report every day to present in front of the
language skills like listening and speaking class for the teacher to comment.” For those
(11 students) and reading and writing (9 who wanted to follow the school curriculum,
students). Others (14) said that they wanted to they also wanted to add the activities of going
study Business English or they had their own out and communicating with foreigners to the
plans for learning English (6 students). Such schedule as one wrote in the questionnaire.
plans were specified in their answers to the This is partly shown in their preference for
questionnaire as “writing essays, following their initiation, activity types and partners in
the teacher’s guide, improving their own Chart 5 hereafter.

Chart 5: Learners’ control of content and environment

As presented in Chart 5, even choosing 4.2. Learner control over language learning
to follow the school curriculum, the learners processes, resources, and out-of-class
also showed their preference to exercise their language using contexts
control over the pair/group work activities
Part of the first questionnaire also
including working with other learners of
attempts to find out learners’ learning activities
higher or lower language levels and according
outside the classroom and their attitudes
to their preferences and abilities (25-26
towards possible learning resources available,
students said so). Importantly, 3 students even
as shown in Table 3.
stated that they could create language learning
activities following the lesson objectives.
Table 3: Students’ taking online and/or extra English courses
Semester 1: Number

students took online courses 3

students took extra English courses 15

students wanted an online account 26

VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200 195

In the first semester, the number of “I meet her [my colleague] about once a
students who took online courses was very week and we speak in English whenever there
small: only three students. Those who were are no customers. We talk about girl-related
taking courses at an English center made problems, our work, our future, challenges
a triple number of this one. Among these in life, outing, life skills, etc. - everything in
students, their favourite English learning English. She teaches me a lot about life skills
activity was communicating with foreigners and communicative skills like not showing
in communicative English courses where they
your sad face when working out or even
found their progress in communication. In
when feeling tired at work. She also teaches
the second questionnaire, two students also
me how to answer customers, how to arrange
emphasized that they took English courses
with foreign teachers so that they could goods according to production dates and
communicate in English only. expiry dates, which I did not notice. But we
can speak in English only when there are no
Twenty-six participants showed their
customers.” (Interview 3, Anh)
willingness to pay 100,000VND for the English
Department’s online account. The reasons Another student has experienced talking
mentioned by them in the questionnaire were with foreign exchange students in several
their poor communicative skills and needs for chances:
help in practice, their view of its necessity “When I was in grade 6 or 7, there was
and usefulness and even their spare time for a student exchange programme and my sister
having not taken an extra course. invited a foreign student to stay in my house
On the other hand, 34 students refused for about 1 month. Whenever I learned a
to buy this online account because they “did new word I’d talk with her. I was not afraid
not have time and could not arrange time for of talking with foreigners. I just say out my
studying online; they already took courses at thought. […] And then for two weeks at the
English centers, found this not necessary and beginning of this semester, I also joined the
were not sure of its effectiveness.” volunteer groups to help foreign students
The students also sought for opportunities going around in their programmes of donating
to be exposed to and use the target language books to Vietnamese schools. We had
as revealed in the second questionnaire and difficulty understanding each other at first but
the in-depth interviews. As to the way they then things were okay. We still keep contact
learn English outside school, four students now.” (Interview 1, Kim)
wrote that they often listened to music and
watched videos, films and news in English. Some other students seek for opportunities
to use English in real life communication
Five other students mentioned that they
themselves by going to places (like Ta Hien
sought for opportunities to use English in real
street as mentioned by a student) where there
life by talking with customers in their part-
time jobs and with foreign exchange students are foreign visitors. For instance, Tan told us
in a volunteer programme and foreign visitors in the interview, “I join events with groups of
in opportunities created by themselves. A foreigners and Vietnamese students who are
student told us about her practice of English good at English: having dinner, talking, and
in her part-time job below. traveling around Hoan Kiem lake.”
196 [Link]/ VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200

5. Discussion However, the number of such autonomous

learners is not very big. Among them, only
Despite as the fact that some students
one student, who often spoke English with
seem to lay the locus (i.e. place) of control
her Vietnamese co-worker in the part-time
on the teacher, a considerable number of job, often showed attention in the lesson and
students do show their high level of autonomy
took classroom learning seriously. The other
in controlling their learning process, content
two students who appeared to actively seek
and environment by organising their (class opportunities to communicate with foreigners
and self) learning activities, seeking language outside school were sometimes off tasks in
learning resources on the Internet and in the class. Such a reality proves that “complete
real life, and creating opportunities to use autonomy is an idealistic goal” and that “the
the target language in places where English degrees of autonomy are unstable and variable”
speaking people are available. (Sinclair, 2000, quoted in Borg, 2012, 5).
Such willingness to take responsibility for Looking more closely at the stories told
their own learning is a typical feature of learner by the students, we can see that autonomy
autonomy as mentioned by Sinclair (2000, comes as a result of both their will and luck,
quoted in Borg, 2012: 5). This can be seen in a i.e. “autonomy has a social as well as an
student’s willingness to be the teacher assistant individual dimension” (Sinclair, 2000, quoted
when she approached the teacher after the in Borg, 2012, 5). Tan was first introduced to
lesson the other day. She said, “I can be your a social meeting event with foreigners in his
assistant. I can help you teach the vocabulary. neighbourhood by his close friend who knew
I think it’s most important to learn new words that his English was good enough (as he studied
in a foreign language. You know, I’m working in English in Sweden from grade 3 to grade 7)
part-time as a teacher assistant at an English to socialize with them throughout the evening.
center”. This example can also be regarded as Then he made friends with a number of people
an indicator of the student’s intrinsic motivation there and kept meeting them during such social
for life-long learning (Nguyễn Thị Hằng Nga events till now. As for Kim, thanks to her active
& Nguyễn Ngọc Toàn, 2017). sister who took a foreign student home in an
Additionally, this student shows two exchange programme, she had opportunities
typical features of an autonomous language to communicate with that student and still kept
learner, that is the ability to control their own contact with her at the time of the interview.
[as well as the class’] learning process (Holec, Her university also brought her another chance
1981; Little, 2009: 223) and the capability to work with foreign exchange students for
of critical reflection and initiation of change two weeks. Lastly, in Anh’s case, she got the
(Little, 1991; Little, 2009). Specifically, the part-time job by chance and met her co-worker
learner’s offer to help the teacher teach new there who initiated to keep practising English
words to the class also shows his/her ability to in order not to forget her English.
carry out management tasks like identifying In general, throughout a year learning
the aim of vocabulary learning, having ideas English at school, the number of students
of what words are necessary, choosing an clearly showing their high level of autonomy
appropriate teaching approach as well as seems not to meet expectation. Nevertheless,
evaluating the effectiveness of the teacher’s “the Western style of autonomy based on
instruction (Holec, 1981: 3, quoted in Lewis language teaching cannot suit the learning
& Vialleton, 2011: 206). style of each student” (Egel, 2009: 2024).
VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200 197

Students’ preference to follow the teacher’s 7. Recommendation – classroom as an

teaching plans and assignments does not mean autonomous learning community
that they are weak or unfavoured learners.
The idea of building the classroom as an
autonomous learning community addresses
6. Conclusion “the importance of developing learner
In this study, we explored the levels of autonomy within the classroom through the
autonomy in terms of learners’ control over support of the teachers and collaboration of the
their language learning process, resources learners” on the basis that “learners are able
and contexts both inside and outside the to develop cognitive skills for their learning
classroom. The results of the study reveal by being provided the opportunities to make
that learners do “become more autonomous decisions within the classroom” (Egel, 2009:
in language learning in proportion as they 2024). It should follow three key principles: (1)
become more autonomous in language use, learner involvement in planning, monitoring
and vice versa” (Little, 1991, cited in Little, and evaluating their own learning, (2) learner
2009). Nevertheless, the learner’s degree continual reflection on the process and content
of autonomy is not constant throughout of their learning and to engage in regular
different language learning contexts in and self-assessment, and (3) target language use:
out of the classroom. In addition, learner the target language as the medium as well as
autonomy cannot simply be built by giving the goal of learning, including its reflective
them chances to control their own learning; component (Little, 2001, cited in Little, 2009:
it is the complex combination of learner’s 224). These can be specified as three main
motivation, investment of money, time and steps in developing learner autonomy: raising
effort and the social situation. In some cases, awareness, changing attitudes, and transferring
with low level language learners, for example, roles (Scharle & Szabó, 2000).
“the inability to control [many aspects of First, learners should be aware of the
the situation in language learning] does not pedagogical goals and content of the materials
make either [the teacher or the learner] less they are using (Nunan, 1997). The questionnaires
autonomous” (Lewis & Vialleton, 2011: in this study were an example of helping learners
218). Such complexity leaves land for further reflect on their own learning process. Moreover,
investigation to enrich our knowledge in this in the first classroom meeting, the students
aspect of language learning. were informed of the course objectives and
As for practitioners, though this study coursebooks. Then, they were divided into groups
presents some specific examples of learners according to their language levels through a
being very active to use English outside the placement test on vocabulary, grammar, reading,
classroom, it also shows a number of students and listening as well as a short speaking test. This
who may be silent in class. This tends to is to prepare them for the second level of learner
suggest that some students prefer language involvement in selecting their own goals from
using to “official” language learning. Thus, a range of alternatives on offer as suggested by
the teacher should create opportunities for Nunan (1997). In fact, at the beginning of each
learners to use the language by themselves lesson, we presented its aims and correspondent
and contribute to the autonomous community activities of different levels of difficulties such as
of classroom as suggested below. writing an advertisement of their house basing
198 [Link]/ VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200

on the sample texts in the book or video taping Acknowledgements

their recommendation of a real hotel nearby for
I am sincerely grateful to the reviewers
a conference. By giving learners choices like
and editors for their great tolerance, valuable
this, we expected that they would recognize
comments and encouraging support for the
of message of promoting their autonomy, and
improvement of this paper. Furthermore, I
thus change their learning attitudes from being
would like to thank all my students for their time
passive to more active, and proactive.
and participation in making this study possible.
Then, the teacher should direct students’
attitudes in terms of motivation, learning References
strategies, community building and self-
Vietnamese
mornitoring towards (Scharle & Szabó, 2000) a
Lưu Ngọc Lan (2014). Sử dụng các phương pháp tạo
higher level of autonomy, namely “intervention” động lực trong lớp học tiếng Anh xã hội dạy kết
(Nunan, 1997). At this levels, learners should be hợp4 kĩ năng nghe, nói, đọc, viết. Trường Đại học
Hà Nội. Kỷ yếu hội thảo khoa học quốc tế Chiến
involved in modifying and adapting the goals
lược ngoại ngữ trong xu thế hội nhập, 107-120.
and content of the learning program. As can be Nguyễn Thị Hằng Nga, Nguyễn Ngọc Toàn (2017).
seen in this study, once the students are aware “Không gậy, không kẹo” (xây dựng thói quen học
of their strengths and weakenesses as well as tập với động lực nội sinh GIVE). Tạp chí Nghiên
cứu Nước ngoài, 1(1), 89-101.
their own learning priorities as raised in the Nguyễn Thị Hằng Nga, Nguyễn Thị Hợp, Nguyễn
questionnaires, the learners could change the Ngọc Toàn (2018). Quản trị bằng mục tiêu để khơi
objectives of each specific task they choose to nguồndopamine nội sinh, gia tăng hứng thú học tập.
Trường Đại học Ngoại ngữ - Đại học Quốc gia Hà
match their own learning goals and preferences. Nội. Kỷ yếu hội thảo quốc gia 2018: Nghiên cứu và
giảng dạy ngoại ngữ, ngôn ngữ & quốc tế học tại
The last step refers to transferring Việt Nam, 409-415.
roles. In Nunan’s (1997) words, learners Đinh Thị Hồng Thu (2017). Tình hình tự chủ trong học
should reach the last two levels of learners’ tập của sinh viên khoa Ngôn ngữ và văn hóa Trung
Quốc Trường Đại học Ngoại ngữ - Đại học Quốc gia
creation of their own goals and objectives Hà Nội. Kỷ yếu Hội thảo khoa học quốc gia 2017:
and transcendence: learners’ going beyond Nghiên cứu và giảng dạy ngoại ngữ, ngôn ngữ &
the classroom and making links between the quốc tế học tại Việt Nam, 347-355.
content of classroom learning and the world
English
beyond. This can be seen in the case of the Benson, P. (1996). Concepts of autonomy in language
student approaching the teacher offerring to learning. In R. Pemberton, E. Li, W. Or and
help teaching vocabulary or the case of the H. Pierson, (Eds.), Taking control: Autonomy in
language learning (pp. 27-34). Hong Kong: Hong
student initiating a talk with the teaching in Kong University Press.
English, telling her story of communicating Benson, P. (1997). The philosophy and politics of
with her co-worker in this language. learner autonomy. In I. Benson & P. Voller (Eds.),
Autonomy and independence in language learning.
By taking the role of a researcher and London: Longman.
Benson, P. & Voller, P. (1997). Introduction: autonomy
adviser for their learners, teachers can build
and independence in language learning. In P. Benson
an autonomous learning classroom in which and P. Voller (Eds.), Autonomy and independence in
learners can build their habit of taking language learning. Harlow: Longman.
control over their own learning and seek for Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy
in language learning. Harlow: Pearson.
opportunities to learn beyond the school as
Benson, P. (2003). Learner autonomy in the classroom.
one student responded in the questionnaire: In Nunan, D. (Ed.), Practical English language
“learning English is my habit, and I love it.” teaching. New York: McGraw Hill.
VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200 199

Benson, P., Chik, A. & Lim, H. (2003). Becoming of applied linguistics (pp. 115-116). Oxford: Oxford
autonomous in an Asian context: Autonomy as University Press.
a sociocultural process. In D. Palfreyman, & R. C. Nunan, D. (1997). Designing and adapting materials to
Smith (Eds.), Learner autonomyacross cultures: encourage learner autonomy. In P. Benson & P.
Language education perspectives (pp. 23-40). New
Voller (Eds.), Autonomy and independence in
York: Palgrave Macmillan.
languag learning (pp. 192-203). Harlow: Longman.
Borg, S. (2012). Leaner autonomy: English language Nunan, D. (2001) (9th printing) /1992 (1st printing).
teachers’ beliefs and practices. London: British
Research methods in language learning. Cambridge,
Council.
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Boud, D. (1981). Moving towards autonomy. In D. Boud Nunan, D. (2003). Nine steps to learner autonomy.
(Ed.), Developing student autonomy in learning. Synpodium, 2003 (193-204). Available through
London: Kogan Page.
< [Link]
Brookfield, S. D. (1986). Understanding and facilitating .1333707257!/menu/standard/file/2003_11_
adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Nunan_eng.pf> , Accessed 15/5/2019 09:33.
Brookfield, S. D. (1990). The skillful teacher. Sanf Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies:
Francisco. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
What every teacher should know. Boston:
Ceylan, N. O. (2015). Fostering learner autonomy. Procedia Heinle & Heinle.
- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 85-93.
Oxford, R. L. (2003). Toward a more systematic model
Dickinson, L. (1987). Self-instruction in language of L2 learner autonomy. In D. Palfreyman, & R.
learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
C. Smith (Eds.), Learner autonomy across cultures:
Egel, I. P. (2009). Learner autonomy in the language Language education perspectives (pp. 75-91). New
classroom: from teacher dependency to learner York: Palgrave Macmillan.
independency. Procedia Social and Behavioural
Palfreyman, D., & Smith, R. C. (2003). Learner
Sciences, 1, 2023-2026.
autonomy across cultures: Language education
Farivar, A., & Rahimi, A. (2015). The impact of CALL
perspectives. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
on Iranian EFL learners’ autonomy. Procedia -
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 644-649. Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative inquiry in TESOL. New
York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Gillham, B. (2000a). Developing a questionnaire.
London: Continuum. Scharle, Á., & Szabó, A. (2000). Learner autonomy: A
Gillham, B. (2000b). Developing an interview. London: guide to developing learner responsibility.
Continuum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language Sinclair, B. (2000). Learner autonomy: The next phase?
learning. Oxford: Pergamon. In B. Sinclair, I. McGrath & T. Lamb (Eds.), Learner
Ismail, N., & Yusof, M. A. M. D. (2012). Using language autonomy, teacher autonomy: Future directions (pp.
learning contracts as a strategy to promote 4-14). Harlow: Longman.
learner autonomy among ESL learners. Procedia - Toohey, K., & Norton, B. (2003). Learner autonomy as
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 66, 472-480. agency in sociocultural settings. In D. Palfreyman
Lewis, T., & Vialleton, E. (2011). The notions of control & R. C. Smith (Eds.), Learner autonomy across
and consciousness in learner autonomy and self- cultures: Language education perspectives. (pp.
regulated learning: a comparison and critique. 72). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Innovation in Language Learning and Vela, V., & Rushidi, J. (2016). The effect of keeping
Teaching, 5(2), 205-219. vocabulary notebooks on vocabulary acquisition and
Little, D. (1991). Learner autonomy 1: Definitions, learner autonomy. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
issues, problems. Dublin: Authentik. Sciences, 232, 201-208.
Little, D. (2009). Language learner autonomy and the Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development
European Language Portfolio: Two L2 English of higher Psychological processes. Cambridge, MA:
examples. Language Teaching, 42(2), 222-233. Havard University Press.
Mackey, A. & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second language Wen, Q. (2004). Research methods and thesis writing.
research. Methodology and design. Mahwah, NY: Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Press.
Norton, B. (1995). Identity and language learning. Xhaferi, B. & Xhaferi, G. (2011). Developing learner
Hong Kong: Pearson Education. autonomy in higher education in Macedonia.
Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2002). Identity and language Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 11,
learning. In R. B. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook 150-154.
200 [Link]/ VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, Vol.35, No.3 (2019) 187-200

TÍNH TỰ CHỦ CỦA NGƯỜI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ

VÀ CƠ HỘI HỌC TẬP TRONG VÀ NGOÀI LỚP HỌC

Hoàng Nguyễn Thu Trang

Trường Đại học Ngoại ngữ, ĐHQGHN, Phạm Văn Đồng, Cầu Giấy, Hà Nội, Việt Nam

Tóm tắt: Nghiên cứu này được thực hiện nhằm chỉ ra mức độ người học là sinh viên không
chuyên năm thứ nhất thể hiện tính tự giác trong đánh giá và quản lý quá trình học tập, nguồn lực và
môi trường học ngoại ngữ trong và ngoài lớp. Dữ liệu được thu thập từ bảng hỏi với 63 sinh viên,
phỏng vấn bán cấu trúc (trong vòng 30-60 phút) và ghi chép quan sát của người dạy trong các tiết
học. Kết quả thống kê để tìm giá trị trung bình và tần xuất và phân tích nội dung để tìm điểm chung
trong dữ liệu này cho thấy mức độ kiểm soát của các sinh viên cũng như mỗi sinh viên đối với quá
trình và tài liệu học tập trong các môi trường học khác nhau là không giống nhau. Điều này thể hiện
tầm quan trọng của việc giúp người học kiến tạo cơ hội học tập trong và ngoài lớp học.
Từ khóa: tính tự chủ, quá trình học tập, nguồn lực học tập, môi trường học tập