Classroom-based Approaches to Learner Autonomy in a Japanese English Conversation School
Daniel Hooper, United Kingdom
Daniel Hooper has taught in Japan in both public and private institutions for almost 10 years and is currently studying in the MA TESOL program at Kanda University of International Studies. His research interests are vocabulary, CALL/MALL, teacher cognition, and learner autonomy. E-mail: tywardreathdan@gmail.com
Menu
Introduction
Background
English Conversation Schools and learner autonomy
Conclusion
References
The development of learner autonomy is sometimes carried out through “learner training” or dedicated strategy instruction often through self-access centres (Gardner & Miller, 1999), but the most likely context in which learners should come into contact with the idea of autonomy and develop appropriate skills is the language course. As such, the classroom teacher is likely to have a major impact on students’ development towards autonomy. Much depends, then, on the teacher’s knowledge of autonomy and his/her ability to implement it into the curriculum, either with or without the use of self-access facilities to complement classroom teaching.
(Reinders & Balcikanli, 2011, p.265).
In most EFL settings, language study is located within a classroom. In Japan, for example, although many progressive higher education institutions are now equipped with self-access learning centres and language advisors, it can be argued that most language study still takes place in a physical or online space, led by a teacher or instructor. It therefore follows that a greater focus on fostering learner autonomy through classroom practice has potentially far-reaching effects in the Japanese EFL context.
Private English conversation schools are commonplace throughout Japan and are a key component of the English education market which, in 2013, was worth $2,772 million (Muramoto, 2015). Despite the vast scale of this industry, very little research has been done into what actually goes on in these private classes and what could be done to develop teacher practice (Lowe, 2014). This paper aims to highlight key findings from research on classroom-based learner autonomy and proposes a number of approaches that could potentially be applied to a conversation class in Japan, as well as in other contexts.
Research has shown that transforming an English conversation classroom into a more autonomy-supportive and motivating environment is a multi-faceted and gradual process within which we have to address issues of power, culture, public and administrative perception, and the importance of social relationships.
Candy (1991, cited in Benson, 2011) argues that an opportunity for student control within a classroom comes from 'the deliberate surrendering of certain prerogatives by the teacher' which leads to 'the concomitant acceptance of responsibility by the learner or learners'. Assor, Kaplan & Roth (2002) also state that providing students with choices in classes as well as allowing criticism of learning materials or activities are behaviours that are autonomy-supportive. In their study of teacher behaviors that supported and suppressed autonomy, they also found that suppressing criticism was the action that teachers should aim to avoid most in order to build autonomy-supportive learning environments. Controlling behaviors by the instructor can extend to every facet of classroom practice, including maintaining control over lesson content, giving praise and criticism, assigning grades, the use of pressuring language, creating competitive pressure, giving of solutions/answers and the monopolization of time or materials (Reeve & Jang, 2006; Reeve, 2006). It has also been shown that involving students in the planning of learning content can help increase a sense of relevance among students as they feel that what they are learning is supportive of their self-determined interests, goals and values (Assor, Kaplan & Roth, 2002). Furthermore, student choice and self-determination have been found to enhance intrinsic motivation in students whereas certain controlling and autonomy-suppressive teaching behaviors, such as threats, deadlines, and directives were shown to diminish it (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Intrinsic motivation in students 'results in high-quality learning and creativity' (Deci & Ryan, p.55) and can be seen as an interrelated partner to learner autonomy. In order to build classrooms in keeping with learner autonomy, one could argue that it behooves the language teacher to 'pass the torch' of power and control to their students.
This shift in focus from teacher to student places control and responsibility in the hands of the learner. La Ganza (2008) refers to autonomy in this sense as an interrelational achievement as it is not only the learner who needs to refrain from seeking help from the teacher, but also the teacher who is holding back from influencing the learner (La Ganza, 2008, cited in Benson, 2011). From this perspective, while it may seem that the teacher is stepping back from classroom activity and assuming a passive role, in reality they are working in tandem with the learner to provide a supportive but empowering learning environment.
The positive effects of group learning are often highlighted in discussion of classroom-based autonomy. One might indeed expect that group work and peer teaching would provide more opportunities to interact with classmates and use the target language whilst taking the focus away from the teacher. In their study of group work in a Japanese university, Ogawa and Hall (2010) received a number of positive responses regarding group work from students and found that it appeared to 'facilitate learner autonomy through helping build their confidence, raising their awareness on responsibility and increasing their motivation.'
Despite these positive findings, however, an instructor who is otherwise ready to implement learner autonomy practices may still hesitate due to external factors. One common argument aimed at those attempting to bring about a more student-centered, autonomous learning environment is that the concept is fundamentally incompatible with the culture or institution that they are working in. Rundle (2007) examines the 'received' view of Japanese culture in which it is considered as 'collective' and based upon 'hierarchy, harmony and passivity' and that the very idea of learner autonomy in Japan may be 'culturally inappropriate'. This idea is countered with more critical views that these cultural attributes are mere 'discourses' rather than 'truths' and that more contextually appropriate embodiments of learner autonomy can be worked out collaboratively between students and teachers rather than just dismissing autonomy as an individualistic, American concept. One point to consider, however, is that Rundle's study also found that stereotypical, 'received' views on Japanese students were held by both Western and Japanese teachers. Based on these results, one might suggest a measured and cautious adoption of approaches centered around classroom-based learner autonomy in institutional settings. This is due to the potential risk of conflict with administrative forces or colleagues. Furthermore, these findings highlight the need for more dialogue and critical consideration of cultural issues and learner autonomy within professional forums.
Autonomy-supportive teachers may also have to contend with a number of misconceptions resulting from a lack of understanding of the nature of learner-centered classrooms or a lack of focus on learner autonomy in general. In their study of teacher training textbooks, Reinders and Balcikanli (2011) found that none of the commonly-used texts that they examined had any in-depth information pertaining to the fostering of learner autonomy. One could therefore, argue that, within a given educational setting, awareness of learner autonomy (other than as a buzzword) and autonomy-supportive teaching strategies is likely to be low or non-existent. This lack of institutional awareness can be further compounded by pressure from outside forces. For example, Flink, Boggiano and Barrett (1990) found that, due to the commonly-held belief that providing incentives or pressure are effective performance enhancers, parents and other lay-people viewed controlling teachers as more effective practitioners than their autonomy-supportive counterparts.
A great many ideas from this area of research can potentially be applied in the private conversation school context. Many English conversation school teachers have a great deal of freedom in terms of lesson and curriculum content, thus allowing them to shape even fundamental elements like the power dynamic of a classroom with relative ease. The promotion of group work activities and an increased reliance on peer-correction are changes that can be quickly applied to a conversation class. Both of these tweaks to the class dynamic encourage students to rely on each other and combine their knowledge in order to complete a task rather than simply deferring to the teacher as the traditional source of knowledge. Activities like dictogloss (Wajnryb, 1990) or running dictation take this even further as they are, without cooperation with their peers, nigh on impossible to complete successfully.
Conversation teachers can attempt to involve their adult students more in the planning of lesson content through a number of different approaches. One approach is distributing questionnaires in class related to class structure and content. Students work in groups or individually and provide information on their preferred lesson structure, ideal amount of homework (if any), types of skills they want to focus on or preferred group size. The questionnaires are then collected and the data is put into a set of charts or graphs for each class which can be periodically updated over the course. This data has the potential to be useful both in motivating students by passing more responsibility for class structure over to them and by allowing the teacher to focus more on the skills or activities that they value. The primary goal in this approach is a move away from the idea that the teacher is the sole focal point in a classroom, both in terms of decision making and responsibility for lesson content.
A power shift from teacher to student can also be achieved through a number of smaller scale, but potentially powerful, alterations in class. One possibility is to gradually put more of the scheduling and learning materials in the hands of the students. By giving students a selection of activities to choose from at the start of the class, the students take on the role of schedulers, choosing what activities they are interested in and stating how long they wish to focus on them. This can be further enhanced by asking one of the students to act as a timekeeper, making them responsible for ensuring that the class is sticking to their lesson plan successfully. Furthermore, the autonomy-supportive nature of classes can be enhanced by giving students immediate and full access to all learning materials. This could be achieved by leaving all worksheets out on a table before the class so that students can take them freely and maybe examine them while waiting for the class to start. This could also provide them with an opportunity to consult with their peers about any unclear language before the instructor arrives, thus strengthening the group dynamic further. An instructor also has the option to gradually step away from controlling materials like the whiteboard and the CD player and encourage the students to perhaps assign themselves roles as to who is in charge of a piece of equipment on a given day.
An increased focus on group work and peer-correction in English conversation classes represents a positive step in furthering learner autonomy and a transfer from passive to active class participation. This solid base, together with the introduction of small-scale changes like regular student questionnaires, reflection sheets at the end of each lesson, student-led lesson scheduling, free access to lesson materials and the student-led assignment of administrative roles could collectively have a significant impact on how private conversation classes run. These steps allow a shift in focus from teacher to student and subsequently can create a learning environment where learner autonomy is fostered rather than stifled.
Assor, A., Kaplan, H., & Roth, G. (2002). Choice is good but relevance is excellent: Autonomy-enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviours predicting students' engagement in schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 261-278.
Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and Researching Autonomy (2nd ed.; first published, 2001). London: Pearson Education.
Candy, P. C. (1991). Self-direction for Lifelong Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.
Flink, C., Boggiano, A. K., & Barrett, M. (1990). Controlling Teaching Strategies: Undermining Children's Self-Determination and Performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 916-924.
Gardner, D. & Miller, L. (1999). Establishing Self-Access: From Theory to Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
La Ganza, W. (2008). Learner autonomy and teacher autonomy: Interrelating and the will to power. In T. E. Lamb and H. Reinders (eds) Learner and Teacher Autonomy: Concepts, Realities and Responses. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 63-79.
Lowe, R. J. (2014). Cram Schools in Japan: The Need for Research. The Language Teacher, 39(1), 26-31.
Muramoto, R. (2015). The English Language Education Market in Japan. Retrieved from http://www.export.gov/japan/build/groups/public/@bg_jp/documents/webcontent/bg_jp_085646.pdf on December 22nd.
Ogawa, H. & Hall, J. M. (2011). Using Group Work and Reflective Journals for Developing Learner Autonomy in an EFL Classroom at a Japanese University. Iwate Daigaku Kyouikugakubu fuzokukyouikujissensougousenta Kenkyuukiyou, 10, 1-9.
Reeve, J. (2006). Teachers as Facilitators: What Autonomy-Supportive Teachers Do and Why Their Students Benefit. The Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 225-236.
Reeve, J. & Jang, H. (2006). What Teachers Say and Do to Support Students' Autonomy During a Learning Activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 209-218.
Reinders, H. & Balcikanli, C. (2011). Do Classroom Textbooks Encourage Learner Autonomy? Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language), 5(2), 265-272.
Rundle, C. F. (2007). Teacher Approaches to Japanese Culture: Implications for Student Autonomy. Proceedings of the Independent Learning Association 2007 Japan Conference: Exploring theory, enhancing practice: Autonomy across the disciplines. Kanda University of International Studies, Chiba, Japan, October 2007, 1-14.
Wajnryb, R. (1990). Grammar Dictation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Please check the English Language Improvement for Teachers course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the English Language Improvement for Adults course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the Creative Methodology for the Classroom course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the Methodology & Language for Secondary Teachers course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the Teaching Advanced Students course at Pilgrims website.
|
