|
MA ELT Dissertation |
An Investigation into Learners’ Disposition and Perceived Ability to Learn Independently in the Centre for Independent Language Learning
Back to Main Page of this Dissertation | Next Page
Link to Part: Intro, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, Bib, Appx
As can be seen from Section 6, where data was available there was often triangulation between the findings of the questionnaires, the interviews and the diary research on individual items, even though the questionnaire was not a reliable instrument for measuring disposition.
Gardner and Miller (1997: 96-7) highlight the problem that Hong Kong self-access students are reluctant to talk to tutors in self-access centres. This may be one reason why CILL students may not be aware of all the LT options open to them.
This lack of seeking a tutor’s advice may have contributed to five out of the six interviewees, as shown by their interviews and confirmed in their diaries, never having used a book from the study skills shelf, only one student having thoroughly used the ‘How to Improve your English at CILL’ computer program on study skills, and only one having used the CILL Internet site and its study skills advice.
The low level of workshop attendance may also show students’ lack of interest in, or low awareness of formal LT in groups. Out of 47 workshops, five had zero attendance, the mean attendance was 6.7 students, and the maximum attendance was 18. Only one interviewee said that she had been to a workshop, and she had only been to one.
This lack of student take-up of LT opportunities contrasts with the belief in the importance of LT of the authors in the literature (Ellis & Sinclair 1989; Esch 1997; Holec 1980; Lum 1996; Nunan 1997; Sheerin 1997; Sinclair 1997; Sturtridge 1997). There may be several reasons for this, especially in the area of self-assessment.
CILL students may be autonomously deciding the level of competence that they are aiming for, and doing only the LT that they consider is necessary to reach that level of competence. This would relate to Holec’s (1980: 32 - 4) opinion that, in self-directed learning, the learner should decide the level of competence aimed for. The recommendations of LT in the literature, and the feeling of CILL staff that more LT might be beneficial, could be seen as unwanted interference by the students.
The third hypothesis was that students’ disposition towards independent language learning and their perceived ability to learn independently would increase with the duration of their total attendance in CILL. Hypothesis Three was refuted by the questionnaire data. This could be seen as confirmation of Gow & Kember’s research into IL and the approaches to learning of HKPU students, which suggests that the use of deep strategies and IL decrease with the duration of a course (Gow & Kember 1990: 313).
However, this conclusion was not supported by the interview responses. All of the six interviewees said that they had become more independent in studying English since they had first started at CILL, although there was only indirect evidence of this in one diary. This difference may have been caused by the questionnaire and the interviews measuring different phenomena. The questionnaire did not pre-and post-questionnaire individual students, rather it looked at a snapshot of dispositions and perceived abilities of students with different durations of CILL attendance. Pre- and post-CILL experience testing may have given different results. However, another reason might have been a possible student reluctance to imply that studying in a centre with ‘Independent’ in it’s name had not made them more independent.
The final hypothesis was that further optional LT opportunities would be wanted by the students. This was only investigated in the interviews. Three out of six of the students said they wanted more training on how to study independently. These three all mentioned learner training rather than learner development wants. One student was a Ph.D. student and teacher at HKPU, and she thought that she was capable of teaching herself. (See Appendix 10.) One student, a Mainland Chinese member of the HKPU staff, wanted ad hoc training whereby he would ask the tutors for advice in his diary as necessary. (See Appendix 11.) The third said, "Well, it is unnecessary to be compulsory but it is better that such a training is available." These comments reflect Holec’s (1981: 7) opinion that students should want to take charge of their learning.
Thomson’s research (1996: 77 - 92) detailing the many problems that HK students have in self-assessment (see Section 2.6) is supported by the negative correlation between the testing item in the disposition section of the questionnaire. However, it may be that self-assessment is not the problem, but reporting the assessment to the teacher is. Although Thomson puts the problem down to lack of self-esteem (1996: 87), cultural influences such as feeling that one should be modest about one’s abilities may be a more important factor. This reluctance to self-assess and report it may lead to their being reluctant to take part in LT about how to self-assess if that LT involves writing the assessment in their learner diaries.
Brindley (1989: 83) might argue that this reluctance to self-assess demonstrates a need for psychological training to convince the students that assessment is their responsibility. (See Section 2.5.) Following Holec’s (1981: 22), recommendations, CILL LT could concentrate on deconditioning students and freeing them "from the notion that there is one ideal method", "that teachers possess that method" and encouraging the learner to break away from the idea that he is "incapable of making any valid assessment of his performance".
The students’ lack of utilisation of CILL’s LT materials such as the study skills books and the CILL Internet site may mean that they have not encountered or considered the view that self-assessment is their responsibility.
The recommendations (see Section Nine below) do not follow Sturtridge’s (1997: 67) summary of the research on LT, that, "few learners learn well by themselves without language awareness and learning awareness development programmes", assuming Sturtridge means formal learner training courses in study skills. This is because if the students have freed themselves from the idea that there is an ideal method to learn a language, and the teacher knows that method, as Holec (1981: 22), suggests, then it is up to individual students to request LT when they think it necessary. In only one case could the LT that the interviewees requested be of the type that Sturtridge (1997:71) recommends, i.e. "a development programme that keeps pace with the learners as they work" if ‘programme’ is taken to mean any provision of LT, as Interviewee Five did request ad hoc training through diary responses and discussion with a tutor.
Sturtridge (1997: 71) goes on to say that, "a successful centre will attempt to make learner development an ongoing cycle of action and reflection and to offer a development program that keeps pace with the learners as they work." This cycle and program is offered to CILL students through their language learning diaries and through tutor support, rather than through a formal program of learner training. The students may be satisfied with this level of support. However, if the low level of usage of CILL LT resources is due to lack of student awareness of these resources, there is a case for experimenting by making students more aware of the resources through some form of LT.
8. Conclusions
Firstly, the CILL students interviewed have a favourable disposition towards independent language learning in CILL. Thus there is a basis for speculating that raising students’ awareness of LT opportunities might be successful.
Secondly, the students agree, but not strongly, that they are satisfied with their abilities to learn independently in CILL, although some would like more LT. Therefore, efforts to raise students’ awareness of LT opportunities might be well-received.
Thirdly, there is inconsistency between the questionnaire and interview results about students’ satisfaction with their abilities changing with their duration of study in CILL. The questionnaire results show an insignificant increase. However, the interviewees all say that they have improved, and some comment on this improvement in their diaries.
Finally, there was mixed reaction among the interviewees to the question about whether they would like more LT. This may have been because of a lack of understanding of the meaning of LT. There were widely-varying requests from the interviewees who did want more. Thus there are grounds for experimenting with further provision of LT.
9. Recommendations for Learner Training in CILL
Due to the lack of awareness shown by the interviewed students, it is recommended that the LT opportunities available in CILL could be pointed out to new students during the orientation. This could be as part of the ‘tape tour’ of the new centre.
Methods for deciding an aim should be given more explanation in the orientation, as five out of the six interviewed students had difficulty writing aims, and two students, both of whom are HKPU staff, frequently write "To Improve my English" as their aim.
The new ‘Guided Independent Language Learning Scheme’ (GILLS) could include LT as one of its aims. In the scheme’s sessions students could be encouraged to investigate or discuss LT opportunities in CILL. This might include use of the study skills resources, as there was little evidence of use of these resources in the student’s diaries. However, based on the opinions of Interviewees Five and Six (see Appendices 11 and 12), these investigations and discussions should not be compulsory, and individualised LT advice and resources should continue to be available to all CILL students.
Based on Gow & Kember’s (1990) evidence of a decreasing tendency towards a deep approach to learning, which they equate to IL, as a student progresses through a university course, it may be advisable to target first year students particularly in the membership drive for the GILLS.
Although LT in self-assessment could be considered, it is suggested that careful consideration should be made of the students’ inhibitions in self-assessment.
If the LT in the GILLS is well-received by the students, further research could be done on what additional developments in LT provision the students would like.
10. Implications for Further Research
The final conclusion may be informative for the staff of other Hong Kong self-access centres, but given the different contexts of each centre it is not generalisable beyond CILL, and staff of such centres are encouraged to investigate these issues with their own students. This is in line with Sturtridge’s (1997:71), comment that, "a centre has to keep its approach and materials under review constantly by making good use of feedback mechanisms and action research from centre staff."
Another possible avenue for further research is to follow up Gardner and Miller’s 1997 A Study of Tertiary Level Self-access Facilities in Hong Kong by investigating learner training provision and take-up in other HK SACs.
Finally, more research could be done into ways of encouraging HK students to self-assess and overcome or work around their inhibitions in self-assessment.
Back to Main Page of this Dissertation | Next Page
Link to Part: Intro, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, Bib, Appx
Last revised on Tuesday, September 24, 2002
If you have any comments, please contact Andy Morrall at ecandym@polyu.edu.hk