The promotion of language learner autonomy has been recognized as being beneficial in various domains, from linguistic achievement to personal growth. Key to the development of learner autonomy is shifting control from the teacher to the learner. While much has been written about the construct of learner control, there has been little close examination of the practices with which language teachers release their command. This article reports on a study conducted in a Chinese private school intent on promoting learner autonomy, and explores ways in which teachers’ practices facilitated or hindered control shift and their perceptions of these actions. From a study of nine teachers within one English department, two case studies are explored in depth through analysis of classroom practices, interviews and post-lesson discussions. While the feasibility of promoting learner autonomy in non-Western contexts has previously been questioned, the present findings highlight the opportunities available within routine tasks, while stressing the delicacy of these opportunities.
BarnardR.LiJ. (Eds.). (2016). Language learner autonomy: Teachers’ beliefs and practices in Asian contexts. Phnom Penh: IDP Publications Asia.
2.
BensonP. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow: Longman.
3.
BensonP. (2003). Learner autonomy in the classroom. In NunanD. (Ed.), Practical English language teaching (pp. 289–308). New York: McGraw Hill.
4.
BensonP. (2011). Teaching and researching autonomy. 2nd edition.London: Pearson.
5.
BorgS. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36, 81–109.
6.
BorgS. (2018). Teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices. In GarrettP.CotsJ. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language awareness (pp. 75–91). Abingdon: Routledge.
7.
BorgS. (2019). Language teacher cognition: Perspectives and debates. In GaoX. (Ed.) Second handbook of English language teaching (pp. 1149–1170). Cham: Springer.
8.
BorgS.Al-BusaidiS. (2012). Learner autonomy: English language teachers’ beliefs and practices. London: The British Council.
9.
BorgS.AlshumaimeriY. (2019). Language learner autonomy in a tertiary context: Teachers’ beliefs and practices. Language Teaching Research, 23, 9–38.
CandyP.C. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learning: A comprehensive guide to theory and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
12.
ChangL.Y.-H. (2007). The influences of group processes on learners’ autonomous beliefs and behaviors. System, 35, 322–337.
13.
CharmazK. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.
14.
ChenR.-Y.HirdB. (2006). Group work in the EFL classroom in China: A closer look. RELC Journal, 37, 91–103.
15.
China Ministry of Education. (2001). 基础教育课程改革纲要(试行) [
National curriculum reform for Basic Education (trial)]. Beijing: China Ministry of Education. Available at: http://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2002/content_61386.htm (accessed September 2020).
16.
CortazziM.JinL. (1996). English teaching and learning in China. Language Teaching, 29, 61–80.
DamL. (1995). Learner autonomy 3: From theory to classroom practice. Dublin: Authentik.
19.
DamL. (2011). Developing learner autonomy with school kids: Principles, practices, results. In GardnerD. (Ed.), Fostering autonomy in language learning (pp. 47–58). Gaziantep: Zirve University.
20.
FarrellT.S.C.IvesJ. (2015). Exploring teacher beliefs and classroom practices through reflective practice: A case study. Language Teaching Research, 19, 594– 610.
21.
FeryokA. (2010). Language teacher cognitions: Complex dynamic systems?System, 38, 272–279.
22.
GlaserB.G.StraussA.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing.
23.
GrossR. (2015). Psychology: The science of mind and behaviour. 7th edition.London: Hodder Education.
24.
HardingJ. (2013). Qualitative data analysis from start to finish. London: Sage.
25.
HoJ.CrookallD. (1995). Breaking with Chinese cultural traditions: Learner autonomy in English language teaching. System, 23, 235–243.
26.
HolecH. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
27.
HuangJ.BensonP. (2013). Autonomy agency and identity in foreign and second language education. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 36, 7–28.
28.
JinL.CortazziM. (2006). Changing practices in Chinese cultures of learning. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 19, 5–20.
29.
KohonenV. (2010). Autonomy, agency and community in FL education: Developing site-based understanding through a university and school partnership. In O’RourkeB.CarsonL. (Eds.), Language learner autonomy: Policy, curriculum, classroom (pp. 3–28). Bern: Peter Lang.
30.
LeeS.H.SmithD.SergueevaK.2016. What do students think about group work in business education? An investigation into the benefits, challenges, and student-suggested solutions. Journal of Education for Business, 91, 380–386.
31.
LittleD. (2007a). Introduction: Reconstructing learner and teacher autonomy in language education. In BarfieldA.BrownS. H. L.LittleD. (Eds.), Reconstructing autonomy in language education: Inquiry and innovation (pp. 1–12). Palgrave Macmillan.
32.
LittleD. (2007b). Language learner autonomy: Some fundamental considerations revisited. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1, 14–29.
33.
MartinezH. (2008). The subjective theories of student teachers: Implications for teacher education and research on learner autonomy. In LambT.E.ReindersH. (Eds.), Learner and teacher autonomy: Concepts, realities, and responses (pp. 103–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
34.
NunanD. (1997). Designing and adapting materials to encourage learner autonomy. In BensonP.VollerP. (Eds.), Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 192–203). London: Longman.
35.
PetersonM. (2012). EFL learner collaborative interaction in Second Life. RECALL, 24, 20–39.
36.
ReindersH. (2010). Towards a classroom pedagogy for learner autonomy: A framework of independent language learning skills. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35, 40–55.
37.
RobsonC. (2002). Real world research: A resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers. Oxford: Blackwell.
38.
SeidelJ.V. (1998). Qualitative data analysis. Available at: http://www.qualisresearch.com/qda_paper.htm (accessed September 2020). Originally published as Qualitative data analysis. In The ethnograph v5.0: A users guide, Appendix E, 1998, Colorado Springs, CO: Qualis Research.
39.
ShuD.-F. (2004). 外语教学改革:问题与对策/ ELT in China: Problems and suggested solutions. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
40.
ShuD.-F.HuaW.-F. (2009). 中国外语教学理论研究六十年:回顾与展望 [Foreign language teaching theories in China in the last 60 years: Reviews and Prospects]. 外语教学 / Foreign Language Education, 30, 37–44.
41.
StorchN. (2001). How collaborative is pair work? ESL tertiary students composing in pairs. Language Teaching Research, 5, 29–53.
42.
StraussA.L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43.
SunC.WeiL.YoungR.F. (2020). Measuring teacher cognition: Comparing Chinese EFL teachers’ implicit and explicit attitudes toward English language teaching methods. Language Teaching Research. Epub ahead of print 7 February 2020. DOI: 10.1177/1362168820903010.
44.
TrebbiT. (2003). Curriculum development and learner autonomy in the foreign language classroom: Constraints and possibilities. In LittleD.RidleyJ.UshiodaE. (Eds.), Learner autonomy in the foreign language classroom: Teacher, learner, curriculum and assessment (pp. 166–184). Dublin: Authentik.
45.
VollerP. (1997). Does the teacher have a role in autonomous learning? In BensonP.VollerP. (Eds.), Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 98–113). London: Longman.
46.
WangQ.MaX. (2009). Educating for learner-centredness in Chinese pre-service teacher education. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 3, 239–253.
47.
WangY.WangM.-X. (2016). Developing learner autonomy: Chinese university EFL teachers’ perceptions and practices. In BarnardR.LiJ. (Eds.), Language learner autonomy: Teachers’ beliefs and practices in Asian contexts (pp. 23–42). Phnom Penh: IDP Publications Asia.
48.
WangY. (2016). Constructing learner autonomy through control shift: Sociocultural implications of teacher cognition and practice in a Chinese secondary school. Doctor of Philosophy thesis, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10289/10822
49.
WangY. (2017a). Reflecting on action: Open post-lesson discussions. In BarnardR.RyanJ. (Eds.), Reflective practice: Voices from the field (pp. 108-117). Abingdon: Routledge.
50.
WangY. (2017b). When teacher autonomy meets management autonomy to enhance learner autonomy. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 40, 392–411.
51.
WatanabeA. (2017). Reflective practice as professional development: Experiences of teachers of English in Japan. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
52.
WoodsD.ÇakırH. (2011). Two dimensions of teacher knowledge: The case of communicative language teaching. System, 39, 381–390.
53.
XuY.WongH. (2011). School-based curriculum development in China. Chinese Education & Society, 44, 44–63.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
