|
NEWSLETTER OF THE AILA SCIENTIFIC COMMISSION March 1999 Issue # 5
A WORD FROM THE EDITOR Welcome to the 1999 newsletter of the AILA Scientific Commission (SC) on Learner Autonomy. As most of you will receive this newsletter in electronic format, you may wish to consult the guide to the contents below, to help you navigate your way around it:
This year's newsletter is significantly larger than earlier issues. This is due to the inclusion of material related to the AILA Congress to be held in August of this year, contributions from new and existing members of the SC (section 5) and a new section on recent publications in the field. Contributions from members include reports on a learner advising project, learning strategy studies, the website of an Italy-based member, and discussion of the potential "technologization" of learning.
Sara Cotterall and Leni Dam
|
| Anita Wenden | Leslie Dickinson |
| 97-37 63rd Rd. | 13 Church Hill, |
| 15e Rego Park, New York | Edinburgh EH10 4BG |
| United States of America | United Kingdom |
| <wldyc@cunyvm> | <les-dickinson@churchhill.demon.co.uk> |
| Fax: 718 262 2087 |
If we do not hear from you, we will assume you support the idea (or, at least, do not oppose it).
4 FORTHCOMING
CONFERENCES
We have received details of the following conferences scheduled in 1999 and 2000. For further information, please contact the person(s) or website listed under each entry.
1999 National Foreign Language
Resource Center Summer Institute, Hawaii
"Self-Directed Learning: Materials and Strategies"
June 14-26, 1999
In 1999, the NFLRC Summer Institute will focus on methods, materials and assessment techniques to promote learner autonomy via technology in the less commonly taught languages. A workshop (June 14-26) and a symposium (June 24-26) will be offered. The three-day Symposium will facilitate the sharing of resources, ideas, and information about all aspects of learner autonomy through papers, panels, and demonstrations. Educators interested in self-directed learning are invited to propose papers (45 minutes), panels (1.5 hours), and demonstrations (1.5 hours) on such topics as:
.Empowering learners through development
of cognitive and metacognitive strategies
.Creating pedagogical environments for learner autonomy
.Learner autonomy and the use of technology
.Learner autonomy and the less commonly taught languages
.Monitoring and self-assessment
.Self-access materials and resources
For more information and the on-line application form, click on: <http://www.lll.hawaii.edu/nflrc/SI99> or contact Irene Thompson at: P.O. Box 3572, Princeville, Hawaii 96722, tel/fax (808) 826-9510,<napooka@aloha.net> <http://www.lll.hawaii.edu/nflrc/IThompson>
Workshop on Advising for Language
Learning, University of Hull - Language Institute, UK
28-29 June 1999
The workshop will look at roles, functions, tools needed to promote, support and manage independent learning outside the traditional classroom environment. Amongst the topics of the workshop: analysing learner needs, organising study plans, learning agreements, learning styles, the discourse of advising for learning, language learning strategies and learner development (otherwise known as learner training), the role of technologies in self-directed learning. Philip Riley, CRAPEL, University of Nancy will open the workshop addressing the concept of learner identity.
For further information and registration please contact: <m.mozzon-mcpherson@selc.hull.ac.uk>; tel 01482-465862; fax: 01482-466180 or visit the website at http://www.hull.ac.uk/langinst
Fourth International Conference
on Language and Development in Hanoi, Vietnam
October 13-15, 1999
The fourth International Conference on Language and Development will be held in Hanoi, Vietnam, from October 13-15, 1999. The Language and Development conferences work from the assumption that professionals working in various capacities in development have perspectives and competencies which are valuable to colleagues working in the same contexts, and that we need to find ways of listening to and learning from each other. In Hanoi, the conference will:
.strengthen and broaden networks of practitioners and researchers involved with language teaching and learning in development projects.
.provide a forum for the exchange of ideas and dissemination of information on practical applications of language learning and teaching research in development contexts.
.promote partnerships and interaction between development professionals and language education specialists.
A call for participation is available at: http://www.clet.ait.ac.th/hanoi/hanoi1999.htm. Further information can be obtained from: <clet@ait.ac.th>
Twentieth Congress of the Federation
Internationale des Professeurs de Langues Vivantes (FIPLV - World Federation
of Modern Language Associations), Paris, France
Language Teaching at the Dawn of the 21st Century -The Challenges of Plurality
July 22-26, 2000
The global theme of the XXth FIPLV Congress for which papers are being solicited, is that of plurality : plurality both as an aim to be achieved (the promotion and development of multilingualism in which language teaching has an essential role to play) and as a state of affairs which needs to be taken seriously into account in education. This recurring theme runs across each separate analytical domain with regard to the languages concerned, with regard to the public, with regard to pedagogical contexts of ever-increasing diversity and with regard to the materials and auxiliary media at the teacher's disposal.
Call for Papers
Presentation proposals can be sent by email or post to the Congress Organising
Committee BEFORE 1 JUNE 1999. Proposals must include the suggested title, the
language to be used, the preferred length and an abstract of about one page.
The Scientific Council will respond to these proposals by 30 September 1999.
The accepted papers will be allocated either to plenary sessions (of 50 minutes),
sections (in general 20 minutes, 40 or 60 minutes for workshops, or 5-10 minutes
for round-table presentations), or forum sessions (of the same length as the
sections). Each section will be devoted to a particular issue reflecting a theme
(or several themes) of the Congress. Contributions could also be made in the
form of poster sessions. There is no restriction on the choice of language for
Congress presentations
For further information, contact FIPLV President, Denis Cunningham at <vsl.dcunningham@c031.aone.net.au> or <fiplv2000@citi2.fr>
5 CONTRIBUTIONS
FROM SCIENTIFIC COMMISSION MEMBERS
Jeremy Bradford, Martina Wilson and Vicky Wright contributed the following report on their CIEL project.
Integrating Open Learning with the Curriculum: CIEL Project, March 1999
Now in its second year, the CIEL Language Support Network is one of ten language projects funded under the second phase of the Higher Education Funding Council for England's Fund for the Development of Teaching and Learning (FDTL). The aim of the project is to promote the integration of independent learning with the language curriculum through three regional support centers based around the project partners - South Bank, Southampton and Leeds Metropolitan Universities. The three-year project, which started in October, 1997 focuses on six related key areas of open or independent language learning: policy making, management, staff development and support, learner training and support, curriculum design and self-access learning resources.
Over the last few years there has been a steady increase in the provision of well-resourced university language resource centers and laboratories. The general aim being to extend and enhance the learning experience of Modern Language students who, at best, are likely to have two to three class contact hours per week (Mar-Molinero and Wright, 1993; Emery, 1993). Variety of materials and medium can cater for learners with individual needs (and disabilities), interests and learning styles, while variety of task can encourage development of the transferable skills and language learning strategies (O'Malley and Chamot, 1990) which lead to learner autonomy (e.g. Little, 1991; Wenden, 1991).
In practice, however, many resource centers are under-used. The 1995/1996 HEFCE/DENI Quality Assessment Overview Reports for French, German and Iberian languages highlight a serious need for further strategic thinking in the use of specialist learning resources in HEIs. They report a frequent failure to exploit what are often well-resourced language learning centers and audio-visual laboratories and call for the use of these centers and for independent study to be more fully integrated into overall teaching and learning programmes. A national survey of provision in the area of independent language learning in Higher Education (http://ciel.lang.soton.ac.uk/cielQUES.html) carried out by CIEL in autumn 1997 has confirmed these concerns.
Through a variety of project activities CIEL has set out to:
- identify current good practice
in Modern Languages in the management and provision of independent and open
learning resources and their integration with the curriculum and to promote
its widest possible dissemination, take-up and implementation;
- raise awareness of the strategic issues involved in planning and managing
a strategy for integrating independent learning with the curriculum;
- stimulate a culture in which teachers
and learners have the confidence to develop and adopt new ideas, new skills
and new teaching and learning strategies;
- move forward developments in independent language learning and to encourage
innovative activities including the use of new technologies;
- maximise the use of independent learning resources and facilities and promote
the development of learner autonomy through their integration with the curriculum.
CIEL is also offering a programme of regional meetings to provide a local forum for discussion and exchange of ideas and a telephone/email helpline to provide answers to practical questions ranging from copyright issues to selection of equipment and materials. Following a number of focus groups consisting of key practitioners, a series of forthcoming publications will discuss good practice and present a number of case studies.
The Project Team would welcome your thoughts, ideas and suggestions. For further information, visit our website at:<http://ciel.lang.soton.ac.uk/>
References
Emery C. 1993. "Integrating new
technology: from multimedia to hypermedia" In Coleman J.A. and Rouxeville A.(eds).
Integrating new Approaches. The teaching of French in Higher Education. London:
AFLS/CILT
Little D. 1991. Learner Autonomy 1: Definitions, Issues, Problems. Dublin: Authentik
Mar-Molinero, C. and Wright V. 1993. "Languages and open learning in higher
education", System, 21/2:245-255
O'Malley J.M. and Chamot A.J. 1990. Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition.
Cambridge:CUP
Wenden A. 1991. Learner Strategies for Learner Autonomy. Hertfordshire:Prentice-Hall
Andrew Cohen (<adcohen@tc.umn.edu>) reports that he and Amanda Brooks will be presenting a paper at AILA 99 in a Symposium on Psycholinguistic Research and L2 Curriculum Design. Their paper will present the results of a study of direct v translated writing processes. Here is a "sneak preview"!
Direct vs. Translated Writing Processes: Strategic Writing for Intermediate L2 Learners
There has been a prevailing assumption that thinking through the target language while writing in that language will decrease the number of errors resulting from native-language transfer. Yet the results from recent studies on the influence of thinking through the L1 while writing in the L2 have tended to go against the maxim. It would appear that for a percentage of intermediate nonnative writers, trying to think directly in the L2 while writing may actually result in a lowered standard of writing than that which can be produced by writing first in the L1 and then translating. In the translation approach to writing in the target language, past research would suggest that cohesion (e.g., through markers of transition) and syntactic complexity (e.g., clause variety) would be enhanced. Likewise, breadth of expression might benefit as well, since writers would be attempting to use a broader vocabulary and set of phrases, consistent with L1 expression. Possibly grammar would suffer because writers would no longer be using only those "safe" grammatical forms that they know how to use in order to avoid what they do not have full control over.
The study to be presented has investigated the value of including translated writing as a means of obtaining a more complete indication of a learner's written language ability. The research questions for this study were
as follows:
1 What are the relative advantages
and disadvantages of writing essays directly in the foreign language vs. writing
the essay in the L1 and then translating it?
2 Does rated performance at writing through translation vs. writing directly
vary with the target language proficiency level?
3 What impact will the proximity of the L1 to the target language have in the
relative quality of the essays in both the direct and the translated versions?
4 For bilingual writers, what impact will varying levels of proficiency in L1
writing have on the outcomes within the two approaches?
5 What strategies do monolingual and bilingual students use in direct vs. translated
writing tasks?
Fifty-five students from first semester of second-year French at the University of Miami were selected on an intact-classroom basis for the study. Most of them were native speakers of English but ten were Spanish-English bilinguals, with varying proficiency levels in written Spanish (high, medium, and low). A questionnaire was designed to provide demographic information on the respondents' age, gender, and year at the university, and language background information regarding their dominant language of literacy, their proficiency in Spanish and English writing (through self-assessment based on ACTFL-like descriptors), and their language use patterns at home, at school, and in the neighbourhood. The questionnaire also inquired as to their Freshman English composition performance (grade).
Two composition tasks were performed by all French learners: writing directly in the foreign language and writing in the native language first before translating that essay into French. The two topics (presented in alternating order) were: (1) Do you agree or disagree with this statement? There is nothing that young people can teach older people. Use specific reasons and examples to support your position. (2) Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Sometimes it is better not to tell the truth. Use specific reasons and details to support your answer. Each topic was provided in a bilingual format, both in the writer's native language and in the foreign language. In the translated writing format, the writers were asked to write the essay in their native or dominant language (allowing for revision if necessary) and then write a French version which was a product of translation. They were to write a draft and then rewrite it, including both more substantial revisions and minor edits
A Strategies Checklist accompanied each of the two tasks, and included possible processing strategies on different phases of each specific set of writing tasks, for the direct and the translated approaches. This checklist was constructed on the basis of empirical evidence of strategy use in similar previous research and on pilot data collected for this study. Writers were thus asked to provide retrospective verbal report as to the extent to which they made use of the various strategies while performing the task. Students were also asked to briefly indicate their reactions to the task - the extent to which they thought exclusively in French when doing the direct writing and their reactions to preparing a French essay through translation.
While the data will not be fully analysed until April or May, the expectations are that the study will yield valuable insights into strategies for incorporating translation into the composing process in a foreign language.
Francisco Gomes de Matos reports from Brazil that in a forthcoming article to appear in FIPLV (Fédération Internationale des Professeurs de Langues Vivantes) WORLD NEWS, which deals with language learners' linguistic rights, he has included an item which explicitly relates to autonomous learning. The article is entitled "The grammatical rights of adult learners: a checklist" and includes the following question aimed at language teachers: "Do I assure my learners of their right to learn how to go on building up/refining their grammatical proficiency as autonomous learners?". Dr. Gomes de Matos is currently awaiting publication of his paper but would welcome inquiries from interested SC members at: <fcgm@cashnet.com.br>
Francisco Hernandez Reinoso, an Assistant Professor in Educational Psychology at a university in Cuba, contributed the following summary of recent research on learning strategies in Cuba. Francisco would welcome feedback from colleagues. He can be contacted at Universidad Pedagogica de Piñar del Rio, 4 Rafael Maria de Mendive, Calle Los Pinos Final,Esquina: Ave. Borregos, Rpto: Hermanos Cruz, Piñar del Rio, Cuba. CP: 20 200. His e-mail addresses are: <alexis@upr.edu.cu> and <isppr@upr.edu.cu>.
Learning Strategy Studies in Cuba
Current movements in education and educational policies strengthen the need to see learning and learners as the center of the teaching learning process. In the midst of such movements, psychologists, educators and specialists in the field of education are reorienting many of their studies to aspects such as learning autonomy, learning styles, strategies and individual differences.
Cuba, a tiny Caribbean island with outstanding successes in education and public health among other sectors, is not ignorant of such trends, and despite the fact that the number of studies is limited in comparison with studies of personality, teaching methods and civic and value-formation, learning styles and strategies appear to be a novel and interesting field of study and theoretical controversy.
At present most of the studies on strategies done in Cuba are of an empirical nature aiming at describing the strategic preference of the students and exploring the correlation between strategic performance and individual variables such as motivation, educational level, age, study habits and learning efficiency or academic results.
Sporadic studies have focused on strategic training (e.g. Hernandez's 1998, 1999 pilot and experimental studies implementing a strategic training program for learners of English as a foreign language; Acosta's 1998 action research study aiming at training elementary school learners of English to use the strategies that Hernandez identified as discriminating high from low achieving language learners; Alvarez and Paneque's 1999 experimental training study of processing strategies with 3rd year Psychology students), most of which are oriented to specific skill areas or subjects. There is persistent confusion of a theoretical nature which has to do with the differentiation of strategies and often confused and misused terms such as: methods, techniques, actions, operations, or - the strongest dichotomy- academic skills.
Few, if any, studies have reported a comprehensive analysis of the strategies and their nature, and only one or two have incorporated the notion of training. Strategy studies and the topic itself are popular only within the circle of academics and university researchers and professors, and within this limited circle only in the Psychology and Pedagogy faculties. Discussion of strategies is rare among elementary, secondary and pre-university teachers despite the efforts of the pedagogical universities' personnel to update teachers with information on current directions in educational research studies and results.
In the future, as studies become more popular, as results spread, as more strategy literature gets translated into Spanish and the theoretical questions are answered, discussion of strategies will become common and strategic training studies become more an integral part of teaching programs.
Luciano Mariani (<luciano.mariani@iol.it>) is one of our newest members. He is based in Italy where he is a freelance teacher trainer and materials writer. He has published both journal articles and learner materials related to learner autonomy, learning styles and strategies (mainly in Italy) and is particularly interested in "teacher development to promote learner training". He plans to put many of his materials on-line through his newly created web site at: <http://utenti.tripod.it/learning_paths> and invites colleagues to visit the site and contact him directly for further discussion.
Christiane Momberg writes that she is currently working as a German teacher at Monash University (Melbourne, Australia) and is writing a PhD thesis on language learning strategies in the context of transition from school to university. Learner autonomy is therefore a crucial issue in her teaching and research. She reports that many Australian universities are experiencing a situation very similar to the one Beverly Carter described in the "Members' update" in our 1998 Newsletter.
Christiane's interest in learner autonomy started about 10 years ago when she studied for her MA at the University of Wuppertal with Prof. Dieter Wolff. After teaching in Asia for a few years, she has now returned to study, this time in Australia, and is pleased to see the increased interest and research activity in both learner autonomy and learning strategies. She is therefore very much looking forward to learn about all the new developments and to discuss them with colleagues working on related issues. Christiane can be contacted at the Department of German Studies, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton Vic. 3168, Australia, ph/fax (home office) : 61 3 9525 7667, <christiane@melbourne.net>.
David Palfreyman of Bilkent University School of English Language, in Ankara, Turkey contributed the following discussion of the relationship between Fairclough's (1995) concept of the "technologization" of learning to learner autonomy. David can be contacted at: <palfreym@ada.net.tr>
The Technologization of Learning
In her description of a "course strategy for learner autonomy" in a higher education setting in New Zealand, Cotterall (1995) reviews a set of measures which one school took to try and encourage autonomy in its students. Some of these seem to have been more successful than others: for example, a booklet designed to guide students in monitoring their independent learning activities perhaps represented the teacher's view of learning rather than the students', with the result that students tended not to "make it their own". On the other hand, making more opportunities for students to consult with teachers on an informal basis about their learning seems to have been more successful. While I feel that promoting learner autonomy is a worthwhile goal, I think it is easy both to forget that "learner autonomy" is primarily an educator's concept (rather than how learners themselves understand the learning situation), and also to assume that any system set up with the intention of promoting autonomy will eventually meet with acceptance and success.
An important distinction to make is between what Clark and Ivanic (1997) call "processes and practices". Successful language learners presumably need to go through certain learning processes such as remembering vocabulary, or realizing whether their own language output is adequate or not. However, the learning practices often associated with these (eg vocabulary journals full of mind maps; peer review; self assessment grids) are socio-cultural practices: that is, they are a particular, socially-accepted way of trying to reach a learning aim; and there may be many other means (more or less acceptable to different groups of learners, or teachers) to reach the same end. In fact, the means may come to be valued (or devalued) completely separately from the ends, or even come to obscure the process of learning.
To understand how this can happen, I have found it useful to adapt Fairclough's (1995) concept of "technologization" to the learning situation. Fairclough suggests certain things which happen when language is "technologized" - that is, treated as a means which is more important than its ends. When we apply these features to learning, we might look out for the following:
1 Design and general application of context-free learning techniques.
Learner training is a prime example of particular learning practices being "marketed" as the way to being "the good language learner": an abstract, idealized figure distinct from any real learner in a real social context. Mind-mapping vocabulary, for example, becomes a technique to be learned, as important as or even more important than the actual learning of vocabulary.
2 Pressure towards standardization of learning practices.
This process of "packaging" and "marketing" particular learning practices leads to learners being steered towards a certain limited conceptualization of what they can do as learners. Note the preponderance of vocabulary strategies in published materials which profess to promote learner autonomy, compared with the patchy treatment of grammar-learning strategies. As materials writers tend to look to other successful published materials for inspiration and validation, the proposed range of learning techniques feeds on and limits itself. Contrast this with the range of learning practices used by successful language learners described by Stevick (1989).
3 Emergence of expert "learning technologists".
The promotion of particular learning practices is in the interests of those who know "the way to learn". It is interesting to review the changes which have taken place this century in language teachers' basis of authority: to teach English as a Foreign Language, it used to be considered sufficient to have a good knowledge of English; then a grasp of teaching methodology became a further pre-requisite; and more recently, the language teacher must know not only "how to teach", but also "how to learn". Like many other shifts in ELT practice, this has been particularly promoted by native speakers; which is ironic, in view of the relatively poor reputation which native speakers of English have for learning other languages successfully.
4 A shift in the policing of learning practices.
The promotion of particular learning practices means that these techniques need to be monitored and "enforced" to some extent. Thus the teacher checks the students' vocabulary journals, or their learning booklets; or gives despairing looks at lists of vocabulary with translations into the learner's mother tongue. Whereas once it was sufficient for students to demonstrate that they had learned something, now it becomes necessary for them to demonstrate that they are learning in the correct way, using "best practice".
5 Strategically-motivated simulation by learners.
I work in an institution which aims systematically to promote learner independence. However, one by-product of the kind of technologization described above - in particular of the policing of learning practices by teachers, curriculum specialists, etc - is that learners in certain circumstances feel obliged to simulate "received" learning practices. For example, they prepare a token vocabulary journal because they know that the teacher checks them - however informally - on a Friday; or they write an essay in an exam and then afterwards hurriedly note an "outline" of the essay on the opposite page, because they think that this is what the teacher wants to see. These are extreme but real examples from my own teaching situation.
All this does not mean that we should not try to promote learner autonomy; however, it is worth reflecting on our means of doing so. I would like to suggest the following preliminary principles for the appropriate and sustainable promotion of learner autonomy:
1 The goals of learner autonomy, and the rationale for them, should be clear to (and ideally shared by) teachers, students and the institution.
As Cotterall (1995) suggests, ongoing dialogue between teachers and students is a key feature, and needs to be facilitated by the institution, for example by allowing quality time for it.
2 The focus should be first and foremost on learning processes rather than learning practices.
Techniques for learning should be developed by teacher and students in an exploratory way, with reference to their particular context, and to learning practices already used by learners. For example, I often see students in my own institution poring over textbooks in groups in the cafeteria; but this social learning style is not capitalized upon by the school curriculum.
References
Clark, R and Ivanic, R. 1997. The Politics of Writing. London: Routledge.
Cotterall, S. 1995. "Developing a course strategy for learner autonomy", ELT
Journal 49/3: 219-27.
Fairclough, N. 1995. "Discourse, Change and Hegemony", in Critical Discourse
Analysis: Papers in the Critical Study of Language. London, New York: Longman
Stevick, E. 1989. Success with Foreign Languages: Seven Who Achieved It and
What Worked for Them. New York: Prentice Hall.
Franca Poppi and Marina Mozzon-McPherson, two SC members working in Italy and the UK respectively, submitted the following report of a joint project on Language Advising conducted in collaboration with the Italian Ministry of Defence.
The MiSSILE Project
In July 1998 CILTA, the Language Center of the University of Bologna signed an agreement with the Italian Ministry of Defence to design a multimedia program to be installed in 150 barracks all over Italy. The Project is called Project MISSILE (standing for Military Service Special Initiative in Language Education) and it caters for the needs of Italian servicemen, with particular attention being devoted to those with poor education and coming from economically disadvantaged areas.
About 70,000 servicemen (55,000 conscripts and 15,000 servicemen who have signed up voluntarily for three years) will take part in the first pilot phase of the project which will last one year. The target language is English, but the project is more process-oriented than product- oriented, as the Ministry of Defence is mainly interested in making these young men realise how they can 'learn how to learn'.
The software includes two levels: Elementary and Intermediate. Before starting work on the computer and embarking on what we hope will be an experience of 'self-directed', rather than simply 'self-access' learning, learners have to complete a test consisting of 40 multiple-choice questions. The completion of this test automatically gives the learners information about their performance in general and about the lexico-grammatical areas that have to be revised. In addition to this, it enables the adviser to assess whether the learner will tackle the Elementary or the Intermediate Module.
In fact in our opinion the feature that makes the MiSSILE CD-ROM different from many others available on the market is the fact that in this project provisions have been made for an adviser to support and assist the learners, acting as the learners' counterpart in social interaction and engaging in 'learning conversations' which function as an enlightening process for the learners, as they can illuminate aspects of personal experience that without dialogue might not become conscious or meaningful.
The model used to organise the advising and the support is inspired by the DIAPASON Laboratories (DIAPASON standing for Distributed Interactive and Personalised Audio-visual Study Over Network) a project funded by the University of Bologna, and by the Hull model and their experience in advising for language learning. Marina Mozzon-McPherson, leader of the HEFCE-funded project SMILE and open learning adviser for languages at the University of Hull took part in a series of training sessions for language learning advisers organised by the University of Bologna, Italy.
About 466 language learning advisers received training at the University of Bologna in Italy on a five-day course during which different issues were raised and discussed, such as the importance of autonomy and the advantages of self-directed learning, the transition from teacher to adviser and the professionalisation of the role of the adviser. A book containing the proceedings of the training programme will be available in Spring 1999. Further information can be received by writing to Franca Poppi at <poppi@cilta.unibo.it>
Joan Rubin has just had a paper on Language Learner Self-management published (see details in Section 6). The paper details the components of learner self-management and provides an interactive model which elaborates how these components interact. It combines procedures (often called metacognitive strategies) with the knowledge learners use to effectively use the procedures. Joan reports that she will be giving a workshop for project managers from five European countries who are designing a course for teachers and teacher trainers to make them more proficient in helping their students become more autonomous. The project is sponsored by the Council of Europe and will be held in Uppsala, Sweden, April 16 and 17, 1999. For more information, contact Joan direct at: <j.rubin@erols.com>.
Mia Victori is editing a special issue of Links and Letters, a refereed journal in the field of English Studies. The special issue is devoted to Autonomy in L2 Language Learning. Mia welcomes contributions for the 2000 issue in the form of survey articles, articles which present a debate within their field, research articles, or articles which make recent research accessible to the non-specialist. She and her colleagues also welcome reviews of recent books (published since 1995) relevant to the issue. The new deadline for receiving copy is May 15, 1999. If you wish to contribute, please contact Mia for further details at: Links and Letters, Issue 7: Mia Victori (issue editor), Departament de Filologia Anglesa i de Germanistica, Facultat de Lletres, Edifici B, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain. Fax: (34 3) 581 20 01, E-mail: <Mia.Victori@uab.es>
Back to top
6 RECENT PUBLICATIONS
ON LEARNER AUTONOMY
This section includes a listing of books, newsletters, journal articles and other manuscripts published within the last 12 months. It also includes advance notice of a number of articles due for publication in 1999.
Collection of Papers on Learner Autonomy from AILA 96
David Crabbe and Sara Cotterall of Victoria University, Wellington, have edited a collection of papers presented at the symposium on learner autonomy held at the 11th World Congress of Applied Linguistics in Finland in August, 1996. The collection is entitled "Learner Autonomy in Language Learning: Defining the Field and Effecting Change" and can be purchased by writing to Peter Lang, Europäischer Verlag der Wissenschaften, Eschborner Landstrasse 42-50, D-60489 Frankfurt a.M., Germany, Tel.: ++ 49/69/7807050,
Fax.:++ 49/69/78070550 or E-mail <101622.27@compuserve.com>.
The papers were contributed by 21 researchers and practitioners in the field of learner autonomy from Asia, Australasia, Europe, Latin America and North America. The collection is divided into two sections. The first section - Defining the Field - focuses on issues of definition. The second section - Implementing Autonomy - discusses interventions aimed at fostering learner autonomy, and is subdivided into three sections: papers which report on working with groups of learners, those which discuss working with individual learners and those which focus on working with teachers.
Electronic Magazine on Language Learning
Phillip Towndrow of Temasek Polytechnic, Singapore, one of our SC members, edits a web-based publication called CILL Matters. CILL Matters is an electronic magazine for students and staff of Temasek Polytechnic (TP) who are interested in Independent Language Learning. Born from the combination of former print-based publications, CILL Matters is designed to keep readers informed of developments in Language and Communication at TP and to publicise the services, materials and staff expertise of the Center for Individual Language Learning (CILL). The URL where CILL Matters can be accessed is: http://www.tp.edu.sg/lcd/cillmatters/. Articles for CILL Matters are invited from readers who wish to reflect upon and share their experiences of independent language learning.
AILA News - Newsletter of the International Association of Applied Linguistics
In November 1998, Richard Baldauf, Stuart Campbell and Peter White produced the first in a new series of twice yearly AILA newsletters. Hard copies were distributed via affiliates but the newsletter can also be accessed electronically at: http://www.brad.ac.uk/acad/aila/. We have contributed information on the SC's activities to the first newsletter and intend to do so with all subsequent issues. Notification will be posted on AUTO-L when the next issue of AILA News is produced later this year.
Recently Published Articles on Learner Autonomy
In the interests of keeping our membership informed of recent research reports and other journal articles published in the field, we have introduced a listing of recently published articles on learner autonomy. Members wishing to bring other articles to our attention are invited to post details on AUTO-L.
Barhuizen, Gary. 1998. "Discovering
learners' perceptions of ESL classroom teaching/learning activities in a South
African context". TESOL Quarterly, 32:1, 85-108.
Benson, Phil and Winnie Lor. 1998. "Making sense of autonomous language learning:
Conceptions of learning and readiness for autonomy". English Center Monograph,
No. 2. University of Hong Kong.
Cohen, Andrew. 1998. Strategies in Learning and Using a Second Language. London:
Longman.
Drew, Fiona and Ottewill, Roger. 1998. "Implications of the increasing provision
of OALF (open or self-access facilities) for course design and delivery". Language
Learning Journal 17:75-80.
Gardner, David and Miller, Lindsay. (forthcoming 1999) Establishing Self-Access:
From Theory to Practice. Cambridge University Press.
Hurd, Stella. 1998. "Too carefully led or too carelessly left alone?" Language
Learning Journal 17, 70-74.
Hurd, Stella. 1998. "Autonomy at any price? Issues and concerns from a British
HE perspective." Foreign Language Annals. 31,2: 219-230
Kinoshita Thomson, Chihiro. 1998. "Junior Teacher Internship: Promoting cooperative
interaction and learner autonomy in foreign language classrooms." Foreign Language
Annals. 31, 4: 569-583.
Littlewood, William. 1999. "Defining and developing autonomy in East Asian contexts."
Applied Linguistics. 20, 1:71-94.
McDonough, Steven. 1999. "Learner strategies". Language Teaching, 32, 1: 1-18.
Mori, Yoshiko. (due September 1999). "Epistemological beliefs and language learning
beliefs: What do language learners believe about their learning?" Language Learning,
49:3.
Rubin, Joan. (due 1999). "Language learner self-management". Journal of Asian
Pacific Communication.
Rubin, Joan. 1999. "The Teaching of Learning Strategies" in Nihongo kyoiku to
gakushu sutorateji (Teaching of Japanese as a Foreign Language and Learner Strategies)
edited by Satoshi Miyazaki and J.V. Neustupny. Published by Juroshio Shuppan,
Tokyo.
Vieira, Flávia. 1998. "Autonomia na aprendizagem da língua estrangeira
- uma intervençao pedagógica em contexto escolar (Phd dissertation,
1996). Braga, Universidade do Minho, Instituto de Educaçao e Psicologia:
Centro de Estudos em Educaçao e Psicologia.
Walter, Pierre. 1998. "Experiential learning in language education: suggestions
for TESOL practice." Prospect (Macquarie University, Sydney), 13, 1: 53-67
Wenden, Anita. 1998. "Learner training in foreign/second language learning:
a curricular perspective for the 21st century." ERIC Reproduction Services ED
416 673.
Wenden, Anita. 1999. "Metacognitive knowledge and language learning. " Applied
Linguistics. 19, 4:515-537.
Yang, Nae-Dong. 1998. "Exploring a new role for teachers: promoting learner
autonomy." System, 26, 1:127-135.
Back to Newsletters