Developing and Calibrating an Autonomy Scale for EFL Learners through an Adapted Model of Task Difficulty
الموضوعات : Journal of Applied Linguistics Studies
Farhad Motaharikia
1
,
Abdollah Baradaran
2
,
Hamid Marashi
3
1 - English Department, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 - English Department, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3 - English Department, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
الکلمات المفتاحية: Learner Autonomy, Task Difficulty, Work Conditions, Work-Scheduling ,
ملخص المقالة :
Improving learner autonomy is one of the significant factors in enabling learners to manage difficulties they encounter during the language production process and different language learning situations. The purpose of the present study was to deploy and create one model for task difficulty to account for the role and influence that it can have on developing and calibrating a new scale of learner autonomy. The researches tried to find out to what extent and in what possible ways varying task difficulty levels based on the adapted model can change the criteria for assessing learner autonomy and how learners assess their independence based on the adapted task model with various difficulty levels. A qualitative design was implemented to answer the research questions through MAXQDA to analyze the qualitative data. To fulfill this , 120 Iranian EFL learners, 62 male and 58 female, at an intermediate level at the Tehran Institute of Technology were asked to participate in task difficulty questionnaires and interviews as well as a piloted task with different difficulty conditions. After coming up with a new model of task difficulty, through some qualitative questionnaires, the calibrated scale for autonomy was developed. The result of qualitative phase showed that factors such as classmates, work conditions, and time have a significant impact on task difficulty, but gender and age have the least influence on it. According to the Learner Autonomy scale, it is divided into three factors Decision-Making, Work-Scheduling, and Work-Methods and learner autonomy can affect learning condition respectively.
Ableeva R. (2008). The effects of dynamic assessment on L2 listening comprehension. Equinox.
Anton, M. (2009). Dynamic assessment of advanced second language learners. Foreign Language Annals, 42(3), 576-598.
Barfield, A., & Brown, S. (2007). Reconstructing autonomy in language education: Inquiry and innovation. Springer.
Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. London: Longman.
Benson, P. (2007). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language teaching, 40(1), 21-40.
Brown, G.,et al. (2002). Teaching talk:Strategies for production and assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dam, L. (1995). Learner Autonomy 3: from theory to classroom practice. Dublin:Authentik.
Ecclestone, K. (2002). Learning autonomy in post16 education: The politics and practice of formative assessment. London: Routledge Falmer.
Gremmo, M.J., Riley, P. (1995). Autonomy, self-direction and self access in language teaching and learning:. The history of an idea. System,, 23(2), 151-164.
Harding-Esch, E. (1977). Self-Directed Learning and Autonomy. Report of a Seminar held at Cambridge, 13-15 December 1976. University of Cambridge, Department of Linguistics and CRAPEL.
Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. . Pergamon Press, Oxford.
Holec, H. (1988). Autonomy and self-directed learning: Present fields of application. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Kohonen, V. (1992). Experiential language learning: Second language learning as cooperative learner education. . In D. Nunan (Ed.), Collaborative language learning and teaching, (pp. 14-39).
Lamb, T., & Reinders, H. (2007). Learner and teacher autonomy: Concepts.Realities and responses. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Linden, G., Jacobi, G., & Benson, E. (2001). Patent and Trademark Office. U.S. Patent No. 6,266,649. Washington, DC: U.S.
Little, D. (1990). Autonomy in Language Learning. In I. Gathercole (Ed.). Autonomy in Language Learning , (pp. 7-15). London: CILT.
Little, D. (1991). Learner autonomy 1: Definitions, issues, and problems. Dublin:Authentik.
Little, D. (2007). Language Learner Autonomy: Some Fundamental Considerations Revisited. Innovation in language learning and teaching, [online] 1(1), 14-29.
Littlewood, W. (1996). Autonomy: An anatomy and a framework. System 24(4), 427-35.
Littlewood, W. (1997). Self-access: Why do we want it and what can it do? Autonomy and independence in language learning, pp. 79-92.
Littlewood, W. (1999). Defining and developing learner autonomy in East Asian contexts. Applied Linguistics,, 20(1), 71–94.
Macaro, E. (1997). Target language, collaborative learning and autonomy. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
McGrath, & Lamb, T. (2000). Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy: Future directions. Harlow: Longman., (pp. 111-117).
Mousavi Arfae, A. (2017) Language Learner Autonomy in Ontario's ESL Context. Electronic Thesis
and Dissertation Repository. 5003. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/5003
Murphy, L. (2008). Supporting learner autonomy: . Developing practice through the Australian Journal of Teacher Education, Vol 35, 1, February 2010.
Nunan, D. (1997). Designing and adapting materials to encourage learner autonomy. In P. Benson & P. Voller (Eds.), pp. 192-203. London: Longman.
Orakci, S., & Gelisli, Y. (2017). Learner Autonomy Scale: A Scale Development Study. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences.
Palfreyman, D., & Smith, R. (2003). Learner autonomy across cultures. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Pennycook, A. (1997). Vulgar pragmatism, critical pragmatism, and EAP. English for specific purposes, , 16(4), 253-269.
Poehner, M. (2017). Dynamic assessment of oral proficiency among advanced L2 learners of French. Doctoral Dissertation.
Prabhu, N. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production:Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 21,27–57.
Sadeghi, K., & Khanahmadi, F. (2011). Dynamic assessment of l2 grammar of Iranian EFL learners: The role of mediated learning experience. International Journal of Academic Research, 3(2), 931-936.
Smith, R., & Barfield, A. (2001). Interconnections: Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy. Language Learning., 7&8(1), 5-6.
Sternberg, R., & Grigorenko, E. (2002). Dynamic Testing. The Nature and Measurement of Learning Potential. . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thanh Nga, N. (2014). Learner Autonomy in Language Learning: Teachers'Beliefs. Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Ushioda, E. (1996). Learner autonomy . The role of motivation. . Dublin: Authentik.
Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy and authenticity. London: Longma.
Xiaoxiao, L., & Yan, L. (2010). A case study of dynamic assessment in EFL process writing. . Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics (Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press).
