Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
AUTONOMY IN LEARNING: STUDY OF AUTONOMY IN
LEARNING BETWEEN UK AND INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS
A study submitted in partial fulfilment
of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science in Information Management
at
THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD
by
YAHUI GUO
September 2012
i
Abstract
Autonomy in learning has become an academic focus since the last decade in
educational area to enhance the efficiency of learning. With the hypothesis that the
respective personal background and local social culture will affect learner’s
awareness, motivation and levels of autonomy learning, and different strategies should
be applied on the basis of their specificities, this research adopted both quantitative
questionnaire and qualitative interview to reveal the main factors affecting learner’s
autonomy, from the aspect of level, behaviour and motivation. With 114 quantitative
responses and 10 subjective interviews for both the UK and international students of in
Sheffield Hallam University, this study demonstrated that cognitive factors show
different impacts on learner’s motivation and behaviour of autonomy in learning.
Besides, social factors also influence learners’ level and behaviour of autonomy in
learning, which are mainly derived from family background and education system. The
two groups of UK and international students have unique characteristics in autonomy
learning, affected by both their cognitive and social factors and resulting in respective
behaviour and improvement strategies of autonomy in learning. With the
comprehensive discussion and relationship characterization, recommendations are
concluded to promote autonomy learning for UK and international students with the
consideration of their characters to achieve better learning performance.
ii
Acknowledgements
Firstly, my sincere thanks go to my supervisor, Professor Ford, who gave me
invaluable support during the whole process of my research. Due to limited
understanding of autonomy in learning at the initial stage, we have several discussions
to outline the project and design the questionnaire, which helped me a lot.
Furthermore, he was always ready to answer my questions and provide suggestive
comments when I faced problems. Without his efforts and help, my research could not
be completed in this way.
Secondly, I would also thanks to all the people involved in the questionnaire and
interview. Though everyone is anonymous, I can feel the enthusiastic of their work.
Their contribution to this research is significant.
Finally, great thanks will go to my parents, who supported me all the time, especially
when I was studying in Sheffield. Their care and encouragement has promoted me to
keep working hard. Besides, I also thank all my friends in Sheffield, who accompanied
with me for the last year.
iii
Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................... i
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................... ii
1. Introduction .............................................................................................. 1
1.1 Project Rationale ................................................................................ 1
1.2 Aims and objectives ............................................................................ 1
1.3 Dissertation Structure ......................................................................... 2
2. Literature Review ..................................................................................... 4
2.1 Introduction to autonomy in learning ................................................... 4
2.1.1 Definition of autonomy in learning ................................................... 4
2.1.2 Self-determination theory ................................................................ 5
2.2 Levels of autonomy in learning ........................................................... 6
2.2.1 Awareness ....................................................................................... 7
2.2.2 Involvement ..................................................................................... 7
2.2.3 Intervention ...................................................................................... 7
2.2.4 Creation ........................................................................................... 8
2.2.5 Transcendence ................................................................................ 8
2.3 Behaviour of autonomy in learning ..................................................... 9
2.3.1 Object-oriented autonomy in learning .............................................. 9
2.3.2 Goal-directed autonomy in learning ................................................. 9
2.3.3 Composed autonomy in learning ................................................... 10
2.4 Motivation of autonomy in learning ................................................... 10
2.4.1 Intrinsic motivation ......................................................................... 11
2.4.2 Extrinsic motivation ........................................................................ 11
iv
3. Methodology ........................................................................................... 13
3.1 Research philosophies ..................................................................... 13
3.2 Research Approach .......................................................................... 14
3.2.1 Secondary Research ..................................................................... 15
3.2.2 Primary Research .......................................................................... 15
3.3 Research design ............................................................................... 15
3.3.1 Quantitative questionnaire design ................................................. 16
3.3.2 Qualitative interviews design ......................................................... 16
3.4 Participants ....................................................................................... 17
3.5 Data collection .................................................................................. 17
3.6 Analysis Methods .............................................................................. 17
3.7 Ethical Aspects ................................................................................. 18
3.8 Limitation .......................................................................................... 18
4. Findings .................................................................................................. 21
4.1 The impact of respondents’ background ........................................... 21
4.1.1 Gender and age ............................................................................. 21
4.1.2 Education background ................................................................... 23
4.2 The impact of knowledge about autonomy in learning ...................... 24
4.2.1 Awareness of autonomy in learning ............................................... 24
4.2.2 Experience of autonomy in learning .............................................. 25
4.3 The motivation of innovation autonomy in learning ........................... 25
4.3.1 Importance and goals of autonomy in learning .............................. 26
4.3.2 Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation .................................................... 29
4.4 The way of improvement ................................................................... 30
v
4.4.1 Behaviour of autonomy in learning ................................................ 31
4.4.2 Relationship with work ................................................................... 32
4.5 Results of qualitative questions ........................................................ 35
5. Discussion .............................................................................................. 37
5.1 The autonomy characteristics between UK and international students . 37
5.1.1 Respective level ............................................................................ 37
5.1.2 Unique behaviour .......................................................................... 38
5.1.3 Motivation ...................................................................................... 38
5.2 Improvement strategies of autonomy in learning .............................. 38
5.2.1 Levels of autonomy in learning ...................................................... 39
5.2.2 Efficient behaviour identification and application ........................... 39
5.2.3 Motivation ...................................................................................... 39
6. Conclusion and recommendation ........................................................ 41
7. References .............................................................................................. 43
8. Appendix................................................................................................. 48
8.1 Quantitative questionnaire ................................................................ 48
8.2 Qualitative questionnaire .................................................................. 53
8.3 Results of Questionnaire ................................................................... 55
1
1. Introduction
1.1 Project Rationale
Learner autonomy has been the focus of renewed interest in the last decade, both in
the area of educational research in general and in applied linguistics in particular. This
renewed interest in learner autonomy has also been linked to technological
developments in education. Throughout the world, independent learning involves
learners taking responsibility for their own learning and developing effective learning
strategies (Sheerin, 1997). It is quite important to identify the feelings and behaviour of
people about autonomy in learning, since it will help students achieve higher education
effect (Cotterall, 1995). Due to the respective cultural and education background,
students from different nations or areas behave distinctly unique in terms of learning
autonomy. To be more precise, the elements of learning autonomy, such as
motivation, level, behaviour and effects, will be different when they face the same
questions under the same conditions (Johnmarshall and Hyungshim, 2006;
Vansteenkiste, et al., 2005). Therefore, significant difference in the learning autonomy
will be realized between students from different countries, such as the British and
international students. It is more important for researchers to investigate the key
factors that cause the variation, since autonomy learning has become one of the most
effective approaches to enhance the teaching effects in respective stages (Della and
Fazey, 2001). Such study on the key factors between British and international students
about autonomy learning will also contribute to the establishment and improvement of
current education system and techniques (Lee, 1998).
1.2 Aims and objectives
The overall aim of this study is to reveal the characteristic of autonomy in learning,
through the case study between UK and international students. The dissertation will
discuss the respective type, motivation and behaviour of autonomy in learning. Both
quantitative and qualitative survey will be carried out to demonstrate the difference
2
between two groups and the detailed objectives are shown below to address the
following questions.
· To which aspects of the UK and international students’ learning is autonomy
appropriate?
· How much autonomy have the UK and international students been given
previously and respectively?
· How much autonomy would the UK and international students have liked to
experience respectively?
· How to identify the differential types of autonomy in UK and international
students and to improve it?
1.3 Dissertation Structure
To address the issue of autonomy in learning, this study argues the key characteristics
associated with autonomy and is categorized into six parts.
The first section is the Introduction, representing a detailed description of autonomy in
learning and the aims of this study.
The second Literature review part focuses on the roles of autonomy in learning, as well
as the types, motivation and behaviour of autonomy in learning.
The third section is Methodology, which demonstrates the design and methods utilised
in this essay, through both quantitative and qualitative survey between UK and
international students.
Findings is the fourth chapter, investigating the main results and findings derived from
the data and analysis respectively, addressing the specific issues of autonomy in
learning and the key factors affecting the performance of autonomy in learning.
The fifth section is Discussions, will comprehensively compare the respective
characteristics of autonomy in learning between UK and international students.
Further improvement strategies are also discussed and suggested in this part.
3
Finally, the Conclusion and recommendation chapter briefly reviewed the information
and findings obtained from this study, as well as some prospects and suggestions for
future work.
4
2. Literature Review
2.1 Introduction to autonomy in learning
Autonomy in learning is an old idea in the history of education but with new generation
recently due to the increasing population demanding education need to improve their
learning performance independently (Dickinson, 1993). However, it is never an easy
work to apply autonomy learning effectively, and there are several factors to be
identified and contribute to the implementation of efficient strategies (Sheerin, 1997).
2.1.1 Definition of autonomy in learning
From the view of the Council of Europe, the concept of autonomy in learning has
become a central idea about language teaching and learning since 1979, when Henri
Holec wrote his historical context of Autonomy and foreign language learning (Holec,
1981). Currently, requiring all the learners with self control and familiar with relative
learning skills, autonomy in learning is a strategy involved with learning management,
cognitive processes and learning content (Benson, 2001). Little (1990) has argued that
autonomy is a conscious learning action, in which students can learn things on their
own determination efficiently, but not under the force of the teachers. According to
Benson (1996), autonomy can only be fostered, not in the way of training or teaching.
Broady and Kenning (1996) also shared the similar statement that autonomy learning
cannot be trained on class through traditional ways, and the best way it on the basis of
promotion.
From the aspect of social psychology, Deci (1995) stated that autonomy is an essential
need for human being to achieve better social reputation or position with free and
volitional learning actions. From the intrinsic interests and motivation, people want to
be successful with specific characters to be regarded (Boud, 1998). Therefore, some
autonomous learners can utilize their intrinsic motivation, doing self determination and
control, to be responsible to their own learning and apply self management to achieve
better learning performance (Brookfield, 1986). Through effective strategies and hard
work of self control, the learners can strengthen their intrinsic motivation and the level
5
of self management to apply effective autonomy learning (Little, 2007; Williams and
Deci, 1998). To be more precise, autonomous learners can have an efficient and
effective learning performance because they are motivated and reflective. On the
other words, when the learners are autonomous, they have more chance to succeed
due to the intrinsic motivation. Besides inside the classroom, relative knowledge and
skills are also required for efficient and effective autonomy in learning, which should
be realized and grasped by the learners (Johnmarshall and Hyungshim, 2006).
From previous investigation on autonomy and motivation, some key issues have been
paid attention to, such as levels, behaviour, motivation and relative learning skill of
autonomy (Dam, 1995). From the aspect of cognitive psychology, cognitive
information processing theories (Anderson, 1980), it is reported that the nature of
individuals in autonomy learning is independent or autonomous nature of individuals,
and they can achieve that in terms of focusing on their attention on the process
information, memory works, or the declarative knowledge transformation into their own
knowledge. Besides, motivation also plays important roles since it is the essential
driven force of autonomy learning (Candy, 1989; Menter and Hulme, 2012). It will
affects different process of autonomy in learning, taking language learning as an
example, such as knowledge (listening and reading, Deng, 2007; Zhao, 2007),
expression (writing and talking, mentioned in Dam and Legenhausen, 1996), and the
understanding of the use of language (Allan, 1997),
2.1.2 Self-determination theory
Though the lack of less self-determined motivation will consequently results in weaker
behaviours of autonomy in learning, Noels et al. (2000) pointed out that extrinsic
motivation is not directly associated with the extent of self-determination. Since many
types extrinsic motivation can be classified due to respective background and
environment of individuals, their performance of self-determination varies to some
extent that some of them can realize the self-determination. Nunan (1997) also
pointed out that autonomy has several degrees or levels, which means it can be
carried out with different efficiencies. Deci and Ryan (1985) raised the idea that
6
self-determination is not only the results of intrinsic motivation, but also can be derived
from some types of extrinsic motivation. They therefore argued that self-determination
is an integral concept of both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, performing not only as
a capacity of autonomy learning efficiency, but also the demand of the learners to
achieve their goals. To be more precise, self-determination is not the results of the
motivation, but the external extent of it, which help the learners engage in their topics
and behaviours to obtain benefits from the learning process.
Due to the characteristics of self determination, individual learners can choose the
most appropriate way to apply autonomy learning on the basis of their awareness of
what they want and the source of their motivation. Based on intrinsic motivation,
individuals can control themselves in autonomy learning through achieving personal
improvement. On the other hand, with the extrinsic motivation, learners might
estimate their environment and outcome, utilizing the benefits to do self determination.
In this case, Deci and Ryan (1985) suggested that the behaviour of self determination
is derived from the motivation but also show its unique impacts return. In other words,
autonomy learning behaviour derived from extrinsic motivation can be regarded as a
type of self determination if individuals choose to be other regulation instead of self
regulation (ten Cate, et al., 2011). Currently, many relative investigations have been
undertaken, attempting to link the different types of autonomy learning, intrinsic
motivation and extrinsic motivation, together to demonstrate their identical
performance.
2.2 Levels of autonomy in learning
Autonomy in learning entails reflective involvement in planning, implementing,
monitoring and evaluating learning. When independence is used as a synonym of
autonomy, its opposite is dependence, which implies excessive reliance on the
direction of teachers or teaching materials (Benson, 2001). On the basis of different
autonomy learning process, the ranges and stages of autonomy can be categorized
into five levels, including Awareness, Involvement, Intervention, Creation and
7
Transcendence (Nunan, 1997). As for detailed learning process, they perform different
in the topic decision, information finding and structure finding.
2.2.1 Awareness
It is the primary level of autonomy learning, at which the learners only have limited
awareness of their pedagogical goals and what types of autonomy learning they can
apply. Normally, learners can identify how to implicate strategies for pedagogical tasks
and realize their preferred or most effective learning strategies. Besides, the detailed
assessment of the goals will be classified with the help of supervisors, such as the
potential way to execute the project, the materials to be utilized and the outline of
future work. The most identification for learners with awareness is to choose the
preferred way for they to carry on working and the practical strategies and partitions
cannot be designed by the learners themselves.
2.2.2 Involvement
At this level, learners are mainly involved in the process to select their own goals from
various alternative candidates (Nunan, 1997). With a range of choices, the learners
can choose the right one on their own decision, such as the topic of the project.
However, the learners at this level cannot create the candidates of the pedagogical
goals, but with the help of their supervisors. Though they perform better than those
from awareness level, they are still lack of relative skills to improve their performance
in autonomy learning, which restricted the efficiency and effectiveness.
2.2.3 Intervention
Learners’ autonomy mainly focuses on the modification and adaption of the goals and
respective detailed content of what they are promoted to learn (Nunan, 1997).
Learners can modify or adapt tasks depending on their own understanding. Though
the original plan is not designed by the learners themselves, they can do modification
on the topics and other adaptions to design the way for information search. From
previous work, the learners of intervention level can move on to the next step to
estimate the potential ways to execute the further work. As Holec (1980) mentioned,
8
the learners of this stage do not define their specific goals, and what they normally do
is to follow the idea of supervisors and do the information search empirically.
2.2.4 Creation
At this higher level, learners can create their own objectives and goals, as well as their
own tasks (Nunan, 1997). From others idea and previous experience, the learners at
creation level can create their own idea about the goals and objectives of the project.
Not only the topic decision process, but also the information search can be
independently carried out by those learners. Holec (1980) also pointed out that these
learners have the capability of executing the project design without suggested
materials or theories from their supervisor, but acquiring relative knowledge through
their own way and draw the outline of the project. All the essential elements and key
ideas will be defined and organized by the learners themselves, without any reference
to be extra provided (Vallerand, 1997). In other words, they are almost out of the level
of the students, just needing suggestions from others to modify the details of the
structure and adjust the idea.
2.2.5 Transcendence
Transcendence is the highest level of autonomy learning, indicating that the learners
have already been beyond the level of the students in the classroom. In other words,
the learners can practically associate what he has learnt or will learn on the class with
the real world (Nunan, 1997). To be more precise, learners at this level are no longer
students, but teachers or researchers. Where they can access information is the
library, internet and other academic resources, but not only the classroom. They can
use different ways to get the information they need and communicate with others to
draw their idea, like the reference or suggestion for them to organize all the materials
more effectively.
In summary, with comprehensive classification of the levels of autonomy in learning,
Nunan’s typology can help to distinguish the characters of learners from each level, as
well as what they can do and what they need most. It will contribute to the identification
9
of autonomy learning behaviour and potential implementation to improve the efficiency
of autonomy learning.
2.3 Behaviour of autonomy in learning
The autonomy in learning requires learners to take control of the management of their
learning. From the psychological point of view, learners will demonstrate their ability
and capacity to control their cognitive processes, while from the political point, learners
are given the opportunity to exercise control over the learning content (Blin, 2005).
With different behaviour of learner autonomy, it is normally categorized as the types of
control, independence and interdependence, regarded as the essential attribute of
learner autonomy. Different behaviours of autonomy in learning have been
investigated in many learning process, especially the language learning (Busse,
2010). Additionally, on the basis of different autonomy learning activities, deferent
types of autonomy in learning can be found in terms of respective strategy (Blin, 2005).
Generally, the three main types of activities can be identified, including object-oriented
learning activity, goal-directed activity and the operational composited activity.
2.3.1 Object-oriented autonomy in learning
The definition of object-oriented autonomy in learning is that individuals will
encourage themselves in autonomy learning actions to achieve higher skills for future
career, higher reputation from the surroundings and more experience for practical
work (Boud, 1998). In this case, autonomy in learning is not only focusing on specific
lecture or project, but the achievements through the process, which can contribute to
individual’s future career. Higher level of self control is necessary in this mode of
autonomy learning (Olearski, 2010).
2.3.2 Goal-directed autonomy in learning
Different from object-oriented way, goal-directed autonomy in learning pays more
attention to the benefits of specific task and want to get reward in a short time
(Murray, 1999). Such behaviour is normally observed through the learning activities of
the students, because their main goals are to achieve a higher mark to access to
10
better University or to get a better position after their graduation. Such goal-directed
autonomy will lead to the phenomenon that the learners will focus on how the goals
can be achieved in an easier or more effective way in a short time, but not on how to
achieve personal improvement. Besides, the short terms of course will also results in
short period of autonomy in learning applied and they will be switched frequently with
the change of the goals.
2.3.3 Composed autonomy in learning
Since either of the two behaviour of autonomy in learning has their advantages and
shortages, Donato and McCormick (1994) suggested that the potential composition of
the two actions practically with the particular consideration of learners situation will
help them more in learning performance. Self control is the most important factors in
this behaviour because the learners should adjust their actions between the current
and long term goals (Dang and Barfield, 2011).
2.4 Motivation of autonomy in learning
The learning autonomy can be derived from different sources, include intrinsic
motivation and extrinsic motivation (Laird, et al., 1986). Intrinsic motivation refers to the
motivation that engages in enjoyable or satisfying activities that someone would like to
apply the learning autonomy with free willing (Deci and Ryan, 1985, p. 39). On
contrast, extrinsic motivation represents another kind of actions which are undertaken
with force to achieve better performance and results, or get more rewards or less
punishment (Deci and Ryan, 1985, p. 39). With the hypothesis that people prefer
challenges if they can choose the activities without consideration about the risk and
reward (Vansteenkiste, et al., 2004), most of them will try to compete with themselves
in terms of holding more abilities and improving self-concept. Both intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation just follows this way to motivate individuals to make determination
for better performance or results to challenge themselves (Vallerand, 2002).
11
2.4.1 Intrinsic motivation
Derived from the heart and mind, intrinsic motivation is a king of needs of individuals to
achieve better performance or benefits in terms of personal will (Brouwer, 2012). On
the basis of cognitive evaluation theory, intrinsic motivation can be identified as the
demand of individuals to utilize an appropriate approach to enhance their personal
capabilities and skills to be competitive with others (Ushioda, 2006). Furthermore,
Noels et al. (2002) hypothesized that learners will attempt to look for interesting
situations to maximally represent their capabilities when they are free to perform
themselves.
Normally, there are three essential types of intrinsic motivation. The first type is in the
taxonomy of knowledge, which is associated with the situations of discovering the new
knowledge. Besides, the second kind of intrinsic motivation is the feeling of completion
and achievements (Ushioda, 2003). Lastly, the third type of intrinsic motivation is
derived from the interesting process during the activities, which make the learners self
satisfied (Ushioda, 1996). Different individuals will hold respective type of intrinsic
motivation from their personal willing.
2.4.2 Extrinsic motivation
Different from intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation is usually regarded as a
non-self-determination phenomenon, where it is determined by external regulation,
introjected regulation, and identified regulation (Wenden, 1991). From this point of
view, extrinsic motivation can be only found in the learners who are exposed to
external incentive. Normally, the behaviour of those autonomy learners is affected by
external resources or benefits, such as higher position, better reputation and higher
salary. Without such external benefits, those learners will not apply autonomy in
learning any more.
In some cases, the extrinsic motivation can be also self determined when the external
benefits are stable and can be easily compared with each other, such as the level of
salary. Therefore, some behaviour of autonomy in learning from extrinsic motivation is
12
similar as that derived from intrinsic motivation. According to Gardner’s instrumental
orientation, external pressure can perform as the self regulated extrinsic motivation
when it has been accepted by the learners as part of their life (Gardner, 1985). In other
words, such regulation is on the basis that if the learners will regard the regulation as
their own (Deci, et al., 1991). If they are accepted by the learers as part of them,
extrinsic motivation will perform like internal motivation, though it is affected by
external factors, such as the environment and surroundings. Such type of motivation
will therefore perform as the combination of two different types, engaged with specific
learner which is unique with others but influenced by the social factors (Deci and Ryan
1991). Thus, the behaviours of autonomy learning from extrinsic motivation can be
affected by both internal factors and external factors, and they will show respective
affection under different conditions or for different individuals (Lord, et al., 2012).
Another type of extrinsic motivation is the identified regulation, representing the
autonomy learning behaviour derived from a good a good cause (Lord, et al., 2012).
This type of identified-regulated autonomy learning is undertaken by learners with their
own will since they respect the values derived from it. Since the value varies from
different learners, such motivation is a unique sense of specific individual, resulting in
self determination (Schwienhorst, 2003). Though it is not fully self determined when
compared with intrinsic motivation, identified-regulated autonomy learning are
normally motivated by the activity or program that the learners are involved (Deci, et
al., 1991).
13
3. Methodology
Different methodologies can be applied in accordance with the aims, objectives and
characteristics of research project. To achieve
3.1 Research philosophies
According to Saunders’s idea about social science philosophies (2009), different of
them can be applied in both theoretical and practical application, including positivism,
realism, interpretivism and pragmatism. In this research, both positivism and
interpretivism philosophies are applied to meet the aims and objectives of the study.
Positivism is the way to utilize natural scientific approach to investigate social
activities, testing or proving the hypothesis and theories in terms of scientific scheme.
It is normally bases on data analysis from large population. The questionnaire is the
most commonly used positivism approach, which provides structured questions for the
respondents to choose the given options relative to their understanding and willing.
Most of them will be single choice questions with multi options covering most of the
situation. Through random respondent selection (Saunders, et al., 2009), which is
regarded as the central part of questionnaire, all the data will be collected from a large
of population (sample size) to do data analysis. Since the selection is random, the
answers from a large sample size can reflect the same distribution of the answers from
the whole society, resulting in the main advantages of positivism that it can draw the
conclusion from scientific approaches and the results can be highly accepted or
comparable by other research or the society. Nevertheless, it also has the shortages
that insufficient design cannot cover all the situations and cause the problems of
validity. Besides, personal reflection on the questionnaire is not considered.
On contrast, interpretivism believes the relationship is more important than individuals
in social science, demonstrating that the way to describe the society it more valuable
than how the individuals perform. To be more precise, interpretivism attempts to reveal
the individuals’ performance with their social roles (Saunders, et al., 2009). They will
not apply statistical data analysis since it can only get the conclusion assuming all the
14
respondents have the same reflection on the social activities. Instead, they will apply
mostly qualitative interview to collect subjective information from the interviewees and
try to understand how their performance is affected by the specific situation in their
social level. Open questions can also be applied in interpretivism, providing
opportunities for the respondents to represent their feeling about the topic and
conclude the main factors affecting their opinion. Though it can be applied in many
cases and interesting findings can be got, the results from interpretivism cannot be
expanded to large population since the effects of social relationship derived from
interpretivist approaches is highly dependent on the respondents themselves.
In this research, since the behaviour of autonomy in learning is higher dependent on
personal background and the source of their motivation, qualitative interview is
important to identify specific information from them. Furthermore, the comparison
between UK and international students rely on a large population, which can be
achieved through quantitative questionnaire approaches. Therefore, both positivist
and interpretivist approaches will be combined here to get a more reliable and
accurate results of the different in autonomy learning from two groups of learners.
3.2 Research Approach
Survey is a usually applied deductive approach, which is popular and widely accepted
in social science (Saunders, et al., 2009). With designed questions, survey can identify
the quantitative or qualitative feedback from the respondents on who, when, why and
how. From the view of primary research, questionnaire and interview are the two most
applied approaches to execute survey and get the data collected. With data collection
from a large population, the survey will do further data analysis to obtain all the valid
responses and get the conclusion through statistical data analysis (Saunders, et al.,
2009). It has the advantage that all the results derived from survey are comparable if
they are undertaken in similar ways. Both qualitative and quantitative data can be
analysed through standard procedure to achieve the acceptable results. Newman and
Benz (1998) suggested that quantitative research belongs to the empirical studies, and
quantitative data are normally statistical analysed to show the distribution of each
15
answers in a large population. In other words, the quantitative research relies on
numbers (Saunders, et al., 2009), where the percentage of respondents with the idea
of autonomy learning and the percentage of learners have applied autonomy in
learning before as examples. Two types of primary research approaches, including
quantitative questionnaire and qualitative interview are utilized in this research to
collect relevant information and achieve better results from the data obtained.
3.2.1 Secondary Research
Literature reviews are mainly referenced from academic resources in secondary
research, shown in the chapter of Literature Review. In this research, further
theoretical analysis and demonstration of autonomy in learning will be listed and
discussed based on the data and debates from secondary research. Those resources
include academic journal, academic textbook and other website with valid and reliable
data.
3.2.2 Primary Research
In secondary research, the information about autonomy in learning is generally
reviewed with general consideration. Nevertheless, these issues may lack of specific
questions and people’s feedback. Therefore, primary research is a useful and highly
efficient method to improve this case. A designed questionnaire is carried out,
especially focusing on two student groups, UK and international students.
3.3 Research design
To reveal the issues mentioned in previous chapter, a survey is going to be designed
to understand the roles of autonomy in learning. Some hypotheses are shown below
for the questionnaire design and the application of data collection and analysis.
1. Students’ idea about autonomy in learning relies on personal background,
which means that there might be significant between UK and international
students (Moore, 1972).
2. The role of autonomy in learning depends on the knowledge and motivation.
16
3. Autonomy in learning can be carried out in different ways by respective
student to achieve similar goals (Vansteenkiste, et al., 2004).
4. Key characteristics of autonomy in learning need to be found out through
qualitative survey due to individual’s specific opinion (Somekh, 1991).
3.3.1 Quantitative questionnaire design
l Respondents’ background
Questions will attempt to reveal the respondents’ information relative to autonomy
learning, including age, gender, experience and the knowledge of autonomy in
learning. It will also help in distinguishing the relationship between autonomy
experience and personal background and finding out the dominant group who
would like to apply learning autonomy during their learning process.
l The impact of knowledge about autonomy in learning
Questions will include if the respondents know the idea or not, apply the idea or
not, their feeling about autonomy, their previous experience of autonomy learning
and what kind of autonomy they prefer.
l The motivation of autonomy in learning
Questions will include the motivation type, the expectation and how much
autonomy will be given. Through this part of questions, the level of autonomy in
learning of UK and international students will also be identified.
l The way of improvement
Questions will include respondents’ idea about autonomy in learning in the future,
such as the motivation type, the expectation, how much autonomy, aspect of
autonomy, and the kind of autonomy applied.
3.3.2 Qualitative interviews design
Besides objective (quantitative) questions, qualitative questions are also provided to
collect subjective opinion from the respondents. Therefore, Face-to-face interview will
be the second approach for deeper information collection, through the ways of direct
interview, phone interview or video interview. All the qualitative questions focus on the
17
respondents’ idea about autonomy in learning and their willing how to apply it in
practical, as shown in Appendix 8.2.
3.4 Participants
For local British students from Sheffield University or Sheffield Hallam University,
around 5 of them will be interviewed directly after class or at their home. For
international students, another 5 students will be randomly chosen from different
areas, such as Asian, Africa and America, to collect their opinions through phone or
online video.
3.5 Data collection
All the quantitative questionnaires will be sent to the students of Sheffield University
and Sheffield Hallam University through official email system. Besides, survey
website, such as http://www.sojump.com/, will be utilized to expose the questionnaire
to the public and get more feedbacks. The questionnaire survey will be mainly
distributed through two ways. The first choice is to directly send them by email to the
students in the University of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam University. Some other
social networks are also adopted, such as Facebook and Twitter. The expected
quantitative feedback will be about 100, which will be collected and analysed for further
discussion. Besides, the qualitative interview will be carried out to get subjective
opinions from around 10 respondents.
3.6 Analysis Methods
The importance of selecting suitable analysis methods for the analysis of data and
information gathered from interviews, questionnaire surveys and literature reviews will
directly influence the identification, deduction and conclusion of research topic. To
achieve the research objective, both qualitative and quantitative analysis methods will
be chosen to analyse the collected data and information (Bryman, 2008). To be more
precise, the appropriate and reliable statistical tools will be Excel for original data
reduction and SPSS for further data statistics analysis. The significance (p-value) of
the difference between UK and international students is calculated through the t-test
18
module in SPSS with two tailed test. All the answers in qualitative interview part will be
copied and organized to demonstrate the main findings.
3.7 Ethical Aspects
In this research project, some personal information, such as age and occupation, will
be gathered through quantitative questionnaires surveys and qualitative interviews, in
terms of primary research methods. Such information will be collected only with the
approval of the participants and kept confidential. Information will also be kept carefully
and only used for this research project purpose only. After this research project, all
these data will be deleted absolutely with the supervision from project supervisor or be
stored secretly as evidence for further data qualification.
3.8 Limitation
Though this study has been carefully designed and carried out throughout the whole
process, there are still some limitations existing and will affect the final results and
conclusion of this research.
l Respondents’ understanding of the questionnaire and interview
As one of the most important factors, respondent’s understanding of the
questions will significantly affect the results, especially when the questionnaire
was carried out online, like the way in this case study. Respondents will have their
respective comprehension, and their feedback will be on different basis.
Therefore, further statistical data analysis will be influenced, and particularly
sometimes the respondents misunderstand the questions. To avoid such
problems from affecting the accuracy of the questionnaire, detailed explanation
was provided for each question, with simple words to make it easy to be
understood. With less barriers in comprehension, more validate information will
be collected efficiently.
l Limited sample size
According to Whitehead (2011), the questionnaire response rate is highly
associated with the way of distribution and the content of the questionnaire, which
19
might be a challenge to achieve an efficient strategy. The response rate of online
survey is reported to be much lower than face to face questionnaire, which might
results in the challenges of data reliability and accuracy. However, there is no
enough time to execute face to face questionnaire since it takes longer time than
online survey. Therefore, the concerns of accuracy and reliability might be
affected due to the limited sample size and lower response rate. To avoid this
limitation, the questionnaire was designed as early as possible and subsequently
it has been discussed with the supervisor to ensure all the questions have been
placed in the right place and all the options have covered our aims and
objectives.
l Limitation of online questionnaire
As mentioned above, face to face interview is more reliable to collect information
from individuals, as well as getting other useful subjective information from them.
Due to the previous limitation, online survey has to be chosen to execute the
questionnaire, which is carried out via online official survey website (Hewson, et
al., 2003). A good website is important for online questionnaire survey, and it will
determine whether the respondents can answer the questions appropriately.
Since there is no communication through online questionnaire, it is necessary to
represent a good administration to help all the respondents to understand and
answer the questions. Each question has a brief introduction to explain the
academic words in the sentence to make it clearer.
l Limitation of interview
As an important way of primary research, the interview in this research has only
10 respondents, which is of low number. It will affect the accuracy of the
conclusion since only limited interviewees have been investigated and the
conclusion derived from their opinions might be not sufficient enough. Small gift,
such as inviting them to have a coffee together with the interview, or a meal
together was applied in this interview to attract the interviewee and ask them
more questions about their understanding and experience of autonomy in
learning. Through this way, better results can be concluded from one interview,
20
effectively avoid part of the problems of limited interview number
l Concern of validity and reliability
Validity and reliability are the two important factors to be concerned in data
analysis. To meet the requirements of validity, all the questions of the
questionnaire must be designed directly associated with the research objectives
and the expected information collection can reflect the real opinion of the
respondents. Additionally, reliability is also important to the questionnaire, which
refers to whether the results can be reproducible in different times or under
different conditions (Saunders, et al., 2009). In this research, the limited time and
knowledge might cause problems of validity and reliability of the questionnaire,
which needs to be judged by future study.
21
4. Findings
With both quantitative and qualitative survey undertaken for about 3 weeks, 114 valid
feedbacks from questionnaire and 10 feedbacks from interview were obtained on the
topic of autonomy in learning. All the results are subsequently analysed and
demonstrated in this chapter from the aspects of personal background, impact of
knowledge, motivation and types of autonomy in learning.
4.1 The impact of respondents’ background
Since autonomy is related to some learners’ background information, and the study is
undertaken between two groups of students of UK and international, the respondents’
background needs to be identified. The significance (p-value) of the difference
between UK and international students is calculated through the t-test module in
SPSS with two tailed test.
4.1.1 Gender and age
From all the 114 respondents, their gender distribution derived from Question 2 is
shown in Figure 1. Almost equal male and female respondents are observed in both
UK (58.0% and 42.0% respectively) and international (48.4% and 51.6% respectively)
student group. There is no significant different in gender between UK and international
groups (p-value = 0.169).
Figure 1. Gender distribution between UK and international students.
22
From the study of Derrick et al. (2007), no significant different can be found in terms of
some domestic variables, such as gender, age and marriage status. The motivation
and behaviour of autonomy in learning are more associated with other personal
information, such as education background and their awareness of autonomy learning.
Thus, the equal percentage in gender of respondents group can ensure that the survey
efficiently covered the feedbacks of both male and females, without further illustration
of their impacts.
Figure 2. Age distribution between UK and international students.
As for the age of the respondents (Question 3), they obey the normal distribution and
the main age group for UK students are 18 to 20 (40.0%) and 21 to 25 for international
students (50%). Besides, no significant difference is observed between UK and
international students in the age distribution, the p-value of which is 0.825 and
indicates the responses are from the same age group. Since the main learners
involved in this research are students in the Sheffield Hallam University, their
expected age should be from 18 to 30 years old. Thus, the results illustrates that the
percentage of respondents is 94.0% for UK students and 95.3% for international
students, most of which locate in the targeted age group. The results of the
questionnaire therefore can honestly reflect the students’ opinion and experience on
autonomy in learning.
23
4.1.2 Education background
The education information of students from UK and international students are shown
in Figure 3 response to Question 4, which illustrated similar degree distribution
(p-value = 0.262). International students have a slightly higher proportion in college
qualification (35.9%) and undergraduate degree (40.6%) than those (32.0% and
34.0%) of UK students. On contrast, more respondents with masters degree (24.0%)
are observed in UK students, when compared with 18.8% of international ones. Thus,
only tiny affection of education background on respondents from different regional
and further analysis between UK and international students will not be influenced by
this factor.
Figure 3. Degree distribution between UK and international students.
Similar results can also be found in the major subject part, as shown in Figure 4 and
Question 6. UK respondents have parallel major distribution in Arts/Humanities
(16.0%), Social Science (26.0%), Engineering (30.0%) and Natural Sciences (32.0%),
compared with those of international students (14.1%, 32.8%, 32.8% and 35.9%).
There is also no significant different between UK and international group (p-value =
0.328) that the students are from similar major background.
24
Figure 4. Major subject distribution between UK and international students.
4.2 The impact of knowledge about autonomy in learning
Since the first level of autonomy in learning is awareness, it is important to identify the
knowledge of respondents and their experience to reveal relative impacts.
4.2.1 Awareness of autonomy in learning
Students from UK and abroad show slight difference in the awareness of autonomy
concept (p-value = 0.174), as illustrated in Figure 5 from Question 7.
Figure 5. Familiarity with autonomy concept between UK and international students.
Furthermore, the results also indicate that the behaviour of students are different.
There is no UK student have no idea about autonomy in learning, but 3.1% of
international students did. However, more international students have more
25
knowledge about the concept of autonomy, and their proportion of Very much (25.0%)
and A lot (31.3%) are higher than those of UK students, which is 20.0% and 30.0%
respectively.
4.2.2 Experience of autonomy in learning
Though UK and international students has similar knowledge about autonomy, their
experience performs unique (p-value = 0.047), as shown in Figure 6. From Question
8, More international students have experienced a lot autonomy in learning (40.6%)
than UK students (24.0%).
Figure 6. Experience of autonomy learning between UK and international students.
The results can be explained by respective education system, where students can
choose what they like in high school and college in the UK. Thus, UK students’ learning
process is on their own willing and autonomy behaviour is more object-oriented. On
contrast, international students usually have no choice and have to learn all the
modules with goal-oriented autonomy behaviour.
4.3 The motivation of innovation autonomy in learning
As one of the most important parts of autonomy learning, motivation determines the
efforts and durability of autonomy, as well as the effects.
26
4.3.1 Importance and goals of autonomy in learning
From Question 9, respective importance of autonomy in learning is identified between
UK and international group, as shown in Figure 7. It is obvious that international
students feel more importance of autonomy than UK students, especially in the option
A lot (35.9% to 28.0%) and Some (32.8% to 20.0%). The results demonstrate that it is
more important for international student to apply autonomy in learning, which might be
derived from their expected benefits to achieve through it.
Figure 7. Importance of autonomy learning between UK and international students.
As for detailed benefits students want to get from autonomy in learning, as data from
Question 10 to 15 and shown in Figure 8, international students show higher mark in
mark, development of learning skills, and difficulty of learning. All the rest benefits are
observed identical between two groups of students, indicating higher benefits are
expected by international students. It is obvious that the higher expectation comes
from different education background and behaviour of autonomy. In the UK, more
objective-oriented autonomy in learning, their expectation of autonomy therefore
varies without specific goals. On the contrast, the pressure of examination and
university entrance forces them to study hard and apply autonomy learning in the
subjects they are not quite interested. Such goal-oriented autonomy results in specific
focus on some benefits, which are found here as mark and learning skills. Besides,
they will feel hardness in those subjects and the way to reduce difficulties is also their
goal of autonomy learning.
27
(A) (B)
(C) (D)
(E) (F)
Figure 8. The potential benefit of autonomy learning between UK and international
student, A for mark, B for motivation, C for interest, D for how much to learn, E for
development of learning skills, and F for difficulty of learning.
28
(A)
(B)
(C)
Figure 9. The importance of autonomy learning, A for deciding on a study topic, B for
seeking information on a study topic and C for structuring/using information to put
coursework together.
29
From the aspects of autonomy learning application in different learning process, as
illustrated in Figure 9 and results from Question 16 to 18, UK and international
students share similar importance feeling in structuring/using information to put
coursework together (p-value = 0.394), but significant different in deciding on a study
topic (p-value = 0.0002) and seeking information on a study topic (p-value = 0.010).
International students show higher importance in both questions, indicating that their
goal-oriented autonomy encourages them to apply more self determination on topic
decision and information searching.
4.3.2 Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation
From Question 19 to 20, the motivation of UK and international students is identified,
as illustrated in Figure 10. As discussed before, the awareness, behaviour and
experience of both groups of students demonstrate that international students apply
autonomy in learning mainly due to the expectation of higher mark, more learning
skills and fewer difficulties, indicating the more extrinsic motivation. The results of this
part prove the idea that UK students show slight but not significant higher intrinsic
motivation (32.0% for very high level) than international students (only 17.2% for very
high level), where the p-value is 0.054. Besides, they show similar motivation from
extrinsic aspects (p-value = 0.907).
(A)
30
(B)
Figure 10. Motivation of autonomy learning, A for intrinsic and B for extrinsic.
The experience of autonomy learning relative to the expectation of both UK and
international students is obtained from Question 21 and shown in Figure 11. It is
obvious that international students have applied more autonomy learning than UK
students, where the 50/50 group is higher (42.2% to 28.0%).
Figure 11. Autonomy learning experience between UK and international students.
4.4 The way of improvement
The identification of characteristics of autonomy in learning can help distinguish
different level, behaviour and motivation, addressing the potential implementation to
promote their autonomy learning efficiency in future study.
31
4.4.1 Behaviour of autonomy in learning
The behaviour of autonomy in learning for UK and international students is derived
from the analysis of Question 22, 24, 26, 28, 30 and 32. With respective options given
different weight, such as 1 for “Tutor tells me what to do”, 2 for “Tutor allows me to
select from alternatives”, 3 for “50/50 negotiation between me and my tutor”, 4 for
“Tutor gives me feedback on my ideas” and 5 for “I decide what to do on my own”, the
impacts of autonomy behaviour can be characterized. As shown in Figure 12(A), UK
students have slightly more involvement in all the levels of autonomy in learning than
international students, which is 2.82, 3.29 and 3.31 respectively with the p-value of
0.071. It indicates that there is less self determination process for international
students and they prefer asking the learning information from their tutors, whose
decision will contribute more to their project, while UK students would like to do their
project on their own with objective-oriented autonomy.
(A) (B)
Figure 12. The level of autonomy in learning for respondents’ expectation (A) and
previous experience (B).
On the contrast, the real experience of autonomy learning in Figure 12(B) illustrates
that UK and international students share similar experience (p-value = 0.615). The
difference of expectation and real experience comes from the characters of education
system, in which the importance of autonomy learning can be reflected. For most of
32
international students, thought they expected more suggestions from their tutors,
limited communication and insufficient professional knowledge of tutors leaves the gap
and the students have to apply more autonomy in learning than expected. As for the
UK students, though they can apply more autonomy learning in topic decision, less
academic leads to the support of their tutors with less autonomy learning in finding
information and structuring information.
4.4.2 Relationship with work
From Question 23, 25, 27, 29, 31 and 33, the relationship of autonomy in learning with
the students’ project are characterized, as shown in Figure 13. From respondents’
expectation (Figure 13(A)), international students prefer more autonomy related to
their project than UK students (p-value = 0.011), which is in accordance with their
autonomy learning goals and affected by the goal-oriented autonomy behaviour. Since
they apply more autonomy learning for higher mark, the higher relationship with the
project will benefit their work. On the contras, UK students have objective-oriented
autonomy behaviour, which releases their willing of autonomy learning from the real
work, but more connected with experience for future work. Thus, less weight of each
autonomy levels is observed for UK students.
Figure 13. The relationship between autonomy in learning and relative work for
respondents expectation (A) and previous experience (B).
33
As for the previous experience, there are fewer differences between two groups of
students, with no significant gaps (p-value = 0.586). It is demonstrated that the weights
of UK students are higher, because they have to put their knowledge learnt from
autonomy to the real projects. Thus, more relationship will be obtained, as shown in
Figure 13(B).
Further discussion about the factors affecting respondents’ autonomy in learning is
obtained from Question 34 to 43, as shown in Figure 14. From the aspect of “Having
expectations of yourself as a learner” (p-value = 0.638), “Being prepared to work hard”
(p-value = 0.571), and “Having appropriate learning skills” (p-value = 0.320), UK and
international students’ performance is similar, while significantly different in “Being
highly motivated” which is 3.61 for UK students and 3.17 for international students
(p-value = 0.030) and “Having higher intelligence” with 3.33 for UK students and 2.82
for international students (p-value = 0.003). Besides, the weights of those two options
for international students are much lower than the other options. The results indicate
that international students pay more attention the results derived from autonomy in
learning (the first three choices) while UK students focuses on the origin. It is in
accordance with the results obtained from Figure 10 (results from Question 19 and 20)
that UK students are more motivated by intrinsic factors while international students
will be promoted by extrinsic motivation. The results of significance test also support
this conclusion that the p-value of each factors are 0.242 for “Having higher
intelligence”, 0.035 for “Being highly motivated”, 1.000 for “Having expectations of
yourself as a learner”, 0.858 for “Being prepared to work hard” and 0.729 for “Having
appropriate learning skills”. Only significant difference is observed from the options of
“Being highly motivated”, indicating that the benefits of motivation will contribute more
to the autonomy learning promotion for UK students. Therefore, further promotion and
implementation of autonomy in learning should take such different motivation into
consideration, where UK and international students will be applied in respective
strategy.
34
(A)
(B)
Figure 14. The factors affecting respondents’ autonomy in learning. (A) for previous
experience and (B) for future implementation.
35
4.5 Results of qualitative questions
In accordance with quantitative questionnaire, the qualitative questions are
categorized into three different parts to obtain their subjective opinions of autonomy in
learning. The first part focuses on their relative knowledge and experience, including
“have you heard about autonomy learning before”, “when do you get the idea about autonomy
learning”, “have you or your friends applied autonomy learning before”, and “when did you
apply autonomy learning and for what kind of things”. The second group of questions
attempts to identify the motivation of each interviewee, such as “why do you try autonomy
learning to improve your performance”, “did autonomy learning work or not, why do you think
autonomy learning work (or not work)”, “what kind of autonomy learning did you apply”, and
“can you tell me some details about your experience of autonomy learning”. The final section
of questions linked their knowledge and experience together to identify their potential
ways of improving autonomy in learning, including “what do you learn from the experience
of autonomy learning”, “do you think your last experience of autonomy learning is successful”,
“what would you like to improve your autonomy learning if given a second chance”, “what do
you think affects your autonomy learning most”, “what kind of motivation do you use to promote
autonomy learning”, “would you like to apply autonomy learning next time”, “would you like to
suggest autonomy learning to your friends or classmates”.
Ten interviewees were randomly chosen, including 5 UK and 5 international students
respectively. From their answers, it is obvious that UK and international students has
different understanding and experience of autonomy in learning, which is mainly
caused by their family background and the education system in each country. For UK
students, the British education system allows them to choose their interested major
since primary school. They therefore will start to apply autonomy learning in the
subjects attracting them, leading to the intrinsic motivation. As one of the interviewees
mentioned, she “was excited after the first class and went to the library directly and
attempted to get more knowledge about the topic”. In this way, the autonomy in learning
for UK students is object-oriented and the level of autonomy is on the basis of their
own willing. Some interviewees had the experience of “talking with the tutor for almost 4
36
hours once, just want to get a clearer understanding of the definition, which will not
contribute to the project but can help me in my future study”.
However, autonomy is different for international students since the higher learning
pressure and more importance of marks drove them to do autonomy learning with
goal-oriented behaviour. As one Chinese interviewee said, “I had to study harder than
the others since I want to be the best students in class. The teaching on class is not enough for
me to get advantages and I therefore applied autonomy in learning, usually extra 5 hours
each day”. Such extrinsic motivation provides not only high pressure on students
learning, but also leads to the misunderstanding of autonomy. Therefore, the
strategies to improve their autonomy learning for international students should focus
on their behaviour and motivation.
37
5. Discussion
From quantitative questionnaire, qualitative interview and the data statistically
analysed in the previous chapter, the differences of autonomy in learning between UK
and international students are identified, with some key factors characterized. Further
discussion will attempt to reveal the detailed relationship between each factor and their
correlation with the performance of autonomy in learning. The specific influence of the
factors affecting autonomy learning will be classified to provide clues of further
implementation. Furthermore, suggestive demonstration will be provided for the
improvement of autonomy in learning, especially for international students for their
adaption in the learning of British style.
5.1 The autonomy characteristics between UK and international students
From both quantitative and qualitative results, the difference of autonomy in learning
can be obtained between UK and international students. The key characteristics
identified from this research include respective autonomy learning level, unique
autonomy learning behaviour and different motivation.
5.1.1 Respective level
Though international students have more understanding and experience of autonomy
in learning from quantitative questionnaire, their misunderstanding of the aims of
autonomy learning can be found from both questionnaire and interview. They are
therefore involved in the primary level of autonomy learning, which is awareness and
involvement, to get higher mark. For UK students, since they choose their subject on
their own decision, the higher level of self control and determination result in better
autonomy learning levels, which are mostly located in involvement and intervention.
Therefore, though more international students have the idea about autonomy learning,
they do not apply it in a proper way, consequently resulting in the low efficiency and
effectiveness in autonomy learning. They need more professional train on how to
improve the levels of autonomy in learning.
38
5.1.2 Unique behaviour
The object-oriented autonomy in learning is the central part for UK students, while
international students are mostly involved in goal-oriented mode. It is derived mostly
from the respective education background of international students. Most of the
countries will apply mark judged education system, which means the estimation of the
students is only judged by their mark, but not their real quality or capability. If they
want to achieve better position after graduation, they have to get a higher mark,
resulting in the goal-oriented mode. Such mode can benefit them in terms of find a job,
but not suitable for them to establish good learning habits and realize the truth and
importance of autonomy in learning.
5.1.3 Motivation
UK students have more intrinsic motivation, which contributes to both current project
and future career. They would like to apply autonomy learning in the subjects or
projects they like or would like to devote to on the basis of their interests of personal
willing. Therefore, the intrinsic motivation occurs and helps them learn relative skills of
autonomy learning, resulting in higher level of autonomy learning involvement. On the
contrast, the motivation of international students is mainly derived from extrinsic
factors, for example, the higher mark, better job opportunities and higher reputation.
From the characters of extrinsic motivation, it can hardly last for long time and usually
switch with the change of subjects that the learners face. Thus, the unique motivation
types between the UK and international students results in respective autonomy
learning behaviours (Jonassen and Land, 2000), as illustrated in previous section.
5.2 Improvement strategies of autonomy in learning
Due to different characters of UK and international students in autonomy learning, the
reasons and behaviours of the limited and improper autonomy learning international
students is classified as mentioned above. Respective implementation can therefore
be suggested to improve the learning performance of international students,
especially for their learning in the UK.
39
5.2.1 Levels of autonomy in learning
More strategies should be applied to the international students to help them in
understanding the real aims of autonomy learning with higher level of involvement.
Firstly, more training should be provided to international student and show them the
importance of autonomy learning, not only for higher mark, but also benefits for the
whole career and life. Relative skills, self control as an example, should be
represented to the international students, which they might execute under extrinsic
pressure with extrinsic motivation, but lose when the pressure is not there. Besides,
the contribution of autonomy in learning with intrinsic motivation should be explained
to the international students, showing them the unique characters of British education
system and why there existed so many geniuses in the history. Their successful
experience through autonomy in learning will encourage international students to
change their motivation type and get involved at deeper autonomy learning level.
5.2.2 Efficient behaviour identification and application
Composed autonomy in learning will be suggested to both UK and international
students. International students should realize the importance of autonomy learning
for their future career and apply more actions on intelligence and motivation
improvement. Considering their education background, strategies to help them with
higher self determination are necessary. As for UK students, they should be promoted
by higher mark or more chance to obtain more benefits from the project and
encourage them to pay attention to the hard working and more expectation. From the
point of international students, career success and personal capability should be
emphasized to be achieved in terms on autonomy learning with intrinsic motivation.
5.2.3 Motivation
The different roles of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation make the motivation
improvement more complex. International students should be promoted from the way
of extrinsic motivation, such as higher mark and better record, while UK students will
be encouraged in terms of more practical skills in relative area. With previous
40
implementation from autonomy learning level and behaviour, both UK and
international students should have realized the importance of autonomy learning and
the contribution of motivation. Therefore, further implementation should be on the
basis of personal activities and respective motivation identification, classification and
improvement should be applied for each student, helping them find the most
appropriate motivation for them to execute autonomy learning with higher efficiency
and effectiveness.
41
6. Conclusion and recommendation
In summary, since learner autonomy has been the most interesting area in education
research, both theoretical and technical research has been carried out to reveal the
key factors affecting the efficiency of autonomy in learning and apply appropriate
strategies to enhance its performance. Due to the increasing international students
studying abroad, especially in the UK, it is important to investigate the difference
between UK and international students, from the aspects of behaviour, level and
motivation of autonomy in learning, to promote their learning performance.
This research applied both quantitative questionnaire and qualitative interview to
address the topic mentioned above, attempting to identify the characters of autonomy
in learning between UK and international students. With respondents from Sheffield
Hallam University, 114 quantitative feedback and 10 subjective interviews were
collected in this study. The results demonstrate that there are significant unique
issues of autonomy in learning between two groups of students. Social factors are the
main reason resulting in such phenomenon and relative promotion strategies can be
applied to encourage their learning in different ways.
From the aspect of the awareness of autonomy in learning, international students
perform better than UK students, though their understanding is not accurate. Due to
the pressure of mark, international students have more autonomy learning experience
with object-oriented behaviour with extrinsic motivation. Therefore, their autonomy
learning efficiency is mitigated since they focus on the current benefits of the work and
most of them are located in the primary level of autonomy learning, such as
awareness and involvement. UK students have better performance and they have
clear objective of autonomy learning and get involved in higher level.
As for the behaviour, Chinese students are more oriented by goals. In other words,
they want higher mark and better learning skills from autonomy learning, focusing on
the current project and resulting in higher relationship between their project and
autonomy learning. On the contrast, UK students prefer getting more skills of learning
42
from autonomy, which makes them pay more attention to intelligence and higher
motivation.
Due to the limitations of this research mentioned in the Chapter 3, there is still space
for improvement and further research can be carried out more smoothly with better
results if relative recommendations can be accepted. First of all, more description and
introduction of autonomy learning should be added on the questionnaire to help
students have a clearer understanding of each question. Though they are exposed to
the same questions, their different understanding will affect the accuracy of the results
and it can be improved through more comments. Secondly, longer investigation time
should be applied in further study, which is limited here and only 114 respondents
have been accessed. For statistical data analysis and with the consideration of data
validity, the sample size is expected to be over 300. With more consideration of the
limitation of online questionnaire, face to face questionnaire is suggested for further
research because the research can communicate with the respondents during the
survey, providing help to make them understand the questions. Furthermore, data
validity and reliability can be also guaranteed in terms of face to face interview since
the research can judge whether the respondents take the survey seriously and if their
feedback is valid. Finally, the experience and knowledge of research should also be
taken into consideration since the survey design and data analysis depend on the
quality of researcher. With preliminary results and conclusion derived from this
research, a deeper research can be applied and experts with more experience in
autonomy learning should be employed to do more comprehensive data analysis and
draw more interesting conclusion.
Word Count: 10944
43
7. References
Allan, M., (1997) Assisting autonomous performance, Prospect, 12 (3), pp. 4-14.
Anderson, J., (1980) Cognitive psychology and its implication, New York: Freeman.
Benson, P., (1996) Concepts of autonomy in language learning, In Pemberton R., et al.
eds, Taking Control: Autonomy in Language Learning. Hong Kong: Hong Kong
University Press, pp. 18-34.
Benson, P., (1997) The philosophy and politics of learner autonomy, In Benson P. and
Voller P. eds, Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning, London:
Addison Wesley Longman Ltd, pp. 18-34.
Benson, P., (2001) Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning, London:
Longman.
Benson, P., (2003) Learner autonomy in the classroom, In Nunan, D., Ed., Practical
English language teaching, NY: McGraw Hill, pp. 289-308.
Blin, F., (2005) CALL and the development of learner autonomy: an activity theoretical
study, Doctor thesis, Institute of Educational Technology, The Open University,
pp. 21.
Boud, D., (1998), Developing student autonomy in learning, 2nd edition, London:
Kogan Page.
Broady, E. and Kenning, M., (1996) Learner autonomy: An introduction to the issue, In
Broady, E. and Kenning, M., Ed., Promoting learner autonomy in university
language teaching London, Middlesex University Printing Services, pp. 9-21.
Brookfield, S. D., (1986) Understanding and facilitating adult learning: a
comprehensive analysis of principles and effective practices, Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Brouwer, K. L., (2012) Writing motivation of students with language impairments, Child
Language Teaching & Therapy, 28(2), pp. 189-210.
Bryman, A., (2008) Social Research Methods, 3rd Ed., Oxford University Press.
Busse, V., (2010) Maintaining Control Autonomy and Language Learning, System,
38(2), pp. 340-341.
Candy, P., (1989) Constructivism and the study of self-direction in adult learning.
Studies in the Education of Adults, 21, pp. 95-116.
44
Clark, I., (2012) Formative Assessment: Assessment Is for Self-regulated Learning,
Educational Psychology Review, 24(2), pp. 205-249.
Cotterall, S., (1995) Readiness for autonomy: Investigating learner beliefs, System,
23(2), pp. 195-205.
Dam, L., (1995) Learner Autonomy 3: from Theory to Classroom Practice, Dublin:
Authentik.
Dam, L. and Gabrielsen, G., (1988) Developing learner autonomy in a school context –
a six-year experiment beginning in the learners’ first year of English, In H. Holec
eds, Autonomy and self-directed learning: Present fields of applications,
Strasbourg: Council of Europe, pp. 19-30.
Dang, T. T. and Barfield, A., (2011) Maintaining Control: Autonomy and Language
Learning, Tesol Quarterly, 45(2), pp. 381-384.
Deci, E. and Flaste, R., (1995) Why we do what we do: understanding self-motivation,
New York: Penguin, pp. 2.
Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M., (1985) Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in
human behaviour, NY: Plenum Press, pp. 39.
Della, M. A. and Fazey, J. A., (2001) The Potential for Autonomy in Learning:
Perceptions of competence, motivation and locus of control in first-year
undergraduate students, Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), pp. 345-361.
Deng, L., (2007) Fostering learner autonomy through meta-cognitive strategy training
in EFL writing, Symposium session presented at 2nd HAAL Research Forum,
Hong Kong.
Derrick, M. G., Rovai, A. P., Ponton, M., Confessore, G. J. and Carr, P. B., (2007) An
Examination of the Relationship of Gender, Marital Status, and Prior Educational
Attainment and Learner Autonomy, Educational Research and Reviews, 2(1),
pp. 1-8.
Dickinson, L., (1993) Talking shop: Aspects of autonomous learning, ELT Journal,
41(10), pp. 1040-1048.
Donato, R. and McCormick, D., (1994) A sociocultural perspective on language
learning strategies: the role of mediation, The Modern Language Journal, 78(4),
pp. 453-464.
Holec, H., (1981) Autonomy and foreign language learning, Oxford: Pergamon. First
published 1979, Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
45
Johnmarshall, R. and Hyungshim, J., (2006) What teachers say and do to support
students' autonomy during a learning activity, Journal of Educational
Psychology, 98(1), pp. 209-218.
Jonassen, D. and Land, S., (2000) Theoretical foundations of learning environments,
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Laird, J. E., Rosenbloom, P. S. and Newell, A., (1986) Chunking in Soar: The anatomy
of a general learning mechanism, Machine Learning, 1(1), pp. 11-46.
Lee, I., (1998) Supporting greater autonomy in language learning, ELT Journal, 52(4),
pp. 282-290.
Little, D., (1990) Autonomy in language learning, In Gathercole, I., Ed., Autonomy in
Language Learning, London: CILT, pp. 7-15.
Little, D., (2007) Learner autonomy: drawing together the threads of self-assessment,
goal-setting and reflection. In E. C. Council for Cultural Co-operation, Modern
Languages Division, Ed., Preparing teachers to use the European Language
Portfolio - arguments, materials and resources Graz: European Centre for
Modern Languages.
Lord, S. M., Prince, M. J., Stefanou, C. R., Stolk, J. D. and Chen, J. C., (2012) The
Effect of Different Active Learning Environments on Student Outcomes Related
to Lifelong Learning, International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(3), pp.
606-620.
Menter, I. and Hulme, M., (2012) Teacher education in Scotland - riding out the
recession, Educational Research, 54(2), pp. 149-160.
Moore, M. G., (1972) Learner autonomy: the second dimension of independent
learning, Convergence, pp. 76-88.
Murray, G. L., (1999) Autonomy and language learning in a simulated environment,
System, 27, pp. 295-308.
Noels, K. A., Pelletier, L. G., Clement, R. and Vallerand, R. J., (2000) Why are you
learning a second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination
theory, Language Learning, 50(1), pp. 57-85.
Nunan, D., (1997) Designing and adapting materials to encourage learner autonomy.
In P. Benson, and P. Voller, eds, Autonomy and independence in language
learning, London: Longman.
46
Olearski, J., (2010) Maintaining Control: Autonomy and Language Learning, ELT
Journal, 64(4), pp. 486-489.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A., (2009) Research Methods for Business
Students, 5th Edition Pearson Education Limited, England.
Schwienhorst, K., (2003) Learner autonomy and tandem learning: putting principles
into practice in synchronous and asynchronous telecommunication
environments, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(5), pp. 427-443.
Sheerin, S., (1997) An exploration of the relationship between self-access and
independent learning, In Benson, P. and Voller, P., Ed., Autonomy and
independence in language learning, Essex: Longman - Applied Linguistic and
Language Study, pp. 54-65.
Silverman, D., (2000) Doing qualitative research: a practical handbook, London: Sage
Publications.
Somekh, B., (1991) Pupil Autonomy in Learning with Microcomputers: rhetoric or
reality? An Action Research Study, Cambridge Journal of Education, 21(1), pp.
47-64.
ten Cate, T. J., Kusurkar, R. A. and Williams, G. C., (2011) How self-determination
theory can assist our understanding of the teaching and learning processes in
medical education. AMEE Guide No. 59, Medical Teacher, 33(12), pp. 961-973.
Ushioda, E., (1996) Learner autonomy 5: The role of motivation, Dublin: Authentik.
Ushioda, E., (2003) Motivation as a socially mediated process, In D. Little, et al., eds,
Learner autonomy in the foreign language classroom: Teacher, learner,
curriculum and assessment, Dublin: Authentik, pp. 90-102.
Ushioda, E., (2006) Motivation, autonomy and sociocultural theory. In P. Benson, eds,
Learner autonomy 8: Insider perspectives on autonomy in language learning and
teaching, Dublin: Authentik, pp. 5-24
Vallerand, R. J., (1997) Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic an extrinsic motivation,
Advances in experimental social psychology, 29, pp.271-360.
Vallerand, R. J., (2002) Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: A hierarchical model. In E. L.
Deci, and R. M. Ryan eds, Handbook of self-determination research, Rochester:
The University of Rochester Press, pp. 37-64.
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M. and Deci, E. L., (2004)
Motivating Learning, Performance, and Persistence: The Synergistic Effects of
47
Intrinsic Goal Contents and Autonomy-Supportive Contexts, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), pp. 246-260.
Vansteenkiste, M. Zhou, M. Lens, W. and Soenens, B., (2005) Experiences of
Autonomy and Control among Chinese Learners: Vitalizing or Immobilizing?
Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(3), pp. 468-483.
Wenden, A., (1991) Learner strategies for learner autonomy, Hertfordshire: Prentice
Hall International (UK).
Whitehead, L., (2011) Methodological Issues in Internet-Mediated Research: A
Randomized Comparison of Internet Versus Mailed Questionnaires, Journal of
Mediate Internet Research, 13(4), e109.
Williams, G. C. and Deci, E. L., (1998) The Importance of Supporting Autonomy in
Medical Education, Annals of Internal Medicine, 129(4), pp. 303-308.
Zhao, J., (2007) Self-regulated English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing of tertiary
students: A motivational and strategy instructional perspectives, Seminar
presented at Postgraduate Research Conference (PRC), The University of Hong
Kong.
48
8. Appendix
8.1 Quantitative questionnaire
1. Are you a UK or an international student?
1. UK
2. International
2. What is your gender?
1. Male
2. Female
3. How old are you?
1. <18
2. 18-20
3. 21-25
4. 26-30
5. >30
4. Do you have any of the following?
1. College qualification
2. Undergraduate degree
3. Masters degree
4. PhD
5. Which year are you in, if you choose undergraduate degree in Question 3?
1. First year
2. Second year
3. Third year
6. What is your major subject?
1. Natural Sciences
2. Engineering
3. Social Science
4. Arts/Humanities
5. Other (please specify)
49
Your views on autonomy in learning
7. How familiar are you with the concept of “autonomy in learning”?
Very much A lot Some Little None 7
8. Have you experienced autonomy in your learning before?
Always Frequently Sometimes Seldom Never 7
9. How important is it for you to have autonomy in your future studies?
Very much A lot To some
extent A little Not at all
7
To what extent do you think that autonomy in learning (as opposed to more traditional
teacher led learning) is likely to lead to the following?
10. The marks you get
Better marks No effect Worse marks 7
11. Your motivation to study
More motivation No effect Less motivation 7
12. Your interest in the subject
More interest No effect Less interest 7
13. How much you learn
Learning more content No effect Learning less content 7
14. Development of your learning skills
More learning skills No effect Less learning skills 7
15. Difficulty of learning
More difficult learning No effect Less difficult learning 7
How important is autonomy in each of the following aspects of your learning?
16. Deciding on a study topic (e.g. an essay topic)
Extremely
important
Quite
important Unsure
Of little
importance
Not
important 7
50
17. Seeking information on a study topic (e.g. literature reviewing)
Extremely
important
Quite
important Unsure
Of little
importance
Not
important 7
18. Structuring/using information to put coursework together (e.g. using it to
construct an essay together, or answer a research question)
Extremely
important
Quite
important Unsure
Of little
importance
Not
important 7
19. How intrinsically motivated are you in studying (to learn as much as you can
out of interest, more than to get good marks/qualifications) ?
Very high High 50/50 Low Very low 7
20. How extrinsically motivated are you in studying (to get good
marks/qualifications, more than from interest in learning)?
Very high High 50/50 Low Very low 7
21. In your learning to date, have you had as much autonomy as you would have
liked?
100% 75% 50% 25% 0% 7
What level of autonomy would you ideally like in relation to deciding a topic (i.e.
essay title or research project)?
22. Level of autonomy you would like
Tutor tells
me what to
do
Tutor allows me
to select from
alternatives
50/50 negotiation
between me and
my tutor
Tutor gives me
feedback on my
ideas
I decide what to
do on my own 7
23. Relating to how much of your work?
All of my
work
Most of my
work
50/50 A small % of
my work
None of my
work 7
51
What level of autonomy would you ideally like in relation to finding
information/resources to learn about a topic?
24. Level of autonomy you would like
Tutor tells
me what to
do
Tutor allows me
to select from
alternatives
50/50 negotiation
between me and
my tutor
Tutor gives me
feedback on my
ideas
I decide what to
do on my own 7
25. Relating to how much of your work?
All of my
work
Most of my
work
50/50 A small % of
my work
None of my
work 7
What level of autonomy would you ideally like in relation to structuring/using
information (putting coursework together)?
26. Level of autonomy you would like
Tutor tells
me what to
do
Tutor allows me
to select from
alternatives
50/50 negotiation
between me and
my tutor
Tutor gives me
feedback on my
ideas
I decide what to
do on my own 7
27. Relating to how much of your work?
All of my
work
Most of my
work
50/50 A small % of
my work
None of my
work 7
What level of autonomy have you actually experienced in relation to deciding a topic
(i.e. essay title or research project)?
28. Level of autonomy learning
Tutor tells
me what to
do
Tutor allows me
to select from
alternatives
50/50 negotiation
between me and
my tutor
Tutor gives me
feedback on my
ideas
I decide what to
do on my own 7
29. Relating to your work
All of my
work
Most of my
work
50/50 A small % of
my work
None of my
work 7
What level of autonomy have you actually experienced in relation to finding
information/resources to learn about a topic?
30. Level of autonomy learning
52
Tutor tells
me what to
do
Tutor allows me
to select from
alternatives
50/50 negotiation
between me and
my tutor
Tutor gives me
feedback on my
ideas
I decide what to
do on my own 7
31. Relating to how much of your work?
All of my
work
Most of my
work
50/50 A small % of
my work
None of my
work 7
What level of autonomy have you actually experienced in relation to
using/structuring information (putting coursework together) ?
32. Level of autonomy learning
Tutor tells
me what to
do
Tutor allows me
to select from
alternatives
50/50 negotiation
between me and
my tutor
Tutor gives me
feedback on my
ideas
I decide what to
do on my own 7
33. Relating to how much of your work?
All of my
work
Most of my
work
50/50 A small % of
my work
None of my
work 7
What is the most important factor affecting the effects of autonomy?
34. Having high intelligence
The most
important Very important
Of some
importance
Not very
important
The least
important
7
35. Being highly motivated
The most
important Very important
Of some
importance
Not very
important
The least
important
7
36. Having high expectations of yourself as a learner
The most
important Very important
Of some
importance
Not very
important
The least
important
7
37. Being prepared to work hard
The most
important Very important
Of some
importance
Not very
important
The least
important
7
38. Having appropriate learning skills
The most
important Very important
Of some
importance
Not very
important
The least
important
7
53
What do you prefer in your future improvement?
39. Having high intelligence
The most
important Very important
Of some
importance
Not very
important
The least
important
7
40. Being highly motivation
The most
important Very important
Of some
importance
Not very
important
The least
important
7
41. Having expectations of yourself as a learner
The most
important Very important
Of some
importance
Not very
important
The least
important
7
42. Being prepared to work hard
The most
important Very important
Of some
importance
Not very
important
The least
important
7
43. Having appropriate learning skills
The most
important Very important
Of some
importance
Not very
important
The least
important
7
8.2 Qualitative questionnaire
• Q1: Have you heard about autonomy learning before?
• Q2: When do you get the idea about autonomy learning?
• Q3: Have you or your friends applied autonomy learning before?
• Q4: When did you apply autonomy learning and for what kind of things?
• Q6: Why do you try autonomy learning to improve your performance?
• Q7: Did autonomy learning work or not?
• Q8: Why do you think autonomy learning work (or not work)?
• Q9: What kind of autonomy learning did you apply?
• Q10: Can you tell me some details about your experience of autonomy learning?
• Q11: What do you learn from the experience of autonomy learning?
54
• Q12: Do you think your last experience of autonomy learning is successful?
• Q13: What would you like to improve your autonomy learning if given a second
chance?
• Q14: What do you think affects your autonomy learning most?
• Q15: What kind of motivation do you use to promote autonomy learning?
• Q16: Would you like to apply autonomy learning next time?
• Q17: Would you like to suggest autonomy learning to your friends or classmates?
55
8.3 Results of Questionnaire
1. Are you a UK or an international student? Number Percentage
UK 50 43.86%
International 64 56.14%
2. What is your gender? Number Percentage
Male 60 52.63%
Female 54 47.37%
3. How old are you? Number Percentage
<18 2 1.75%
18-20 37 32.46%
21-25 47 41.23%
26-30 24 21.05%
>30 4 3.51%
4. Do you have any of the following? Number Percentage
College qualification 39 34.21%
Undergraduate degree 43 37.72%
Masters degree 25 21.93%
PhD 7 6.14%
5. Which year are you in, if you choose
undergraduate? Number Percentage
First year 11 26.19%
Second year 14 33.33%
Third year 17 40.48%
56
6. What is your major subject? Number Percentage
Natural Sciences 27 23.68%
Engineering 36 31.58%
Social Science 34 29.82%
Arts/Humanities 17 14.91%
7. How familiar are you with the concept of
“autonomy in learning”? Number Percentage
Very much 26 22.81%
A lot 35 30.70%
Some 38 33.33%
Little 13 11.40%
None 2 1.75%
8. Your views on autonomy in learning
Very much A lot Some Little None
How familiar are you with the
concept of “autonomy in learning”?
26 35 38 13 2
22.81% 30.70% 33.33% 11.40% 1.75%
Have you experienced autonomy in
your learning before?
13 38 36 24 3
11.40% 33.33% 31.58% 21.05% 2.63%
How important is it for you to have
autonomy in your future studies?
24 37 31 12 10
21.05% 32.46% 27.19% 10.53% 8.77%
57
9. To what extent do you think that autonomy in learning (as opposed to more
traditional teacher led learning) is likely to lead to the following?
More Neutral Less
The marks you get 50 53 11
43.86% 46.49% 9.65%
Your motivation to study 44 57 13
38.60% 50.00% 11.40%
Your interest in the subject 52 47 15
45.61% 41.23% 13.16%
How much you learn 31 69 14
27.19% 60.53% 12.28%
Development of your learning skills 48 48 18
42.11% 42.11% 15.79%
Difficulty of learning 24 70 20
21.05% 61.40% 17.54%
10. How important is autonomy in each of the following aspects of your learning?
Extremely
important
Quite
important
Unsure
Of little
importance
Not
important
Deciding on a study
topic
24 36 17 30 7
21.05% 31.58% 14.91% 26.32% 6.14%
Seeking information
on a study topic
20 33 40 17 4
17.54% 28.95% 35.09% 14.91% 3.51%
Structuring/using
information to put
coursework together
21 34 34 23 2
18.42% 29.82% 29.82% 20.18% 1.75%
58
11. How important is autonomy in each of the following aspects of your
learning?
Intrinsic motivation 27 47 28 8 4
23.68% 41.23% 24.56% 7.02% 3.51%
Extrinsic motivation 10 39 48 14 3
8.77% 34.21% 42.11% 12.28% 2.63%
12. How extrinsically motivated are you in studying
(to get good marks/qualifications, more than
from interest in learning)?
Number Percentage
100% 0 0.00%
75% 45 39.47%
50% 41 35.96%
25% 27 23.68%
0% 1 0.88%
13. What level of autonomy would you ideally like in relation to
Tutor tells
me what
to do
Tutor allows
me to select
from
alternatives
50/50
negotiation
between me and
my tutor
Tutor gives
me feedback
on my ideas
I decide
what to do
on my own
deciding a
topic
15 40 37 15 7
13.16% 35.09% 32.46% 13.16% 6.14%
finding
information/
resources
6 29 44 27 8
5.26% 25.44% 38.60% 23.68% 7.02%
structuring/
using
information
9 30 46 18 11
7.89% 26.32% 40.35% 15.79% 9.65%
59
14. What level of autonomy would you ideally like in relation to
Tutor tells
me what
to do
Tutor allows
me to select
from
alternatives
50/50
negotiation
between me and
my tutor
Tutor gives
me feedback
on my ideas
I decide
what to do
on my own
deciding a
topic
15 40 37 15 7
13.16% 35.09% 32.46% 13.16% 6.14%
finding
information/
resources
6 29 44 27 8
5.26% 25.44% 38.60% 23.68% 7.02%
structuring/
using
information
9 30 46 18 11
7.89% 26.32% 40.35% 15.79% 9.65%
15. What level of autonomy have you actually experienced in relation to
Tutor tells
me what
to do
Tutor allows
me to select
from
alternatives
50/50
negotiation
between me and
my tutor
Tutor gives
me feedback
on my ideas
I decide
what to do
on my own
deciding a
topic
4 32 41 29 8
3.51% 28.07% 35.96% 25.44% 7.02%
finding
information/
resources
6 27 48 17 16
5.26% 23.68% 42.11% 14.91% 14.04%
structuring/
using
information
6 36 43 17 12
5.26% 31.58% 37.72% 14.91% 10.53%
60
16. The level of autonomy ideally related to your work?
Tutor tells
me what
to do
Tutor allows
me to select
from
alternatives
50/50
negotiation
between me and
my tutor
Tutor gives
me feedback
on my ideas
I decide
what to do
on my own
deciding a
topic
18 45 34 13 4
15.79% 39.47% 29.82% 11.40% 3.51%
finding
information/
resources
10 38 41 20 5
8.77% 33.33% 35.96% 17.54% 4.39%
structuring/
using
information
7 34 51 15 7
6.14% 29.82% 44.74% 13.16% 6.14%
17. The level of autonomy actually related to your work?
Tutor tells
me what
to do
Tutor allows
me to select
from
alternatives
50/50
negotiation
between me and
my tutor
Tutor gives
me feedback
on my ideas
I decide
what to do
on my own
deciding a
topic
7 32 42 25 8
6.14% 28.07% 36.84% 21.93% 7.02%
finding
information/
resources
8 33 44 22 7
7.02% 28.95% 38.60% 19.30% 6.14%
structuring/
using
information
4 41 44 19 6
3.51% 35.96% 38.60% 16.67% 5.26%
61
18. What is the most important factor affecting the effects of autonomy?
The least
important
Not very
important
Of some
importance
Very
important
The most
important
Having high
intelligence
7 22 52 26 7
6.14% 19.30% 45.61% 22.81% 6.14%
Being highly
motivated
2 19 42 36 15
1.75% 16.67% 36.84% 31.58% 13.16%
Having high
expectations of
yourself as a
learner
6 18 41 35 14
5.26% 15.79% 35.96% 30.70% 12.28%
Being prepared to
work hard
6 21 38 37 12
5.26% 18.42% 33.33% 32.46% 10.53%
Having
appropriate
learning skills
8 16 44 32 14
7.02% 14.04% 38.60% 28.07% 12.28%
62
19. What do you prefer in your future improvement?
The least
important
Not very
important
Of some
importance
Very
important
The most
important
Having high
intelligence
14 28 40 25 7
12.28% 24.56% 35.09% 21.93% 6.14%
Being highly
motivated
4 27 37 29 17
3.51% 23.68% 32.46% 25.44% 14.91%
Having high
expectations of
yourself as a
learner
4 20 39 40 11
3.51% 17.54% 34.21% 35.09% 9.65%
Being prepared to
work hard
4 23 37 32 18
3.51% 20.18% 32.46% 28.07% 15.79%
Having
appropriate
learning skills
8 13 42 31 20
7.02% 11.40% 36.84% 27.19% 17.54%
63
8.4 Note of qualitative interview
· Interview 1
Nationality: British
Place: Starbuck Coffer, Sheffield City centre
Time: 23th July 2012
Q1: Have you heard about autonomy learning before?
A: Yes, but I have little idea about it. But I think I have applied the autonomy
learning before.
Q2: When do you get the idea about autonomy learning?
A: Let me think…. I got it from my grandma, who taught me when I was only 4
years old. I can remember at that time she told me the importance to learn
by myself and my life should rely on it.
Q3: Have you or your friends applied autonomy learning before?
A: For me, it is yes. But I am not sure about my friends.
Q4: When did you apply autonomy learning and for what kind of things?
A: Most of time I will force myself to learn something which I think will be useful
in the future. For example, I want to be a technician in the university. I
therefore will look for the books about how to control some normal
instruments and the way of diagnose. If I can get to chance to touch them, I
will try to do it as long as possible.
Q6: Why do you try autonomy learning to improve your performance?
A: I think through so many years, I have more experience than other people in
some instruments, no matter control or repair it. Therefore, I think I am better
than them and have more chance to be promoted if I can get the relative job.
I think it mainly owes to the autonomy learning.
Q7: Did autonomy learning work or not?
64
A: Yes, I think it is amazing in my experience.
Q8: Why do you think autonomy learning work?
A: I think when I apply autonomy learning, I just learned something with more
time when compared with others. I think it is the main reason for it.
Q9: What kind of autonomy learning did you apply? Motivation? Level?
A: I think my autonomy learning is derived from intrinsic motivation since I do
not care what it can bring me at the moment, but how it can contribute to my
life in the future. As for the levels, I think I belong to the middle. I can learn
quite a lot from the book but sometimes feel it too boring and no clue, and
then I will ask the teachers for help.
Q10: Can you tell me some details about your experience of autonomy learning?
A: Read relative books, news and some programs. If get the chance to touch
some instruments, I will try to grasp the chance. Besides, when others are
playing on the ground, I sometimes still keep on reading.
Q11: What do you learn from the experience of autonomy learning?
A: I think it is quite useful, and if anyone want to success, he or she should
definitely apply autonomy learning to compete with others.
· Interview 2
Nationality: Japanese
Place: Opal 2, Student Apartment, Sheffield
Time: 29th July 2012
Q1: Have you heard about autonomy learning before?
A: Not quite clear and I think I know something about it.
Q2: When do you get the idea about autonomy learning?
65
A: I am not sure about it and currently I am still not quite clear about the idea.
Sorry.
Q3: Have you or your friends applied autonomy learning before?
A: I think I have tried something like that but no idea about my friends.
Q4: When did you apply autonomy learning and for what kind of things?
A: Once I want to get higher mark in one class, en… Environmental
Microbiology. It is too hard for me and I cannot remember the key points of
the lecture. I have to go to the library every day to find the books related to it.
It gave me great impression and it is about 3 months ago.
Q6: Why do you try autonomy learning to improve your performance?
A: I believe that anyone can get a higher mark if he would like to study hard.
Since everyone has the same class time, extra time working can bring more
benefits, such as the higher mark to you. So I think autonomy learning will
improve my performance.
Q7: Did autonomy learning work or not?
A: Yes, I passed finally but some of my friends did not.
Q8: Why do you think autonomy learning work?
A: I think it is simple, just remind me I can get higher mark if I can stick on
studying it.
Q9: What kind of autonomy learning did you apply? Motivation? Level?
A: It should be extrinsic motivation since I just want to get higher mark from it.
The level, I think should be the lowest level because I even have no clear
idea about it.
Q10: Can you tell me some details about your experience of autonomy learning?
A: I just look at the lecture note and try some textbook as reference to
understand what it really means.
66
Q11: What do you learn from the experience of autonomy learning?
A: I think it is painful, but deserve it since I get a pass and will get my degree
soon. It really helped me a lot.
· Interview 3
Nationality: Chinese
Place: Students Union, Sheffield University, Sheffield
Time: 24th July 2012
Q1: Have you heard about autonomy learning before?
A: Yes, I have tried alot.
Q2: When do you get the idea about autonomy learning?
A: Just from my teacher when I was 7 years old. My teacher told all of us you
must study hard, not only on class, but also at home as autonomy learning.
Q3: Have you or your friends applied autonomy learning before?
A: Yes, most of my friends, and me, applied autonomy learning and even now.
Q4: When did you apply autonomy learning and for what kind of things?
A: When I was in high school, just find many exam papers to do test and read
reference books about the major. When I came here for undergraduate, my
friends and I always go to the library to read the reference book that the
professors let us read.
Q6: Why do you try autonomy learning to improve your performance?
A: For higher mark, definitely. If you mark is lower than others, you have no
chance to get a good job and you will have a low salary. I have to apply
autonomy learning in my spare time to catch the others.
Q7: Did autonomy learning work or not?
67
A: Most of them worked but sometimes it failed, maybe I am not smart enough.
Q8: Why do you think autonomy learning work (or not work)?
A: If I can get better mark, it is definitely successful; maybe I tried the right way.
If I fail to get a higher mark, it did not work.
Q9: What kind of autonomy learning did you apply? Motivation? Level?
A: Extrinsic motivation? I believe that I hate to learn too many things after class
but I have no choice since it is the only way for me to get higher mark and the
mark is the only motivation for me. The level should be high, I think. I apply
autonomy learning in most of my lessons.
Q10: Can you tell me some details about your experience of autonomy learning?
A: Do more exercise in high school. And here I will read more former paper
work and some textbook if there is an essay.
Q11: What do you learn from the experience of autonomy learning?
A: If you can spend time on autonomy learning instead of playing, you can have
a higher mark.
Participant Information Sheet
You are invited here to take part in the research entitled “Autonomy in learning:
Study of autonomy in learning between UK and international students“, which is an
MSc project of the University of Sheffield.
Before you decide it is important for you to understand why the research is being
done and what it will involve. Please take time to read the following information
carefully and discuss it with others if you wish. Ask us if there is anything that is not
clear or if you would like more information. Take time to decide whether or not you
wish to take part. Thank you for reading this.
The overall aim of this study is to reveal the characteristic of autonomy in learning,
through the case study between UK and international students. The study will
discuss the respective type, motivation and behaviour of autonomy in learning, partly
through this interview to collection information and demonstrate the difference
between two groups.
In this research, the research will focus on distinguish the key elements related to
autonomy learning, which is an interesting topic in both areas of educational
research and applied linguistics. Throughout the world, independent learning
involves learners taking responsibility for their own learning and developing effective
learning strategies. It is quite important to identify the feelings and behaviour of
people about autonomy in learning, since it will help students achieve higher
education effect. Due to the respective cultural and education background, students
from different areas behave distinctly unique in terms of learning autonomy. The
elements of learning autonomy, such as motivation, type, behaviour and effects, will
be different when they face the same questions under the same conditions.
Therefore, significant difference in the learning autonomy will be realized between
students from different countries, such as the British and international students. It is
more important for researchers to investigate the key factors that cause the variation
and such study on the key factors between British and international students about
autonomy learning will also contribute to the establishment and improvement of
current education system and techniques.
As a representative individual of UK or international students, you are chosen as the
interviewee for this survey. You will be asked series of questions related to the topic
and aims of this research mentioned above, such as your experience, view and
feeling about autonomy learning. The semi-structured interview will ask feedback
from you on the basis of your previous answer. You answer will be recorded
manually on paper.
It is up to you to decide whether or not to take part. If you do decide to take part you
will be given this information sheet to keep and ask the researcher for a consent
form to be signed. You can still withdraw or request a break at any time without it
affecting any benefits that you are entitled to in any way. You do not have to give a
reason for the choice.
All the information that we collect about you during the course of the research will be
kept strictly confidential and used for this research project purpose only. You will not
be able to be identified in any reports or publications.
Please contact for further information:
Yahui Guo, 07760807383, [email protected]
Autonomy in learning: Study of autonomy in learning between UK and international students
Yahui GUO
1
UUnniivveerrssiittyy RReesseeaarrcchh EEtthhiiccss AApppplliiccaattiioonn FFoorrmm for Undergraduate & Postgraduate-Taught Students
This form has been approved by the University Research Ethics Committee (UREC) Complete this form if you are an undergraduate or a postgraduate-taught student who plans to undertake a research project which requires ethics approval via the University Ethics Review Procedure. Your Supervisor decides if ethics approval is required and, if required, which ethics review procedure (e.g. University, NHS, Alternative) applies. If the University’s procedure applies, your Supervisor decides if your proposed project should be classed as ‘low risk’ or potentially ‘high risk’. *PLEASE NOTE THAT YOUR DEPARTMENT MAY USE A VARIATION OF THIS FORM: PLEASE CHECK WITH THE ETHICS ADMINISTRATOR IN YOUR DEPARTMENT*
This form should be accompanied, where appropriate, by all Information Sheets / Covering Letters / Written Scripts which you propose to use to inform the prospective participants about the proposed research, and/or by a Consent Form where you need to use one.
Further guidance on how to apply is at: www.sheffield.ac.uk/ris/other/gov-ethics/ethicspolicy/approval-procedure/review-procedure Guidance on the possible routes for obtaining ethics approval (i.e. on the University Ethics Review Procedure, the NHS procedure and the Social Care Research Ethics Committee, and the Alternative procedure) is at: www.sheffield.ac.uk/ris/other/gov-ethics/ethicspolicy/approval-procedure/ethics-approval Once you have completed this research ethics application form in full, and other documents where appropriate, check that your name, the title of your research project and the date is contained in the footer of each page. If your Supervisor has classed the project as ‘low risk’:
· Email this form, together with other documents where applicable, to your Supervisor; and
· Sign and date Annex 1 of this form and provide a paper copy to your Supervisor.
Important Note for Supervisors: Following the ethics review the Supervisor must provide the academic department’s Ethics Administrator with a copy of the ‘low risk’ research ethics application that s/he reviewed and a completed Ethics Reviewer’s Comments Form indicating the ethics decision that s/he took in relation to it. The Ethics Reviewer’s Comments Form can be downloaded here: www.sheffield.ac.uk/ris/other/gov-ethics/ethicspolicy/further-guidance/universityprocedure2/reviewersc The Ethics Administrator reserves the right to consult the Chair of the academic department’s Ethics Review Panel (or equivalent) of s/he has concerns that projects classed as low risk should in fact have been classed as potentially high risk.
If your Supervisor has classed the project as potentially ‘high risk’:
· Email this form, together with other documents where applicable, to your department’s Ethics Administrator; and
· Ask your Supervisor to sign and date Annex 2 of this form and provide a paper copy of it to your department’s Ethics Administrator.
Ethics Administrators are listed at: www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.99105!/file/Ethics-Administrators.pdf
2
UUnniivveerrssiittyy RReesseeaarrcchh EEtthhiiccss AApppplliiccaattiioonn FFoorrmm for Undergraduate & Postgraduate-Taught Students
I confirm that I have read the current version of the University of Sheffield
‘Ethics Policy Governing Research Involving Human Participants, Personal
Data and Human Tissue’, as shown on the University’s research ethics website
at: www.sheffield.ac.uk/ris/other/gov-ethics/ethicspolicy
A1. Title of research project: Autonomy in learning: Study of autonomy in learning between UK and international students
A2. Name of Student: Yahui GUO
Department: Information School Email: [email protected] Tel.: 07760807383
Name of Supervisor: Professor Nigel Ford A3. Proposed Project Duration:
Start date: 12/05/2012 End date: 30/08/2012
A4. Mark ‘X’ in one or more of the following boxes if your research:
involves adults with mental incapacity or mental illness
involves prisoners or others in custodial care (e.g. young offenders)
involves children or young people aged under 18 years
involves using samples of human biological material collected before for another purpose
involves taking new samples of human biological material (e.g. blood, tissue) *
involves testing a medicinal product *
involves taking new samples of human biological material (e.g. blood, tissue) *
involves additional radiation above that required for clinical care *
involves investigating a medical device *
* If you have marked boxes marked * then you also need to obtain confirmation that
appropriate University insurance is in place. To do this email [email protected] and request a copy of the ‘Clinical Trial Insurance Application Form’.
It is recommended that you familiarise yourself with the University’s Ethics Policy Governing Research Involving Human Participants, Personal Data and Human Tissue before completing the following questions. Please note that if you provide sufficient information about the research (what you intend to do, how it will be carried out and how you intend to minimise any risks), this will help the ethics reviewers to make an informed judgement quickly without having to ask for further details.
X
3
A5. Briefly summarise:
i. The project’s aims and objectives: (this must be in language comprehensible to a lay person)
The overall aim of this study is to reveal the characteristic of autonomy in learning,
through the case study between UK and international students. The dissertation will
discuss the respective type, motivation and behaviour of autonomy in learning. Both
quantitative and qualitative survey will be carried out to demonstrate the difference
between two groups and the detailed objectives are shown below to address the
following questions.
· To which aspects of the students’ learning is autonomy appropriate?
· How much autonomy have the students been given?
· How much autonomy would the students have liked?
· Differential types of autonomy in UK and international students.
ii. The project’s methodology:
(this must be in language comprehensible to a lay person)
Primary research is also applied this case, where a designed questionnaire is carried
out, especially focusing on two student groups, UK and international students. To
reveal the issues mentioned in previous chapter, a survey is going to be designed to
understand the roles of autonomy in learning. All the quantitative questionnaires will
be sent to the students of Sheffield University and Sheffield Hallam University through
official email system. Besides, survey website, such as http://www.sojump.com/, will
be utilized to expose the questionnaire to the public and get more feedbacks.
Besides objective (quantitative) questions, qualitative questions are also provided to
collect subjective opinion from the respondents. Therefore, face-to-face interview will
be the second approach for deeper information collection, through the ways of direct
interview, phone interview or video interview. For local British students from Sheffield
University or Sheffield Hallam University, around 5 of them will be interviewed directly
after class or at their home. For international students, another 5 students will be
randomly chosen from different areas, such as Asian, Africa and America, to collect
their opinions through phone or online video. All the qualitative questions focus on the
respondents’ idea about autonomy in learning and their willing how to apply it in
practical.
A6. What is the potential for physical and/or psychological harm / distress to participants?
There is not potential physical and/or psychological harm / distress to participants
4
A7. Does your research raise any issues of personal safety for you or other researchers involved in the project? (especially if taking place outside working hours or off University premises)
This research does not raise any relative issues.
If yes, explain how these issues will be managed.
A8. How will the potential participants in the project be:
i. Identified?
All the quantitative questionnaires will be sent to the students of Sheffield University
and Sheffield Hallam University through official email system. Besides, survey
website, such as http://www.sojump.com/, will be utilized to expose the questionnaire
to the public and get more feedbacks. Potential interviewees will be identified from
respondents to the questionnaire.
ii. Approached?
As above..
iii. Recruited?
As above.
A9. Will informed consent be obtained from the participants?
YES X NO
If informed consent or consent is NOT to be obtained please explain why. Further guidance is at: www.sheffield.ac.uk/ris/other/gov-ethics/ethicspolicy/policy-notes/consent
A9.1. This question is only applicable if you are planning to obtain informed consent:
How do you plan to obtain informed consent? (i.e. the proposed process?): A10. What measures will be put in place to ensure confidentiality of personal data,
where appropriate?
In this research project, some personal information, such as age and occupation, will
be gathered through quantitative questionnaires surveys and qualitative interviews, in
terms of primary research methods. Such information will be collected only with the
approval of the participants and kept confidential. Information will also be kept
5
carefully and only used for this research project purpose only. After this research
project, all these data will be deleted absolutely with the supervision from project
supervisor or be stored secretly as evidence for further data qualification.
A11. Will financial / in kind payments (other than reasonable expenses and
compensation for time) be offered to participants? (Indicate how much and on what basis this has been decided)
No.
A12. Will the research involve the production of recorded media such as audio
and/or video recordings?
YES NO X
A12.1. This question is only applicable if you are planning to produce recorded media:
How will you ensure that there is a clear agreement with participants as to how these recorded media may be stored, used and (if appropriate) destroyed?
Guidance on a range of ethical issues, including safety and well-being, consent and anonymity, confidentiality and data protection’ are available at: www.sheffield.ac.uk/ris/other/gov-ethics/ethicspolicy/policy-notes
Annex 1
6
For Undergraduate & Postgraduate-Taught Students
SSttuuddeenntt DDeeccllaarraattiioonn
(The student completes Annex 1 if the Supervisor has classed the
student’s proposed research project as ‘low risk’)
The Supervisor needs to receive an electronic copy of the form, and other documents where appropriate, plus a signed, dated paper copy of this Annex 1 ‘the Student Declaration’.
Full Research Project Title: Autonomy in learning: Study of autonomy in learning between UK and international students
In signing this Student Declaration I am confirming that:
· The research ethics application form for the above-named project is accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.
· The above-named project will abide by the University’s ‘Good Research Practice Standards’: www.sheffield.ac.uk/ris/other/gov-ethics/good
· The above-named project will abide by the University’s ‘Ethics Policy Governing Research Involving Human Participants, Personal Data and Human Tissue’: www.sheffield.ac.uk/ris/other/gov-ethics/ethicspolicy
· Subject to the above-named project being ethically approved I undertake to adhere to any ethics conditions that may be set.
· I will inform my Supervisor of significant changes to the above-named project that have ethical consequences.
· I will inform my Supervisor if prospective participants make a complaint about the above-named project.
· I understand that personal data about me as a researcher on the research ethics application form will be held by those involved in the ethics review process (e.g. my Supervisor and the Ethics Administrator) and that this will be managed according to Data Protection Act principles.
· I understand that this project cannot be submitted for ethics approval in more than one department, and that if I wish to appeal against the decision made, this must be done through the original department.
Name of Supervisor: Professor Nigel Ford
Name of student: Yahui GUO
Signature of student: Yahui Guo
Date: 30/07/2012
Annex 2
7
For Undergraduate & Postgraduate-Taught Students
SSuuppeerrvviissoorr DDeeccllaarraattiioonn
(The Supervisor completes Annex 2 if s/he has classed the
student’s proposed research project as potentially ‘high risk’)
The Ethics Administrator needs to receive an electronic copy of the form, and other documents where appropriate, plus a signed, dated paper copy of this Annex 2 ‘the Supervisor Declaration’.
Full Research Project Title: Autonomy in learning: Study of autonomy in learning between UK and international students
In signing this Supervisor Declaration I am confirming that:
· The research ethics application form for the above-named project is accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.
· The above-named project will abide by the University’s ‘Good Research Practice Standards’: www.sheffield.ac.uk/ris/other/gov-ethics/good
· The above-named project will abide by the University’s ‘Ethics Policy for Research Involving Human Participants, Data and Tissue’: www.sheffield.ac.uk/ris/other/gov-ethics/ethicspolicy
· Subject to the above-named project being ethically approved I will undertake to ensure that the student adheres to any ethics conditions that may be set.
· The student or the Supervisor will undertake to inform the Ethics Administrator of significant changes to the above-named project that have ethical consequences.
· The student or the Supervisor will undertake to inform the Ethics Administrator if prospective participants make a complaint about the above-named project.
· I understand that personal data about the student and/or myself on the research ethics application form will be held by those involved in the ethics review process (e.g. the Ethics Administrator and/or reviewers) and that this will be managed according to Data Protection Act principles.
· I understand that this project cannot be submitted for ethics approval in more than one department, and that if I and/or the student wish to appeal against the decision made, this must be done through the original department.
Name of Supervisor: Professor Nigel Ford Name of student: Yahui GUO Signature of Supervisor: Nigel Ford
Date: 3/08/2012
