<span class="text_page_counter">Trang 1</span><div class="page_container" data-page="1">

<b>MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY </b>

<b>……….. </b>

<b>LE HA TO QUYEN </b>

<b>LEARNER AUTONOMY: THE ROLES OF TEACHERS AND PEERS </b>

<b>DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DISSERTATION IN TEACHING ENGLISH TO SPEAKERS OF OTHER LANGUAGES </b>

<b>HO CHI MINH CITY, 2023</b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 2</span><div class="page_container" data-page="2">

<b>MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY</b>

<b>……….. </b>

<b>LE HA TO QUYEN </b>

<b>LEARNER AUTONOMY: THE ROLES OF TEACHERS AND PEERS </b>

Major: Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages Code: 91 40 111

<b>DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DISSERTATION IN TEACHING ENGLISH TO SPEAKERS OF OTHER LANGUAGES </b>

SUPERVISORS:

1. BUI THI THUC QUYEN, Ph.D. 2. DANG TAN TIN, Ph.D.

<b>HO CHI MINH CITY, 2023</b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 3</span><div class="page_container" data-page="3">

<b>STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP </b>

<b>The Doctoral Dissertation titled “Learner Autonomy: The Roles of Teachers and Peers” has been submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Teaching English </b>

to Speakers of Other Languages.

Except for the references cited in this dissertation, I hereby declare that the whole or parts of this dissertation have not been published or used to obtain the degree elsewhere. No other person’s work/research may be used in this dissertation that is not properly cited. This dissertation has never been submitted for any degree at any other university or training institution.

Ho Chi Minh City, 2023

<b> Le Ha To Quyen </b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 4</span><div class="page_container" data-page="4">

<b>ACKNOWLEDGEMNENTS </b>

“Learner Autonomy: The Roles of Teachers and Peers” Doctoral Dissertation has been completed at Ho Chi Minh City Open University.

I take this opportunity to extend my heartfelt thanks and deep gratitude to all those who have contributed to the successful completion of this dissertation. Their continuous support, guidance, and encouragement have been instrumental in my academic journey. First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my scientific supervisors, Ms. Bui Thi Thuc Quyen, Ph.D. and Mr. Dang Tan Tin, Ph.D. Their comprehensive knowledge, unwavering support, and enthusiastic guidance have been the cornerstone of my research. Their insights and intellectual stimulation have been invaluable to my growth and understanding of the subject matter. I am forever indebted to them for their roles in my achievement.

I am also deeply thankful to the Graduate Lecturers at Ho Chi Minh City Open University. Their extensive expertise and generous provision of background knowledge have significantly enriched my study activities.

I must also extend my appreciation to my family, relatives, colleagues, classmates, and friends. Their belief in me and constant encouragement have fortified me during the challenges and pressures of this endeavor. Without their support and love, this journey would have been far more arduous.

Finally, I acknowledge all others who have contributed in any way to this project, whether directly or indirectly. The collaborative spirit I have experienced will stay with me as cherished memories.

In closing, I reflect on this journey with profound appreciation for the collective wisdom, guidance, and support that have made this dissertation a reality. It is my hope that the work presented here honors the efforts and contributions of all those mentioned above.

Ho Chi Minh City, 2023

<b>Le Ha To Quyen </b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 5</span><div class="page_container" data-page="5">

<b>ABSTRACT </b>

Learner autonomy has been considered the central aim of education because of its significant role in enabling students to develop into successful lifelong learners. In modern times, students have many opportunities to learn outside the classroom, the ideal context for learner autonomy development. Therefore, research about learner autonomy in the out-of-class learning context needs more focus. Based on sociocultural theory as the theoretical framework, the current research explores the situation of EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in out-of-class learning and the potential of promoting it through teachers’ and peers’ roles in the classroom. With the explanatory sequential mixed methods design, the study collected data from answers to a questionnaire on learner autonomy and teachers’ and peers’ roles (N=709) and semi-structured in-depth group interviews (N=35). The findings pointed out positive correlations between factors of the situational, behavioural, and psychological dimensions of learner autonomy and the roles of teachers as a resource, an evaluator, a controller, an instructor, a facilitator, and a co-learner in the language classroom. The mediating factors of these correlations were the students’ motivation and trust, the teacher as a role model, and the teachers’ care. In addition, the correlations between learner autonomy and the four perceived peers’ roles in the classroom: a co-learner, an encourager, an assessor, and a supporter were also statistically significant. The mediating factors of these correlations were positive emotions, interdependence, responsibilities, and face value. The research findings have provided empirical data about EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in the out-of-class context and the connection between in-class and out-of-class learning in fostering learner autonomy.

<b>Key words: learner autonomy, teachers’ roles, peers’ roles, out-of-class learning, </b>

in-class learning.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 6</span><div class="page_container" data-page="6">

<b>LIST OF FIGURES ... xii </b>

<b>LIST OF TABLES ... xiii </b>

<b>LIST OF APPENDICES ... xv </b>

<b>Chapter 1 – INTRODUCTION ... 1 </b>

1.1. General context of the study ... 1

1.1.1. The history of English teaching and learning in Vietnam ... 1

1.1.2. The current situation of English teaching and learning in Vietnam ... 3

1.1.2.1. The vital role of English in Vietnamese education ... 3

1.1.2.2. English teaching and learning from primary to high school education ... 4

1.1.2.3. English teaching and learning at tertiary level ... 5

1.1.3. The challenges of English language teaching and learning in Vietnam ... 6

1.2. The statement of problem ... 9

1.3. Rationale of the research ... 11

1.4. Research aims, objectives, and research questions ... 13

1.5. Significance of the research ... 13

1.6. Scope of the research ... 14

1.7. Dissertation organisation ... 14

1.8. Summary ... 16

<b>Chapter 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW ... 17 </b>

2.1. Learner autonomy ... 17

2.1.1. Conceptualisation of learner autonomy ... 17

2.1.1.1. Concepts of learner autonomy in language learning ... 17

2.1.1.2. Perspectives of learner autonomy ... 20

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 7</span><div class="page_container" data-page="7">

2.1.1.3. Models of learner autonomy ... 20

2.1.1.4. Operational definition of learner autonomy ... 26

2.1.2. The importance of learner autonomy ... 27

2.1.3. Degrees of learner autonomy ... 28

2.1.4. Factors that influence the development of learner autonomy... 29

2.1.5. Approaches to foster learner autonomy ... 32

2.1.6. Learner autonomy in out-of-class learning ... 35

2.2. Perceived teachers’ roles in the language classroom ... 38

2.4.3. Community of Practice (CoP) ... 55

2.5. Learner autonomy and perceived teachers’ roles ... 56

2.5.1. Perceived teachers’ roles in learner autonomy development ... 56

2.5.2. Mediating factors of learner autonomy and perceived teachers’ roles ... 57

2.6. Learner autonomy and perceived peers’ roles ... 60

2.6.1. Perceived peers’ roles in learner autonomy development ... 60

2.6.2. Mediating factors of learner autonomy and perceived peers’ roles ... 61

2.7. Related studies and research gap ... 62

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 8</span><div class="page_container" data-page="8">

2.8. The conceptual framework of the study ... 66

3.3.3.4. Translating the questionnaire ... 84

3.3.3.5. Piloting the questionnaire ... 85

3.3.4. Quantitative data collection procedure ... 87

3.3.5. Quantitative data management ... 87

3.3.6. Quantitative data analysis ... 89

3.3.7. Issues of reliability and validity of the quantitative research ... 93

3.4. The qualitative research ... 94

3.4.1. Objectives ... 94

3.4.2. Rationale for adopting semi-structured in-depth group interview ... 94

3.4.3. Participants and the recruitment process ... 95

3.4.4. Instrument ... 97

3.4.4.1. Instrument design ... 97

3.4.4.2. Piloting the interview protocol ... 98

3.4.5. Qualitative data collection procedure ... 98

3.4.6. Qualitative data analysis ... 99

3.4.7. The trustworthiness and authenticity of the qualitative data ... 101

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 9</span><div class="page_container" data-page="9">

3.5. Ethical considerations ... 102

3.6. Summary ... 104

<b>Chapter 4 – DATA ANALYSIS ... 105 </b>

4.1. Results of the quantitative research ... 105

4.1.1. Demographic information ... 105

4.1.2. EFL students’ learner autonomy in out-of-class learning ... 106

4.1.2.1. Internal consistency reliability measure of learner autonomy scale .... 106

4.1.2.2. Descriptive statistics of learner autonomy ... 107

4.1.3. Perceived teachers’ roles in the language classroom ... 113

4.1.3.1. Exploratory Factor Analysis of perceived teachers’ roles scale ... 113

4.1.3.2. Descriptive statistics of perceived teachers’ roles ... 116

4.1.4. Perceived peers’ roles in the classroom ... 119

4.1.4.1. Exploratory Factor Analysis of perceived peers’ roles scale ... 119

4.1.4.2. Descriptive statistics of perceived peers’ roles ... 122

4.1.5. Correlations between learner autonomy and perceived teachers’ roles ... 124

4.1.5.1. Pearson correlations between learner autonomy and perceived teachers’ roles ... 124

4.1.5.2. Canonical correlation between learner autonomy and perceived teachers’ roles ... 127

4.1.6. Correlations between learner autonomy and perceived peers’ roles ... 130

4.1.6.1. Pearson correlations between learner autonomy and perceived peers’ roles ... 130

4.1.6.2. Canonical correlation between learner autonomy and perceived peers’ roles ... 134

4.2. Results of the qualitative research ... 137

4.2.1. Mediating factors of learner autonomy and perceived teachers’ roles ... 138

4.2.1.1. Motivation as a mediating factor ... 138

4.2.1.2. Trust as a mediating factor ... 140

4.2.1.3. Role model as a mediating factor ... 141

4.2.1.4. Care as a mediating factor ... 142

4.2.2. Mediating factors of learner autonomy and perceived peers’ roles ... 144

4.2.2.1. Positive emotions as a mediating factor ... 144

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 10</span><div class="page_container" data-page="10">

4.2.2.2. Interdependence as a mediating factor ... 145

4.2.2.3. Responsibilities as a mediating factor ... 146

4.2.2.4. Face value as a mediating factor ... 148

4.3. Summary ... 149

<b>Chapter 5 – FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ... 150 </b>

5.1. EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in out-of-class learning ... 150

5.1.1. The situational dimension ... 150

5.1.2. The behavioural dimension... 153

5.1.3. The psychological dimension ... 156

5.2. Perceived teachers’ roles in the classroom ... 157

5.3. Perceived peers’ roles in the classroom ... 160

5.4. Learner autonomy and perceived teachers’ roles ... 161

5.4.1. Correlations between learner autonomy in out-of-class learning and perceived teachers’ roles in the classroom. ... 161

5.4.2. Mediating factors of correlations between learner autonomy in out-of-class learning and perceived teachers’ roles in the classroom ... 163

5.5. Learner autonomy and perceived peers’ roles ... 167

5.5.1. Correlations between learner autonomy in out-of-class learning and perceived peers’ roles in the classroom ... 167

5.5.2. Mediating factors of correlations between learner autonomy in out-of-class learning and perceived peers’ roles in the classroom ... 169

5.6. Finalising the research model ... 171

5.7. Summary ... 173

<b>Chapter 6 – CONCLUSION ... 174 </b>

6.1. Summary of main findings ... 174

6.1.1. EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in out-of-class learning ... 174

6.1.2. Correlations between learner autonomy and perceived teachers’ roles and their mediating factors ... 175

6.1.3. Correlations between learner autonomy and perceived peers’ roles and their mediating factors ... 176

6.2. Contributions of the study ... 177

6.2.1. Theoretical contributions ... 177

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 12</span><div class="page_container" data-page="12">

English as a Foreign Language Ho Chi Minh City

IELTS International English Language Testing System

LBC Learning Beyond the Classroom LMS Learning Management System

TOEIC Test of English for International Communication ZPD Zone of Proximal Development

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 13</span><div class="page_container" data-page="13">

<b>LIST OF FIGURES </b>

<b>Figure 2. 1 The operational definition of learner autonomy ... 26 Figure 2. 2 The conceptual framework of the study ... 67 </b>

<b>Figure 4. 1 Scree plot test with Eigenvalues greater than 1 of the second EFA run on </b>

perceived teachers’ roles ... 114

<b>Figure 4. 2 Scree plot test with Eigenvalues greater than 1 of second EFA run on </b>

perceived peers’ roles ... 120

<b>Figure 4. 3 Canonical Correlation Analysis between perceived teachers’ roles and </b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 14</span><div class="page_container" data-page="14">

<b>LIST OF TABLES </b>

<b>Table 2. 1 Roles of teachers in the language classroom ... 40 </b>

<b>Table 3. 1 Research design ... 71</b><small> </small>

<b>Table 3. 2 Overview of the questionnaire ... 77 </b>

<b>Table 3. 3 Detailed information of the scales with the adapted sources ... 82 </b>

<i><b>Table 3. 4 Cronbach’s alpha values in the pilot test ... 86 </b></i>

<b>Table 3. 5 Extract of the descriptive statistics of quantitative data ... 91 </b>

<b>Table 3. 6 Description of participants in the qualitative research ... 96 </b>

<b>Table 4. 1 Demographic information of the participants ... 106 </b>

<b>Table 4. 2 Cronbach’s alpha values of nine constructs of learner autonomy scale ... 106 </b>

<b>Table 4. 3 Descriptive statistics of the situational dimension of learner autonomy .. 107 </b>

<b>Table 4. 4 Extract of the descriptive statistics of the behavioural dimension ... 109 </b>

<b>Table 4. 5 Extract of the descriptive statistics of the psychological dimension ... 111 </b>

<b>Table 4. 6 KMO and Bartlett’s Test of the second EFA run on perceived teachers’ </b>

<b>Table 4. 9 Cronbach’s Alpha values of perceived teachers’ roles constructs ... 116 </b>

<b>Table 4. 10 Extract of the descriptive statistics of perceived teachers’ roles ... 118 </b>

<b>Table 4. 11 KMO and Bartlett’s Test of the second EFA run on perceived peers’ roles</b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 15</span><div class="page_container" data-page="15">

<b>Table 4. 15 Descriptive statistics of perceived peers’ roles ... 123 </b>

<b>Table 4. 16 Pearson correlations between factors of learner autonomy in the </b> situational dimension and perceived teachers’ roles ... 125

<b>Table 4. 17 Extract of Pearson correlations between factors of learner autonomy in </b> the behavioural dimension and perceived teachers’ roles ... 126

<b>Table 4. 18 Pearson correlations between factors of learner autonomy in the </b> psychological dimension and perceived teachers’ roles ... 127

<b>Table 4. 19 Canonical correlations between factors of perceived teachers’ roles and </b> learner autonomy ... 128

<b>Table 4. 20 Variables of Canonical Variate 1 ... 129 </b>

<b>Table 4. 21 Proportion of variance explained of Canonical Variate 1 ... 129 </b>

<b>Table 4. 22 Pearson correlations between factors of learner autonomy in the </b> situational dimension and perceived peers’ roles ... 131

<b>Table 4. 23 Pearson correlations between factors of learner autonomy in the </b> behavioural dimension and perceived peers’ roles ... 133

<b>Table 4. 24 Pearson correlations between factors of learner autonomy in the </b> psychological dimension and perceived peers’ roles ... 134

<b>Table 4. 25 Canonical correlations of perceived peers’ roles and learner autonomy . 134 Table 4. 26 Canonical Variate 1 loadings ... 135 </b>

<b>Table 4. 27 Proportion of variance explained of Canonical Variate 1 ... 135 </b>

<b>Table 4. 28 Summary of themes and sub-themes generated from data analysis ... 137 </b>

<b>Table 4. 29 Extract of summary table of Motivation as a mediating factor ... 139 </b>

<b>Table 4. 30 Extract of summary table of Trust as a mediating factor ... 141 </b>

<b>Table 4. 31 Extract of summary table of Role model as a mediating factor ... 142 </b>

<b>Table 4. 32 Extract of summary table of Care as a mediating factor ... 143 </b>

<b>Table 4. 33 Extract of summary table of Positive emotions as a mediating factor .... 145 </b>

<b>Table 4. 34 Extract of summary table of Interdependence as a mediating factor ... 146 </b>

<b>Table 4. 35 Extract of summary table of Responsibilities as a mediating factor ... 147 </b>

<b>Table 4. 36 Extract of summary table of Face value as a mediating factor ... 148 </b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 16</span><div class="page_container" data-page="16">

<b>LIST OF APPENDICES </b>

<b>Appendix 3A University participant invitation letter ... 221 </b>

<b>Appendix 3B Sample survey participant invitation letter ... 223 </b>

<b>Appendix 3C Interview sample participant invitation letter ... 224 </b>

<b>Appendix 3D Interview sample participant consent form ... 225 </b>

<b>Appendix 3E List of questionnaire items and adapted sources ... 226 </b>

<b>Appendix 3F Questionnaire in English ... 231 </b>

<b>Appendix 3G Questionnaire in Vietnamese ... 237 </b>

<b>Appendix 3H Interview protocol ... 244 </b>

<b>Appendix 3I Descriptive statistics of learner autonomy, perceived teachers’ roles, and </b> perceived peers’ roles ... 246

<b>Appendix 4A Perceived teachers’ roles in the classroom ... 253 </b>

<b>Appendix 4B Perceived peers’ roles in the classroom ... 260 </b>

<b>Appendix 4C Correlations between learner autonomy and perceived teachers’ roles</b> ... 265

<b>Appendix 4D Correlations between learner autonomy and perceived peers’ roles ... 267 </b>

<b>Appendix 4E Mediating factors between learner autonomy and perceived teachers’ </b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 17</span><div class="page_container" data-page="17">

<b>Chapter 1 – INTRODUCTION </b>

Learner autonomy has more and more been considered as a central aim of education because it lets individuals flourish and participate in liberal and democratic societies (Winch, 2002). In language training, learner autonomy has also been in the mainstream of research for more than three decades but remains a complicated concept that requires more empirical data to strengthen the understanding of itself and its relationships with other factors (Illés, 2012; Littlewood, 1999; Yu, 2020).

Research into students’ learner autonomy is of importance in the context of Vietnam because autonomy is one of the main attributes of training outcomes at all levels (MoET, 2021). The current study is designed to understand EFL (English as a Foreign Language) students’ learner autonomy in the out-of-class context by exploring the correlations between it and two influencing factors, teachers and peers, contributing to the knowledge of this dynamic construct. The following section of this chapter presents an overview of the study, starting with a description of the study context, then proposing the research rationale and pointing out the research’s objectives and questions. It also highlights the study’s significance before addressing the study’s limitations and the organisation of the dissertation.

1.1. General context of the study

Vietnam is a developing country whose history was heavily related to fighting for independence. Its turbulent history explained why different foreign languages were taught in the country. This section describes English’s role in society, the learning and teaching process of English, especially at the tertiary level, and the challenges that educators and learners face. This piece of information will set up the context of the study.

1.1.1. The history of English teaching and learning in Vietnam

The foreign languages taught in Vietnam throughout history have reflected its socio-political and economic frameworks (Le, 2013). English has been held in high regard since the country embarked on its economic reform known as Doi Moi

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 18</span><div class="page_container" data-page="18">

(Renovation) in 1986 (Ngo, 2021). The history of English language teaching in Vietnam undergoes these main milestones: before 1954, 1954–1975, 1975–1986, and from 1986 to the present.

In the first period, foreign language teaching was under the influence of controlled countries. Mandarin Chinese was the first foreign language in Vietnam during the Chinese occupation and influence period. After that, the six decades of French colonialism from 1884 to 1945 made French the second primary foreign language taught in schools in Vietnam. English also made its first presence in Vietnam as a minor foreign language (Hoang, 2020).

After the end of the French colonisation and from 1954 to 1975, Vietnam was divided into two parts (the North and the South), and each part was allied with different world superpowers. The Soviet Union provided economic assistance to North Vietnam; meanwhile, the United States began to replace France as the principal foreign power in South Vietnam. The support from the Soviet Union and American involvement in Vietnam added Russian and English to the choices of foreign languages taught in schools besides Chinese and French. Notably, the North promoted learning Russian and Chinese, and the South emphasised the study of English and French as the main foreign languages in secondary and post-secondary education (Hoang, 2010).

After the end of the Vietnam War and the independence of the country from 1975 to 1986, Russian was the language that dominated the foreign language scene in Vietnam; other foreign languages, such as Chinese, French, and especially English, were relegated to an inferior status (Hoang, 2020). In 1986, Vietnam initiated an overall economic reform commonly known as Doi Moi (Renovation), opening the door of Vietnam to the world, especially to Western and non-Communist Asian countries. The implementation of the open-door policy has strongly supported the teaching and learning of English as a significant foreign language, turning it to become the key to international communication. Additionally, Vietnam joined different international organisations in the region and all over the world, such as the United Nations (UN) in 1977, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 1995, the Asia-Pacific Economic

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 19</span><div class="page_container" data-page="19">

Cooperation (APEC) in 1998, the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 2007, the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement (TPP) in 2015.

It can be said that Doi Moi has been of great significance, as the future economic wellbeing and success of the nation entrusts in no small part to the English language capabilities of its citizens (Vu, 2020). Singh et al. (2002, pp. 53–54) underscore this by stating that enhancing citizens’ competence in English is viewed as “a way of securing economic advancement, elevated status and prestige, and trans-national mobility of a country.” Post-1986, English has become the dominant foreign language in the Vietnamese education system, playing a pivotal role in shaping the country’s educational landscape and its international engagements (Hoang, 2020).

1.1.2. The current situation of English teaching and learning in Vietnam 1.1.2.1. The vital role of English in Vietnamese education

Good command of English has become the passport to well-paid jobs in Vietnam and the advanced education systems of prestigious universities worldwide (Hoang, 2018). A qualified workforce with strong English proficiency is essential for the nation’s rapid transformation to a modern, globally integrated, middle-income country (World Bank, 2018). Because of its vital role, many legal documents from the Ministry of Education and Training (MoET) stressed the importance of improving students’ English levels. The Government’s Vietnamese Education Strategies document stated that one of the essential attributes that Vietnamese students must possess is English competency (Vietnamese Government, 2005). The Vietnamese Education Law required that the foreign language taught in the national education system be “widely used in international communication” (Vietnamese National Assembly, 2005, p. 2). In 2008, the approval of the National Foreign Language Project entitled “Teaching and Learning Foreign Languages in the National Education System, Period 2008–2020” (with a budget of up to 450 million US dollars) proved that English teaching and learning is one of the priorities in the government’s investment strategies and education policies (Vietnamese Government, 2008). The Project specified English as the foreign language

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 20</span><div class="page_container" data-page="20">

taught at all education levels in Vietnam. It stated that Vietnamese students need to acquire a certain level of English after completing each education level to communicate and work in a global working environment (Vietnamese Government, 2008). Even though in the framework of the Vietnamese Constitution 2013, English was a foreign language with six other foreign languages, it has a special status, second only to Vietnamese (the national language) in terms of time and training outcomes. The vital role of English is displayed in its dominant status in a student’s learning process in Vietnam.

1.1.2.2. English teaching and learning from primary to high school education

School education takes 12 years for students aged six to 18 years, including primary education (five years), secondary education (four years) and high school education (three years) (World Bank, 2015). Vietnam has joined the move to begin teaching English at the primary level. English can be taught at the third year of primary education with four periods of 50 minutes per week (Moon, 2009). On December 26, 2018, MoET issued the two-year optional curriculum entitled General School Education Introductory English Curriculum for Grades 1 and 2, with two periods per week and 70 periods per year (MoET, 2018c). Vietnamese children, therefore, have contact with English earlier and earlier. Some even have their first contact with English during their time in kindergartens of big cities (Tran, 2020).

After primary education, English is taught three periods per week at the secondary education, and three periods at the high school education (MoET, 2018a, 2018b). The General School Education Curriculum (GSEC) required English to be taught nationally as a compulsory subject for seven years from secondary through high school with a total number of 700 periods (400 periods more than it was from 1982 to 2002) (Hoang, 2020). The time allocated to English accounts for over 10 percent of the total time designed for all general school education subjects in Vietnam (MoET, 2018a, 2018b). Further, English is one of the three compulsory examinations (Mathematics, Vietnamese, and

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 21</span><div class="page_container" data-page="21">

English) that a high school student must take to get a high school graduation certificate to proceed to tertiary education.

1.1.2.3. English teaching and learning at tertiary level

Vietnamese students have various higher education options in Vietnam, such as universities, senior colleges, junior colleges, professional secondary schools, vocational schools, and research institutes (World Bank, 2020).

Higher education training in Vietnam has specific characteristics. Firstly, most students tend to study away from home when they go to university, being attracted to universities in big cities such as Ha Noi, Ho Chi Minh, and Can Tho for better training quality, forming the knowledge clusters in the North and South of Vietnam (Evers & Bauer, 2011). Hence, classes at university typically consist of students from different provinces with different educational backgrounds, even though they have achieved similar scores in the high school graduation examinations. Secondly, training at the tertiary level follows the central credit-based system. When students select the course they want, they can exercise their active role in learning. The students’ freedom to make selections also maximises the flexibility of teachers’ teaching methodologies to meet the programmes’ objectives and the learners’ demands. Next, technology is gradually being applied in the training process in Vietnam, and the digital transformation of education has sped up through the pandemic of COVID-19. Educators fully know the importance of ICT (Information and Communication Technology) implementation but ICT facilities and instruction on ICT use were underinvested (Nguyen, 2021).

There are two main categories of English language training in tertiary education in Vietnam: non-English majors and English-majors (Hoang, 2020).

Non-English majors must study English as a compulsory subject from undergraduate through doctoral level (MoET, 2014). The amount of time allocated to English teaching may vary in universities and colleges, but in general, undergraduate students must accumulate 14 over 120 credit hours (equivalent to 630 learning periods); at seven out of 50 credits (equivalent to 315 learning periods) at graduate (master) level and four credit hours (equivalent to 180 learning periods). One of the requirements for

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 22</span><div class="page_container" data-page="22">

non-English major students’ graduation is non-English at Level 3 for undergraduate students as defined in MoET’s Six-level Foreign Language Competency Framework for Vietnam (equivalent to CEFR Level B1) or Level 4 (equivalent to CEFR Level B2) for doctoral level (MoET, 2014). Non-English major students can submit international English certificates such as TOEIC and IELTS to shorten the time of English training at the institution. Non-English majors whose instructors use English as a means of instruction may need to achieve a higher level of English to graduate.

The second division is the training programme for students who choose English as their major. They can study at departments or faculties of English language in universities and colleges. The training programme lasts four years, and the requirement for graduation is advanced English level (level 5) as defined in MoET’s Six-level Foreign Language Competency Framework for Vietnam (equivalent to CEFR Level C1) (MoET, 2014). English major has attracted many students to enroll, requiring them to have high scores in high school graduation examinations (Vnexpress news, 2023). English majors with a passion for education can pursue careers in teaching and training. Others can find jobs in translating and interpreting sections or work for jobs that require Business English. Following the requirements of MoET, the learning outcomes of English major graduate include the qualities and competencies for general and specialized knowledge, skills, degree of autonomy and accountability (MoET, 2021).

Overall, the effort allocation for helping the students throughout their time studying at different levels of education to have a good command of English has proven the vital role of English in the Vietnamese context. However, over the past decades, the country’s English teaching sector has consistently been underperforming (Ngo, 2021). The challenges encounter in the English teaching and learning process are factors contributing to the constraints on the teaching quality.

<i>1.1.3. The challenges of English language teaching and learning in Vietnam </i>

The challenges of the English teaching and learning in the context of the Vietnamese education system are from systematic issues, resource constraints and learners’ passivity.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 23</span><div class="page_container" data-page="23">

The first systematic issue is the high centralism of the educational system in Vietnam (Hoang, 2020). MoET takes the initiative for curriculum design, development, revision and review, and textbook writing and assessment. It adopts a one-size-fits-all approach to centrally mandated curricular changes, and teachers are expected to implement those changes in their classroom teachings faithfully. Besides the possibility of reaching a consensus in the teaching process, this approach leads to the fact that most of the teaching focuses on dealing with the content of the coursebook rather than the specific conditions of students or the ability to use English for real-life communication (Ton & Pham, 2010).

The second systematic issue comes from its test-oriented characteristic (Hoang, 2018; Nguyen, 2017). Even though MoET stresses developing practical communication skills, the crucial examinations do not reflect that. As a result, the training activities in the classroom focus on developing reading comprehension, vocabulary, and structural patterns to prepare students to pass those examinations. Teacher training and development programmes have been updated and designed to help teachers to teach communicatively; however, classroom reality does not promote opportunities to develop students’ communicative competence.

The resource constraint is from both the training force and teaching conditions. There is a disproportionate demand–supply for English teachers and learners. The number of English teachers, both native and competent non-native speakers, is far less than the number of learners who have an ardent desire to learn English (Hoang, 2020). Moreover, teachers of English’s professional training and retraining are limited due to the lack of resources and investment. Teachers are having difficulties meeting MoET’s requirement to have an English-level proficiency of CEFR B2 for primary and secondary school teachers and CEFR C1 for high school teachers and tertiary level teachers as part of the National Foreign Languages Project 2020 (Nguyen, 2020). Furthermore, most teachers do not have a chance to study in an English-speaking country. These limitations have caused teachers, in general, not usually to communicate in English and cannot sustain teaching that depends on communicative interactions (Hoang, 2020). They also claimed

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 24</span><div class="page_container" data-page="24">

that they would teach about the diversity of English when they had a more thorough understanding of the recent changes in English (Phan, 2017). In addition, there remains problems of first language (Vietnamese) overuse and misuse in the language classroom (Nguyen, 2017). As Vietnam has moved towards an entire market-driven economy, traditional teacher values are increasingly in conflict with the quasi-marketisation of the educational system. Teachers, therefore, must face even more challenges, such as the demanding attitudes of students and parents (Hoang, 2020).

The limited teaching conditions, which revolves around class size and teaching resources, also challenge the English language teaching and learning process (Nguyen et al., 2020). Classes usually have more than 40 students with fixed tables and chairs and a blackboard in a small room in noisy places with poor ventilation. Large classes lead to difficulties in classroom management, such as the need for teacher-student interactions (Nguyen, 2017). The unattractive textbooks and the lack of supplementary resources fail to engage students to learn. Textbook writing for the new programme has been completed with significant modifications; however, using the new textbooks effectively requires time and investment (Hoang, 2020). Facilities outside the classroom, such as libraries, labs, and self-study areas, could be better equipped and maintained in most learning situations, which can demotivate students to learn outside the classroom (Hoang, 2018).

Finally, students’ passivity in learning is the most crucial factor that makes the teaching process ineffective (Truong, 2017). This reactive response was blamed for the influence of Confucianism over the long time of Chinese domination in Vietnam (Tran, 2013). Confucianism is a philosophical and ethical system that originated in ancient China and is associated with the teachings of Confucius (Kong Fuzi or Kongzi). It emphasises social hierarchy and respects the role of teachers in the classroom. Teachers’ role extends beyond academic instruction to include character development and ethical guidance. Confucianism also insists on collectivism, social harmony, and the community’s well-being over individual interests. Despite the increasing modern influence, Confucianism is deeply embedded in the learning practices of Vietnamese

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 25</span><div class="page_container" data-page="25">

students (Nguyen, 2018). These influences explain students’ lack of flexibility and obedience to teachers’ arrangements in classroom learning (Bui, 2018). As a result, when students enter higher education, they still need detailed guidance or even teacher dictation to conduct their learning (Phan, 2015), which can hinder them from taking control of their learning.

To conclude, systematic issues, resource constraints, and learners’ passivity are the challenges that have affected the quality and effectiveness of English teaching and learning process. Due to these difficulties, Vietnam was placed in the ‘low proficiency’ group in the global English proficiency ranking (VCCI, 2020), which can prevent the country from fully participating in the global community.

1.2. The statement of problem

Having discussed the history, the current situation of English teaching and learning in Vietnam as well as its challenges, this part presents the problem of English teaching and learning at tertiary level, the main context of this study.

Tertiary education is a valuable period for students to be nurtured, supported, and matured in knowledge and generic skills. This stage is crucial as it prepares students to refine their skills and knowledge for future employment. Because of its importance, the Vietnamese government has invested much more money in tertiary level training than other levels (World Bank, 2020), expecting students not only understand and utilise existing technologies and business practices but also to innovate and contribute to the development of new technological solutions and business strategies. Once higher education is successful, the quality of the workforce can be improved, which contributes to the sustainable growth of the country’s economy.

Even though tertiary students have learned English for many years from primary to high school education, and they belong to Generation Z, the generation born after 1995, who tend to be digital natives, fast decision-makers, and highly connected (Dauksevicuite, 2016), their learning outcomes are also not very promising. They fail to achieve the required language level to graduate (Nguyen, 2017) and they must rely on extra language training, such as at the training centre in the long term, to meet the

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 26</span><div class="page_container" data-page="26">

graduation requirements, which takes them much time and money (Dtinews, 2017). Graduates also face mounting criticism from employers about their English competence when they join the workforce (Tran & Marginson, 2018; Vo et al., 2016).

To enhance learning outcomes, many reforms have been taken for English teaching and learning at tertiary level. To name a few are to renovate the tasks of teaching and learning within the national education system, enhance the capacity of the training force through an ecology of professional development (Le, 2020), and improve the infrastructure of teaching and learning at institutions throughout the country (World Bank, 2020). These overarching actions have been done at different levels, along with specific teaching and learning situations, but the solutions that target the students themselves, to be specific promoting their control in learning, are more in need. The importance of being independent in learning and from that, get ready for lifelong learning, gives rise to the need to promote learner autonomy for this specific group of students.

Learner autonomy was typically considered a Western construct, which is difficult for Vietnamese students to fully master due to the strong influences from Confucian cultural features (Bui, 2018; Dang & Robertson, 2010). Despite these cultural factors, supporting learner autonomy has received more concerns in the Vietnam education system in recent years. From the policy level, national policies on tertiary-level education reform state in Article 40 that “students need to be provided opportunities to develop positiveness, self-awareness, activeness, creativity and self-study ability to meet the country’s demand for industrialisation, modernisation, and international integration” (Vietnamese National Assembly, 2005). Promoting students’ ability to self-study first was considered the primary responsibility of high school and tertiary level training (Vietnamese Communist Party, 2013). Moreover, the policy issued in 2017 stressed that autonomy needed to be encouraged for learners of all ages (Vietnamese Government, 2017). Most recently, the regulations required that any training programme’s learning outcomes clearly define a graduate’s degree of autonomy besides the requirements for knowledge, skills, and accountability (MoET, 2021).

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 27</span><div class="page_container" data-page="27">

Regardless of these efforts, Vietnamese tertiary students still exhibited low and reactive learner autonomy (Dang, 2012; Nguyen, 2009; A. N. T. Le, 2019), indicating the need of fostering actions. While autonomy training can be done in the classroom with the support of teachers and peers (Nguyen, 2009, Nguyen, 2018), classroom teaching is constrained by prescriptive exams and traditional teaching methods (Roe & Perkins, 2020). The focus on promoting learner autonomy, then, may need to shift to out-of-class learning.

To sum up, fostering learner autonomy can help Vietnamese tertiary students gain greater control over their learning, which in turn leads to improvements in their English proficiency (Dafei, 2007; Lin & Reinders, 2018). Out-of-class learning is the learning context suitable for developing learner autonomy, but it is under research in the Vietnamese context. As a result, the problem that persists is the inadequate discussion and understanding of EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in out-of-class learning, along with the factors influencing it.

1.3. Rationale of the research

The researcher has three main reasons to conduct the current research to explore EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in the out-of-class learning context and its associations with teachers and peers’ roles in the classroom.

First, it is necessary to investigate EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy because it positively correlates with learners’ English proficiency (Phuong & Vo, 2019). Learner autonomy is the premier goal of education and a core value of lifelong learning (Gavrilyuk, 2015). However, previous research shows that educators and learners at tertiary may appear psychologically, but not behaviourally ready for autonomy (Lin & Reinders, 2019). Specifically, learner autonomy is a fluid construct for students to master in Vietnamese context (Dang, 2012; Nguyen, 2009; A. N. T. Le, 2019). Thus, research about EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy is significant for the understanding of this construct in the local context.

Second, EFL tertiary students’ autonomy in out-of-class learning contexts has not been considered adequately. Learning beyond the classroom, such as learning at the

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 28</span><div class="page_container" data-page="28">

self-access centre where learners could self-access necessary learning materials to learn independently, has been considered the ideal place for learner autonomy to develop (Morrison, 2008). Learners can also get together outside the classroom in social learning spaces to socialise and learn (Murray, 2014). With the advancement of technology, out-of-class learning context is no doubt flourishing more than ever. Vietnamese students also reported that their learning not only occurs in the classroom but also outside the classroom (Q. H. T. Le, 2019). Despite its essential role, the out-of-class learning context often receives insufficient attention (Lai et al., 2018) as it is out of the responsibilities of teachers. Research about Vietnamese EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in the out-of-class context remains scattered, giving little information about students’ out-of-class learning. Therefore, research on learner autonomy in this specific learning context is particularly needed.

Third, considering the associations between learner autonomy in out-of-class learning context and the roles of teachers and peers in the classroom is significant because it can bridge in-class and out-of-class learning (Reinders, 2021; Sockett, 2022). Learner autonomy is a social construct; students develop their learner autonomy when interacting with other social factors. Teachers and peers are the two external factors that influence the development of learner autonomy. Research about learner autonomy in the Vietnamese context showed that teachers’ interventions in the classroom, such as strategy training (Nguyen, 2009), mentoring (Le, 2013), portfolio writing (Duong, 2015), or online learning platforms designing (Nguyen, 2018) could promote learner autonomy. Peers can also help students become more autonomous through peer assessment (Phan, 2015). However, classroom training in Vietnam is typically constrained by prescriptive examinations and traditional learning methods (Roe & Perkins, 2020), which provide no space for learner autonomy promoting activities. Hence, the focus should be on opportunities to promote learner autonomy within routine tasks of in-class learning. These opportunities have been proven to exist but very delicate (Wang & Ryan, 2020). Research, therefore, is needed to understand how learner autonomy in out-of-class learning is associated with teachers and peers in the classroom.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 29</span><div class="page_container" data-page="29">

1.4. Research aims, objectives, and research questions

The research aims to contribute to understanding EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in the out-of-class learning context and its mediating factors.

The research has two objectives: to find correlations between EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in the out-of-class learning context and the perceived teachers’ and peers’ roles in the classroom and to explain these correlations through the mediating factors. Parallel with the objectives, the research has four research questions (RQs).

<i>RQ1. To what extent does EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in out-of-class learning correlate with their perceived teachers’ roles in the classroom? </i>

RQ2. To what extent does EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in out-of-class

<i>learning correlate with their perceived peers’ roles in the classroom? </i>

<i>RQ3. What factors mediate the correlations between EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in out-of-class learning and their perceived teachers’ roles in the classroom? </i>

RQ4. What factors mediate the correlations between EFL tertiary students’ learner

<i>autonomy in out-of-class learning and their perceived peers’ roles in the classroom? </i>

1.5. Significance of the research

First, the current research gives necessary insights into the construct of learner autonomy in the out-of-class learning context from local students’ perspectives. Although learner autonomy is regarded as one of the primary outcomes of education at all levels in Vietnam, it remains a fluid construct for learners and educators. Hence, this understanding contributes directly to the understanding of learner autonomy in Vietnamese context.

Second, the research provides understanding about associations between students’ learner autonomy in out-of-class learning and two external factors: perceived teachers’ and peers’ roles in the classroom. The findings are significant in identifying how external factors such as teachers and peers influence learner autonomy development, even when learner autonomy and teachers and peers’ roles are discussed in different learning contexts.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 30</span><div class="page_container" data-page="30">

Finally, the associations between learner autonomy in out-of-class learning and teachers and peers’ roles in the classroom can give important suggestions for policymakers, institutions, teachers, and students. These implications can boost learner autonomy in the out-of-class context, improve out-of-class learning, and enhance the overall quality of English teaching and learning in Vietnamese tertiary education. 1.6. Scope of the research

The research focuses on learner autonomy in tertiary education within universities in Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam over the academic year 2021–2022. To be specific, it targets EFL students at three institutions that offer training for English majors in different district in Ho Chi Minh city. The study explores the associations between EFL students’ learner autonomy in out-of-class learning context and the perceived roles of teachers and peers in the English language classroom. Employing the sequential mixed methods design, including surveys and interviews, to gather quantitative and qualitative data to get empirical data about the associations between learn autonomy and perceived teachers’ and peers’ roles, as well as factors that mediate these correlations. Finally, from the understanding of how EFL students’ learner autonomy in out-of-class learning associates with the roles of teachers and peers in the classroom, the study provides implications for stake holders and the learners support learner autonomy development.

1.7. Dissertation organisation

This dissertation is organised into six chapters.

Chapter 1 is the introduction of the dissertation. It first describes the general context of study by going through the history of English teaching and learning in Vietnam, its current situation, and the challenges it is facing. It then provides the problem statement about EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy, one of the goals of the higher education reform agenda. After presenting the research rationale, it formulates the research objectives and questions. Finally, the significance, scope of the study, and the dissertation organisation are presented.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 31</span><div class="page_container" data-page="31">

Chapter 2 includes a literature review of learner autonomy in out-of-class learning context, perceived teachers’ roles, and perceived peers’ roles in the language classrooms. First, learner autonomy’s conceptions and models are discussed to finalise the operational definition of learner autonomy. It then continues with the importance of learner autonomy, its degrees, factors influencing learner autonomy development, and approaches to fostering learner autonomy. It ends with learner autonomy in out-of-class learning context, the focus of the research. Next, it documents and analyses the perceived roles of teachers and peers in the classroom. Having defined the main constructs, the chapter presents the theoretical framework to explain for the potential associations between learner autonomy in out-of-class learning and the perceived teachers’ and peers’ roles in the classroom. It then concludes with the conceptual framework of the research.

Chapter 3 describes the methodology of the investigation. It first develops a research perspective consistent with the conceptual framework proposed in Chapter 2. It then argues for employing mixed methods to align with the research perspective and generate necessary data for the investigation. A set of procedures for implementing these phases is also reported together with the data integration method. Accordingly, the researcher describes the participants, objectives, instrument design, data collection procedures, data analysis, and issues of reliability and validity of each method. The chapter finishes with ethical considerations.

Chapter 4 reports the findings of the quantitative and qualitative research conducted in the current investigation. Quantitative data generated from the questionnaire answers the three research sub-questions and the first two research questions. Qualitative data from the semi-structured group interviews answers the last two research questions.

Chapter 5 discusses the findings from integrating different data sets about EFL tertiary students’ learner autonomy in out-of-class learning context, its correlations with perceived teachers’ and peers’ roles in the classroom, and mediating factors of these associations.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 32</span><div class="page_container" data-page="32">

Chapter 6 includes the conclusion and implications of the investigation. It starts with a research summary, highlighting significant results and critical analyses. The chapter continues with the research contributions to promote learner autonomy in EFL education in the local and regional contexts. It then addresses the study’s limitations, considers the possibility of generalising the study findings, and puts forward directions for further research.

1.8. Summary

The chapter has provided the study context, the problem remains, leading to the rationale for conducting the research. The researcher then presented the objectives and the research questions. The chapter also presents the significance of the research and the scope of the study. The chapter concludes with a definition of the key terms and the dissertation organisation with six chapters.

The next chapter reviews the relevant literature on learner autonomy in out-of-class learning and the perceived teachers’ and peers’ roles in the classroom. The theoretical frameworks explain the potential correlations between learner autonomy and perceived teachers’ and peers’ roles. Previous research is reviewed to point out the research gap for the current research before providing the conceptual framework of the study.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 33</span><div class="page_container" data-page="33">

<b>Chapter 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW </b>

This chapter provides a synthesis overview of learner autonomy in prior foreign/second – language education research. It starts with presenting the conceptualisation of learner autonomy in language education over time and its models before finalising them into the current study’s operationalized definition. The first section then continues with the importance of learner autonomy, its degrees, the factors that influence learner autonomy development and approaches to fostering learner autonomy. The part of learner autonomy ends with learner autonomy in out-of-class learning, the main context of the research. The following two parts discuss learners’ perceptions of teachers’ and peers’ roles in the classroom, with detailed descriptions for each role. Finally, the chapter presents the theoretical framework to convey the connection between the students’ learner autonomy in the out-of-class learning context and the perceived teachers’ and peers’ roles in the classroom. From that, the researcher presents the conceptual framework of the research.

2.1. Learner autonomy

2.1.1. Conceptualisation of learner autonomy

2.1.1.1. Concepts of learner autonomy in language learning

Learner autonomy has been one of the foci in educational practices and research

<i>for over four decades (Nguyen & Stracke, 2020). The term autonomy traces its roots to the Greek word auto-nomos, where auto signifies self, and nomos denotes rule or law </i>

(Voltz, 2008). Auto-nomos, in essence, describes a state in which an individual establishes their own rules or laws (Dang, 2012). The classical Greek philosopher Plato further shaped its human-centric interpretation, defining autonomy as the independence and freedom of an individual, a concept applying in various fields such as philosophy, medicine, and psychology (Marshall, 2006). In the realm of education, the term autonomy is often used for schools, teachers, and learners, referred to as school autonomy, teacher autonomy, and learner autonomy. While the first two constructs are

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 34</span><div class="page_container" data-page="34">

related to education policies and teachers’ professional development, the third, and the focus of this research, is on students’ learning attributes.

Learner autonomy in foreign/second language learning is widely recognised as a complicated (Little, 2003), complex (Paiva & Braga, 2008), and multifaceted construct (Smith & Ushioda, 2009).

Holec, the father of language learner autonomy, defined learner autonomy as “the ability to take charge of one’s learning” (Holec, 1981, p. 3). An autonomous learner can “determine the learning objectives, define the contents and the progressions, select methods and techniques to be used, monitor the procedure of acquisition (rhythm, time, place...), and evaluate what has been acquired” (Holec, 1981, p. 3). The control ability is similarly expressed through how learners would make decision regarding “setting goals, choosing materials and tasks, planning practice opportunities, monitoring, and evaluating progress” (Cotteral, 1995, p. 5). The term “ability” could be replaced by different terms such as “skill” (Littlewood, 1999) or “skill and technique” (Oxford, 2003) to control one’s learning, but “ability” is a more popular term. Le (2019) defined learner autonomy as the ability to set goals, plan autonomous activities outside the classroom, manage time, materials, and resources, and self-assess.

The conception that learner autonomy is the ability to undertake a series of actions to make decisions regarding various elements of the learning process has faced criticism for not sufficiently integrating the cognitive dimensions of how learner autonomy develops (Little, 1991). Learner autonomy was then conceptualised as “a capacity for detachment, critical reflection, decision-making, and independent action” (Little, 1991, p. 4). Wenden (1991) also stressed learners’ attitudes and awareness when stating that learner autonomy refers to how students reflect on their learning and evaluate the effectiveness of their learning options. From these definitions, an individual’s “willingness” was added to the conceptions of learner autonomy alongside a learner’s ability to control their learning behaviours.

Benson (2001) substituted the terms “ability” and “take charge” with “capacity” and “control,” respectively, to define learner autonomy as “the capacity to take control of

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 35</span><div class="page_container" data-page="35">

one’s learning” (p. 47). He suggests that learners will actively self-direct their learning if they have the ability, the desire to control their learning, and if they are not hindered by learning materials, social, and psychological constraints. Benson (2006) and others (Freire, 1974; Illich, 1971) advocate for autonomy in learning contend that freedom is essential for the development of autonomy, implying that educational environments should support this freedom for autonomy to flourish.

The term “capacity” compiling of “ability, desire, and freedom” has become the overarching concept to depict the individual learner taking control of their learning (Benson, 2011). Researchers have based on this conception to form their own definition of learner autonomy in the specific research context. Nguyen (2018) described learner autonomy as learning strategies, motivation, and attitudes in learning English, focusing mainly on ability and desire. Nguyen and Habók (2019) defined learner autonomy as a construct with teachers’ roles, motivation, metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive skills, desire to learn English, and freedom, covering

In summary, the notion of learner autonomy has undergone significant development, reflected its complexity and how it has adapted to evolving learning environments. Initially characterised solely by a learner’s ability to take charge of learning, the concept has expanded to encompass the desire of learning, including learners’ attitudes, awareness, and willingness. Additionally, learner autonomy now involves not only the ability and desire to learn but also the element of freedom in the learning process.

In the context of this study, Benson (2011)’s definition of learner autonomy, highlighting learner autonomy as the capacity of learners to take control of their own learning, is aptly chosen. This conceptualisation resonates with the out-of-class learning context where learners not only exhibit their ability but also be mentally ready to learn on their own. Furthermore, learners manage their learning processes effectively underscores how learners navigate the freedom they have outside the classroom. By adopting this definition, the study acknowledges the multifaceted nature of learner autonomy and its relevance to the specific context of out-of-class learning.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 36</span><div class="page_container" data-page="36">

2.1.1.2. Perspectives of learner autonomy

Benson (1997) introduces three perspectives of learner autonomy: (a) technical, encompassing skills or strategies for unsupervised learning, (b) psychological, involving the individual’s attitudes and cognitive abilities which enable the learner to take responsibility for his/her own learning, and (c) political, dealing with empowerment of learners by giving them control over the content and processes of their learning.

Learner autonomy is socially conditioned and constrained; therefore, it is impossible to ignore the social interactions in the development of learner autonomy (Oxford, 2003). She added adds the sociocultural perspective of learner autonomy, consisting of Sociocultural I and II (Oxford, 2003). The first one refers to Vygotskyan approaches, which focuses on mediated learning, stating learning begins from the starting point of the child’s existing knowledge and experience and develops through social interaction

<b>(Oxford, 2003). The second one relates to ‘situated learning’ theory, discussing learning </b>

as participation or learning is the process of becoming a full participant in a sociocultural practice (Bloch et al., 1994).

All in all, research about learner autonomy needs to take into consideration all four perspectives (technical, psychological, political, and socio-cultural) to have a thorough view of learner autonomy (Oxford, 2003).

2.1.1.3. Models of learner autonomy

Regarding areas of control, there are three main models of learner autonomy. The first one is Littlewood (1997)’s three-aspect model of learner autonomy. The model includes language acquisition, learning approach, and personal development. In the area of language acquisition, learner autonomy is “the ability to operate independently with the language and use it to communicate personal meanings in real, unpredictable situations” (“autonomy as a communicator”) (Littlewood, 1997, p.81). In the area of classroom organisation, learner autonomy involves the “ability to take responsibility for their learning and to apply active, personally relevant strategies” (“autonomy as a learner”) (Littlewood, 1997, p. 81) . In the broadest dimension, learner

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 37</span><div class="page_container" data-page="37">

autonomy is “a higher-level goal of greater generalized autonomy as individuals” (“autonomy as a person”) (Littlewood, 1997, p. 81).

The second one is the model that Macaro (1997) develops, which consists of three dimensions: autonomy of language competence, autonomy of language learning competence, and autonomy of choice and action. The first dimension refers to communicative ability after mastering second language rules at a certain level. The second dimension refers to the ability to reproduce the language skills gained and transfer them to other similar situations. The third dimension refers to the ability to decide about learning options, such as short-term and long-term objectives and preferred personal learning strategies. It also includes performing higher-order thinking skills in the target language, such as constructing argumentative essays and providing justifications for a particular matter. This model seems to be similar with the model of Littlewood (1997) but is more specific in terms of outcomes.

In the third model, Benson (2011) describes the capacity of control of a learner in three dimensions: learning situations (situational dimension), learning behaviour (behavioural dimension), and psychology of learning (psychological dimension). The control of learning situations is a learner’s capacity to control the learning content and their right to do so. The control of learning behaviour is the student’s capacity to control the learning management, emphasising learning skills and strategies in the self-study process. The control of psychology of learning is the control of the cognitive processes, referring to the learners’ internal mental capacities, attitudes, and readiness that enable the learner to take responsibility for his/her learning. The development of control in one dimension can support the performance of the others. Effective control over learning content can lead to positive attitudes and appropriate learning strategies. The level of cognitive awareness of learning promotes the level of control over the learning management process.

The three models under discussion each addresses different aspects of learner autonomy. The first two models primarily emphasise the learner’s control over a specific language skill, then language learning processes, and finally being an autonomous

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 38</span><div class="page_container" data-page="38">

person not only in their learning, but also in their daily life. On the other hand, Benson’s (2011) framework of three dimensions of control – situational, behavioural, and psychological – focuses on providing a comprehensive lens to view learners’ capacity to control a whole learning process. This model captures the multifaceted nature of learner autonomy by considering how learner autonomy can be exercised over the learning situation, the learning actions, and their mental states. These three dimensions can depict students’ learning, especially in the context of out-of-class learning when the learners need to control not only their learning behaviours, but also the learning situations and psychology of learning. It is the reason for the selection of this model in this research. The three dimensions of control will be elaborated upon in the following sections.

2.1.1.3.1. Situational dimension

The situational dimension concerns learners’ capacity to control learning situations. Dickinson (1979) defines the control of the learning situations as “the learner is responsible for all the decisions concerned with their learning and the implementation of those decisions” (p. 11). Benson (2011) states that “the learners should freely determine the content of learning” and that autonomous learners should “have the freedom to determine their own goals and purposes if the learning is to be genuinely self-directed” (p. 49), considering the learning context where certain constraints (such as curriculum) usually exist. The control of the situational dimension, therefore, indicates the empowerment or emancipation of learners by giving them control over the learning content. Murase (2015) defines the control of the situational dimension as political-philosophical autonomy, which can be depicted as group/ individual autonomy and positive/ negative freedom. In the current research, the control of situational dimension is depicted based on Murase (2015)’s political-philosophical autonomy, dividing into Group influence and Freedom. Group autonomy expresses learners’ view/ awareness of teachers as authority and other authorities, namely their institution’s regulations, parents’ expectations, friends’ suggestions, and social norms. Freedom is

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 39</span><div class="page_container" data-page="39">

defined as the learners’ view of making decisions on the learning goals, materials, and ways of learning outside the classroom.

2.1.1.3.2. Behavioural dimension

The behavioural dimension emphasises learners’ capacity to control the skills or strategies for unsupervised learning, such as the metacognitive, cognitive, and social strategies (Benson, 2011). The control of these learning strategies manifests through learners’ specific behaviours in various stages of the learning process. The learning process is generally divided into three main stages: before, while, and post-learning.

In the pre-learning stage, learners prepare for learning. They can gather past learning experiences and think about what and how to learn (Dam, 1995). Gathering previous learning experiences is identifying learners’ strengths and weaknesses (Murase, 2015). Other researchers clarify thinking about what and how to learn is to determine the learning goals, plan, and select resources and strategies (Holec, 1981; Murase, 2015; Reinders, 2010; Ruelens, 2019; Zimmerman, 2002). In the current research, the pre-learning stage is named Getting ready and learners identify their strengths and weaknesses, know the most suitable learning ways, identify the learning goals, and plan the learning steps.

The while-learning stage is when the learners perform (Zimmerman, 2002) or practise the learning content (Reinders, 2010). Students learning progress in this stage goes together with monitoring (Murase, 2015; Reinders, 2010; Zimmerman, 2002). Focusing on the importance of the capacity to monitor learning activities, the current research describes the while-learning process through two learning phases: Carrying out the plan and Monitoring.

In the carrying out the plan phase, learners initiate their learning. They create the conditions under which they can study best and arrange the time to study. As they study, they also try different learning ways and resources until they can find the most effective ways (Murase, 2015). Arranging the best conditions for learning, initiating it, trying different learning ways and resources are the focus of the current research in Carrying out stage.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 40</span><div class="page_container" data-page="40">

Monitoring happens throughout the learning process. Learners engage and maintain learning, modify learning paths, and negotiate with others (Dang, 2012). Murase (2015) suggests that learners consider whether learning is progressing according to the learning plan and effectiveness to make needed adjustments. They seek help and modify their learning in response to the comments and help they receive (Murase, 2015). The ability to check whether the learning is happening as plan, reflect whether the learning routine is effective, adjust the learning process if necessary, and solicit help when needed is the focus of the current research in the monitoring stage.

The post-learning stage consists of evaluating the learning process to see what good or bad and starting new planning (Dam, 1995). These two processes are termed Self-evaluating and Transcending in the current research.

In the self-evaluating stage, learners assess their own learning and think about ways for revising (Reinders, 2010). Ruelens (2019) highlights the ability to select criteria to evaluate the learning plans, goals, and learning process. From those reflections, they can conclude the level of learning success. In the current research, the control of the self-evaluating stage is exercised when learners can select criteria to evaluate their learning outcomes, conduct the evaluation regarding the effectiveness of their learning plan and learning process, and then withdraw the conclusion whether they have reached their learning goals.

Second, having concluded the effectiveness of their learning, learners do not stop there. They must transfer the newly acquired knowledge or skills to a new context and start a new learning activity. Reulens (2019) focuses on retaining newly acquired knowledge and skills, integrating them into the learner’s knowledge, and transcending them to similar contexts and subsequent learning activities. The final aim of this stage is transferring acquired skills or information to other contexts, so the ability to look for new learning opportunities is argued to be essential. The capacity to find new learning opportunities, retain and integrate the newly acquired knowledge and skills in the new learning activities is the concern of the Transcending stage in the current study.

</div>