Hành vi học tập của sinh viên tại Phòng đọc, Trung tâm học liệu tiếng Anh

Tạp chí KHOA HỌC ĐHSP TPHCM Số 37 năm 2012<br /> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> STUDENTS’ LEARNING BEHAVIORS<br /> IN THE READING UNIT OF ELRU<br /> SUPHATRA SUCHARITRAK*<br /> <br /> ABSTRACT<br /> The university has invested a huge amount of money and effort in the Reading Unit of<br /> the English Language Resource Unit (ELRU). The researchers aim to examine specifically<br /> whether the Reading Unit can yield the optimal productivity for the students. This article<br /> reports students’ learning behaviors and styles as well as difficulties when learning in the<br /> Reading Unit. Furthermore, the attitudes towards and their perspectives on autonomous<br /> learning are also discussed along with constructive criticism for ELRU.<br /> Keywords: learning behavior, autonomous learning, and perspective.<br /> TÓM TẮT<br /> Hành vi học tập của sinh viên tại Phòng đọc, Trung tâm học liệu tiếng Anh<br /> Trường đại học đã đầu tư rất nhiều tiền và công sức vào Phòng đọc của Trung tâm<br /> học liệu tiếng Anh (ELRU). Các nhà nghiên cứu muốn tìm hiểu cụ thể rằng Phòng có thể<br /> thu hút được nhiều sinh viên của trường tham gia đọc tài liệu hay không. Bài báo này nói<br /> về hành vi học tập, kiểu học tập và những khó khăn của sinh viên khi học tập tại Trung<br /> tâm. Ngoài ra, còn bàn luận về thái độ và quan điểm học tập độc lập cùng với những góp ý<br /> xây dựng đối với ELRU.<br /> Từ khóa: hành vi học tập, học tập độc lập, quan điểm.<br /> <br /> 1. Introduction join and take control of their learning. At<br /> Autonomous learning is one of the the self-access center, students decide<br /> interesting topics in the field of language which skills to practice, which activities<br /> learning research. The national and to do, how long to spend on an activity,<br /> international interest in self-access and how to evaluate their own learning<br /> language learning (SALL) and (Flowerdew & Miller, 2005).<br /> autonomous learning in recent years has Suranaree University of<br /> manifested itself in a proliferation of Technology (SUT), a regional and<br /> papers, books and conference national university in Nakhon<br /> presentations. There has also been an Ratchasima, saw the importance of<br /> increase in the incorporation of self- autonomous learning and established a<br /> access as a component in teacher self-access language learning center<br /> education (Gardner & Miller, 1999: I). under the name of English Language<br /> Many schools provide a self-access Resource Unit (ELRU) as one element of<br /> center where students are encouraged to a self-directed learning program in order<br /> to encourage and promote students’<br /> *<br /> Dr., Christian University of Thailand School autonomous learning. Students at SUT<br /> of International Programs<br /> are required to exploit the English<br /> <br /> <br /> 16<br /> Tạp chí KHOA HỌC ĐHSP TPHCM Suphatra Sucharitrak<br /> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> resources available at ELRU as a part of Autonomous learning has been<br /> compulsory learning activities directly understood differently by different<br /> related to their English curriculum. researchers in various studies. Henri<br /> Credits are awarded to those for Holec (1981, p.3) defines the term of<br /> fulfillment of the requirement. autonomous learning as “the ability to<br /> At present, large sums of money take charge of one’s own directed<br /> have been invested by the university in learning.” Scharle and Szabo (2000, p.4)<br /> order to keep the ELRU running and believe that autonomy means “the<br /> large amounts of time have been spent by freedom and ability to manage one’s own<br /> the students at ELRU. Are the students affairs which entails the right to make<br /> thoroughly exploiting the resources decisions as well.” For Dickenson (1987,<br /> provided? Are they working efficiently cited in Oxford 2003:81), autonomy<br /> there? Is it worth the financial refers to the situation in which the learner<br /> investment? Is it worth the students’ is totally responsible for his or her<br /> valuable time? These are among the decisions and the implementation of<br /> many questions that prompted the these decisions. From previous literature,<br /> researchers to explore the phenomena in we can find neither consensus<br /> the ELRU. The present research focused understanding of the term autonomy nor<br /> on students’ learning behaviors in the theoretical framework of learner<br /> Reading Unit of ELRU of Suranaree autonomy in the field of L2 learning.<br /> University of Technology. The purpose In this study, the researchers define<br /> of the study was to find out students’ autonomous learning as being composed<br /> learning behaviors and their perceptions of the following elements: (a) self-<br /> of as well as their perspectives towards determination of learning, (b) the ability<br /> autonomous learning in the Reading Unit to monitor the learning process, and, (c)<br /> of ELRU. the ability to evaluate the results of<br /> The research objectives are as learning.<br /> follows: Autonomous learning has been<br /> (1) To explore the students’ found closely related to motivation.<br /> English learning behaviors in the According to the theory of Deci and<br /> Reading Unit of ELRU; Ryan (1985), self-determination leads to<br /> (2) To find out the students’ intrinsic motivation and that intrinsic<br /> difficulties in learning autonomously in motivation leads to more effective<br /> the Reading Unit of ELRU; learning. By using intrinsic motivation,<br /> (3) To investigate the students’ students purport to contrast it with<br /> perspectives on autonomous learning in extrinsic motivation. The former refers to<br /> the Reading Unit of ELRU. the motivation to do an activity for its<br /> 2. Literature review own sake rather than because of external<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> 17<br /> Tạp chí KHOA HỌC ĐHSP TPHCM Số 37 năm 2012<br /> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> pressure or promise of reward for doing difficulties in language learning. Some<br /> it. perceive grammar as being difficult to<br /> Another study by Chan et al (2002) master; others find a problem with<br /> focuses on the students’ attitudes and pronunciation. Some may have a very<br /> behaviors related to autonomous positive attitude towards a language like<br /> language learning at Hong Kong English, whereas others may see it more<br /> Polytechnics University. It was a large- negatively as something they have to<br /> scale study which investigated students’ learn rather than something they want to<br /> views of their responsibilities and learn. Different learners may have<br /> decision making abilities in learning different personal goals in learning the<br /> English, their motivation level and the language. For some, being able to pass a<br /> actual language learning activities they test or have minimum competence might<br /> undertook inside and outside the be the goal, for others they want native-<br /> classroom with a view to gauging their like pronunciation and full command of<br /> readiness for autonomous learning. The the language.<br /> findings revealed that students were 3. The study<br /> involved in 22 outside-class activities and This study examined the<br /> that among these there were 10 activities autonomous learning in the Reading Unit<br /> about which more than half of the of ELRU and the perspectives of the<br /> respondents said they ‘sometimes’ or students towards autonomous learning.<br /> ‘often’ engaged in. Among other things, As the university has invested a huge<br /> the respondents reported reading English amount of money and effort in the<br /> notices, books, magazines and Reading Unit, then the researchers aimed<br /> newspapers, and noting down new words to study specifically whether the Reading<br /> and their meanings. The interview in this Unit can yield the optimal productivity<br /> research found that the respondents for the students. The following research<br /> inclined to work in the patterns of pairs questions were addressed in this study:<br /> and groups. This research also suggested (1) What are the behaviors related<br /> that the students there were less to learning English found in the Reading<br /> motivated and less ready to learn Unit of ELRU?<br /> autonomously than their peers elsewhere. (2) Do students have any<br /> The study showed that even when difficulties when learning autonomously?<br /> students have fairly positive attitudes to If so, what are they? And how do they try<br /> autonomous learning, they could still be to overcome them?<br /> insufficiently motivated to take full (3) What are the students’<br /> control of their language learning. perspectives on autonomous learning in<br /> With regard to self-access learning, the Reading Unit of ELRU?<br /> Richards and Lockhart (1994) suggested Methodology<br /> that students have different kinds of<br /> <br /> <br /> 18<br /> Tạp chí KHOA HỌC ĐHSP TPHCM Suphatra Sucharitrak<br /> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Informants. University undergraduate in their entirety during the interview<br /> students enrolled in five English courses, sessions. The conversation with the staff<br /> English I to English V, participated in was noted down to provide information<br /> this study. Purposive sampling methods related to the procedure of using ELRU.<br /> were used to select the informants with Data analysis. The data collected<br /> specific features related to the research from the observation and semi-structured<br /> objectives. Two categories of informants interview were analyzed qualitatively<br /> were selected based on their learning using several different methods often<br /> behaviors in the Reading Unit of ELRU: used in studies of this type. First, the data<br /> those who are occupied in the process of from the interview recordings were<br /> language learning (Group A) and those transcribed from the spoken version to<br /> who are not occupied in the process of the written version. Second, the written<br /> language learning (Group B). In total, 10 versions of the interview were translated<br /> informants were involved in the study from Thai into English. Third, the<br /> and 5 were chosen to represent each researchers followed the procedure of<br /> category. familiarization, organization, and coding.<br /> Data collection. The data for this For open coding, the data were first<br /> study were collected from two resources: broken into discrete parts before being<br /> observations and semi-structured closely examined and compared. It was<br /> interviews. The data were collected over performed on each individual<br /> a period of three weeks. The time participant’s data set. All relevant data<br /> duration for observation was between were grouped into emerging themes.<br /> 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., covering the These themes led to concept and<br /> whole of the working hours of ELRU. categories. After concept and categories<br /> For the observation, the researchers were developed, the raw data were<br /> followed Robinson framework examined and all relevant data bits were<br /> (Robinson, 2003) which includes put under an appropriate concept. Open<br /> dimensions such as the space, the actor, coding was completed for each<br /> action, goal, object, the feelings, and the participant before any comparisons were<br /> event. During the on-site observation, attempted across participants. Once the<br /> the researchers kept detailed records of data had been filed for each participant<br /> events in the Reading Unit of ELRU. For and categories had been developed, the<br /> interviews, three kinds of probing researchers began to draft the<br /> techniques were employed: detail- descriptions of each individual case. The<br /> oriented probing, elaboration-oriented data was synthesized and pulled together<br /> probing, and clarification-oriented to capture the essence of individual<br /> probing. Guiding questions were used to participants. For the cross case analysis,<br /> help researchers to focus on the research the categories for individual participants<br /> objectives. Interviews were tape recorded seemed to cluster naturally into themes<br /> <br /> <br /> 19<br /> Tạp chí KHOA HỌC ĐHSP TPHCM Số 37 năm 2012<br /> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> which were further analyzed after were supposed to come to study, but<br /> reexamining the raw data. Some instead sat around and waited for the time<br /> categories were combined. Some new to get the stamps which were given by<br /> categories appeared in the study. For the staff of ELRU to confirm their<br /> axial coding, the relationships between presence and “work”.<br /> different categories were carefully (2) Patterns of learning in the<br /> examined. Connections as well as links Reading Unit<br /> were established. According to the observation and<br /> 4. Results and findings interview, three patterns of learning can<br /> The qualitative information from be obviously identified. Some students<br /> the data analysis fell into five major preferred to work in groups, some in<br /> categories: (1) students’ learning pairs, and others individually. Those in<br /> behaviors in the Reading Unit, (2) groups or pairs claimed that they could<br /> patterns of learning in the Reading Unit, have more chances to help each other to<br /> (3) informants’ difficulties in learning in overcome the difficulties related to<br /> the Reading Unit, (4) informants’ unknown vocabulary, complicated<br /> expressed attitudes to the English grammar structures, and comprehension<br /> Language, and, (5) students’ perspectives of the texts. Those who worked<br /> on autonomous learning. individually claimed that they could work<br /> (1) Students’ learning behaviors in without any interruptions from others.<br /> the Reading Unit (3) Informants’ difficulties in<br /> Researchers classified learning learning in the Reading Unit<br /> behaviors of informants into two groups, According to the interviews, the<br /> labeled as group A and group B. Group A informants had difficulties in<br /> was comprised of the students who came understanding unfamiliar lexical items,<br /> to study in the Reading Unit. They intricate syntactic structures, and some<br /> performed different activities such as foreign cultural backgrounds. When such<br /> vocabulary, grammar, and reading difficulties were encountered, they would<br /> exercises or read magazines, short try various strategies such as guessing the<br /> stories, novels, and textbooks. Some from meanings of new words from the context,<br /> this group did class assignments, and using dictionaries, referring to grammar<br /> copied reading passages, vocabulary, and books, and negotiating with their friends.<br /> exercises. With the help of those strategies,<br /> Group B was comprised of the sometimes they could successfully solve<br /> students who came but did not study in their problems and language obstacles,<br /> the Reading Unit. They spent their time but other times they just met with<br /> chatting and hanging out with their frustration and could not solve their<br /> friends, doing exercises irrelevant to problems.<br /> English learning. Some from this group<br /> <br /> <br /> 20<br /> Tạp chí KHOA HỌC ĐHSP TPHCM Suphatra Sucharitrak<br /> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (4) Informants’ attitudes toward the studying in English courses ranging from<br /> English language English 1 to English 5. The emergent<br /> The interviews revealed that the data from the observation and semi-<br /> students in group A had a positive structured interview showed that students<br /> attitude towards English; 4 of the who spent the time in the Reading Unit of<br /> informants claimed that they like English ELRU were free to choose their own<br /> and one claimed that he moderately likes learning material. Some of them did<br /> English. For group B, the researchers vocabulary, grammar and reading<br /> found that one likes, three moderately exercises while others read magazines,<br /> like, and one dislikes English. short stories, and novels.<br /> (5) Students’ perspectives on Further inquiry found that students<br /> autonomous learning chose their own ways of learning<br /> The data revealed that all ten differently. Some chose to study in<br /> informants from both group A and group groups, some in pairs, and some<br /> B have positive perspectives on individually. Students who came to work<br /> autonomous learning. They claimed that in groups or in pairs in the Reading Unit<br /> autonomous learning could extend their preferred to read magazines, novels, short<br /> working hours beyond the limitation of stories, or work on reading and<br /> class time. They believed that more vocabulary exercises. They enjoyed<br /> knowledge could be obtained from discussions, exchanges of ideas, and<br /> autonomous learning. sharing academic texts with each other<br /> 5. Discussion (Dam, 1995). In contrast, some of<br /> Students’ learning behaviors in the students preferred to work individually.<br /> Reading Unit of ELRU will be presented Their reasons were that they said they<br /> and discussed according to the four main needed to concentrate on their own<br /> points: the existence of autonomous reading without interruptions.<br /> learning in the Reading Unit of ELRU; More data came up from the semi-<br /> students’ difficulties in autonomous structure interview when researchers<br /> learning; divergence between students’ posed questions to all ten informants on<br /> beliefs and behaviors, and students’ their views towards learning and reading<br /> motivation; and students’ learning apart from the school setting. All of the<br /> behavior of copying. Researchers will informants expressed a positive<br /> discuss these behaviors in the order perspective on reading. They claimed that<br /> presented above. they could choose what they like to read<br /> (1) The existence of autonomous and be independent from the teachers.<br /> learning in the Reading Unit of ELRU Some of them claimed that their class<br /> The students, who came to study time was not sufficient.<br /> English in the Reading Unit during our Jones’ (1995) study on English<br /> research, were students who were language students in Cambodia indicated<br /> <br /> <br /> 21<br /> Tạp chí KHOA HỌC ĐHSP TPHCM Số 37 năm 2012<br /> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> that students were ready to work (2) The difficulties of autonomous<br /> independently of the teacher despite their learning<br /> strong orientation towards acceptance of The students had difficulties in<br /> power, authority, collectivism and inter- vocabulary, grammar, and<br /> independence. comprehension of texts. This is common<br /> According to students’ learning to most language learners. However, they<br /> behaviors in the Reading Unit of ELRU were able to use effective strategies to<br /> and our own definition in this study, deal with their difficulties. When<br /> autonomous learning occurred in the difficulties could be solved, the<br /> Reading Unit of ELRU because of three informants could carry on studying<br /> reasons. Firstly, students could take smoothly. At the early stages, the<br /> charge of their own learning. They had informants tried to solve their difficulties<br /> the freedom to choose what to learn and without consulting outside facilitators,<br /> how to learn it. They could control their for example, by using dictionaries or<br /> thinking and focus their attention on the asking their friends. They tried to solve<br /> work at hand. Secondly, they could study their problems with their own syntactic<br /> independently without teacher control. structure knowledge by guessing the<br /> Lastly, they had positive attitudes unknown words from the context. If they<br /> towards learning and practicing by still could not resolve their problems,<br /> themselves. Lee (1998) did research on then they turned to consult outside<br /> tertiary students in Hong Kong, and facilitators. ELRU provided such<br /> found that effective self-learning involves facilitators as dictionaries and a variety of<br /> taking responsibility for the objectives of other books for students to use to<br /> learning, self-monitoring, self-assessing, overcome their difficulties. The students<br /> and taking an active role in learning. took advantage of ELRU’s resources. On<br /> Dickenson (1995) states that those who the other hand, when difficulties were not<br /> have capacity for being active and overcome, the learners may have been<br /> independent in the learning process can discouraged to continue the work at hand.<br /> identify goals, formulate their goals, and The difficulties involved in the<br /> can change goals to suit their own autonomous learning in the Reading Unit<br /> learning needs and interests and monitor could be related to the learners’ language<br /> their own learning. Gieve and Clark proficiency levels. In the course of<br /> (2005) compared reflections written by observation, the researchers found that<br /> Chinese students with those of European some learners could have difficulties with<br /> students, finding that the Chinese simple words such as “mice”, “hole”,<br /> students actually appreciated the benefits “wall”, “wait”. Some learners’ language<br /> of autonomous study and claimed to proficiency level might not match the<br /> make good use of opportunity. level required for autonomous learning in<br /> the Reading Corner. The research study<br /> <br /> <br /> 22<br /> Tạp chí KHOA HỌC ĐHSP TPHCM Suphatra Sucharitrak<br /> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> by Yang Xinde (2007) also showed that perspectives toward autonomous<br /> difficulty in autonomous learning can be learning, because most of them claimed<br /> caused by the mismatch of the students’ to have positive attitudes towards the<br /> ability and the degree of difficulty of the English language (although not so strong<br /> text. It has also found that not all the as that in Group A on average) and all of<br /> difficulties met by the learners could be them had positive perspectives on<br /> successfully overcome. Failing to autonomous learning. The divergence<br /> overcome the difficulties might result in a between attitude and behavior is no<br /> decrease of self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is surprise in social life. Fred P. Pestello1,<br /> an individual’s belief in both the value of H. Frances G. Pestello (2000) sought to<br /> doing something by oneself and his/her challenge the typical simplistic<br /> ability to accomplish it. Self-efficacy assumptions of consistency between<br /> may influence one’s performance and words and deeds. Thus, behavioral<br /> achievement. The lower the self-efficacy problems cannot be completely solved by<br /> is, the lower the possible achievement developing the desirable attitude. A<br /> one may get. So, difficulty in remedy for the problem could be to<br /> autonomous learning can result in more stimulate the students’ intrinsic<br /> harmful and destructive effects than motivation, as will be discussed as<br /> merely the failure to overcome the follows.<br /> learning obstacles at hand. According to (4) The function of motivation<br /> Mozzon & Pherson (2006), not all the According to the scoring system,<br /> learners who use a self-access center are the students (involved in the course from<br /> already fully independent. They may be English 1 to English 5) have to work in<br /> at different stages of their learning ELRU 10 times in order to get 5% of<br /> development and may want to access their final score. Each time they have to<br /> different levels of support while in the stay there for approximately 1 hour to<br /> center. In this case, the university and earn the stamps given by the ELRU staff<br /> ELRU need to support students with which confirms their presence. The<br /> different strategies in order to generate scoring system is an extrinsic motivation<br /> optimal success from autonomous since the learners are more interest in the<br /> learning. result. Anyway, it is indispensable.<br /> (3) The divergence between beliefs Without the scoring system, many fewer<br /> and behaviors learners would work in the ELRU. Due to<br /> Why was the level of effectiveness the encouragement from the scoring<br /> of autonomous learning so different in system, so many students have come and<br /> Group B as compared to Group A? We really learned English. But, extrinsic<br /> can’t attribute it to their expressed motivation is not long lasting. Once the<br /> attitudes towards the English language, reward is canceled, the learners might no<br /> neither can we attribute it to their longer continue working in the ELRU.<br /> <br /> <br /> 23<br /> Tạp chí KHOA HỌC ĐHSP TPHCM Số 37 năm 2012<br /> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Intrinsic motivation can compensate for more efficiently used to provide the<br /> the limitations of extrinsic motivation. students more comprehensible input,<br /> Since the learners involved have interest which is the driving force for inter-<br /> in the learning activity itself, they have language development (Judie Haynes,<br /> the inner force for learning regardless of 1998).<br /> whether outside reward exist or not. 6. Recommendations & suggestions<br /> (5) The behavior of learning by According to the present study, the<br /> copying researchers put forward the following<br /> A lot of informants in Group A suggestions for further consideration:<br /> learned English by copying in the (1) Measures should be taken to<br /> Reading Unit of ELRU. They copied stimulate and strengthen the students’<br /> very neatly and carefully. They claimed intrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation<br /> that they copied for class presentation is rooted in the interest in the language<br /> and for language improvement. Copying learning itself. English games, role<br /> may be a learning style for some people. playing, and other activities are popular<br /> But since so many informants employed means which can be employed to<br /> it, peer influence might be involved in the stimulate the learners’ interest in the<br /> behavior. In the research of Chan et al English language learning.<br /> (2002), the respondents reported that (2) Set up programs to help learners<br /> “reading English notices, books, to develop strategies related to English<br /> magazine and newspapers, and noting reading such as reading for general ideas,<br /> down new words and their meaning” reading for details, or reading for<br /> were the general methods of reading enjoyment. The learners have to learn<br /> involved in autonomous learning. The how to learn (Hill, 1994, as cited Zhao<br /> researchers have found little positive Chunrong 2006)<br /> evaluation with regard to the 7. Future research<br /> effectiveness of learning by copying. The findings from this study<br /> Copying might not be so efficient for suggest three areas of future research,<br /> those who just followed the “fashion”. which are, first, the study of ways of<br /> On the plus side, copying probably stimulating the students’ intrinsic<br /> occupies a certain amount of their motivation for learning at ELRU. The<br /> attention, which could result in deeper researchers raise this suggestion because<br /> processing of the information. Copying we found that intrinsic motivation can<br /> slows down the speed of reading and is lead to successful autonomous learning.<br /> not advantageous for the reader to The second area is the study of training<br /> mentally combine different parts of the students to use the resources at ELRU<br /> context in order to catch a full picture of most efficiently. The third area is the<br /> the content. Copying consumes a lot of study of probing into the two other parts<br /> the students precious time that could be of ELRU, the Listening and Computer<br /> <br /> <br /> 24<br /> Tạp chí KHOA HỌC ĐHSP TPHCM Suphatra Sucharitrak<br /> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Units. These are the main areas that the autonomous learning. Yet, the difficulties<br /> researchers suggest for future study. which they were unable to overcome<br /> 8. Conclusion might have a negative effect on the<br /> The informants in the Reading Unit learners because they could reduce the<br /> of ELRU were found to be involved in learners’ self-efficacy. Intrinsic<br /> autonomous learning. Although they had motivation needs to be developed in<br /> difficulties with new words, grammar, order to provide the learners a long<br /> and text comprehension, they could select lasting push for language learning.<br /> effective strategies to overcome a lot of Reading strategies need to be developed<br /> the difficulties. Most had positive to help the learners use the resources in<br /> attitudes towards the English language, the ELRU more effectively.<br /> and had positive perspectives on<br /> <br /> REFERENCES<br /> 1. Chan V., Spratt M., & Humphreys G. (2002), Autonomous language learning: Hong<br /> Kong tertiary students’ attitudes and behaviors, Evaluation and Research in<br /> Education, 16:1, 1-18.2.<br /> 2. Dam L. (1995), Learner Autonomy: From Theory to Classroom Practice,<br /> Dublin:Authentik.<br /> 3. Flowerdew J., Miller L. (2005), Second language listening: Theory and practice,<br /> Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br /> 4. Gardner R., Miller L. (1999), Establish Self-Access: from theory to practice,<br /> Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br /> 5. Gieve S., Clark R. (2005), The Chinese approach to learning: Cultural trait or<br /> situated response? The case of a self-directed learning programmed, System, 33(2),<br /> 261-276.<br /> 6. Mozzon-McPherson M.(2006), Promoting and supporting independent learning out<br /> of the classroom: An analysis of the skills of advisingand their implications on the<br /> emerging role of language learning advisors, Links & Letters 7, 111-126.<br /> 7. Oxford R. (2003), Toward a more systematic model of L2 learner autonomy, In<br /> D.Palfreyman, R.C.Smith (Eds.), Learner autonomy across cultures, Palgrave<br /> Macmillian.<br /> 8. Scharle A., A. Szabo (2000), Learner autonomy: A guide to developing learner<br /> Responsibilities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br /> <br /> (Received: 08/12/2011; Accepted: 07/6/2012)<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> 25<br />