Educational Constraints Are Primary Threat to Pro-Autonomy Approaches to Learning - Case Study Example

ID No Word Count: Educational Constraints are Primary Threat to Pro-Autonomy Approaches to Learning Introduction The history of autonomy in language education dates back to the 1990s where autonomy focused on the learner, referring to the ability of one taking charge of personal learning (Mackenzie, 2002). It could for instance be recognized through unpredictable contribution in classroom by students that would end up throwing the plans of the teacher off course. But with the proliferation of centers for self access and computer-based teaching, pro-autonomy in education context became even more complex. Since second and foreign language learning entails the enablement of self expression as opposed to acquisition of specific knowledge according to Macaro (2008), pro-autonomy would be critical to foster the acquisition of the relevant communication skills. Teacher pro-autonomy refers to the freedom of teachers to exercise their discretion in the implementation of curriculum (Benson, 2006). Additionally, Benson (2012) points out at self-directed professional development and action as important concepts in defining teacher autonomy in language learning. The language teaching literature context puts much emphasis on the autonomy of the teacher as a professional attribute, linking it to learner autonomy. According to Chapman, pro-autonomy clauses from most agreements would require that teachers “have individual professional autonomy in determining the methods of instruction, and the planning and presentation of course materials in the classes of pupils to which they are assigned” within the prescribed curriculum and in line with effective education practices (2003). Pro-autonomy approaches to learning encompass the various practices that aim at developing pro-autonomy among teachers in the educational context. These include the inductive approach where students discuss among themselves and involve the teacher for complex questions and the learner centered approach where the teacher focuses on promoting learner’s autonomy. Educational Constraints In line with the pro-autonomy argument by Benson and Huang (2008) which gives the teacher the power to make choices and decisions that influence learning, pro-autonomy enables teachers to adopt professional choices that would enable them attend to the diverse changing needs of students. With these changes in education setting, various factors come into play to deter effective learning, referred to as educational constraints. Educational constraints are the factors that hinder the attainment of skills that bring about the desired social, individual and policy outcomes in the educational context (Dörnyei, 2005). These factors could be a contribution from the environment, teacher or students and deter the attainment of objectives of education on the teacher or students. This paper analyses the socio-cultural, institutional and individual constraints placed on teachers, appreciating that these constraints primarily deter pro-autonomy, an important aspect in driving education agenda. Institutional factors, those related to the environment of educational delivery, have been noted to be among the major constraints in pro-autonomy. Inadequacy or lack of appropriate learning materials hinders teachers’ choices on the materials to use for teaching. They would be forced to use whatever materials would be available whether they give the desired outcome or not. Additionally, the style of teaching would be determined by the technology available for use, whether computers, document cameras or the likes and the software needed. Lack of these technologies in educational institutions could limit teachers on the freedom they have on delivery of lessons. Similarly, the institution could fail to have the relevant license for such technologies hence limiting the teacher on the freedom of teaching style that would have otherwise been accorded to the students. Most of these institutions have developed curricula which teachers find already in place and have to comply by its requirements. The lack of freedom of lesson execution, compounded by the existence of pre-determined curricula, limits the freedom of teachers on how to deliver lessons to the students. Elective courses in particular give the students the freedom to choose whether to undertake such courses or not leaving teachers without any freedom of dictating the courses that the students need to undertake so as to realize the objectives of education. Various scholars (Dörnyei, 2005; Mackenzie, 2002; Palfreyman, 2003; Santoro, 2003) have argued on pro-autonomy facing potential threat from the learning context, be it the classroom context, which became a significant study in the 1990s or outside the classroom context which Benson refers to as “beyond the classroom,” (2006, p. 26). Beyond the classroom encompasses self-access centers, distance learning, tandem learning involving two language learners helping each other, self instruction and studying abroad. Even though these self-access centers threaten the pedagogical freedom of teachers, Benson and Huang (2008) still support the role of teachers for the full realization of pro-autonomy due to their role as facilitators. Thus, the role of teachers has evolved from guiding students in the selection of learning materials and their subsequent use, to their role in individual tutoring and learner development. Having fixed periods of time for lessons deters pro-autonomy in classroom context. Teaching Assistants could limit the wide range of knowledge and strategies that could be shared by teachers, known to be better knowledgeable. Secondly, teachers have varied individual factors that could constrain education. Motivation largely determines the willingness of the teacher to explore varied teaching approaches at varied times, teach within the scope of learners, arouse their interest and respect the autonomy of learners’ goals (Macaro, 2008). While much of the literature in language teaching would consider teacher autonomy as a professional attribute, it becomes difficult to separate it from the willingness and ability of teachers to foster autonomy among students (Benson, 2006). Lack of motivation hinders the freedom teachers have to promote pro-autonomy, an observation supported by Humphrey and Chan (2002) who indicate that motivation would precede pro-autonomy. Closely related to this would be the motivation for enrolling for the course. When teachers enroll for language courses just to enable them get the certificates required for pursuance of other courses or just to benefit from the associated handouts such as the 1,000 Saudi Riyals given monthly to technical college students in Saudi Arabia, they would be less motivated to pursue individual efforts to ensure greater pro-autonomy. Teacher development also determines the level of pro-autonomy in educational context because, for instance, the level of second language education among teachers informs the ability of a teacher to navigate in their profession in a way that would enable the creation of an educationally sound and contextually appropriate condition for promotion of pro-autonomy in second language learning. Finally, socio-cultural factors, referring to factors that relate to the social and cultural background of the teacher also significantly influence pro-autonomy. Benson (2006) observes that psychological factors including age, aptitude, personality, cognitive style, ethnicity and gender which are biologically determined and social class, affective state and learning preferences and beliefs which are constructed socially, both of which would suppress as opposed to highlight one’s individuality. Referring to Vygotskyan learning theory, the scholar postulates that learning would be conducted in a specific cultural and social setting which consists of specific persons at a time. The interaction of teachers with various cultural environments informs their ability to handle students from various work and educational backgrounds as they would have diverse inputs. This would in turn promote the freedom that such teachers have in the educational context. Lack of social skills among teachers in the context of education execution would pose a significant threat to propagation of pro-autonomy. My Position Having evaluated the influence of the various constraints on the teacher, it would be appreciated that these socio-cultural, individual and institutional constraints primarily pose a threat to pro-autonomy learning approaches in the educational context. The major reason for this is the fact that any constraint on teachers’ pro-autonomy deters autonomy in the educational context. This follows the observation by Benson (2012) that teachers play a critical role of determining instruction methods and planning of lessons based on the prescribed curriculum, hence the importance of their professional autonomy in the delivery of the pedagogical objectives. Foreign language teachers have the responsibility of promoting pro-autonomy in the education environment, being an educational aim that seeks to develop the thoughts and action of a person with reference to own choices. Therefore, any deterrent factor to the enhancement of teachers’ pro-autonomy primarily influences pro-autonomy approaches to learning. How to Tackle the Problem In the recent past, it has been noted that accounts of teacher autonomy have adopted a tendency that tries to balance teacher freedom and professional attributes with the former being acknowledged as a result of self-guided professional development and the willingness to get involved in institutional change processes beyond the classroom context. This therefore calls for control on self access learning approaches based on collaborative control and learner involvement so as to promote pro-autonomy in language learning. Early studies on autonomy considered the changing roles of teachers in new practice modes such as self access (Benson & Huang, 2008). The efforts of teachers to promote autonomy would be constrained by some factors that would be variably dependent on their control. Spratt, Humphrey and Chan (2002) therefore suggest the need for adoption of a teacher-learner pedagogy that would effectively prepare teachers in their engagement in autonomy pedagogy with learners. The centrality of autonomy in education would require that teacher development efforts align teacher education programs to the emerging education demands. Finally, even though attaining wholesome equipment could be difficult, institutions should strive to provide for the most of teaching materials that would consequently provide teachers with a wide array of choices on teaching approaches. References Benson, P. & Huang, J. (2008). Autonomy in the transition from foreign language learning to foreign language teaching. Delta, 24, 421 – 439. Benson, P. (2006). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 40, 21 – 40. Benson, P. (2012). Autonomy in language learning, learning and life. Synergies France, 9, 29 – 39. Chapman, A. (2003). Professional autonomy in the life of a teacher. Teacher Newsmagazine, 15(5). Retrieved 25 March 2013 from http://bctf.ca/publications/NewsmagArticle.aspx?id=10104 Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Macaro, E. (2008). Learning strategies in foreign and second language classrooms. London: Continuum. Mackenzie, A. S. (2002). Changing contexts: Connecting teacher autonomy and institutional development. In A. S. Mackenzie & E. McCafferty (Eds.), Developing autonomy: Proceedings of the JALT CUE Conference 2001 (pp. 223–232). Tokyo: The Japan Association for Language Teaching College & University Educators Special Interest Group. Palfreyman, D. (2003). Expanding the discourse on learner development: A reply to Anita Wenden. Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 243–8. Santoro, E. (2003). Autonomy, freedom and rights: A critique of liberal subjectivity. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Spratt, M., Humphrey, G. & Chan, V. (2002). Autonomy and motivation: Which comes first? Language Teaching Research, 6(3), 245–256. Read More