Page 156 - Beyond Methods

144 Promoting learner autonomy
gogic choices related to the aims, outcomes, tasks, and materials of learning and teaching. At the initial stage of autonomy, the empha- sis is simply on raising the learner’s awareness of the reasons be- hind the teacher’s choice of goals, tasks, and materials. At the in- termediary stage, the emphasis is on allowing the learner to choose from a range of options given by the teacher. Finally, at the ad- vanced stage, the emphasis is on learner determination of his or her own goals, tasks, and materials.
It certainly makes sense to start with a modest beginning and gradually move toward greater challenges. However, it would be a mistake to try to correlate the initial, intermediary, and advanced stages of autonomy mentioned in the previous paragraph with the beginning, intermediate, and advanced levels of language profi- ciency of a given group of learners. In fact, teachers and learners can follow different stages of autonomy depending on the linguistic and communicative demands of a particular task in a particular class. It would also be a mistake to presuppose that academic au- tonomy is suitable for learners of lower proficiency levels, and lib- eratory autonomy for learners of higher proficiency levels. Given appropriate conditions and adequate preparations, learners at dif- ferent proficiency levels will profit from an emphasis on academic as well as liberatory autonomy.
Whether one believes in the narrow or broad view of learner au- tonomy, what should be recognized is that autonomy is a complex construct that can be understood only through careful study, and achieved only through continual struggle. Autonomy cannot be effectively promoted in the absence of a supportive institutional en- vironment and a conducive classroom culture. It also requires teachers who are willing to let go and learners who are willing to take hold. As Christopher Candlin wisely warns us: “Autonomy can- not be legislated, independence cannot be wished, in the curricu- lum as anywhere else in the social polity; what can be done is to embed their defining principles in the actions of teachers and learners and make such actions not only open for reasoned choice by both, but, much more importantly, to establish the philosophi- cal, purposeful and language acquisitional bases of such choices themselves as part of the subject matter of the curriculum. After all, deciding what is to be done and why is one of the few genuinely communicative acts any classroom can encourage” (Candlin, 1987, p. xi–xii).