Learner Beliefs

about Language
Learning and
Learner Autonomy:
A Reconsideration
Miyuki Usuki
Formerly Hokuriku University, Japan
Currently PhD Candidate & Lecturer,
Edith Cowan University, Australia
msurma@tpg.com.au
Learner autonomy has received increased attention in recent language teaching and learning
literature. Although Holec (1981)proposed a somewhat categorical definition of learner autonomy,
thisconcept canbeviewed in various ways depending onfactors suchascontext andculture. Onemay
posit thatlearner autonomy is based on Western values and, as such, is notas easilyaccessible in the
Asian context. With such views in mind, the purpose of mystudy is togain a greater understandingof Japanese students' beliefs regarding foreign language learning in a particular context. Learnerautonomy is defined in this chapter as learners' internal attitudes for self-motivation. My study
shows thatpositive self-beliefs and metacognitive awareness can beconsidered as keys inpromoting
learner autonomy. Instead of training learners to satisfy teacher expectations, or simply giving
students unbounded freedom to make decisions, learner development should be more concernedwith the nature of both students' and teachers' learning as a path towards self-growth.
*l'#iilfttt, :tjfi©*f§gff-^lf#WTffig£*feT^-5,, Holec (1981) tt, ¥S#6££Jt«

stiiTfcf). tvr. mm^w^a')-7tMrwamm/fi, ^i§&'&*Mtbz>tz&<Dmx:-foz>ttZttft&ftttttt^ttB&&ttZfrt)mz>M<0^%&ffll±\z\i, Wffit*FB%<?m%ilin•Autonomy You

Ask!

12

»

USUKl

In existing understandings of learner autonomy, learner responsibility is often focused on thelearners' independent management skills—that is, their own learning processes. This focus
tends to stress the learners' active display of autonomous behaviour. Because Asian learners are
typicallyviewed as passive, such a concern with active displays of autonomous learning leads tothe viewthat Asian learners may need to changetheir beliefs and expectations. In this chapter,
I explore whether such stereotypical attitudes towards Asian learners, especially Japaneselearners, are justified. Through a series of interviews with two groups of students, I suggestthat different interpretations of their apparent passivity are possible. These new interpretations
are based on an examination of the internal attitudes and beliefs that learners have themselves

towards the question of learner responsibility. I argue that respect for, and appreciation of,learners' own perspectives may not only lead to a deeper understanding of the development oflearner autonomy in Japan and other Asian education systems, but also in other contexts andcultures, too.

Part i: From a Literature Review of Learner Autonomy

The Notion of Learner Training

Within Asia, a general approach to promoting autonomous learning seems to depend on learn
ers changing from being passive to active participants in their learning, as identified by researchers such as Dickinson (1987), Sinclair (2000), and Wenden (1991). For such a reorientation to occur, it may first be necessary to retrain teachers towards acting more as facilitators andless as transmitters of'knowledge.' This appears to be the pedagogic basis for promoting learnertraining and raising learners' awareness of their own roles as learners. According to Wenden(1998a), the reason for the importance of'learner training' is that "it should enable learners to
become effective agents of change within their educational context" (p. 5). She further indicates that learner training is likely to bring about major changes in the learner's role if they arehelped towards greater learning responsibility by planning, monitoring, and evaluating what
they do. This will raise their awareness of metacognitive and affective factors in their learning.

Specific examples of the application of Wenden's theoretical stance can be seen in Robbins(1996), Wilkins (1996), and Lin (1996). All three teacher-researchers discuss the organizationof learner training within an Asian context. Robbins (1996) presents "a metacognitive model oflearning strategies instruction adapted to the Japanese university classroomenvironment" (p.
169). In this model, Robbins comments:.. .students are expected to become self-regulated learners, that is, taking responsibility
for their own learning by choosing the strategies that will help them to be more
effective in completing language tasks, and managing their own learning throughmetacognitive knowledge (knowledge about how we learn) that is developed during
strategies instruction, (p. 172)
Wilkins (1996) also emphasizes the need for such explicit training in teaching Japanese
students. She puts the case like this:.. .because most students are not educated about the nature of the thinking processes
involved in manipulating information, they fail to understand or learn these processes
that are so necessary to foster independent, life-long, language mastery outside of aclassroom, (p. 254)

— LD SIG 2003 A n t h o l o g y —13 * Learner Beliefs . . .

Wilkins goes on to demonstrate how to foster independence through developing themetacognitive processes of "planning, monitoring and assessing one's own thinking" (p. 254).
Similarly, Lin (1996) describes training students in Malaysia so that they become ready"todirect the course of their own learning in the self-access centre with minimal supervision" (p.
117). Lin sums up learner training as being focused on "... a change of psychological attitude
towards what learning is and confidence building" (p. 117), explaining that:
Learning training also includes training of skills and strategies required forindependent learning. Students learn to select their own learning objectives, identify
the relevant resources, design their own learning plan, assess their own performanceand select the appropriate strategies, (p. 117)

Taking these three examples as typical, we may deduce that learner training currently
occurring in Asian contexts is predominantly aimed at reorienting the thinking processesof learners without teachers understanding better the apparently inappropriate beliefs thatlearners are thought to hold about language learning.
Autonomous Activities in Asian Contexts

One approach towards promoting learner autonomy in Asian contexts involves adapting thenotion of learner autonomy to what are seen as group-oriented societies. Littlewood (1996)
states that Asian learners should be provided with an interpersonal environment imbued withmutual support and harmony He suggests that "reactive autonomy" (p. 136) should be focusedon in Asian contexts. "Reactive autonomy" is the notion that the learner regulates their activ
ity, once the direction has been externally established. This contrasts with Littlewood's view of"proactive autonomy" where the learner takes charge of their own learning and action. Little
wood implies that "proactive autonomy" is characteristically Western.
Beyond such a simple dichotomous understanding of autonomy, there have also been
attempts to produce 'negotiated' versions of autonomy applicable to the Asian context
generally, and the Japanese context in particular (e.g., Aoki & Smith, 1999). Various educators
in Japan have tried to integrate autonomy with group work in an empirical fashion throughtheir own classroom-based action research. It has thus been suggested that group work
settings could work well with Japanese students. For example, Hart (2002b), Murphey andJacobs (2000), and Smith (1998) provide evidence of group cooperative learning, resulting
in increased active involvement by Japanese students. With Japanese students' passivity
in accepting teachers' power and authority seen as stemming from Japanese educational
influences, Aoki (1999) emphasizes the importance of giving students decision-making
opportunities. Thus, both group activities and decision-making opportunities may offer
students the chance to improve their active participation in the classroom. Such approaches
aim to provide students with practical involvement in learner-centred activities and tangible
experiences of collaboration.
Cultural Appropriateness and Existing Attempts
at Promoting Learner Autonomy

Given that different cultural issues relating to learner autonomy have been raised, we will
now consider such issues in more detail. The notion of learner training in Asian contexts is
predominantly based on assuming Asian students' passivity.Although small-group approaches
to active involvement and responsiveness in classrooms might be effective in Japan, the main

Autonomy You

Aski

—

i4

*

Usuki

focus should not be a 'Western versus Eastern' perspective. This is because different contexts
exist even within the same culture and should not be overgeneralized.
Contextual differentiation often occurs due to individual teacher differences within a culture

or institution. Esch (1996) has, for example, argued that "cultural differences may not be themain barrier to the promotion of the concept of autonomy in countries with a group-oriented
tradition" (p. 46). Moreover, Jones (1995) raises some doubts with regard to the cultural ap
propriateness of autonomy, while Aoki and Smith (1999) point out that "arguments against
the aspirations of people and/or for the political status quo in a particular context can easily
be masked by stereotyping or arguments against cultural imperialism" (p. 23). They make theclaim that it is important to recognize that autonomy is not an approach enforcing a particu
lar way of learning. It is rather an educational goal, as Holec (1981) explicitly states. Aoki andSmith (1999) thus assert that "...objections to autonomy based on students' current incapacity
to learn in a wholly self-directed manner therefore lack validity in any context" (p. 21).
Beebe (1998) has suggested that rather than underestimating or giving up on Japanese
students, teachers ought to find out what the students are doing on their own with regard totheir learning, and what lessons their experiences can offer to the teacher and other students.
What maybe needed are more in-depth investigations of students' insights about how theylearn and what they believe to be their part in the process. Becauselearner autonomy does
not mean that learners have to display certain behaviours, we need to find ways to strengthen
learners' awareness of, and commitment to, their own responsibility as learners. Yet,to do that,
we need first to understand better the stereotypical cultural assumptions that are made about
Japanese learners, particularly with regard to arguments about 'Japanese-ness' and 'passivity'

Although in the 1990s the cultural appropriateness of autonomous learning in Asian
contexts began to be addressed (Benson, 2001), culturally appropriate forms of learnerautonomy have yet to be promoted to any meaningful extent in Japan. Japanese learners areoften said to be passiveand dependent (Usuki, 2002). It is also widely acknowledged in Japanthat the discrete relationship between teachers and students is accentuated within typicaltraditional classroom settings where teachers demonstrate their authority and students
passively accept their teacher's power. Accordingly, Japanese learners tend to be perceived as
accepting the teacher's authority in an unquestioning and unchallenging manner.

In Japanese society, successful learners praise themselves positivelyfor their efforts, whereas
less successful learners blame their apparent failure on insufficient effort. In addition, successful
students gain the teacher's attention and trust, while less successful students receive lessattention and will be expected to put in greater effort. As a result, it is successful learners who,with the help of external reinforcement, are likelyto develop positive self-beliefs, whereas lesssuccessful learners more likelyto develop negative self-beliefs (cf., Puchta, 1999).
Attribution Theory (Barry & King, 1998) can help further explain this. Attribution
Theory deals with the teacher's perceptions of the students' performance as well as thestudents' perceptions of their own performance. Thus, perceived causes of success and failure
may influence students' motivation to expend effort, and mediate teaching and student
achievement. Clearly then, teachers' own beliefs about learning can and do influence theirlearners' beliefs about learning. Aoki and Smith (1999) emphasize this point:
Teachers' actions in the classroom and their interactions with their learners will mirror,

either implicitly or explicitly, their own beliefs about learning, their views of the world,
their self-views, and their attitudes towards their subject and their learners. Thus,
whatever methodology teachers purport to adopt, whatever course-book or syllabus

LD SIG 2003 A n t h o l o g y15*Learner Beliefs

they are following, what goes on in their classrooms willbe influenced by their beliefs
about the learning process, (p. 27)
Teachers' beliefs and educational institutions' expectations of classroom learning andteaching need to be considered so that the stereotypical view of Japanese students' passivity
can be challenged. As long as teachers are concerned only with the students' display of activeclassroom behaviours, cultural differences will remain problematic for the development oflearner autonomy. In brief, learner autonomy needs to be understood from the learner's
internal functioning rather than from external evidence alone.
Part 2: The Study

The Purpose of the Study

The aim of this study was to gain a greater understanding of high achievers' beliefs about
language learning. In total, 16 students majoring in English at a private university in Japan wereselected for the interviews on the basis of their TOEIC score improvement. English majors takethe TOEIC several times a year after entering university. The high achievers were chosen on
the basis of their score improvement by comparing their present scores with their first TOEIC
results. Out of approximately 200 students in each year after the first year, the students with thehighest achievement and improvement were selected.
The students' TOEIC examination scores and pilot interviews in English, together with
their oral test results were combined to determine their overall English proficiency. Also, theparticipants' grades for all their English-related subjects were obtained. Through interview
transcription analysis, 12 learners' beliefs were clearly identified as representing either
stereotypical or non-stereotypical characteristics of Japanese learners. Six of the 12 learners
were termed Heterogeneous learners because of their non-stereotypical consciousness. Another6 learners were labeled Homogeneous learners because of their broadly stereotypical attitudes.
(Four of the original 16 students could not be immediately categorised and were therefore
excluded from further analysis in this particluar study.)
Research Procedure

The research procedure for this study consisted of gathering retrospective self-reports of theparticipants' beliefs about language learning. The semi-structured, open-ended, and audio
tape-recorded interviews were conducted and transcribed by the researcher in order to identify
in detail the similarities and differences between the participants' beliefs. Consent forms
were given to all participants of the study for reading and signing. Before the interviews, theparticipants were surveyed about their background experience in foreign language learning(such as their past English learning experiences and overseas visits). This was done so thatstudents who had learned English most of the time in Japan and had less experience staying
overseas could be selected for interview. Interview questions were given to each interviewee
prior to the interview. Each interview took approximately one hour. The interviews wereconducted in Japanese. From the interview data, the students' insights about self-direction were
explored by comparing and contrasting key words and sentences in their responses. All the data
analysis was then translated into English. (See Frontman & Kunkel (1994), Glasser & Strauss(1967), and Strauss & Corbin (1994) for similar procedures.)

Autonomy You

Ask!

—

16

Usuki

Identification of Two Styles of Learning

In the process of comparing and contrasting the data, it was found that the Heterogeneous
Learners' approaches to learning were positive and active, while the Homogeneous Learners'
approaches were negative and passive. Furthermore, learners in the Heterogeneous groupdisplayed some non-stereotypical Japanese characteristics such as being challenging, brave, andindependent. On the other hand, learners in the Homogeneousgroup showed both a passive
attitude, that is, a fear of standing out from others, and rather stereotypical characteristics suchas being quiet, shy, and collectivist in attitude.

As homo- and heterogeneity seemed at first sight to be related to stereotypical andnon-stereotypical behaviour respectively, a closer investigation of the characteristics wasundertaken. The stereotypical / non-stereotypical characteristics of Japanese learners have been
explored by previous researchers (e.g.,Kubota, 1999; Purdie, Douglas, & Hattie, 1996). Basedon a literature review of such studies, Table 1 below summarizes the stereotypical and nonstereotypical characteristics of Japaneselearners. The descriptors are identified by acronyms
and explained beneath the table.

Table 1 Homogeneous (Stereotypical) and Heterogeneous (Non-stereotypical)
Characteristics of Japanese Learners
Homogeneous Learners Stereotypical Characteristics

Descriptors

Acceptance of Teacher Authority
Unquestioning / Unchallenging / Keeping distance

SATA

Passive

Following the direction set by others / Dependent / Shy / Unconfident

SP

Lack of Self-Expression
Quiet / Fear of making mistakes / Memorising by rote / Lack of
creativity / Lack of critical thinking

SLSE

Groupism
Harmony / Collectivist / Same as others

SG

Heterogeneous Learners Non-stereotypical Characteristics

Descriptors

Questioning of TeacherAuthority
Questioning / Challenging / Relating well

NQTA

ActiveFollowing own direction / Independent / Brave / Confident
Self-Expression
Talkative / Acceptance of mistakes / Understanding / Creative /Critical thinking
Individualism

Personal interest / Individualist / Different from others

NA

NSE

NI

SATA=Stereotypical characteristics of Acceptance of Teacher Authority
SP=Stereotypical characteristics of Passivity— LD SIG 2003 A n t h o l o g y —17*Learner Beliefs

SLSE=Stereotypical characteristics of Lack of Self-Expression
SG=Stereotypical characteristics of Groupism

NQTA=Non-Stereotypical characteristics of Question of Teacher Authority
NA=Non-Stereotypical characteristics of Activeness
NSE=Non-Stereotypical characteristics of Self-Expression
NI=Non-Stereotypical characteristics of Individualism

The next section further elaborates the stereotypical and non-stereotypical characteristics
of Japaneselearners summarized in Table 1, through specific analysis of interview excerpts
from the Heterogeneous and Homogenous Groups. The descriptors for the non-stereotypicalcharacteristics (NQTA, NA, NSE, NI) and stereotypical characteristics (SATA, SP, SLSE, SG) areindicated in the excerpts.
The Heterogeneous Group:

Hideo, Kyoko, Tooru, Ichiro, Yasuhiro and Kazuko

All six English major students in the Heterogeneous group were aware that their attitudes
towards learning were very much individualistic and different from other students aroundthem. These learners appeared to accept themselves positively and to have a distinct positive
self-image.
These Heterogeneous learners had had teacher-centred lessons devoid of any focus oncommunicative English use. Although they had experienced overseas stays, their periods abroad
had been limited. They had spent most of their time learning English in Japan; yet, despite such alimited English-speaking learning environment, they still displayed non-stereotypical self-beliefs.
Evidence of a Heterogeneous Learning Style

Some of the non-stereotypical characteristics of the six learners within the Heterogeneousgroup can be seen from the following verbatim excerpts of how they expressed themselvesin the interviews. The excerpts are shown in italics, and the stereotypical descriptors, whichwere identified in Table 1 above, have been placed in parentheses to cross-reference thecharacteristics of the 6 Heterogeneous learners.
Hideo

A littlestrange (curious)
An exceptional student
An oddperson (quite a character)
My existence itselfis a gag

(NI)
(NI)
(NI)
(NA)

Strange
Strongpersonality
Annoying(NI)(NA)(NQTA)(NQTA)
(NI)
(NI)

Kyoko

Persistent

A difficult student
An oddperson

Autonomy

You

Askj

—

1 8

•

USU K

Tooru

StrangeA verypositive person
Ifeel like I'm standing out

(NI)
(NA)
(NI)

IchirooToughHardfor others to assimilate
Sticking out
Patient

(NA)
(NI)
(NI)
(NA)

Yasuhiro

A challenger
Self-intoxication
A juggler
Conspicuous

(NA)
(NI)
(NA)
(NI)

KazukoOptimistic
Not depressed/ am unusually confident

(NA)
(NA)
(NA)

During the interviews, these learners appeared to be confident and responsive to theinterviewer's questions all the time. In fact, of the 16 participants, the above 6 were outstanding
with regard to their improvement and achievement in their TOEIC scores. Their school marks
in English subjects were of a high level, as were their English communication skills.
The Homogeneous Group

Kaori, Tsuyako, Sumiko, Aiko, Asami, Mayumi

Because of their awareness of their passivity and lack of desire to stand out from the rest of thegroup, the following 6 female English major students were included in the Homogeneous group:
Kaori, Tsuyako, Sumiko, Aiko,Asami, and Mayumi. These learners spoke openly about theirfear of standing out from others. They also shared common aspects in their language learning
experiences in that their English lessons at high school had focused heavily on university entrance
examinations. None of them had had much experience of an English-speaking environment.
Evidence of a Homogeneous Learning Style

While the overall improvement in TOEIC scores was higher than those of average students,
the Homogeneous group learners' individual English communication skills varied. For
example, Sumiko, Aiko and Asami had acquired good communication skills in terms ofadequately expressing themselves. On the other hand, Kaori, Tsuyako and Mayumi still had
problems in their actual use of English for effective communication. Although they wereserious students and came across as committed to learning, they were sometimes hesitant
to use English in class.The following excerpts show this internal ambiguity about theirstereotypical preference but underlying non-stereotypical desire. More detailed transcriptions
have been provided for this group as their interview performance indicated that they preferred
to develop their reasoning to a greater extent than the previous group. This may in itself be
indicative of the cognitive processes used by stereotypical learners.

— LD SIG 2003 A n t h o l o g y —19*Learner Beliefs

Kaori

If I were stricter with myself, I would improve more. Once I improved, I wouldsee mypotential. If I did a little more, I would seeit. (SP) / think of myself not as a hard worker,
as others think of me. I worry before tests, and worry how others will do on tests. (SG)Tsuyako/ think of myselfas a normal student, not so bad, but not so smarteither, just thesame
aspeople around me. (SG)J am a little passive. As I don't have enough ability, I can't say
what I want to say. (SP)Sumiko/ haveafeeling of not wanting to stick out. When I stand out a littlefrom others, people
aroundme lookat me as if theywould like to avoid me. Even when I consciously try not tostand out, I am told that I am a serious student. (SG)AikoWhat canI say, Ifeel shyinfront of my classmates, because theyare thesame ageas I am.
(SG) It would be noproblem if I could speak English perfectly, but my English is notperfectat all. (SLSE) Ifeel shy when my class members see me tryinghard. (SP)Asami

I believe that my teachers think of me as an average student. (SA) J think that in class I
ask questions quite often, and maybe too often. So, to avoid embarrassment, I ask teachers
more, afterlessons. I don'twant anyone to think about me as a pushyperson. (SG) I havelots of things in my mind, butI can express only20% of what I think in English. Becauseof this, Ifeel very frustrated. (SLSE) My conversational class teacher might think that I am
not so good. Also, I did not havesuch good rapport with him. (SA)MayumiI don'tstand out. I don'tmake a strong impression on people. (SG) I'm a quietperson. My
teachers might not notice me. Although myschool marks aregood, I don'tcontribute muchin class. (SLSE) Ifeel like I should not do anything wrong, Ifeel likeI should not speak out
too much, I worry about making mistakes. (SLSE)
As can be seen, all 6 learners indicated that they were uncomfortable with their passive
behaviour and wished to be more active in the class.Compared with the Heterogeneous group,
these learners were less talkative and less confident. For example, Kaori kept silent for a while
before replying to each interview question, and then she replied quietly with only a few short
sentences. Mayumi was close to crying during the interview, which may have been due to herlack of confidence. There seemed to be a clear gap between what she wanted to say and what
she could not say in class. Moreover, Mayumi, as well as Kaori, was often very quiet. This
may indicate that for both girls, their basic communicative skills, as well as their characters,somehow influenced their behavior in English classes.

Autonomy You

Aski

2o

••

Usuki

Comparison of Heterogeneous Group Vs. Homogeneous Group
Learner Beliefs about Learning English

From the interview transcripts, each of the participants' responses, pertaining to Little's (1991)
notion of learner autonomy, was categorized. A descriptor was attached to each discrete aspectof learner autonomy revealed by the participants. After translating the responses into English,
the responses and their corresponding autonomy descriptors were collated and placed into five
broad categories. These five categories of learner beliefs were defined as follows:
1. Affective beliefs = Learners' wishes and feelings such as job related motivation; thewish to get a certificate, or high TOEIC score; the wish to acquire English skills.
2. Self-perceptional beliefs = Learners' awareness of self-management and selfresponsibility factors.
3. Self-motivational beliefs = Learners' needs and reasons for promoting their own
English learning.
4. Cognitive beliefs = Learners' awareness of strategic language learning skills.
5. Social beliefs = Learners' expectations of teacher's role and awareness of relationshipwith others.

From the analysis of the interview transcripts, learner beliefs for the two groups werecompared and described under these five categories. The differences between the two groups
can be summarized as follows.

Affective Beliefs

In terms of affective factors, the main difference between the two groups of learners seemed
to be one of goal awareness. The Heterogeneous group learners had a clear goal for learning
English, and this goal was related to their self-actualization in life generally. Their English
learning was, therefore, just a means of achieving their final goal. On the other hand, the
Homogeneous learners seemed to be interested in learning English and better appreciating
cultures in which English is spoken. They liked studying English and they admired fluent
English speakers. In this respect, they saw the acquisition of English proficiency as an end in
itself.

Self-perceptive Beliefs

The Heterogeneous learners were positive about themselves.They believed in their potential.
The learners in this group also felt that their teachers had high expectations of them. Theirteachers' high expectations further supported their confidence building. They were aware of,and utilized, the metacognitive strategies of self-regulation, self-direction, and self-motivation.
The Heterogeneous learners always reflected on what they were doing, why they were doingit, and where it was taking them. The Homogeneous group, however, was very different interms of self-image and self-trust. They seemed to have ambiguous, almost dichotomous
feelings of both positive and negative self-images.They were very conscious and sensitive aboutothers' opinions. Although they wished to acquire native-like fluency, they seemed to take apassive attitude in their conversational classes. The Homogeneous learners were recognized
as good students in their lecture-type lessons, whereas they were not seen in the same way intheir conversational classes. Thus, their self-image received conflicting positive and negative
reinforcement from their teachers.

— LD SIG 2003 A n t h o l o g y —2i•

Learner

Beliefs.

.

.

Self-motivational Beliefs

The Heterogeneous and Homogeneous groups tended to hold differing views about
learning. The Heterogeneous group was aware of English as a means of communication and as
a matter of life-long learning. Conversely, the Homogeneous learners seemed only to focus on
their skill improvement rather than learning for communicative use. The Homogeneous groupdisplayed an acute concern for perfection. As a result, they doubted that it would be possible forthem to acquire their desired skills. In fact, they seemed to have insufficient drive for learning
English. Such contradictions between their thinking and their actions seem to be one of thedefining characteristics of the Homogeneous group. In contrast, the Heterogeneous group oflearners was active and confident. One of their major characteristics was their flexibility. Also,
the Heterogeneous learners had a strong, critical awareness that they needed to continue theirpresent effort to maintain their level.Through this attitude, they seemed to have sufficientinternal drive to motivate themselves towards their goal.
Cognitive Beliefs

In classroom learning, the Heterogeneous learners were recognized as active students, while
the Homogeneous learners were seen as serious students. The Heterogeneous learners stoodout from others, but they themselves, their teachers and other students showed a positive
acceptance of their characters. The Homogeneous group, on the other hand, consciously tried
to avoid standing out. They were recognized as normal students, and, in fact, they behaved
like that. The Heterogeneous learners were aware of themselves as class members, and sought
to create a good relationship with teachers and fellow classmates. They wanted a good classatmosphere to promote effective classroom learning. The Homogeneous group was highly
conscious of their own English skills and how others thought about them. They seemed to lackawareness about the synergies which existed in the classroom.

As for effective learning strategies, both groups believed that authentic input was very
important, in particular, with listening practice. Also, separate strategies for learning both
inside and outside the classroom were considered important in making learning more effective.
In this respect, both groups of learners were strongly aware of the totality of their learning
process both within the classroom and in the world beyond it.
Social Beliefs

Learners in both groups were aware of their own responsibility as learners. They were all
self-directed in their study. The Heterogeneous group believed that the teacher's role should
be as a facilitator or supporter, whereby the students were responsible for learning and needed
the teachers' support or assistance. The Homogeneous group felt the need for teacher direction
and understanding. The Heterogeneous group also seemed to be more aware of the need fora good relationship with other students, while the Homogeneous group focused on the tacit
relationship among students.
The comparisons between the Heterogeneous and Homogeneous groups are presented inTable 2 overleaf.

—

Autonomy You

Ask;

22

Usuki

Table 2 Five-way Comparison of the Two Groups' Beliefs(1) Affective beliefs
Heterogeneous group

Homogeneous group• having job-related motivation• seeing English skills as tools• enjoying and having interest in theirlearning• being strongly motivated to acquire
English• having no clear objectives• being interested in English for cultural
understanding rather than using skills fortheir future career• having admiration for, or placing value on
the advantages of, English acquisition(2) Self-perceptive beliefs
Heterogeneous group

Homogenous group• being positive and displaying a belief in• gaining high marks in English tests
through considerable effort• being aware of both positive and negative
self-image, self-trust, and doubt• feeling that they make a very good
impression on their teachers in lecturetype lessons• having ambiguous feelings about theirlearning• being inconsistent with their actualself• being aware of self-regulation, selfdirection, self-encouragement, positive
self-image, self-trust

behaviour

Teacher expectation towards thelearner• Teachers thought of them as different fromother students.

• Teachers had positive expectation for them.

Teacher expectation towards the learner• They were recognized as serious students in
lecture-type classes.
• Teachers thought of them as quiet students,
or at worst they were unnoticed by teachers.
• They were recognized differently
depending on the teacher and the class.

(3) Self-motiv ational beliefs
Heterogeneous group

Homogeneous Group• focusing on the communicative use ofEnglish as well as their own proficiency• having no clear purpose for learning• seeing the teacher as a leader/advisor fromwhom they obtained necessary skills anddirection for further learning• being serious, earnest students who neverfail to do their given assignments• gaining positive recognition from teachersin lecture-type lessons but being quiet andpassive in conversation classes• focusing on their own English
proficiency improvement rather than on

improvement• setting target test scores as a series of small
progress-checking milestones• being open-minded and possessing aflexible way of thinking• being good at controlling themselves.
• enjoying both learning English and theirsocial life

• having a long-term view of their language
learning

communication with others— LD SIG 2003 A n t h o l o g y23*Learner Beliefs• having passive, short term effort,
restrictedness, insufficient internal energy,—uncertainty about skills application(4) Cognit ive beliefs
Heterogeneous group

Homogeneous groupClassroom learning• being aware of the classroom as a part oftheir learning process• being aware of learners' active involvement

Classroom learning• being aware of the classroom as animportant opportunity for their English
learning• being aware of challenging and activeinvolvement needs but not following
through• emphasising their own needs

needs• being aware of self-responsibility• being aware of English-use needs

Effective language learning strategies• creating an environment to support
English language opportunities• being aware of authentic input• externally embellishing classroom learning

Effective language learning strategies• being aware of English learning• being aware of authentic input(5) Social beliefs
Heterogeneous group

Homogeneous group• being aware of self-responsibility as a

• having different attitude and behaviour
relative to teacher-expectation and type oflearner• considering the teachers' role to be
facilitator or supporter• being cognizant of developing positive
relationships between teacher and students
and amongst students• being aware of collaborative needs

class involvement• considering teachers' role to be helper andadviser• being aware of the teachers' understandingof their needs• being aware of peer pressure forconformity rather than facilitatinginteractiveness

Discussion of the Heterogeneous and Homogeneous Learners' Beliefs

In comparing both groups of Heterogeneous and Homogeneous learners, it was seen that theHeterogeneous-type learners' beliefs were seen to be more effective and should be promoted
to all students as effective routes to successful language learning. So, it seems that the goal of
fostering learner autonomy in language education should aim at engendering and encouraging
Heterogeneous-type learners' beliefs.

Despite the fact that the Heterogeneous learners were positive about themselves, they seemedto feel that somehow they were different from others. With reference to teacher expectations,
all Heterogeneous learners tended to believe that their teachers thought of them as being very
individual and therefore as standing out from other students. This recognition stemmed fromthe students' active behaviour and their teachers' positive reinforcement of that. They seemedto feel that their teachers recognized their hard work.

—

Autonomy

You

Aski

24

•

Usuki

The Homogeneous learners had gained high marks in English tests through considerable
effort. These learners were, in fact, very autonomous in terms of gaining high marks. However,they seemed to be struggling with the realization that they could not use the same skills andstrategies that they had developed and utilized for their past examinations. For their lecturetype lessons, the Homogeneous learners felt that they would therefore have to make a very
good impression on their teachers. In fact, these students never failed to do what was requiredof them. They would preview and review the lessons. In their conversation classes, they felt that
their teachers did not pay attention to them, even though they tried their hardest. However,they reproved themselves for still not making the mark. With all Homogeneous learners
apparently having ambiguous feelings about their learning, their perceptions also seemed to beinconsistent with their actual behaviour.

Homogeneous-type learners' beliefs, such as low confidence, being afraid of standing out,
perfectionism, and the contradictory behaviour of wanting to be communicative but notdisplaying any such desire, were seen as not being conducive to language learning. Thesebehaviours are arguably a product of Japanese educational influences upon the students.
Conclusion

In this chapter, I have looked at existing definitions of learner autonomy and argued thatlearners' internal attitudes should be given more focus than external behaviour. From my own
experience, the main issue in promoting learner autonomy can be understood as the learners'
internalization of their beliefs and attitudes for taking charge of their own learning. It is theiracceptance of responsibility for their own learning, in Little's (1991) terms. The main issue
in promoting learner autonomy is therefore not one of methods of teaching, but rather how
learners perceive themselves, and in what ways they motivate themselves in their own learning.
It seems that these two points are most important when considering learner autonomy inlanguage learning. By comparing stereotypical views of Japanese learners with the more indepth insights gained from this interview study, I believe that we are able to confirm these twopoints.

This study examined students' beliefs in a specifically Japanese context. The group studied
was small, and the learners were chosen from one particular context in Japan. Because of theselimitations of this study, it might be difficult to generalize from the results of this study. Yet,in anticipation, the study may make a contribution to developing a deeper understanding of
the concept of learner autonomy for pursuing and achievingeducational goals. It may also be
relevant, I hope, to successful language learning in wider contexts.

— LD SIG 2003 A n t h o l o g y25•Learner Beliefs

Critical Reader Response i

Stacey Vye

Miyuki's project has sparked an exciting debate for me about how autonomy relates to various
learning contexts in Japan.I am curious about her project because I am interested in theperceptions of English learning and learning contexts that native Japanese learners and learners
from various countries living in Japan have.
Reading about her project I wondered: Who makes up the body of teacher-researchers thatstereotype Japanese learners as being passive? Are they of a certain native language orientation?
In addition, Miyuki mentions in her chapter that teachers' beliefs about passivestereotypicalviews of Japanese students need to be challenged. My sense is that, at least in Japan, teacherresearchers including Miyuki are in the process of reaching beyond the stereotyping and arefocusing on learner perceptions and processes.
Both because of the duality of the categories and out of general curiosity, I also wanted
to know more about how she defined Heterogeneous learners and Homogenous learners.
Additionally, I noticed that all four of the learners with male names in her project are in theheterogeneous group, while the homogenous learners' names are exclusivelyfemale. That mademe curious to know if her homogenous / passive students had gender or anxiety issues thatlearners of various languages can experience.
It would be nice to meet Miyuki sometime. If she and I have the chance, I would enjoy
discussing her project face-to-face with her.
Critical Reader Response 2

Eric M. Skier

Reading this chapter, I felt that Ms. Usuki's research held a number of very important
reminders for those of us hoping and trying to foster autonomous language learners (in any
country). The first is that just saying one believes in fostering autonomy doesn't necessarily
equate with being an 'autonomy-fosterer.'
Right from her introduction, Miyuki speaks of autonomous behavior being equated withactive displays (in the classroom), and I am as guilty as the next teacher of shows of Attribution
Theory and displaying a preference for the energetic outspoken student. I guess I have a soft
spot for anyone as talkative as me. However, over the years in my own classrooms, I have cometo realize that no matter what I do or believe,it is the students' own actions (obvious and maybe
not-so-obvious), as well as their perceptions that will ultimatelyaffect and shape their learning
experiences.Speaking for myself, this leads to the biggest leap of faith required when trying tofoster autonomy: Forcing someone to speak out when they don't want to could be the mostcounterproductive action I as a language teacher could engage in. Which, in turn, leads me tothe likelihood that successful language learning for the sake of communication may boil down tofactors that the teacher has absolutely no sayin or control over: time, out-of-class experiences (seeChapter 3), and, as we see in this study, the students' personality and/or character.
Whether homogeneous / passive or heterogeneous / active, the students in this study have shareda great deal with us, and I think we should allbe thankful for their reminding us that we teachers
can't see everythingthat is going on in a classroom, no matter how good or dedicated we are.
—Autonomy

You

Aski

—

26

•

Usuki

Critical Reader Response 3
KazuyoshiSato

As language teachers, we know the difficulty of changing students' attitudes and beliefs about
language learning. Although learner beliefs have gained prominence in the recent literature,
few studies have been done, especially about how learner beliefs affect language learning (Ellis,
1994). The strength of Usuki's paper is that she has found and described Japanese students withpositive self-beliefs,which contrasts with stereotypical views about passive Japanese learners.
These students also outperformed others in TOEIC scores, oral tests, and overall grades. She
concludes that, in order to promote learner autonomy, teachers should pay more attention to
the beliefs that students bring into their classrooms.
However, it is not clear how these good students in the heterogeneous group developed
their beliefs about language learning. What kind of beliefs did they bring into their classrooms
when they entered the university? What kind of instruction did they receive? How did teachers'
beliefs influence those students' beliefs?Although Usuki was aware of the importance of therelationship between learner beliefs and teacher beliefs, she focused on learner beliefs in thisstudy In short, recent studies are more concerned with how learners develop or change theirbeliefs about language learning in relation to teachers' beliefs than what kind of beliefs students
have (cf. Kern, 1995). In fact, Kern showed that students in western countries had difficultychanging their beliefs and called for a more comprehensive study using both quantitative andqualitative measures.

In contrast to previous studies that mainly relied on surveys such as BALLI (The Beliefs
About Language Learning Inventory), Usuki used interviews to collect rich data about students'
beliefs. I personally would have liked to have seen even more of the data instead of summaries,
heard more students' voices to better explain the characteristics of their beliefs, and seen thequantitative data of the TOEIC scores, oral tests, and overall grades with the correlations
among them. Sato and Kleinsasser (1999) recommend employing multiple data sources
including both quantitative and qualitative data to better describe learner and teacher beliefs.
Another concern is why she categorized 12 students into heterogeneous and homogeneousgroups and eliminated the 4 other students. Those 4 students who did not belong to the two
distinct groups might have shown an evolving nature of learner beliefs. In this way she might
have been able to show more clearly how students in this institution developed their beliefs,
what strategies they used, and how they became autonomous learners.

There are some questions for future study. How do students develop and change theirbeliefs? How do teacher beliefs, materials, tasks, and assessment influence learner beliefs? How

do students with positive beliefs influence other students (see Murphey 8c Arao, 2001)? What is
the relationship between learner beliefs and outcomes? How do learner beliefs influence otherindividual characteristics such as learning styles, motivation and attitudes, personality, andlearning strategies? What are the relationships between the context, teacher beliefs, and learner
beliefs? These and other questions need to be investigated in future studies in different contexts
in different countries.

LD SIG 2003 A n t h o l o g y —