EAST TECH N ICA i UNIVERSITY.
A THESIS PRESENTED BY
AYŞE DÎNÇER DEMİRTAŞ
■
■" T O - . ^
THE INSTITUTE OF EC O N O M ICS AND SO CIA L SC IEN C ES
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
- -
FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTERS OF ARTS
IN THE T E A C H IN G O F ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LA N C U A G E
BILKENT UNIVERSITY
AUGUST 1996
>X>46
EAST TECHNICAL U N I V E R S I T Y .
A THES; PRESENTED BY
AYŞE DİNÇER DE;MIRTAŞ TO
THE INSTITUTE OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTERS OF ARTS
IN THE TEACHING OF ENGLISH AS A. FOREIGN LANGUAGE
—B ^ < L... ¿ ) і/іСлГ.
-tarofindui ^¿¡¿іалтііЬг. BILKENT UNIVERSITY
Title: A survey of the design features of national and international self-access centers: Inputs to the
process of decision-makring for a self-access center in the Middle East Technical University.
A u t l i o r : Ay.'^e D i n g e r Demirta.^
T h e s i s C1). a i r; p e r s o n : Ms. Bena Gül PeJcer, BilJcent University^ MA TEFL Program
h C's ;i s Conmi i 11 e e Membe r s : Prof. Theodore S. Rodgers Dr. Susan D. Bosher
Billcent University, MA TEFL Progr£-im
Since the 1970s, there has been increasing attention to learner-centeredness in the field of foreign language
teacliing. The concept of learner-centeredness has led to various modes of teaching which focus on the notion that learners need to take responsibility for their own learning. These inodes of teaching have been labelled individualized instruction, self-instruction, self-directed learning and learner autonomy. If learner aubonomy is the ultimate goal, one way of achieving learner autonomy is through a self- access system in which materials are made available to students in a user-friendly manner.
This study focused on the critical design factors to be considered when setting up a self-access center in order to assist the administration of the Middle East Technical
University, (METU), Department of Basic English (DBE), in their task: of setting up a self-access center.
A number of questions were asked by the researcher to provide METU with a detailed description of the critical design factors in respect to setting up a self-access center. Tlie first question was to determine the design factors. The second question was to sample nationally and internationally how various centers dealt with the design decisions and how students reacted to these design decisions.
Stirdent reactions were examined by a questionnaire and institutional design decisions were examined by interviewing administrators of various national and international
institutions. The national institutions selected were Başkent University, Bilkent University and Çukurova University. One hundred and fifteen students at these institutions were given questionnaires and four administrators were interviewed at
these institutions. Students were selected randomly except for proficiency levels.
The international sampling was done via E-mail and fax correspondence, and leading self-access experts were
corresponded with while doing the international sampling. Some of these experts contributed to the study by forwarding or recoimnending source papers and those who agreed to
cooperate were interviewed. The experts corresponded with are; Lindsay Miller (City University of Hong Kong, Head of English Department), Ann Heller ( Head of lALS, United
Kingdom), Edith Esch (Head of The English Language Center, University of Cambridge), Bruce Morrison (Coordinator. Center for Independent Language Learning, Department of English,
Hong Kong E^oly University) , Phil Riley (Head of CRAPEL, University of Nancy, France) and Leslie Dickinson (Lecturer at the Scottish Center for Education Overseas). Among these leading self-access experts, Bruce Morrison and Lindsay Miller answered the researcher's interview questions.
Data were analyzed and presented in a detailed and conversational format to facilitate the decision-making
process of the administrators of METU. The design factors in respect to a self-access center were determined to be
materials, physical lay-out, budgets, teacher and learner roles, teacher and learner training and relationship of a self-access center to the school curriculum. It was found out that students and administrators agreed on the usefulness and iiecessity of self-access centres. It was further found out that students did not use the self-access centers due to a variety of reasons. The task of the decision-makers at METU, seems to be increasing the utilization of the self-access center they are in the process of establishing, taking into consideration the factors of non-use presented in the
M A THESIS EXAMINATION RESULT FORM
August 31, 1996
The examining coimnittee appointed by the
InsLitute of Economics and Social Sciences for the thesis examination of the MA TEFL student
AYSE DINQER DEMIRTA?
has read the thesis of the student. The coiimiittee has decided that the thesis
of the student is satisfactory.
Tliesis Title A survey of the design features of
national and international self-access centers: Inputs to the process of
decision-making for a self-access center in the Middle East Technical University.
T h e s i s Ad V i s o r Prof. Theodore Rodgers
Bilkent University, MA TEFL Program
Committee Members Dr. Susan Bosher
Bilkent University, MA TEFL Program
Ms. Bena Gül Peker
We certify that we have read this thesis and that in our combined opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts.
C R
Dr. Susan Bosher (Committee Member)
Approved for the
I would likre to express iny gratitude to my thesis advisor, Prof. Theodore Rodgers, who graciously contributed to my study with his ideas, help and encouragement. I would also like to thank Dr. Susan Bosher and Ms. Bena Gül Peker for giving me guidance and support over the past year.
1 am indebted to Ms. Banu Barutlu and Ms. Naz Dino for giving me permission bo abtend the MA TEFL Program.
I am grateful to Ms. Gülten Hergüner, Ms. Funda Bolat, Mr. Halis Çetin, Ms. Zeynep İskenderoğlu, Ms. Lindsay Miller, Mr. Bruce Morrison, Ms. Edith Esch and Ms. Ann Heller, Mr.
Phil Riley and Mr. Leslie Dickinson for their invaluable contributions to my study. My thanks also go to the students ab bhe Basic Engiish Departments of Bilkent University,
Başkent University and Çukurova University for their parbicipabion in bhis sbudy.
My friend Seda Korukçu deserves a special notes of bhanks for her kindness and encouragement.
My most special thanks are extended to all the MA TEFL students at Bilkent for their support and co-operation.
Finally, my greatest debt is to my parents Nurhan and Burhan Dinçer and my husband Dr. Mehmet Demirtaş without whom none of bhis would have been possible.
To my husband Mehmet DEMlRTAi? for his never-ending love,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ... xi
CBAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ... 1
Background to the Study... 1
E’urpose of the Study... 2
Significance of the Study... 4
Research Questions... 5
Definition of Terms... 7
CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE... 10
Introduction... 10
Concepts Related to Self-access Language Learning... 11 Individualised Instruction... 12 Autonomy... ;... 14 Self-directed Learning... 16 Self-instruction... 17 Self-access Centers... 18
Design Features of a Self-access Center.... 20
Learner Roles: Preparation and Training. 22 Materials... 25
Teacher Roles: Preparation and Training. 26 Issues and Problems in Designing Self-access Centers... 28
Recomm6:;ndations for an Ideal Self-access Center 30 Models for Self-access Center for Decision Makers... 31
Unknowns in Literature on Self-access... 35
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY... 38 Introduction... 38 Research Design... 39 Subjects... 40 Setting... 42 Materials... 43 The Questionnaire... 43
The Interview Questions... 44
Data Collection... 4 4 Analytical Procedures... 45
CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS... 47
Introduction... 47
Data Analysis... 49
Results of Student Questionnaire... 51
Results of Administrative Interviews... 69
Responses of Administrators of National Self-access Centers... 70
General Issues on Self-access... 70
Learner Issues... 73 Teacher Issues... 76 Materials... 80 Physical Lay-out... 81 Working Hours... 82 Budgets... 83
Learner Issues... 85 Teacher Issues... 85 Materials... 8 7 Physical Lay-out... 87 Working Hours... 87 Budgets... 8 8 General Recommendations of Administrators... 88
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS... 90
Summary of l:he Study... 90
Discussions of Findings and Conclusions... 92
Tj i mi tations of the Study... 102
Pedagogical Implications... 103
Implications for Further Research... 10 6 REFERENCES... 108
APPENDICES... 112
Appendix A: Student Questionnaire... 112
Appendix B: Student Questionnaire/Turkish Version... 119
LIST OF TABLES TabJ.e 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 1 TabJ.e 0 Table 9 Table 10
Male and Female Subjects of Universities
and Proficiency Levels... 41 Means and Standard Deviations of Student Responses Related to General Feelings about the ISCs.... 52 Means and Standard Deviations of Student Responses Related to Features of ISCs... 54 Means and Standard Deviations of Student Responses Related to E'eatures of ISCs... 56 Means and Standard Deviations of Student Responses Related to Features of ISCs... 58 Frequencies and Percentages Representing Learner
Preferences... 60
Means and Standard Deviations of Student Responses Related to Personal U s e ... 63 Frequencies and Percentages Representing Reasons
for ISC U s e ... 65 Means and Standard Deviations of Student Responses Related to Skills Practiced in ISCs... 66 Frequencies and Percentages Representing Activities
"In the century spanning the mid 1880s to the mid 1980s, ttie language teacJiing profession was involved in a search. That search was for what has popularly been called 'methods', or ideally, a single method, generalizable across widely varying audiences, that would successfully teach students a foreign language in the classroom" (Brown, 1994, p. 157) .
As Brown points out, that research is now considered misguided. Studies of learning and teaching styles, age and cultural differences, personal and professional background influences, etc. have convinced language educators that one "method size" cannot fit all learners and that response to these learner variables is critical to learning success.
"Self-access centers and self-instructional systems have been established in various institutions, based on some evidence that such centers and systems assist language learning by accommodating individual differences" (Davies, Dwyer, Heller & Lawrence, 1991, p. 37). Contemporary research into the
nature of self-access emphasizes the role of self-access as a system wtiich assists language learning as it is considered a response to individual differences. A large part of this research, therefore, has been based on the idea that self- access centers are learning environments which allow students of different backgrounds, personalities, styles and
promoted, opporl:unities to study beyond the regular
curriculum are provided and the optimum use of instructional materials is permitted. The formal classroom in which
sIndents are treated as a group needs to be supported by alternative educational environments where uniqueness is recognized. Such an environment could provide an
individualized kind of instruction through which the students can Lake the responsibility for their own learning at their own pace and have opportunities to work alone or with a guide. "In spite of the agreement of researchers on the
positive aspects of self-access centers on language learning, exacLJ.y how an institution can establish one which is
suitable in terms of budgets, access, materials and staffing needs to be well-defined"(Little, 1989).
Purpose of the Study
The MiddJ.e East Technical University (METU) is one of the major universities in Turkey and the medium of
instruction in this university is English. The students who attend this university take a proficiency exam in English to determine whether they need to study at the Department of Basic English before they can precede with their studies related to their area of specialization. The students
Department of Basic English (DBE) is in the process of
setting up a self-access center, believing such a center will improve students self directed learning skills and give them an opportunity to take responsibility for their own learning. How to design a self access center which best suits the
students' needs and the university's budget and which is effective in terms of relationship to curriculum, materials, learner roles, teacher roles, learner training, teacher
training, budgets, working hours and physical lay-out has to be clearly specified. This study aims to provide METU, the focus institution, with detailed descriptions and analyses of predecessors of self-access language learning and current self-access centers in Turkey and elsewhere to facilitate decision making in respect to the design of such a center.
This study will include comparative data on choice factors in decision-making such as materials, budgets, learner roles, teacher roles, learner training, teacher training, working hours and physical lay-out. Factors of success and non-success of current self-access centers will also be examined in the thesis. To sum-up, the purpose of the thesis is to describe and analyze the current state of self- access in the national and international contexts; to include in the analysis a consideration of design factors for self- access centers; and to provide the home institution in the
making.
Significance of the Study
Research has shown that students of different needs, backgrounds, personalities, learning styles and strategies need environments where they can study at their own pace and time independently for successful language learning. As has been mentioned above, self-access centers are environments which enable students to take responsibility for their own learning, and find materials and activities related to their individual needs. METU, DBE, has decided to create a self- access center in order to cater for students who are in need of out-of-ciass support.
This study surveying the predecessors of self-access language learning, namely. Individualized Instruction, Autonomy, Self-directed learning, and Self-instruction as well as current self-access centers is significant in that it sets out to provide the Middle East Technical University Dejpartment of Basic English with detailed description of critical variables that need to be taken into consideration when setting up a self-access center. Furthermore, self- access centers are not very wide spread in the language teaching institutions in Turkey. Therefore, such a study which aimes at providing my home institution with the
the initial stages of designing self-access centers.
Research Questions
This thesis attempted to determine (A) the critical design factors in planning self-access centers, (B) the various decisions made by administrators and students
reactions in respect to these design factors and (C) what student factors appear to affect students use of self-access centers.
The answers to the questions stated below provides METU with critical information on design factors necessary to set up a self-access center of high use, optimized benefit and supportable cost.
A. What factors appear to be critical in operating an effective and economical self-access center?
B. l. Are the self-access centers supportive of the institutions' curricula or syllabus objectives?
2. What roles do the students and teachers take in the self- access centers mentioned above?
3. Plow are matters of learner training and teacher training dealt with in tPie self-access centers?
4. WPiat materials exist in tPie self-access centers mentioned above and Plow are they organized?
seJ.f-access centers?
The national sources that were consulted as mentioned previously are Başkent University, Bilkent University and Çukurova University. There were certain reasons for choosing
these institutions. Firstly, they are the main institutions which are running self-access centers. They are English medium Universities and are considered to be similar to the Middle East Technical University as the students selected to study at these universities are selected through similar exams and study English for the same academic purposeş.
The study intended to be descriptive study and the procedure that followed while conducting this descriptive study is stated below.
The predecessors of self- access language learning mentioned above and the state of current self-access centers were reviewed.
Administrators of self-access centers in the three major language teaching institutions in Turkey were interviewed in order to obtain information on the previously stated design factors.
The questions in the questionnaire related to the critical design factors defined and aimed at observing what student factors appear to encourage effective use of self- access. That is, gender and level of proficiency. The
Students of three language teaching institutions were given questionnaires. Students were selected randomly and inevitably included users and non-users of self-access centers.
Administrators of self-access centers of two
international language teaching institutions in Hong Kong were interviewed via E-mail and fax correspondence in order to obtain information on the choice factors stated above. The self-access centers that were sampled depended on the
responses the researcher got to the E-mail messages asking administrators to share their experience.
Design recommendations of administrators of self-access centers internationally in terms of a self-access design were examined.
Definition Of Terms
The terms Individualized Instruction, Self-direction, Self-instruction and Learner Autonomy need to be defined to serve the purpose of the study as they are all closely related to the concept of self-access learning.
The main key to understanding these terms concerns the concept of responsibility for learning and the concept of learner centeredness.
meet tlie students' diverse needs. According to YanoJc, (1988) individualization is conceptualized as a process of
personalizing teaching to provide instruction that recognizes and responds to the unique learning needs of each student,
" Self direction describes a particular attitude to the learning task, where the learner accepts responsibility for all the decisions concerned with his learning but does not necessarily undertake the implementation of those decisions. Self direction refers to attitude rather than technique or even modes of instruction" (Dickinson, 1977, p.ll)).
"Autonomy, on the other hand, describes the situation in which the learner is totally responsible for all the
decisions concerned with his learning and the implementation of those decisions. An autonomous learner differs from a self-directed learner in that he undertakes all the
management tasks himself where as a self-directed learner
retains responsibility for the management of his learning but does not necessarily undertake the tasks" (Dickinson, 1977, p.9).
Dickinson (1977)defines the term self-instruction to be a neutral term referring generally to the situations in which tlie learners are working without the direct control of the teaclier (Dickinson) .
instruction, as self-access incorporates and builds on all of these ideas.
According to Benson,(1992) self-access is the design and organization of resources for self-directed learning. In this
case a self-access system is a system which leads
students to take the responsibility for major decisions such as why, what, where, when, and how they are going to study
and therefore is a system which supports self- directed
learning and gradually autonomy.
Having given a brief definition of self-access and the related terms, it might be noted that attempting to make
ciear distinctions between these terms is not easy. These are abstract, overlapping and ili-defined terms in the
iiterature. The interchangeable use of these terms and the fact that they are used in different senses by different or even the same authors is an issue which will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 2. The brief definitions included in
tills chapter are intended to provide the reader with an insight to the broad field of self-access.
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction
In Chapter 1, the concepts underlying self-access language learning, namely Individualized Instruction, Self- directed Learning, Autonomy and Self-instruction were
mentioned and brief definitions of these movements which might be considered the predecessors of self-access learning were given. The reasons why METU has decided to set up a
self-access center for language learning were discussed in the light of these concepts.
In the first part of this chapter, the literature on Individualized Instruction, Self-directed Learning, Learner Autonomy and Self-instruction will be reviewed. In the second part of this section, a detailed discussion on self-access will be given. In the third part, the literature on the critical variables that need to be taken into consideration when setting up a self-access center will be reviewed. In the fourth part, the literature which focuses on the advantages, disadvantages, problems and issues in self-access will be reviewed. The fifth part will include recommendations for ^n ideal self-access center and the gaps in literature will be pointed out as conclusion to the literature review.
Concepts Related to Self-Access Language Learning Some current concepts in language learning namely^ Individualized Instruction, Self-directed Learning, Learner Autonomy and Self-instruction are believed to be closely
related to Self-Access Learning.
Individualized Instruction, Self-directed Learning, Learner Autonomy and Self-instruction are educational movements which began in the period between 1950 and 1970. These labels are often used interchangeably or in different senses by different authors and sometimes in different senses by the same author. In order to avoid terminological confusion
tlie labels will be used in an attempt to characterize
precedents to current discussions on self-access. However, I should note that distinctions are often not clear-cut or consistent.
According to Benson, (1994) "it is worth noting from the outset that the concepts of self-access, self-directed
learning and learner autonomy and their interrelationships in language learning remain ill-defined both in the literature and in the practice of self-access. A clearer definition of these concepts and the levels at which they operate is needed. As a working model, there might be general agreement that autonomy represents a goal, self-directed learning a means of achieving it, and self-access an environment with in which it can be achieved."(p.8)
Individualized Instruction Self-access is usually thought to promote
individualistic approaches to language learning. In the 1980s, the idea of self-access, autonomy and individualization were brought together in the works of Geddes and Sturtridge (1982) and Brookes and Grundy (1988) . "The fact that learners have different learning strategies and learning styles and that each learner's way of learning is a complex cluster of
experiences, needs, capacities and preferences also supported self-access and created a strong bond between
individualization and self-access" (Benson, 1995, p.7).
In the first chapter, learner-centeredness was mentioned as the major concept underlying individualized instruction, self-directed learning and learner autonomy and self-access learning. "Learner-centeredness which best characterizes this decade includes humanistic ideas and assumes the ultimate goal of education to be individualization and learner autonomy"
(Brookes&Grundy, 1988, p.l). Differences between individual learners in terms of personality, cognitive style and learning style and attention is focused on the learner as an individual in individualized instruction(Valette & Disick cited in
Sheerin, 1991).
The early sense of individualized instruction focused on learners working at their own speed. The individualization of instruction stressed the fact that the learner could work at^ his or her own pace. However, pace was the only element that
was individualized. "The learner was not free to make
significant choices about the sorts of activities undertaken, or the order in which they could be tackled" (Higgins &
Johns, 1904, p.l7). That learners are different and have different goals, needs, personalities, learning styles, strategies and motivation was an aspect of individualized instruction that developed over time. Individualized
instruction is one aspect of self-access as a self-access center aims at catering for differing needs of learners.
"All too frequently, individualization has been assumed to be synonymous with one-to-one instruction. However, what individualized instruction refers to is instruction that is appropriate for the student regardless of whether it occurs within one-to-one, small group or a whole class setting. Individualization is a process of personalizing teaching to provide instruction that recognizes and responds to the unique learning needs of each learner"(Yanok, 1988, p.l63).
Providing all students with appropriate levels of
instruction could be solved by simply assigning all students their own teacher. In this way, instruction could be tailored precisely to a student's needs. In reality, however,
providing every student with a teacher is not practical and for this reason, educators have been trying to find ways to get as close as possible to the one-to-one tutoring
situation. One strategy for providing appropriate tutorial levels of instruction can be via a self-access center where
students can work: on self-instructional materials, with computers, tapes, videos and so forth (Slavin, 1986). According to Allwright(1908), individualization is a word
that conjures up images of situations where classroom instruction has been largely abandoned in favor of giving learners opportunities to viork by themselves in the quite different environment of self-access centers. Individualized programs imply that the learner's needs are recognized. To tliat extent, they are welcomed by learners and enrollment on such courses in some universities are strong. In fact,
individualization means much more than that learners' needs are being addressed. It also means that individual learners are working towards autonomy in ways related uniquely to their own needs. Individualized programs, therefore, include an element of self-directed learning and autonomy.
Autonomy
Autonomy implies self-government and personal freedom. It is more likely to be seen as a value judgment while
individual learning, which refers to an emphasis on the
individual rather than on the group or class, does not imply a value judgment. Autonomy in learning, refers to the
independent learner who does not heavily rely on the sources of authority presented and who is eager to make his own
judgments about the truth or value of what is presented as knowledge(Houghton, Long, Fanning, 1988).
Autonomy, like individualization is a concept that implies restructuring of the whole of language pedagogy and
involves the rejection of the traditional classroom and the
introduction of new ways of learning, one of which being learning through a self-access center(Allwright, 1988). "Autonomy is the mode of learning in which the learner is totally responsible for making and implementing all the decisions concerned with his own learning"(Dickinson, 1987, p.ll). However, there are some aspects of autonomy that have been misinterpreted. Esch(1996) tries to highlight these
misinterpretations by summarizing what autonomy is not rather than stating what it is. According to Esch, autonomy is not necessarily self-instruction or learning without a teacher, it does not mean that intervention or initiative on the part of the teacher is to be banned. It is not something that
teachers do to learners like a methodology and it is not a sj.ngle easily identifiable behavior. Finally, it is not a steady state achieved by learners once and for all.
Self-directed Learning
"In self-directed learning, the knowledge to be acquired is defined by the learner on the basis of his
coInmunic¿ıtive aims alone, without reference to the complete range of competence of the native speaker or to the needs of the other learners"(Holec, cited in Bloor&Bloor, 1988,p.62). This definition of self-directed learning indicates that it differs from individualized instruction and learner autonomy in th6it its major focus is on the students designing a
syllabus. Self-directed learning implies a position in which students are able to understand and articulate their language learning objectives. Learners need to have a clear
understanding of the knowledge they hope to acquire. Self- directed learning is a mode of learning which enables the learner to set his objectives and state specifically what he really wants from his studies. A self-directed learner who is aware of his aims and objectives can go into a self-access center and work on what he really needs to learn. For
example, if he needs to know how to write business letters he can find the related material and do this on his own. Self- directed learning allows syllabus negotiation and one-person LSP course design. Since this is rarely practical in
institutions of high student population, a self-access center can be the environment where a student can have access to materials that will assist him in achieving the personal goals tie has set for himself. "Self-directed learners are the
ones who are able to make decisions about their own learning. They can decide on how much time they need to study, the time
that is suitaVjie for themselves to study, whether they need help from an authority and how much help they
need"(Dickinson, 1987, p.l2). A self-access center provides facilities for self-directed learning and due to the close relationship between self-directed learning and self-access this predecessor of self-access centers has been included in the study.
Self-instruction
Self-instruction is often used as a general cover term to make reference to situations in which learners are working without the direct control of the teacher. It is often used to refer to correspondence courses. It is a mode of learning whicli is effective in coping with the various sorts of
differences among learners including differences from an institutional center.(Dickinson, 1987). Self-instruction is based on the idea that learning is a personal, individual act. Learning results from a complex organization of materials, lessons, drills, exercises, tests and so on.
Traditionally, a teacher or guide is responsible for setting up this organization and managing it. The teacher is further responsible for such things as determining learning goals, making decisions about materials, deciding how the materials will be used, keeping records, evaluating progress.
allocating time to taslcs, and deciding on what tasks are to be done.
Self-instruction is a mode of learning in which the teacher may increasingly involve the learner in the decision making process about learning. The teacher may transfer to
the learner an increasing degree of responsibility for his or
her own learning(Dickinson, 1987).
The Justification of all the predecessors of self-access mentioned previously is the recognition of the fact that
differences among learners exist and should be responded to. Self-access centers might be considered as a means to develop autonomous learners who are at the same time self-directed and who are following modes of self-instruction.
Self-access Centers
Having looked at several predecessors of self-access, it is at this point necessary to give a detailed description of self-access centers and self-access learning. A definition of self-access has been made both in Chapter 1 and while
referring to the predecessors of self-access. The purpose of the literature review on self-access is to provide the reader with a better understanding of what a self-access center is and to highlight factors that seem to be critical when
Self-access recognizes the need to help learners in "learning how to learn" and individuals achieve autonomy. One way to support learners in achieving autonomy is to make
learning material available to the learner and to guide the learner to the most appropriate material. A major question is how this is to be done? A self-access center needs to respond
Lo this question. How can self-access materials be made
easily accessible to learners? One purpose of this thesis is to sample a number of self-access centers to help my own university institution in responding to such questions. As preface to this inquiry^ the literature on self-access will be reviewed. 1 should note that there is as yet limited literature on self-access compared to that for the
predecessor movements discussed above.
The term self-access is often used as if it were a method or technique, however, self-access refers to an
organization of learning materials made directly available to the learner. Making learning materials directly available to the students brings along with it a wide range of questions related to how this is to be done , how able the learner is to take advantage of these materials, how able the learner is to identify his needs and match these needs with appropriate materials. The learner's ability to ask questions related to techniques which will enable him to match his needs with the appropriate materials and use them effectively is at the core of self-access learning (Dickinson, 1987).
S t .John(1988) defines a self-access center as a system wliich is potentialiy available for students to use at any time. That is, within scheduled class time or in the
students' own time or both. It means having a range of materials available with the choice being the ultimate responsibility of the student.
E s c h (1996)states that promoting learner autonomy is possible by providing circumstances and contexts for language
learning. Such circumstances and contexts will make it more likely for students to take charge of the whole or part of their learning and furthermore make it more likely for them to exercise autonomy. "Self-access" can be the name given to systems whicli are supportive of learner autonomy.
Design Features of a Self-Access Center
The topic of the thesis is determining critical local features in the design of a self-access center. Discussion of general design features is included in this section since it is essential to know what makes up a self-access center in order to determine those features which are critical.
McCafferty provides a useful checklist on how to make a self-access center as user friendly as possible. These can be considered as keys to the design features which the
researcher will focus on in order to facilitate institutional decision-making. In this checklist McCafferty includes the following points;
- is the self-access center open for long hours? - is it possible to call or find a member of staff? - is the material indexed and if yes how?
- is there a place for learners to look: at print and video a and listen to tapes and meet in small groups?
- is it possible for the users to obtain copies of print material and tapes whenever the-center is open?
- does the center allow separate space for oral skills, viewing films, reading and writing, doing role-plays, discussion, playing games, conversation with staff, catalogs and an area restricted to staff?
“ is there a special kind of indexing used? - how does the system operate?
- how are the teachers and students prepared to use the self- access center? (McCafferty, cited in Dickinson, 1987)
Miller and Revell,(1993) in their paper named "Self- access Systems" state that "an institution has to make an informed decision about what type of system is most suitable for its particular situation well in advance of establishing the center"(232). Their questions will be incorporated as critical design factors which an institution has to take into consideration in setting up a self-access center.
- How will the self-access center affect classroom teaching? - What materials have to be bought or produced for the self-
access center?
students to evaluate their progress?
- Does the institution have enough resources available for the bype of system it wants or can it get more resources? - What type of a lay-out should the system have?
Miller (1992) also discusses the major factors that have to be taken into consideration in design of self-access
facilities. These include: supporting, preparing and training learners, materials for self-access and the role of the
terocher. We turn to these features now.
Learner Roles: Preparation and Training
According to Miller, learners must see that there is a structure and purpose to their work in self-access. She indicates that this can be done by needs analysis and by demonstrating to the learners how to go about preparing a work plan. Furthermore, the learners also face changing roles when working in self-access. They need to be prepared for the new approach and they have to be psychologically prepared for their new roles(Miller, 1992).
The role of the learner is a key issue to be considered in the context of self-access. How important is it that
learners design their own learning programs and what information do they need to enable them to do this?
Rodgers (1978) states his opinion on the role of the learner in the following sentences:
"Learners need information about language learning options that relate to their own previous learning experience.
Learners carry with them notions about themselves as learners and those notions will shape the kind of choices that
learners make and what they do about these choices once made. It is the responsibility of the designers of autonomous
learning programs to speak to potential learners in a
language of learning variables that they understand or can be led reasonably easily to acquire "(p.90).
I.ittle (1989) states that the role of the learner in a self-access system is to learn how to learn and to apply that skill to the learning of the language. However, this process of learning to learn and studying the language is carried out simultaneously. Little outlines the tasks that need to be carried out by the learner who is involved in a self-access system. These include: defining needs and objectives;
selecting materials and working techniques; organizing and implemenbing a program; and evaluating and observing personal progress. Defining the objectives and needs can be summarized as the learner thinking about the situation in which he or she will use the foreign language and how he or she will put il into use. The learner is supposed to decide on the
linguistic objectives and to decide on the priorities. Defining objectives is followed by selecting materials and work techniques. Here, of course, the way the materials are
organized in the self-access center is central. This issue will be dealt with later in the chapter. The learner is
supposed to find materials keyed under headings which fit the lOfarner objectives. Organizing and implementing the program is a further step in which the learner takes on the
responsibility for deciding when, where, how long and how often he will study. While doing this the learner has to take into consideration the working hours of the self-access
center. The final step is evaluating progress. In this step, the learner will establish criteria and techniques for
evaluating his progress varying according to his personal needs, objectives and motivation. An overarching
consideration is how the learner will carry out the tasks mentioned above(Little, 1989).
Bolat(1995), in her thesis, points out that in order to help students use a self-access center efficiently much
preparation is needed. Bolat cites Dickinson who mentions the importance of learner training stating that a self-access center is a means of practising autonomy and that the
effective use of self-access facilities is dependent upon the implementation of appropriate learner preparation. Bolat, further reconunends that students who are purely self-directed may know how to achieve successful language learning, and it may be sufficient to simply introduce these students to the self-access center, but the students who are confused or depressed about what and how to study may need more
preparation. To help overcome this problem, the students who are to use the self-access center in the Bilkrent University- are asked to fill in the Independent Learner Center Study Plan in which they indicate what areas they need to work in and make a study plan accordingly. In doing so students come to better understand the system of self-access(Bolat, 1995).
Materials
Another major factor that has to be taken into consideration in the design of a self-access center is materials for self-access. Miller(1992) suggests that
materials have to be carefully prepared so as to fulfill many of the traditional roles of the teacher. That is, motivate, guide and provide feedback. Miller provides a materials format which considers the following areas for self-access materials writers. The format reconunends the following elements:
- S e c t i o n - r e a d i n g , w r i t i n g , s e l f - a s s e s s m e n t , e t c . -Title- for ease in cataloguing
-Aims- clearly stated aims for materials writer and the students using the materials
-Activity time- to let the students know how long they should spend on the material
-Preparation time- to guide the materials writer when they want to develop similar materials
-Resources- anything other than the worksheet that the student needs in order to complete the task.
-Preamble- a lead-in statement outlining the rationale for developing the material
-What you have to do- clear, materials writer to follow in developing similar materials
-What the student has to do- clear, simple instructions for the students to follow
-Possible variations-some ways to extend the activity to give further liinguage practice
-Material writer- the name of who developed the material as a way of recognition to the teacher/writer and so that others can get assistance from the teacher/writer if necessary.
Other concerns include selection of commercial materials, cataloguing, coding, display, sign-out,
replacement of materials and so forth. Unfortunately, the literature as yet does not deal with this concern.
Teacher Roles: Preparation and Training
A third major self-access design factor that needs to be taken into consideration is the roles, preparation and
training of teachers. Miller(1992) points out that teachers ne'ed to be prepared and trained for working in self-access both methodologically and psychologically. Miller further points out that teachers need to know that their role in the self-access is different from their role in the classroom in terms of how tliey work and behave.
The roles of teacher has been a problem in student- centered learning. Some of the 'resource-based learning'
experiments of the 1960s and early 1970s misinterpreted the roles of the teachers and assumed that the trend towards autonomy meant a less active role for the teacher(Waterhouse, 1909). However, the role of the teacher is central in the success and effective operation of the study center ( O'Dell cited in Martyn & Voller, 1993) . According to Disick, (1975) individualization and increasing students' responsibility does not require teachers to abandon their responsibilities for explanation, guidance and direction. Furthermore, it does not mean students should be left alone. Voller(1995), states that there is a major shift in the role of the teacher with the trend towards learner autonomy. He points out that the commitment of learner autonomy challenges traditional
educational structures and power relationships as some
teachers might find this new situation threatening to their roles as source and transmitters of knowledge.
The shift in the role of the teacher should not be viewed as a loss of power. "For language teachers who regard themselves as diagnosticians as well as clinicians,
pinpointing the source of errors, self-access offers an ideal mode of individualizing treatment, allowing the teacher to remain the authority both in identifying needs and
prescribing solutions"(Sheerin cited in Martyn & Nim Yin, 1992,p:64)
Iji sum, teachers' roles in self-access will be less thet of dominating, controlling, and directing and more that of
facilitating, counseling and assisting. The active and centra], role of the traditional teacher will be preserved although realized in a new context.
Issues and Problems In Designing Self-Access Centers Self-access language learning grew out of an anti- authoritarian trend in language education in the
1970's (Ben.son, 1995). Although, self-access facilities were thouglit of as support for [)rojects in self-directed and autonomous learning, (Holec, Riley and Dickinson cited in Benson, 1994) in recent years there has been renewed interest in self-access language learning covering a wide range of areas within language learning, including strategies for learning, materials, organization and management of self- access centers and types of self-access
centers(Miller&Revell, 1993). Benson(1994) summarizes the general point of view when he says that self-access has
become an issue in its own right and attention has shifted to organizational aspects of setting up and running self-access centers. Benson states that in much of this literature,
underlying philosophies of learning take secondary place to the solution of practical problems and learner autonomy Increasingly appears as a purely optional or ideal goal. He points out that those concerned with autonomy in language learning may not find much interest in the day-to-day organization of self-access centers. He criticizes the
practical approach to self-access comparing it to commodity consumption and further argues that such approaches do little to promote learner aubonomy. Benson(1994) suggests a
developmenb of ¿\ sysbematic approach that considers the
ideological implications of organizational solutions and that firmly links self-access to the goal of autonomy.
This study then must take the practical approach to self-access and focus on the practical constraints of setting up a self-access center but at the same time maintain the connection to learner autonomy which is considered the ultimate goal. In order to further focus on this two edged chailenge, some issues or problems that prevent self-access centers from being places which promote learner autonomy will now be considered.
Esch (1996), warns readers against certain
misconceptions in autonomous learning. One misconception, Esch poinbs out is to reduce autonomous learning to a series of techniques to train language skills leading to the display of autonomous behavior. This concern of Esch, is similar to BeJison's and she uses a similar "market" metaphor.
Another misconception targeted by Esch (1996) is that aubonomous language learning is learning in isolation. She calls our attention to two factors that have obscured the radically social character of autonomy in language learning, i'irst, the individualistic approaches to language learning have sblessed individual differences between learners rather
bhan whab bhey have in coiiunon. Second, the popularization of learning bechnologies has led learners to thinJc of computing centers and language laboratories as cells where one had to go bo pracbise languages. These two factors lead to an
identification of isolation with individualization.
Esch(1996) argues that being autonomous is not the same as being isolated. Again this is a reminder of the close
relationship between self-access, individualization and aubonomy.
Recoimneridations for Setting Up an Ideal Self-access Center In the literature reviewed on self-access, the idea that bhere is no one ideal way to set: up a self-access center is one encountered frequently. Miller and Revell(1993) point out the fact: that the rationale for choosing a particular system of self-access seems a fundamenbal decision: yet systems are rarely menbioned in the self-access language learning
literature. Benson(1994) notes that the only way to know whether or not an institution has set up an effective self- access center is to test whether or not the system is able to ac'hieve bhe goals which it sets for itself. And yet often such goals are not made explicit. McCafferty cited in Miller and Revell(1993) states that any system for learning or
teaching has to be justified in at least two ways. The system has to be explicit, defensible and relevant in terms of
applications. Miller and Revell (1993), in support, note that making an informed decision about the type of the self-access system, based on the rationale of the institution and the human resources available, will ensure an efficient system that suits the end-users. Institutional rationale for setting up a self-access center may be based on one or a combination of the following reasons:
Financial: A self-access center is seen as the most cost- efficient way of providing language training.
Pedagogical: A self-access center is seen the best way of helping learners improve their language skills.
Ideological: A self-access supports autonomous learning as valuable goal, increasing motivation, independence and therefore enthusiasm to learn.
P r e s t i g i o u s : A s e l f - a c c e s s c e n t e r i s s e en as " s t a t e of a r t " upgr ade f o r t h e i n s t i t u t i o n .(p.229).
Models of_ Self-access Centers for Decision-Makers So as to provide models for decision-maker
considerations, I will now outline four types of self-access systems following Miller and Revell(1993). Further comments will elaborate on these model types from other perspectives. The first model is the menu-driven system in which all the materials are classified and the information is stored electronically or on hard copy. When the student wishes to use the facility, he or she refers to the menu to gain access to the system. The information held in the system is usually
classified according to level, topic, function, etc. and is often cross referenced. To be able to use this system, the J.earner needs to V:iecome tiighly systems-wise which requires a certain amount of pre-training and practice. An example of this type of system is found in CPA.PEL at the University of Nancy, France.
The second model is the supermarket system, which as the name implies, offers the learner the opportunity to browse and choose what to study. The system displays materials under clearly marked categories: listening, reading, phonology, games, etc. which are usually color-coded according to the level. In this system, the learners can independently gain a'jcess into the system and lociite somewhat by chance, the areas they wish to study. This kind of a supermarket system is found in The Specialist Teachers' Training Institute in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
The third model, the controlled-access system, is a model in which learners are directed to a specific set of materials by their tutors. Usually the materials held in such a center are closely related to work covered in class and classified in a similar way. Learners using this type of system would have individualized materials but little or no control over what they choose to study. Students studying engineering at Chulalongkorn University's Language Institute in Bangkok, Thailand make use of a controlled-access learning system.
The fourth model is an open-access system ^usually part
o£ an institutional library open for use by language
students as well as other library users. The self-access maferial may be classified as part of the main library
materials or it may be classified along with like material so
that English l6\ngu£ige m£iterial may be found alongside French
and German material. The user can gain access to the system by several methods^ through the library classification
system, via a separate LT section or by browsing. The British Council in Hong Kong operates a self-access/open-access
system with a separate EFL section (Miller & Revell, 1993). The section on ideal self-access centers will continue with Cotterall's suggestions related to successful self- access centers. Cotterall (1993) defines a successful self- access center as a well-used one and points out that she assembled a list of features associated with centers which were considered to be functioning successfully. The list includes: learner support, materials, technology, management and research activity.
According to Cotterall(1996), in the most successful self-access centers, learners are supported before, during and after each visit to the center in a variety of ways. Support before visits to the self-access center involves psychological and methodological preparation.
The second characteristic which contributes to the effective functioning of the centers is the wide range of
interesting , up-to-date learning materials and activity types. The materials are freely accessible to students^ cataloguing systems are streamlined and transparent and the resources provided for learners included learning to learn documents as well as language learning documents. The third characteristic is technology^ which is a contributing factor in addition to learner support and materials. The technology in the well-used centers was of excellent range and high calibre. However, Cotterall(1996) states that hi-tech
facilities are not a high priority in setting up self-access systems and technology by itself is not enough.
Benson (1994) also warns designers against the fact that for some users highly organized systems may be intimidating.
The last two factors which contribute to the success of a self-access center are management and research activity. The staff of the language departments are observed to be committed to participating in decisions affecting lay-out, resourcing and the ongoing materials development of the self- access centers. The staff makes recommendations on the self- access development, discuss language curriculum issues and formulate policy on language support. Both the staff and the administration of language centers were recognized as
bringing an essential perspective to the discussion of matters relating to developments. (Cotterall, 1996)
Contrary to common belief, socialization is another factor contributing to the successful operations of
