Contrasting Learner Autonomy and Self-Regulated Learning

closely related to cognitive psychology, which emphasizes learners‟ mental processes Wenden, 1997. The development of learner autonomy gains support from the notion that knowing and thinking develop with experiences. However, in fact, due to exam oriented basis, learners ‟ motivation and learning objectives are not parallel and bounded to the faith in authorities of teachers and textbooks that hinders learners intrinsic motivation due to extrinsic goals such as grades and task completion Borg Al-Busaidi, 2012. Perspectives that researchers have employed to explore learner autonomy. Benson 1997 attempted to systemize learner autonomy by introducing the idea of different versions or perspectives of representing the idea of learner autonomy including: technical, psychological, and political, which now seems to be a standard model for any discussion about learner autonomy. The technical perspective emphasize the situational conditions under which learner autonomy may develop. “Research adopting this perspective values attribute s from the learning environment” Benson, 1997 . Morrison 2008 adopting this perspective have been conducted in self - access learning centers where authentic materials and personalized learning activities can foster learner autonomy. With its emphasis on external conditions, this perspective has its own value in that it is possible to have a full understanding of various autonomy factors in a particular learning situation. However, if a researcher took only a technical perspective on autonomy, it would be not complete as Oxford 2003 contended that “without psychology, the technical perspective would be inert”. With the psychological perspective, some researcher s Benson, 2007 take learners‟ ability or capacity into account. Lit tle‟s 1995 definition involves an element of awareness cognitive factor in that capacity. Benson 2001 considered learner autonomy as a capacity consisting of two interrelated elements, namely „behavioral‟ and „Meta cognitive‟. These two elements allow learners to „initiate, monitor, and evaluate‟ their learning processes. This perspective fits closely with Oxford‟s 2003 who stated that “the psychological perspective examines mental and emotional characteristics of learners who are viewed as individuals or members of a sociocultural group”. Pennycook‟s 1997 work illustrates this perspective, where context refers to ideologies and attitudes found in specific locations, situations, groups related to age, gender, religion, and culture, institution s, and socioeconomic levels . The difficulty of defining learner autonomy in terms of its most important components has also been expressed by two assumptions: the “degrees of learner autonomy” and the “behaviours of autonomous learners” Nunan, 1997. A number of researchers Benson, 2001; Nunan, 1997 have attempted to define the notion that autonomy is a matter of degree. Nunan 1997 argued that “autonomy is not an absolute concept”. He developed a model of five PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI levels of learner actions: “awareness, involvement, intervention, creation, and transcendence”. At the awareness level, for example, learners would be “made aware of the pedagogical goals and contents of the materials”, “identify strategy implication of pedagogical tasks”, and “identify their own learning styles”. At the other end of the spectrum, in the transcendence level, “learners would make links between the content learnt in the classroom and the world beyond” and “become teachers and researchers”. Nunan 1997 contended that “most learners do not come into the learning situation with the knowledge and skills to determine content and learning proccesses which will enable them to reach their objectives in learning another language” and that “fully autonomous learners are a rarity”. Nunan 1997 suggested that teachers need to encourage learners to become autonomous and, for the purpose of the current research, this best takes place in the language classroom. Littlewood 1999 classified learner autonomy into two levels: proactive autonomy and reactive autonomy. Proactive autonomy is where learners are able to plan, monitor, and access their learning. In this way, learners establish their own “personal learning agenda” and their own “directions for learning”. This level of autonomy is often seen as the autonomy generally attributed to learners in Western cultures, such as Australia. However, in education in general and in language education in particular, Littlewood 1999 argued that it is necessary to mention and