Background of Learning Autonomy

2 Control over cognitive process Control over cognitive process is related to the psychology of learning and related to mental process of controlling idea Benson, 2001: 87. Similar to Benson’s definition, O’Malley Chamot 1990: 44 cited in Thanasoulas, 2002 elaborate cognitive process as a process that works “directly on the incoming information”. Benson proposes there are three factors involved in cognitive processes which are interrelated each other. Those are shown in figure 2.2 The Psychology of Autonomous Learning below. Figure 2.2 The Psychology of Autonomous Learning Taken from: Benson, 2001: 86 As it is elaborated by Bialystok 1994 cited in Benson, 2001 that directing attention includes the process of noticing linguistic input, terms that are taken from language learning, and constructing mental meaning of the input. The attentional process itself establishes consciousness and awareness to the learning input. Building metacognitive knowledge Cognitive Process Directing attention Reflection Reflection is the process which includes learners’ attaining of input. It also increases learners’ awareness which then build metacognitive knowledge involving planning, problem-solving, monitoring, and evaluating the learning. Wenden 1998: 34, cited Thanasoulas, 2002 defines that metacognitive knowledge “includes all facts learners acquire about their own cognitive processes as they are applied and used to gain knowledge and acquire skills in varied situations”, or in other words, metacognitive strategies are not the learning strategies itself but the strategies about learning. 3 Control over learning content Control over learning content implies learners’ ability to select the appropriate learning materials in order to gain the goal expected. In relation to control over learning content, Littlewood 1999 cited in Benson, 2001: 99 characterizes two types of autonomy namely proactive and reactive autonomy. According to Littlewood 1999 cited in Benson, 2001, proactive autonomy is described as type of autonomy “which affirms their individuality and sets up directions in a world which they themselves have partially created”. Benson 2001 explains that it is where the objectives, methods, and techniques are determined and the learning is evaluated by the learners themselves. While reactive autonomy is “the kind of autonomy which does not create its own directions but, once a direction has been initiated, enables learners to organize their resources autonomously in order to reach their goal” Littlewood, 1999: 75 cited in Benson, 2001: 99. In his research report, Ardi 2007: 33 elaborates that the concept of autonomy was firstly developed in the western culture, thus the principle concept of autonomy is different from that of in the eastern culture, including Asia. The concept of learning autonomy which develops in western culture gives emphasize on individual independence Holec, 1979, while eastern culture is characterized by its collectivism and interdependence Ardi, 2007. Therefore, Holec’s concept of autonomy is comprehendible but difficult to be achieved.

3. Classroom Action Research CAR

The discussion of classroom action research CAR is elaborated in three sub-parts. The first sub-part is history of classroom action research. The second sub-part is definitions, characteristics, and functions of classroom action research. And the third sub-part is theory of classroom action research.

a. History of Classroom Action Research

As it is retold by McNiff Whitehead 2002: 40 that action research was firstly done by John Collier, a Commissioner of Indian Affairs from 1933-1945. The work of Collier was to develop the community of Native Americans; it was in the field of education and social context. Other person believed to be involved in the birth of classroom action research is Kurt Lewin McNiff Whitehead, 2002: 40; Reason Bradburry, 2001: 2. Lewin was a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany. Lewin’s work was in the industrial contexts and it was about how participation in decision-making