第五届中国英语教学国际研讨会 暨第一届中国应用语言学大会 Autonomy in Subcultures: An Exploration of Possibilities and Constraints HUANG Jing ( 黄景 )

1. 第五届中国英语教学国际研讨会 暨第一届中国应用语言学大会 Autonomy in Subcultures: An Exploration of Possibilities and Constraints HUANG Jing (黄景) University of Hong Kong, PhD candidate peterjh@hkusua.hku.hk; peterjhuang@yahoo.com.cn http://www.edu.hku.hk/RPGS/profiles/peter.htm

2. Outline • Background • Researcher’s story: Why learner autonomy? • PhD dissertation research • The study (presentation today) • National/ethnic culture VS subcultures (small cultures) • Subcultures in the Chinese EFL context • A case study: BA Graduation Paper Writing • Towards conclusion: Points and questions

3. Background: Researcher’s story • Metacognition and metacognition training (MT); problematizing MT/LT for autonomy (Huang, 2005a, 2005b, 2006a) • Learner difficulty and learner autonomy • Teacher autonomy and teacher development • Returning to learner autonomy, and bringing in related concepts of identity, agency, affordances, communities of practice, etc.

4. Background: Researcher’s story Reasons for getting back to learner autonomy: • personal interest • emerging issues of learner autonomy in research • grounding PhD research in my publications • Benson and Huang, 2006, forthcoming; Huang, 2005a, 2005b, 2005c, 2006a, 2006b, 2006c, 2007a, 2007b, 2007c

5. Background: PhD research Tentative titles • From student to teacher: A dynamic account of autonomy, identity and agency in EFL learning and teaching • Autonomy, identity and agency in EFL learning and teaching: Stories of the Chinese learners

6. Background: PhD research Overall objectives • To identify and examine a possible “Chinese” interpretative model of foreign/second language learner autonomy that takes into account of the culture of learning in a particular institution; • To establish and examine a “Chinese” pedagogical model of second/foreign language learner autonomy; and • To document (non-)autonomy, self-identity construction and learner agency in EFL learning and teaching and explore their interrelationship.

7. Study 1: • An exploration of teacher-learner role relationships in EFL learning in the Chinese university context Study 2: • An investigation into Chinese university students' in-class and out-of-class EFL learning Study 3: • Autonomy in the Chinese EFL context: Possibilities and constraints Study 4 (optional): • Learning to teach EFL: Student teachers’ stories of self-directed language learning and teaching

8. The study (presentation today) Purpose: • To examine the possibilities for and constraints on the exercise and development of autonomy Focus: • Small cultures (Holliday, 1999)/subcultures

9. National/ethnic cultures • National/ethnic cultures (Japanese culture, Chinese culture, etc.) are often viewed as a hindrance in promoting autonomy: • Cortazzi & Jin, 1996; • See a brief review in Huang, 2007a; • Contributions in Watkins & Biggs, 1996, and Pemberton et al, 1996). • Generalizations about national/ethnic groups may be useful as heuristics, but are insufficient.

10. Small cultures/(non-ethnic) subcultures • In distinguishing national/ethnic culture and non-ethnic cultures (subcultures), the traditional tie between culture and nation is unpicked. • Culture: • “a value system current in a particular group or setting” (Palfreyman, 2003: 11).

11. The kinds of culture that are most relevant to autonomous language learning (Palfreyman, 2003: 12): • Educational and academic cultures • Professional cultures of language teaching • Organizational cultures • Social class- or gender-associated cultures

12. Subcultures: Examples • Examination culture; • Certification culture; • Teacher and student evaluation; • Teachers’ professional freedom; • Administration; • Policies, rules, regulations; • Discourses, (power) relationships.

13. A case study: BAGP • An academic exercise that does not take into account learner difficulty (Huang, 2005b); • Little pre-BAGP preparation for students; • Oral defense VS poor administration: • Oral defense must happen even though student work does not meet the basic requirements; • Difficulty in failing a student who does not produce: • “You have to pass me sooner or later!”

14. Huang, 2006b, p.47 [Fieldnotes 2006, in English]: • At today’s staff meeting to set standards and formats for BAGP, supervisors were urged to note matters concerning an external evaluation on the university in the following year. • Then there was a shift of focus, quite naturally. Supervisors were keen to know and asked repeatedly what’s the minimum mark to enable students to get the BA degree: jige (pass, or 60 out of 100), zhongdeng (a good pass, or 70 of 100) or lianghao (very good, 80 out of 100)? • Many said the degree-guaranteed grade was zhongdeng last year, so they wanted to know whether there would be any change this year. Finally the answer was found in a university document distributed recently: zhongdeng. • Another interesting thing was the administration of GP: only when students had made a lot of complaints in the university’s website (BBS), did the department call a meeting to set the overall format and standard (length of abstracts, order of English and Chinese abstracts, English and Chinese within-text and end references, etc.).

15. Huang, 2006b, pp. 47-48 (interview data): HJ: • In an interview with students today, they said they expected teachers to give them pressure to push them forward with their BAGPs. T1: • Pressure alone doesn’t solve the problem. There is something wrong with the administration, because we have to pass students who produce rubbish. • In my group, I gave two students respectively 64 and 65, but XX said he couldn’t give very higher marks to upgrade students to 70 or plus [each BAGP was evaluated by two teachers but the supervisor’s evaluation counted more]. • If students can’t get 70 and commit suicide, will they find fault with me? I am a bit scared…I think I need to adjust my marks.

16. Towards conclusion: Ps and Qs • Subcultures are influential in the exercise and development of learner and teacher autonomy. • Fostering autonomy within constraints may begin with creating spaces for the existing sense of autonomy. • Possibilities for autonomy entail learner/teacher agency and a general approach of negotiation and mediation (Huang, 2006b). • A need for ethnographic studies. • Does the discussion so far give rise to any “Chinese” interpretative and pedagogical models of autonomy?

17. Towards conclusion: Ps and Qs If “control” is a key construct of autonomy (Benson, 2001), we need to ask the following Qs (cf. Benson, 2007): • Who actually assumes control over the learning and teaching processes? • What important aspects of learning/teaching are controlled by students/teachers themselves, by others, or can not be controlled at all? • How does the (re-)configuration of student/teacher control, other control, and no control work towards or against autonomy?

18. References • Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow, England: Pearson Education. • Benson, P. (March 2007). Testing the untestable: Autonomy in language learning. Presented at HASALD (Hong Kong Association for Self-Access Learning and Development) monthly seminar, City University of Hong Kong. • Benson, P., & Huang, J. (2006). Autonomy in language learning: A thematic bibliography. In T. Lamb & H. Reinders (Eds.), Supporting Independent Learning: Issues and Interventions. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. • Cortazzi, M., & Jin, L.X. (1996). Cultures of learning: Language classrooms in China. In H. Coleman (Ed.), Society and the language classroom (pp. 169-206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. • Holliday, A.R. (1999). Small cultures. Applied Linguistics, 20(2), 237-264.

19. Huang, J. (2005a). Metacognition training in the Chinese university classroom: An action research study. Educational Action Research, 13(3), 413-434. • Huang, J. (2005b). A diary study of difficulties and constraints in EFL learning. System, 33(4), 609-621. • Huang, J. (2005c). Teacher autonomy in language learning: A review of the research. Research Studies in Education, Volume 3 (Faculty of Education, University of Hong Kong). • Huang, J. (2006a). Learner resistance in metacognition training? An exploration of mismatches between learner and teacher agendas. Language Teaching Research, 10(1), 95-117. • Huang, J. (2006b). Fostering learner autonomy within constraints: Negotiation and mediation in an atmosphere of collegiality. Prospect: An Australian Journal of TESOL, 21(3), 38-57. • Huang, J. (2006c). On offering training in learner autonomy to pre-service teachers. AILA Research Network on Learner Autonomy in Language Learning Newsletter, Issue 10 – October 2006. Available at: http://www.aiu.ac.jp/~renlanews/#_Research_Projects

20. Huang, J. (2007a). Learner autonomy in the Chinese university classroom: An insider perspective on teacher-learner role relationships. In P. Benson (Ed.), Learner autonomy 8: Teacher and learner perspectives (pp. 84-103). Dublin: Authentik. • Huang, J. (2007b). Teacher autonomy in second language education. Teaching English in China, 30(1), 30-42. • Huang, J. (2007c). Research on teacher and learner autonomy in the context of English curriculum standards, to appear in Curriculum, Teaching material and Method. Published in Chinese as:黄景. 基于课程标准的教师和学习者自主性研究.《课程.教材.教法》，2007年第6期(拟定)。 • Palfreyman, D. (2003). Introduction: Culture and learner autonomy. In D. Palfreyman & R.C. Smith (Eds.) (2003). Learner autonomy across cultures: Language education perspectives (pp. 1-19). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. • Pemberton, R., Li, E.S.L., Or, W.W.F., & Pierson, H.D. (Eds.) (1996). Taking control: Autonomy in language learning. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. • Watkins, D.A., & Biggs, J.B. (Eds.) (1996). The Chinese Learner: Cultural, Psychological and Contextual Influences. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, University of Hong Kong / Victoria, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.