Non-English major students' perceptions of aspects of their autonomous language learning

Abstract

The study investigated the perceptions among non-English major students of autonomous language learning (ALL) of their responsibilities, ability to act autonomously, motivation to learn English, and autonomous activities within and outside of class. The data were collected using questionnaires and follow-up interviews. Nearly 300 students at a university in Hanoi, Vietnam, participated, 11 of whom were later interviewed. The analysis suggested that students preferred shared responsibilities. They were relatively confident in their abilities to act autonomously and were moderately to highly motivated to learn English. Nevertheless , ALL activities were conducted only on an irregular basis. Our results indicated that gender did not affect the implementation of ALL. The more motivated the students, the more frequently they practiced ALL activities. A relatively strong positive correlation was observed between self-perceived ALL abilities and activities. Some pedagogical implications were also extracted.

Full text

Son Van Nguyen* and Anita Habók
Non-English major students’perceptions of
aspects of their autonomous language
learning
https://doi.org/10.1515/cercles-2022-2044
Received September 13, 2021; accepted February 25, 2022
Abstract: The study investigated the perceptions among non-English major stu-
dents of autonomous language learning (ALL) of their responsibilities, ability to
act autonomously, motivation to learn English, and autonomous activities within
and outside of class. The data were collected using questionnaires and follow-up
interviews. Nearly 300 students at a university in Hanoi, Vietnam, participated, 11
of whom were later interviewed. The analysis suggested that students preferred
shared responsibilities. They were relatively confident in their abilities to act
autonomously and were moderately to highly motivated to learn English. Never-
theless, ALL activities were conducted only on an irregular basis. Our results
indicated that gender did not affect the implementation of ALL. The more moti-
vated the students, the more frequently they practiced ALL activities. A relatively
strong positive correlation was observed between self-perceived ALL abilities and
activities. Some pedagogical implications were also extracted.
Keywords: autonomous language learning; learner autonomy; non-English major
students; perceptions; responsibility
1 Introduction
The concept of learner autonomy (LA) in English language teaching (ELT) is of
significant interest for researchers, educators, and practitioners in language
education. This interest is reflected in the increase in the number of academic
publications reporting developments in this field. In part, because of its roots in
Western countries, LA was originally deemed unsuitable for Asian countries, such
as Vietnam (Pennycook 2013). However, LA has been accepted and adopted by
learners from a range of sociocultural backgrounds (Humphreys and Wyatt 2014;
*Corresponding author: Son Van Nguyen, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary,
E-mail: nguyen.son.van@edu.u-szeged.hu. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2614-7831
Anita Habók, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary, E-mail: habok@edpsy.u-szeged.hu.
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0904-8206
CercleS 2022; 12(1): 231–253
Open Access. © 2022 Son Van Nguyen and Anita Habók, published by De Gruyter. This work
is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Nguyen 2009). The Vietnamese case may not ultimately be an exception to this
trend.
Students who enter Higher Education in Vietnam tend to be dependent on
their teachers for learning materials and input throughout high school (Nguyen
and Hoang 2010) and are accustomed to such modes of instruction when they enter
university. Consequently, it is more challenging to promote LA at universities
where lecturers receive little support but are required to achieve institutional goals
(Humphreys and Wyatt 2014). It is widely accepted that fostering LA among non-
English majors is difficult (Le 2017; Trinh and Mai 2018). Moreover, the credit-based
system used in Vietnamese Higher Education requires increased LA from students
(Tran 2019), so LA “has been endorsed to be included in English language edu-
cation from the policy level”(Bui 2018: 161). Nevertheless, LA has not received
systematic attention with regard to its theory and practice, there have been few
studies on autonomous language learning (ALL), and those that have been con-
ducted focus on teachers and English-major students (e.g., Dang 2012; Le 2013;
Nguyen 2009; Tran 2019). Studies of ALL among non-English major students are
scarce. To address this gap, this study investigates ALL in non-English major
students in Vietnamese Higher Education, observing several aspects of LA,
including perceptions of responsibility, decision-making abilities, motivation
level, and ALL activities. The study seeks to deduce rigorously the implications of
ALL for ELT.
2 Theoretical background
LA has been an important topic in ELT for nearly four decades. It is considered to be
the most essential component of a successful language learning process (LLP)
(Farrell and Jacobs 2010) and an important educational goal in English as a foreign
language (EFL) (Teng 2019).
LA is widely recognized as having “a myriad of different meanings”(Oxford
2008: 42). However, scholars usually begin discussion of LA with Holec’s (1981)
definition, which is considered a “useful starting point for closer scrutiny of the
concept”(Hamilton 2013: 17). In his report, Holec (1981: 3) wrote that LA is the
“ability to take charge of one’s own learning …to have, and to hold, the
responsibility for all decisions concerning all aspects of this learning”. Accord-
ingly, an autonomous learner is someone who is capable of the following:
–determining objectives
–defining content and progression
–selecting methods and techniques
232 Nguyen and Habók

–monitoring acquisition of proper speaking (e.g., rhythm, time, and place)
–evaluating acquired knowledge
(Holec 1981: 3)
This definition, which characterizes the capacity to make decisions about
one’s own learning, is the emphasis for many other definitions of LA in ELT. The
instruments used in this study are adopted to investigate the ability to act
autonomously.
The conceptualization and definition of LA have been expanded considering
additional components. For instance, responsibility and decision-making became
popular, such as to be considered “the flavor of the month”in the 1980s (Hsu 2005:
13). In the 1990s, willingness and capacity became understood as crucial compo-
nents that must be considered for thedevelopment of LA (Hsu 2005; Le 2013). Thus,
investigating learners’willingness particularly and readiness generally for auton-
omous learning indicates the critical role that educators can play in promoting LA
among students (Le 2013; Ming and Alias 2007). First, learners are expected to
develop awareness of the roles that students and teachers should play because
learners’perceptions of these roles may exert an important influence on their
exercise of LA in class and outside of it and their preparedness to learn English
autonomously. Many studies, including Chan et al. (2002), Le (2013), and Mousavi
Arfae (2017), provide support for this point. Students who consider that teachers
facilitate their learning are ready for autonomous learning. On the other hand,
those who think of their teachers as the dominant figures in their learning and who
expect to be told what to do, to receive help, and to have everything explained are
not ready. Hence, an expectation of teacher authority can prevent teachers from
transferring responsibility to their students (Chan et al. 2002; Gan 2009). Thus,
learners’beliefs about their own role and that of their teacher will greatly
contribute to their willingness/readiness for LA (Nguyen and Habók 2020, 2021).
Second, learners are expected to be motivated (Nguyen and Habók 2020, 2021).
An increase in motivation is conducive to the development of LA (Hsu 2005), since
motivation is essential to promoting autonomous learning (Benson 2007). Previ-
ous studies have found that motivation is a precursor of LA (Chan et al. 2002; Hsu
2005; Le 2013; Nguyen and Habók 2020). Therefore, this study explores learners’
perceptions of roles and motivation levels.
Another point of interest is that students’actual activities, whether in class or
outside of it, can be understood as ALL behaviors (Chan et al. 2002; Orawiwatnakul
and Wichadee 2017). Hence, this study considers the nature of ordinary ALL
activities as reported by students and examines whether students’abilities and
motivations can necessarily be translated into actual behaviors.
Aspects of autonomous language learning 233

3 Empirical background
There have been many theoretical and empirical studies of LA in language learning
in general, but this section only examines work on non-English majors’ALL to
provide a comprehensive overview of the research problem and elucidate how the
present study contributes to the field of teaching English to speakers of other
languages (TESOL). The following inclusion and exclusion criteria were estab-
lished to identify the relevance of the review. The studies reviewed are journal
articles in English from 2000 to the present on the subject of EFL at tertiary level.
The literature search uses the keywords perceptions of responsibilities,autonomous
language learning abilities,autonomous language learning activities, and learner
autonomy. All publication journals are indexed in either SCOPUS or SCIMAGO
Journal & Country Rank. The search is performed on SCOPUS,Science Direct,Google
Scholar,ERIC, and JSTOR. This search produces six studies that fulfill the above-
mentioned criteria (Table 1).
Chan (2001) investigated a small group of learners and observed their attitudes
and perceptions in language learning, their roles as learners, perceptions of LA,
and learning preferences. The findings indicated that students demonstrated
positive attitudes toward LA and were deemed autonomous to a certain extent
because they displayed clear learning objectives, preferences, expectations, and a
desire to be involved in an LLP.
Chan et al. (2002) examined the perceptions of undergraduates in Hong Kong
regarding their responsibilities, ability to act autonomously, motivation level, and
Table :Brief review of previous studies.
References Context Participants (n) Instruments
Chan () Hong Kong Poly-
technic University
Second-year language majors
(n=)
Questionnaire survey and
interviews
Chan et al.
()
Hong Kong Poly-
technic University
Undergraduates (n=) Questionnaire and
interviews
Abdel Razeq
()
Birzeit University,
Palestine
First-year English-major stu-
dents (n=)
Questionnaire (adapted
from Chan et al. )
Alrabai () Saudi Arabia EFL learners (from intermedi-
ate schools to universities;
n=)
Questionnaire
Lin and Rein-
ders ()
Seven universities
in Anhui, China
First-year students (n=) Two questionnaires (close-
and open-ended
questions)
Şenbayrak
et al. ()
A state university
in Ankara, Turkey
EFL learners in preparatory
language courses (n=)
Questionnaire
234 Nguyen and Habók

ALL activities. The students’responses illustrated a well-defined view of their
roles, which demonstrated a preference for the teacher to have a dominant role.
Additionally, the students appeared to be generally confident in their own
decision-making abilities. They reported relatively high motivation levels, but
these levels did not seem to be equivalent to the frequency of their performance of
ALL activities.
In the Palestinian context, Abdel Razeq (2014) examined university students’
perceptions of aspects of ALL. He found that learners attributed success or failure
in learning English to the teacher, although he also believed that they were capable
of autonomous learning. The statistics indicated a difference in the practice of
ALL activities. Nevertheless, no significant difference in the students’perceptions
of their abilities was noted between genders and/or across levels of achievement.
Alrabai (2017) found that Saudi EFL learners had low levels of readiness for LA.
The students perceived moderate to high motivation levels and decision-making
ability but low levels of independence, responsibility, and involvement in ALL
activities.
Lin and Reinders (2019) argued that students appeared to be psychologically
ready but not technically or behaviorally prepared for ALL. Specifically, they
reported positive perceptions of their roles but a lower level of readiness for
autonomous ability and behavior. In other words, their behavioral readiness for LA
was lower than their psychological and technical readiness. Interestingly, the
study identified a gap between the beliefs and actual practices of learners. Şen-
bayrak et al. (2019) pointed out that the participants considered teachers to be the
dominant figures in their LLP. Additionally, the perceived levels of decision-
making ability among the students were above average, with relatively high
motivation levels. Furthermore, the students adopted metacognitive strategies to
enhance their English skills. In summary, the students were considered to be ready
for LA despite their inclination to accept the authority of the teacher.
This study draws three themes from the studies examined. First, all the studies
used questionnaires, most of which were adapted from Chan et al. (2002). Other
studies also elaborated on the findings with the support of interview data. This
point laid the methodological basis for the present study. Second, there was little
consistency in the results of these studies, particularly regarding the relationships
between aspects of ALL and variables such as gender. The variations in the find-
ings are subject to the differing sociocultural contexts, individual differences, and
various levels of experiences among learners. However, all the studies contributed
to the call for promoting LA in ELT. Third, the studies emphasized the importance
of students’readiness for LA in relation to pedagogy and curriculum planning.
Moreover, they investigated learner perception regarding ALL from a wide range of
mainly Asian contexts, including Hong Kong, Saudi Arabia, Palestine, and China.
Aspects of autonomous language learning 235

However, the topic has been under-researched in the Vietnamese context; thus,
this study is intended to address the above-mentioned gaps and help develop an
overview of the topic in the Asian context. In summary, the present study in-
vestigates the following research questions:
(1) How do students perceive the division of responsibility between teacher and
students regarding ALL?
(2) How do students view their own decision-making abilities in relation to
learning English?
(3) How do students view their own motivation level to learn English?
(4) What ALL activities do students conduct in and outside of class?
(5) Does student gender influence students’perceptions of their own re-
sponsibility, ability to act autonomously, and ALL activities?
(6) Does a relationship exist between motivation level and learning activities on
the one hand and autonomous learning abilities and learning activities on the
other?
4 Methods
4.1 Context and participants
This study was conducted at a large public technical university in Hanoi, Vietnam.
In 2016, this university became one of the first in Hanoi to implement blended
learning in EFL education. The two key components of EFL courses here are
traditional face-to-face instruction and online instruction or learning (Hrastinski
2019). The blended learning approach provides learners with access to rich re-
sources, accommodates reflective learning, develops independent study skills,
and improves learning outcomes (Hoang 2015). The university staff designed
language courses in the form of blended learning and cultivated an integration of
general English and English for career purposes. For example, students majoring
in electronic and electrical engineering (EEE) used a coursebook entitled English
for EEE, whereas students with a major in tourism worked with English for Tourism.
The EFL content differs by major, but the course formats are similar. Students are
required to attend four face-to-face lessons per week focusing on improving
speaking skills and to complete online sessions working on grammar, pronunci-
ation, vocabulary, listening, reading, and writing. The in class lessons and online
components cover the same topics in each unit.
The target population of the study was first- and second-year non-English
major students learning English as part of an overall degree. They had finished at
least one semester of English language Higher Education and therefore were
236 Nguyen and Habók

familiar with language learning at the university level. The coronavirus disease
2019 (COVID-19) pandemic restricted the researchers to recruiting the participants
on the basis of convenience sampling. Table 2 presents the information of the
participants.
The students reported allotting an average of 4.7 h per week to learning En-
glish outside class.
4.2 Instruments
Two instruments were applied to gather data to answer the above-mentioned
research questions, namely, an adapted questionnaire survey and a follow-up
interview. The questionnaire was adapted from Chan et al. (2002) to suit the Viet-
namese sociocultural context. The follow-up interview questions developed by the
researchers in this study were formulated using the components of the survey,
including responsibilities, autonomous learning abilities, motivation, and learning
activities.
The survey component was used to investigate EFL students’perceptions of
several aspects of ALL. We made the following changes to the original question-
naire. The questions on students’background information were moved to the end
of the survey. Section 1, regarding responsibilities, adds two more options referring
to both teacher and student and no idea so that students could choose what best
reflected their viewpoint. We did not use two items from the original version
regarding choosing materials and evaluating the course because the prescribed
curriculum in our university context did not enable students to select their own
learning materials or provide course evaluations. The other items were not
changed in terms of content but were paraphrased and shortened. For example,
deciding how long to spend on each activity in class was changed into deciding on a
timeframe for each activity in class. Section 2, regarding the ability to act autono-
mously, and Section 3, regarding motivation level, are the same as in the original
survey. Section 4, discussing ALL activities, adds four items on planning your
Table :Participants in this study.
Total
number
Year of study Majors Gender English
level
st nd EEE IT ME COM Male Female
 
(.%)

(.%)

(.%)

(.%)

(%)

(.%)

(.%)

(.%)
A–A
in CEFR
IT = information technology; ME = mechanical engineering; COM = commerce; CEFR = Common European
Framework of Reference.
Aspects of autonomous language learning 237

study,taking notes,summarizing lessons, and using external resources, but we
merged the relevant items into new ones. For example, read English notices around
you,read newspapers in English,read books or magazines in English, and collected
texts in English (e.g., articles, brochures, and labels) were turned into one item
entitled finishing reading material in English. Our version of the questionnaire
consisted of five parts with a total of 45 questions (Appendix): (a) participants’
perceptions of teacher and student responsibilities in EFL (11 questions),
(b) learners’self-perceived ALL ability (13 questions), (c) motivation level to learn
English (one question), (d) frequencies of ALL practices (17 questions), and
(e) students’demographic information (three questions). The students responded
to the questionnaire on a Likert scale to reflect their ALL process. The researchers
then applied back translation to translate from English to Vietnamese and facili-
tate the participants’understanding (for more, see Behr 2017).
Semi-structured follow-up interviews were conducted to elicit additional
information regarding students’perspectives on the issues raised in the survey.
Interpreting the quantitative data using the detailed descriptive information
obtained from the participants in interviews enabled the researchers to “explain or
build upon initial quantitative results”(Creswell and Clark 2007: 71). The main
interview questions included the following. (1) What responsibilities do you have
in an EFL class, and what responsibilities does your teacher have? Which aspects
identified in the survey are you and your teacher responsible for? (2) What is your
ability to act autonomously in the aspects mentioned in the survey? (3) How
motivated are you to learn English? (4) Which English learning activities do you
prefer to show your LA? How often do you participate in those activities?
4.3 Data collection and analysis
This study was conducted with ethical approval from the researchers’university,
permission from the administration of the participating university, and the
informed consent of the participants. Data collection lasted nearly 2 months from
May 2020 to mid-June 2020. The questionnaires were administered online due to
the COVID-19 pandemic, and a total of 290 students provided responses, of which
276 were valid questionnaires and were utilized, while 14 were discarded, for an
approximate valid response rate of 95.2%. Using the questionnaire data and on a
random basis, 30 students who provided their email addresses, accounting for
over 10% of the total questionnaire respondents, were emailed and invited to
participate in Zoom follow-up interviews, of whom 11 agreed. The interviews were
conducted in the interviewees’native language (Vietnamese) and recorded with
their consent. Other questions were posed as the students responded to the main
238 Nguyen and Habók

questions dependent on the conditions of the given interview, which lasted
approximately 30 min in each case.
Data from 276 valid questionnaires were coded and encoded into SPSS version
24. Initial analyses showed that the questionnaire had an excellent level of reli-
ability (α= 0.935) (Taber 2018) and adequate validity (KMO = 0.919, χ2= 7,618.66,
d.f. = 861, p< 0.001, total variance extracted = 55.6%). The statistics included the
means (M) and standard deviations (SD), independent-sample t-tests, Pearson’s
correlations, and ANOVA. These statistical analyses allowed the researchers to
evaluate the questionnaire’s results, examine trends, and determine any re-
lationships or differences between the samples and variables.
Students’answers in the interviews helped interpret the questionnaire’s
results to obtain an improved understanding of the responses. Data from the
interviews were transcribed and translated into English before coding. The stu-
dents’names were not provided or recorded, to ensure anonymity, but the students
were assigned codes, from S1 to S11, to enable cross-reference. The researchers
then employed thematic content analysis to observe the themes that emerged from
the data and matched them with the equivalent research questions. For example,
the interviewees discussed the activities they carried out to study English at home,
including activities related to ALL. These statements were coded as autonomous
activities and were used to provide an answer to the sixth research question.
5 Findings
5.1 Students’perceptions of responsibilities in language
learning
As indicated in Table 3, the first part of the questionnaire survey elucidated stu-
dents’perceptions of their responsibilities and their teacher’s role in LLP.
Obviously, some students did not knowhow to assign certain responsibilities in
all aspects of LLP. However, nearly 90% of respondents considered that they had at
least some responsibility for making progress outside of class, and approximately
60% of the respondents considered that the teacher should be responsible for
evaluating the students’learning. More than half of the students perceived the
existence of shared responsibilities in students’progress during lessons, students’
interest in learning English, hard work among students, and learning goals in
English courses. For certain pedagogical activities, such as deciding on class ac-
tivities for learning, establishing the content of the lessons and the timeframe to be
Aspects of autonomous language learning 239

allotted foreach activity, the respondents tended to attribute these responsibilities to
the teacher.
Several noteworthy points emerged from the follow-up interviews in support
of the results. First, all participants considered that their own personal endeavors
determined their progress, as one of them stated that “no one but me can make
progress in learning English”(S4). Second, the interviewees (91%) considered that
learning materials, class activities, length of activities, and student evaluations
should be considered teachers’work because “the syllabus was already prescribed
by the leaders, and students have to follow it to achieve its objectives”(S2). Third,
most students interviewed (9 out of 11) highly valued shared responsibilities as a
means of facilitating students’success in language learning. Specifically, the
students were relatively aware of their main roles. However, the teachers helped
stimulate the students’interest by encouraging them to work hard or by helping
them set goals because they had “low English proficiency as a result of poor
language education in high school”(S7).
5.2 Students’views of their autonomous learning abilities
This part of the questionnaire indicated how students rated their ability in making
decisions regarding their activities in the ALL process. As shown in Table 4, a
Table :Students’perceptions of English teachers’and students’responsibilities in % (N=).
Teacher Student Teacher
and
student
No
idea
. Students’progress during lessons ....
. Students’progress outside class ....
. Students’interest in learning English ....
. Students’working harder ....
. Identifying students’weaknesses in English ....
. Setting learning goals for students in the English
course
....
. Establishing concepts for learning in English
lessons
....
. Selecting educational activities for English
learning in lessons
....
. Deciding on a timeframe for each activity in class ....
. Evaluating students’learning ....
. Deciding what students learn outside class ....
240 Nguyen and Habók

significantly higher percentage of responses are clustered under the OK category
than under other categories. Students tended to rate their abilities as average,
indicating a positive self-rating of their ability to carry out activities. The re-
spondents considered themselves autonomous in learning because they could
evaluate their course (M= 3.2), select their own learning materials in class
(M= 3.16), set their own learning objectives in class (M= 3.14), set learning goals
(M= 3.1), and select their own learning activities in class (M= 3.1). Nevertheless,
the participants reported that they had little ability in planning and evaluating
their learning, selecting learning activities, objectives, or materials outside of
class, or setting the timeframe for activities. For the remainder of the activities, the
students self-reported moderate abilities.
The interview data enabled an interpretation of the survey results. Of the 11
interviewees, seven expressed that they would be able to set goals and choose
learning objectives, materials, or activities in class if allowed.One student expressed
the view that “I totally can do these things if my teacher lets me do them. Among
available choices offered by my teacher, I can easily select whatI think is suitable or
what I prefer”(S3). All interviewed participants shared a similar viewpoint, that is,
that formulating a learning plan and selecting materials or activities outside class
was challenging. They “did not know which sources to refer to and whether those
Table :Students’perceptions of their abilities in autonomous learning (N=).
Very poor
and Poor
(%)
OK
(%)
Good and
very good
(%)
MSD
. Choose learning activities in class .....
. Choose learning activities outside class .... .
. Choose learning objectives in class .... .
. Choose learning objectives outside class .... .
. Choose learning materials in class .... .
. Choose learning materials outside class .... .
. Evaluate your learning .... .
. Identify your weaknesses in English .... .
. Decide the next content of the English
lessons
.... .
. Decide on the timeframe for each
activity in class
.... .
. Plan your learning .... .
. Evaluate the course .....
. Set learning goals .....
Very poor = ; poor = ;OK=; good = ; very good = .
Aspects of autonomous language learning 241

sources were reliable or not”(S9), and, importantly, they lacked “training or guid-
ance in doing these activities. The focus of English courses was on knowledge and
language skills, rather than study skills”(S5). Six students shared the opinion that
choices were given to them for certain aspects, such as what sections in each unit
should be learned, which objectives to achieve, and which activities to do. Never-
theless, the teacher made the final decision, informed by the choices of the majority.
These students reported feeling satisfied and respected.
5.3 Students’perception of their motivation level
The third part of the survey requested the respondents’motivation level as EFL
learners. They produced a comprehensive picture in which a majority (69.2%) of
them perceived themselves to be motivated (54.7%) or highly motivated (14.5%) to
learn English. Nevertheless, others reported that they were moderately motivated
(27.5%), and the fact that only a small percentage of students felt not at all moti-
vated to learn English (3.3%) was encouraging.
The follow-up interview data were consistent with these results. More than half
of the interviewees (63.6%) indicated that they had a high motivation level to learn
the English language due to its importance to their future career prospects and
ability to communicate with foreigners. One interviewee said, “I am highly moti-
vated to learn English. I know it is necessary for my future job promotion and
probably my study abroad”(S11). Four other students indicated that they were
relatively motivated to learn English to satisfy the minimum requirements of the
university and their future employers.
5.4 Students’English language learning activities inside and
outside class
In the last part of the survey, the participants were asked to indicate the frequency
with which they conducted several ALL activities. Table 5 demonstrates the
frequency of each activity.
The top activities of the students were as follows:
–listening to English songs (M= 3.28; 86.9%; sometimes and often)
–taking note while studying (M= 3.10; 79.7%; sometimes and often)
–writing down new words and their meanings (M= 3.09; 79.7%; sometimes and
often)
–engaging in group studies in English lessons (M= 3.00; 78.9%; sometimes and
often)
242 Nguyen and Habók

The low-frequency activities included
–talking to foreigners in English (M= 1.96; 71.8% never and rarely)
–suggesting something to the English teacher (M= 2.41; 51.9% never and rarely)
–asking the teacher about English tasks (M= 2.42; 56.5% never and rarely)
The percentages for “rarely”were relatively high for other activities.
The interview data corroborated these results. The interviewees reported that
their most frequent activities were listening to English songs, working in groups
during English lessons, and writing down new words and their meanings, and the
Table :Frequency of students’practice of ALL activities (N=).
Never
(%)
Rarely
(%)
Sometimes
(%)
Often
(%)
MSD
. Completing non-compulsory
assignments in English
..... .
. Writing down new words and their
meanings
..... .
. Finishing a reading material in
English
..... .
. Visiting teachers to inquire about
tasks related to learning English
..... .
. Watching English programs ..... .
. Listening to English songs ..... .
. Practicing conversational English
with friends
..... .
. Conversing with foreigners in
English
. ... .
. Engaging in group studies in
English lessons
..... .
. Asking the teacher questions when
you do not understand
..... .
. Making suggestions to the English
teacher
..... .
. Planning your lesson/study ..... .
. Taking notes while studying ..... .
. Summarizing lessons while
studying
..... .
. Using external resources while
studying
..... .
. Discussing learning problems with
classmates
..... .
. Taking opportunities to speak in
English inside the classroom
..... .
Aspects of autonomous language learning 243

least commonly pursued activities were communicating in English with foreigners
and asking teachers about assignments. The following quotations illustrate the
results:
Along with English lessons in class, I learn English by listening to songs in English performed
by my favorite singers, such as Westlife or Justin Bieber …but for entertainment rather than
learning purpose. (S1)
At home, I usually write down any new words and look up for their meanings to improve my
vocabulary …. In every English class lesson, we have group studies with my classmates to
complete tasks from our teacher. We also work in pairs very much to role-play some speaking
activities. (S6)
Well, I hardly communicate with my teacher to make suggestions or ask her about something
although she is so friendly. I am not shy at all but I can find solutions on the Internet.
Occasionally, I ask her what homework is or how exams will be. (S3)
For me, speaking English with foreigners never happens because they are not around me and
I do not know how to look for them. The classroom environment is the only place to practice
English. (S5)
Eight students believed that the heavy workload of other subjects and personal
matters hindered them from performing ALL activities. For example, “practicing
English is not my most frequent activity because I have too many assignments from
other courses”(S10) or “I work a part-time job to make my living and my studies in
Hanoi affordable”(S2).
5.5 Gender and students’autonomous learning
A set of independent-sample t-tests was conducted to compare the aspects of ALL
between male and female students. No significant differences were noted in respect
of the views ofautonomous learning abilities between male(M= 3.03, SD = 0.73) and
female (M= 2.86, SD = 0.74) students [t(274) = 1.19, p= 0.23]. Finally, no significant
difference was found for the frequencies of ALL activities between male (M=2.77,
SD = 0.58) and female (M= 2.64, SD = 0.59) students [t(274) = 1.15, p= 0.25]. The
responses regarding ALL were not statistically different between genders.
5.6 Level of motivation and learning activities
ANOVA results indicated a significant difference in the scores of autonomous
learning activities (F= 9.25; p< 0.001; η2= 3) in terms of motivation level, as
244 Nguyen and Habók

reported by the respondents (Table 6). Pairwise comparisons were used to further
explore the significant effects using Tukey’s correction.
A Tukey’sa,b post-hoc analysis indicated that motivation levels differ signifi-
cantly between groups regarding autonomous activities. The scores for autono-
mous learning activities for the highly motivated group were significantly higher
than those for the motivated, slightly motivated, and unmotivated groups
(Table 7). The higher the degree of motivation, the more frequently students
participated in autonomy-promoting activities.
In addition, Pearson’s product–moment correlation was run to determine the
relationship between motivation level and ALL activities. A strong positive and
statistically significant correlation was noted between motivation level and
autonomous activities (r= 0.544, N= 276, p< 0.001). Increases in motivation level
were correlated with increases in the frequency of autonomous learning activities.
5.7 Autonomous learning abilities and learning activities
Pearson’s product–moment correlation coefficient was computed to assess the
relationship between autonomous learning abilities and learning activities, and a
bidirectional correlation was found between the two variables (r= 0.503, N= 276,
p< 0.001). In summary, a strong, positive correlation between ALL abilities and
activities was perceived and reported.
Table :ANOVA of motivation level.
Level of motivation Sum of squares df Mean square FSig.
Between groups .  . . .
Within groups .  .
Total . 
Table :Tukey’sa,b post-hoc analysis for motivation level.
Level of motivation NSubtest for alpha = .
None .
Moderate  .
Average  .
High  .
aUses harmonic mean sample size = ..
bThe group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of the group sizes is used. Type I error levels are not
guaranteed.
Aspects of autonomous language learning 245

6 Discussion and conclusions
This study explored the perceptions of non-English major students of LA regarding
their perceptions of their responsibilities in learning and their ALL activities. Data
were collected using an adapted questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. A
total of 276 students at a technical university in Hanoi, Vietnam completed the
questionnaire, and 11 participated in the interviews.
The students preferred responsibilities to be shared between the teacher and
themselves for most aspects of ALL. However, they remained aware of their own
responsibility in making progress outside of class. The students indicated that the
teacher was responsible for evaluating the students’learning. Contrary to previous
studies (Abdel Razeq 2014; Alrabai 2017; Chan et al. 2002; Lin and Reinders 2019),
the present study found a sense of responsibility and involvement in the ALL
process among the respondents although the teacher still had an undeniably
important role in LLP. This could be explicated from a consideration that the
sociocultural context of the study was environment. A blended learning approach
has been prominent at the university for several years, and students have had the
opportunity to study career-oriented English. In other words, students have
additional time to self-study at home and take charge of their home learning,
facilitated by the teacher if required. Because of the availability of learning
resources on the Internet, students can work on their own at any time they wish.
However, they are not allowed to change anything in the curriculum provided by
the university (Nguyen 2009). Thus, in the context of English tertiary education,
pedagogical activities were assigned to the teacher, and the students merely
followed the teacher’s instructions and considered the teacher an important but
not dominant figure. Moreover, because of their low levels of English and uneven
proficiency (Trinh and Mai 2018), teacher support is necessary (Breen and Mann
2013), especially in the Vietnamese context, where English has yet to be estab-
lished as a second language.
Students’perceived ability to act autonomously in learning English was
relatively positive. Relevant to the perceptions of the above-mentioned roles, if the
students had the chance, they deemed themselves capable of ALL. This result is
consistent with the results in the literature (Abdel Razeq 2014; Alrabai 2017; Şen-
bayrak et al. 2019), which indicated that learners appeared confident about their
ALL abilities. Although they are not inborn, these abilities could be recognized and
nurtured through learner training by EFL teachers and experts (Abdel Razeq 2014;
Le 2013; Nguyen 2009; Oxford 2017). Specifically, planning learning, evaluating
learning, and selecting learning materials should be prioritized because of the
participants’low self-perceived abilities. In addition, ALL abilities vary among
learners; thus, teachers should diversify their teaching methods to consider indi-
vidual differences (Cirocki et al. 2019). Moreover, a negotiated syllabus can be
246 Nguyen and Habók

applied to engage learners in the decision-making process and develop decision-
making abilities (Azarnoosh and Kargozari 2018).
Regardless of internal or external motivation (Hsu 2005), the participants
reported moderate to high motivation levels to learn English, primarily because of
its usefulness in their future careers in the internationalized labor market and for
communication purposes. This finding matches those of previous studies (Alrabai
2017; Chan et al. 2002; Lin and Reinders 2019; Şenbayrak et al. 2019). Interestingly,
the statistics indicated that the more motivated the students were, the more
frequently they carried out ALL activities. Hence, EFL learners should strengthen
their motivation to learn English for prospective future opportunities and to avoid
lagging behind due to their low levels of language proficiency. EFL teachers should
help students improve their motivation level when necessary. As a result of an
increase in motivation, students will develop LA (Borg and Alshumaimeri 2017).
Both within and outside of class, students were most engaged in listening to
English songs, taking notes, noting new words and their meanings, and engaging
in teamwork in English lessons. This result is in line with those of previous studies
(Abdel Razeq 2014; Alrabai 2017; Chan et al. 2002). The first of these, namely, using
English language media, may be considered a by-product of their ordinary pursuits
because students spontaneously make use of entertainment and the Internet. The
three other popular activities are frequently implemented in other subjects, not
only in English lessons. Importantly, the findings indicated low to moderate levels
of frequency of ALL activities for two main reasons. First, sociocultural contexts,
such as the absence of an English-speaking community, pressure from workload,
and other personal matters prevent students from frequently practicing ALL.
Second, the activities mentioned above were not introduced and implemented in
the curriculum during the student training.
The statistics indicate that no significant difference appeared in any aspect of
ALL between genders. Understandably, each student at the university has an equal
chance to access language education, and there is no gender discrimination in
tertiary education in Vietnam. Additionally, a positive correlation was found
between ALL abilities and ALL activities. Accordingly, the more the students were
able to act autonomously, the more frequently the ALL activities were performed
(Chan et al. 2002). It may be that students with better abilities may engage in ALL
activities more frequently because of their self-beliefs and a lack of fear or shyness.
7 Suggestions
The findings suggest several pedagogical implications to guide relevant stake-
holders in TESOL.
Aspects of autonomous language learning 247

First, on the macro-level, policymakers should introduce and promote the
notions of LA and ALL in the language education curriculum to raise awareness
among stakeholders, including leaders, teachers, students, and parents. Notably,
only the aspects that are culturally appropriate in the local sociocultural contexts
should be implemented (Bui 2018). Another important point here is the integration
of courses specialized in LA into teacher education programs, such that preservice
teachers are familiarized with the concept and apply it in their own future teaching
(Mai and Pham 2018).
Second, at the meso-level, unique and specific institutional initiatives for
language education should be established that can promote ALL, such as modi-
fying the class size, time constraints, testing and assessment, benchmarking,
teaching facilities, learning materials, computer-assisted access, and Internet
access to support expanded ALL (see more at Bui 2018; Hamilton 2013; Le 2017,
2020; Trinh and Mai 2018). For example, a class of non-English majors is typically
crowded, including more than 40 students, which prevents teachers from
adequately managing the class and designing activities, thus hindering ALL. The
curriculum should emphasize competency-based learning and balance students’
workload to provide additional time to practice study skills and study languages
for global integration to a greater degree. Reducing unnecessary workload can
create space to develop ALL abilities and increase motivation, as seen in the
relationships between the variables and frequencies of ALL activities. Moreover,
EFL teachers are expected to be aware of LA and to act autonomously if they desire
to promote LA among their students (Breen and Mann 2013). Thus, university
leaders should facilitate professional development programs (PDPs) to support
teachers financially, technically, and psychologically, especially those working at
technical universities, where English is a minor component of education.
Third, at a micro-level, teachers are advised to regularly attend PDPs in order
to be able to introduce LA to students and systematically implement diverse
approaches to the fostering of ALL, with an emphasis on learner training and
motivation, due to the relationship of both aspects with the frequency of auton-
omous activities. Teachers’willingness to transfer some of their responsibilities
and allow learners to have more choice in their education is encouraged as a means
of fostering LA, despite the difficulty of this task. Initially, teachers may seek to
remain open-minded and friendly with students, sharing their learning experience
and accepting criticism from them (Bui 2018). Additionally, students themselves
should increase their awareness of LA and the importance of English in the present
era. LA will help them become global citizens in the 21st century (OCED 2005). This
study’sfindings show that students should develop their own motivation so that
the frequency of ALL activities will increase and the students will gradually
become autonomous.
248 Nguyen and Habók

Appendix
Student questionnaire
Dear students,
I am currently doing a research on English language learning among Viet-
namese learners. Following is a survey and I do hope that you can spend time
helping me complete it in an honest way to reflect yourown learning. Your responses
will help me much describe how students learn English. Thank you so much.
Responsibility
Tick the box that reflects your viewpoint (√). Whose responsibility do you think
belongs to?
Abilities
Tick the box that reflects your viewpoint (√). How do you evaluate your abilities in
learning English?
Teacher Student Both
teacher
and student
No
ideas
. Students’progress during lessons
. Students’progress outside class
. Students’interest in learning English
. Students’working harder
. Identifying students’weaknesses in English
. Setting learning goals for students in the English
course
. Establishing concepts for learning in English
lessons
. Selecting educational activities for English learning
in lessons
. Deciding on a timeframe for each activity in class
. Evaluating students’learning
. Deciding what students learn outside class
Aspects of autonomous language learning 249

Motivation
How do you describe your motivation? (circle the suitable option)
A. highly motivated
B. motivated
C. moderately motivated
D. not motivated
Activities
Tick the box that reflects your viewpoint (√). How frequently do you ….?
Very poor Poor OK Good Very good
. Choose learning activities in class
. Choose learning activities outside class
. Choose learning objectives in class
. Choose learning objectives outside class
. Choose learning materials in class
. Choose learning materials outside class
. Evaluate your learning
. Identify your weaknesses in English
. Decide the next content of the English lessons
. Decide on the timeframe for each activity in class
. Plan your learning
. Evaluate the course
. Set learning goals
Never Rarely Sometimes Often
. Complete non-compulsory assignments in English
. Write down new words and their meanings
. Finish a reading material in English
. Visit teachers to inquire about tasks related to learning
English
. Watch English programs
. Listen to English songs
. Practice conversational English with friends
. Converse with foreigners in English
. Engage in group studies in English lessons
. Ask the teacher questions when you do not understand
. Make suggestions to the English teacher
. Plan your lesson/study
. Take notes while studying
250 Nguyen and Habók

Background information
Gender (circle one option)
A. Male
B. Female
C. Others
Thank you for your cooperation. Good luck.
References
Abdel Razeq, Anwar Ahmad. 2014. University EFL learners’perceptions of their autonomous
learning responsibilities and abilities. RELC Journal 45(3). 321–336.
Alrabai, Fakieh. 2017. From teacher dependency to learner independence: A study of Saudi
learners’readiness for autonomous learning of English as a foreign language. Learning and
Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives 14(1). 70–97.
Azarnoosh, Maryam & Hamid Kargozari. 2018. Negotiated syllabus. In Akram Faravani,
Mitra Zeraatpische, Maryam Azarnoosh & Hamid Kargozari (eds.), Issues in syllabus design,
135–147. Rotterdam: Sense Publisher.
Behr, Dorothée. 2017. Assessing the use of back translation: The shortcomings of back translation
as a quality testing method. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 20(6).
573–584.
Benson, Phil. 2007. Autonomy and its role in learning. In Jim Cummins & Chris Davision (eds.),
International handbook of English language teaching, 733–745. Boston: Springer.
Borg, Simon & Yousif Alshumaimeri. 2017. Language learner autonomy in a tertiary context:
Teachers’beliefs and practices. Language Teaching Research 23(1). 9–38.
Breen, Michael & Sarah Mann. 2013. Shooting arrows at the sun: Perspectives on a pedagogy for
autonomy. In Phil Benson & Peter Voller (eds.), Autonomy and independence in language
learning, 132–149. Abingdon: Routledge.
Bui, Ngoc. 2018. Learner autonomy in tertiary English classes in Vietnam. In James Albright (ed.),
English tertiary education in Vietnam, 158–171. Abingdon: Routledge.
Chan, Victoria. 2001. Readiness for learner autonomy: What do our learners tell us? Teaching in
Higher Education 6(4). 505–518.
(continued)
Never Rarely Sometimes Often
. Summarize lessons while studying
. Use external resources while studying
. Discuss learning problems with classmates
. Take opportunities to speak in English inside the
classroom
Aspects of autonomous language learning 251

Chan, Victoria, Mary Spratt & Gillian Humphreys. 2002. Autonomous language learning: Hong
Kong tertiary students’attitudes and behaviours. Evaluation & Research in Education 16(1).
1–18.
Cirocki, Andrzej, Syafi’ul Anam & Pratiwi Retnaningdyah. 2019. Readiness for autonomy in English
language learning: The case of Indonesian high school students. Iranian Journal of Language
Teaching Research 7(2). 1–18.
Creswell, John. & Vicki Clark. 2007. Designing and conducting mixed methods research.
California, CA: SAGE Publications.
Dang, Tin. 2012. Learner autonomy perception and performance: A study on Vietnamese students
in online and offline learning environments. Budoora: La Trobe University Dissertation.
Available at: http://arrow.latrobe.edu.au:8080/vital/access/manager/Repository/latrobe:
34050.
Farrell, Thomas & George Jacobs. 2010. Essentials for successful English language teaching.
London: Continuum.
Gan, Zhengdong. 2009. ‘Asian learners’re-examined: An empirical study of language learning
attitudes, strategies and motivation among mainland Chinese and Hong Kong students.
Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 30(1). 41–58.
Hamilton, Miranda. 2013. Autonomy and foreign language learning in a virtual learning
environment. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Hoang, Tue. 2015. EFL teachers’perceptions and experiences of blended learning in a Vietnamese
university. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology Dissertation. Available at:
https://eprints.qut.edu.au/83945/.
Holec, Henri. 1981. Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Hrastinski, Stefan. 2019. What do we mean by blended learning? TechTrends 63(5). 564–569.
Hsu, Wen-Cheng. 2005. Representations, constructs and practice of autonomy via a learner
training programme in Taiwan. Nottingham: University of Nottingham Dissertation.
Humphreys, Gareth & Mark Wyatt. 2014. Helping Vietnamese university learners to become more
autonomous. ELT Journal 68(1). 52–63.
Le, Canh. 2017. English language education in Vietnamese universities: National benchmarking in
practice. In Eun Park & Bernard Spolsky (eds.), English education at the tertiary level in Asia:
From policy to practice, 183–202. Abingdon: Routledge.
Le, Canh. 2020. English language teaching in Vietnam: Aspirations, realities, and challenges. In
Canh Le, Hoa Nguyen, Minh Nguyen & Roger Barnard (eds.), Building teacher capacity in
Vietnamese English language teaching research: Policy and practice,7–22. Abingdon:
Routledge.
Le, Quynh. 2013. Fostering learner autonomy in language learning in tertiary education: An
intervention study of university students in Hochiminh City, Vietnam. Nottingham: University
of Nottingham Dissertation. Available at: http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/13405/.
Lin, Lilan & Hayo Reinders. 2019. Students’and teachers’readiness for autonomy: Beliefs and
practices in developing autonomy in the Chinese context. Asia Pacific Education Review 20(1).
69–89.
Mai, Lan & Thuy Pham. 2018. Vietnamese EFL teacher training at universities. In James Albright
(ed.), English tertiary education in Vietnam, 172–184. Abingdon: Routledge.
Ming, Thang & Azarina Alias. 2007. Investigating readiness for autonomy: A comparison of
Malaysian ESL undergraduates of three public universities. Reflections on English Language
Teaching 6(1). 1–18.
252 Nguyen and Habók

Mousavi Arfae, Alireza. 2017. Language learner autonomy in Ontario’s ESL context. Ontario: The
University of Western Ontario Dissertation. Available at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=6981&context=etd.
Nguyen, Le. 2009. Learner autonomy and EFL learning at the tertiary level in Vietnam. Wellington:
Victoria University of Wellington Dissertation. Available at: http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.
nz/handle/10063/1203.
Nguyen, Ha & Lam Hoang. 2010. How to foster learner autonomy in country studies at Faculty of
English - Hanoi National University of Education? VNU Journal of Foreign Studies 26(4).
239–245.
Nguyen, Son & Anita Habók. 2020. Non-English-major students’perceptions of learner autonomy
and factors influencing learner autonomy in Vietnam. Relay Journal 3(1). 122–139.
Nguyen, Son & Anita Habók. 2021. Designing and validating the learner autonomy perception
questionnaire. Heliyon 7(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06831.
OCED. 2005. Definition and selection of competencies: Executive summary. Available at: http://
www.oecd.org/pisa/35070367.pdf.
Orawiwatnakul, Wiwat & Wichadee Saovapa. 2017. An investigation of undergraduate students’
beliefs about autonomous language learning. International Journal of Instruction 10(1).
117–132.
Oxford, Rebecca. 2008. Hero with a thousand faces: Learner autonomy, learning strategies and
learning tactics in independent language learning. In Stella Hurd & Tim Lewis (eds.),
Language learning strategies in independent settings,41–63. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Oxford, Rebecca. 2017. Teaching and researching language learning strategies: Self-regulation in
context. Abingdon: Routledge.
Pennycook, Alastair. 2013. Cultural alternatives and autonomy. In Phil Benson & Peter Voller
(eds.), Autonomy and independence in language learning,35–53. Abingdon: Routledge.
Şenbayrak, Mürüvvet, Deniz Ortaçtepe & Kimberly Trimble. 2019. An exploratory study on Turkish
EFL learners’readiness for autonomy and attitudes toward self-access centers. TESOL Journal
10(2). e00401.
Taber, Keith. 2018. The use of Cronbach’s Alpha when developing and reporting research
instruments in science education. Research in Science Education 48(6). 1273–1286.
Teng, Feng. 2019. Autonomy, agency, and identity in teaching and learning English as a foreign
language. Singapore: Springer.
Tran, Ha. 2019. English language learner autonomy in the Vietnamese higher education context:
Enabling factors and barriers araising from assessment practice. Adelaide: The University of
Adelaide Dissertation. Available at: https://digital.library.adelaide.edu.au/dspace/handle/
2440/123107.
Trinh, Hien & Loan Mai. 2018. Current challenges in the teaching of tertiary English in Vietnam. In
James Albright (ed.), English tertiary education in Vietnam,40–53. Abingdon: Routledge.
Aspects of autonomous language learning 253