Discussion of Participants’ Perceptions of Their Support for/Practice of

Metacognition is one of the categories TEs focused on in their support. TEs refer to promotion of planning, reflection, centring learning and a critical stance in support of facilitating metacognition. On learners’ side, most name planning, reflection and monitoring learning through reflection. Linking learning to previous learning and to the contents of other courses is a metacognitive strategy mentioned only by a few STs.

Facilitating metacognition can be considered as what Voller (1997) refers to as

technical support that helps learners develop and implement metacognitive

strategies. Planning is a metacognitive strategy significant in autonomous learning (Oxford, 1990; Wenden, 1991). TEs advocate encouraging learners to prepare learning plans as learner autonomy support considering learning plans as a tool to later check what has been accomplished in learning, and therefore become aware of achievements and failures. This finding accords well with related literature. Dam (1995) maintains learning plans augment self-assessment with their focus on reflection and foster the management of learning. Benson (2016) argues learners themselves are in best position to set learning goals and teachers have a role in scaffolding learners towards their goals.

Regarding planning, while half of the participating STs suggested they plan their learning, the other half admitted they do not make plans but instead prefer to be flexible. As one ST explains this may be linked to their previous experiences where in some contexts there is a tendency to ask learners to make and follow detailed plans. Since such detailed study schedules do not give enough freedom to learners to personalise their plans, it is difficult to follow them. It can be

159

concluded that detailed plans is daunting in terms of the effort needed to comply and that the practice also prevents an autonomous planning capacity from developing.

Setting one’s own objectives and being realistic (Dickinson, 1995; Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2013; Nunan, 1996) have been identified as important aspects of autonomous learning in the present study by STs who offer evidence they set objectives, which mostly aim to find solutions for their immediate needs. In a study conducted by Bown (2009), it is suggested learners set mini goals upon whose accomplishment they are in a position to set others. These mini goals accumulate to later set and achieve long term goals. These decisions regarding short-term goals help give direction to their learning to an extent, yet the efficiency of such decisions for long term achievement is open to discussion since in nature some may be made to save the day rather than serving needs. Some STs further propose they set self-imposed deadlines. Although not all could stick to the deadlines, they at least had ownership and the internal pressure assisted them in staying on schedule, even if for not all targets.

Reflection is perceived as a precursor for autonomy (Benson, 2011; Dewey, 1933; Little, 1991) and promoting reflection on learning with the intention of monitoring learning has been emphasized as common practice by half of the TEs. The skills of reflecting and monitoring are associated with autonomous learning skills and is hence of no surprise to appear in TEs’ support. However, as Kolb (1984) underlines, reflecting may not be of value without taking action, and in the study, although reflection is argued to be fostered, there is no data to suggest TEs support their learners to rectify their weaknesses after practising reflection. The data also suggests TEs promote reflection but do not overtly emphasize the need to carry out reflection independently rather than as a response to teacher questions (p.150).

TEs suggest they utilise reflective questions in promoting reflection. Yet, the nature of these questions is significant (Thavenius, 1999). These questions should be formulated in a way to help learners realise why things might be incorrect/incomplete. It is the nature of the reflective questions supplied by TEs that is crucial in moving from seeing something is wrong to understanding

160

how/why it is wrong to building an approach that will prevent it being wrong in the future. In the current study, some TEs attempt to help learners arrive at self- discovery with the questions they ask. However, questions asked by others mainly require learners to reflect on the extent they have learnt.

The data suggests TEs strive to enhance reflection on content mainly, with a few also promoting reflection on process. However, there is limited data from their own testimony about this issue to suggest they inspire critical reflection (p.151), which although is rarely observed due to its challenging nature, has the capacity to modify perceptions (Kember et al., 2000; Thorpe, 2004). In order to be able to control beliefs about oneself, one has to exercise critical reflection and make their deep-seated beliefs visible to themselves. Unless one is conscious about their belief systems and values, it is not possible for them to modify the ones that have the potential to inhibit their learning (Kember et al., 2000). Therefore, it can be suggested that in order for learners to question and change their mind-set about the learning process, reflecting on beliefs, attitudes and values is necessary. Only one participant suggests she creates space where learners have the chance to reflect on teacher and learner roles.

ST data on reflection suggests they check their understanding during and after lessons. They also draw attention to the role of others in the reflection process be it their teachers or friends, emphasising the concept of ‘objects of comparison’ (Fox & Riconscente, 2008) where others serve as catalysers for initiating reflection, discussed under 2.3.3 Interdependence. STs suggest they compare their work and learning approach to those of their friends and value such comparison since these enable them to judge their work in relation to others. This makes them either feel proud of what they do or take others as models in an attempt to improve their work.

In the present study, learners referred to monitoring and regulating their learning until the end of the course but gave no indication that they evaluate their work/efforts at the end of the course with the intention for future regulations. This may be due to being continuously assessed by others resulting in a feeling of less ownership over the evaluation process. ‘In the dominant discourses of education and assessment there appears to be little place for student voice’ (Bain,

161

2010, p. 18) with students as ‘passive subjects of others … to be measured and classified’ (Boud, 2007, p. 28). Yet, negotiation and the opportunity given to learners to raise voice on issues regarding learning are significant components of autonomy (Little, 2006). Although students in the study provide evidence of reflecting on their learning with a view to monitoring it, the fact that they are not offered a voice in terms of decisive assessment in real terms (Bain, 2010; Camillieri, 1999) may be the underlying reason for not practising evaluation, since the inclusion of learners in decisions regarding assessment is only brought up by one teacher (p.170). In traditional contexts assessment may be viewed as the responsibility of the teacher (Chamot, Keatley, Meloni, Gonglewski, & Bartoshesky, 2010), with students doing their best to progress during their courses, and leaving the evaluation part to the teacher since this has been the established norm. It is also possible to suggest that this is due to the fact that they were mainly involved in this study in the middle of a term before the end of the course and they were mainly practising monitoring, not evaluating.

Sharing criteria is suggested by TEs as a way to support metacognitive awareness. Besides raising awareness on requirements through reflection, criteria, which has the potential to provide checklists, can be considered as affective support since it helps learners to feel more confident and eases their stress when they check their accomplishments (Oxbrow, 1999). The findings of the study suggest besides sharing criteria, TEs invite their learners to express their expectations from the course/teacher which boosts their ownership over the learning process.

The significance of self-assessment has been highlighted by authorities in the field, in which the benefits of self-driven criteria were particularly emphasized (Benson, 2011; Boud, 2013). The data suggests students use different tools to assess themselves such as reflecting on learning, exam results and etc. TE data suggests they share their criteria with their learners to foster reflection, and ST data suggests they make use of teacher criteria. However, in the literature, there is a suggestion that learners benefit from designing their own criteria for self- assessment (Cooker, 2012). Although data from TEs and STs emphasize the role of self-assessment, neither party refer to learner generated criteria.

162

The findings indicate TEs find it valuable to support centring learning. Centring learning (Oxford, 1990) is significant in that it entails the link between present learning and previous learning which is of paramount importance in the learning process. This is in line with constructivists’ thinking which proposes learners base their conceptualisations on their prior knowledge; therefore, previous knowledge is in fact the raw material for new knowledge (Chamot et al., 2010; Schneider & Stern, 2010). Linking what they learn in one course to the contents of what they learn in other courses requires the act of reflecting and deliberating on content and as such, is a metacognitive strategy that can be used for the regulation of learning. Making such links among the contents of courses helps learners arrive at a deeper level of learning as well as having control over the content through realising different viewpoints it is approached in different courses.

Questioning the validity of the information encountered is considered significant by participating TEs. They suggest they support students to this end to help them generate their own meanings as emphasized in the constructivist view (Poerksen, 2005). The data suggests TEs encourage learners to adopt a critical stance and not accept any information given without scrutinizing it (p.156), reflecting Yumuk (2002) who emphasizes the significance of critically reflecting on new information rather than reciting learned knowledge. Facilitating evaluation of information and resources with a view to ensure their validity as well as to identify stand points is a metacognitive strategy ascertained in the study, mainly by TEs, echoing literature (Mall-Amiri & Sheikhy, 2014; Pemberton & Nix, 2012; Quintana, Zhang, & Krajcik, 2005). Pemberton and Nix (2012, p. 5) suggest critical thinking is significant in that learners become ‘producers’ rather than ‘reproducer’s of knowledge and that they can voice themselves without adopting others’ stance. STs in the study do not make references to the development of criticality, with the exception of one student who suggests they do not read the top hits on the search engine but choose the ones they think serve their aim.

To refer to the development of criticality as an example of metacognitive strategy, different teachers use different words to express their conceptualisation which can all be found in the literature regarding LA and metacognition.

163

Questioning, judging, rejecting, evaluating are some of those used by TEs and that are already part of the related literature. Interestingly, the notion of filtering is referred to as an autonomous learner characteristic in the present study. I consider it significant as a finding from the current study that filtering is named by TEs while not appearing in the previous literature as a metacognitive strategy. It is a skill that has the potential to deserve significance, especially in the current climate of new technologies and social media since it necessitates the ability to refine information to what one needs and exclude unimportant or incorrect information.

6.3 Conclusion

The present chapter presented and discussed the methods participating TEs use to facilitate metacognitive enterprise and the metacognitive strategies STs suggest they utilise in the regulation of their learning. Reflecting the literature on metacognition, TEs suggest they facilitate planning, reflection, centring learning and the development of criticality, and STs propose they practise planning, reflection and centring learning. In the present study, filtering emerged as a significant metacognitive strategy TEs consider necessary in attaining autonomy, which is not present in previous literature. While some of the teacher support in metacognition is reflected in ST practice, there is a certain amount of disparity between TE and ST testimony, which will be discussed in detail under 11.5.3.3 Metacognition.

164

Chapter 7: An Atmosphere Conducive to Learner Autonomy