Theoretical Framework

I adopted an interpretivist and socio-constructivist stance in the present study. Epistemologically, I believe in the interpretivist/subjectivist view of inquiry where ‘Investigators work directly with experience and understanding to build their theory on them’ (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007, p. 22) and where ‘the knower and the respondent co-create understandings’ (Lee, 2012, p. 407). Ontologically, I embrace a socio-constructivist worldview, with the belief that individuals create their own meanings through moulding their previous experiences with new information and through interacting with others in the context (Putnam & Borko, 2000). I believe such an approach is best suited to the study at hand where I research into LA and teacher support for LA, and in which knowledge construction, collective knowledge construction and interpretation of experiences for understanding the subjective nature of knowledge are the guiding principles.

3.1.1 Interpretivism

The Interpretivist paradigm contends that there is no one fixed reality and maintains that there are multiple realities since there are multiple interpretations by different individuals. It is believed individuals interpret events and situations and act accordingly. Therefore, human action is intentional, also referred to as ‘behavior-with-meaning’ in Cohen, Manion and Morrison’s terms (2007, p.21). Individuals make meanings through interpreting their actions/experiences and contexts, and the relationships in these contexts (Cohen et al., 2007).

78

In the present study I adopted an interpretivist approach. I designed my data gathering with consideration to obtaining participants’ views as truly as possible with the maximum amount of data I could collect so that I could interpret participants’ views, conceptualisations and experiences appropriately.

3.1.2 Constructivism

In the wide literature covering autonomy, the autonomous learner is characterized as the one who is proactive in their learning (Benson, 2001; Dafei, 2007; Little, 1995; Littlewood, 1996). They assume agency through taking the initiative and actively manipulating the learning process. These learners do not merely act as respondents in their learning but they actively construct their own meanings instead of accepting and reiterating others’ meanings (Ackermann, 2001; Baz et al., 2018; Jordan, Carlile, & Stack, 2008; Schunk, 2004), a line of thinking congruent with the theory of constructivism.

In constructivism, experiencing and discovery are the two guiding principles that help shape understanding and knowledge construction (Zoghi & Dehghan, 2012). The wealth of experiences that learners bring to learning contexts constitutes the basis for learning. Constructivism advocates that learners reorganise and restructure their experiences in pursuit of construing meanings (Thanasoulas, 2000) rather than simply reflecting on what they are told or read (Tam, 2000). It is therefore acceptable to claim knowledge is a commodity that is built up by the learner and it cannot be obtained or borrowed from another person in exactly the same way the other person possesses it. The different experiences each person possesses shape the construction of knowledge in a unique way, making it a personal tenet and so differentiating it from others’ knowledge. Hence, it is possible to talk about multiple realities in constructivist perspective (Jordan et al., 2008; Schunk, 2004; Thanasoulas, 2000; Von Glasersfeld, 1989). As Thanasoulas (2000, p. 4) suggests: ‘knowledge is constructed rather than discovered or learnt’. Moreover, in constructivists thinking, learning is a process that learners make happen; it is not something that is done to them (Gremmo & Riley, 1995; Zoghi & Dehghan, 2012). This line of thinking runs counter to the idea of internalising objective knowledge which constitutes the basis of positivist views (Thanasoulas, 2000). In positivism, there are scientific truths that wait to be learned and it is believed that objective

79

knowledge reflects objective reality that can be transferred from one person to another. In constructivism, however, learners use their experiences and construct meanings for themselves, which can vary from person to person (Schunk, 2004) through the competence of learning to learn, which facilitates lifelong learning and autonomous learning.

The fact that in the constructivist view, individuals create their own meanings has been taken as the principal belief in the present study. In this study, I aim to explore TEs’ and STs’ beliefs and perceptions of experiences with respect to LA: how TEs perceive their support for the development of learner autonomy and how STs perceive their own learner autonomy in practice. Therefore, capturing teacher and learner voices regarding their meaning constructions around these concepts is important for me.

Socio-constructivism

Vygotsky (1980) introduced the social aspect of learning into constructivism. Vygotsky’s socio-cultural constructivist perspective emphasizes the role of social environment in the learning process, affirming the part played by the context, teachers and peers as discussed under 2.3.3 Interdependence.

Putnam and Borko (2000) propose social interactions one participates in are vital in shaping what is learnt and how it is learnt. They suggest the role of others in the learning process is more than providing stimulation and encouragement for individual knowledge construction but that interactions with others ‘are major determinants of both what is learned and how learning takes place’ (p. 5). Hence, learning taking place in social settings and with the help of social interactions becomes more meaningful and fosters cognitive growth, leading to development (Schunk, 2004). It is therefore argued that learning cannot be dissociated from the context. This reminds us of the notion of situated cognition which claims the physical and the social contexts in which learning occurs constitute a fundamental part of what is learnt (Smith 2003, 2009; Putnam & Borko, 2000; Schunk, 2004).

The concepts under constructivism such as situated cognition, apprenticeship (p.47) and ZPD (p.48) all stress the importance of collaborative meaning making

80

and form the theoretical basis of the present study. The support learners receive through the notions of apprenticeship and particularly ZPD is in fact a reflection of teacher support that is considered to be helpful for learners’ development and implementation of LA. They all hold that the role of others in learning is inescapable: people work together to create meanings. Thus, collaboration among peers, where people learn from each other by challenging perspectives and where the responsibility is distributed among participants, is greatly valued. Since socio-constructivism relies heavily on collaboration among participants, other learners and teachers, constructivist teachers encourage learners to reflect on their experiences in order to be able to construct their own meanings. They talk about what is learnt and how it is learned. In that way, learners learn from each other particularly during reflection episodes. They not only help each other in terms of content to be learnt acting as ‘objects of comparison’ (Fox & Riconscente, 2008) but while reflecting on their learning, they can pick up effective learning methods from each other. That is, besides learning from each other, collaboration enables learners to review and reflect on the way they approach learning, which is underscored in autonomous learning and in the present study.