Self-Directed Learning
Self-directed learning has been discussed worldwide although there is not a common understanding of self-directed learning (Straka, 2000). There were over twenty different terms for self-directed learning found by Philippe Carré (1994) and over 200 terms found by the analysis Roger Hiemstra (1996) did on the conference proceedings previous to the tenth International Symposium on Self-Directed Learning. To try to describe the concept of self-directed learning from these different terminologies, three principal ideas are incorporated that self-directed learning is:
A self-initiated process of learning that stresses (1) the ability of individuals to plan and manage their own learning, (2) an attribute or characteristic of learners with personal autonomy as its hallmark, and (3) a way of organizing instruction in formal settings that allows for greater learner control.
(Caffarella, 1993, p. 25-26) Caffarella (1993) further reviewed four philosophical perspectives underlying self-directed learning to help us better understand the concept of self-directed learning: humanistic in nature, progressivism, behaviorism, and critical theory. From the humanistic in nature perspective, learners are expected to take major responsibility for their own learning, focusing the learning on the learner himself and self-growth. If there is an educator involved in the learning process, he is better not to be a content expert but acts as a facilitator or a guide to ensure the process of learning is centered on learner’s need than on the content (Long, 1992;
Hiemstra, 1992; Knowles, 1980). While the progressivism perspective explains that learner’s experiences are the core essence of the learning process so that the learning outcome is more realistic in nature, the behaviorism digs more deeply into the process of learning to disclose
“how one should goes about the process of self-directed learning” (Caffarella, 1993, p. 26).
Plans and learning contracts were the ones most learners used for their self-directed learning endeavors in Hiemstra and Sisco’s (1990), and Knowles’ (1975) research. They showed the examples of the learning contracts, in which behavioral learning objectives were determined, ways to achieve the objectives were written, and objectives that had been reached were
evaluated. Lastly, the critical perspective that links self-directed learning in some ways to social changes was added by Brookfield (1986). He stated “The most fully adult form of self-directed learning… is one in which critical reflection on the contingent aspects of reality, the exploration of alternative perspectives and meaning systems, and the alteration of personal and social circumstances are all present. (Brookfield, 1986, pp. 58-59)”. Changes in policies and procedures, legislative changes, role changes, and etc. make critical reflective thinking prominent to be considered as a key part of self-directed learning because it may partly change what and how learners learn.
In addition to the descriptive knowledge about self-directed learning discussed above, one table and one figure shown below (Table 2.1. & Figure 2.1.) can give us a clearer picture of how self-directed learning is described. Self-directed learning is described as follows (see Table 2.1.):
Self-directed learning takes place when, assuming a learning need or, rather, a learning goal, the interaction between learner and subject may be characterized as interest, the learner applies strategies in order to acquaint himself with the content, controls the application of these strategies and subjects his achieved learning result to an evaluation (Straka et al., 1996).
(Straka, 2000, p. 242)
In the beginning of a self-directed learning process, the premise is that “the learner has already prepared himself for learning, that he is so to speak ‘ready to go’, a situation which Knowles refers to as initiative”(Straka, 2000, p. 243). The concept interest was made to describe this situation, and further it was divided into two constructs, interest in the content and interest in the procedures (Nenniger et al., 1996). The reason why a student joins an English club may be that he likes the English language so much (the content) or that he likes to do presentations in an English club (the procedures). Within the concept of strategies, three constructs were determined: acquisition, resource management, and sequencing. “Structuring (through which information is condensed and organized), the working out of differences and similarities, elaboration (the critical examination of information) (Brookfield, 1989) and rehearsal (the repeating with the aim of memorizing what has been learned) (Pintrich et al., 1991)” (Straka,
2000, p. 242) are all the activities that belong to the acquisition construct. The listing order (see Table 2.1) of the other two constructs in the strategies concept shows that in the self-directed learning, “resource management and sequencing are given higher status” than acquisition (Straka, 2000, p. 243). Resource management refers to the works such like deciding where to learn, finding resources, asking coworkers for social support at work (Weinstein and Mayer, 1986). Based on three aspects, the next concept control is divided accordingly to three constructs cognitive control, meta-cognitive control, and motivational control. Straka (2000, p. 243) gave each of them an example, that “when I am learning I do not allow myself to become distracted, that I sometimes interrupt my learning in order to consider what I have so far achieved (Brown, 1978), and that it is important to me to achieve the learning goal (McClelland, 1955)”. Just like any other process or program design, the last concept evaluation reviewed the ways of diagnosis and attribution. Activities such as assessing the gap between the expected objectives and the actual learning outcome are the diagnose construct, and activities such like the “establishment of the reasons why the learning result was realized by the individual” (Straka, 2000, p. 243) are the attribution construct.
Table 2.1
Concepts and Constructs of Motivated Self-Directed Learning
Note. Adapted from “Conditions Promoting Self-Directed Learning at the Workplace,”
by G. A. Straka, 2000, Human Resource Development International, 3(2), p. 244. Copyright 2000 by the Taylor & Francis Ltd.
With the base knowledge constructed upon Figure 1., environmental conditions and internal conditions are introduced into the self-directed learning process, forming a model named Two-Shell Model of Motivated Self-Directed Learning (Straka, 2000, p. 243) (see Figure 2.). With the illustration of Figure 2., it can clearly tell the differentiation of the conditions that influence self-directed learning processes and the activities where the concepts interest, strategies, control and evaluation belong.
Concepts Constructs
Interests Contentual Interest Procedural Interest Strategies Resource Management
Sequencing Acquisition Control Cognitive Control
Metacognitive Control Motivational Control Evaluation Diagnosis
Attribution
!
Figure 2.1 The two-shell model of motivated self-directed learning. Adapted from
“Conditions Promoting Self-Directed Learning at the Workplace,”
by G. A. Straka, 2000, Human Resource Development International, 3(2), p. 245. Copyright 2000 by the Taylor & Francis Ltd.
Straka wrote, under external and internal conditions,
Self-directed learning is a process in which a person approaches a learning subject with an interest as regards the content as well as in the proceedings, applies strategies of resource management, of sequencing and of acquisition, controls their application cognitively, meta-cognitively and motivationally, as well as evaluating by diagnosing and attributing the achieved learning result.
(Straka, 2000, p. 243) Summary
In this session, both the abovementioned descriptive knowledge and illustrative knowledge about directed learning were reviewed and the detailed process of a self-directed learning was also discussed. In this study, the self-self-directed learning was mainly focused and used as the mediating factors that sharpened and honed an English learner’s
ability. Motivation and interest were also discussed since they acted as the base of the learner’s autonomy and willingness to start a self-directed learning.
English Fluency and the Communicative Needs of English
Business English and ESP (English for specific purposes) are the products of the massive attention on the English language skills that are necessary for doing business at work (Fitzpatrick & O’Dowd, 2012). In such fields, the English Fluency of more practical and business-oriented English competencies and skills is what the experts and scholars focus on.
Skills in the basic business works such as English email writing, formal western meeting language etiquette…etc. are one of the focus; however, informal interpersonal skills and social skills that help build relationships and keep fellowship in the business workplace are also as useful and important as the previous ones mentioned (Kassim & Ali, 2010; Forey &
Nunan, 2002).
Kassim and Ali (2010) gave an example in their study about how important English communication skills were for the engineers in Malaysia. They stated that, for engineers in Malaysia, especially for those who wanted to move up the career ladder, having the ability to read technical information in English was insufficient. What supplemented them to succeed was the English communication and social skills, meaning that the capability of joining and conversing in small talks was considered as the key for chances of job promotion. If they had better oral speaking skills, they would have more possibilities of getting promoted, since they could better express themselves more effectively in English. Forey and Nunan’s (2002) study done on the case of a group of accountants from Hong Kong also showed that small talks played an important role in their environment from which they found most of their talent.
More evidences were found to prove that English communication skill is inevitably unavoidable. It has found in the CILT report (The National Centre for Languages in the UK, 2006) that the shortages of foreign language skills had a great impact on the companies in the EU economy because of the English as lingua franca. They said that English is the only access for their business to the export markets. Pinon and Haydon (2010) also stated that,
“increasing the standards of English language proficiency among workers enables countries to participate successfully in the international business world and to attract more foreign
investment” (Fitzpatrick & O’Dowd, 2012, p. 15). All of these can really say that for non-English-speaking countries, companies must have their employees be proficient in English in order to get the key to gaining access to the English-speaking area and even to the whole world.
21st-century skills (Trilling & Fadel, 2009)— was a collection of skills that those employees who have just graduated must possess to perform at the workplace. Problem-solving, effective communication, ability to work in teams, technological skills, and critical thinking are some of these said skills. These are all the employable skills of English for an employee to excel in the multicultural and multilingual workplace. Due to the role of English as the global language, these skills are more than basic LSRW skills of English, but are the abilities to research, analyze and synthesize in English.
Particularly in the speaking and communication skills of English, English fluency plays an important key in a smooth-flow way of speaking. Under the language production, the term ‘fluency’ is born and it is normally related to speech. It is an ability of a speaker to link units of speech together without strain or in appropriate slowness, or undue hesitation. Faerch et al. (1984, p. 168) defined fluency as one kind of communication competence that it is a speakers’ ability to make use of whatever linguistic and pragmatic competence they have.
They listed three types of fluency:
1. Semantic fluency: Linking together propositions and speech acts.
2. Lexical-syntactic fluency: Linking together syntactic constitutes and words.
3. Articulator fluency: Linking together speech segments.
English fluency describes that an ESL speaker communicate in English whenever, wherever possible, does not necessarily speed but have good pronunciation, correct grammar, and even mastery of rules of politeness, in order to show professionalism in the business settings (Vitthal, 2010).
Summary
English fluency reviewed here in this study mainly focused on a much higher level of English ability. It is not the basic learning English any more, it is more about mastering the English language. The research participants of this study were that who have a certain level of their English skills and who wants to excel at work. Memorizing vocabularies, delivering
prepared speeches, generally greeting to clients…etc. were pieces of cake for them. They set their English learning goals such as confidently doing impromptu talks in English and professionally having discussions with English-native speakers so that they could take jobs with higher customer expectations in this current multicultural and multilingual workplace.
Learn-by-Doing and English Training Methods
In this highly competitive workplace, to stay competitive in this global village, companies need to have innovative, effective and quick ways to adapt or to get prepared for the challenges such as more diverse customer demands and speedy technology changes.
Companies, in fact, have spent billions of dollars on forming learning to improve employees’
knowledge and skills (Jeon & Kim, 2012; O’ Leonard, 2008). However, a study showed a striking fact that 70% of learning at workplace is from the on-the-job experiences which are seen as a form of learning outside of the formal learning settings (Michaels, Handfield, &
Axelrod, 1997). This describes that informal learning is becoming a primary learning approach in the workplace while formal learning has started to lose its status since the latter does not always give opportunities to employees for learning the skills they need to maintain competitive in the market and to meet the higher customers’ needs (Hartley, 2000; Sternber &
Keeton, 1999). Jacobs wrote (2009),
Informal learning recognizes that the acquisition of knowledge and skills in the work setting does not occur from organized programs alone. Indeed, learning also occurs during critical moments of need embedded in the context of practice. … Informal learning may be undertaken by engaging with others or by embarking on some sort of self-initiated study. Most of this learning is unplanned and somewhat serendipitous in nature, because it occurs as needed.
Two main categories of factors that may improve or impede the effectiveness of informal learning, from human resource development (HRD) scholars’ viewpoints, are the organizational factors, such as top management leadership, open communication and innovation culture, and the task characteristic factors, such as complexity and competence requirements of the task (Joen & Kim, 2012).
Learning by doing is one of the predominant methods of informal learning; also, it is through learning by doing that the informal learning is influenced by the task factors in terms of task complexity or routine task characteristics (Skule, 2004). There are quite a few more informal learning methods proposed by some other researchers (Lohman, 2005; Marsick &
Watkins, 2001):
1. Working experience with success
2. Trial and error (learning from mistakes, Slotte, Tynjälä & Hytönen, 2004) 3. On the job training
4. Coaching 5. Mentoring
6. Talking and sharing with others 7. Searching the internet experience through collaboration with others in a community or through introspective experiences (Merriam, Caffarella & Baugartner, 2007). There are different theoretical conceptualizations of experiential learning, Fenwick proposed (2003),
1. Constructivist approach 2. Situative theory
3. Psychoanalytic perspective 4. Critical culture perspective 5. Complexity theory
Constructivist approach focuses on “reflection on experience” (Fenwick, 2003, p 22).
Learning occurs by constructing new knowledge as a result of reflecting on concrete experiences. The product of the experience is mainly determined in the learners’ meaning-making processes. Situative theory asserts that knowing is bounded with doing. Fenwick (2003) argued, “Learning is rooted in the situation in which the person participates… The
outcome of experiential learning as participation is that the community (of practice) refines its practices, develops new ones, or discards and changes practices that are harmful or dysfunctional” (p 25-27). Psychoanalytic perspective recognizes that our conscious experience is influenced by our unconscious. Hence, “we must work through psychic conflicts to learn” (Fenwick, 2003; Merriam, Caffarella & Baugartner, 2007, p. 160). Desires and motivations can probably affect our learning experience. Critical cultural perspective “seeks to transform existing social orders, by critically questioning and resisting dominant norms of experience” (Fenwick, 2003, p 38). Complexity theory says learning is produced through interaction “among consciousness, identity, action and interaction, objects and structural dynamics of complex systems”, looking mainly at “the relationship binding them together in complex systems’ (Fenwick, 2003, p 37).
So do experiences always guarantee positive learning outcome? “Every experience is a moving force. Its value can be judged only on the ground of what it moves toward and into”.
Or do experiences always have learning outcome? Dewey (1938, p. 27) mentioned that for learning to occur through experience, there are two major principles that the experience must exhibit: the continuity and interaction. “The principle of the continuity of experience means that every experience both takes up something from those which have gone before and modifies in some way the quality of those which come after.” It means that they are never just one-time incidents of experiences that offer learning; people must refer current experiences to those they have learned in the past and find possible implications for the future ones (Merriam, Caffarella & Baugartner, 2007, p. 162). The second principle, the interaction, posits “an experience is always what it is because of a transaction taking place between an individual and what, at the time, constitutes his environment” (Dewey, 1938, p. 41). This is why most of educators right now try hard to develop a welcoming and comfortable atmosphere, provide the right materials, and link these materials to learners’ past and future experience, in order to assist adults to learn from their experiences (Merriam, Caffarella &
Baugartner, 2007, p. 163).
There were two methods associated with reflective and situative paradigms reviewed:
reflective practice and situated cognition.
Reflective Practice
In a complex and vague situation, reflective practice helps an individual to make to judgments based on experience and preceding knowledge. It can be applied in both formal and informal learning settings. York-Barr, et al. (2001) further defined, “Reflective practice is a deliberate pause to assume an open perspective, to allow for higher-level thinking processes.
Practitioners use these processes for examining beliefs, goals, and practices, to gain new or deeper understandings that lead to actions that improve learning. Actions may involve changes in behavior, skills, attitudes, or perspectives within an individual, partner, small group, or school”. There are four elements concerning about reflective practice.
1. A deliberate slowing down to consider multiple perspectives
2. Maintaining an open perspective: the purpose in practice is not to win or to be right but to be open for new understandings to occur
3. Active and conscious processing of thoughts: analysis, synthesis, and metacognition can be done to achieve a broader context for understanding.
4. Beliefs, goals, and practices must be examined.
Two basic processes have been identified as central to reflective practice: reflection-on-action and reflection-in-action. While reflection-reflection-on-action involves thinking through a situation after it has happen, reflection-in-action reshapes what we are doing while we are doing it (Schön, 1987, p. 26).
In reflection-on-action, we consciously go back to the past experiences, reassess them, decide how we can do differently, and then give a try of whatever we decided to do. It is a cyclical nature that it is a process of continued change and growth. Often this practice begins with a feeling that something could be improved upon in one’s practice (Osterman &
Kottcamp, 2004). “In the process of improving their practice, people think about their espoused beliefs, examine what they actually do and the results of their actions, and contrast their espoused beliefs with their practice to unearth their theories-in-use” (Merriam, Caffarella
& Baugartner, 2007, p. 175). A series of questions can be asked to guide reflection of a person (York-Barr et al., 2001):
1. Why did things happen this way? Why did I act the way I did? How did the context affect the experience? Did past experiences affect the way I reacted?
2. What have I learned from this event? How can I improve? How might this change my future thinking, behaving, and interactions?
2. What have I learned from this event? How can I improve? How might this change my future thinking, behaving, and interactions?