Article Sidebar

Submitted
April 21, 2023
Accepted
June 5, 2023
Published
August 2, 2023
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 110 Download : 40

Main Article Content

Abstract

Students' autonomy in learning is becoming more important in education. An ethnographic research study was conducted on institutional strategies for student autonomy in secondary schools in China, having found a paradoxical issue that is the "quality education" in the curriculum and teaching for testing system in China's secondary schools. We propose developing students' autonomy to resolve this paradoxical issue. Schools are applying some strategies in developing students' autonomy, such as strict schedules and motivating students in learning. Although these strategies may increase students' willingness to learn to some extent, the drawbacks are obvious. Schools need to adopt other strategies to develop students' autonomy to a higher level.

Keywords

autonomy paradoxical issue strict schedule motivation strategy autonomy paradoxical issue strict schedule motivation strategy

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2023 INSTED: Interdisciplinary Studies in Education & Society

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

TCE (INSTED) is an open access journal, which means that access to the full texts is free of charge. People using the journal may download publications, copy and print them, as well as post on their websites links to the full texts of the journal's publications. Texts can be used as long as readers do not exceed the licenses. Authors submitting manuscripts for publication obtain copyrights. Unless otherwise specified, published texts are available under the Creative Commons Attribution - Share Alike 4.0 International license.

How to Cite
Yu, H., Czerepaniak-Walczak, M., & Muszyńska, B. (2023). Developing Students’ Autonomy to Resolve a Paradoxical Issue in China’s Secondary School Education. INSTED: Interdisciplinary Studies in Education & Society, 25(1(93), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.34862/tce/2023/07/21/ta-ak1
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Allwright, D. (1990). Autonomy in language pedagogy. Centre for Research in Language Education; University of Lancaster.
  2. Benson, P. (2007). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 40(1), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003958
  3. Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and researching autonomy (2nd ed.). Longman/Pearson.
  4. Benson, P. (2013). Teaching and researching autonomy. Routledge.
  5. Breen, M. P., & Mann, S. J. (1997). Shooting arrows at the sun: Perspectives on a pedagogy for autonomy. In P. Benson, & P. Voller (Eds.), Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning (pp. 132-149). Longman.
  6. Chong, S. W., & Reinders, H. (2021). A methodological review of qualitative research syntheses in CALL: The state-of-the-art. System, 103, 102646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102646
  7. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum.
  8. Dickinson, L. (1987). Self-instruction in language learning. Cambridge University Press.
  9. Everhard, C. J., & Murphy, L. (Eds.). (2015). Assessment and autonomy in language learning. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137414380
  10. Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Published for and on behalf of the Council of Europe by Pergamon Press.
  11. Jiménez Raya, M. (2009). Pedagogy for autonomy in modern language education: TheEuroPAL contribution. Learner Autonomy in Language Learning.
  12. Jiménez Raya, M., Lamb, T. & Vieira, F. (2007). Pedagogy for autonomy in language education in Europe: Towards a framework for learner and teacher development. Authentik.
  13. Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Evaluating constructivistic learning. Educational Technology, 31(9), 28–33.
  14. Li, N., & Hein, S. (2019). Parenting, autonomy in learning, and development during adolescence in China. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2019(163), 67-80. https://doi.org/10.1002/cad.20272
  15. Little, D. (Ed.). (1999). Learner autonomy. 1: Definitions, issues and problems. Authentik Language Learning Resources.
  16. Littlewood, W. (1996). “Autonomy”: An anatomy and a framework. System, 24(4), 427–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(96)00039-5
  17. Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2020). curriculum standards for senior secondary schools. https://moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A26/s8001/202006/t20200603_462199.html?from=groupmessage&isappinstalled=0
  18. Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2022). Compulsory education curriculum program and standards. https://moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A26/s8001/202204/t20220420_619921.html
  19. Oxford, L. R. (2017). Teaching and researching language learning strategies: Self-regulation in context. Routledge.
  20. Palfreyman, D., & Smith, R. C. (Eds.). (2003). Learner autonomy across cultures: Language education perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan.
  21. The state council of China. (2021, July 24). Guidelines to ease the burden of excessive homework and off-campus tutoring for students undergoing compulsory education. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2021-07/24/content_5627132.htm
  22. Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.