Reflection # 3

Healey’s effort, in fact, represents a critical look out of the concept of autonomy in terms of learning that conveys creating the ways and strategies to best achievements, meaningful learning, and perceiving the goals for learning. Healey discusses the four perspectives on autonomy described by Oxford (2003) in the area of CALL: technical (issues of setting & content), psychological, socio-cultural, and political-critical.

The term technical perspective, covering issues of learning, focuses on the gradual alteration of the process of controlling over learning, ranging from highly structured learning through highly self-directed learning. Likewise, regarding the issues of content, the effects of technology on learners’ styles of learning is discussed that how technology can offer varying modes of learning.

Considering the psychological perspective, the matters such as self-motivation, creating independent style o learning, and developing self-knowledge are perceived as major advantages of autonomous learning. This section of the article argues that the real goal of teaching is not necessarily to feed learners by knowledge, but rather to let them to construct knowledge, and to create their own styles.

The article also emphasizes the need for interpersonal interaction that challenges the misconception existing regarding the idea of “autonomy” which implies the association between autonomous learning and isolation or individualized learning. It also addresses CALL as an effective instrument to assist the interpersonal interaction.

The last part of the article, the political-critical perspective, emphasizes learners’ self-awareness and alerts the autonomous learners to be careful regarding using technology because as the article states, all the data is not necessarily provided by a handful of more skilled. Rather, the author encourages the autonomous learners to do not easily accept them. Therefore, the learners must critically look at the issues and should be aware of how to evaluate information.

Overall, I enjoyed a lot reading this article. The author’s efforts show that she could clearly define the responsibility of both instructors and the learners in the process of autonomous learning. In particular, I agree with what the author brought as the main concept of autonomous learning that the term autonomous refers more of thoughts rather than a technique. Most important, I was impressed by what the writer comes up with, that the term autonomy is not associated with isolation, but rather she emphasizes the highly effects of communities on autonomous learners. However, it is disputable for me that regarding the responsibilities of instructors, the article overemphasizes some pedagogical issues as instructors’ responsibilities more than content knowledge. So, I have a question that are the teachers responsible for directing students how they should learn, or also to assist them more of what should they learn?

Reading Reflection #2

Mainly the purposes of Anderson’s study (2003) are, firstly, to point out the distinctions between those types of education that occur in a formal education and the types of interaction which are dealt with any informal context; and secondly, to explain three modes of interactions: student-student, student- teacher, and student-content; as well as to assess the equivalency among those types of interaction. Anderson comes up with the idea of equivalency while there has also been a tendency that along the development of technology, the term student-content form of interaction might be considered as a high priority.
Giving these, I assume that in distance education context, apparently the students would effectively benefit from the student-content interaction rather than the other two modes of interaction because in this case the students are basically more exposed with the contents rather than effective ways of student-teacher, and student-student interactions.

Website Evaluation

Software Title: Resources for English as a Second Language

URL: http://www.usingenglish.com/

Grade/Age Level: All level


The website UsingEnglish.com, as described on the homepage, provides a large collection of sources and tools for any level of learners, teachers and academics, which consists of the items such as grammar glossary and references of irregular verbs, phrasal verbs and idioms, ESL forums, articles, teacher handouts and printables. The focus is on the areas of English as a Foreign Language (EFL), English as a Second Language (ESL), English to Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL), and EAP (English for Academic Purposes?).This website is well-organized due to its simplicity and categorized issues. There are totally six categories of resources and tools. The first category includes four sections: English Idiom, English Phrasal Verbs, English Irregular Verbs, and Grammar Glossary. Each section is organized alphabetically and provides clear definitions and examples for English learners and teachers. The second category, ESL Tests, offers a kind of self-tests and quizzes covering beginner, intermediate and advanced levels to test the learners’ understanding of English language. What is most interesting is that if one decides to take a test, the score and statistics are automatically recorded and s/he can refer back to a full history of the results as well. However, to access these facilities you need to first register and then log in. The third category, ESL Articles, mainly focuses on some unique articles, comments and thoughts in the area of English language from different perspectives. The fourth category, ESL Teacher Resources, provides the resources dedicated for ESL teachers. The resources include some printable handouts and worksheets, different models of lesson plans (in PDF format) for any level, articles, and further sites for the teachers. The fifth category, ESL Discussion Forum, consists of two sections: Ask an English Teacher, and English Language (ESL) Forum. For the first section even you can access without any authorization, but there are some rules which you have to consider, or you can register yourself as a member. Through registration or considering the rules given in the section you can post any question regarding English and will receive the answers. In the second section of fifth category you can access broad discussions on learning and teaching the English language. And finally, the sixth category consists of some resources and tools which provide the software(s), and the tools to facilitate the process of English learning.
Overall, I found this website very useful for any level of English learners and teachers. I would recommend this site for all of ESL, and EFL learners and teachers. Particularly the forums which are created for posing questions and participating in the discussions are very helpful for both learners and teachers due to their constructivistic notion.

Egbert (2005) - Reaction

Egbert tries to explain that there has been a misconception in the operational definition of CALL. In a glance, however, one may perceive that CALL might refer to some computer-based skills which a learner should be familiar with, Egbert argued that CALL is used as a tool to develop the interactive process of learning and teaching in order to make the students be involved in authentic tasks and the process of interaction, rather than to its technological aspects. Egbert’s ideas in fact relies on the issue that computer can be used alongside, or probably as an alternative tool to the classic instrument of learning such as pencils, notebook, books, and blackboards. Overall, according to Egbert, computer and any technological tools can be used to facilitate the process of learning alongside their usage in the areas of skill-based approaches.
In my opinion, partly Egbert’s ideas can be very important. Indeed, CALL resources must be considered as tools for learning rather than the skills by themselves. I would strongly favor Egbert’s idea which states that the term learning should be considered as a greater interest comparing to the familiarity with the skills linked to the technological resources. However, I assume that Egbert has overstated the interactive aspect of CALL. CALL can assist and facilitate the process of language learning. But, as language is a process of communication and integration of thoughts, it seems like CALL will not be able to compensate the face to face approaches of learning of language.