ENGLISH 200

Hello and welcome to the GPS 200 Module 4 presentation, “Learner Autonomy.” In our examination of Fishbein & Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior we have seen that intentions are a focal point of the model. But intentions do not happen in a vacuum; they are directed toward a desired goal. For our purposes, the desired behavior, or goal, is engaging in autonomous learning activities that contribute to eventual degree-completion.

1

So, what is autonomous learning? Autonomous learning is similar to self-directed learning. In a couple of minutes we will look more closely at autonomous learning, but for now let’s examine the concept of self-directed learning.

2

Self-directed learning has been studied at length since a large body of work was produced by Malcolm Knowles in the 1960’s and 1970’s. According to Maurice Gibbons, with self-directed learning (SDL), an individual takes the initiative and the responsibility for what occurs. Individuals select, manage, and assess their own learning activities, which can be pursued at any time, in any place, through any means, at any age.

3

From the perspective of the individual learner, self-directed learning involves initiating personal challenge activities and developing the personal qualities to pursue them successfully.

4

From the perspective of the teacher, self-directed learning emphasizes skills, processes, and systems rather than content coverage and tests.

5

In the 1990s, Gary Confessore considered factors that contribute to self-directed learning and he was influenced by Fishbein & Ajzen’s Simple Behavioral Model, an earlier version of the Theory of Reasoned Action, most notably due to the inclusion of psychological factors in their model.

6

Let’s begin by reviewing the Theory of Planned Behavior model from the end of the theory of planned behavior presentation. Starting on the left side of the model, we see that beliefs, attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control all contribute to intentions. If intentions are of sufficient strength, fueled by the aforementioned beliefs, attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control (or self-efficacy), they lead to the desired behavior.

7

In the 1980’s and 1990’s, as Confessore was formulating his autonomous learning model, he adapted Fishbein & Ajzen’s Simple Behavioral Model. In fact, his work formed the basis for four doctoral dissertations at the George Washington University in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s. We will revisit those four dissertations again later in this presentation. In 2004, Confessore and Park, published an adapted Simple Behavioral Model pictured above. We can see that Confessore and Park added descriptors under three of the variables in the model—beliefs form the cognitive domain, attitudes form the affective domain, and intentions form the conative domain. We also can see that Confessore & Park included self-efficacy in the model, which is no surprise.

8

According to Derrick and Carr, authors of two of the aforementioned four dissertations, autonomous learning is the process in which the learner makes an intentional decision to assume the responsibility for a learning situation. “Intentional decision” is underlined because intention is the focal point in the simple behavioral model and the theory of planned behavior. As was mentioned earlier, the theory of planned behavior has been applied to many fields including political science, health care, and education. Professionals in all of these fields are interested in people’s intentions because when behavioral intentions are of sufficient strength, they will give rise to behaviors. Therefore, measuring intentions becomes very important and that was the purpose of the aforementioned four doctoral dissertations.

9

To recap, if intentions are of sufficient strength, they will give rise to behaviors. If this hypothesis is true, then measuring an individual’s intentions can tell us a lot about where an individual is in terms of his or her motivation to engage in a particular behavior. Armed with this knowledge, four of Dr. Confessore’s doctoral students created four instruments that measure a learner’s intentions to engage in autonomous learning behaviors. The authors contend that a learner’s intentions are comprised of desire, resourcefulness, initiative, and persistence. Each of the four doctoral students created an instrument to measure each of these constructs. Dr. Meyer created the Inventory of Learner Desire. Dr. Carr created the Inventory of Learner Resourcefulness. Dr. Ponton created the Inventory of Learner Initiative. Dr. Derrick created the Inventory of Learner Persistence. If you look at the first letter of each construct, you see the acronym DRIP, which makes it easier to remember. Self- efficacy is measured by the Appraisal of Learner Autonomy, an instrument that was created by Dr. Bandura and is used with his permission. All five instruments combined comprise the Learner Autonomy Profile (LAP).

10

Back to describing learner autonomy, according to Dr. Confessore, learner autonomy is defined as “The relative capacity to productively participate in learning experiences.”

11

As we can see from this continuum, functional learner autonomy is flanked on either side by two opposite extreme forms of dysfunctional learner autonomy— dysfunctional learner dependence and dysfunctional learner independence.

12

A learner who exhibits dysfunctional learner dependence depends on the instructor and/or others to provide directions to an unhealthy extreme. Dysfunctional learner dependence is characterized by a substantial need for guidance and assistance regarding the learning process. This individual is unable or unwilling to undertake learning projects without substantial directions. In this extreme, the learner relies on others to shape all aspects of the learning process.

13

Functional learner autonomy is a range of ability and willingness to participate in selecting and shaping learning projects in which the learner may function independently or in concert with others. The degree to which an individual is engaged in functional learner autonomy is expressed in the extent to which the learner optimizes the learning process by making efficient and appropriate use of personal resources and the resources of others. A learner who exhibits functional learner autonomy knows when to operate independently and when to work in concert with others. This learner makes efficient and appropriate use of personal resources and the resources of others.

14

One popular myth about autonomous learning is that the learner is alone, learning on an island so to speak. This simply is not true. An autonomous learner is one who takes ownership of his or her learning and knows when, where, and from—or with whom—to find help when needed.

15

If you would like to learn more about the learner autonomy profile, here are two good resources. Please note that if you read the article by Confessore and Park, after providing some valuable history, the authors provide detail about each of the DRIP constructs. The descriptors are on pp.42-47.

16

Thank you for your time and attention during this presentation. Have a great day!

17