A comparison of non english major students’ perceptions of learner autonomy in english language learning by different ethnicities at a university in viet nam

THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES

NGUYEN THI TUYET

A COMPARISON OF NON-ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS’
PERCEPTIONS OF LEARNER AUTONOMY IN ENGLISH
LANGUAGE LEARNING BY DIFFERENT ETHNICITIES

AT A UNIVERSITY IN VIET NAM

M.A THESIS
Field: English Linguistics

Code: 8220201

THAI NGUYEN - 2024

THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES

NGUYEN THI TUYET

A COMPARISON OF NON-ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS’
PERCEPTIONS OF LEARNER AUTONOMY IN ENGLISH
LANGUAGE LEARNING BY DIFFERENT ETHNICITIES

AT A UNIVERSITY IN VIET NAM

M.A THESIS
(APPLICATION ORIENTATION)

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 8220201
Supervisor: Nguyen Thi Minh Loan, Ph.D

THAI NGUYEN – 2024

ĐẠI HỌC THÁI NGUYÊN
TRƯỜNG NGOẠI NGỮ

NGUYỄN THỊ TUYẾT

SO SÁNH NHẬN THỨC VỀ TÍNH TỰ CHỦ CỦA NGƯỜI
HỌC TRONG VIỆC HỌC TIẾNG ANH CỦA SINH VIÊN
KHÔNG CHUYÊN TIẾNG ANH THEO DÂN TỘC TẠI

MỘT TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC Ở VIỆT NAM

LUẬN VĂN THẠC SĨ
(Định hướng ứng dụng)

Ngành: Ngôn ngữ Anh
Mã số: 8220201
Cán bộ hướng dẫn: TS. Nguyễn Thị Minh Loan

THÁI NGUYÊN– 2024

DECLARATION

I, Nguyen Thi Tuyet certify that the thesis named “A comparison of non-

English major students’ perceptions of learner autonomy in English language
learning by different ethnicities at a university in Viet Nam” performs the result
of my study. I also declare that the thesis has not been submitted for any degree to
any other universities or institutions.

Approved by Author’s signature
SUPERVISOR

Nguyen Thi Minh Loan, PhD Nguyễn Thị Tuyết

Date, January, 2024

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Without the invaluable assistance and unwavering support of a lot of people,
the successful completion of this thesis would not have been possible.
First and foremost, I wish to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor,
Dr. Nguyen Thi Minh Loan, whose persistent guidance, insightful feedback, and
enthusiastic encouragement were instrumental in this endeavor.
Secondly, I extend my heartfelt appreciation to the Thai Nguyen University
of Science (TNUS) for creating conditions for me to conduct research and to the
K20 students at TNUS for their prompt and wholehearted responses to my survey
questionnaires and interviews.
Last but certainly not least, I want to give my deepest thanks to my family
and friends, who have consistently provided me with their support, sympathy, and
motivating words throughout the writing process.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ........................................................................................................ i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................... iii
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................v
LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................. vii
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................ viii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................1
1.1. Rationale ..............................................................................................................1
1.2. Aims of the study .................................................................................................3
1.3. Scope of the study ................................................................................................3
1.4. Significance of the study......................................................................................4
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................5
2.1. Learner autonomy (LA) .......................................................................................5

2.1.1. The concept of learner autonomy (LA) ......................................................5
2.1.2. Learner autonomy in language learning .....................................................6
2.2. Perceptions of autonomous language learning...................................................12
2.2.1. Learners' autonomous perceptions ...........................................................12
2.2.2. Learners’ autonomous activities..............................................................13
2.3. Factors affecting students’ autonomy in language learning ..............................13
2.4. Previous studies on students’ perceptions of LA in English language learning at
higher education ........................................................................................................15
2.4.1. Overseas studies .......................................................................................17
2.4.2. Studies in Vietnam....................................................................................18
2.4.3. Gaps in previous studies ...........................................................................20
2.5. Summary of the chapter .....................................................................................21
CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ......................................................23
3.1. Research Design.................................................................................................23

3.2. Subjects and locale of the study .........................................................................23

iii

3.2.1. Subjects.....................................................................................................23
3.2.2. Locale of the study ...................................................................................24
3.3. Research Instruments .........................................................................................26
3.3.1. Survey questionnaire ................................................................................26
3.3.2. Semi-structured interviews ......................................................................28
3.4. Data Gathering Procedure ..................................................................................30
3.5. Data analytical method.......................................................................................31
3.6. Summary of the chapter .....................................................................................32
CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ........................................................33
4.1. Results ................................................................................................................33
4.1.1. Survey questionnaire ................................................................................33
4.1.2. Interview ...................................................................................................58
4.2. Discussion ..........................................................................................................61
4.2.1. Non-English major students’ perceptions of LA in English language learning ... 61
4.2.2. The difference in the student's perception of autonomous English learning
between ethnicities .............................................................................................66
4.3. Summary of the chapter .....................................................................................69
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS.........................................70
5.1. Conclusion..........................................................................................................70
5.2. Implications of the study....................................................................................71
5.2.1. For EFL teachers ......................................................................................71
5.2.2. For EFL students ......................................................................................72
5.2.3. For curriculum developers........................................................................72
5.3. Limitations of the study .....................................................................................73
5.4. Suggestions for further research.........................................................................73
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 75

APPENDICES ........................................................................................................... 81

iv

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1. A brief review of previous studies............................................................16
Table 3.1. Summary of the information of the English program (in the academic

year 2022-2023).......................................................................................25
Table 3.2. Information about interview students.......................................................29
Table 4.1. The demographic information of the participants ....................................34
Table 4.2. Descriptive statistics of autonomous English learning ............................38
Table 4.3. Descriptive statistics of non-English major students’ perceptions of their

abilities ..................................................................................................... 39
Table 4.4. Analysis of compare means for their abilities to act autonomously while

learning English .......................................................................................40
Table 4.5. Descriptive Statistics of non- English major students’ perceptions of their

responsibilities .........................................................................................42
Table 4.6. Analysis of Comparative Means for Their Responsibilities during English

Language Classes.....................................................................................42
Table 4.7. Descriptive Statistics of Non-English Students’ perceptions of their

motivation level .......................................................................................43
Table 4.8. Descriptive Statistics of Non-English Students’ perceptions of their activities . 44
Table 4.9. Analysis of Compare Means for their activities outside and inside the class ..45
Table 4.10. Pearson correlation coefficient between observed variables .................48

Table 4.11. Analysis of one-way ANOVA for variables by ethnicity .......................49
Table 4.12. Summary of the mean scores of the variables in the study ....................50
Table 4.13. Analysis of a two-way ANOVA for learner autonomy...........................53
Table 4.14. Analysis of a two-way ANOVA for learner autonomy by ethnicity and

major ........................................................................................................55
Table 4.15. Analysis of a two-way ANOVA for learner autonomy by ethnicity and

English 2 scores .......................................................................................57

v

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1. Model of learner autonomy (Benson, 1997; Oxford, 2003) .....................8
Figure 2.2. Model of learner autonomy (Trinh, 2005; Nguyen and Habok, 2020) ....9
Figure 2.3. Model of learner autonomy (Nguyen and Habok, 2020, 2022) .............11
Figure 4.1. The proportion of distribution of ethic groups, gender, majors, and

English 2 scores .......................................................................................35
Figure 4.2. The percentage of students’ responses about their abilities related to LA

according to “Likert scale” ......................................................................41
Figure 4.3. The percentage of students’ responses about responsibilities related to

LA according to the “Likert scale”..........................................................43
Figure 4.4. The percentage of students’ responses about motivation levels related to

LA according to the “Likert scale”..........................................................44
Figure 4.5. The percentage of students’ responses about activities related to LA

according to the “Likert scale” ................................................................46
Figure 4.6. A scatter plot of the correlation between students’ abilities,

responsibilities, motivations, and activities .............................................47
Figure 4.7. The mean scores of LA and attributes: abilities, responsibilities,

motivation level, and activities of ethnic groups.....................................50
Figure 4.8. The mean score value of perception of LA by gender ...........................54
Figure 4.9. The mean score value of perception of LA by ethnicity group and

gender ......................................................................................................54
Figure 4.10. The mean score value of perception of LA by majors .........................56
Figure 4.11. The mean score value of perception of LA and English 2 scores ........58

vi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
% : Percent
LA : Learner Autonomy
M : Mean score
SD : Std. Deviation
EFL : English as a Foreign Language

vii

ABSTRACT
The study aimed to examine the non-English major students’ perceptions of
learner autonomy in English language learning at TNUS and the difference in the
students’ perception of learner autonomy in English language learning between
ethnicities. The data was collected using a questionnaire and semi-structured

interviews. 138 non-English major students at a university in Thai Nguyen, Vietnam,
took a survey. Of these participants, 14 were later interviewed. The finding revealed
that the students’ perception of LA in the English language was assessed at an
average level. The students’ low self-perceived abilities included planning their
learning activities, evaluating their learning, and identifying their weaknesses in
English. The students were relatively aware of their responsibility related to
autonomous English learning. The students preferred shared responsibilities. They
had the motivation to learn English, but the motivation was not high enough to be
autonomous in learning English. Thus, they did not vary their activities toward
autonomy. The results of the study indicated that students with higher levels of
motivation engaged in autonomous language learning activities more frequently. It
was found that there was no significant difference in perceptions of LA between
students of different ethnic groups. The study also extracted some implications from
these findings.

viii

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

The chapter first provides the rationale, aiming to briefly analyze the context
leading to the research problem, and determine the position of the study in theory
and practice. Then, the chapter presents the aims of the study. Based on that, the
research questions have been posed. Additionally, the scope of the study is clearly
outlined in terms of content, research location, and duration. Finally, the chapter
discusses the significance of the study.

1.1. Rationale

It is said that English has become a widely accepted dominant language. It
plays an important role in the need for socio-economic development, integration,

and cooperation between our country and the world. For the young generation and
students, fluency in the English language is a key to success in life. They can find
many job opportunities and have chances to study abroad as well as get a
scholarship. Moreover, they can discover rich sources of knowledge in all fields,
such as technology, music, science, education, culture, and so forth. In Vietnamese
education, English is the most widely taught at all levels and majors. English has
been included in the training program as a compulsory subject from primary school
to higher education in the Vietnamese educational system for many years. English
language teaching in recent decades has faced many innovations in terms of both
language teaching methodology and the roles of learners and teachers (Nguyen,
2018). The aim of developing the communicative competence of learners has led to
the development of the concept of a learner-centered approach, which is the idea
that learners are responsible for their learning including all aspects of language
learning (cited in Pham, 2018), and this has revealed the notion of learner autonomy.

Learner autonomy (hereinafter LA) is a learning concept that appeared in the
1960s of the 20th century in Western countries. One of the first people to introduce
the definition of LA was Henri Holec (1981). He defined LA as the “ability to take
charge of one’s learning, the responsibility for all the decisions concerning all
aspects of this learning”. In the mid-1970s (Chan, 2015), LA became an interesting

1

topic for researchers, educators, and learners in language education as it empowered
learners and fostered a deeper understanding of the language. Especially, the
interest in learner autonomy within the context of English language learning in
higher education is evident in the growing number of academic publications that
discuss developments and research findings related to this field in the world as well
as in Viet Nam.

In Viet Nam Higher Education, English language learning was a compulsory
subject for non-major students. When students entered university, they might be
accustomed to the traditional way of learning, which had often emphasized rote
memorization, reliance on teachers, and passive learning, but they were not familiar
with the credit-based system, which required increased LA from students (Tran,
2019). Moreover, the students who graduated from university had to achieve the
English language proficiency standard of B1. Consequently, it was widely accepted
that fostering LA among non-English majors is difficult.

At Thai Nguyen University of Sciences (TNUS), the students came from
many different ethnic groups with different socio-economic conditions and academic
backgrounds. The current status of English subject results at TNUS showed that
English average scores for ethnicities ranged from 5,4 to 6,4 points (Nguyen, 2018).
To achieve English language proficiency at the B1 level and use English to support a
student's career prospects, it was implied that the learner should contribute as much as
they gain and require much time and effort in English learning, as well as autonomy
in English language learning. Due to the importance of LA in tertiary education in
Viet Nam in general and at TNUS in particular, it was necessary to learn how
students perceive LA. Although different aspects of LA in English language learning
had been examined, there was a paucity of research that mentions the comparison of
students’ autonomy by different ethnicities. Thus, to fill this gap, this study was
conducted with the title “A comparison of non-English major students’ perceptions
of learner autonomy in English language learning by different ethnicities at a
university in Viet Nam”. The study investigated several aspects of LA, including

2

students’ perceptions of abilities, responsibilities, motivation level, autonomous
English language learning activities, and exploring the differences between ethnic
groups in their perceptions of LA in English language learning.

1.2. Aims of the study

There were two aims to be achieved.
The primary aim of this study was to find out the non-English major students’
perceptions of learner autonomy in English language learning at TNUS.
The secondary aim of the study was to identify whether there was a
significant difference in the students’ perception of learner autonomy in English
language learning between ethnicities.
From the above-mentioned aims, two main research questions were:
1. What are the non-English major students’ perceptions of learner autonomy
in English language learning at TNUS?
2. Is there any significant difference in the students’ perception of learner
autonomy in English language learning between ethnicities?
1.3. Scope of the study
The study investigated the non-English major students’ perceptions of four
aspects of LA in English language learning, namely non-English major students’
perceptions of their abilities, responsibilities, motivation level, and activities
regarding LA in English language learning. The study identified a difference in the
students’ perceptions of learner autonomy in English language learning between
ethnicities.
The study was conducted at Thai Nguyen University of Science (TNUS) in
the academic year 2022-2023 with 138 first-year non-English major students (C20)
of majors (Law, Travel and Tourism Management, and Management Science) as the
participants.

3

1.4. Significance of the study
The study was of significant importance to gain a deeper understanding of

the learner autonomy of Vietnamese students and the level of their capacity to
conduct independently, as well as the autonomous learning activities in which they
are involved. The research is also significant importance for local teachers and
educators in fostering students’ autonomy. Its results are expected to be valuable
sources for researchers who want to investigate students’ perceptions of LA and the
relationship between the students’ characteristics and LA in English language
learning.

4

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

In this chapter, the researcher provided a systematic review of the literature
on learner autonomy by discussing various aspects of learner autonomy and its
related issues. These issues include definitions, learner autonomy in language
learning, perceptions of autonomous language learning, and factors affecting learner
autonomy in language learning. Besides, the researcher synthesized and described
previous studies on students’ perceptions of LA in English language learning in
higher education. At the end of this chapter, the researcher explained how the
identified gaps and limitations in the existing literature have led to the necessity of
conducting the current research study.

2.1. Learner autonomy (LA)

2.1.1. The concept of learner autonomy (LA)

This section started by defining and explaining the concept of learner
autonomy. This likely involves clarifying what learner autonomy means in the
context of language learning and education.

Learner autonomy (hereinafter LA) is known as autonomous learning or self-
directed learning. There are numerous definitions of learner autonomy. However,
one of the definitions that is widely cited is Henri Holec’s (1981), the father of the
concept. He defined LA as the “ability to take charge of one’s learning and
responsibility for all the decisions concerning all aspects of the learning”.

Following Henri Holec, there have been several different views in the
literature, such as Dickinson (1987), Cotterall (1995), and Littlewood (1999).

According to Dickinson (1987), LA has been viewed as a situation in which
“the learners make all the decisions for their learning”. This view refers to a situation
in which the learner is self-instructed without the guidance of their teachers.

Cotterall (1995) elucidated that “LA is the level of the learner in the ability to
use techniques to identify goals, choose assignments and activities, schedule
practice opportunities, and keep track of and assess one's learning.”

5

According to Littlewood (1999), LA entailed that “learners should be fully in
charge of their learning”. This view indicated that the learners need to develop the
ability to learn by themselves and need to be responsible for many processes that
were previously part of the teacher domain such as making a decision on learning
goals, choosing learning methods, and evaluating processes.

From the definitions given above, it could be seen that the ability and
responsibility to make decisions were considered key characteristics of LA and were
the emphasis for many other definitions of LA in English language learning (ELT).

2.1.2. Learner autonomy in language learning

This section likely explored how the concept of learner autonomy
specifically applies to language learning by discussing the characteristics of LA,
which are emphasized in many definitions of LA.

In the field of higher education, learner autonomy is particularly important,
and language learning is an ongoing process that requires students to be able to
explore the language on their own to fully comprehend it. In a language classroom,
students must study both inside and outside of the classroom to develop their
language skills. Therefore, independent learning is important for language learners.
According to Benson and Voller (1997) and Wright (2005) (cited in Nguyen, 2021),
“independent language learning may refer to an environment or setting for
language learning in which students often, but not always, acquire skills in the
target language on their own”.

As noted in Section 2.1.1, which characterizes the ability and responsibility
to make decisions about one’s learning, this is the emphasis for many other
definitions of LA in language learning. For example, Hsu (2005) contended that
“originally, the concept of autonomy in language learning was defined as a
capacity”. Lê (2013) claimed that “LA is conceptualized as a combination of the
“capacity” and “willingness” to take responsibility for their learning, then extended
to include other constructs, such as responsibility, decision-making, control,

6

readiness, beliefs, attitudes, and motivation. From this view, autonomy in language
learning means taking responsibility. To take responsibility for learning, learners
will need the capacity or ability to make informed decisions about their learning and
the willingness to do so. Lengkanawati (2017) perceived “autonomous learning as a
learner’s capacity to control their learning”. From this view, autonomous learners

can make their own decisions on determining learning objectives, learning contents
and progressions, learning methods and techniques, monitoring acquisition learning
procedures, and evaluating the outcomes of learning.

The conceptualization and definition of LA have been viewed in many
different ways and expanded, considering additional components and dimensions.
For instance:

Little (1991) stated that “learner autonomy is not the same as self-
instruction”. Learner autonomy means the learner works individually or with other
students without the control of their teachers during the learning process.
Pennycook (1997), and Young (1986) (cited in Nguyen, 2021) concluded that LA
is related to “learners’ freedom” in showing personal styles, approaches, and
activities in their learning. However, this freedom is thought to be limited, and it is
not identical with autonomy (Benson, 2007).

According to Benson (1997, cited in Dương 2021), three major dimensions
(components) of autonomy in language education were suggested, namely,
“technical”, “psychological”, and “political”. Oxford (2003, cited in Dương, 2021)
developed Benson's (1997) model with four dimensions, namely, “technical”,
“psychological”, “political”, and “sociocultural” (see Figure 2.1). Each of them is
briefly described as follows:

Technical: Focus on learning skills, strategies, or learning activities that can
be applied in autonomous learning without the intervention of a teacher.

Psychological: Emphasize the abilities of students to take responsibility for
their learning.

7

Political: Underline conditions in which students exert control over the
content and process of their learning.

Sociocultural: Point out the roles of interaction in students’ learning
processes.

Four elements relating to learners are fundamental to conceptions of learner
autonomy, namely “cognitive factors, affective factors, metacognitive factors, and
social factors” (Trịnh, 2005) (see Figure 2.2). Macdougall (2008) stated, “LA is a
type of learning that is described by personalization, self-directedness, and less
reliance on the teacher”. “LA is the transfer of responsibility from educators to
students through a redeployment of power among them” (Banerjee, 2011). This point
of view is understood as LA being the learners’ ability to plan, organize, and monitor
their learning without the assistance of an educator. The learners are required to take
on duties requiring them to determine learning objectives, select learning procedures
and strategies, and define their own learning needs (Paudel, 2019).

Figure 2.1. Model of learner autonomy (Benson, 1997; Oxford, 2003)

Technical Technical

Benson's Psychological Oxford’s Sociocultural
(1997) (2003)
model model

Psychological Political

Political

Nguyen and Habok (2020) shared the same viewpoint as Lê (2013).
Accordingly, LA requires both the willingness and capacity to take on the
responsibility for learning. Willingness includes motivation and beliefs about the
teacher’s role. Capacity consists of ability, which refers to metacognitive

8

knowledge and metacognitive skills, desire, and freedom. The author combined
metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive skills into metacognition in language
learning as one component of LA (see Figure 2.2).

Figure 2.2. Model of learner autonomy (Trinh, 2005; Nguyen and Habok, 2020)

Cognitive Beliefs about
factors Teacher’s role

Metacognition Desire
in language
Trinh's learning
(2005)
Social version Affective Nguyen.,et
factors factors al (2020)'s

version

Metacognitive Freedom Motivation
factors

Nguyen and Habok (2022) and Razeq (2014) added noteworthy aspect to
consider is that students’ actual activities both within the classroom and beyond, can

be understood as autonomous language learning behaviors. These researchers
examined whether students’ abilities, responsibilities, and motivations can be
translated into actual behaviors.

In short, sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 highlighted the multifaceted nature of learner
autonomy in the context of education. Learner autonomy is characterized by a variety
of facets and qualities that contribute to a comprehensive understanding of this
concept. Some of the key characteristics and dimensions of learner autonomy include:

Ability and Responsibility to Make Decisions: Learner autonomy entails the
capacity to make informed decisions about various aspects of the learning process,
including choosing learning materials, setting goals, and selecting strategies.

9