entre at the University of Hong Kong during the 1992-93 year, and relate these back to an earlier survey of teacher attitudes from the previous year. The Survey of Teacher Attitudes to Self-Access Learning is appended. (JL)Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * * from the original document.
HONGKONG PAPERS IN LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING 16 (1993) Teachers’ Attitudes to Self-Access Learning Elaine Martyn & Peter Vol ler The University of Hong Kong Though no research has proven that teachers-their attitudes, values, expectations, relationship with students, and confidence in self-access learning-make a difference to the success of this type of learning, these factors are often raised as significant (Littlejohn, 1985; Tompkins & McGraw, 1988; Ellis & Sinclair, 1989; O’Dell, 1992; Nakhoul, 1993). For example, based on an experiment with 150 Bachelor of Education students, Littlejohn (1985) found two factors that appeared to influence students’ success in self-access learning most: the maturity and previous experience of learners, and the attitude of the teacher. O’Dell (1992) placed a similar focus on the teacher in the process of self-access language learning. She summarised her view as follows: Our experience …has shown very clearly that most of the students who make full use of the learning centre’s resources are in classes where the teacher is confident and wellinformed as far as learning centre use is concerned. …
Thus, the teacher has a key role to play in the exploitation of the study centre (p. 153). In this paper we will detail the results of two surveys of teacher attitudes to self-access which took place at the English Centre at the University of Hong Kong during the 1992-93 academic year and relate these back to an earlier survey of teacher attitudes conducted in the previous year. The original survey conducted by members of the Self-Access Action Research (SAAR) group was intended to identify teachers’ views of self-access in the context of its introduction into two major first year English courses in the academic year 1991-2, particularly since one-third (20 hours) of these courses had been allocated to self-access study. As noted in the original report on the project (Martyn and Chan, 1992): We believed that the success of self-access hinged as much on learner training as on materials, so were convinced that to make the whole SA [self-access] concept work, we would need to work on human resources and implementation strategies (p.59). The survey confirmed that although most teachers had a fairly positive view of self-access learning, they were concerned about its implementation and effectiveness as a required course component. The results also pointed to the need to develop more effective teaching/learning strategies to maximize the potential benefits of self-access. Thus the members tested various approaches to selfaccess during the second semester focusing on learner training and motivation. At the end of the school year, the group made several recommendations to the English Centre. Most influential were those dealing with orientation to self-access. As a result orientation materials and activities for both students and staff were developed. These consisted of: a video that introduced self-access learning and the Practice Lab facilities; a Practice Lab orientation map; a crossword puzzle that required students to use Practice Lab resources and facilities in order to complete it; an orientation game in which students had to try out self-access materials to answer questions on cards; a Practice Lab tour in which a teacher or consultant would briefly introduce self-access materials and facilities; a unit introducing self-access learning in the course materials; a selfaccess log book that both helped students to plan their self-access learning and provided a record of their self-access work over the year; and tutorials in which teachers and students could discuss their progress in self-access study.
