Self-access systems

Lindsay Miller and

Pamela Rogerson-Revell

This paper proposes a framework for consideration when establishing a

self-access centre. It describes four such centres and the different systems
they use, and then outlines the differences between each centre’s rationale,
human resources, and end-users. The paper suggests that the practical
application of the system of self-access language learning must be
examined before setting up a self-access centre. Making an informed
decision about the type of self-access system, based on the rationale of the
institution and the human resources available, will ensure an efficient
system that suits the end-users.

Introduction In recent years there has been renewed interest in self-access language
learning, or SALL. This covers a wide range of areas within language
learning, including: strategies for learning (Wenden, 1986, Porte, 1988,
and Bertoldi et al., 1988); materials (Sheer-in, 1990); self-assessment
(Blanch and Merino, 1989); organization and management of self-access
centres, (SACS), (McDowell and Morris, 1989, and Mitchener, 1991);
and types of SAC (Harding-Esch, 1982, Dickinson, 1987, Riley et al.,
1989, Sheerin, 1991, and Miller, 1992).
All of the above-cited references make significant contributions to the
discussion on SALL. However, as McCafferty (undated: 19) states:
Any system for learning or teaching a language has to be justified in at
least two ways - in terms of rationale, which has to be explicit, defensible
and relevant, and in terms of realistic and practical applications.
In the view of Sheerin (1990: 147):
. . . the system [our italics] of access plays a crucial role in ensuring
that the learner has the freedom of choice that efficient information
retrieval provides.
So the rationale for choosing a particular system of self-access seems a
fundamental decision; yet systems are rarely mentioned in the SALL
literature.
The aim of this paper is to briefly describe four self-access systems and
consider how the rationale for establishing a SAC relates closely to (a) the
human resources available or needed, and (b) the type of learners who use
the facility.

Types of self- In this section we describe four types of self-access systems, giving
access systems examples of each. These examples will be discussed in more detail in the
‘Comparison of Systems’ section.
228 ELT Journal Volume 47/3 July 1993 © Oxford University Press 1993

articles welcome
 Menu-driven A menu-driven system is a dedicated self-access system specifically for
language learning. All materials are classified, and the information is
stored either electronically or on hard copy. When the student wishes to
use the facility, he or she refers to the menu to gain access to the system.
The information held in the system is usually classified according to skill,
level, topic, function, etc., and is often cross-referenced. To be able to use
this type of facility, the learner needs to become an efficient user of the
system, which requires a certain amount of pre-training and practice. An
example of this type of self-access system is found in CRAPEL (Centre de
Recherches et d’Applications Pédagogiques en Langues) at the
University of Nancy, France.

Supermarket A ‘supermarket’ is a self-access system which, as the name implies, offers

the learner the opportunity to look around and choose what to study. The
system displays materials under clearly marked categories: listening,
reading, phonology, games, etc, which, in turn, are usually colour-coded
according to level. In this way, learners can independently gain access into
the system and easily find the area they wish to study. The Specialist
Teachers’ Training Institute (STTI) in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, offers
trainee English language teachers a supermarket self-access system.

Controlled-access A system where learners are directed to a specific set of materials in a self-
access centre by their tutors can be called a ‘controlled-access’ system.
Usually, the materials held in the centre are closely related to work
covered in class and classified in a similar way. Learners using this type of
system would have little or no control over what they choose to study and
the classification of materials is usually very simple, e.g. ‘Worksheet l’,
‘Worksheet 2’, etc. Students studying engineering at Chulalongkom
University’s Language Institute (CULI) make use of a controlled-access
language learning system.

Open-access An open-access system is usually part of a library. The self-access

material is open for use by students studying English and to other library
users. The self-access material may be separated from the main library or
it may be classified along with other material, so that English language
textbooks may be found alongside French and German language
textbooks. The user can gain access to the system by several methods:
l the library classification system;
l the separate EFL section (if it exists);
l by browsing.
The British Council in Hong Kong operates a self-access centre by means
of an open-access system with a separate EFL section.

Discussion Before choosing a particular self-access system the following questions

are important to consider (see Figure 1):
1 Why set up a self-access centre’? (Rationale);
2 Who will use the facility? (End-user):
Self-access systems 229

articles welcome
 3 What human resources are available to help establish and manage a
self-access centre? (Human resources).
Figure 1:
Se/f-access systems
s
Y * Menu-driven
Rationale
S * Supermarket
End-user
T * Open-access
Human resources
E * Controlled-access
I M I

Often the system is established before
consideration, with the result that an
appropriate type of self-access centre
after a great deal of money and effort
centre rarely gets used.
the above questions are taken into
institution may not have the most
for its situation, or worse, find out
has been spent that the self-access

Rationale The rationale for establishing a self-access centre may be based on one or
a combination of the following reasons:
1 Financial
A SAC is seen as the most cost-efficient way of providing language
training, possibly also under pressure of cost cuts, for example, staffing
or budget.
2 Pedagogical
A SAC is seen as the best way of helping learners improve their
language skills - on either a remedial or a developmental basis.
3 Ideological
Based on the belief that self-access or autonomous learning is a
valuable goal, increasing motivation, independence, and therefore,
enthusiasm to learn.
4 Prestigious
Similar to the promotion of language labs in the 1970s, SACS may be
seen as ‘state of the art’ in language training.

End-user All SACS are unique facilities, as they cater for differing groups of
learners in different environments. Table 1 identifies some of the
categories of end-users.
Tab/e 1: Public sector vs Private sector
Different categories of (tertiary institutes) (company training centre)
SAC end-users
Internal vs External
(on-site/full time) (off-site/part time)

Self-development vs Educational
(long-term motivation) (short-term motivation)

‘Sophisticated’ vs ‘Unsophisticated’
(pre-SAC induction) (no induction)

General purpose vs Specific purpose

(skill or subject)

230 Lindsay Miller and Pamela Rogerson-Revel1

articles welcome
Human resources Each type of self-access system requires several involved personnel, from
the head of administration to helpers. However, each system also relies on
specific types of expert in its establishment and running. These we can
describe as the key human resources. Table 2 shows some of the key
human resources needed in the setting up and running of a SAC, and the
functions they have.

Tab/e 2: Key human resources Functions

Types of key human
resources and their Language specialist Resources, materials development system
functions classification, adviser to end-user

Computer ‘consultant’ Computer system classification, set up and

development

Librarian System classifier and manager

Materials development Materials development

Administration/clerical assistant Administration, reception

Technician/AV specialist AV preparation, maintenance

Comparison of By looking at the institution’s rationale, its end-users, and the human
systems resources available, it is possible to see reasons for establishing the types
of self-access systems referred to in this paper.
CRAPEL at the University of Nancy has a large number of sophisticated
language users in different subject areas. It has developed a menu-driven
system based on its comprehensive card index system. Students at this
institute can make use of the system easily once they have been
introduced to its method of operation. With such a large number of
potential users, the emphasis has been placed on establishing a system
which needs little teacher manpower.
The STTI in Kuala Lumpur has a specific user group which has differing
language problems. Here, the institute has opted for the supermarket
system. The users are all well motivated and take a lot of responsibility for
their own language improvement. The supermarket system is preferred,
as it is cheaper than a menu-driven system, more specific in its target
group than an open-access system, and less restrictive than a controlled-
access system.
CULI in Bangkok caters for a very specific type of student with its
controlled-access system. Students studying science subjects may not be
highly motivated to spend a lot of time learning English and therefore
need some form of extrinsic motivation. By directing students to specific
materials, and perhaps by including completion of the worksheets as a
form of assessment for their English course, the system motivates
students to use it. The anticipated washback effect is that these students
will become more interested in spending time in the SAC and go on to
improve their English language skills independently.
Self-access systems 231

articles welcome
 The British Council in Hong Kong has the most difficult group of users to
cater for - a large group of general users of different language levels and
ages. The open-access system offers the best solution in this situation, as
the user does not have to be a sophisticated language learner and the
system can cater for many different areas of study and for a large number
of users. The open-access system also operates within the already
established library system, which makes it cost effective.

Conclusion We can see from Table 3 how an analysis of the rationale, the human
resources available, and the end-users can facilitate an appropriate choice
of self-access system.

Table 3: Rationale Human resources End-users System Example

Schema for choosing a
To cater for an computer university menu-driven CRAPEL
self-access system
increased number consultant students
of students teaching advisers
studying English

To allow similar types self-access manager teacher trainees supermarket STTI

of users to develop facilitators
different language
skills

To motivate and teachers engineering and controlled- CULI

encourage students helpers science students access
to study English
outside class

As an integral part of librarian assistants general users of open-access BCHK

the library different ages
and different
levels

This schema, however, is only a model for consideration. We do not propose

that the only system which is appropriate for, say, engineering students is a
controlled-access one, or that if an institution is well-financed then it should
necessarily spend the money on developing a menu-driven system.
An institution has to make an informed decision about what type of
system is most suitable for its particular situation; some may decide that
all systems mentioned above are useful, and opt for a multi-system.
However, these informed decisions have to be made well in advance of
establishing the self-access centre, as they will effect all operational
aspects, raising questions such as:
l How will the SAC affect classroom teaching?
l What materials have to be bought and/or produced for the SAC?
l What forms of self-assessment have to be in place for the students to
evaluate their progress?
l Does the institution have enough resources available for the type of
system it wants, or can it get more resources?
l What type of lay-out should the centre have?
Before investing the time and energy needed to develop a SAC, these, and
many more questions will have to be addressed. And it is only by knowing
what the institution is aiming at that they can be answered.
Received July 1992

232 Lindsay Miller and Pamela Rogerson-Revell

articles welcome
Acknowledgement
The authors wish to thank Dr Martha Pennington
her editorial comments on this paper.
References
Bertoldi, E., J. Kollor, and E. Richard. 1988.
‘Learning how to learn English: from awareness to
action’. ELT Journal 42/3: 157-66.
Blanche, P. and B. Merino. 1989. ‘Self-assessment
of Foreign Language Skills: Implications for
Teachers and Researchers’. Language Learning.
39/3: 313-40.
Dickinson, L. 1987. Self-instruction in Language
Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Harding-Esch, E. 1982. ‘The Open Access Sound
and Video Library of the University of Cambridge:
Progress Report and Development’. System 10/1:
13-28.
McCafferty, J. B. (undated). A consideration of a
self-access approach to the learning of English.
Mimeo. London: The British Council.
McDowell, J. and J. Morris. 1989. ‘How to set up a
Self-Access Centre’. EFL Gazette. February: 4-5.
Miller, L. 1992. Self-access Centres in S.E. Asia.
Hong Kong: Research Report No. 11. Department
of English, City Polytechnic of Hong Kong.
Mitchener, D. 1991. ‘Setting up a self-access unit’.
Self-access systems
Modern English Teacher. 17/3 and 17/4.
for Porte, G. 1988. ‘Poor language learners and their
strategies for dealing with new vocabulary’. ELT
Journal 42/3: 167-72.
Riley, P., M. Gremmo, and H. Moulden. 1989.
‘Pulling yourself together: the practicalities of
setting up and running self-access systems’ in D.
Little (ed.), Self-access systems for language
learning. Dublin: Authentik in association with
CILT.
Sheerin, S. 1989. Self-access. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Sheerin, S. 1991. ‘State of the Art: Self-access’.
Language Abstracts. July: 143-58.
Wenden, A. 1986. ‘Helping language learners think
about learning’. ELT Journal 40/1 : 3-12.
The authors
Lindsay Miller is a lecturer in EST at City
Polytechnic of Hong Kong. He has taught in the Arab
World and SE Asia. He has an MEd degree from
Manchester University.
Pamela Rogerson-Revell is a lecturer in Business
English at City Polytechnic of Hong Kong. She is co-
author of two books published by Cambridge
University Press: Speaking Clearly and Business
Speaking. She has an MA from York University.
233
articles welcome