This article was downloaded by: [Gazi University]

On: 01 May 2015, At: 13:10

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Computer Assisted Language Learning

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ncal20

University student and teacher

Click for updates
perceptions of teacher roles in
promoting autonomous language
learning with technology outside the
classroom
a b a
Chun Lai , Yuk Yeung & Jingjing Hu
a
Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Island, Hong Kong
b
School of Chinese, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Island, Hong Kong
Published online: 18 Mar 2015.

To cite this article: Chun Lai, Yuk Yeung & Jingjing Hu (2015): University student and teacher
perceptions of teacher roles in promoting autonomous language learning with technology outside
the classroom, Computer Assisted Language Learning, DOI: 10.1080/09588221.2015.1016441

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2015.1016441

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015
 Computer Assisted Language Learning, 2015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2015.1016441

University student and teacher perceptions of teacher roles in

promoting autonomous language learning with technology outside the
classroom
Chun Laia*, Yuk Yeungb and Jingjing Hua
a
Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Island, Hong Kong; bSchool of
Chinese, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Island, Hong Kong
(Received 29 December 2014; accepted 2 February 2015)
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

Helping students to become autonomous learners, who actively utilize technologies for
learning outside the classroom, is important for successful language learning.
Teachers, as significant social agents who shape students’ intellectual and social
experiences, have a critical role to play. This study examined students’ and teachers’
perceptions of the specific roles teachers may play in promoting autonomous language
learning with technology outside the classroom. Interviews were conducted with 15
language learners and 10 language teachers at a university in Hong Kong. The study
found mismatches between students’ and teachers’ perceptions of the degree of
teacher involvement and the specific roles teachers could play. On the one hand,
students expected teachers to play a greater role in supporting their autonomous
learning with technology by recommending a variety of technological resources and
sharing metacognitive and cognitive strategies for effective use of the resources. On
the other hand, teachers expected to play a minimal role due to their overestimation of
students’ capacities and their concern over their limited abilities to provide such
support. The research findings indicate the importance of raising teachers’ awareness
of the various roles their students expect them to play and of equipping teachers with
the knowledge and skills to advise and support students in making use of
technological resources outside the classroom for language learning.
Keywords: learner autonomy; out-of-class learning; self-directed use of technology
for learning; learner perceptions; teacher perceptions

Introduction
The popularization of information and communication technologies has brought about an
exponential expansion of information and a knowledge revolution, which moves lifelong
learning to the forefront and demands it to be the ultimate goal of education (Australian
Qualifications Framework [AQF], 2011; European Commission, 2001; Field, 2000; Orga-
nization for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2007). As Collins and
Halverson (2009) argued, “we are now entering the lifelong learning era of education,
having experienced the apprenticeship and schooling eras” (p. 5). This lifelong learning
era of education demands a set of essential skills, including learning and innovation skills,
digital literacy skills and career and life skills. At the intersection of these skills is the
capacity to use technology to engage in self-directed lifelong learning (Trilling & Fadel,
2009). Thus, a core educational goal is to support students to become autonomous learn-
ers who actively utilize technologies to construct personalized learning spaces and

*Corresponding author. Email: laichun@hku.hk

Ó 2015 Taylor & Francis

 2 C. Lai et al.

experiences from “a complex network of people and technologies” (Sims, 2008, p. 160).
Moreover, these learning spaces and experiences exist both within and beyond the school
context (B€aumer et al., 2011; Benson, 2009; Brown, 2000).
As a significant social agent who shapes the quality of students’ intellectual and social
experiences (Davis, 2003), the teacher has a critical role to play in helping students to
exert autonomy both inside and outside the classroom (Lazaro & Reinders, 2009; Little,
2004; Toffoli & Sockett, 2015). In the case of language learning, autonomy outside the
classroom heavily involves the use of technological tools and resources (Benson, 2006;
Lai, 2014a; Reinders & White, 2011). Autonomous use of technology outside the class-
room for language learning has been found to be positively associated with language
gains (Inozu et al., 2010; Lai, Zhu, & Gong, 2014; Sundqvist, 2011; Sylven & Sundqvist,
2012). Thus, language teachers have a major responsibility to help language learners to
develop the attitudes and competencies necessary to engage in the autonomous use of
technology for learning beyond the classroom (Benson, 2011; Reinders & Darasawang,
2012). What roles do learners expect teachers to play in promoting their autonomous use
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

of technology for language learning beyond the classroom? Are teachers aware of the
roles they are expected to play? Understanding students’ and teachers’ perceptions of
teacher roles could inform teacher professional development initiatives that enhance
teacher support for learner autonomy with technology.
The current literature abounds in discussions on teachers’ roles and class pedagogies
in promoting learner autonomy (Benson, 2001; Reinders, 2010; Voller, 1997). However,
little attention has been given to teachers’ roles in promoting learners’ autonomous use of
technology outside the language classroom (Toffoli & Sockett, 2015). Supporting learner
autonomy with technology outside the language classroom involves a series of technol-
ogy-associated issues such as locating appropriate technological resources, matching
technological resources with specific language learning needs, using technological resour-
ces effectively for language learning, and so on. Thus, this study aims to enrich our under-
standing of how teachers can help promote learners’ autonomous use of technology for
language learning outside the classroom by examining and contrasting student and
teacher perspectives.

Literature review
Discussions of teachers’ roles in promoting out-of-class autonomous use of technology
for language learning need to be based on what learners’ autonomous use of technology
encompasses. Despite the various definitions of learner autonomy, it is widely agreed that
learner autonomy consists of two major dimensions: 1) the ability to self-regulate one’s
learning and make use of the learning opportunities in one’s surroundings, and 2) the will-
ingness to self-direct one’s learning processes across settings and contexts (Benson, 2008;
Garrison, 1997; Stolk et al., 2010). With regard to the autonomous use of technology for
learning, the ability dimension entails not only self-regulation skills in general but also
the specific skills of locating, selecting and effectively using technology for language
learning (Bailly, 2011; Lai, 2013). The willingness dimension involves a flexible mindset
to deal with the uncertainties and complexity of interacting with technology (Kop &
Fournier, 2011), a proactive approach to seeking opportunities to learn and using the lan-
guage (Kormos & Csizer, 2014; Wong & Looi, 2012), the perceived usefulness of tech-
nology for language learning and the perceived educational compatibility of technology
with language learning needs and preferences (Lai, 2013).
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 3

At the same time, scholars have pointed out that students do need support in both the
ability and willingness dimensions of the autonomous use of technology for learning.
Research has found that students only perceive and act on the affordances of a limited
and rather conventional set of technologies for learning (Winke & Goertler, 2008; Lai &
Gu, 2011), and that their use of available technologies does not reflect a good understand-
ing of how to use these technologies effectively (Kennedy & Miceli, 2010; Oxford,
2009). Their ability to construct quality language learning experiences with technology is
also quite limited (Bailly, 2011), and they tend to use resources with a high level of for-
mality and engage in conventional activities (,Benson, 2011; Doyle & Parrish, 2012; Lai,
Zhu, & Gong, 2014).
Research has also identified various ways through which teachers could influence
students’ autonomous use of technology for language learning outside the classroom.
Teachers’ in-class autonomy support behaviors can boost students’ willingness to engage
in autonomous learning outside the classroom (Hagger & Chatzisarantis, 2012). The tech-
nological resources that teachers utilize in class are likely to be adopted by students
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

(Fagerl€und, 2012; Lai & Gu, 2011). Teachers’ advice on what technologies to use and
how to use them affects the types of activities students engage in beyond the classroom
(Fagerl€und, 2012; Inozu, Sahinkarakas, & Yumru, 2010). Students are found to incorpo-
rate the technological resources recommended and shared by teachers into their learning
ecology (Lai, 2014a; Gray et al., 2010). The assignments and assessments that teachers
engage students in and the degree to which teachers incorporate student-generated materi-
als from outside the classroom for in-class instruction also affect the quantity and quality
of students’ autonomous learning outside the classroom (Fukuda & Yoshida, 2013; Guo,
2011; Saad, Yunus, & Embi, 2013; Zhan & Andrews, 2014). Furthermore, Lai (2014b)
found that different teacher behaviors may have different influences on learners’ autono-
mous use of technology for language learning outside the classroom: teacher encourage-
ment influenced autonomous technology use through enhancing the perceived usefulness
of technological resources for language learning, and resource recommendations, strategy
sharing and engaging students in technology-enhanced learning activities influenced
autonomous technology use through boosting learners’ computer self-efficacy and
perceived conditions that facilitated the use of technology for language learning.
Given the need for teacher support and the various ways teachers could provide sup-
port, are teachers aware of the roles they need to, and could, play in promoting learners’
autonomous use of technology for language learning outside the classroom? A small
number of studies have reported teachers’ perceptions of learner autonomy and their roles
in promoting learner autonomy in general (Borg & Al-Busaidi, 2012). Researchers have
found that teachers do believe that learner autonomy is important and that they, as teach-
ers, need to play a role in promoting learner autonomy (Al Asmari, 2013; Chan, 2003;
Thanh, 2011; Shahsavari, 2014). However, their understanding of learner autonomy and
their roles in promoting learner autonomy is quite limited (Al-Shaqsi, 2009; Shahsavari,
2014). They are also quite selective in adopting instructional practices to promote learner
autonomy in the classroom (Nakata, 2011; Ur€ € un, Demir, & Akar, 2014). When it comes
to learner autonomy in out-of-class contexts, teachers tend to perceive themselves as
playing even more limited roles (Chan, 2003; Thanh, 2011; Toffoli & Sockett, 2015).
They believe that students should bear the responsibility for organizing their learning
experience outside the language classroom, and that students possess the abilities to do so
(Chan, 2003; Thanh, 2011). Furthermore, teachers do not realize the mediating role they
need to play in helping students to connect learning experiences in different contexts
(Toffoli & Sockett, 2015). However, surveys with foreign language learners show that
 4 C. Lai et al.

students do not have confidence in their abilities to engage in out-of-class learning activi-
ties (Gamble et al., 2012; Qi & Li, 2006), do not know how to utilize various resources
for learning despite their awareness of the importance of out-of-class learning (Chang &
Tung, 2008; Holden & Usuki, 1999), and expect teachers to play a more active role in
supporting their self-directed learning (Wang, 2007). The mismatches between teachers’
and students’ perceptions of autonomous language learning outside the classroom have
led researchers such as Chan (2003) to highlight the importance of teachers “work(ing)
with their students’ preferences” (p. 47). Thus, it is critical to understand students’ and
teachers’ perceptions of the support teachers need to provide to support autonomous use
of technology for learning.
Previous studies have mainly focused on teacher and student perceptions of learner
autonomy inside and outside the classroom in general, and not many studies have exam-
ined and contrasted students’ and teachers’ perceptions of teacher roles in learner autono-
mous language learning with technology outside the classroom. This study aimed to fill
this research gap by addressing the following research question:
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

What are language learners’ and teachers’ respective perceptions of teacher roles’ in promot-
ing the autonomous use of technology for language learning outside the classroom?

Method
Context and participants
The research was conducted at a large comprehensive research university in Hong Kong.
The university has an up-to-date IT system and service infrastructure. The use of technol-
ogy at the university is voluntary. Although the university encourages and supports the
use of the virtual learning environment (VLE) Moodle, there is no university regulation
on the mandatory use of VLE. In fact, in the academic year 2012 2013, only 56% of the
courses registered on VLE were activated by teachers for student use. The classrooms are
all equipped with AV/IT equipment that are fully functional at all times, and well serviced
and supported. Classroom technical support is readily available at the university. Regular
technical training seminars on the use of AV/IT equipment in the classrooms and the e-
learning platforms are offered to staff at the university.
Due to its exploratory nature, this study was based on the self-report of a small cohort
of foreign language learners and teachers who volunteered to participate in the study. The
participants were 15 undergraduate students who were taking second language courses at
the time of the study and 10 foreign language teachers who were teaching foreign lan-
guage courses at the university. The student participants included eight female and seven
male students. The student participants were recruited on a voluntary basis close to the
end of the 2013 2014 academic year through a mass email announcement in the School
of Modern Languages. They were recruited to share their perceptions of issues related to
their use of technology outside the classroom for language learning. The participants’
average age was 20 years old. The majority of the participants were in their second year
of university study, with only four in their first year and one in their third year. They were
all ethnic Chinese and were studying a wide range of languages, including Japanese,
Spanish, French, German, Korean and English. Of the participants, 11 had studied the for-
eign language for two or more years, and four for less than two years. Most of them were
studying the language either as a major or as a minor. The majority of the participants
considered themselves to be at the beginner level, with only four of them regarding them-
selves as at the intermediate level and above. The participants reported varied frequency
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 5

of self-initiated out-of-class technology use for language learning, with some reporting
less than 1 3 hours per week and others reporting 4 7 or 7 14 hours per week.
The teacher participants were recruited, also close to the end of the 2013 2014 aca-
demic year, through individual emails sent to the teaching staff at the School of Modern
Languages inviting them to share their views on technology and language learning and
teaching. Ten teachers volunteered to participate in the study. The teacher participants
included eight female and two male teachers. They were teaching a variety of languages
including French, German, Spanish, Japanese and Mandarin. The majority of them were
veteran teachers who had more than ten years of teaching experience. Most of them were
teaching all levels of the language courses. See Table 1 for participant profiles (the names
were pseudonyms).

Data collection and analysis

Data consisted of individual semi-structured interviews with the student and teacher par-
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

ticipants. Written consents were obtained in advance of the face-to-face interviews. To

answer the research question, the interview guides focused on eliciting students’ and
teachers’ attitudes towards students’ autonomous use of technology for language learning
outside the classroom, and perceptions of how teachers influenced and could support
students’ autonomous technology use and why. The student interviews elicited students’
out-of-class use of technology for language learning, their perceptions of the influence of
language teachers on their out-of-class technology use, the challenges or frustration they
might have encountered in using technology outside the classroom for language learning,
and the support they expected from their language teachers to enhance their use of tech-
nology outside the classroom. Prior to the interview, each student participant was asked
to report on their frequency (average hours per week) of autonomous use of technology
for language learning outside the classroom. The teacher interviews elicited teachers’
beliefs about and use of technology in language teaching and learning, their attitudes
towards and perceptions of students’ out-of-class technology use for language learning,
their perceptions of the influence of their instructional behaviors on students’ out-of-class
technology use, their perceptions of how they could enhance student use of technology
outside the class for language learning and the concerns they had about promoting learner
out-of-class use of technology for language learning (see Appendix 1 for student and
teacher interview guides). Interview questions were piloted and revised accordingly. The
interviews were conducted by the first and third researcher together in either English or
Chinese, depending on the interviewees’ preference. Each student interview lasted around
30 minutes and each teacher interview lasted around 45 minutes. The participants were
given minimal guidance in their responses, with only follow-up questions being asked to
elicit more in-depth responses and clarification questions being asked to confirm the
intended meaning of the participants. The two interviewers discussed their impressions
after the interviews and field notes were taken to record their reflections.
The interview data were transcribed verbatim in either English or Chinese by one
researcher, and double-checked for accuracy by another. The interview data were first cat-
egorized into organizational themes according to the research question and the interview
guides. For instance, the teacher interview data were analyzed into three organizational
themes: (1) Teachers’ attitudes towards and perceptions of out-of-class learning with
technology; (2) The roles teachers play or envision themselves to play; and (3) The con-
cerns teachers have with regard to promoting out-of-class technology use for language
learning. The excerpts under each organizational theme were coded and recoded
 Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

6
C. Lai et al.

Table 1. Student and teacher participant background information.

Student participants Teacher participants

Language Length Technology use Language Ethnic Years of Levels

Gender studied of study Major (hrs/week) taught background Gender teaching taught

Lee Female Japanese 6 months Computer science 1 3 hours Jie Cantonese Chinese Female 2 years Beginner
Sze Female Spanish 2 years Spanish 1-3 hours Ming Mandarin Chinese Female >5 years Beginner advanced
Tam Female Spanish 2 years Plan to major in Spanish 1 3 hours Yue Mandarin Chinese Female >5 years Beginner
Tian Female English 10 years Accounting and Finance 1 3 hours Ping Mandarin Chinese Female 2 years Beginner
Chi Male Japanese 1.5 years Japanese 1 3 hours Le German Chinese Female >10 years Beginner intermediate
Hao Male French 3 years Electric Engineering (French minor) 4 7 hours Sofıa Spanish Spanish Female >10 years Beginner advanced
Lam Male German 6 months Plan to major in German Less than 1 hour Agathe French French Female >5 years Beginner advanced
Ho Male Japanese 1 year Chemistry (Japanese minor) 4 7 hours Jose Spanish Spanish Male >10 years Beginner intermediate
Tai Male French 4 years French 4 7 hours Aoi Japanese Japanese Male >10 years Beginner advanced
Chan Female French 2 years English studies (French minor) 7 14 hours Mei German Chinese Female >10 years Beginner advanced
Yeung Female French 3 years Undeclared Less than 1 hour
Cheung Female French 2 years English studies (French minor) 4 7 hours
Yang Female Japanese 1 year Architecture 1 3 hours
Leung Male French 2 years Chemistry (French minor) Less than 1 hour
Loh Male Korean 2 years Public Administration (Korean minor) 7 14 hours
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 7

to generate concrete categorizations in each organizational category. Transcriptions were

read through reiteratively, and bits of data that struck the researcher as interesting or
important to the study were coded. Similar codes were aggregated into analytic catego-
ries. For instance, for the teacher interview, under the organizational category of
“Teachers’ attitudes towards and perceptions of out-of-class learning with technology,”
the codes, “able to find anything they are searching for,” “better than us in locating things
online,” and “know a lot more than us about apps” were grouped into the analytic cate-
gory, “students know where to locate resources.” Annotations and memos were used dur-
ing the data analyses to record immediate comments and reflexive thinking on the data,
and the annotations and memos as well as interview field notes were used to assist the
coding process. The initial coding of analytic categories was then compared across inter-
viewees to find repeating ideas to saturate categories with repeated supporting evidence,
and for cross validation of the categories that emerged. For each category, segments of
the texts that illustrated the category were pooled across individuals (see Table 2 for the
final coding system and tabulated supporting segments). The analytic categories gener-
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

ated from teachers’ interview data and students’ interview data were compared and con-
trasted to identify the major areas of consistency and discrepancy in their perceptions,
which are reported in the Findings section. Pseudonyms were used when presenting the
Findings.

Findings
Perceptions of and attitudes towards learners’ autonomous use of technology for
language learning
Both the teacher participants and the student participants held positive views of out-of-
class learning with technology. They believed that out-of-class use of technology for lan-
guage learning was necessary because it could enhance students’ exposure to the target
language by providing opportunities for language practice in different contexts:

In Hong Kong, it’s hard to find Spanish speakers. All the people I have contact with speak
either Chinese or English. It’s hard to find someone from Spain or has learned Spanish
before. (S_Sze)
They [technologies] provide more opportunities for students to interact with authentic materi-
als in Spanish or with Spanish speaking people. (T_Jose)

Some teacher participants also pointed out that out-of-class use of technology for lan-
guage learning could compensate for the limited time in class and was needed to study or
strengthen the areas that teachers were not able to cover during class:

It is extremely important that students use technology outside the language classroom, as a
few contact hours per week is not enough for learning a foreign language, especially a lan-
guage like German, of which the target country is so far away. (T_Mei)
The aspect that technologies could help more is Chinese characters, such as how to write
Chinese characters and what the meanings of the Chinese characters are. We don’t have time
to cover these aspects in class. (T_Ming)

Despite the general belief in the necessity and importance of out-of-class technology
use for language learning, some teacher participants did express reservations about
encouraging their students to use technological resources outside the class. One major
 Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

Table 2. The final coding system and tabulated supporting segments.

8

Teacher perception (10 interviewees) Student perception (15 interviewees)

1. Attitudes towards and perception of out-of-class technology use 1. Expected teacher role
 Importance of out-of-class technology use  Encouragement (9)
Increase exposure to the language (6) Enhanced perceived usefulness (9)

Compensate for the limitation of instructional hours (4)

C. Lai et al.

 Recommendation (15)
 Teachers have minimal involvement in learner out-of-class Knowledge of where to access (10)

technology use Enhanced perceived usefulness (7)

Priority in class (3)  Metacognitive tips (7)

Student privacy (3) Knowledge of how to use (6)

Students know where to locate resources (7)  In-class technology use (10)
 Teachers wait for students to approach them for resources (7) Knowledge of where to access quality resources (5)

2. Envisioned & enacted role Knowledge of how to use the resources (4)

 Guiding (5)  Assignments (3)

 Help students interact with authentic materials 2. Teacher actual behavior
Provide controlled resources (7)  Encouragement
Teach student strategies (3) No encouragement (7)

 Encouragement (4) Encourage limited resources (6)

 Recommendation (2) Encourage but no recommendation (5)

 Assignments (5) Encourage a wide range of resources (3)

3. Concerns  Recommendation
 Inaccuracy of information and language (6) Recommend vocabulary, dictionary and dictionary like websites (7)

 Student’s limited proficiency level (5) Recommend websites that introduce culture (2)

 Limited knowledge about useful resources and tips (5)  Provide tips
Tips on how to use (4)

3. Challenges in out-of-class technology use

 Difficulty selecting useful resources (10)
 Difficulty locating appropriate and trustworthy resources (4)
 Difficulty evaluating the accuracy of information and language (4)
 Lack of knowledge in using the resources effectively (9)
4. Supports needed
 Teachers recommend resources (14)
 Teachers help with resource selection (6)
 Teachers give tips on how to use resources(8)

Note: The number in the bracket stands for the number of interviewees who expressed the opinion.
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 9

concern was the accuracy of the information and language in the online resources. For
instance, Teacher Sofıa voiced her concerns about the online content and teachers’ lim-
ited control over the online resources students accessed outside the classroom:

The Internet is a great resource but it goes very much unchecked. We do try to steer students
towards good sites rather than bad ones, but at the end of the day, we don’t have control about
what students do or access outside the classroom.

Similar concerns made Teacher Yue hesitate to encourage students to use online
resources:

I wouldn’t suggest using technologies too much, since many things on the web did not go
through careful review and students may end up with inaccurate information and language
online.

Some teacher participants were also concerned about students’ difficulties in inter-
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

acting with authentic materials online due to their limited language proficiency. Teacher
Yue and Teacher Sofıa were concerned that exposing their beginning-level students to
authentic materials might increase their fear of the language and reduce their self-effi-
cacy in learning the language. Teacher Aoi felt that his beginner students might survive
better in a controlled environment, and that pushing these students into authentic com-
munities would be very difficult for many of his students. Thus, the teacher participants
held dilemmatic attitudes towards encouraging learners’ autonomous use of technology
for learning.
Furthermore, the teacher and student participants diverged in their perceptions of the
need for teacher involvement. The teacher participants perceived themselves as having
limited obligations regarding learner out-of-class technology use for language learning.
Some of them felt that their primary responsibility lay in helping students build their basic
knowledge about the target language. In Teacher Aoi’s opinion,

These are university students. They need a degree. They have to study the language seriously.
It’ll be helpful to provide the online sources to students, but technology is not the priority.
For me, the class is the priority.

Others felt that students were grown-ups and knew what they needed, and they, as
teachers, should not interfere in students’ private time:

Surely it’s important. However, after school is students’ personal terrain and we, as teachers,
should not interfere too much. (T_Le)
My students are quite mature and independent. They are not easily influenced by teachers,
unless the teacher is really an expert in the field. (T_Yue)

More importantly, most teacher participants felt that their students possessed the
capacity to locate online resources themselves. They felt that “students could find any-
thing they are looking for” (T_Ming), and “they knew a lot more than us teachers”
(T_Sofıa). Consequently, most teacher participants expected their students to use their
initiative in technology use outside the classroom, and they adopted a passive, rather than
a proactive, approach, involving themselves only when students approached them for
help. Teacher Jie did not provide the links of the Youtube movies she played in class to
her students unless “they requested so.” Teacher Jose took a neutral stance:
 10 C. Lai et al.

I did not discourage them but did not encourage them either. But if some students did
approach me to ask for recommendations, I would give them help.

However, the passive approach that most teacher participants adopted in their involve-
ment with learner autonomous use of technology for learning mismatched students’
expectations. The student participants expressed their wish for teachers to play a more
active role in assisting them in their out-of-class experience with technology. They
reported having difficulty evaluating the accuracy of information and the appropriateness
of language online. As Student Loh pointed out, “when I searched for information by
myself, I was not sure about the accuracy and reliability of the sources.” The student par-
ticipants also expressed difficulty locating appropriate and trustworthy resources:

I don’t know which website is most useful or fits me better. I have great difficulty selecting
the appropriate resources. (S_Hao)
I think I can find the resources, but I am not sure I can judge whether it’s appropriate.
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

(S_Leung)
When I searched for podcasts in Korean on Google, I simply chose the sites according to
chronological order. I usually chose the first one or two. I’m not sure about my ability to
select the most appropriate resources (S_Loh)

This problem was further exacerbated by students’ limited language proficiency. Stu-
dent Ho found that many online resources were very difficult, and he had to check the dic-
tionary frequently when using the resources, which discouraged him from using these
resources for learning. Thus, contrary to the teacher participants’ expectations, the student
participants needed much greater involvement and support from teachers. The passive
approach that most teacher participants adopted made students feel that their teachers
were not supportive of technology use outside the classroom. Student Cheung reported
that her French teacher did not emphasize the use of technology outside the class for
learning, which gave her the following impression:

The teacher did not have the sense that this [technology use] could help us learn better, or
even though they knew it can help; they did not understand the importance of it.

Thus, both the teacher participants and the student participants agreed on the necessity
and importance of autonomous use of technology outside the classroom. However, the
teacher participants were inclined towards minimum teacher involvement, whereas the
student participants expected greater proactive teacher support concerning this issue. In
view of this, exactly what roles did the student participants and teacher participants
expect teachers to play in promoting learners; autonomous use of technology for language
learning?

Expected and enacted teachers’ roles in promoting learners’ autonomous use of

technology for language learning
General encouragement vs. specific recommendation
The teacher participants’ belief in their students’ abilities to locate resources themselves
led them to perceive that their roles lay more in guiding and orienting students in certain
directions than in recommending specific resources. For Teacher Aoi, guiding students
towards the right approach to learning was important. He encouraged his students to look
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 11

actively for opportunities to use the language, but left the responsibility for locating and
selecting specific resources to the students. Teacher Jie concurred with him: “teachers are
the ones to provide information since our students are younger than us and they know
more about technology than us.” Teacher Le further pointed out that this guidance was
more about experience sharing: “we need to share our experience with them and tell them
what activities are good and what activities are not worth the time.” This downplaying of
teachers’ role of resource recommendations was not well received among the student
participants.
When asked about the support they needed from their teachers in autonomous use of
technology for learning, all the student participants listed teacher recommendations as the
No. 1 support they needed. Student Chi pointed out that when teachers only encouraged
them to use online resources for learning without any recommendations on specific
resources to use, students would not treat the encouragement seriously and would not
spend time searching for the resources. For the student participants, both encouragement
and resource recommendations had significant but distinctive influences on autonomous
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

use of technology. They felt that teacher encouragement could change their beliefs about
language learning, reinforce their beliefs about the usefulness of out-of-class technology
use, and thus help them persevere in using online resources for learning:

When the teacher encouraged more, I’d realize that Japanese learning could happen any-
where and anytime. (S_Yang)
Because of their encouragement, I would use online resources for learning more frequently.
(S_Ho)
Constant encouragement from teachers would make me treat the online resources more seri-
ously. In the past, I mainly used them for pleasure. If I didn’t feel like using them, I’d stop
going there. (S_Hao)

As for teachers’ resource recommendations, the student participants felt that they
could help in two major ways: by delivering an explicit message concerning the affordan-
ces of a given technological resource for language learning, and by providing easy access
to more trustworthy resources. Student Loh’s Korean teacher recommended her to use
social networking tools for Korean learning, which transformed the way she used the
tools:

I hadn’t thought about learning language or getting familiar with the Korean culture through
these social networking sites. I had used them mainly for entertainment. But now, it has
become one of my purposes of using these social networking sites. So that’s a major change.

For Student Cheung, even though the particular mobile apps recommended by her
teacher were not attractive, the teacher’s recommendations still stimulated her to search
for similar and more interesting ones. More importantly, the student participants reported
that teachers’ resource recommendations relieved them of the frustration involved in
searching for and selecting the appropriate resources and provided access to trustworthy
resources:

Then I’d know which websites to search for and which websites were of better quality.
(S_Tian)
It would give me easier access to the resources. Otherwise, I’d have to search for resources
myself. It would be very inefficient. I may not be able to locate good websites, which may
discourage me from using online resources at all. (S_Hao)
 12 C. Lai et al.

If the teacher recommended some resources, we would feel more confident using them
because the teacher judged them to be good. It’s better than if we search for resources online
without any criteria to choose. (S_Yang)

Unfortunately, only 3 out of the 15 student participants reported that their teachers
actively encouraged them to make use of a wide range of online resources. The rest felt
that their teachers either did not explicitly encourage them (or encouraged a limited set of
resources such as movies and songs), or encouraged them but did not recommend specific
resources. Furthermore, the teacher participants’ expectations of the resources to be rec-
ommended also mismatched those of the student participants. The majority of teachers
recommended resources with a primary focus on reinforcing the instructional content,
such as additional online exercises, self-assessment or websites that introduced students
to the target culture. The majority of the student participants felt that the resources recom-
mended by their teachers were boring, consisting mainly of vocabulary exercises, dictio-
naries and “dictionary like” websites. The student participants wished that the resources
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

recommended by the teachers could be more interesting:

I feel that teachers need, first of all, to stay on the same page as us. The websites the teacher
recommended were not the ones our generation would normally visit. (S_Lee)

The student participants also expressed the wish that teachers would provide support
on how to select resources:

I think first of all, the teacher should introduce some websites to us. Perhaps, they can tell us
how to choose the appropriate ones, like some kind of criteria [for resource selection], so that
we can know how to choose when and what to select or what not to choose. (S_Leung)

However, despite students’ expectations concerning greater teacher roles in resource

recommendation and support, the teacher participants expressed concerns over their lim-
ited knowledge in this aspect. They felt that they did not have sufficient knowledge about
useful technological resources to make specific recommendations; as Teacher Ping
pointed out,

I would encourage my students to use technological resources for learning. But the problem
is I don’t know much. Here’s the dilemma. On the one hand, I think it’s a good thing. On the
other hand, I’m not a high-tech person, and I’m still learning. I don’t know what the latest or
most useful resources for my students are.

For Teacher Aoi, lacking knowledge about technological resources was also the rea-
son behind his passive approach to resource recommendations:

I think it’s a good idea. But as I said, I’m not really good at technology. I’m learning and am
getting to know more and more technological resources. But I haven’t sorted them out yet. So
I can’t make a list and recommend to the students. When individual students approached me
in class for resources like online dictionaries, I simply told them the one that I thought was
good. But my knowledge is not organized enough to give comprehensive recommendations.

Controlled access to resources vs. tips on how to use authentic resources

Another major role that the teacher participants identified for themselves was in helping
students to deal with online authentic materials, given their concern over the inaccuracy
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 13

of information and language online and the difficulty level of the authentic materials
online. The majority of the teacher participants responded to this self-identified responsi-
bility by taking on the role of the gatekeeper. They felt that a major role teachers could
play was to select the online resources for students and provide controlled and structured
learning resources that were appropriate for their students content-wise and language-
wise. Quite a few teacher participants either provided teacher-made materials or recom-
mended well-structured instructional materials and materials that had been screened for
content appropriateness. Teacher Ming recommended self-recorded texts for out-of-class
listening practice because she felt that “students were more familiar with [her] voice.”
Teacher Jose recommended teacher-adapted online texts for additional reading because
“many students were very insecure when they encountered materials that were too diffi-
cult or when they did not understand many words.” Only three teacher participants,
instead of helping students circumvent authentic websites, focused on developing
students’ attitudes to and strategies for interacting with authentic materials. Teacher
Agathe guided her students to understand that “there were no such movies for beginners
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

and movies for intermediates” and encouraged them to make use of online audio resour-
ces with the help of subtitles and dictionaries. Teacher Sofıa taught her students “how to
listen to authentic dialogues” by guiding them not to expect 100% comprehension and
teaching them listening strategies they could utilize when listening to authentic materials.
Teacher Sofıa and Teacher Aoi taught their students how not to rely too much on dictio-
naries while reading authentic materials. Thus, the majority of the teacher participants
chose to control students’ access to online resources rather than helping them to interact
with authentic materials and use technological resources effectively for learning. This
was corroborated by the student interview data, where the student participants pointed
out that their teachers seldom provided tips on how to use resources effectively. Only
four student participants reported that their teachers gave metacognitive tips and cogni-
tive strategies on how to use technological resources effectively for learning.
However, the student participants greatly valued metacognitive tips (e.g., resource
selection and planning) and cognitive strategies (e.g., effective utilization of resources)
from teachers on how to use the resources for language learning. Most of the participants
reported that they lacked the knowledge to use the resources effectively for language
learning. They did not know how to transform the use of the online tools from entertain-
ment to learning:

I have been immersed in the Internet world and am very versatile in using the tools. However,
I still haven’t figured out how to use them for Japanese learning. But I’m very interested.
(S_Lee)

Student Cheung remarked that although students might have greater computer techni-
cal skills than their teachers, teachers knew more about how to use the technologies to
learn the language and to communicate with native speakers. Thus, the student participants
regarded tips and strategies on technology use for language learning as a significant sup-
port that teachers could provide. They reported that tips from the teachers influenced their
likelihood of incorporating online resources into their learning repertoire. Student Loh’s
teacher held a two-hour session on how to use a Korean resource website to learn Korean,
and the tips shared by the teacher made him start using this online resource for learning:

It [the tip] made me know how to use the site. If the teacher just introduced the website to me
[without explaining how to use it for Korean learning], I wouldn’t know how to use it.
 14 C. Lai et al.

I would just know that it’s a site that is frequently used by the Koreans and could be useful
for Korean learning. But I wouldn’t know how to use it.

They also reported that teachers’ tips enhanced their ability to use technology as
learning tools. Student Lee’s Japanese teacher raised his awareness of the differences
between the vernacular Japanese used online and the standardized Japanese, which made
her consciously compare the language she heard in movies and TV shows with the lan-
guage she learned at school while viewing these sources.

In-class technology use for instruction purpose alone vs. in-class technology use as
stimulus for out-of-class technology use
As for teachers’ in-class technology use, the teacher participants did report using techno-
logical resources in class. The resources they reported using were mainly YouTube vid-
eos for either cultural information or relaxation during recess. Moreover, they reported
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

using the videos mainly to attract students’ attention and to make the cultural informa-
tion more receptive and comprehensible to the students. None of them reported con-
sciously using technological resources in class to enhance students’ use of technology
outside the classroom. The teacher participants also reported incorporating a greater
variety of technological resources into assignments, such as searching for online infor-
mation for presentation, Facebook for writing as communication, video production, and
so on.
However, the student participants felt that teachers’ demonstration of technology use
in class could help them develop the mentality and knowledge necessary to use techno-
logical resources for language learning. Student Hao’s French teacher used YouTube in
class, which made him realize that YouTube was not just an entertainment site with inter-
esting movies and news; rather, it contained resources that could be used to learn French.
Student Yang and Student Tian felt that teachers’ use of technologies in class raised their
awareness of the important functions of the tools that were useful for language learning.
In addition, the student participants commented that in-class use of technological resour-
ces provided them easy access to resources, since quite a few of them started using the
online sites that their teachers visited in class. When Student Hao’s teacher played the
songs of a few French singers in class, he got the idea of who to search for, which led him
to more songs from different singers. The student participants also perceived teachers’ in-
class use of technology as conveying a strong message concerning the usefulness of the
technological resources for language learning. Student Chi’s Japanese teachers played a
few Japanese songs in class, which made him aware that teachers expected them to
expose themselves to Japanese in their daily lives, not just in the classroom, and increased
his confidence in using the resources since he found that he was actually able to compre-
hend the source. However, the majority of the student participants were dubious about the
potential influence of teachers assigning technology-enhanced homework on their autono-
mous use of technology outside the classroom due to the compulsory, and usually boring,
nature of the assignments. Whether assignments could influence their technology use
depended a lot on whether the resources involved were interesting or not. For instance,
Student Hao pointed out that he would not usually explore the technological resources
involved in the assignments further because, in his words, “I simply regarded it as a com-
pulsory work. If the content is dull, I may not even finish it.” However, he further pointed
out: “if the materials were not dull and were of great interest to me, the resources might
serve as an entry point for further exploration.”
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 15

Thus, the teacher participants and student participants reported different expectations
concerning the degree of teachers’ responsibilities and involvement and the specific roles
teachers could or needed to play in promoting autonomous use of technology for language
learning. Whereas the student participants valued teacher encouragement, resource rec-
ommendations, metacognitive tips and cognitive strategies and in-class use of technolo-
gies, the teacher participants perceived that their primary role was in providing general
guidance and encouragement and offering controlled resources that were appropriate to
the students. Only a few of them realized the necessity of providing a wider range of
online resources and tips on how to use the resources.

Discussion
Concurring with the current research findings on teachers’ perceptions of learner auton-
omy in out-of-class learning in general (Chan, 2003; Thanh, 2011; Toffoli & Sockett,
2015), the teacher participants in this study regarded themselves as having minimal
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

responsibility for and adopting a passive approach to learners’ out-of-class use of technol-
ogy for language learning despite their acknowledgement of the importance of such learn-
ing experience. This passive approach was a product of teachers’ hesitancy towards
introducing authentic materials to students and their overestimation of students’ abilities
to use technological resources for learning. Thus, to help teachers perceive the needs for
a proactive approach, as expected by the students, to supporting autonomous use of tech-
nology for language learning outside the classroom, teacher educators may need to, on
the one hand, attune teachers’ attitudes towards learners’ use of online authentic materials
as self-study materials and, on the other hand, enhance their understanding of the knowl-
edge and skills students need in using technological resources for learning.
In this study, some teacher participants expressed concerns over the linguistic accu-
racy of online authentic materials, which oriented them towards taking the primary
responsibility of providing adapted online materials to their students. The inclination
towards controlled or simplified materials is influenced by a misunderstanding of the lin-
guistic merits of simplified and authentic texts (Crossley, Louwerse, McCarthy, &
McNamara, 2007), and by a prevailing emphasis on developing students’ linguistic com-
petence, which may sacrifice the development of pragmalinguistic and discourse compe-
tence that authentic materials afford (Gilmore, 2007). Researchers argue that such a
single-minded emphasis on controlled material runs the risk of providing a distorted view
of language and culture to the students. Thus, it is important to broaden teachers’ percep-
tion of the range of competences their language teaching need to serve. It is equally
important to help teachers understand the respective linguistic merits of controlled and
authentic materials and correct their misconceptions of the inappropriateness of online
authentic materials for learners of lower proficiency levels (Crossley et al., 2007). Even
more important is that teachers need to share strategies with their students on how to com-
prehend authentic materials and learn from them, and consciously incorporate online
authentic materials during class instruction and guide students to develop the relative
skills and strategies in processing authentic materials.
This study also found that the teacher participants tended to take an oversimplified
view of the skills needed in making use of technologies for learning, where they equated
students’ technical savvy and familiarity with the digital world with their ability to use
technological resources to construct personal learning experiences. This oversimplified
view led to the discrepancies between the teacher participants’ and student participants’
expectations on teachers’ responsibilities for and roles in supporting autonomous learning
 16 C. Lai et al.

with technology outside the classroom. Teachers need to understand that familiarity with
digital world is a necessary but not sufficient condition for autonomous use of technology
for learning outside the classroom. The knowledge and skills that are essential to technol-
ogy use for learning are multidimensional, including the metacognitive, cognitive, social
and affective aspects (Lai, Shum, & Tian, 2014; Stolk et al., 2010). This study found that
at the metacognitive dimension, students need help with resource location and selection;
at the cognitive dimension, students need support on how to use resources in effective
manner; and at the social and affective dimension, students need a positive community
where technology use outside the language classes is highly promoted and their self-effi-
cacy and abilities to use technological resources for autonomous learning are strength-
ened. The multidimensional nature of the essential knowledge and skills determines that
teacher roles in supporting autonomous technology use outside the classroom are multi-
faceted as well, where teacher encouragement, resource recommendation, strategy shar-
ing and in-class technology use exert differential and complementary impacts on
students’ autonomous use of technology for learning outside the classroom (Lai, 2014b).
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

In this study, we found that the teacher participants downplayed the role of resource
recommendation and strategy sharing. The downplaying of these two roles was partly due
to teachers’ overestimation of students’ abilities and partly due to their lack of the knowl-
edge and skills required to play these two roles. Thus, teachers need not only a solid
understanding of the pedagogical affordances that different technologies possess for dif-
ferent learning purposes, but also the knowledge and skills in advising and supporting stu-
dents on selecting and using technological resources effectively to meet their individual
learning needs. Namely, teachers need to know how to help learners perceive and act on
the affordances, how to assist learners to select and orchestrate different technological
resources to serve their learning needs, and how to support learners in dealing with issues
of accuracy and level of difficulty when interacting with online authentic materials. Fur-
thermore, the teacher participants in this study tended to view in-class technology use
solely for instruction purposes. Failing to see the connection between in-class technology
use and students’ out-of-class use for learning shaped the types of technologies selected
and the monotonous ways they were used, which in turn largely constrained the potentials
of in-class practice in promoting students’ autonomous use of technology for language
learning outside the classroom. To maximize the potentials, teachers may want to select
and use the technological resources in ways that could enhance learners’ likelihood of
using, and ability to use, the resources outside the classroom. For instance, when using
YouTube video in class, rather than providing a YouTube video directly to the students,
teachers could show the process through which they search for a YouTube video. Rather
than using YouTube solely for cultural information, teachers could sometimes use You-
Tube videos for listening comprehension purposes and showcase the important functions
and the strategies to use in order to enhance comprehension. Considering the importance
of out-of-class learning with technology for successful language learning (Benson, 2006;
Lai, Zhu, & Gong, 2014; Reinders & White, 2011) and the vast amount of time students
spend with technology outside the classroom, we would argue that both the advising abili-
ties and the consciousness and abilities to connect in-class with out-of-class technology
use and to utilize in-class technology use to support out-of-class technology use should
be critical components of teachers’ technological, pedagogical and content knowledge.
There are a few limitations of this study. First, the study was based on interviews with
self-selected student and teacher samples. The self-selected nature of the samples may
mean that the teacher and student samples may have contained a large proportion of par-
ticipants who perceived themselves as adopters of technology for teaching and learning.
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 17

Thus, the findings from this study may only represent the views of students who are
highly committed to learning a foreign language and of students and teachers who hold
positive views of technology and language teaching and learning. Despite the potential
sample bias, the findings on the differences between teacher and student expectations
concerning teacher involvement and teacher roles may still apply, perhaps even to a
greater degree, to teachers and students who have less experience with using technology
for teaching and learning. Furthermore, the self-selected nature of participation biased the
sample towards a predominance of veteran teachers and students with more than two
years of learning experience, and thus some findings need to be interpreted with caution
when applying to different teacher and student bodies. The second limitation of this study
is that it was conducted at a university in Hong Kong which is heavily influenced by Con-
fucian educational norms, and all the student participants and two-thirds of the teacher
participants were of Asian backgrounds. Consequently, the views reported in this study
might be culture- and context-dependent. In educational contexts with different stu-
dent teacher pedagogical relationships, the expected teacher roles might be different.
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

However, given the consistent research findings on teachers’ minimum involvement in

learner autonomy outside the classroom and students’ lack of knowledge and skills for
using technological resources for learning across different educational contexts (Bailly,
2011; Chan, 2003; Lai, Shum, & Tian, 2014; Kennedy & Miceli, 2010; Thanh, 2011;
Toffoli & Sockett, 2015), the differences in student and teacher expectations with respect
to teacher involvement in learner out-of-class use of technology for learning might still
be found.

Conclusions
This study examined university language teachers’ and students’ expectations concerning
teacher involvement and teacher roles in promoting learners’ autonomous use of technol-
ogy for language learning outside the classroom. It showed that there were mismatches in
students’ and teachers’ perceptions of the degree of teacher involvement and the specific
roles teachers could play. Specifically, students expected greater involvement from teach-
ers in supporting autonomous learning with technology due to their limited understanding
and skills of how to locate, select and use technological resources for language learning
purposes. Students expected teachers to play a greater role in recommending a variety of
technological resources and sharing metacognitive and cognitive strategies for effective
use of these technological resources. However, teachers considered themselves to have a
minimal role due to their overestimation of students’ abilities and their concern over their
limited abilities to provide the support. The study also found that in-class technology use
and technology-enhanced assignments might influence students’ out-of-class behavior
only if the technological resources are interesting and the way technologies are used
affords students easy access to the resources and knowledge of how to use the resources
effectively for language learning.
It is important to raise teachers’ awareness of the differences between student and
teacher expectations and to help them resolve these differences (Chan, 2003). The
research findings of the study suggest that teacher technology education needs to pay
greater attention to making teachers aware of the various roles their students expect them
to play in supporting their out-of-class learning with technology and to equipping teachers
with the necessary knowledge and skills to advise and support students in making use of
technological resources outside the classroom for language learning. Due to its explor-
atory nature of a one single data point with a modest size of participants, the study could
 18 C. Lai et al.

only provide some preliminary findings that are suggestive and the findings need to be
further verified with large-scale studies in different contexts and with a longitudinal, tri-
angulated design that incorporate observations of students’ and teachers’ actual behav-
iors. Nonetheless, this study calls for greater efforts in understanding the various roles
teachers could play to help and support students in making active use of technologies for
language learning outside the classroom, and how teachers could be supported to develop
the abilities to perform these roles. More research could be conducted to understand the
expected teacher roles in different cultural and educational contexts, to examine the types
of knowledge and skills teachers need in order to support learners’ autonomous learning
efforts with technology outside the classroom, and to explore various teacher technology
education models that could help teachers develop the necessary awareness and abilities
to promote learner autonomous language learning with technology outside the classroom.

Disclosure statement
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors
Chun Lai is an assistant professor at the Faculty of Education, the University of Hong Kong. Her
interests include self-directed language learning beyond the classroom, technology enhanced lan-
guage learning, and technology integration. Her most recent projects entails understanding the
nature of self-directed language learning with technology beyond the classroom and developing
learner training models to support self-directed use of technology for foreign language learning.
Yuk Yeung is a lecturer in the Chinese Language Center at the School of Chinese. Her research
interest is in teaching Chinese as a second language.
Jingjing Hu is a research assistant at the Faculty of Education. Her research interest is in second lan-
guage teacher cognition.

References
Al Asmari, A. (2013). Practices and prospects of learner autonomy: Teachers’ perceptions. English
Language Teaching, 6(3), 1 10.
Al-Shaqsi, T.S. (2009). Teachers’ beliefs about learner autonomy. In S. Borg (Ed.). Researching
English language teaching and teacher development in Oman (pp. 157 165). Oman: Ministry
of Education.
AQF. 2011. Australian qualifications framework. Adelaide, Australia: Australian Qualifications
Framework Advisory Board. www.aqf.edu.au.
Bailly, S. (2011). Teenagers learning language out of school: What, why and how do they learn?
How can school help them?. In P. Benson, & H. Reinders (Eds.), Beyond the language class-
room (pp. 119 131). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
B€aumer, T., Preis, N., Roßbach, H., Stecher, L., & Klieme, E. (2011). Education processes in life-
course-specific learning environments. Z Erziehungswiss, 14, 87 101. doi: 10.1007/s11618-
011-0183-6
Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow, UK: Pearson
Education Limited.
Benson, P. (2006). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 40, 21 40.
Benson, P. (2008). Teachers’ and learners’ perspectives on autonomy. In T. Lamb, & H. Reinders
(Eds.), Learner and teacher autonomy: Concepts, realities, and responses (pp. 15 32).
Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Benson, P. (2009). Mapping out the world of language learning beyond the classroom. In F. Kjisik,
P. Voller, N. Aoki, & Y. Nakata (Eds.). Mapping the terrain of learner autonomy: Learning
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 19

environments, learning communities and identities (pp. 217 235). Tampere: Tampere Univer-
sity Press.
Benson, P. (2011). Language learning and teaching beyond the classroom: An introduction to the
field. In P. Benson, & H. Reinders (Eds). Beyond the language classroom (pp. 7 16). New
York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Borg, S., & Al-Busaidi, S. (2012). Learner autonomy: English language teachers’ beliefs and practi-
ces. ELT Journal, 12(7), 1 45.
Brown, J.S. (2000). Growing up digital: How the web changes work and education and the ways
people learn. Change, 32, 11 20. doi:10.1080/00091380009601719
Chan, V. (2003). Autonomous language learning: The teachers’ perspectives. Teaching in Higher
Education, 8, 33 54.
Chang, S., & Tung, F. (2008). An empirical investigation of students’ behavioral intentions to use
the online learning course websites. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 71 83.
Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital rev-
olution and schooling in America. New York: Teachers College Press.
Crossley, S.A., Louwerse, M.M., McCarthy, P.M., & McNamara, D.S. (2007). A linguistic analysis
of simplified and authentic texts. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 15 30.
Davis, H.A. (2003). Conceptualizing the role and influence of student-teacher relationships on
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

children’s social and cognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 38, 207 234.
Doyle, H., & Parrish, M. (2012). Investigating students’ ways to learn English outside of class: A
researchers’ narrative. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 3, 196 203.
European Commission. (2001). Making a European area of lifelong learning a reality. Brussels:
Commission of the European Communities.
Fagerlund, T. (2012). Learning and using English and Swedish beyond the classroom: Activity sys-
tems of six upper secondary school students (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of
Jyv€askyl€a, Finland.
Field, J. (2000). Lifelong learning and the new educational order. Trent, UK: Trentham Books Ltd.
Fukuda, S.T., & Yoshida, H. (2013). Time is of the essence: Factors encouraging out-of-class study
time. ELT Journal, 67, 31 40.
Gamble, C., Aliponga, J., Wilkins, M., Koshiyama, Y., Yoshida, K., & Ando, S. (2012). Examining
learner autonomy dimensions: Students’ perceptions of their responsibility and ability. In A.
Stewart, & N. Sonda (Eds.), JALT2011 Conference Proceedings (pp. 263 272). Tokyo: JALT.
Garrison, D.R. (1997). Self-directed learning: Toward a comprehensive model. Adult Education
Quarterly, 48, 18 33.
Gilmore, A. (2007). Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language
Teaching, 40, 97 118.
Gray, K., Chang, S., & Kennedy, G. (2010). Use of social wLLA technologies by international and
domestic undergraduate students: Implications for internationalising learning and teaching in
Australian universities. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(1), 31 46.
Guo, S.C. (2011). Impact of an out-of-class activity on students’ English awareness, vocabulary,
and autonomy. Language Education in Asia, 2, 246 256.
Hagger, M.S., & Chatzisarantis, N.L.D. (2012). Transferring motivation from educational to extra-
mural contexts: A review of the trans-contextual model. European Journal of Psychology and
Education, 27, 195 2012. doi:10.1007/s10212-011-0082-5
Holden, B., & Usuki, M. (1999). Learner autonomy in language learning: A preliminary investiga-
tion. Bulletin in Hokuriku University, 23, 191 203.
Inozu, J., Sahinkarakas, S., & Yumru, H. (2010). The nature of language learning experiences
beyond the classroom and its learning outcomes. US-China Foreign Language, 8, 14 21.
Kennedy, C., & Miceli, T. (2010). Corpus-assisted creative writing: Introducing intermediate Italian
learners to a corpus as a reference resource. Language Learning and Technology, 14, 28 44.
Kop, R., & Fournier, H. (2011). New dimension of self-directed learning in an open-networked
learning environment. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning, 7(2), 1 20.
Kormos, J., & Csizer, K. (2014). The interaction of motivation, self-regulatory strategies, and
autonomous learning behavior in different learner groups. TESOL Quarterly, 48(2), 275 299.
Lai, C. (2013). A framework of developing self-directed technology use for language learning. Lan-
guage Learning & Technology, 17, 100 122.
 20 C. Lai et al.

Lai, C. (2014a). Perceiving and traversing in-class and out-of-class learning: Accounts from foreign
language learners in Hong Kong. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching. Advance
Online Publication. doi:10.1080/17501229.2014.918982
Lai, C. (2014b). Modeling teacher’s influence on learners’ self-directed use of technology for lan-
guage learning outside the classroom. Computers & Education, 82, 74 83.
Lai, C., & Gu, M.Y. (2011). Self-regulated out-of-class language learning with technology. Com-
puter Assisted Language Learning, 24(4), 317 335.
Lai, C., Shum, M., & Tian, Y. (2014). Enhancing learners’ self-directed use of technology for lan-
guage learning: The effectiveness of an online training platform. Computer Assisted Language
Learning. Advance Online Publication. doi:10.1080/09588221.2014.889714
Lai, C., Zhu, W.M., & Gong, G. (2014). Understanding the quality of out-of-class English learning.
TESOL Quarterly. Advance Online Publication. doi:10.1002/tesq.171
Lazaro, N., & Reinders, H. (2009). Language learning and teaching in the self-access centre: A
practical guide for teachers. Sydney, Australia: NCELTR.
Little, D. (2004). Constructing a theory of learner autonomy: Some steps along the way. In K.
M€akinen, P. Kaikkonen, & V. Kohonen (Eds.), Future perspectives in foreign language educa-
tion (pp. 15 25). Oulu: Publications of the Faculty of Education in Oulu University 101.
Nakata, Y. (2011). Teachers’ readiness for promoting learner autonomy: A study of Japanese EFL
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

high school teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 900 910.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2007, April). Qualification
and lifelong learning (pp. 1 2). Paris: Policy Brief, OECD.
Oxford, R. (2009). The influence of technology on second language writing. In R. Oxford, & J.
Oxford (Eds.), Second language teaching and learning in the Net generation (pp. 9 21).
Manoa, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center.
Qi, S.J., & Li, Q. (2006). A survey on English majors attitudes towards learner autonomy. CELEA
Journal, 29, 66 74.
Reinders, H. (2010). Towards a classroom pedagogy for learner autonomy: A framework of inde-
pendent language learning skills. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35, 40 55.
Reinders, H., & Darasawang, P. (2012). Diversity in language support. In G. Stockwell (Ed.), Com-
puter-assisted language learning: Diversity in research and practice (pp. 49 70). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Reinders, H., & White, C. (2011). Learner autonomy and new learning environments. Language
Learning & Technology, 15(3), 1 3.
Saad, N.S.M., Yunus, M.M., & Embi, M.A. (2013). Research on international students in traditional
host countries and Malaysia: Some potential areas in Malaysia. Procedia Social and Behav-
ioral Sciences, 90, 488 496.
Shahsavari, S. (2014). Efficiency, feasibility and desirability of learner autonomy based on teachers’
and learners’ point of views. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4, 271 280.
Sims, R. (2008). Rethinking (e)learning: A manifesto for connected generations. Distance Educa-
tion, 29, 153 164.
Stolk, J., Martello, R., Somerville, M., & Geddes, J. (2010). Engineering students’ definitions of and
responses to self-directed learning. International Journal of Engineering Education, 26,
900 913.
Sundqvist, P. (2011). A possible path to progress: Out-of-school English language learners in
Sweden. In P. Benson, & H. Reinders (Eds.), Beyond the language classroom (pp. 106 118).
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sylven, L.K., & Sundqvist, P. (2012). Gaming as extramural English L2 learning and L2 proficiency
among young learners. ReCALL, 24, 302 321.
Thanh, Van N. (2011). Language learners’ and teachers’ perceptions relating to learner autonomy-
Are they ready for autonomous language learning?. VNU Journal of Science, Foreign Lan-
guages, 27, 41 52.
Toffoli, D., & Sockett, G. (2015). University teachers’ perceptions of online informal learning of
English (OILE). Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 7 21.
Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
€ un, M.F., Demir, C.E., & Akar, H. (2014). A study on ELT high school teachers’ practices to fos-
Ur€
ter learner autonomy. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5, 825 836.
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 21

Voller, P. (1997) Does the teacher have a role in autonomous language learning? In P. Benson, & P.
Voller (Eds.), Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 98 113). London:
Longman.
Wang, Y. (2007). What do autonomous language learners expect their teachers to do?—A study on
teacher’s roles in autonomous learning project. Foreign Language World, 4, 005.
Winke, P., & Goertler, S. (2008). Did we forget someone? Students’ computer access and literacy
for CALL. CALICO Journal, 25, 482 509.
Wong, L.H., & Looi, C.K. (2012). Enculturing self-directed seamless learners: Towards a facilitated
seamless learning process framework mediated by mobile technology. Conference Proceeding:
Wireless, Mobile and Ubiquitous Technology in Education (WMUTE), 1 8.
Zhan, Y., & Andrews, S. (2014). Washback effects from a high-stakes examination on out-of-class
English learning: Insights from possible self theories. Assessment in Education: Principles,
Policy & Practice, 21, 71 89.

Appendix 1. Interview Guides

Student Interview Guide
Downloaded by [Gazi University] at 13:10 01 May 2015

(1) Do you use technology outside the language classroom to support language learning?
How?
(2) What challenges or frustrations have you encountered in using technology for language
learning outside the classroom?
(3) Does your teacher have any impact on your use of technology outside the language class-
rooms? How?
(4) What kind of teacher behavior would increase your use of technology outside the lan-
guage classrooms? How?
(5) What support do you need in order to engage in technology-enhanced use of technology
for language learning? How might teachers support you better in this aspect?

Teacher Interview Guide

(1) What is your previous and current teaching background?

(2) What do you perceive as the relationship between technology and your teaching in
general?
(3) How did you involve technology in your course/curriculum and teaching [teaching mate-
rials, teaching activities, assignments, assessment, etc.]? What technological resources/
tools were used and for what purposes?
(4) What are your views on students’ use of technology outside the language classroom for
language learning purpose?
(5) Did you encourage your students to use technology outside the class to learn the
language? Why? & How?
(6) Do you feel that you influence students’ self-directed use of technology outside the class-
room for language learning? In what aspects?
(7) What concerns do you have about students’ use of technology outside the language
classroom?
(8) In general, how might teachers help enhance student use of technology outside the class
for language learning (If we want to enhance students’ use of technology outside the class
for language learning, what roles could teachers play)?