System, Vol. 23, No. 2. pp. 207-221.

1995

~ Pergamon Elsevier Science Ltd

Printed in Great Britain
0346-25 IX/95 $9.50 + 0.00
0346-251X(95)00009-7

AUTONOMY AND STRATEGY USE IN DISTANCE FOREIGN

LANGUAGE LEARNING: RESEARCH FINDINGS

CYNTHIAW H I T E
Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand

The predominant context for strategy research over the last two decades has been
language learning situated in a conventional classroom environment. The strategies learners
use in self-instruction contexts and the degree of autonomy they exercise to develop foreign
language skills without the help of a teacher or learning group have received little
attention. This paper examines results from a comparative study of the strategies of distance
and classroom foreign language learners (French, German, Japanese and Chinese)
enrolled in a dual-mode institution. Data on strategy use is gathered through a questionnaire
(N = 417) and one kind of verbal report procedure, the yoked subject technique (N = 37),
and is analysed using a refined version of the metacognitive, cognitive, social and
affective model (O'Malley and Chamot, 1990). Results indicate that mode of study is
the predominant influence on metacognitive dimensions of strategy use, ahead of age
and level of study. The distinctive use of metacognitive strategies, particularly self-
management strategies, by distance learners is illustrated using extracts from the verbal
reports, and the discussion focuses on the contribution made by such strategies to the
development of autonomy in language learning.

1. INTRODUCTION

The investigation of language learning strategies over the past two decades has advanced our
understanding of the processes learners use to develop their skills in a second or foreign language.
Research has also pointed to variance in strategy use according to factors such as level of study
(Cohen and Aphek, 1981; Tyacke and Mendelsohn, 1986; Chamot and Ktipper, 1989) and gender
(Ehrman and Oxford, 1989; Oxford and Nyikos, 1989). The influence of different learning
environments on learners and on the means they use to develop language skills has not, to date,
been the subject of research, although the importance of such research has been emphasized (e.g.
Stem, 1983; Skehan, 1989; O'MaUey and Chamot, 1990; Jones, 1993). An important component
of strategy research in nonclassroom environments is the issue of learner autonomy; Legutke and
Thomas (1991) refer to the mutual benefit to be gained from closer research endeavours between
the learner autonomy movement and learning strategy research. One avenue of research linking
these two fields is the investigation of the way learners behave within a self-instruction context
and the strategies they employ to develop target language (TL) skills. The current study has been
motivated by questions about how distance learners manage to develop competence in a foreign
language and how their strategy use compares with that of more conventional classroom learners.
It explores learner roles in two different learning environments, specifically in terms of the

207
208 CYNTHIAWHITE

degree of autonomy learners are required to develop in such contexts and how this relates to their
use of learning strategies.

SELF-INSTRUCTION MODES OF LANGUAGE LEARNING

Self-instruction, for the purposes of this paper, refers to a mode of learning in which the learners
are working without direct control of the teacher, outside of a conventional classroom environment.
Teach-yourself courses, distance education, open learning and self-access centres are some of the
self-instruction options available when a classroom-based approach is either not feasible or
dersirable. There are a number of important parallels which can be seen to exist between these
language learning contexts, such as the absence of a teacher to direct and oversee the learning
process, student isolation from a learning group, choice about what, where and when to study and
the need for self-direction on the part of the learner.

Distance education, the self-instruction mode of learning in this study, is characterized by "the
physical separation of teacher and learner" whereby "the individual is responsible for his (sic) own
learning" (Rumble, 1989: p. 33). In distance education the role of the teacher in the learning process
and the role of the learner are radically altered (Davis, 1988). For example, the teacher does not
direct each learning session indicating what should be learned and how it can be learned. Similarly
the teacher is not available to set up and oversee learning activities and to intervene when
problems are struck, and does not provide an immediate source of explanation, correction,
feedback and encouragement. Rather, the role of the teacher is that of respondent, whom the learner
must make some effort to contact (for example by phone, e-mail, letter) and who may not be able
to make an immediate reply. The distance learner is not only separated from the teacher but also
from the learning group. Thus learning must take place without the support of fellow learners and
without the interactions provided by pair work and group work which allow the learner to,
among other things, develop and assess his/her performance in the TL.

The distance context places a number of what may be new demands for self-direction on the
language learner. At the same time it presents some exciting prospects. For example, distance
learners have more opportunities than their classroom counterparts to choose what and how they
learn. They also have more freedom to determine the kinds and combinations of tasks they work
on and to ignore activities or sections of the materials which they do not consider to be personally
useful for the development of their TL skills.

Faced with the demands and opportunities of a self-instruction context, distance learners are
compelled to re-evaluate their role and responsibilities as language learners. To succeed in
learning the TL, they need to be self-directed, which involves first and foremost developing an
awareness of the process of language learning and an understanding of the need to "master their
own performative role" (Carver, 1984; p. 127) in the language. Once such self-knowledge begins
to develop, learners have a basis for devising their own means of learning and of managing their
learning.

When distance learners are confronted with the task of working into a language on their own, they
report initial feelings of lack of preparedness and lack of confidence and a sense of inadequacy.
 AUTONOMY AND STRATEGY USE IN DISTANCE FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING 209

For distance learners, devising ways of learning the TL is seen to be a time-consuming process.
This is illustrated by this comment from a distance learner of Japanese:
Deciding how to tackle things on my own seemed to take me ages and it also took a lot of faith that
I would eventually know what I was doing. I was really concerned to get stuck into learning the language
but it took me months to really work out my own system for doing it. Now it's automatic.
Furthermore, the intrinsic value for the learner in finding his/her own way is not always
appreciated, as in the following extract from a distance learner of Chinese:
I wasted a lot of time at the beginning working out how I was going to learn from the course and finding
out what was effective for me. I wish I'd known that at the start.

AUTONOMY AND THE DISTANCE LANGUAGE LEARNER

The concept of learner autonomy, as used in this study, relates to an attitude on the part of the
learner towards taking control of the language learning process and assuming responsibility for
the process. The ability to exercise autonomy requires the learner to have developed an
understanding of the nature of language learning and of his/her role in that process, and as part
of this to have developed an appropriate repertoire of language learning strategies. These two
requirements are similar to Wenden's conceptualization of autonomy as consisting of "the use
of self-instructional techniques" and "an internal change of consciousness" (1987: p. 12).
Autonomy then is something which is internal to the learner and which is not necessarily tied to
any particular learning circumstances. A self-instruction context for leaming does not automatically
equate with learner autonomy but autonomy may arise and develop within the learner as a
response to the specific demands of a self-instruction context.

The relationship between the learning context and the need for learner self-reliance is a recurrent
theme in writings on distance education (e.g. Moore, 1977; Thompson and Knox, 1987; Moore,
1990). In an early work on distance and autonomy Moore (1977) argues that learner autonomy
is a necessary theoretical component of distance education because of the separation of teacher
and learner; the learner is alone and is compelled as such to assume a degree of autonomy that
might be uncomfortable in other circumstances. While distance language learning may require
learners to be autonomous in Holec' s sense of having the "ability to assume responsibility" for
their learning (Holec, 1981: p. 3), it would be wrong to assume that the distance context p e r se
gives rise to learner autonomy. Learners tend to opt for a distance mode of language learning either
because of the flexibility offered by that mode of learning or because work commitments,
geographical distance or lifestyle mean that it is not feasible for them to attend classes (Cull, 1993).
However not all such learners find they can meet the demands of self-directed learning. This factor
is often cited as one of the main reasons for attrition rates in distance courses (Burge, 1988; Krajnc,
1988) along with competing professional priorities and personal commitments.

The study reported here explores the relationship between learner autonomy, the instructional context
and strategy choice. It examines the effects of mode of study on metacognitve, cognitive, social
and affective strategy use relative to other influences from the learning context or learner
characteristics. It also seeks to identify particular strategies or dimensions of strategy use which
set distance learners apart from their classroom counterparts. Thus, Wenden' s first dimension of
autonomy concerning self-instructional techniques is foregrounded. However, the second
dimension, that of the metacognitive self-knowledge and beliefs of language learners, is also
210 CYNTHIA WHITE

important, and is an integral part of any consideration of the means learners choose to develop
TL skills.

In the reporting of this research, the methods and findings of the questionnaire study are
summarised as background to the verbal protocol study which forms the main focus of the paper
since it provides more fine-grained information on the distinctive strategy use of those learners
who develop language skills in a self-instruction context. However, firstly it is necessary to define
the term learning strategies and to examine in more detail the model of strategy use which is applied
to the reports of language learners.

LEARNING STRATEGIES

Language learning strategies are the operations or processes which learners deploy to learn the
TL. Research into what learners do to learn a language has resulted in the identification of
specific strategies (e.g. inferencing, advance organization, self-talk) and in attempts to classify
them in some way. Most current research has been carried out either through the framework
developed by Oxford (see Oxford, 1990) or through the metacognitive, cognitive, socio-affective
scheme used by O'Malley, Ktipper, Chamot and others (see O'Malley and Chamot, 1990, for a
review of recent studies).

This latter theoretical framework comprises three main categories of strategy use, depending on
the kind and level of processing involved: metacognitive, cognitive and socio-affective strategies.
Within the metacognitive category are those strategies which involve "knowing about learning
and controlling learning through planning, monitoring and evaluating the learning activity"
(O'Malley et al., 1989: p. 422). Cognitive strategies are more directly related to individual
learning tasks than metacognitive strategies and involve the manipulation or transformation of
the material to be learned. A third type of learning strategy identified in the cognitive psychology
literature points to the influence of social and affective processes on learning: social strategies
involve interaction with another person while affective strategies are concerned with the
management of one's feelings about learning and language use.

The metacognitive, cognitive, socio-affective model of strategy use was used in this study for two
reasons. First, the scheme has a strong foundation in general learning theories, particularly in terms
of the role of metacognition in learning. Second, the generic categories fit well to questions about
differential strategy use by classroom and distance learners. It is possible, for example, that the
absence of classroom instruction to guide distance learners in planning, monitoring and evaluating
their learning influences the patterns of metacognitive strategy use (MSU) by distance language
learners. In addition, one could also expect that since distance learners generally study on their
own, their opportunities to use social strategies are very much fewer than those available to
classroom learners.

One important modification to the model was introduced. In previous studies social and affective
strategies were subsumed into one category, namely that of socio-affective strategy use. An analysis
of the data from a questionnaire pilot study revealed that the socio-affective scale had low
internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha r = 0.48). This is not surprising since social
strategies relate to quite a different construct from the construct underlying affective strategy use.
Social strategies such as questioning involve interaction with another person while affecting
 AUTONOMY AND STRATEGY USE IN DISTANCE FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING 211

strategies such as self-reinforcement are concerned with "ideational control over affect" (O'Malley
and Chamot, 1990: p. 45). Thus, in this study social strategies and affective strategies are treated
as two distinct categories.

THE QUESTIONNAIRE STUDY

The primary aim of the questionnaire study was to assess the impact of mode of study on strategy
choice relative to a number of influences or potential influences identified in previous studies.
These influences were classified as pertaining to either the language learning context (the TL, level
of study, language use opportunities) or to learner characteristics (age, gender, language learning
experience, prior experience in learning the TL, motivation, proficiency). The questionnaire
study was also used to isolate those strategies which maximally distinguish classroom and
distance learners.

A self-report questionnaire was developed from the classification of strategy use reproduced in
O'Malley and Chamot (1990: pp. 137-139). The questionnaire was administered to first, second
and third year university students enrolled in foreign language papers (French, German, Japanese
and Chinese). The distribution of classroom and distance learners was as follows: classroom learners
(N = 143), distance learners (N = 274). Canonical variate analysis was applied to the questionnaire
data to determine the relationship between the strategy use variables and the variables relating
to the language learning context and to learner characteristics. It was also used to highlight
which set of strategies, if any, contribute to the differentiation of learners according to, for
example, mode of study.

The results showed that mode of study was the principal influence on the MSU of learners ahead
of age and level of study. Distance learners made greater use of metacognitive strategies than
classroom learners, most notably with regard to the strategy of self-management. Self-management
involves "understanding the conditions that help one successfully accomplish language tasks and
arranging for the presence of those conditions" (O'Malley and Chamot, 1990: p. 137). Mode of
study exerted some influence on cognitive strategy use (CSU), but this was much less apparent
than for MSU. The presence or absence of prior TL experience, particularly in the host country,
was the main determinant of cognitive strategy choice. In terms of social strategy use, classroom
learners reported more frequent use of questioning and co-operation than distance learners. The
most frequent response of distance learners to questions about their use of social strategies was
that they had "no opportunity" to use either questioning or co-operation. Classroom learners reported
that they used these strategies "sometimes" or "rarely". The undergraduate foreign language learners
were comparable in their infrequent use of affective strategies, irrespective of their learning context
(e.g. mode of study, TL) or individual characteristics (e.g. age, gender, motivation).

In short, the questionnaire results suggest that mode of study impacts on the metacognitive and
social dimensions of strategy use; distance learners make more frequent use of metacognitive
strategies than do classroom learners in managing their language learning and generally have few
opportunities to make use of social strategies.

The relationship between mode of study and strategy use was then examined in more detail through
a study based on verbal reports.
212 CYNTHIA WHITE

THE YOKED SUBJECT STUDY

Sample
The yoked subject study (N = 37) took place with a subgroup from within the questionnaire study.
The subjects in this case were second year learners of French and Japanese, and again contained
classroom and distance learners (see Table 1).

Table 1. Distribution ofverbalrepoa subjects

Classroom mode Distance mode

French 4 15
Japanese 5 13

An obvious limitation of this sample is the uneven distribution of subjects according to mode of
study. This was unavoidable in that the classroom learners of French were a small group and the
classroom learners of Japanese appeared diffident about participation in the procedure. A larger
representation of classroom learners would have been desirable. Had the classroom sample been
closer to the size of the distance sample, the effects of individual variability would have been more
similar for the two populations.

The yoked sub'fect technique

Concerns about the use of data based on verbal reports have been expressed (e.g. Seliger, 1983;
Ericsson and Simon 1987; Ericsson, 1988), and have been reviewed and debated in the applied
linguistics literature. (For a recent article on these issues see Cohen, 1991.) The yoked subject
technique was chosen as the procedure for this study since it meets various criteria recommended
to produce more valid verbal report data, such as asking learners to report on specific events, not
hypothetical situations (Garner, 1988) and the use of a warm-up phase (Ericsson and Simon, 1980;
Rubin, 1981).

The technique is a form of retrospective account and was first used by Nayak, Hansen Krueger
and McLaughlin (1990) to investigate how monolingual versus multilingual subjects attempted.
to learn a miniature linguistic system. As used in the current study the technique requires subjects
to imagine that they are talking to another student (the hypothetical yoked subject) who plans to
embark on the same language programme the following year and who is interested to learn how
others work through the course. Subjects are presented with a previously unseen section of
course materials and are asked to talk about their ways of working with the materials for the benefit
of the intending student.

Procedure
A pilot study was carried out with third year learners to test the viability of the initial warm-up
phase and of the yoked subject procedure. The pilot verbal reports were used to develop and refine
ways of analysing the descriptions of strategy use. In the main study data was gathered during
four sessions: two for distance learners during on-campus courses and two for classroom learners
during class time. After the warm-up task subjects were told that the purpose of the session was
to find out how language students work with the materials, and that brief extracts from these reports
would be included in a language learning strategy guide for other foreign language students enrolled
at the University. It was emphasized that the researcher was interested in the diverse ways in which
 AUTONOMY AND STRATEGY USE IN DISTANCE FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING 213

students work with the materials and that there was no single right way to do this. Confidentiality
was guaranteed. A brief set of written instructions was given to learners to assist in contextualizing
the procedure. A further aim of these instructions was to provide a number of general questions
which would serve as the kind of "keep talking" comments which might be made by the
hypothetical yoked subject. Learners recorded their reports simultaneously in language laboratory
booths. The whole procedure, including the warm-up task, took approximately 35 minutes.
Tapes were numbered then labelled according to the mode of study (C, D) and the TL (F, J). A
more detailed account of the yoked subject technique is provided in White (1994).

Data analysis
Analysis of the verbatim transcripts involved identifying and classifying each occurrence of reported
strategy use. The preliminary classification was made according to the main categories of strategy
use: metacognitive, cognitive, social and affective. Further classification was then carried out
according to the taxonomy reported by O'Malley and Chamot (1990: p. 137-139) which was used
in the questionnaire study. The lists and definitions of learning strategies provided by Ellis and
Sinclair (1989: pp. 151-154) were also consulted.

The researcher and an independent rater analysed separate copies of the verbatim transcripts. The
application of the same strategy to a different learning activity was recorded as a new instance
of strategy use. Repetition of strategy use in relation to a particular activity was recorded as a single
occurrence. In order to ensure consistency in strategy classification the two raters transformed
the raw data independently, identifying and classifying instances of strategy use. Several
descriptions of the use of each strategy were extracted from the reports and put into a separate
file. It was thus possible to compare different instances of the use of a particular strategy type,
and to check that each instance was consistent with the definition.

Intra-rater reliability was assessed by both raters re-analysing the reports in a different order, using
fresh transcripts, to compare the degree of agreement which existed between the first and second
analyses. Each rater then attempted to resolve any disparities between their first and second analyses.

Up to this point analysis of the verbal report data was carried out by the two raters working
independently. The next stage was for the two raters to compare their analyses. Any differences
in classification were noted and agreement was reached through discussion. The main difficulties
related to determining when particular instances of strategy use were sufficiently frequent and
different from the definitions which appeared in the literature (e.g. Ellis and Sinclair, 1989; O'Malley
and Chamot, 1990; Oxford, 1990), to warrant identification of a new strategy.

Descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages) relating to strategy use were computed.

RESULTS

Mode of study and strategy use

The 37 verbal reports were found to contain a total of 836 instances of strategy use. Preliminary
analysis revealed that significantly more descriptions of strategy use appeared in the reports of
distance learners compared to classroom learners. The verbal reports obtained from classroom
learners contained on average 10.2 instances of strategy use while those obtained from distance
214 CYNTHIA WHITE

16.

14

,it 12.

,g 10.

c 6'

O.

Ideto Co9 So¢io Aff Meto Cog So¢lo NI

Fig. 1. Mean scores for reported strategy use---classroom and distance learners.

learners contained on average 26.6 instances of strategy use.There was no appreciable difference
in the length of reports of either group. A breakdown of the mean number of strategies reported
by classroom and distance learners is displayed in Figure 1.

The most marked difference between classroom and distance learners was found to occur for reports
of MSU. Classroom learners reported on average four instances of MSU, while distance learners
reported 15 such instances. A similar trend occurred for CSU, though mean differences were not
so great. On average, distance learners reported 9.75 uses of cognitive strategies while classroom
learners reported 5.37 instances. Both classroom and distance learners reported relatively
infrequent use of social and affective strategies.

Results from this stage of the analysis can be summarized as follows. Classroom learners as a group
used proportionately more cognitive strategies than metacognitive strategies in their language
learning. They also used more social strategies than affective strategies. The reverse situation was
found for distance learners who made more frequent use of metacognitive strategies than cognitive
strategies and who used more affective means to manage their learning than techniques involving
social contact. The most marked difference between classroom and distance learners occurred for
MSU. More detailed results relating to metacognitive dimension of stretegy use are now presented.

Mode of study and metacognitive strategy use

Instances of MSU by classroom and distance learners were classified according to the following
three dimensions established by Brown, Bransford, Ferrara and Campione (1983):planning,
monitoring and evaluation. For both classroom and distance learners, the majority of metacognitive
strategies related to planning activities, a finding consistent with other studies carried out with
high school students (e.g. Chamot and Ktipper, 1989). Monitoring strategies were the least
mentioned group.

Distance learners made proportionately greater use of the monitoring (almost 20% of MSU) and
evaluation (26.7% of MSU) dimensions of metacognition than did classroom learners. For
 AUTONOMY AND STRATEGY USE IN DISTANCE FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING 215

a.J

I~annin9 Monitorlnq [valuation I=lannln~; Monltor~ I[vatuat]on

~ Cl. . . . . . . ~ ~ 01.tonte

Fig. 2. Mean scores for MSU categories---classroom and distance learners.

classroom learners, metacognition, when it was used, was largely concerned with planning
activities (comprising 72.22% of MSU). Some evaluation of learning took place (19.44% of MSU),
but very little monitoring (8.34% of MSU).

Figure 2 reveals the differences in the use of planning, monitoring and evaluation strategies by
the two populations. The least reported category of MSU for distance learners, that of monitoring,
matched the most frequently reported dimension of MSU for classroom learners namely, planning.

The next stage of the analysis was to compare the strategy use of classroom and distance learners
in terms of the use of individual metacognitive strategies (see Table 1, Appendix). Results reveal
that self-management is the most frequently used metacognitive strategy by distance learners,
but accounts for a relatively low proportion of the MSU of classroom learners.1 Self-management,
as defined earlier, is used to manage the learning process based on the learner's understanding
of how s/he learns best. It includes what Rubin and Thompson (1982) call "identifying one's
successful learning experiences", understanding the critical elements in these experiences and
applying them to new situations. Self-management takes place when learners draw on their
understanding of how they learn best to set up the learning conditions which they have found to
be favourable (though not necessarily ideal), and to manage their interactions with the TL. 2 An
analysis of the instances of use of self-management in the verbal reports revealed that it was deployed
comprehensively by distance learners to derive optimum benefit from their language learning
sessions. The strategy had diverse applications since it is founded on the learner's own experience
of how s/he learns best, and involves the replication of these favourable circumstances and
processes. The verbatim extracts from distance learners are included to give some idea of the ways
in which self-management was used by learners in combination with other strategies, but they should
not be interpreted as the most frequent or typical uses of self-management. The diversity of the
ways in which self-management was applied to learning processes meant that it was not possible
to identify and extract a fully representative set of examples.

The following extract shows how self-management was combined with another metacognitive
strategy, which was labelled time lapse, 3 in order to overcome difficulties with either a particular
task or aspect of TL:
216 CYNTHIA WHITE

2FD If I get hopelessly stuck I' 11just have a break. An overnight break is great. You reach a total dead end
and then you pick it up the next morning and usually it comes clear, sometimes it does, sometimes it
doesn't. If it doesn't you can put it aside and keep going.

The same combination was used in other instances in what can be described as mental drafting
of language over time, particularly for extensive writing:

IFD I find the essay writing section the most problematic. So, I wait. I let those sections stew and I do them
almost subconsciously. I have them ticking over gently for most of the four weeks that I have to complete
the assignment.

8JD After I have worked through the workbook I leave it for a few days. I find that a few days are necessary
to remember things that I have learnt in the past about the constructions or whatever, remember
conversations that I heard when I lived in Japan and to get my mind set on the subjects that particular
lesson is about. Once I have had a break from that and thought about it a b i t . . . I sit down to do the
assignment.

Directed attention, that is attending and maintaining attention during learning, was often linked
to the successful management of learning in the verbal reports:

6FD When I'm learning new material I find I learn best when I'm noticing things--when I' m alert and picking
out what I haven't really got control of in the language--rather than mindlessly reading or copying.
I always try to keep myself paying attention in this way, while being relaxed about it too. It's
something you get a feel for.

The reports of distance learners revealed an understanding of the effect of the ordering of tasks
on their ability and confidence in language learning. In the following extract the learner shows
that managing her feelings about her ability to complete the work is critical if she is to succeed,
and that she does this by carefully ordering tasks:

13FD At the beginning I do not look at the assignment--not until Ihave worked through the unit--that would
actually scare me silly. I do not need to put that extra stress on myself before I have had a chance to
learn what is actually in the unit.

In the examples presented above, the learners reveal an understanding of how they learn best and
also their concern to manage their learning according to this knowledge.

DISCUSSION

The wider and increased use of metacognitive control by distance learners found in this study can
be seen as a response to the demands placed on those learners by the distance learning context.
Sussex (1991) observes that "both distance learning and open-access learning involve high levels
of student control and direction" (p. 181). Distance learners need to manage the learning process
for themselves since their learning context does not provide the kind of regular direction and
guidance which are normally furnished by a classroom environment.
In terms of the three dimensions of MSU, distance learners made much greater use of the
monitoring and evaluation dimensions than classroom learners. Monitoring has been shown to
be critical in distinguishing effective from ineffective learners (Nisbet and Shucksmith, 1986;
 AUTONOMY AND STRATEGY USE IN DISTANCE FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING 217

Chamot and Ktipper, 1989; O'Malley et al., 1989) but the use of this strategy has not been explored
in relation to effects from the learning context. The monitoring strategies which distance learners
were particularly concerned with were comprehension monitoring, that is, checking up on their
understanding of the TL and problem identification, which entails identifying the aspects of a task
which are preventing its successful completion. The increased use of monitoring by distance learners
in this study can be attributed to an absence in their learning environment of two functions
normally performed by classroom teachers. These are now discussed.

First, distance learners are not able to regulate the degree of complexity of the material presented
to them. They are not necessarily provided with material at a level appropriate to their own powers
of understanding and so it is possible that they have to decide for themselves whether the material
is within their comprehension abilities. Language teachers, on the other hand, in face-to-face
classroom teaching, are generally sensitive to the level of understanding of their learners and make
attempts to present material which is within the learners' grasp. Second, distance learners do not
have a teacher to check up on their comprehension through the regular posing of questions. Distance
learners must make efforts to monitor their understanding for themselves. Classroom learners, on
the other hand, do not have the same need to ask themselves "How am I going in all of this?" and
"Have I got the right idea?"

In both the questionnaire study and the verbal report study it was evident that the single most
important strategy which served to differentiate classroom and distance learners was self-
management. An essential prerequisite for the use of self-management is for the individual
learner to know how s/he learns best. The use of self-management also requires the learner to have
the necessary procedural skills to set up these optimal learning conditions. Self-management can
be considered to be the definitive metacognitive strategy in that it comprises both dimensions of
metacognition, namely knowledge of cognition and control of cognition. The other metacognitive
strategies are concerned, for the most part, with control of cognition. As such, they exercise the
executive dimension of metacognition rather than the self-knowledge dimension. Because self-
management taps both aspects of metacognition, it is a powerful index of the metacognitive
knowledge and skills of learners. Thus, when one considers the strong relationship between mode
of study and metacognition, it is not surprising that self-management emerges as the principal
strategy to set classroom learners apart from distance learners.

From this study we have an image of distance learners who respond to the demands of a self-
instruction mode of study by developing a knowledge of how they can manage the process of
language learning for themselves. To do this they deploy all dimensions of metacognitive control
(planning, monitoring and evaluation) in their learning. The single most important metacognitive
skill in all of this is self-management. The distance leamers who were deploying more metacognitive
strategies, that is who were behaving more autonomously in their learning, actually worked with
the TL in ways which were generally similar to those of classroom learners, in that the CSU
of both classroom and distance learners was comparable. This suggests that autonomy in
language learning results from the way in which, and the extent to which, the learner manages
his/her interactions with the TL, rather than from the use of any specific set of cognitive
strategies.
218 CYNTHIA WHITE

Distance learners have limited opportunities to work with others in learning the TL, and in the
verbal report study were found to use more effective means to manage their learning than their
classroom counterparts. It is possible that distance learners in fact compensate for the lack of support
that comes from social contact by focusing on their ability to manage their feelings as they arise
in relation to the learning process. The relationship between affective strategy use and autonomous
language learning warrants further study.

One way to do this would be to explore the way the same group of learners behave in a
conventional classroom and in a distance learning context, or some other self-instruction mode
of learning. It would then be possible to trace how individuals respond to the different demands
and conslraints of different leaming contexts, and how this impacts on various dimensions of strategy
use. Using the same group of subjects in the research design would overcome the main limitation
of this study, namely that it was not entirely possible to separate the influence of the mode of study
from other possible characteristics of the learners. 4

CONCLUSION

The research reported here has a number of limitations which should be borne in mind in any
interpretation of the results. The most substantive of these are summarized below:

(1) To investigate the degree of autonomy learners assume under different learning conditions,
the research design should ideally involve a comparative study of the same group in different
contexts.

(2) A relatively small number of classroom learners compared to distance learners participated
in the yoked subject procedure. Thus greater individual variability effects for the classroom
sample were introduced.

(3) The effect of social desirability on subjects' responses in both the questionnaire study and
the verbal report study cannot be entirely ruled out.

(4) Findings from the verbal report study cannot be seen as providing a comprehensive account
of the strategic repertoire of each learner, since learners probably reported on a particular subset
of strategies they were conscious of at the time of the procedure. In addition, subjects may have
varied in their ability to talk about their strategy use, and thus it is possible that their reports were
relatively incomplete compared to their actual strategy use.

(5) The study did not include a check of self-reports against learners' performance on particular
language tasks. This remains a highly desirable source of confirmation about the reliability of self-
report data.

To conclude, our understanding of the varied means learners use to learn a second or foreign
language has been artificially limited by an almost exclusive focus on learners in conventional
classroom environments. The results presented in this paper have permitted preliminary insights
into how learners respond to the demands of a self-instruction mode of language learning and serve
 AUTONOMY AND STRATEGY USE IN DISTANCE FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING 219

to underline the importance of investigating the relationship between strategy use and autonomy
in a wider range of contexts than has been the case hitherto. For distance learners in a self-instruction
context it is the frequent use of a wide range of metacognitive strategies which enables them to
develop a degree of autonomy exceeding that required of learners in the more conventional
classroom setting. The findings also reveal that distance learners succeed in overcoming the
potentially perverse effects of an isolated language learning context by developing and applying
their self-knowledge as language learners. Such individually-derived self-knowledge provides the
basis for the use of self-management strategies which appear to be pivotal in the development of
a more autonomous approach to language learning. Ross Paul (1990) argues that the most
important criterion for success in distance education should relate to learner independence and
that "the ultimate challenge.., is to develop each individual's capacity to look after his or her
own learning needs" (p. 37). Questions about how individuals acquire and can be assisted to acquire
such a capacity continue to be raised. The role of self-management strategies in autonomous
language learning is a promising avenue for further, more detailed research into the means by which
learners develop the ability to manage for themselves the complex process of acquiring a second
foreign language.

NOTES

' The high number of reports of strategy evaluation by both classroom and distance learners can be attributed to the yoked
subject procedure; many learners included an evaluative dimension in their reports of the use of individual strategies.
2 While distance learners may have found different means of managing their learning in ways which work for them, they
did not consider their learning environment to be ideal or even desirable. Isolation, lack of feedback and the inherent
limitations of practising with oneself were frequently acknowledged.
3 Time lapse is a metacognitive strategy and involves consiously spacing study sessions to facilitate mastery of a
particular task or aspect of the TL.
' This isse was addressed in only a limited and rather unsatisfactory way through the findings of the questionnaire study
that the principal influence on MSU was mode of study, irrespective of the age, motivation, proficiency etc. of learners.

REFERENCES

BROWN, A. L., BRANSFORD, J. D., FERRARA, R. and CAMPIONE, J. C. (1983) Learning, remembering and
understanding. In Flavell, J. H. and Markham, E. M. (eds), Carmichael's manual of child psychology. Vol. l, pp. 77-166.
New York: Wiley.
BURGE, E. (1988) Beyond andragogy: Some explorations for distance learning design. Journal of Distance Education
3(1), 5-23.
CARVER, D. (1984) Plans, learner strategies and self-direction in language learning. System 12(2), 123-131.
CHAMOT, A. U. and KOPPER, L. (1989) Learning strategies in foreign language instruction. Foreign Language Annals
22(1), 13-24.
COHEN, A. D. (1991) Feedback on writing. The use of verbal report. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 13(2),
133-159.
COHEN, A. D. and APHEK, E. (1981) Easifying second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 3(2),
221-236.
CULL, M. (1993) The meaning of success. A literature review. Proceedings of the Ninth Annual DEANZ Conference,
pp. 133-143. Massey University, Palmerston North: Distance Education Association of New Zealand.
DAVIS, J. N. (1988) Distance education and foreign language education: towards a coherent approach. Foreign Language
Annals 21(6), 547-550.
EHRMAN, M. and OXFORD, R. (1989) Effects of sex difference, career choice, and psychological type on adult
language learning strategies. Modern Language Journal 73(1), 1-13.
220 CYNTHIA WHITE

ELLIS, G. and SINCLAIR, B. (1989) Learning to learn English. A course in learner training. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
ERICCSON, K. A. (1988) Concurrent verbal reports on text comprehension: a review. Text 8, 295-325.
ERICSSON, K. A. and SIMON, H. A. (1980) Verbal reports on data. Psychological Review 87, 215-251.
ERICSSON, K. A. and SIMON, H. A. (1980) Verbal reports on thinking. In Faerch, C. and Kasper, G. (eds), Introspection
in second language research, pp. 5-23. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
GARNER, R. (1988) Verbal-report data on cognitive and metacognitive strategies. In Weinstein, C. E., Goetz, E. T. and
Alexander, P. A. (eds), Learning and study strategies: issues in assessment, instruction and evaluation, pp. 63-76. New
York: Academic Press.
HOLEC, H. (1981) Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
JONES, F. R. (1993) Beyond the fringe: a framework for assessing teach-yourself materials for ab initio English-
speaking learners. System 21(4), 453-469.
KRAJNC, A. (1988) Social isolation and learning effectiveness in distance education. ZiffPapiere 71. Hagen: Fern
Universit~t.
LEGUTKE, M. and THOMAS, H. (1991) Process and experience in the language classroom. London: Longman.
MOORE, M. G. (1977) On a theory of independent study. Hagen: Femuniversit~it (DIFF).
MOORE, M. G. (1990) Introduction: Background and overview of contemporary American distance education. In
Moore, M. G. (ed.), Contemporary issues in American distance education, pp. xii-xxvi. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
NAYAK, N., HANSEN, N., KRUEGER, N. and McLAUGHLIN, B. (1990) Language-learning strategies in monolingual
and multilingual adults. Language Learning 40(2), 221-244.
NISBET, J. and SHUCKSMITH, J. (1986) Learning strategies. Boston, MA: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
O'MALLEY, J. M., CHAMOT, A. U. and KIrPPER, L. (1989) Listening comprehension strategies in second language
acquisition. Applied Linguistics 10(4), 418-437.
O'MALLEY, J. M. and CHAMOT, A. U. (1990) Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Camb ridge: Cambridge
University Press.
OXFORD, R. (1990) Language learning strategies: what every teacher shouM know. New York: Newbury House--Harper
and Row.
OXFORD, R. and NYIKOS, M. (1989) Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students.
Modern Language Journal 73(3), 291-298.
PAUL, R. (1990) Towards a new measure of success: developing independent learners. Open Learning, Feburary, 31-38.
RUBIN, J. (1981 ) The study of cognitive processes in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11(2), 117-131.
RUBIN, J. and THOMPSON, I. 1982) How to be a more successful language learner. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle
Publishers Inc.
RUMBLE, G. (1989) 'Open Learning' and 'distance learning': the misuse of language. Open Learning, June, 32-40.
SELIGER, H. (1983) The language learner as linguist: of metaphors and realities. Applied Lingustitcs 4, 179-191.
SKEHAN, P. (1989) Individual differences in second-language learning. London: Edward Arnold.
STERN, H. H. (1983) Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
SUSSEX, R. (1991) Current issues in distance language education and open learning: an overview and an Australian
perspective. In Ervin, G. L. (ed.), Internationalperspectives on foreign language education, pp. 177-193. Lincolnwood,
IL: National Textbook Company.
THOMPSON, G. and KNOX, A. (1987) Designing for diversity: are field-dependent learners less suited to distance education
programs of instruction? Contemporary Educational Psychology 12(1), 17-29.
TYACKE, M. and MENDELSOHN, D. (1986) Student needs: Cognitive as well as communicative. TESOL Canada Journal,
special issue 1, 171-183.
WENDEN, A. (1987) Conceptual background and utility. In Wenden, A. and Rubin, J. (eds), Learner strategies in language
learning, pp. 3-13. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
WHITE, C. J. (1994) Language learning strategy research in distance education: the yoked subject technique. Research
in Distance Education 3, pp. 10-20. Deakin University, Australia: Deakin University Press.
 AUTONOMY AND STRATEGY USE IN DISTANCE FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING 221

APPENDIX

Table 1. Frequency of metacognitive strategy use-----vlassroom and distance learners

Metacognitive strategies Classroom Distance Total

learners learners
(n = 9) (n = 28)
n % n % n %
PLANNING
Advance organization 1 2.78 22 5.24 23 5.04
Organizational planning 3 8.33 48 11.43 51 11.18
Time lapse 4 11.11 20 4.76 24 5.26
Directed attention 1 2.78 16 3.81 17 3.73
Selective attention 3 8.33 27 6.43 30 6.58
Self-management 2 5.56 61 14.52 63 13.82
Analysing needs 0 0.00 2 0.48 2 0.44
Revision 5 13.89 14 3.33 19 4.17
Delayed production 1 2.78 3 0.71 4 0.88
Prioritizing 2 5.56 5 1.19 7 1.54
Seek practice opp. 4 11.11 7 1.67 11 2.41
Subtotal 26 72.22 225 53.57 251 55.05

MONITORING
Comprehension monitoring 2 5.56 39 9.29 41 8.99
Production monitoring 0 0.00 7 1.67 7 1.54
Auditory monitoring 0 0.00 1 0.24 1 0.22
Visual monitoring 0 0.00 1 0.24 1 0.22
Strategy monitoring 0 0.00 10 2.38 10 2.19
Plan monitoring 0 0.00 2 0.48 2 0.44
Double-check monitoring 0 0.00 1 0.24 1 0.22
Problem identification 1 2.78 22 5.24 23 5.04
Subtotal 3 8.34 83 19.76 86 18.86

EVALUATION
Production evaluation 1 2.78 7 1.67 8 1.75
Performance evaluation 0 0.00 6 1.43 6 1.32
Ability evaluation 1 2.78 27 6.43 28 6.14
Strategy evaluation 4 11.11 60 14.29 64 14.04
Lang. repertoire evaluation 1 2.78 12 2.86 13 2.85
Subtotal 7 19.44 112 26.67 119 26.10

Total 6 100.00 420 100.00 456 100.00

Due to rounding the total percentages do not equal 100.