System 29 (2001) 45±67

www.elsevier.com/locate/system

Teachers attitudes within a self-directed

language learning scheme
Maria de los Angeles Clemente
Language Centre, Universidad Autonoma Benito Juarez de Oaxaca, AP 900, 68000 Oaxaca, Mexico

Received 30 August 1999; received in revised form 15 February 2000; accepted 31 March 2000

Abstract
In the following article I explore one of the least studied areas of self-directed language
learning: the attitudes of the language teachers that work as counsellors for self-directed lan-
guage learners. In order to do this, I make use of Freeman's scheme to de®ne teacher educa-
tion. Freeman's is a very appropriate frame for this type of study because it includes attitudes
as one of the four essential constituents of teacher education. Within an attitudinal construct,
then, I analyse four di€erent factors (students, past, colleagues and self) that account for the
attitudes that the teacher has towards, in this speci®c case, self-directed language learning and
the self-access centre s/he works for. # 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Teachers' attitudes; Self-direction; Autonomy; Innovation; Teacher education

1. Introduction

Self-directed learning, within the umbrella term of ``learner autonomy'', is a young

®eld in which there are still virgin areas to explore. This is the case of the language
teacher in his/her role of counsellor within a self-directed language learning (SDLL)
scheme. However, this exploration does not necessarily have to start from scratch.
There already are well designed tools that one can make use of in order to throw some
light on relatively obscure zones of this ®eld. I am speci®cally referring to all these
methodological resources developed for teacher education research. Most of what has
been said there can be helpful in analysing the role of the teacher as SDLL counsellor.
In this article I will bring together elements of these two areas (self-direction
and teacher education) in order to understand some aspects of the role of the lan-
guage teacher in his/her role as SDLL counsellor and the way s/he sees it.

E-mail address: angelesclemente@hotmail.com (M. de los Angeles Clemente).

0346-251X/01/$ - see front matter # 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S0346-251X(00)00045-2
46 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67

Within this context, there are also two speci®c concepts that I want to work with
because of their relevance to this discussion. These are innovation and attitudes. For
the purposes of this paper, innovation is relevant as a way of understanding SDLL
schemes and their introduction into an already established language teaching sys-
tem. The concept of attitude is regarded as one of the most important elements of
the belief system of the teacher, hence, an essential element to be considered within a
language teacher education scheme.
Teacher education has been de®ned as ``a link between what is known in the ®eld
with what is done in the classroom and it does that through the individuals whom
we educate as teachers'' (Freeman, 1989, p. 30). Moreover, educating teachers also
means providing them with the competence they need to cope with the requirements
of their job. In the same way, one talks about ``language teacher competence''
(Bamber, 1987, p. 119), I assume that one can talk about counsellor competence.
Little has been written about this kind of competence, but we can reach some con-
clusions if we take into consideration the concepts and models already established
for language teacher education.
The development of this paper will be based mainly on Freeman's (1989) scheme
of teacher education and the data that is presented here was gathered from coun-
sellors of the Self-access Centre (SAC) which belongs to the Language Centre (LC)
of the State University in Oaxaca, Mexico. At the time of the study, the centre had
been open for 3 years. Before starting, the teachers received some courses related to
the rationale of learner autonomy and self-direction and practical training about the
setting up and running of a self-access centre (Clemente and Kissinger, 1994).

1.1. The subjects

Fifteen language teachers who work as SDLL counsellors at the SAC Oaxaca took
part in the study. This group of teachers was very heterogeneous (Table 1)1. They are
from eight di€erent countries and their education as language teachers ranges from
MA in TEFL to none. All of them work as language teachers in the LC of the uni-
versity; however, their SAC training can be considered to be pre-service because they

Table 1
The subjects

Nationality: American (4), Mexican (3), French (2), Canadian (2), Swiss (1), Scottish (1), Dutch (1),
Italian (1)
Age: over 50 (4), 40±49 (2), 35±39 (5), 30±35 (2), less than 29 (2)
Sex: male (8), female (7)
Seniority: over 15 years (4), 6±10 years (3), 4 years (5), 3 years (1), 2 years (1), 1 year (1)
Education: MA in TEFL (2), MA in other areas (2), BA in TEFL (6), BA in other areas (4), none (1)
Experience in language: English/Spanish (8), Fluent in more than 3 languages (4), Learning Spanish as a
SL (2), Monolingual (1)

1
For reasons of anonymity, the information of Table 1 is given in a general way, preventing the pos-
sibility of recognition of individuals.
 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67 47

did not have previous knowledge about self-directed language learning. Not all the
teachers received the same training because some of them started working in the SAC
after the training stage of the project was over.

2. The methodology

This study was carried out under the belief that an ethnographic approach would
result in a comprehensive view of the researched situation. Thus, a decision was
made to make use of two di€erent sources for the gathering of data. On the one
hand, an anonymous open questionnaire was designed to get information from the
teachers (Appendix A). It was given to and discussed with all the teachers working
as SDLL counsellors at the SAC at that time. This questionnaire and the discuss-
ing sessions about it provided information about the subjects in their roles as
teachers, SAC counsellors and language learners. The results of the questionnaire
are summarized in Appendix B. On the other hand, I made use of my own knowl-
edge of the context and situation of the SAC and its teachers at the di€erent stages
of development. This data was also complemented by information from informal
conversations with some of the teachers, comments at teachers' meetings and a per-
sonal interview with the Coordinator of the SAC.
I adopted this ethnographic approach for two reasons. Firstly, I strongly believe
that it is ethnography that allows the researcher to get to know the aspects, such as
attitudes, of the educational context that are not observable and recordable through
quantitative methods. Secondly, being a teacher of the LC and a counsellor of the
SAC, I belong to the same community as the participants of the study. This allowed
me, in my role of researcher, to have an emic perspective of the actual situation and
understand it in a better way. The information which was considered relevant for
the purposes of this study is discussed and interpreted in the following sections.

3. Using a teacher education scheme

Freeman states that teacher education should integrate four basic constituents:
knowledge, skills, attitudes and awareness. The ®rst two have been very well
explored and de®ned in the literature on language teacher training. However,
according to Hargreaves,
while what teachers do and how teachers think is now more familiar territory to
those who study teaching, we know less about how teachers feel while they
teach, about emotions and desires which motivate and moderate their work (my
italics; Hargreaves, 1994, p. 41).

This is the main reason why I have become very interested in doing research on
the last two constituents. However, for reasons of space, the objective of this paper
will only focus on the third of Freeman's elements: attitudes of teachers as SDLL
counsellors. I will leave the topic of awareness for further research.
48 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67

Along with some language education writers nowadays (i.e. Freeman and
Richards, 1996), I strongly believe that a holistic approach to language teaching
should include the personal side of teaching, mainly the way teachers feel. However,
a more technology-oriented approach (one that only includes knowledge and skills
in the education of teachers) seems to forget the fact that almost no teachers start
training for their profession with ``blank minds and neutral attitudes'' (Wallace,
1991, p. 50). ``Minds'' and ``attitudes'' that, according to several researchers (Har-
greaves, 1994, p. 41; Freeman, 1990, p. 32; Prabhu, 1992, p. 103) shape teachers'
performance in front of a class.
Using attitude as a generic term, Freeman (1990) de®nes this concept as ``the
stance one adopts towards oneself, the activity of teaching and learners'' (p. 32).
According to him, attitudes are such important factors that they can be the cause of
either teachers' success or failures (ibid).
In order to understand the di€erent attitudes of teachers, it is necessary to analyse
their nature and source. Several authors have talked, in a general way, about the
forces that intervene in the decision-making and performance of the teacher.
Woodward (1991, p. 165), for instance, mentions 18 variables (age, sex, needs,
motivation, etc.) to be taken into account. However, not all of them generate atti-
tudes. From my point of view, there are four major elements that act directly upon
teachers' attitudes: students, past, colleagues and self. As I see it, these elements
make up what Prabhu (1992, p. 103) calls the teacher's ``sense of plausibility'', which
stands for what the teacher believes that works in doing his/her job. These four ele-
ments in¯uence ``the underlying framework or schema which guides the teacher's
classroom actions'' (Richards, 1990, p. 29).
Students, past, colleagues and self are relevant elements of the teacher's work
context that act upon his/her attitudes in a very subjective way. This means that they
re¯ect the way the teacher places him/herself in relation to them and to his/her own
teaching. There are two ways in which this relationship takes place. The ®rst one is
the teacher's own feelings about these elements, that it is say, the way s/he thinks
about his/her past, his/her colleagues, his/her students, etc. I will call this factor-
attitudinal expression. The second type of relationship is to establish the way the
teacher feels that students and colleagues perceive of themselves and perceive others,
including him/herself, in other words, my own feelings (as a teacher) about someone
else's feelings. I will call this attitudinal perception.
Together, expression and perception make an attitudinal construct that shapes the
teacher's ``behaviours in various typical or consistent ways'' (Wallace, 1991, p. 50),
which is, in turn, part of a ``conceptual construct or schemata'' (ibid) that accounts
for all the complex forces that underlie the teacher's performance, including knowl-
edge and skills (Fig. 1).

4. Attitudinal expression and perception of students

What teachers think about their students and what they believe the students think
about them, their ``interpretation of (their) attitudes and feelings'' (Prabhu, 1992,
 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67 49

Fig. 1. Attitudinal construct of a language teacher as a self-directed language learning counsellor.

p. 103), determine their own attitudes about their job as teachers and their rela-
tionship with the students.
In this study, the attitudinal expression of the SDLL counsellors about their stu-
dents came to be a description completely divergent from their own idea of what a
``good student'' should be. For most of them, the good student should be:
self-motivated,
a risk-taker,
organised,
independent and
assertive. (see answers to Q6, Appendix B)

None of these features were included in their description of their Mexican students
(Q7, Appendix B). Although some counsellors stated only partial divergence of both
descriptions (Mexican vs. good student), however, they still mentioned important
¯aws in Mexican students (passive, dependent, relying too much on the teacher, etc.).
This was reinforced by the teacher's perception of his/her students (Q5, Appendix B).
S/he thinks that they want a class with a teacher-centred approach, where the
teacher is in control and whose role is to be a passer of knowledge and a provider of
models to follow. Therefore, more than half of the counsellors think that studying in
a group and with a teacher is the most appropriate situation for Mexican students
(Q8, Appendix B). A few of them also think that a combination of both approaches
(``SAC and classroom'') would be very good for their students because they need
more practice (``using SAC as a practice centre'').
Another attitudinal perception regarding the students was found in the reason that
most counsellors attribute to SAC enrolment (Q9, Appendix B). According to them,
students enrol in SAC because they do not get a place in the Language Centre, or
they do not have time to attend regular classes. To use Breen's (1987, p. 26) terms,
50 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67

their objective is survival, due to external criteria, rather than achievement, which
means ``in harmony with their own learning'' (ibid). ``We get the wrong students'', a
counsellor said.
In short, most of us do not believe in our students. We think that only very few
are capable of studying independently. We do not think that most students in SAC
will survive without the teacher. I will call this attitude distrust of students.

5. Attitudinal expression and perception of past

Prabhu (1992) states that the ``loyalty to his/her past'' (p. 103) generates in the
teacher a certain stance in his/her professional work. Speci®cally, he refers to two
aspects of the teacher's past: his/her past as a student and his/her past as a teacher.
Before becoming teachers, all of us were students. later, in our role as teachers,
most of us ``tend to teach in the ways (we) have been taught'' (Winer, 1992 p. 75).
The reason is obvious: the experience of ``our most impressionable years'' (Wallace,
1991, p. 50) is stronger than the comparatively short period of training we receive as
teachers. Moreover, we tend to think that if something worked for us, the same
thing would work for our students. With regards to the SDLL counsellors in this
study, none of them have learned a language under self-directed conditions. So it
seems to me that their natural attitude is to favour the approaches that they have
experienced. Most of them learned their second languages living in a country where
the target language is spoken or with a teacher and in a group (Q11 and 12,
Appendix B). Moreover, most of them stated that they would learn a new language
in the same way they learned the previous ones (Q13 and 14, Appendix B). Some of
them answered that they would like to try SAC facilities. However, rather than
having an authentic motivation to self-learning (for they have not started to learn
that way), they added that this is due to a recent suggestion from the administration
to try things out. They may want to know if it works, and they may want to believe,
but they do not yet believe.
The other factor of past is the teacher's professional past. During his/her experi-
ence of working in front of di€erent classes, the teacher has developed certain
teaching patterns that work for him/her, certain ``experiential knowledge'' (Wallace,
1991, p. 15) that is the result of his/her practice of the profession. This experience
may be the strongest factor in the teacher's sense of plausibility since the more
experience s/he has the more con®dent s/he feels. Furthermore, when the teacher is
introduced to an innovation, when s/he has to change his/her habitual way of doing,
s/he feels threatened. ``Change in behaviour is a form of denial of validity of past
behaviour'' says Prabhu (1992, p. 103). For the teacher it is as if what s/he has been
doing and improving in years of constant practice is not valid anymore.
In the case of the SDLL counsellor, the change is even more radical for s/he has to
change not only ways of doing but also ways of being. Some of them reported that
they were told that in the SAC, they were not going to be teachers anymore.
Therefore, they have to face the fact that being a teacher is useless in the new scheme
to which they are being introduced. There is a clear ``mismatch between old and new
 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67 51

perceptions'' (ibid) and, with this, ``a threat to prevailing routines and to the sense of
security depending on them'' (ibid).
These feelings can be minimized and even disappear if the context and the circum-
stances favour innovation. Otherwise they ¯are into negative attitudes that a€ect
daily performance and the innovation becomes a ``meaningless process that cannot be
adequately conceptualized or controlled by those who experienced it'' (Hargreaves,
1994, p. 24).
In regard to SDLL counsellors in Oaxaca, they agreed that the implementation of
the SAC was an imposition (Q30 and 31, Appendix B). This is not because they
reacted against the implementation of the SAC, but because of the fact that
they were not consulted in making the decision. They were aware that an ``outside
agency'' (``The Ministry of Education'', ``the government'', ``politicians'' were some
of the institutions mentioned) de®ned and proposed the innovation (White, 1988,
p. 142). Using Prabhu's term, the implementation of the SAC in Oaxaca was ``stat-
utory'' (Prabbu, 1992, p. 105). According to him,
statutory implementation of an innovation is likely to distort all (bene®cial
processes of innovation) and aggravate the tensions in teachers' mental frames.
The threat to existing routines can make teachers reject the innovation out of
hand, as an act of self-protection (ibid).
A possible consequence of the negative aspects of innovation is the adoption of an
eclectic view that in this speci®c statutory context means ``an exercise of wordly
wisdom Ð a search for the safest course in the midst of many risks'' (ibid, p. 108).
The ``safest course'' for the teacher who is involved in statutory innovation means
adopting the new perspective with the mere purpose of going with the trend (for
social acceptance) but rejecting the rationale behind it. The consequence is a short-
cut to ``ritual teaching behaviour'' (Maingay, 1988, p. 118). In other words,
the counsellor acts without believing in what s/he is doing, just goes through the
motions. According to Maingay, this teaching ``has become divorced from principles
that are behind it''. In this particular case I would say that principles and perfor-
mance did not even marry. Thus, even though the counsellor practises certain pat-
terns, s/he does not believe in them. I will call this attitude unbelief in principles.

6. Attitudinal expression and perception of colleagues

The colleagues of a teacher are one of the most important attitudinal factors. First
of all, this is because of the status of the teacher in relation to them (Prabhu, 1992,
p. 103), but above all because the academic sta€ of an educational institution tends
to group together according to di€erent cultures2. A teaching culture is de®ned as the
entirety of

2
In this article, the concept of culture corresponds to what Holliday (1999) calls ``small culture'' which
he de®nes as ``any cohesive social grouping''. This concept of culture is ``more concerned with social pro-
cesses as they emerge'' and ``does not relate to the essences of ethnic, national or international entities''.
52 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67

beliefs, values, habits and assumed ways of doing things among communities of
teachers who have to deal with similar demands and constraints over many
years (Hargreaves, 1994, p. 165).

According to Hargreaves, cultures can be characterized by content and form. The

content of a culture is the whole set of attitudes, beliefs, etc., a particular group of
teachers share. The form is the way in which a community of teachers is organised as
a whole or in subgroups. As White (1988) states, sometimes these ``networks of
relationships'' (p. 116) act in favour of the organisation's purposes but sometimes
against it.
As far as the SAC is concerned, I see the phenomenon in the following way.
However, before describing it I should remind the reader that I form part of the
teaching community, which means that the analysis may be contaminated by my
own subjectivity.
Before the SAC was introduced to the Language Centre community, there existed
a group of teachers with two types of members: the ones that had long seniority,
which means that they were the founders of the centre and at the same time the
representatives of its philosophy, and the ones that had a strong friendship with
the founders. There were other teachers that did not share these characteristics;
therefore they preferred to remain individual. In some cases they would rather
work by themselves (elective individualism, Hargreaves, 1994, p. 167), and in others
they were fearful of the judgement of the group of ``old-timers'' (constrained indi-
vidualism, ibid).
When the SAC was introduced to the established system, some of the ``individual''
teachers came across the rationale they needed to form an alliance. Of course,
some teachers decided to remain with their elective individualism. In this way, we
found ourselves in a phenomenon that Hargreaves calls the ``balkanization of
teaching'':

which is de®ned by particular patterns of interrelationships among teachers. . .

(who are) neither working in isolation, nor with most of their colleagues as a
whole school, but in smaller subgroups within the school community (Har-
greaves, 1994, p. 212).

The features of balkanization are low permeability, high permanence, personal

identi®cation and political complexion, and all of them describe in perfect detail the
phenomenon we experienced in the SAC Oaxaca. First, the boundaries between
the two groups were very well established and, although some of them worked in
both places (according to the regulations, SAC counsellors had to work in the LC as
well), they openly established a membership and did not wish to move to the other
group. Then, members of each subgroup identi®ed in a very personal way with the
rationale that prevailed in that subgroup. Finally, members of each subgroup looked
for the political power that legitimised their beliefs and attitudes.
According to White (1988, p. 127) there are three strategies for introducing inno-
vation. The Power-Coercive strategy uses power, either political or intellectual, to
 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67 53

impose innovation within a system. The Empirical-Rational strategy appeals to the

rational side of people in order to convince them that the innovation is bene®cial for
them or for the institution. The Normative-Re-Educative strategy is an emphasis
on the people's attitudes and the bene®ts of the innovation. An important factor of
the Normative-Re-Educative strategy is an emphasis on people's involvement in the
actual process of innovation.
As I see it, the way the SAC project was introduced was through an Empirical-
Rational strategy. Using White's (1988, p. 128) explanation of it, the SAC project
was proposed by some of us who believed that the innovation was ``desirable,
e€ective and in line with the self-interest of the organization concerned'' (ibid),
which was, in this case, the university community. The bene®t of the proposal was
clearly justi®ed; therefore it was assumed that everybody would happily and thank-
fully adopt the change. But as Morris (quoted by White, ibid) states, this type of
strategy usually tends to fail because the rationale that underlies it makes perfect
sense for the change agent but not for the clients. It is ``too rational'', he says. I also
understand this overrationality in the sense that it only focuses on the knowledge
and skill aspects of the teacher education but forgets the a€ective side of it, that is to
say, how people feel about the innovation (the whole purpose of this article!).
Nevertheless, the strategic introduction of the SAC project was not a failure for
every single individual. For some, it meant the integration of a subgroup with its
own rationale and aims. For them the SAC project was a positive innovation and
they welcomed it. Two of the teachers expressed it in this way:

T1: ``I learned a lot during the process''

T4: ``It meant a positive change in my professional life''

In fact, they felt that they were involved in the implementation of the project and
they even had the opportunity to re-invent (White, 1988, p. 144) it, that is to say, to
modify and adapt it according to the contextual situation (Q18, 31, and 34). For
them, the experience was Normative-Re-Educative. For others, however, the project
was a clear imposition, as stated above, through the manipulation of power. They
considered that they had not been taken into account and that the SAC goes against
some of their principles. This fact was negatively reinforced by the low degree of
interconnectedness in the social system (ibid, 140). That is to say, the degree to which
the innovation (SAC) ®ts within the already established system (LC) is very low
(Q30). Most of the teachers talked about the lack of integration between the SAC
and the LC. They also mentioned that there were political and interpersonal con-
¯icts between the two entities and they seemed resentful because the regulations of
the SAC excluded their LC students from bene®ting from SAC facilities. In short,
for some of the teachers, their experience with SAC as an innovation was done
through Power-Coercive ideology.
My point is that White's de®nition of strategies of innovation (White, 1988, p. 126)
serves to describe two di€erent discursive phenomena: intention and interpretation.
On the one hand, as White uses it, the term refers to the strategy actually used by the
change agent to introduce innovation into a system, that is to say, the way s/he, as
54 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67

an addresser, intended it to be conveyed. On the other hand, these three di€erent

categories (Power-Coercive, Empirical-Rational and Normative-Re-Educative) are
also very useful in describing the attitudinal perception of the client about the way
the innovation was introduced, in other words, the way s/he, as an addressee, inter-
preted it. Taking the latter into account, these three terms refer to a very relative
and contextual phenomenon that is not determined by the change agent but by the
prevalent cultures of the teachers'community in combination with the actual strat-
egy of innovation selected. I will call this attitude rejection of innovation.

7. Attitudinal expression and perception of self

The way the teacher sees him/herself in relation to his/her work is an attitudinal
factor that has usually been overlooked. It is usually expected that teachers should
be self-con®dent and assertive. Their social status and role call for these features.
However, a closer look at the teacher as a human being (not as a teaching machine)
will bring about some awareness concerning this issue.
Starting from a very general perspective, the ®rst problem the teacher encounters
is that his/her profession is facing a con®dence crisis. Actually, this is not a parti-
cular problem of teaching. According to SchoÈn, all the professions are facing the
same problem:

Professionals have been loudly critical of their own failure to solve social prob-
lems, and to meet reasonable standards of competence in their service to their
clients (SchoÈn, 1983, p. 4).

In the case of the language teachers interviewed, this feeling of failure ``to meet
reasonable standards of competence'' is re¯ected in, for example, their preference for
learning a language in the future by living in the country and not with a teacher, at
least not only with a teacher (Q13 and 14).
If they have doubts about their role as teachers, despite all the positive attitudes
they have about teaching (as opposed to counselling), it is logical to expect that they
strongly devalue their role as counsellors. Because of all the attitudinal factors
mentioned before and the corresponding attitudes that arise (distrust of students,
unbelief in principles, rejection of innovation), the teacher does not have a sound
sense of plausibility on which to base his/her daily practice. This results in a lack of
con®dence, which is shown in di€erent ways. For example, there is an evident con-
¯ict between the ideal aims that the SAC literature talks about (the independent
learners, the knowledgeable counsellor, the perfect SAC system, etc.) and the reality
s/he is facing. It was found that among the SDLL counsellors interviewed, there was
a clear tendency to mix the two elements. On several occasions they answered with
an ideal description of what should be happening in SAC instead of giving an actual
account of what is happening in it (Q15, 19, 21 and 22). This fact proved to be
especially true when they talked about their main tasks at the SAC. The subjects'
answers were compared with the report of the SAC coordinator about the di€erent
 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67 55

jobs the counsellors do during their hours in the SAC. The di€erence was evident.
According to the counsellors, working in direct and individual contact with the user
was their most important contribution; while for the coordinator it was the contact
with materials (Table 2). Although the point of view of the coordinator might be
subjective, it seems to me the closest to reality since almost all the counsellors overtly
complained (when discussing their answers) about the lack of contact with the SAC
users. To my mind, counsellors were not lying. They just wanted to understand the
question in a di€erent way and they answered it according to that interpretation.
Clearly indicative of the counsellors' lack of con®dence is the fact that they tend to
divert attention away from themselves and their performance. One way of doing this
is to focus on others' faults but not theirs. When questioned about the causes of FL
teaching and learning problems (Q4, 7, 10), most of the counsellors answered that
the students were to blame for their failure to learn a language in the classroom, to
study independently, to be a ``good'' student, etc. Furthermore, when the counsel-
lors were asked about the possibility of having a practice centre instead of a learning
centre, more than half answered that it was better to have a SAC as a practice cen-
tre. But the reason for this preference was focused only on the student. As T5
expressed it

T5: ``Mexican students are not capable of dealing with self-directed learning''

None of them referred to their incapacity as counsellors to help learners to man-

age their learning.
Another factor related to the lack of con®dence has to do with the counsellor's
attitudinal perception about others' (colleagues' and students') judgements on his/her
performance. This is shown in some counsellors' resistance to or uneasiness about
certain professional practices:

T1: ``I've seen counsellors that become upset when a user asks for their help''

This phenomenon can also be seen in the counsellors' resistance to talking openly
about their weaknesses. On the one hand, all the teachers answered that they

Table 2
Comparative table of self-directed language learning counsellor's contributions

Most important contribution %

Counsellor
Giving counselling sessions about suggesting and using materials 37
Giving counselling sessions about users' own learning processes and strategies 35
Assisting users during on-the-¯oor hours 28
SAC coordinator
Cataloguing and processing materials (textbooks, tapes, videos, etc) 45
Creating new didactic materials (standardized or speci®c exercises for authentic materials) 29
Giving counselling sessions about suggesting and using materials 26
56 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67

received training and they were quite satis®ed with it (Q16). Moreover, they think
that the counselling sessions are one of the most important tasks. Furthermore, they
believe that counselling sessions work.
On the other hand, however, when they were asked about an area in which they
needed further training almost all of them agree that this area was counselling
(Q20). In spite of their resistance to accepting their lack of skills and knowledge in
this area, they opened up in the questionnaire because it was anonymous. According
to Tucker (quoted in Hargreaves, 1994):
Teachers won't seek help through normal channels. They want something that
is anonymous. There is a fear of not measuring up, of having somebody think
that they're not doing a good job (p. 150).
Apart from all the situations mentioned above, there is still the fact that the
counsellor is facing innovation, which a€ects him/her in two direct ways. The ®rst
one is very evident: it is the fact that innovation increases the work of the teacher,
``creating senses of overload among (them)'' (Hargreaves, 1994, p. 4) and making
him/her think that s/he cannot cope with the change. One of the counsellor's main
concerns is the realization of the amount of SAC work that is still to be done.
Moreover, this ``sense of overload'' leaves little room for the ``informal interstitial
moments'' (ibid, p. 49), when they would be able to care for their own emotions,
feelings and attitudes and those of their students.
The second aspect related to innovation is less evident. Innovation involves eva-
luation and that means that ``there is some obligation on those involved to demon-
strate that improvement has in fact occurred'' (White, 1988, p. 115). Therefore, it is
the teacher who is going to be evaluated. According to Hargreaves (1994) account-
ability is one of the main factors that trigger a teacher's feeling of guilt. Persecutory
guilt, Hargreaves states,
arises from doing something which is forbidden or from failing to do something
which is expected by one or more external authorities (p. 143).
I will use Hargreaves' term competence anxiety (ibid, p. 150) to refer to the coun-
sellors' attitude that arises from their lack of con®dence and their feeling of guilt.

8. Conclusion

The objective of this article has been to describe some of the attitudes that
underlie the behaviour of SDLL counsellors. I described their unbelief in principles,
their distrust of students, their rejection of innovation and their competence anxiety.
By way of conclusion, let me now make two comments on these ®ndings. On the one
hand, it has become obvious that teachers' attitudes are the consequence of a com-
plex web of contextual elements and circumstances. Moreover, most of these ele-
ments are out of the teacher's control. They are given factors the teacher has to deal
with. S/he has no choice. In this sense it would be rather objectionable to assume
that the teacher is the only factor responsible for his/her own attitudes.
 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67 57

On the other hand, it is necessary to stress the fact that most SDLL counsellors
are far from being aware of their own attitudes. Actually, in general terms, attitudes
may be the teaching constituent we are the least aware of. Our traditional technology-
oriented approach to teaching makes us deny our own feelings even though they
may be the main cause of our con¯icts. We prefer (or are trained) to think that we
are perfectly objective and neutral and that references about attitudes belong to a
humanistic trend that does not have anything to do with the ``authentic scienti®c
approach''.
However, I do not want to give a rather sombre and depressing conclusion about
the language teacher in his/her role as SDLL counsellor. In fact, the hidden agenda
of this article is not to depict a pessimistic view of the actual situation but to raise
awareness of it. My point is rather optimistic. In the case of the SAC in Oaxaca and
its academic sta€, it is true that many mistakes were made and that we took a lot of
things for granted. Nevertheless, there is a desire for improvement, which all the
teachers share. The participation of teachers in the study described in this article is a
proof of that. So I would only add that we, as classroom teachers and as SDLL
counsellors, are not aware of some of our attitudes, but I also believe that we can
become aware.
In spite of the fact that the information and analysis carried out in this paper
referred only to the situation in the SAC Oaxaca, I strongly believe that its impli-
cations can serve as a foundation for drawing some conclusions about SAC coun-
sellor education in general. It is evident that teachers working in SACs face di€erent
situations from teachers working in a classroom. For most teachers, I believe, their
past experience and present status reinforce a positive stance on their profession. In
contrast, SDLL counsellors' past as students and as experienced teachers usually
acts against them and raises negative attitudes towards several elements of their
professional context.
Whereas in teachers' contexts, innovation can be just one of the many variables
that in¯uence their performance, in SDLL counsellors' situation, innovation is at
the very core of their profession. Consequently, everything within the teaching/
learning situation is a€ected by it, including the most hidden attitudes and beliefs of
the counsellor. Hence, it is imperative that FL teacher educators and SDLL experts
stop working isolated from each other and start developing a speci®c scheme that
deals with the speci®c needs of SDLL counsellors.

Appendix A

(This questionnaire was given to SDLL counsellors to be answered individually

and anonymously. For reasons of space, the present form is compressed. In the
original the teachers had enough space for writing their answers)

UNIVERSIDAD AUTONOMA BENITO JUAREZ DE OAXACA

SELFACCESS CENTRE
58 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67

SELF-ACCESS CENTRE PROJECT EVALUATION QUESTION-

NAIRE
*****************************************************
The purpose of this questionnaire is to evaluate some aspects of the SAC project.
This instrument is only for teachers because it is considered that they are a very
valuable source of information.
Some of the aspects dealt with in this questionnaire make reference to the experi-
ence of a teacher not only as SAC counsellor but also as language teacher and as a
language learner; it is considered that the teachers' experiences in these areas have to
be taken into account, because these are what underlie their judgements about SAC
and the way it works. The information obtained in this questionnaire will remain
anonymous and will only be used for academic purposes. Thank you for your help.

SECTION I
1. Do you consider that being a SAC counsellor requires di€erent skills from
being a language teacher?
( ) yes ( ) no Why?
2. In regards to classroom work, what is the most important role of the
teacher? (Choose three and give # 1 to the most important):
a) provide useful learning experiences
b) provide a model of correct language use
c) answer learners' questions
d) correct learners' errors
e) help students discover e€ective approaches to learning
f) pass on knowledge and skills to his/her students
g) adapt teaching approach to match his/her students needs
3. Who should decide upon the syllabus and the materials to use in a class?
a) the head of the department
b) the teacher (a team of teachers)
c) the student (a team of students)
d) the institution
4. According to your own experience, which are the main reasons for the stu-
dents' failure in a language class. (Choose three and give # 1 to the most
important:
a) inecient learning strategies
b) poor attention in class
c) irregular attendance
d) particular problems with any of the four skills
e) diculty with discrete language points
f) failure to use the language outside class
g) faulty teaching techniques
h) inappropriate learning objectives
i) inappropriate learning materials/activities
 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67 59

j) inappropriate learning arrangement

k) personal problems of learners (including physical disabilities) like______
l) Others. Please specify____________________________________________

SECTION II

5. Choose a) or b) according to what your students believe about learning a

language

5.1 a) learning consists of acquiring of a b) learning consists of

body of knowledge
5.2 a) the teacher is a resource person
who provides language input for the
learner to work with
5.3 a) language data is to be found
everywhere
5.4 a) it is the role of the teacher to assist b) it is the role of the
learners to become self-directed by
providing access to language data.
5.5 a) learning a language consists of forming b) learning a language
hypotheses about the language input to
which they will be exposed, these
hypotheses being constantly modi®ed
in the direction of the target language.
acquiring organizing
principles through
encountering experiences
b) the teacher has
knowledge the students
do not have.
b) the teacher is the source
of language data
teacher to impart his/her
knowledge to the learner.
The learner will be given
a program in advance.
consists of learning the
structural rules of the
language and the
vocabulary through such
activities as memorisation,
reading, listening, etc.

6. How would you describe a good student? Why?

7. According to your experience, how would you describe Mexican students?
8. According to their pro®le, which situation is the most appropriate for
Mexican students to learn a foreign language?:

a) in a group and with a teacher b) in the self access centre

Why?

9. Why do you think students enrol in the SAC and not with a teacher in a
group?
10. According to you, why do users drop out from the SAC?
60 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67

SECTION III

11. Have you ever learned a second or foreign language?

( ) yes Which one?_________________________ ( ) no
12. How did you learn it (them)?
a) living in the country (no formal instruction)
b) self-directed mode (studying with grammar books, textbooks, tapes, etc.)
c) classroom mode (with a teacher, in a group, etc) other________________
13. Would you like to learn another language?
( ) yes ( ) no Which one?___________
How?
a) living in the country (no formal instruction)
b) self-directed mode (studying with grammar books, textbooks, tapes, etc.)
c) classroom mode (with a teacher, in a group, etc)
d) other____________________________
14. Why would you like to learn it in such a way?
15. What activities of your language classes cannot be done in the self-access
centre?

SECTION IV

16. Have you received any training for working in the SAC?
( ) yes ( ) no In which areas______________
17. How valid was the information that you received (how useful was it in
terms of applicability)?
18. How did you like it (well conveyed, user friendly, new and interesting)?
19.What do you think are your most important contributions to the SAC?
(Choose from three to ®ve options and give #1 to the most important and #5
to the least one)
a) cataloguing and processing materials (textbooks, tapes, videos, etc)
b) creating new didactic materials
c) creating supporting materials (guides, menus, etc)
d) giving counselling sessions to users about their own learning processes
and strategies
e) giving counselling sessions about suggesting and using SAC materials
f) giving counselling sessions about using SAC equipment
g) giving users' courses and monthly workshops
h) assisting users during on-the-¯oor hours (to locate materials, solve minor
technical problems, etc)
i) answering questions on linguistic matters (grammar, vocabulary, pro-
nunciation, etc)
j) assessing users' linguistic progress
k) other_________________________________________
 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67 61

20. In which of the areas mentioned in 19 do you think that SAC counsellors
need more training?
21. According to your experience, do counselling sessions work?
( ) yes ( ) no ( ) it depends
Why?
22. Do you feel that we are helping SAC users through counselling sessions?
( ) yes ( ) no ( ) it depends
Why?
23. Do you think that users like counselling sessions?
( ) yes ( ) no ( ) sometimes
Why?
24. Can we suggest another way of helping SAC users instead of the counselling
sessions?
25. What do you like doing the best in the SAC?
26. What do you like doing the best as a language teacher?
Why?
27. Evaluating the SAC in general terms, and according to your experience, is
it working?
( ) yes ( ) no
Why?
28. What changes would you suggest in order to improve the services in the SAC?
29. Do you think that the SAC would work better if it was a practice centre
(everybody taking classes in the Language Centre and going to the SAC to
practise what they were taught)?
( ) yes ( ) no
Why?
30. Do you think that the SAC Project was properly introduced and imple-
mented in the context of the Language Centre?
( ) yes ( ) no
Why?
31. According to you, what was the reason for creating the SAC?
32. Do we actually need it?
( ) yes ( ) no
Why?
33. Can we really justify the innovation in terms of costs and e€ort?
( ) yes ( ) no
Why?
34.Would you like to add any other comment?

Appendix B

This appendix summarizes the information obtained through the questionnaire

given to the SAC counsellors (see Appendix A). Italics refer to the actual words the
subjects used.
62 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67

Question Answer
1. Di€erence teacher/counsellor 93% yes
Di€erent attitudes
Di€erent roles: orient, guide but
not teaching
Di€erent techniques for one-to-one
interactions
7% it depends
0% no
2. Teacher role 29% adapt teaching approach to
match his/her Ss
26% help students discover e€ective
approaches to learning
22% provide useful learning
experiences
22% pass on knowledge and skills
to students
13% provide a model of correct
language use
3. Decision making 50% the teacher
25% the student and the teacher
12.5% the head of the department
12.5% the institution
4. Reasons for students failure 26% inecient learning strategies
22% failure to use the language
outside the classroom
21% irregular attendance
10% faulty teaching techniques
10% objectives inappropriate for learning
10% others
5. Teachers' perceptions of 71% learning consists of acquiring of a
students beliefs body of knowledge
71% the teacher has a knowledge the
students do not have
93% the teacher is the source of
language data
87% it is the role of the teacher to
impart his/her knowledge to the
learner. . .
79% learning a language consists of
learning the structural rules of the
language. . .
 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67
6. Good student features
7. Mexican student features
8. Ideal learning situation for
Mexicans
9. Reasons for SAC enrolment
10. Reasons for attrition
11. Experience in SL learning
12. Mode of SL learning
13. Preference of learning more
14. Reasons for preference
63
(self ) motivated, organised, risk taker,
assertive, independent, good attendance,
participative, con®dent, creative, ¯exible
(adjectives ordered according to
frequency in responses)
Most are opposites of previous answer.
The most recurrent were passive,
dependent, and relying too much on the
teacher.
66% in a group and with a teacher
culture (traditional education, students
are irresponsible, dependent, students
like interaction)
17% in a group and with a teacher+in
the self-access centre
17% either
they do not have other option, because
of schedule (73%)
they want to work independently
(27%)
other comments: We get the wrong
students, their objectives do not
match ours
Who is to blame:
the students (53%)
the SAC (26%)
the students and the SAC (13%)
no answer (7%)
100% yes (from two to ®ve languages)
50% living in the country
40% a classroom mode
6% no answer
4% self-directed mode
37% living in the country
30% classroom mode
25% in the self-access centre
For living in the country:
personal style
acquisition vs learning
motivation
For classroom mode:
personal style
dependent
lazy
64 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67
15. Di€erence classroom and SAC
activities
16. SAC training
17. SAC training value
18. SAC training acceptability
19. Teachers' contributions to SAC
20. SAC training needs
21. E€ectiveness of counselling
sessions
22. Counselling sessions usefulness in
terms of helping learners
For self-access centre:
being a Mexican I want to prove
that Mexicans can!
The answers show that teachers
believe that very few activities cannot
be done in the SAC such as oral
presentations and working in groups.
100% said that they have been trained
for SDLL counselling functions
70% it has been useful
15% it hasn't been useful
15% no answer
76% it was interesting and new
16% no answer
8% I do not know
37% Giving counselling sessions
about suggesting and using materials
35% Giving counselling sessions
about users' own learning
28% Assisting users during on-the-
¯oor hours
55% counselling about learners'
learning processes and strategies
16% assessing learners' linguistic
progress
11% assisting users' during on-the-
¯oor hours
11% creating supporting materials
6% creating and cataloguing didactic
materials
21% yes
0% no
73% it depends (on convergence
between counsellor and learner)
53% yes (because of experienced
language learners and well trained
teachers)
7% no (no reason)
33% sometimes (when the learners are
well trained, when there is convergence,
when learners get over the fear of
asking)
7% did not answer
 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67 65

23. Learners attitude to counselling 26% Ss like counselling sessions

sessions (most get what they want)
7% Ss do not like counselling sessions
(get more confused and frustrated
afterwards)
53% sometimes Ss like counselling
sessions
7% did not answer
24. Suggestions for improving 50% more human contact
counselling sessions 15% did not answer
12% more communication between
counsellors
12% more training
6% teacher control
3% didn't answer (ask users!)
25. Teachers' preferences as SDLL 33% working with students
counsellors 33% did not answer
20% creating and cataloguing
materials
20% everything
26. Teachers' preferences as language 33% teacher/student interaction
teachers 33% did not answer
13% developing communicative skills
13% developing speaking abilities in
students
8% cross-cultural experience
27% SAC e€ectiveness 40% SAC is working in some ways
but not in others
26% SAC it is not working
20% SAC is working
13% did not answer
Reasons:
In favour:
For being so new, it is OK
Against:
we lack information
fear of counselling sessions
materials are not well adapted
we haven't done anything
lack of human contact
Ts and Ss are to blame
28. Solutions for SAC get more information about SDLL
counselling
research on counselling sessions
work more on materials adaptation
66 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67

more interaction between counsellors

29. Role of SAC
30. Attitudes towards innovation
31. SAC objective
32. Reasons for keeping SAC
33. Justi®cation of SAC
and learners
60% SAC as a practice centre (In the
classroom you get the basics, the
context. It is more complete and Ss
are more comfortable. Self-learning is
not for Mexicans)
20% SAC as both, a learning and a
practice centre (for some students
self-learning is an option, if the Ts
encourages autonomy)
13% did not answer
7% SAC as a learning centre (for
some learners it works)
40% It was properly introduced and
implemented
33% it was not properly introduced
and implemented (political reasons,
interpersonal con¯icts, administrative
problems, SAC and LC are not
integrated, changes needed to be
introduced little by little, it excluded
our own students)
20% I do not know (didn't
understand the question)
7% did not answer
40% to bene®t university students,
to cope with their needs
26% a new way for language learning
26% to get more income, the Ministry
of Education ``said'' Ss need it, the
Government was concerned about the
low level of university students
8% did not answer
93% We need SAC
for future teachers to experiment
self-directed learning
as an alternative for some Ss
according to their needs
because it has a lot of potential
7% no, we do not need it
86% SAC is justi®able (as long as
there are users)
7% do not know
7% did not answer
 M. de los Angeles Clemente / System 29 (2001) 45±67 67

Note: most reasons seem to be

contradicting their positive short
answer:
It is too soon to say
Counsellors' hours should be
extended
There is a lack of information
Problems with maintenance

References

Bamber, B., 1987. Training the trainers. In: Language Teacher Education: an Integrated Programme for
ELT Teacher Training. ELT Documents, Modern English Publications and The British Council,
Manchester, pp. 125.
Breen, M., 1987. Learner contributions to task design. In: Candlin, Ch., Murphy, D. (Eds.), Language
Learning Tasks. Prentice Hall International, London.
Clemente, M.A., Kissinger, D., 1994. El Projecto de Autoacceso en Oaxaca. Universidad AutoÂnoma
Benito JuaÂrez de Oaxaca, Mexico.
Freeman, D., 1989. Teacher training, development and decision making: a model of teaching and related
strategies for language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly 23.
Freeman, D., 1990. Intervening in practice teaching. In: Richards, J., Nunan, D. (Eds.), Second Language
Teacher Education. CUP, Cambridge.
Freeman, D., Richards, J., 1996. Teacher Learning in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Hargreaves, A., 1994. Changing Teachers, Changing Times. Cassell, London.
Holliday, A., 1999. Small Cultures. Applied Linguistics 20 (2), 237±264.
Maingay, P., 1988. Observation for training development, or assessment? In: Du€, T. (Ed.), Explorations
in Teacher Training Ð Problems and Issues. Longman, Essex.
Prabhu, N., 1992. Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Richards, J., 1990. The dilemma of teacher education in second language teaching. In: Richards, J.,
Nunan, D. (Eds.), Second Language Teacher Education. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
SchoÈn, D., 1983. The Re¯ective Practitioner. Basic Books, London.
Wallace, M., 1991. Training Foreign Language Teachers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
White, R., 1988. The ELT Curriculum, Design, Innovation and Management. Blackwell, Cambridge.
Winer, L., 1992. Spinach to chocolate: changing awareness and attitudes in ESL writing teachers. TESOL
Quarterly, 26.
Woodward, T., 1991. Models and Metaphors in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press, Cam-
bridge.