8/3/2019 Barfield 2001

1/7

The following paper explores what developing teacher autonomy can mean. FromDevelopingAutonomy, Proceedings of the College and University Educators' 2001 Conference, Shizuoka,

Japan. Tokyo: The Japan Association for Language Teaching.

Exploring and Defining Teacher Autonomy: A Collaborative

Discussion

Andy Barfield, Tim Ashwell, Michael Carroll, Kristie Collins, Neil Cowie, Michael Critchley,

Ellen Head, Mike Nix, Andrew Obermeier & Martha C. Robertson

INTRODUCTION

Teachers and researchers have little difficulty defining learner autonomy. The Bergen definition

represents one view of learner autonomy that many teachers find appropriate ( Bergen , 1990).Yet, the task of defining teacher autonomy seems much more problematic (cf., Little, 2000). At

the bare minimum, teacher autonomy may hinge on "ideas of professional freedom and self-directed professional development" (Benson, 2001, p.174, citing McGrath, 2000); alternatively,

teacher autonomy may highlight "critical reflection" (Smyth, 1989) and "transformation throughdialogue" (Shor & Freire, 1987). Little explains but does not define teacher autonomy when he

states that "...successful teachers have always been autonomous in the sense of having a strongsense of personal responsibility for their teaching, exercising via continuous reflection and

analysis the highest possible degree of affective and cognitive control of the teaching process,and exploiting the freedom that this confers" (Little, 1995, p.179). Sustainable development of

teacher autonomy may however require a specific and contextually sensitive discussion anddefinition.

To address this need, the workshop leaders--Tim Ashwell, Andy Barfield, Neil Cowie & MikeNix--invited the participants to (1) discuss their personal definitions of teacher autonomy, (2)

develop these shared ideas in writing, and (3) take part in a post-conference e-mail discussion.This led to (4) an extended working definition of teacher autonomy, which was revised

according to (5) feedback and comments from teachers elsewhere responding to a posting of thefirst draft of the definition on the AUTO-L list in early June 2001. (AUTO-L is a listserve

devoted to autonomous language learning.)

To capture this incremental process of collaborative discussion, this paper is divided into fiveparts:

Starting ideas for teacher autonomy from workshop discussionsShort individual reflections written immediately after the workshop

8/3/2019 Barfield 2001

2/7

Extended reflections written on email after the conferenceAn exploratory working definition of teacher autonomy (the

"Shizuoka" definition)Feedback from other similarly interested teachers.

STARTING IDEAS FOR TEACHER AUTONOMY: Initial ideas raised during

the workshop

The initial discussion of teacher autonomy focused heavily on understanding the different (butclearly similar) contexts in which we work. This led to an early emphasis on dealing with

institutional constraints. We began by recognising that teaching is always contextually situatedand by proposing that teacher autonomy involves:

negotiation skills;

institutional knowledge in order to start to address effectivelyconstraints on teaching and learning;

willingness to confront institutional barriers in socially appropriateways to turn constraints into opportunities for change;

readiness to engage in lifelong learning to the best of anindividual"s capacity;

reflection on the teaching process and environment;commitment to promoting learner autonomy.

SHORT INDIVIDUAL REFLECTIONS: Initial post-workshop contributions

Despite the apparent initial consensus, our written reflections began to point out areas of conflict

and contradiction. Part of the tension here came from making explicit our different constructs ofautonomy (cf., Wellington & Austin, 1996). Should this be seen as a set of skills? Should the

emphasis rather be on the processes of fostering teacher autonomy? Might it be better to definethe essence of an autonomous teacher in discrete characteristics? Tim Ashwell questioned

whether teacher autonomy and learner autonomy can be interlinked. Noting that there areconstraints on teachers which may be different from those on students, Tim argued that there is

no necessary connection between fostering learner autonomy and teacher autonomy. MichaelCarroll made a case for the notion of the autonomous teacher as not just a set of wishes or

preferences, but also as skills and common professionalism: Informed and well-chosen decisionmaking is part of being an autonomous teacher. Both Ellen Head and Kristie Collins developed

this line of thinking by focusing on the process of facilitating a move in responsibility fromteacher to student. On the other hand, Neil Cowie discussed the qualities of an autonomous

teacher as a desire for personal improvement and change over the course of his or her career todevelop further; Neil also pointed to the importance of teacher development groups as teacher-

learner pools of equal power. At the same time, Andrew Obermeier saw autonomy as apredominantly individual issue, while Mike Nix connected the personal with the institutional by

8/3/2019 Barfield 2001

3/7

framing teacher autonomy as exploring choices and alternatives within particular classroom andinstitutional constraints (through action research).

EXTENDED REFLECTIONS ON TEACHER AUTONOMY: Edited from an

on-line post-workshop discussion

Michael Critchley:Even if students become totally autonomous as learners in the classroom, the teacher will still notbe an autonomous entity--student autonomy does not equal teacher autonomy. Teachers are still

likely to feel pressure from peers or from the institution that questions their practices, and assuch can never really be autonomous: The power difference and the ability to have complete

professional control is never likely to be equal between the teacher and the institution. Should we

be always moving ourselves and our students towards autonomy, i.e., away from traditionalbased methods? To move a group of learners in any direction implies the use of will--in otherwords, what we are saying is, "you can do anything you want in the classroom, as long as it falls

within the limits of what we as teachers and language experts consider appropriate learningbehaviour." Is this true autonomy? For students, the ability to behave autonomously is dependent

upon their teacher creating a classroom culture where autonomy is accepted. For teachers, thisacceptance of autonomy would come from the institution. For both, this acceptance is really the

transfer of power--the loss of power and control from teachers / institutions.

Ellen Head:There is potential ambiguity in the way the phrase "teacher autonomy" can be used. It can mean(a) a teacher who favours and promotes autonomy in the learners and (b) a teacher who wants to

"have control over her/his own affairs"

Martha Robertson:Obviously teacher autonomy does not mean freedom from all constraints--nor does learnerautonomy, but I wonder if members of the teaching profession can ever be considered

autonomous in the context of fulfilling the mission of our profession. Perhaps teachers can beautonomous only as individuals and self-actualized learners (and revolutionaries, of course...). I

don't think what students want is always (or even often) an autonomous choice. Autonomy isdeveloped through observation, reflection, thoughtful consideration, understanding, experience,

evaluation of alternatives...the absence of coercion does not automatically result in autonomy,nor is choice always autonomous. We often make choices because we desire comfort, safety,

repetition, familiarity--or because we fear punishment or loss or the unknown, or because we aredriven by unconscious needs, habits, desires, or unthinking situational responses. Certainly

autonomy means the right to make poor choices, but poor choices they remain. As teachers, ourprimary concern is how our students are making their choices rather than whether we can or

should accommodate their desires.

Tim Ashwell:

8/3/2019 Barfield 2001

4/7

Teacher autonomy seems to be very closely bound up with the notions of the "critically reflectiveteacher" (Bartlett, 1990), "teacher-research" (Freeman, 1998) and "action research." The basic

premise here is that teachers are best placed to develop their own teaching in order to better thelearning experiences of their students. Teacher autonomy seems to be an umbrella term for these

innovations in teacher education and on-going teacher development. Rather than accepting the

received wisdom, the autonomous teacher interprets ideas about teaching and learning forher/himself probably in collaboration with others making the meaning more real for her/himself.Crucially, the autonomous teacher goes beyond this to search for new answers to new problems

which inevitably occur to us as individuals in our own unique teaching/learning situations.

Michael Carroll:Tim argues that the autonomous teacher is independent from traditional notions of what it takesto be a good teacher. I disagree. An autonomous teacher without the "traditional" teaching skills

may be ineffective. I think good teachers have always been autonomous in the sense where our

discussion has led us to: Autonomy entails working within social contexts in order to best meetthe needs of students. I"d add, though, that autonomy doesn't mean throwing out the baby withthe bathwater: Tried and tested answers (albeit regularly re-evaluated) to old problems are as

important as new answers to new problems.

AN EXTENDED WORKING DEFINITION OF TEACHER AUTONOMY

The following working definition tries to capture the many different points raised during thiscollaborative discussion of teacher autonomy:

The "Shizuoka" Definition of Teacher Autonomy

"Characterised by a recognition that teaching is always contextually situated,teacher autonomy is a continual process of inquiry into how teaching can best

romote autonomous learning for learners. It involves understanding and makingexplicit the different constraints that a teacher may face, so that teachers can

work collaboratively towards confronting constraints and transforming them intoopportunities for change. The collaboration that teacher autonomy requires

suggests that outside the classroom teachers need to develop institutionalknowledge and flexibility in dealing with external constraints. It also suggests that

teacher autonomy can be strengthened by collaborative support and networkingboth within the institution and beyond. Negotiation thus forms an integral part of

the process of developing teacher autonomy.

Teacher autonomy is driven by a need for personal and professional improvement,so that an autonomous teacher may seek out opportunities over the course of his

8/3/2019 Barfield 2001

5/7

or her career to develop further. Teacher autonomy is a socially constructedrocess, where teacher support and development groups can act as teacher-

learner pools of diverse knowledge, experience, equal power and autonomouslearning.

Within the classroom, developing teacher autonomy will overlap with principles oostering learner autonomy and with an evolving body of professional knowledge,skill and expertise. Because society confers teachers and learners with different

roles, rights and responsibilities, it is not possible to identify a perfect matchbetween the processes of teacher autonomy and learner autonomy. The

interrelationship between learner autonomy and teacher autonomy becomes clearwhen the values of co-learning, self-direction, collaboration and democratic co-

articipation are consciously highlighted in relation to the following three criticalrinciples of action:

critical reflective inquiry

empowermentdialogue.

It is the quality of interdependence between these values and actions that links thedevelopment processes of teacher autonomy and learner autonomy. The processes

by which those principles of action can be achieved centre on observing,inquiring, negotiating, evaluating and developing in collaboration with one"s

learners and colleagues. These action research processes are made explicitthrough dialogue and critical reflective inquiry, the richness of which empowers

teacher autonomy and helps it develop further.

Crucially, developing teacher autonomy involves questioning and flexibly re-interpreting the exercise of authority within the classroom. An autonomous

teacher works with his or her learners openly and accountably in ways that willbest stimulate their learning. An autonomous teacher continually searches, in

collaboration first and foremost with his or her learners, for better answers to thedifferent problems inevitably arising in developing and re-interpreting learner

autonomy further."

FEEDBACK FROM A WIDER PEER GROUP: Responses from similarly

interested teachers from AUTO-L

Responses to the extended definition centred on interconnecting values, principles and actions of

developing autonomous practice. Both of the responses that follow push towards a universalgeneralizable theory of teacher autonomy (cf., Dam & Little, 1999), away from the shared

8/3/2019 Barfield 2001

6/7

regional focus which the participants in the workshop took on similarly perceived everydayinstitutional constraints within tertiary education in Japan.

Flavia Vieira (Portugal):What's the use of having a concept of reflective teaching, teacher empowerment or teacher

autonomy which can accommodate transmissive, authoritarian, even oppressive purposes? Justthink of some of our colleagues at university. I have colleagues whose autonomy allows them todiscriminate among students, defend their role as subject matter authorities, deny students the

right to express their views. These teachers are very aware of their options and hold strongarguments to support them. Reflection, empowerment or autonomy do not necessarily mean

"teaching towards learner development". The argument that defending autonomy for learnersimplies a redefinition of the teacher role also applies to teacher autonomy. The link between

teacher development and learner development is necessary and ideological, whatever theideology is. If the link is not clearly established, what we have is a "hidden ideology", not an

absence of ideology. What/Whose purposes does teacher development/action serve? I thinkteacher educators cannot escape this question, and it surely points to the connection between

teacher development and school pedagogy.David Palfreyman (United Arab Emirates):How can we make "values', 'principles' and 'processes' of teacher autonomy fit together in

practice? In learner autonomy one can make a distinction between the individual as a 'learner'(trying to learn) and as a 'student' (trying to learn and work within an institution/ education

system)--writing about learner autonomy tends to take the former as a starting point, althoughideas like Littlewood's 'reactive autonomy' tackle the latter (Littlewood, 1999). A teacher can

also be seen as both a developing individual and as a social actor, and a teacher's formal roles (inlessons, in meetings, in course planning, in professional development activities...) are even more

complex than a learner's. One question: What does 'context' involve? I feel from this definitionthat it means mostly the institution; but the classroom is another setting again; and learners and

teachers have other contexts outside the institutional framework (peer-groups, wider society,other learning situations) which may be important in the kind of development that teacher

autonomy points to.

References

Bartlett, L. (1990). Teacher development through reflective teaching. In Richards, J.C. & D.

Nunan (eds.), Second language teacher education (pp. 202-214), Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. London: Pearson

Education.

Bergen (1990). Developing autonomous learning in the foreign language classroom. Bergen:Universitetet i Bergen Institutt for praktisk pedagogikk. In Dam, L. (1995),Learner autonomy:

8/3/2019 Barfield 2001

7/7

From theory to practice (pp.1-2), Dublin: Authentik.

Dam, L. & Little, D. (1999). Autonomy in foreign language learning: From classroom practice togeneralizable theory. In Barfield, A.W., Betts, R., Cunningham, J., Dunn, N., Katsura, H.,

Kobayashi, K., Padden, N., Parry, N. & M. Watanabe (eds.), On JALT98:Focus on the

Classroom: Interpretations (pp.127-136), Tokyo: The Japan Association for Language Teaching.

Freeman D. (1998).Doing teacher research. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.

Little, D. (1995). Learning as dialogue: The dependence of learner autonomy on teacher

autonomy. System 23 (2), 175-181.

Little, D. (7-9 September, 2000). We"re all in it together: Exploring the interdependence ofteacher and learner autonomy.Paper presented at Autonomy 2000. University of Helsinki

Language Centre.

Littlewood, W. (1999). Defining and developing autonomy in East Asian contexts.AppliedLinguistics 20 (1), 71-94.

McGrath, I. (2000). Teacher autonomy. In Sinclair, B., McGrath, I. & T. Lamb (eds.),Learner

autonomy, teacher autonomy, London: Longman.

Shor, I. & Freire, P. (1987).A pedagogy for liberation. New York: Bergin & Garvey.

Smyth, J. (1989). Developing and sustaining critical reflection in teacher education.Journal ofTeacher Education 40 (2), 2-9.

Wellington, B. & Austin, P. (1996). Orientations to reflective practice.Educational Research 38(3), 307-316.

The full reference for this paper is: Barfield, A., Ashwell, T., Carroll, M., Collins, K., Cowie, N.,

Critchley, M., Head, E., Nix, M., Obermeier, A. & M.C. Robertson. Exploring and defining

teacher autonomy. Forthcoming. In Developing Autonomy, Proceedings of the College andUniversity Educators" 2001 Conference, Shizuoka, Japan. Tokyo:The Japan Association for

Language Teaching.