Effect of learner autonomy on English proficiency of non-English major students

iation 
Self-
regulation 
Average EP Pearson 
Sig(2-tailed) 
N 
1 
205 
.099 
160 
205 
.071 
313 
205 
LA 
Self-
initiation 
Pearson 
Sig(2-tailed) 
N 
.099 
160 
205 
1 
205 
.063 
354 
205 
Self-
regulation 
Pearson 
Sig(2-tailed) 
N 
.071 
313 
205 
.063 
354 
205 
1 
205 
Notes: EP = English proficiency; LA = Learner autonomy 
Table 6. Correlations between LA and Pass EP 
 Pass 
EP 
Self-
initiation 
Self-
regulation 
Pass EP Pearson 
Sig(2-tailed) 
N 
1 
34 
.043 
809 
34 
.037 
834 
34 
LA 
Self-
initiation 
Pearson 
Sig(2-tailed) 
N 
.043 
809 
34 
1 
34 
.031 
768 
34 
Self-
regulation 
Pearson 
Sig(2-tailed) 
N 
.037 
834 
34 
.031 
768 
34 
1 
34 
Notes: EP = English proficiency; LA = Learner autonomy 
As can be seen in Table 3 and 4, there are positive and 
significant correlations at the 0.01 level (p<.01) between 
LA and EP of high proficiency learners. Specifically, the 
correlations between EP and self-initiation and self-
regulation of the students of Excellent EP are r = .358 and 
r = .332 respectively and those for the students of Good EP 
are r = .289 and r = .277 respectively. The correlations 
between self-initiation and self-regulation of the high 
proficiency learners are also statistically significant with 
r = .221 and r = .172 respectively. By contrast, as shown in 
Table 5 and 6, there are no significant correlations (p>.01) 
between LA and EP of low proficiency learners including 
students of Average EP and Pass EP. 
Furthermore, in order to see whether LA can predict 
learners’ EP, linear regression is performed. Linear 
Regression is a statistical model used to predict the value 
of a dependent variable (EP) or a result variable based on 
the values of at least one independent variable (LA) or the 
causal variable. Since the regression model analyzes the 
dependence of a variable on a single variable, this is a 
ISSN 1859-1531 - THE UNIVERSITY OF DANANG, JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, NO. 12(133).2018 41 
simple linear regression. The results in Table 7 show that 
the LA coefficient has statistical significance at the 0.05 
level (t = 37.056, p <.05). Therefore, it can be concluded 
that LA can significantly predict students’ EP. 
Table 7. Linear Regression between LA and EP 
Model 
Unstandardized 
coefficients 
Standardized 
coefficient 
t Sig. 
 B 
Std. 
Error 
Beta 
1 
(constant) 
.224 .170 1.315 .021 
LA .924 .025 .827 37.056 .000* 
 Note: *p<.05; LA = Learner autonomy; EP: English 
proficiency; B= Beta. 
5. Discussions 
The results of this study show that there are positive and 
significant correlations between LA and learners’ EP as a 
whole. These results echo those of previous studies (Dafei, 
2007; Myartawan et al., 2013; Nguyen, 2010; Sakai & 
Takagi, 2009; Valadi & Rashidi, 2014; Zafarian & Nemati, 
2016), which offer evidence of the overall correlations 
between LA and EP of Asian EFL learners. 
However, the present study has investigated in depth the 
correlations between two aspects of LA including self-initiation 
and self-regulation and each level of EP including Excellent, 
Good, Average and Pass. The results show that there are 
significant correlations between LA and EP of high proficiency 
learners (learners of Excellent and Good EP), while no such 
correlations exist among low proficiency learners (learners of 
Average and Pass EP). The results also show that the 
correlations between learners’ self-regulation and the levels of 
EP are always lower than those of their self-initiation. These 
results imply that high-proficiency learners are highly 
autonomous learners who are more responsible for their own 
learning and have better self-management of their learning 
inside and outside the classroom; therefore, they can adopt more 
effective learning strategies of planning, monitoring and 
evaluation to achieve a high level of EP. By contrast, low-
proficiency learners are less autonomous learners as they lack 
self-management and self-regulated learning; therefore, they 
are more likely to achieve a lower level of EP. 
The present study also indicates that LA can 
significantly predict learners’ EP, which reflects some 
previous studies showing the correlations between LA and 
learners’ language skills (Masita, 2016; Safari & 
Tabatabaei, 2016; Zafarian and Nemati, 2016). However, 
the previous studies only indicate the correlations between 
LA with one individual language skill such as reading, 
speaking, writing or listening skill, but not with learners’ 
overall EP as the present study did. 
6. Conclusions 
In today’s globalized world, LA has become one of the 
important goals in education in general and in English 
language learning in particular. This study confirms 
previous studies that Asian EFL learners do have LA, that is, 
LA is feasible in Asian EFL learning context. The study 
shows that while there are positive and significant 
correlations between aspects of LA and EP of high 
proficiency learners, such correlations do not exist among 
low proficiency learners. In addition, the study also indicates 
that LA can predict learners’ overall EP. This means that if 
learners have a high degree of LA, it is very likely that they 
will achieve a better level of EP. This shows that LA has a 
great decision on learners’ academic achievement. 
The results of the study prove to reflect the current EFL 
learning situation of non-English major students at member 
universities of the University of Danang. In the author’s 
teaching experience, low-proficiency learners of non-
English majors are still dependent a great deal on the 
teacher’s provision of knowledge and consequently their 
low degree of LA results in a low level of EP. These results 
suggest some implications for English language teaching 
and learning. Firstly, it is crucial that EFL learners be 
informed and aware of the importance of LA to facilitate 
their language learning process as LA has a positive and 
significant effect on their EP. The more autonomous a 
learner is, the higher level of EP he/she can achieve. 
Secondly, English language teachers should engage EFL 
learners in a more active learning environment, inside and 
outside the classroom, where learners can maximize their 
LA. This means that EFL learners should be empowered to 
take more charge of their own learning process and develop 
the ability to control their own learning in order to achieve 
the ultimate goal of their English learning. Thirdly, as high 
proficiency learners tend to be more autonomous than low 
proficiency learners, English language teachers should 
provide the latter with appropriate scaffolding based on 
their level of EP so that they can gradually develop LA to 
improve their level of EP accordingly. Fourthly, as the 
correlations between learners’ self-regulation and EP tends 
to be lower than those of their self-initiation, it is necessary 
that EFL learners be equipped with more effective 
strategies of planning, monitoring, and evaluation in 
English language learning in order to achieve a higher 
degree of LA. Last, but not least, as LA can predict 
learners’ overall EP, curriculum designers should develop 
a strong focus on LA in curriculum innovation and LA may 
be used by university administrators as one of the 
important variables to predict learners’ academic potential. 
Acknowledgements: This research is funded by Funds 
for Science and Technology Development of the University 
of Danang under grant number B2017-ĐN05-08. 
REFERENCES 
[1] Benson, P. Teaching and researching autonomy in language 
learning. Essex: Pearson Education Ltd, 2001. 
[2] Benson, P., & Huang, J. Autonomy in the transition from 
foreign language learning to foreign language teaching. D.E.L.T.A., 
24 (esp.), 421-439, 2008. 
[3] Borg, S. and Al-Busaidi, S. Learner autonomy: English language 
teachers’ beliefs and practices. London: British Council, 2012 
[4] Dafei, D. An exploration of the relationship between learner 
autonomy and English proficiency. Asia EFL Journal, 1-23, 2007. 
[5] Dang, T.T. Learner autonomy in EFL studies in Vietnam: A 
discussion from sociocultural perspective. English Language 
Teaching, 3(2), 3-9, 2010. 
[6] DeVellis, R. Scale development: theory and applications. Thousand 
Okas, CA: Sage, 2003. 
[7] Dickinson, L. Self-instruction in language learning. Cambridge: 
42 Ho Si Thang Kiet 
Cambridge University Press, 1987. 
[8] Hall, G. Exploring English language teaching. Taylor &Francis e-
Library, 2011. 
[9] Holec, H. Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: 
Pergamon Press. (First published in 1979, Strasbourg: Council of 
Europe), 1981. 
[10] Jiménez Raya, M., Lam, T. and Viera, F. Pedagogy for autonomy in 
language education in Europe: Towards a framework for learner and 
teacher development. Dublin, IE: Authentik, 2007. 
[11] Lamb, M. “It depends on the students themselves”: independent 
language learning at an Indonesian state school. Language, Culture, 
and Curriculum, 17(3), 229-245, 2004. 
[12] Little D. Learner autonomy: Drawing the threads of self-assessment, 
goal-setting, and reflection. Retrieved from 
 2007 
[13] Masita, D. D. EFL students’ ability in performing autonomous 
learning and their writing proficiency across cognitive styles. Jurnal 
Pendidikan, 1(6), 1204 - 1215, 2016. 
[14] Morimoto, Y. “How we get hooked”-what motivated students to 
commit themselves so fervently into autonomous and collaborative 
English learning projects? In E. Skier & M. Kohyama (Eds.), 
Learner and teacher autonomy in Japan 2: Autonomy you ask! (pp. 
113-140). Tokyo, Japan: The Learner Development Special Interest 
Group of the Japan Association for Language Teaching, 2006. 
[15] Myartawan, I.P.N.W, Latief, M. A. and Suharmanto. The correlation 
between learner autonomy and English proficiency of Indonesian 
EFL college learners. TEFLIN Journal, 24 (1), 63-81, 2013. 
[16] Nguyen, T.C.L. Learner autonomy and EFL learning at the tertiary 
level in Vietnam (Doctoral thesis). Victoria University of 
Wellington, New Zealand, 2010. 
[17] Sakai, S., Chu, M., Takagi, A., Lee, S. Teachers’ roles in developing 
learner autonomy in the East Asian region. The Journal of ASIA 
TEFL, 5(1), 93-117, 2008. 
[18] Sakai, S. and Takagi. Relationship between learner autonomy and 
English language proficiency of Japanese learners. The Journal of 
Asia TEFL, 6(3), 297-325, 2009. 
[19] Saffari, S and Tabatabaei, O. Relationship between autonomy and 
listening comprehension ability among Iranian EFL learners. 
International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 
4 (13), 33-46, 2016. 
[20] Trinh, Q.L. Stimulating learner autonomy in English language 
education: A curriculum innovation study in a Vietnamese context. 
Amsterdam: unpublished thesis, 2005. 
[21] Valadi, A and Rashidi, V. How are language learners’ autonomy and 
their oral language proficiency related in an EFL context? 
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied 
Linguistics World, 7(1), 124-131, 2014. 
[22] Wakui, Y. Developed autonomy through self- and peer-assessment 
and reflection: Awareness and success in students’ presentation 
skills. In E. Skier & M. Kohyama (Eds.), Learner and teacher 
autonomy in Japan 2: Autonomy you ask! (pp. 63-72). Tokyo, Japan: 
The Learner Development Special Interest Group of the Japan 
Association for Language Teaching, 2006. 
[23] Zafarian, S. E. and Nemati, A. The effect of learners' autonomy on 
EFL learners reading comprehension. Journal of Administrative 
Management, Education and Training, 12(3), 526-533, 2016. 
Appendix: Questionnaire on learner autonomy 
1. Self-initiation 
Instructions: How many times a week do you do the following activities? 
Circle the correct number: 
1 = Never (0 time/a week) 2 = Rarely (1 time/a week) 
3 = Sometimes (2-3 times/a week) 4 = Often (4-5 times/a week) 
5 = Always (6-7 times/a week) 
1. I try to speak as much English as possible in pair work or group work. 
 1 2 3 4 5 
2. I encourage my classmates to speak English so that I can practise 
English with them. 
1 2 3 4 5 
3. I observe the way my classmates speak, write or learn English so that 
I can learn from them. 
1 2 3 4 5 
4. I ask the teacher questions when I do not understand the lessons. 
1 2 3 4 5 
5. I volunteer first to do the tasks asked by the teacher. 
1 2 3 4 5 
6. I try to think and express my ideas in English. 
 1 2 3 4 5 
7. At the end of each lesson, I try to work out what I can do and review 
what I cannot do to improve my English. 
 1 2 3 4 5 
8. I try to do all exercises in the textbook/workbook after school. 
 1 2 3 4 5 
9. I do independent study in the library or at home. 
 1 2 3 4 5 
10. I try to speak English to foreign teachers at my university or any other 
foreigners I meet. 
1 2 3 4 5 
11. I make friends with people from other countries and communicate 
with them in English or via email. 
1 2 3 4 5 
12. I watch English programmes on TV (news, movies, sports, etc.) or 
listen to radio in English. 
1 2 3 4 5 
13. I use online English-learning programmes to study English. 
1 2 3 4 5 
14. I join English-speaking clubs (at my university or elsewhere) to 
practise English. 
1 2 3 4 5 
15. I take advantage of various learning resources such as the library, the 
Internet, dictionaries, etc. to improve my English. 
1 2 3 4 5 
2. Self-regulation 
Instructions: How true are these statements to you? Circle the correct 
number: 
1 = Not true at all 2 = Slightly true 
3 = Moderately true 4 = True 
5 = Definitely true 
16. When studying English, I establish practical goals for myself based 
on the course requirements and my true English level. 
1 2 3 4 5 
17. I have a clear plan for studying on my own. 
1 2 3 4 5 
18. I am good at adjusting my study plans and creating a practical study 
schedule based on my progress. 
1 2 3 4 5 
19. I make an effort to overcome emotional issues that may hinder my 
English studies such as lack of confidence, shyness, anxiety, and 
inhibition. 
1 2 3 4 5 
20. I can consciously employ effective learning strategies to improve my 
English skills. 
1 2 3 4 5 
21. I monitor my learning process consciously. 
1 2 3 4 5 
22. I am conscious of whether my learning strategy is effective or not. 
1 2 3 4 5 
23. If I realize my learning strategy is impractical, I quickly find a more 
suitable one. 
1 2 3 4 5 
24. While practicing English, I am able to realize my own mistakes and 
correct them. 
1 2 3 4 5 
25. I consider the teacher’s assessment criteria to judge how well I learn 
English. 
1 2 3 4 5 
(The Board of Editors received the paper on 05/11/2018, its review was completed on 25/12/2018)