Purpose: To determine students’ autonomy level.
Source: http://www.innovationinteaching.org/autonomyscale.docx
Short description: A questionnaire of 32 questions to determine students’ autonomy level, as well as a questionnaire with 8 (open) questions for teachers. The instruments were designed specifically for use in the Chinese higher education context (but could well be used outside of this). the instruments consider three elements of autonomy: learners’ ability in self-management of their language learning; 2) learners’ consciousness of and attitudes towards autonomy; and 3) autonomous learning practice.
Sample question: Students are responsible for deciding their learning goals.
Paid or free: Free
Reliability/validity measures:
Reliability:
- Cronbach’s alpha = .949, considered to have an excellent level of internal consistency of the items in the global scale as well as in the three subscales.
Validity:
- Cronbach’s Alpha = .952
Setting: Instructed or managed
Stakeholder(s):
- Curriculum designer
- Administration office
Type of measurement: Questionnaire
Possible uses:
- Curriculum design
- Learner plans
Ease of implementation: Easy. 32 items, est. 10-15 min.
Advantages: It seems that it is easy to administer the survey and the items seem to be covering metacognitive strategies thoroughly.
Drawbacks:
- Self-report
- There are some technical terms such as monitor, evaluate, learning outcomes that students may know the literal meanings but not the concepts behind it. What they really mean should be taught before they take the survey.
- Question 1-4 use different phrasing compared to others. I could be rephrased in first person to make them consistent.
- There are some items that use future tense “will” and they may confuse students as for whether the survey is asking about general habits / ideal behavior or what they actually do now.
- Some items are about task management whereas some are about learning process/habit management. It is not clear which one the survey is trying to measure.
- There are two components (students’ and teachers’ questionnaires), which may take longer to compile data for an individual student.
Studies this has been used in: Lin & Reinders (2017).