INTRODUCTION
Background of the study
In the morden age, individuals are expected to embrace the social and cultural aspects of a knowledge-based society, which is characterized by its rapid changes and diversity in terms of culture, race, and religion Moreover, the swift evolution of social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter further exemplifies this dynamic environment and so on aids the promotion of social relationships among people, breaking the gap in time and geography Hence modern societies are becoming global communities and it requires people to learn about other diverse cultures, traditions, beliefs, and languages It empowers individuals to gain more independence and fosters lifelong learning In order to nurture our students into self-assured citizens within the contemporary knowledge-driven society, essential attributes for engaging in a culturally diverse world include access to education, the capacity for continued study, a commitment to lifelong learning, effective communication skills, and active involvement in collaborative knowledge creation activities
Among many different skills, self-directed learning is considered as crucial skill to help individuals to thrive in a rapidly changing world It enables individuals to assume charge of their own learning and personal growth, tailoring their learning to their own needs and interests As such, it is an essential skill for personal and professional success
According to Zyl and Mentz (2019), Self-directed learning (SDL) has become an essential aspect of adult education research in the 21 st century SDL is referred to as an essential skill for university students and higher education institutions should prioritize teaching and learning strategies aimed at enhancing SDL (Bagheri et al.,2013) Also, learning by memorization and replication of facts may become redundant in the near future since these do not prepare students for the demands of the contemporary workplace in the 21 st century In the 21 st century, students must be
2 able to take lifelong responsibility for their own learning (Knowles,1975).The educational paradigm should evolve from being primarily teacher-directed to becoming learner-directed or self-directed, as proposed by Candy in 1991 In this approach, students take charge of their own education by identifying their own learning requirements, creating learning objectives, choosing appropriate learning methods, and assessing their progress and achievements, in alignment with Knowles' ideas from 1975
Technology also plays an important part in developing students’ capacity in the knowledge society as well as SDL process In particular, technology contributes to enhancing students’ motivation, engagement, lifelong skills, and language skills (Taqipour et al, 2016; Ramadhani & Siregar ,2019; Barrios Altamiranda et all, 2016;
Vu and Shah, 2016) Moreover, many developed countries in the word as the United Kingdom, and the United States, Singapore enacted a nationwide policy regarding the incorporation of ICT in education More specifically, Singapore's Ministry of Education aspires to shape its students into self-directed learners who assume responsibility for their own education, actively engaging in questioning, reflection, and a tenacious pursuit of knowledge This transformation is envisioned with the integration of ICT, as outlined in the Ministry of Education's 2009 plan To sum up, SDL is an essential skill for university students in Vietnam and for adults for higher education and lifelong learning.
Statements of the problem
Self-Directed Learning (SDL) is an essential aspect of university education as its benefits in developing critical thinking, promoting independent learning, enhancing motivation, and preparing students for continuous learning beyond their academic journey Firstly, SDL develops critical thinking skills Through SDL, students are actively engaged in recognizing their educational requirements, establishing objectives, and selecting suitable learning methods This process requires critical thinking as students analyze, evaluate, and apply information to solve
3 problems and achieve their objectives (Candy, 1991) Secondly, SDL promotes independent learning In particular, university students need to develop the ability to assume control of their own learning journey SDL encourages them to become self- directed, manage their time effectively, set and achieve their own goals, and take responsibility for their academic journey (Knowles, 1975) Thirdly, SDL enhances motivation and engagement Specifically, when students have control over their learning, they invested more in the process SDL fosters intrinsic motivation as students take ownership of their learning, leading to higher engagement and better academic performance (Zimmerman, 2002) In addition, SDL prepares students for life-long learning In a rapidly changing world, the ability to learn continuously is crucial SDL equips university students with the skills and mentality necessary for continuous, lifelong learning, allowing them to adapt to new challenges and opportunities (Long, 2011)
Self-directed learning holds paramount importance for the acquisition and mastery of the English language Bordonaro's (2006) exploration of self-directed language learning among ESL students in an American college library underscores the significance of autonomous learning environments Long's (2005) emphasis on needs analysis in second language learning aligns with the idea that learners, through self-directed initiatives, can identify and address their specific linguistic requirements Knowles' seminal work (1975) on self-directed learning serves as a foundational guide, emphasizing learners' ability to take charge of their educational journey Chan's case study (2015) on language learner autonomy and learning contracts further supports the notion that empowering learners to set goals and manage their learning process is crucial in language education Additionally, Garrison's comprehensive model of self-directed learning (1997) highlights the holistic nature of this approach, acknowledging its potential to foster autonomy, motivation, and a deep understanding of the English language These researchers underscore the impotent role of self-directed learning in shaping effective language
4 acquisition strategies and empowering learners to navigate the complexities of learning English autonomously
Determining the level of self-directed learning readiness (SDLR) among English majors in Vietnam is important for designing effective pegagogical instruction and EFL curriculum to enhance student success and employment First, assessing the level of SDLR helps educators and institutions understand the students' ability to take charge of their own learning It allows EFL instructors and course designers to design efective instructional strategies to foster students’ learning (Fisher, King & Tague, 2001) Secondly, knowing the SDLR level can be significant for curriculum development It enables the incorporation of SDL-promoting elements and activities into the curriculum to enhance students' self-directedness and foster students’ lifelong learning skills (Candy, 1991) Thirdly, since higher levels of SDLR are associated with better academic performance and learning outcomes; therefore, identifying SDLR levels is significant in providing support for students with low level of self-directed learning readiness (Zimmerman, 2002) Last but not least, SDL is a crucial skill for graduates entering the workforce, particularly in an ever-changing job market
Few studies on students' preparedness for self-directed learning (SDL) were conducted in Vietnam Besides, studies rarely focused on language learning in Vietnam, except for one study of Lai, Shum and Tian (2014) about language learning in the e-learning environment However, SDL contributes to the enhancement of learning English as communicative ability, speaking skill, writing and listening skills
In particular, self-directed learning (SDL) helps the students improve life-long learning skills (Taqipour et al, 2016), ICT can improve academic writing skill of English majors (Ramadhani and Siregar, 2019) In their investigation of Vietnamese students' self-directed learning of English, Vu and Shah (2016) underscored the significance of SDL in the development of English listening skills Hence, SDL is also considered an essential and necessary skills for English language students
This research explored EFL students' self-directed learning readiness (SDLR) using the SDLR scale of Fisher et al (2001) The SDLR Scale encompasses three main components: self-management, desire for learning, and self-control The study also examined if there were any differences in SDLR of English majors of different year groups.
Purpose statement
The purpose of this research is to explore the self-directed learning readiness (SDLR) of English majors at a university in Ho Chi Minh city Additionally, the research examined whether there were differences in the SDLR levels among English majors of three different year groups at the university.
Research questions
The study addressed the following questions:
1 What is the level of Self-Directed Learning Readiness among the English majors?
2 How does the English majors’ level of Self-Directed Learning Readiness differ by year groups?
Significance of the study
According to Klunklin et al (2010), determining Self-directed Learning Readiness (SDLR) of the students is crucial to enhance students' SDL capabilities The results of the study offer practical insights into supporting students with diverse learning styles Additionally, recognizing individual differences is important for refining curriculum design and optimizing teaching effectiveness Ultimately, this research serves as a reference for future investigations into SDL in both the Vietnamese context and on an international scale.
Structure of thesis
Chapter 1 Introduction presents outlines the study's context, problem statements, purpose, research questions, and significance
Chapter 2 Literature review presents a comprehensive examination of theoretical foundation underpinning the research, focusing on Self-directed learning, Self-directed learning readiness, factors influencing students' Self-directed learning readiness, and prior relevant studies
Chapter 3 Methodology describes the study's design, setting, participant demographics, instrumentation, and the procedures for gathering and analyzing data
Chapter 4 Results and Discussion provides the research results and engages in a discussion of those findings
Chapter 5 Conclusion offers a summary of the entire research endeavor, acknowledges its limitations, and provides recommendations for future studies
LITERATURE REVIEW
Self-directed learning (SDL)
2.1.1 Definitions of Self-directed learning (SDL)
The term Self-directed learning (SDL) is defined and conceptualized in various ways by different researchers In this section, different definitions of SDL were examined in depth
Malcolm Knowles first proposed the idea of self-directed learning in the 1970s
He described SDL as "a process in which individuals take the initiative, with or without the assistance of others, to diagnose their learning needs, formulate learning goals, identify resources for learning, choose and implement suitable learning strategies, and assess learning outcomes”, (Knowles, 1975) According to Tough
(1971), SDL is "a process in which individuals take the initiative, with or without the help of others, to identify learning needs, formulate learning goals, design a learning plan, apply appropriate learning strategies, and evaluate learning outcomes" These early definitions underscore the role of the students in directing their own learning journey, encompassing tasks such as choosing appropriate learning methodologies and learning needs and goals, and assessing their own progress
Guglielmino (1977) viewed SDL as a cyclical process that entails ongoing assessment, goal establishment, implementation, and self-evaluation In this regard, self-directed students assume responsibility for their study and actively participate in the educational process Guglielmino's model of SDL has been widely embraced and
7 applied in educational research and practice in a variety of contexts and modes of delivery including distance education, adult education, and workplace learning
Since the 1970s, the conceptualization of SDL has undergone various reinterpretation by researchers In the past decades, Gibbons (2002) redefined SDL as a process in which individuals take the initiative to plan, manage, and evaluate their own learning activities Candy (1991) argued that SDL is a process in which students define objectives, locate resources, put techniques into practice, and assess results in order to improve their own learning and performance Brockett and Hiemstra (1991) defined SDL as a process in which students take control of their own learning and decide what, when, where, and how they will learn Several other definitions seem to agree that SDL is the students’ responsibility and autonomy in directing their own learning by setting goals, identifying resources, and evaluating outcomes
The concept of SDL has also been associated with self-regulated learning, self- paced learning, and lifetime education While these concepts share some similarities, they each have distinct characteristics and focus on different aspects of the students’ responsibility to guide their own learning
In conlusion, SDL has been conceptualized and defined differently by different scholars Several scholars defined SDL as the learner's autonomy, responsibility, and goal-setting while recognizing the importance of identifying resources and evaluating outcomes Researchers highlight the potential of SDL to promote life-long learning, critical thinking, and personal growth
2.1.2 The brief historical review of Self-directed learning (SDL)
SDL has been studied extensively in the field of education for several decades The following literature summarizes a brief historical review of SDL
The roots of SDL can be traced back to the 1970s when Malcolm Knowles, a leading figure in adult education, first proposed the concept of andragogy which is
8 rooted in theory and application of adult learning This theory emphasized the need for students to assume responsibility for their own learning journey Knowles (1975) argued that adults are self-directed students who learn best when they are motivated by their own goals and interests
In the 1980s, the definitions of SDL gained more attention in the education field Researchers began to explore the factors that influenced SDL including motivation, goal setting, and self-regulation They also examined methods for promoting self- directed learning in education contexts
Houle's (1980) categorized three types of students: those who are learning- oriented, activity-oriented, and goal-oriented Accordingly, learning-oriented students are mostly inclined to partaking in SDL as intrinsically motivated students tend to enjoy the learning process rather than external rewards or outcomes
Candy (1991) suggested a model of SDL that included three phases: planning, taking action, and reflecting He argued that self-directed students should possess the capability to establish their own objectives, track their progress, and contemplate their learning encounters in order to be successful
More recently, researchers have continued to study SDL in many educational contexts such as online learning and workplace training They have explored the role of technology in facilitating SDL as well as the challenges and benefits of SDL in different contexts
Overall, the history of SDL has been characterized by a growing recognition of the importance of learner autonomous learning and there is a growing emphasis on the elements that foster effective SDL Presently, SDL is broadly acknowledged as a vital facet of life-long education and is considered a fundamental skill for achieving success in the 21 st century
Self-directed learning readiness (SDLR)
2.2.1 Definitions of Self-directed learning readiness (SDLR)
According to Fisher et al (2001), SDLR is defined as the extent to which a self- directed learner takes control and acknowledges the freedom associated with learning what they deem important The student’s talents, attitudes, and personality qualities affect how much control they have Several key assumptions regarding SDL readiness are made Firstly, there's an assumption that adults inherently possess self- directed tendencies, arguing that there is a continuum of SDL preparedness, and various levels of SDL readiness can be found in each individual Secondly, it is posited that self-directed competence is difficult to develop, with the most effective way to comprehend and demonstrate self-directed perform being through learning and practicing autonomous behavior Thirdly, the ability to engage in SDL within a particular context can be transferred to other learning environments and settings, although it may be complex to ascertain SDL readiness, as a high level of readiness in one context does not necessarily guarantee readiness in unexpected settings and contexts (Fisher et al., 2001)
SDL readiness is viewed as a continuous spectrum that is very personalized and indicative Research has indicated that students with low SDL readiness, when introduced to an SDL activity, displayed elevated levels of anxiety to the responses of students with high SDL readiness exposed to settings with heightened levels of teacher guidance and orientation (Fisher et al., 2001; Wiley, 1983)
2.2.2 Dimensions of Self- directed learning readiness (SDLR)
Readiness necessitates that adult students address specific factors to effectively regulate their activities (Merriam, 2002) These dimensions encompass self-control, self-discipline, effective communication, effective planning, receptivity to constructive criticism, and self-evaluation and self-reflection (Merriam, 2002) These dimensions coalesce into internally significant domains, including self-management, self-monitoring, and motivation Here are three areas related to SDL:
Self-management: According to Garrison (1997), self-management pertains to addressing issues related to controlling tasks, focusing on the adult's social and behavioral characteristics as they engage in self-directed learning programs It encompasses external activities related to their learning, which is significant as it helps prevent passive students from disconnecting themselves from the external influences of the wider world This also necessitates having access to the necessary resources to support the learning process Therefore, adult learners must shape their own contextual conditions, including self-management, self-discipline, and perseverance, in order to take purpose-driven actions and lay the essential groundwork for effective learning An important factor in this context is management control, which denotes freedom from external influence and social independence, both of which are vital for effective functioning in educational sessions Additionally, Garrison (1992) posited that greater control over the learning process results in increased accountability, which reinforces the importance of SDL Consequently, in SDL environments, adult students can only be considered prepared for learning when they are capable of exercising effective management
Self-monitoring: Readiness is intertwined with the ability to oversee one's self- directed activities For adult students, proficient self-monitoring plays a pivotal role in establishing the necessary boundaries for improved outcomes (Garrison, 1997) Moreover, Loftin, Gibb, and Skiba (2005) underscored that through effective self- monitoring, it is more feasible to adapt one's thinking in alignment with learning objectives and tasks
Motivation: Garrison (1992) highlighted that motivational factors wield a significant practical impact on the cognitive processes that underlie human education These factors facilitate a relationship in the learning process between awareness or responsibility and control or context Consequently, when motivated, adults are actively engaged in their learning environments They might attend training sessions to retain their employment or advance their careers Furthermore, Yap (2009) stressed
11 that a high level of motivation is a prerequisite for adult learners to be ready for the learning journey The absence of motivation undoubtedly obstructs the learning process and renders students unprepared for the task at hand
In summary, self-management and self-monitoring collectively establish a setting that inspires adult students to attain the necessary prepraredness for engaging in SDL These components of SDLR are interrelated and interconnected is showed in Figure 2.1
Figure 2.1 Components of self- directed learning readiness
2.2.3 Factors Affecting Self-directed learning readiness
There are some factors that contribute to SDLR It includes cognitive factors, metacognitive factors, affective factors, behavioral factors In particular, cognitive factors refer to the knowledge, skills, and abilities that students possess that enable them to engage in SDL These factors include learning styles, critical thinking skills, and knowledge of learning strategies According to Zimmerman's (2008) theory of self-regulated learning, students need to have metacognitive knowledge and skills to engage in SDL effectively In addition, metacognitive factors refer to students' ability to reflect on their learning, monitor their progress, and regulate their learning This includes self-reflection, self-monitoring, and self-regulation According to Pintrich's
(2000) model of self-regulated learning, metacognitive processes plays a crucial role in SDL Also, affective factors which refer to students' emotional and motivational states influence their engagement in self-directed learning This includes motivation, self-efficacy, and confidence According to Bandura's (1997) social cognitive theory, students with high levels of self-efficacy are able to engage in SDL activities Last but not least, behavioral factors, students' actions and behaviors, enable them to engage in SDL This includes goal-setting, time-management, and information- seeking According to Gagne's (1985) theory of instruction, students need to engage in certain behaviors to be successful in taking part in SDL activities
According to Fisher et al (2001), three factors affecting self-directed learning readiness include self-management, desire for learning, and self-control Self- management refers to learner's ability to control their own educational processes and to assume accountability for their own learning results This includes setting goals, planning and organizing learning activities, monitoring progress, and reflecting on learning experiences Desire for learning relates to an individual's motivation and attitude towards learning It includes having a positive attitude towards learning, being curious and open to new ideas, and having a strong desire to learn and achieve The self-control factor refers to an individual's ability to control their own behavior and emotions in order to achieve their learning goals This factor includes managing distractions and avoiding procrastination, as well as being able to control one's own emotions when faced with difficulties or setbacks These three factors are seen as key components of SDLR and are thought to play an essential role in SDL
2.2.4 Self-directed learning readiness scale instrument
Fisher et al (2001) developed an assessment instrument for measuring the Self- Directed Learning readiness They conducted an extensive review of the literature to compile a comprehensive inventory of the attitudes, abilities, and personality traits associated with self-directed learners They then developed a pool of items drawing on seminal works of Chickering (1964), Gugliemino (1977), Knowles (1975, 1990),
13 and Candy (1991) Knowles (1975, 1990) was known for his works on adult learning theory and the definition of andragogy, which focused on how adults learn differently from children Some ideas related to Knowles that may have influenced items in the scale include the significance of SDL for adult education, the need for adults to participate in planning and assessment Candy (1991) emphasized the role of self- regulation and motivation in SDL Items related to self-regulation, self-motivation, and goal setting
Gugliemino’s work (1977) may have contributed to the scale by emphasizing on the characteristics and traits of self-directed students These traits could include qualities like curiosity, independence, self-discipline, and a willingness to take assume accountability for one's own learning Chickering (1964) was known for his work "Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education" Although it did not specifically focus on self-directed learning, some of these principles, such as student engagement and collaboration, active learning, and clear expectations, may have influenced the scale items in terms of assessing students' readiness for SDL
The Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale developed by Fisher et al (2001), comprises a total of 40 items distributed across three subscales: Self-management (13 items), Desire for learning (12 items), and Self-control (15 items) Each item is aligned with one’s personal attributes using a five-point Likert scale, with a rating of
1 signifying strong disagreement and a rating of 5 signifying strong agreement The reported Cronbach's coefficient alpha for the entire scale in this study was 0.87.
Previous Studies
2.3.1 Previous studies in the international context
Self-Directed Learning Readiness (SDLR) is widely researched in different disciplines and educational contexts At university level, Litzinger, Wise and Lee
(2005) measured the readiness for SDL of engineering students Litzinger and Wise, measured SDL using the Self-directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) to obtain data from students spanning from the first semester to the eighth semester The results
14 show that SDLRS scores were related to academic year of study and grade point average Lee (2005) used The Self-directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) to survey undergraduate students in their ninth and tenth semester, the results show a considerable increase in students’ SDLR The research indicates that undergraduate students' SDLR improved as a result of problem-based learning approach the students received during the courses
Similarly, El-Gilany and Abusaad (2013) investigated the SDLR and learning styles among Saudi undergraduate nursing students Data was gathered by using self- administered survey using Fisher's SDLR scale and the Kolb's learning styles inventory The questionnaires were distributed to 275 students The results indicate the students’ high level of SDLR was not associated with their demographics (age, gender, residence, marital status) and their learning styles
A study of EFL Students’ Language Learning Strategy Use as a Predictor for Self-Directed Learning Readiness was conducted by Min-hsun and Duo (2010) and the study of Self-directed Learning Readiness of College Students in Thailand was carried out by Prabjanee and Inthachot (2013) In these studies, the researchers used survey and interview The participnats were different In the study of Min-hsun and Duo (2010) was EFL major college students in Taiwan In the study of Prabjanee and Inthachot (2013), it was undergraduate students in a college in Thailand The findings indicate that English as a Foreign Language (EFL) major students at Ming Chuan University possess a moderate to high level of SDLR Additionally, the study shows a positive correlation between students' utilization of learning strategies and students’ SDLR In Prabjanee and Inthachots’s study (2013), Thai college students reported a moderate to high level of SDLR Among the eight dimensions, creativity and openness to learning were at a moderate level, while the other six dimensions exhibited a high level Additionally, SDLR varied among students of different year groups and majors
Monkaresi, Abbasi, and Razyani (2015) examined factors influencing SDLR The research shows that accessible learning objectives, learning approaches, and the learning environment were the primary factors affecting the Self-Directed Learning Readiness (SDLR) of master students majoring in instructional technology and curriculum The study used four instruments to gather data: Fisher's Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (2001), a two-factor study process questionnaire, a course experience questionnaire, and a questionnaire on accessible learning objectives The findings show that graduate students exhibited a greater degree of SDLR in comparison to undergraduate students Additionally, although there was no statistically significant difference, there was positive association between the learning environment and the learning strategies adopted by the students Particularly, female students had marginally higher SDLR levels than male students However, this difference was not statistically significant
Leatemia, Susilo and van Berkel (2016) investigated SDLR aspect on hybrid problem-based curriculum In a study conducted in five medical schools in Indonesia, researchers examined the impact of a hybrid problem-based curriculum on students' Self-Directed Learning Readiness (SDLR) A questionnaire utilizing the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale was distributed to students in all academic batches who had previously used the hybrid problem-based curriculum as part of the project Additionally, three focus group discussions were held, each comprising six to twelve randomly selected students, to identify the factors influencing their SDL The results showed that senior students exhibited a high level of SDLR compared to junior students who demonstrated a lower level of SDLR Surprisingly, the study indicated that the hybrid problem-based curriculum did not significantly affect students' SDL However, factors such as teacher's experiences, students' backgrounds, and cultural elements may have contributed to the challenges students faced in exercising self- directed learning
Alfaifi (2016) employed Guglielmino's Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale
(1977) to determine the level of SDLR among Saudi university undergraduates Demographic information sheets were distributed to the students to investigate age, gender, and college information The results showed that the students’ SDLR level was moderate There was no statistically differences in students’ SDLR in terms of age and gender
Tangkanchanayuenyong, M., and Chaengchenkit, R (2019) investigated the self-directed learning readiness and activities of Thai EFL students in a secondary school, utilizing a questionnaire, the Self-Directed Learning Skills Scale of Ayyildiz and Tarhan (2015), and focus group interviews Results indicated that all students displayed "Above Average Readiness" for self-directed learning, underscoring the significance of active participation Students believed success hinged on linking new knowledge to prior understanding Predominant out-of-classroom English activities included listening to songs, watching movies, and playing online games Focus group interviews uncovered additional activities such as watching YouTube videos, reading quotes on Pinterest, and repeating phrases from series or movies These findings provided educators with valuable insights into students' self-directed learning readiness and diverse engagement in extracurricular English activities
Li, Nanyun, and Hyesook Park (2019) explored the relationships between self- directed learning readiness (SDLR), motivation, and English proficiency A questionnaire that included background details, SDLR, motivation, and English proficiency data was administered to 234 Korean university students (English and non-English majors) Participants were categorized into low and high SDLR groups Analyses involved descriptive statistics, ANOVA, MANOVA, Pearson correlation, and regression The findings showed that high SDLR scores correlate with better TOEIC performance, indicating a significant difference in motivation between high and low SDLR groups Overall, SDLR has a closer correlation with English
17 proficiency Regression analysis confirms SDLR and L2 learning experience as predictors of Korean EFL learners' English proficiency
Hafizah Adnan, N., and Sayadi, S S (2022) investigated self-directed learning among Malaysian secondary school students to enhance their English writing skills The research involved 50 secondary school ESL students through a survey Two questionnaires measured different aspects, the first assessing self-directed learning with components like awareness, learning strategies, activities, evaluation, and interpersonal skills The second focused on students' readiness for self-directed learning in improving English writing skills Results revealed a predominant medium level of self-directedness, with a positive correlation between students' self- directedness and their readiness for incorporating self-directed learning in English writing Notably, students with high self-directedness exhibited greater readiness The study underscored the need for future research on self-directed learning strategies to cultivate positive attributes for lifelong learning experiences, including discipline, attention, responsibility, and creativity in planning learning objectives
Alegado, Erika S., et al (2023) determined the level of self-directed learning among secondary education students specializing in English teaching Furthermore, this study used a descriptive survey involving 133 major English students The study employed a Likert-type questionnaire with 44 items and a six-point scale, adapting the SDLR scale of Xuan, Razali, and Samad (2018), assessing respondents' perspectives and demographics Data revealed that the self-directed learning of English language students is high However, no significant difference was found in the level of self-directed learning among English language students across year level, gender, and socioeconomic status Hence, the researchers highly encouraged self- directed learning as enhancement or innovation on set assessments It can help develop the optimum potential of the learners, as well as integrate the strategy into the teaching and learning process based on the study results
2.3.2 Previous studies in the Vietnamese context
Although the SDLR has been studied in countries including Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Iran, Asia, and Thailand, studies on SDLR in Vietnamese are still limited
Vu and Shah (2016) investigated self- directed learning of Vietnamese students in learning English listening skills and Van and Trib (2021) look into the use of SDL approach to teach technical drawing to students The study concludes that SDL was an appropriate approach to higher education in the context of increasing diversity and knowledge (Van & Trib, 2021)
Dong, Truong Phan Nguyen, Tuong Nguyen Van, and Giau Dinh Sang (2021) explored self-directed learning readiness and self-efficacy among students at the University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh City Utilizing scales developed by Schwarzer and Jerusalem (1993) and Fisher et al (2001, 2010), the research involved 395 students from a total population of 12,540 Sample size determination followed Watson's (2001) formula, resulting in a confidence level of 95% and a sample size ranging from 385 to 390 The findings revealed an intermediate level of self-efficacy and self-directed learning readiness Notably, differences were observed among students in different academic years regarding readiness for self-directed learning The study suggests a close correlation between self-efficacy and self-directed learning readiness among university students
Research indicates that self-directed lifelong learning skills and attitudes are becoming increasingly important in 21 st -century higher education If teachers and students do not undergo a paradigm shift in teaching/learning methodologies and overcome the barriers to integrating self-directed learning abilities and attitudes, they risk falling behind peers and fail to keep up to date with the changing knowledge and technological currents (Giddings, 2015) Also, in the workplace, SDL within the context of Industry 4.0 technology not only significantly reduces the costs but also provides employees with opportunities for self training (Karakas & Manisaligil,
Summary
In general, some conclusions are drawn from previous studies on students’ SDLR First, the results of the several studies are still inconsistent In some studies, students’ SDLR is not related to the academic year of study (El-Gilany & Abusaad, 2013; Alfaifi, 2016; Dong, Truong Phan Nguyen, Tuong Nguyen Van, and Giau Dinh Sang, 2021; Alegado, Erika S., et al., 2023) However; other studies show that students’ levels of SDLR depends on the year groups they belonged to (Litzinger, Wise & Lee, 2005; Prabjanee & Inthachot, 2013; Monkaresi, Abbasi & Razyani, 2015; Leatemia, Susilo & van Berkel, 2016) In previous studies, whether the age variable affects students’ self-directed learning readiness were inconclusive
Second, different research methods seem to produce different results For instance, Prabjanee and Inthachot (2013) utilized a survey method to investigate the SDLR of undergraduate students in Thailand A cross-sectional study method was adopted in the quantitative research of Litzinger, Wise, and Lee (2005) and El-Gilany and Abusaad (2013) In addition, other methods such as the correlational method and a between-network approach were used in the research of Monkaresi, Abbasi and Razyani (2015) and Lee, Yeung, and Ip (2017)
Third, although the SDLR has been studied in some countries around the world, including Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Iran, Asia, and Thailand, this area has only been extensively researched in Vietnam Morevoer, in the learning and teaching contexts, self-directed lifelong learning skills and attitudes are becoming increasingly important in 21st-century higher education Also, in the workplace, SDL in the 4.0 technology era is not only for future career development but also to substantially reduce HRD/training expenses and offer employees timely and on-demand training (Karakas & Manisaligil, 2012)
In addition, there are several studies regarding students' viewpoints on the utilization of technology in SDL (Lai, 2013; Asfar & Zainuddin, 2015; Lai, Wang,
Li, & Hu, 2016; Gokcearslan, 2017) and collaborative learning (Lee et al., 2014) In
20 spite of investigating the SDL process of learning and teaching effectiveness and promoting SDL with technology for students, the researchers overlooked a crucial factor, readiness Students' preparedness for self-directed learning and how it interacts with personal factors has not been thoroughly investigated
Last but not least, passive learning is the typical image of Asian culture as well as Vietnamese culture (Jones, 1999; Hung, 2002), whether Vietnamese students are willing to take control of their own learning remains unclear More research on SDLR among Vietnamese students should be conducted to complete the overall picture of assessment of SDLR in Vietnam.
Theoretical framework of the study
The study was guided by the adult education theory of SDL by three influential contributors and theorists of SDL including Knowles (1975), Guglielmino (1987), and Fisher et al (2001) These scholars shared similar insights into SDL and their works have laid strong foundation for further research on SDL
Knowles (1975) proposed that adults have unique characteristics and needs and thus require a different approach to learning than that used for children He suggested that adults are self-directed and have accumulated life experiences that can serve as a valuable learning resource, and are more problem-centered in their approach to learning in Knowles' theory of andragogy
Guglielmino’s (2008) Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) (Guglielmino, Guglielmino, & Long, 1987) revolves around three core principles: context, activation, and universality Guglielmino reinforced Knowles' vision of self- directed learning and endorsed his perspective that self-directed learning is essential for individual survival, supporting human competence's essential qualities and the survival of the human race as much as it supports the survival of the individual Being able to learn on one's own is basically necessary to live adaptably in the modern environment (Knowles, 1975; Guglielmino, 2008)
Fisher et al (2001) introduced the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale, drawing from several earlier works on self-directed learning including Chickering
(1964), Gugliemino (1977), Knowles (1975, 1990), and Candy (1991) Chickering
(1964) notably identified seven principles of good practice in undergraduate education, one of which involved promoting active learning and student responsibility Gugliemino (1977) developed a SDLR scale that encompassed items related to self-evaluation, goal-setting, and self-study Knowles (1975, 1990) introduced a theory of andragogy, emphasizing the significance of SDL and the active role of the learner in the learning process Candy (1991) identified an array of SDL strategies and stressed the importance of metacognitive awareness in SDL
Building on these earlier works, Fisher et al (2001) developed a SDLR scale for nursing education They conducted a literature review and identified key constructs related to self-directed learning, including self-evaluation, goal-setting, self-initiated learning, metacognitive awareness, and self-motivation They developed a pool of items based on these constructs and administered the scale to a group of nursing students Through analyzing factors and other statistical methods, they developed three subscales (self-management, desire for learning, self-control) that contributed to overall SDLR
Theoretical framework for Self-Directed Learning Readiness in this study was drawn from Fisher et al.'s (2001) work The framwork includes three dimensions including self-management, desire for learning, and self-control regarded as key components of self-directed learning readiness The interrelationship among these components of self-directed learning readiness is depicted in Figure 2.2
Figure 2.2 Theoretical framework of self-directed learning readiness
METHODOLOGY
Research design
The study used mixed methods for several reasons First, mixed methods are valuable for elucidating and providing explanations for relationships that exist between variables For instance, the study aimed to explore the connection between students' academic year groups and their Self-Directed Learning Readiness (SDLR) Second, mixed methods allow for in-depth exploration of relationships between variables In the study, a qualitative approach was employed to identify the role of the age variable in SDLR, which was then quantified through a questionnaire administered to a larger group of students This quantified variable was subsequently correlated with other variables through interviews Third, mixed methods enable the confirmation or cross-validation of relationships between variables By comparing quantitative and qualitative methods, the study sought to determine if they converged on a single interpretation of a phenomenon In cases where they did not converge, the reasons for this discrepancy could be investigated
This research design incorporated both quantitative and qualitative data collection approaches Specifically, it employed a descriptive research method, which focuses on the current state of the phenomenon under investigation (Khan, 1990) Similarly, as noted by Seliger and Shohamy (2000), descriptive research aims to provide descriptions of naturally occurring phenomena without experimental intervention or treatment The mixed research design entailed the connection of both quantitative and qualitative research methods According to Jick (1979) and Bazeley
(2002), this approach offers the advantage of enhancing the validity of the study
In the study, the quantitative approach was adopted to obtain numerical data using questionnaires administered among the students The qualitative approach was
24 used to collect data from interviews The two methods aimed to collect data from multiple sources to address the research questions.
Research setting
The study was conducted at a public university in Ho Chi Minh City The participants were undergraduate English majors at the Faculty of Foreign languages The university offers study programs in business management, economics, banking and finance The training program for undergraduate English majors was the Business English Major It includes 125 credits of compulsory and elective courses in Business English The training program aims to prepare graduates to work in different types of businesses and organizations locally and internationally where they can use English as a working language.
Participants of the study
The research aimed to explore the SDLR among the English majors at the university in Ho Chi Minh city At the time of the study, the partipants had completed at least one semester at the university
A total of 150 undergraduate English majors of three different year groups took part in the study They were freshman, sophomore, and the third- year students in the university Each year group included 50 students The data was selected in the summer semester of the academic year 2023 Senior students were not included in the research as they were busy with internships or working on their graduation theses
The participants were invited to the study on a voluntary basis and convenience sampling was employed as a technique to select participants for the study.
Research instruments
The instrument used to collect data for this study includes a questionnaire using the Self-directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) and interview protocol For questionnaire, the SDLRS Scale (Fisher et al, 2001) was used The questionaire focused on three attributes of self-directed students including self-management,
25 desire for learning, and self-control In this study, the questionaire was used as a research instrument to determine the level of SDLR of the undergraduate English majors at the university
The study utilized a questionnaire as the technique for gathering data to answer the research questions Questionnaires are one of the most popular tools for collecting data on attitudes and opinions from large groups of participants (Mackey & Gass,
2005) Furthermore, questionnaires facilitate the collection of responses from a considerable number of respondents with ease (Burns, 1999) They are self- administered and can be distributed to large groups of participants simultaneously, making them a cost-effective data collection method compared to other procedures (Seliger & Shohamy, 2000) Additionally, questionnaires provide a platform for participants to share sensitive information comfortably when anonymity is assured
The questionnaire in this study was translated into Vietnamese to ensure that the students fully comprehended its content Before collecting data, questionnaire piloting was conducted among eight students in order to ascertain whether the question items were completely clear to the participants This pilot study was carried out since it was considered an essential way to evaluate the viability and effectiveness of data collection methods and to make any required revisions before employing them with research participants (Mackey & Gass, 2005)
The questionnair included 2 parts Part 1 was personal information and part 2 was Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS)
The survey of this study began with two demographic questions: What is your gender? Which year group do you belong to? See Appendix A and B for a copy of the demographic information sheet in both English and Vietnamese The researcher considered gender and year group variables because the researcher wanted to
26 determine the level of SDLR of the participant group They can represent the population of the study In this way, the research can draw a conclusion about the relationship between year group variables and the level of readiness for SDL among English majors In short, the participant's information in this study was a necessary tool that provided a general overview of respondents and valuable data for the next parts
Part 2 Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS)
The questionnaires were adapted from the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) of Fisher et al (2001) for measuring the level of SDLR The Self- directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) comprises 40 questionnaire items categorized into three scales: self-management (13 items), desire for learning (12 items), and self-control (15 items) The researcher removed two items from the scale One item from the desire for learning dimension, "I enjoy studying," was removed because it was not suitable for the research participants in the study Another item from the self-control dimension, "I prefer to set my own goal," was removed because it easily duplicated meanings with other items in this dimension In summary, after removing two items, the questionnaire left self-management (13 items), desire for learning (11 items), and self-control (14 items).The questionnaire employed a 5-point Likert scale, with a range from 5 for 'strongly agree' to 1 for 'strongly disagree’ for the items about the level of readiness for r self-direct learning among English majors
Reliability and validity of the SDLRS
The Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS), as validated and made reliable by Fisher (2001), encompasses three subscales: self-management, self- control, and desire to learn Safavi et al (2010) determined the reliability of the self- directed learning readiness scale, achieving a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.86 In Fisher et al.'s (2001) study, the reliability coefficient for the total scale was reported as 0.92 using Cronbach's alpha, with coefficients for the subscales of self- management, self-control, and desire for learning varying between 0.85, 0.84, and
0.83, respectively Fisher's (2001) scale has been widely utilized in various studies exploring aspects of SDLR
The main purpose of the semi-structured interviews was to gain deeper insights into English majors' level of SDLR The interviews were conducted with nine English majors at the university The interviews were conducted by the researcher Each interview lasted approximately 30 minutes The interview protocol included 9 questions Questions 1,2,3 were to find out students’ perception towards how they managed their own learning Questions 4,5,6 were to find out students’ perception towards their desire for their own learning Questions 7,8,9 were students’ perception towards how they controled their own learning.
Data collection procedures
3.5.1 Data collection procedure from the questionnaire
The researcher sent an email with information about the research project and consent letter to the Dean of Faculty of Foreign languages to ask for permission to carry out the study at the faculty After obtaining permission from the Dean, the reseacher approached the students at the faculty The survey was conducted among three groups of English majors including the first-year, the second-year, and the third- year in May, 2023 The researcher attended classes to explain the purpose of the study to the teachers and students and invited the students to take part in the study The questionnaires were distributed to students of different classes of different year groups
3.5.2 Data collection procedure from semi-structured interviews
Invitation for interviews was sent to students About 20 students responded to the invitation The researcher reached out to nine students to extend invitations for their participation in the interviews The students were invited to join the interviews organized at the university’s campus at the students’ convenience There were three
28 groups of interviewees representing three different year groups, each consisting of 3 students (1 st , 2 nd and 3 rd year) To ensure clarity and ease of comprehension of the interview questions and answers, the interviews were conducted in Vietnamese Each interview typically lasted from 35 to 45 minutes
At the beginning of the interview, the researcher asked the students for their consent to record the interviews Next, the researcher requested that the students sign the consent form Then, the researcher posed the questions in order The interviewer thanked the participants for their participation at the end of the interview The recorded interviews were transcribed and analyzed to answer the research questions.
Data analysis procedures
The researcher employed both descriptive and inferential statistics to describe and analyze the data The SPSS program was utilized to analyze the data collected from the participants Different analyses were conducted for the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the research
To address the first research question, descriptive statistics with Mean (M), Standard Deviation (SD), and Frequency (F) were carried out to process the data of the questionnaire to examine the level of English majors’ SDLR at a public university The Mean was calculated to address the English majors' SDLR The five-point Likert scale was from level 1 “strongly disagree” to level 5 strongly agree for the items about the level of English majors’ SDLR
The Mean scores were interpreted as follows:
To address the second research question, analysis of variance (ANOVA) was employed to investigate whether a significant difference existed between the level of SDLR and the year group variable
For the interview data, the researcher engaged in a qualitative analysis process, which involved reading the transcripts, annotating them, conceptualizing the data, segmenting the data, analyzing these segments, and finally, reporting the results.
Summary
This chapter presents a description of the research methods employed in this study which utilized both quantitative and qualitative approaches The dependent variable under investigation was the total score on the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) among undergraduate English majors at a university in Vietnam The independent variable considered in the research was the year group to which the students belonged The target population consisted of undergraduate English majors at the university who were enrolled in at least one course
The research used the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS), an instrument developed by Fisher et al (2001), to assess students' SDLR The survey includes two demographic questions to gather information on gender and year group The questions encompassed 40 items designed to measure the students' level of readiness for self-directed learning Descriptive and inferential statistics were applied to analyze the data of the study
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Introduction
This chapter presents the results obtained from both qualitative and quantitative data to answer the research questions.
Results
4.2.1 The demographic characteristics of the sample
In the study, 150 students from three year groups (1 st , 2 nd and 3 rd year) with 50 students in each group completed the survey Table 4.1 presents the number and percentage of participants by year groups
4.2.2 Level of SDLR among English majors
Research question 1 aimed to investigate the level of Self-Directed Learning Readiness (SDLR) among the English majors This examination incorporated both quantitative and qualitative data to assess the SDLR level within this group, considering the three dimensions of SDLR which are detailed in the subsequent sections
Three dimensions (self-management, desire for learning, and self-control) were demonstrated in the findings In terms of self-management, the researcher
31 measured the learners' ability to control their own educational processes and to assume accountability for their own learning results In the desire for learning dimension, the researcher examined an individual's motivation and attitude towards learning The self-control dimension was about individual's ability to control their own behavior and emotions in order to achieve their learning goals
Concerning the result of the questionnaire, the overall mean score of the level of English majors’ SDLR is 3.86 It means that the English majors had a high level of SDLR To be more precise, desire for learning attained the highest mean score of the three dimensions, with M = 4.20 and SD = 0.40 Following closely was 'self- control' with a mean score of 3.94 (SD = 0.49) Meanwhile,'self-management' had the lowest mean score at M = 3.43, with a standard deviation of SD = 0.51 (see table 4.2) Overall, these mean scores indicate that of the three dimensions of SDLR, the level of ‘desire for learning’ was higher than that of 'self-control' and 'self-management'
Table 4.2 SDLR level for each dimension
No Dimension Level of SDLR (N0)
This part demonstrates the self-management level of English majors in SDLR scale This part consists of 13 items as shown in Table 4.3
Table 4.3 Self-management level of English majors in SDLR
No Self-management Mean SD
7 I am systematic in my learning 3.28 90
8 I set specific times for my study 3.29 1.10
11 I can be trusted to pursue my own learning 3.91 93
12 I prefer to plan my own learning 3.57 1.11
13 I am confident in my ability to search out information
As can be seen from table 4.3, ‘self-management’ within the context of SDLR among English majors revealed insightful patterns The English majors' perceptions of their self-management attributes were shown in 13 separate items These findings illustrated a range of responses in terms of mean and standard deviation, reflecting both the mean rank and the degree of variation in each trait English students considered themselves to possess moderate levels of self-management, as evident in
33 attributes such as time management (M=3.20, SD=0.85), self-discipline (M=3.35, SD=0.88), and organization (M=3.48, SD=0.83)
The English majors' ability to adhere to strict time frames (M=2.88, SD=0.93) and their confidence in setting specific study times (M=3.29, SD=1.10) demonstrated relatively high levels of SDLR In addition, their ability for problem-solving through structured plans (M=3.43, SD=1.00) and prioritization of tasks (M=3.70, SD=0.96) were demonstrated English majors show a high level of confidence in their ability to search out information during their learning (M = 3.79, SD=0.89) The average mean score of 3.43 and a standard deviation of 0.51 across the 13 items show a moderately high level of SDLR in terms of self-management aspect among the students
The level of SDLR among English majors with regard to ‘self-management’ demonstrated diverse approaches to SDLR among the students revealed in their time management strategies, self-discipline challenges, responsibilities balancing, and proactive study planning
First, the interview data show a variety of time management strategies used by English majors For instance, some English majors used a structured approach, utilizing tools like Google Calendar to plan their daily tasks Some flexibly adjusted their schedules based on daily needs and unexpected tasks Some English majors mainly relied on their university’s schedule as a framework for managing their time while others adopted digital scheduling tools to stay organized
Second, self-discipline and maintaining focus during study sessions seemed to be common challenges for English majors Some students struggled with distractions and found it challenging to stick to their study plans For example, S04 in IQ2 reported “I get distracted with something else and don't continue studying" This revealed that while they may have time management strategies, they faced difficulties in applying them consistently
Third, balancing multiple responsibilities was a recurring theme found in the interview data among English majors The students often juggled academic commitments, part-time work and other tasks To give an example, S08 in IQ1 shared her thought in this regard: "I also take on additional tasks from outside and make use of any available free time for studying " This highlighted their ability to adapt their schedules to accommodate various responsibilities and tasks
Proactive study planning and goal setting were evident among several English majors Some students set specific study goals for each semester For instance, S07 in IQ3 reporeted “I set up a plan to improve my grades and looked at the study plans of my high-achieving friends." When asked about their study plan in each semester and academic year, some English majors collaborated with study groups to align their subject choices For example, S09 in IQ3 reported:
“We often form study groups and discuss which subjects to enrol before each semester and which prerequisite courses to study for the upcoming ones
If the schedules align and don't conflict, my friends and I will enrol in the same courses so that we can study together We also coordinate with our class schedules to allocate time for each subject and lecture Additionally, I set a goal to achieve at least a score of 8 for each subject and a GPA of above 8 for all courses completed”
This proactive approach reflected a strong commitment to academic success and a willingness to plan ahead These findings revealed the varied levels of SDLR among English majors, and emphasized the importance of personalized support and strategies to enhance self-directed learning readiness
This part demonstrated the desire for learning level of English majors in SDLR at the university The questionnaire in this part consisted of 11 items which are described in Table 4.4
Table 4.4 Desire for learning level of English majors
No Desire for learning Mean SD
14 I want to learn new information 4.57 62
19 I like to gather the facts before I make decision 3.87 70
20 I like to evaluate what I do 3.85 78
21 I am open to new ideas 4.39 68
24 When presented with a problem I cannot resolve,
The discriptive statistics in Table 4.4 shows that the ‘desire for learning’, the level of self-directed learning readiness of English majors had the highest level (M 4.20, SD= 0.40) Among the items, the English students expressed a strong desire to learn new information (M=4.57, SD=0.62) and to enjoy the process of acquiring knowledge (M=4.53, SD=0.63) This shows their proactive approach to education The need to learn was also strong (M=4.40, SD=0.76) which indicates their strong intrinsic motivation
Although the students generally had positive attitude towards learning, their answers varied While the enjoyment of challenges (M=3.74, SD=0.94) demonstrated a slightly lower level, the students show a tendency to critically evaluate new ideas (M=3.89, SD=0.92) The students' preference for gathering facts before decision- making (M=3.87, SD=0.70) and evaluating their work (M=3.85, SD=0.78) reflected a balanced approach to learning Their openness to new ideas (M=4.39, SD=0.68), willingness to learn from mistakes (M=4.35, SD=0.71), and desire to understand the underlying reasons (M=4.25, SD=0.79) highlighted their holistic learning perspective Notably, seeking assistance when encountering unsolvable problems (M=3.93, SD=1.10) showed a high level of independence and collaboration among the students Overall, the descriptive statistics indicated positive attitude towards learning, including curiosity, adaptability, and a constructive attitude among English majors
Discussion
4.3.1 Level of SDLR among the English majors
The results based on the quantitative and qualitative data show that students majoring in English had high levels of SDLR in three dimensions, including self- management, a desire for learning, and self-control These findings were in alignment with previous studies by El-Gilany and Abusaad (2013), Prabjanee and Inthachot
(2013), Litzinger, Wise and Lee (2005) In detail, the level of SDLR in ‘desire for
47 learning’ was higher than that of ‘self-control’ and ‘self-management’ It can be inferred that English majors show a greater inclination and motivation toward learning, and this intrinsic desire plays a significant role in their readiness for self- directed learning The level of SDLR in terms of 'desire for learning' is characterized by intrinsic motivations and resource utilization This suggests that students are internally driven to learn, and they effectively use available resources to support their learning endeavors This suggested that their language learning success is influenced more by being driven by their passion for learning rather than their ability to control their study plan and maintain discipline or their ability to manage the learning journey
In terms of ‘self-management’, the findings revealed that many English majors had good time management skills, using strategies such as setting specific study schedules and setting time for self-directed learning activities These strategies aligned with the literature on SDL, which emphasized the significance of effective time allocation and organization (Zimmerman, 2002) The ability to manage time efficiently was important for optimizing learning outcomes and enhancing self- directed learning readiness However, some English majors faced the self-discipline challenges in their self-management efforts Procrastination, difficulty staying focused, and struggles to adhere to self-imposed study schedules were among the challenges identified These findings were consistent with the literature, which emphasized the critical role of self-discipline in self-directed learning (Knowles,
1975) To foster SDLR, it was essential to recognize and address these self-discipline challenges
In additional, many English majors found it challenging to balance academic responsibilities and other life commitments such as juggling academic obligations with part-time jobs, family responsibilities, and extracurricular activities This challenge was consistent with existing literature, which recognised the difficulty of balancing multiple responsibilities for self-directed students (Brockett & Hiemstra,
1991) Moreover, several English majors showed that they had good study plan They set clear learning goals, selected appropriate learning resources, and developed structured study plans which positively contributed to their SDLR This finding aligned with the literature which emphasized the importance of proactive planning and goal setting in SDL (Caffarella & Barnett, 2000)
In terms of ‘desire for learning’, the findings revealed that the English majors had a variety of motives which drove their desire for learning These motives included personal interests, career aspirations, and academic goals This finding was consistent with the concept of intrinsic motivation in the field of SDL (Deci & Ryan, 1985) Acknowledging the multifaceted nature of these motivations was important because it emphasized the need for tailored approaches to engage English majors in their pursuit of SDLR Besides, this research identified that English majors were adept at leveraging various resources to facilitate their academic journey These resources included textbooks, online platforms, peer-to-peer interactions, and libraries Understanding the resourcefulness of English majors emphasized the importance of creating a rich environment in accessible learning resources Despite their dedication to SDL, the English majors faced challenges in effectively absorbing knowledge, such as unfamiliar vocabulary, comprehending fast-paced speech, and obstacles to effective communication Acknowledging these obstacles was instrumental in addressing them effectively
The study also highlighted the importance of evaluation among English majors in monitoring their progress and adjusting their learning strategies This finding was consistent with the fundamental role of self-assessment in self-directed learning (Knowles, 1975) Encouraging and facilitating self-assessment activities became important to enhance readiness for self-directed learners
In terms of ‘self-control’, the finding suggested that English majors with a strong learning goal orientation tend to demonstrate higher level of self-control as they often set specific study goals This finding was consistent with Zimmerman's
(2008) theory of self-regulated learning that students need to have metacognitive knowledge and skills to engage in SDL effectively, emphasizing the importance of goal setting and progress monitoring
However, English majors aslo faced many self-control challenges, including distractions and procrastination, which can hinder their self-directed learning This implied the need for acknowledging and addressing these obstacles Next, interest- driven learning was as a significant factor in self-control among English majors English majors who were motivated by personal interests frequently demonstrated stronger self-control, stayed focused, and were more self-regulated in their academic pursuits This aligned with research on intrinsic motivation and self-directed learning (Deci & Ryan, 1985), and this implied that the connection between the academic journey and personal interests can bolster self-directed learning readiness Besides, effective task balancing was as a critical dimension of self-control among English majors English majors faced common challenges in balancing multiple responsibilities, such as academics, work, and personal commitments This implied that English majors needed to exercise self-control and organizational skills to successfully handle their diverse responsibilities
4.3.2 The differences in the level of SDLR among the English majors of the three year groups
The findings based on the quantitative data showed that the level of SDLR among the English majors did not differ significantly by year groups In other words, regardless of whether a student is a freshman, sophomore, or junior in their English major program, they had a similar level of SDLR This result was consistent with a number of earlier investigations by El-Gilany and Abusaad (2013) and Alfaifi (2016) This suggested that the number of years a student had spent in the program did not have a substantial impact on their ability or tendency to engage in SDL activities The findings from the interviews also showed that there was not significant difference in the level of SDLR among the English majors from different year groups
Some small differences among the groups revealed For instance, the self- management dimension shows that the first-year students were found to lack structured study plans, often relying on daily schedules as they navigated the transition to university life The second-year students demonstrated flexibility in their learning approaches although they still lacked specific study plans The third-year students exhibited a higher level of SDLR, characterized by clear goals and a balanced approach to flexibility and peer collaboration In terms of “desire for learning”, the first-year students tended to depend on guidance and face challenges in communication and information sourcing
The second-year students demonstrated a variety of approaches, with some focusing on reflective communication and others struggling with procrastination and concentration The third-year students seemed to have a higher degree of motivation, viewing English as a practical necessity They employed a range of strategies for improvement, including goal setting and collaboration
In terms of “self-control” in SDLR, the first-year students prioritized career development and language skills The second-year students had diverse motivations but struggled with motivation and focus The third-year students were highly committed to academic excellence and emphasized self-discipline in their learning journey However, the above few differences did not reveal a significant difference in their readiness or tendency for SDL This suggested that regardless of the academic year they were in, the students appeared to have similar levels of SDLR.
Summary
This chapter reports the findings of the study A total of 150 undergraduate English majors at a university completed the survey using the SDLR scale The mean scores on the three SDLR dimensions were high on the SDLR scale There were no significant differences in the SDLR level by year groups
CONCLUSION
Summary of the findings
Research question 1: What is the level of SDLR among English majors?
The study shows that English majors had a high level of readiness for SDL In particular, among English majors' SDLR dimensions, the level of desire for learning surpassed that of the self-control and self-management In addition, this study implied that English majors showed a greater level of self-control and desire for learning within their SDLR compared to their focus on self-management
Research question 2: How does the English majors’ level of SDLR differ by year groups?
The results found that there was no statistically significant difference in the level of SDLRS of the students of the three different year groups.
Implications of the study
Based on the study results, there are implications made for administrators, teachers, and students
Historically, Vietnamese students have not been strongly encouraged to adopt a self-directed approach to learning To foster potential SDLR, the administrators could introduce courses or activities teaching self-directed learning skills The educators could support this by incorporating time management workshops, offering academic coaching, and providing flexible scheduling options They could also help students to develop study plans and meaningful learning goals Simultaneously, to foster SDLRS among English majors, educators should use tailored approaches that consider individual motivations, offer access to diverse learning materials, promote
52 collaborative learning, and provide guidance on time management, information management, and confidence-building Morever, English departments and academic institutions could provide workshops or seminars for effective goal-setting and self- control strategies Maintaining motivation, recognizing sources of motivation, addressing self-control challenges, emphasizing the connection between coursework and personal interests, and encouraging task-balancing skills are essential for enhancing SDLRS They should offer resources and support to help students effectively manage their academic responsibilities
Besides, the results based on the year group variable in this study showed no significant differences This could be clarified by the fact that the study participants were relatively close in age, resulting in similar outcomes based on the age variable However, this aslo implied that if the age of the students were to increase or if the participants had a wider age range, there is a possibility that differences in SDL might become more noticeable In this case, there is such a change that the administrators may need to take measures to address these changes In other words, if the age variable can impact participants' self-directed learning, it may be necessary to implement measures to effectively respond to this change
Determining the SDLRS level of English students can help lecturers review their curriculum to match the level of SDLR among English majors Faculty members should provide guidance and support, and technology resources should be readily available to facilitate self-directed learning In addition, teachers should help students set learning objectives, track progress, and adjust strategies through self-assessment
To promote self-directed learning readiness among English major students, teachers should cultivate a supportive and inclusive learning environment that encourages collaboration and autonomy Clearly communicating learning objectives, offering choices in assignments, and teaching effective study skills empower students to set and achieve personal goals Incorporating reflective activities, integrating
53 technology tools, and emphasizing real-world applications foster a sense of relevance and autonomy in their learning Encouraging critical thinking, providing mentorship, and assessing progress through formative assessments contribute to the development of lifelong learning habits By combining these strategies, teachers can create an atmosphere that not only enhances students' academic and professional skills but also instills a proactive approach to their own education
Determining the SDLRS level of EFL students may help language instructors to adopt effective strategies to enhance students’ SDL Although this study shows a high level of SDLR among the students, some of them demonstrated a low level of SDLR Therefore, it is necessary to assist students with low level of SDLR with appropriate teaching approaches to enhance their SDLR degree
To enhance their self-directed learning readiness, English majors can leverage technology in various ways They should explore online resources, databases, and digital libraries, embracing platforms like Coursera and edX for additional courses and webinars that align with their interests Utilizing educational apps and tools for language learning, writing, and literature analysis provides interactive and engaging learning experiences Participating in virtual book clubs, discussion forums, and online literary communities allows for collaborative engagement with peers and professionals Creating a digital portfolio on platforms like WordPress, engaging in professional networking through social media, and experimenting with digital writing tools such as Google Docs and Grammarly enhance their writing skills By attending virtual conferences, following online literary journals, and curating digital reading lists, English majors stay informed and connected in their field Moreover, staying abreast of technology trends, such as digital humanities tools and AI-driven language analysis, ensures that they remain well-equipped for self-directed learning in the ever- evolving digital landscape
Limitations of the study
There are limitations of the study First, the sample of participants was lacking in seniors, and the sample of participants in year groups was not large enough to be representative of the whole population of the English language department However, it is acceptable for mixed-method design research Second, the study only explored one demograhic variable that was age group with SDLR.Third, the sample chosen for the study might not be representative of all English majors The research was conducted among the English majors at the university level, so the findings may not be generalizable to students of other disciplines and other levels of education and settings.
Recommendations for the further research
There are some suggestions for future research Firstly, further research should have a larger sample to obtain more information and generalize the results for the population, so it may provide greater insights into student SDLRS Secondly, it involves a diverse range of participants in your research This should include different age groups, educational backgrounds, and levels of prior experience with SDL so that the furture researchers can obtain a comprehensive understanding of SDLR across various demographic groups Thirdly, there is a need for more research in the field of SDLR, and it should be integrated with other aspects For example, the researchers can conduct a longitudinal study to monitor changes in SDLR over time This can help identify trends and factors contributing to improvements or declines in SDLR Another example is to compare SDLR across different cultural or geographical contexts Understanding how SDLR varies in different cultural settings can be a valuable source of information and may reveal culture-specific factors influencing readiness for SDL Besides, the researchers can investigate the factors that support or hinder SDLR This could include exploring the role of teachers, educational institutions, and technology in promoting SDL
Alegado, E S., Navarro, E M A., Roxas, P J., & Monteza, A M M (2023) Self-directed learning among secondary education students specializing in English at
UM Digos College, Philippines European Journal of Education Studies, 10(8)
Alfaifi, M S (2016) Self-directed learning readiness among Undergraduate students at Saudi Electronic University in Saudi Arabia (Doctoral dissertation,
Asfar, N., & Zainuddin, Z (2015) Secondary students' perceptions of information, communication and technology (ICT) use in promoting self directed learning in Malaysia The Online Journal of Distance Education and E-
Ayyildiz, Y., & Tarhan, L (2015) Development of the self-directed learning skills scale International Journal of Lifelong Education, 34(6), 663-679
Bagheri, M., Ali, W.Z.W., Abdullah, M.C.B, & Daud, S.M (2013) Effects of project-based learning skills of educational technology students Contemporary Educational Technology 4(1), 15–29
Bandura, A (1997) Self-efficacy: The exercise of control New York: Freeman
Barrios Altamiranda, A L., & Correa Narváez, J M (2016) Self-directed learning tasks through ICT in the development of vocabulary for speaking performance (Master's thesis, Universidad de La Sabana)
Bazeley, P (2002) Issues in Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches to Research Research Support P/L, Bowral, Autralia
Bordonaro, K (2006) Self-directed language learning of ESL students in an American college library Journal of Language and Learning, 5(1), 29-49
Brockett, R G., & Hiemstra, R (1991) A conceptual framework for understanding self-direction in adult learning In R G Brockett & R Hiemstra (Eds.),
Self-Direction in Adult Learning: Perspectives on Theory, Research, and Practice
London and New York: Routledge Retrieved from http://infed.org/mobi/a- conceptual-framework-for-understanding-self-direction-in-adult-learning/
Burns, A (1999) Collaborative action research for English language teachers Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Caffarella, R S., & Barnett, B G (2000) Teaching doctoral students to become scholarly writers: The importance of giving and receiving critiques Studies in Higher
Candy, P C (1991) Self-direction for lifelong learning A comprehensive Guide to theory and Practice, 97-244
Chan, M (2015) Language learner autonomy and learning contract: A case study of language majors of a university in Hong Kong Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 5(2), 147–180
Chickering, A W (1964) Dimensions of independence: The findings of an experiment at Goddard College Journal of Higher Education, 35(1), 38–41
Deci, E L., & Ryan, R M (1985) Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior Plenum
Dong, T P N., Van, T N., & Sang, G D (2021) The relationship between self–efficacy and readiness for self–directed learning of students at Vietnam University
El-Gilany, A.-H., & Abusaad, F E S (2013) Self-directed learning readiness and learning styles among Saudi undergraduate nursing students Nurse Education Today, 33(9), 1040–1044 doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2012.05.003
Fisher, M., King, J., & Tague, G (2001) Development of a self-directed learning readiness scale for nursing education Nurse Education Today, 21(7), 516–
Gagne, R M (1985) The conditions of learning (4th ed.) New York: Holt,
Garrison, D R (1997) Self-directed learning: Toward a comprehensive model
Garrison, R (1992) Critical thinking and self-directed learning in adult education: An analysis of responsibility and control issues Adult Education Quarterly, 42(3), 136-148
Garrison, R (1997) Self-directed learning: Toward a comprehensive model
Gibbons, M (2002) The self-directed learning handbook: Challenging adolescent students to excel San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Giddings, S (2015) Self-Directed Learning (SDL) in Higher Education: A Necessity for 21st Century Teaching and Learning
Gokcearslan, S (2017) Perspectives of students on acceptance of tablets and self-directed learning with technology Contemporary educational technology, 8(1), 40-55
Guglielmino, L (1977) Development of the Self-directed Learning Readiness
Scale (Doctoral dissertation) Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations &
Guglielmino, L (2008) Why self-directed learning? International Journal of Self-directed Learning, 5(1), 1-14
Guglielmino, P J., Guglielmino, L M., & Long, H B (1987) Self-directed learning readiness and performance in the workplace Higher Education, 16(3), 303-317
Hafizah Adnan, N., & Sayadi, S S (2022) ESL students’ readiness for self- directed learning in improving English writing skills Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 12
Jick, T B (1979) Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation
Johnson, R B., & Christensen, L B (2008) Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative and Mixed Methods (Fourth Edition) Thousand Oaks, CA:
Jones, A (1999) The Asian learner: An overview of approaches to learning Melbourne: The University of Melbourne
Karakas, F., & Manisaligil, A (2012) Reorienting self-directed learning for the creative digital era European Journal of Training and Development, 36(7), 712–731 https://doi.org/10.1108/03090591211255557
Khan, M S (1990) Educational research New Delhi: Ashish Publishing
Knowles, M S (1975) Self-Directed Learning: A Guide for Students and Teachers Chicago: Association Press
Lai, H.-J (2011) The influence of adult students’ self-directed learning readiness and network literacy on online learning effectiveness: A study of civil servants in Taiwan Educational Technology & Society, 14(2), 98–106 Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/download_pdf.php?j_idQ&a_id29
Leatemia, L D., Susilo, A P., & van Berkel, H (2016) Self-directed learning readiness of Asian students: students perspective on a hybrid problem based learning curriculum International journal of medical education, 7, 385
Lee, C., Yeung, A S., & Ip, T (2017) University English language students’ readiness to use computer technology for self-directed learning System, 67, 99–110 doi:10.1016/j.system.2017.05.001
Li, N., & Park, H (2019) The relationships of self-directed learning readiness and motivation with the English proficiency of Korean EFL learners Studies in English Language & Literature, 45(4), 153-181
Litzinger, T A., Wise, J C., & Lee, S H (2005) Self-directed Learning Readiness Among Engineering Undergraduate Students Journal of Engineering Education, 94(2), 215–221 doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00842.x
Loftin, R L., Gibb, A C., & Skiba, R (2005) Using self-monitoring strategies to address behavior and academic issues Remedial & Special Education, 18(2), 12-18
Long, H B (2011) The role of self-directed learning in enhancing lifelong learning In T Rocco & M L Shreckengost (Eds.), Leadership for the Twenty-First
Century (pp 153-162) Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing
Long, M (2005) Second language needs analysis Cambridge: Cambridge
Mackey, A., & Gass, M S (2005) Second language research: Methodology and design Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Merriam, S B (2002) Andragogy and self-directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 89, 3-14
Min-hsun, M S., & Duo, P C (2010) EFL students' language learning strategy use as a predictor for self-directed learning readiness Journal of Asia TEFL, 7(2) Ministry of Education (2009) The desired outcomes of education Retrieved f Lee, C., Yeung, A S., & Ip, T (2017) University english language students’
60 readiness to use computer technology for self-directed learning System, 67, 99–
Monkaresi, H., Abbasi, A., & Razyani, R (2015) Factors Affecting the self- directed learning readiness Eur Onilne J Nat Soc Sci, 4(4), 865-874
Nguyen, T H (2002) Vietnam: Cultural background for ESL/EFL teachers The Review of Vietnamese Studies, 2(1), 1-6
Pintrich, P R (2000) The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning In
M Boekaerts, P R Pintrich, & M Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp 451-502) San Diego: Academic Press
Prabjanee, D., & Inthachot, M (2013) Self-directed learning readiness of college students in Thailand Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, 2(1),
Ramadhani, Y R., & Siregar, R K (2019) Enhancing students’activities learning using self-directed learning model based on ict Jurnal education and development, 7(3), 53-53
Seliger, H W., & Shohamy, E (2000) Second Language Research Method
Tangkanchanayuenyong, M., & Chaengchenkit, R (2019) Readiness and activities for self-directed learning of EFL students in a secondary school in Thailand (Doctoral dissertation, Thammasat University)
Taqipour, M., Abbasi, E., Naeimi, A., Ganguly, S., & Zamani, N (2016) An investigation of self-directed learning skills among the Iranian agricultural students (Case of Agricultural College, Tarbiat Modares University) Journal of Agricultural
Thuy, D T T., Thuy, T T., & Van Minh, T (2021) Review of Self-directed Learning Readiness Assessments Among Undergraduate Students in the World and Lessons Learnt for Vietnam VNU Journal of Science: Education Research
Tough, A (1971) The adult’s learning projects Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
Van Honga, B., & Trib, T M (2021) Self-Directed Learning to Teaching the Subject of Technical Drawing for Students: A Research Result at Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology and Education Learning, 15
Vu, H Y., & Shah, M (2016) Vietnamese students’ self-direction in learning English listening skills Asian Englishes, 18(1), 53–66 doi:10.1080/13488678.2015.1136104
Wiley, K (1983) Effects of a self-directed learning project and preference for structure on self-directed learning readiness Nursing Research, 32(3), 181-185
Yap, C R (2009) Understanding the adult students’ motivation and barriers to learning European Society for Research on the Education of Adults, 8(8), 905–915
Zimmerman, B J (2002) Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview
Zimmerman, B J (2008) Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects
Zyl, S., & Mentz, E (2019) Moving to deeper self-directed learning as an essential competency for the 21st century In Self-directed learning for the 21st century: Implications for higher education (pp 67–102) AOSIS
APPENDICES APPENDIX A: QUESTIONAIRE FOR STUDENTS (ENGLISH VERSION)
I am Luong Thi Thu Thao, a graduate student of the MTESOL019 class at Ho Chi Minh City Open University I am conducting a research project titled "An investigation into Self-Directed Learning Readiness among English majors" and
I would appreciate if you could spend a few minutes of your time to complete the survey questionnaire
Thank you for your support
Please check (√) the box that indicates your answer
2 Which year group do you belong to?
1 st year 2 nd year 3 rd year
Part II: SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING READINESS SCALE
Please circle a number (from 1-5) to indicate your level of agreement with the following statements
7 I am systematic in my learning 1 2 3 4 5
8 I set specific times for my study 1 2 3 4 5
11 I can be trusted to pursue my own learning 1 2 3 4 5
12 I prefer to plan my own learning 1 2 3 4 5
13 I am confident in my ability to search out information
14 I want to learn new information 1 2 3 4 5
19 I like to gather the facts before I make decision 1 2 3 4 5
20 I like to evaluate what I do 1 2 3 4 5
21 I am open to new ideas 1 2 3 4 5
24 When presented with a problem I cannot resolve, I will ask for assistance
25 I like to make decisions for myself 1 2 3 4 5
26 I am responsible for my own decisions/actions 1 2 3 4 5
27 I am in control of my life 1 2 3 4 5
29 I prefer to set my own learning goals 1 2 3 4 5
34 I am able to focus on a problem 1 2 3 4 5
35 I am aware of my own limitations 1 2 3 4 5
36 I can find out information for myself 1 2 3 4 5
37 I have high beliefs in my abilities 1 2 3 4 5
38 I prefer to set my own criteria on which to evaluate my performance
I would like to invite you for an interview to be conducted at your university in about 2 weeks (for about 30 minutes) to gain in depth knowledge into your Self- directed learning Readiness Please provide your contact details below if you agree Your email address: _
APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS (VIETNAMESE
VERSION) BẢNG CÂU HỎI KHẢO SÁT
Tôi là Lương Thị Thu Thảo - Học viên cao học lớp MTESOL019 tại trường đại học Mở TP.HCM Tôi đang thực hiện đề tài luận văn thạc sĩ “ Điều tra sự sẵn sàng tự định hướng trong học tập của sinh viên ngành Ngôn ngữ Anh” Rất mong các bạn dành ít thời gian để điền vào phiếu khảo sát dưới đây
Chân thành cảm ơn sự hỗ trợ của các bạn
Phần I: THÔNG TIN CÁ NHÂN
Vui lòng đánh dấu (√) vào ô tương ứng
1 Vui lòng cho biết giới tính của anh/chị a Nam b Nữ
2 Anh/ chị hiện là sinh viên năm…
năm nhất năm hai năm ba
Phần II: THANG ĐO MỨC ĐỘ TỰ ĐỊNH HƯỚNG TRONG HỌC TẬP
Hãy khoanh tròn vào một con số (từ 1-5) thể hiện mức độ đồng ý của anh/chị với các câu hỏi sau đây
Kỹ năng tự quản lý bản thân
1 Tôi quản lý thời gian của mình tốt 1 2 3 4 5
2 Tôi có tính tự giác kỷ luật 1 2 3 4 5
3 Tôi có tính tổ chức 1 2 3 4 5
4 Tôi đặt ra các khung thời gian nghiêm ngặt 1 2 3 4 5
5 Tôi có kỹ năng quản lý tốt 1 2 3 4 5
6 Tôi là người làm việc có phương pháp 1 2 3 4 5
7 Tôi là người sắp xếp việc học có hệ thống 1 2 3 4 5
8 Tôi đặt ra các thời điểm cụ thể cho việc học của mình 1 2 3 4 5
9 Tôi giải quyết vấn đề bằng cách lập kế hoạch 1 2 3 4 5
10 Tôi luôn ưu tiên việc học của mình 1 2 3 4 5
11 Tôi tin tưởng bản thân khi theo đuổi việc học của chính mình
12 Tôi thích lên kế hoạch học tập của chính mình 1 2 3 4 5
13 Tôi tự tin vào khả năng tìm kiếm thông tin của mình 1 2 3 4 5
14 Tôi muốn học hỏi những điều mới 1 2 3 4 5
15 Tôi cảm thấy hứng thú khi học những điều mới mẻ 1 2 3 4 5
16 Tôi có nhu cầu học hỏi 1 2 3 4 5
17 Tôi thích sự thử thách 1 2 3 4 5
18 Tôi luôn xem xét đánh giá ý tưởng mới một cách nghiêm túc
19 Tôi luôn thu thập các dữ kiện trước khi đưa ra quyết định 1 2 3 4 5
20 Tôi thích đánh giá những gì tôi làm 1 2 3 4 5
21 Tôi sẵn sàng đón nhận những ý tưởng mới 1 2 3 4 5
22 Tôi học hỏi từ những sai lầm của mình 1 2 3 4 5
23 Tôi luôn muốn tìm tòi học hỏi 1 2 3 4 5
24 Khi gặp vấn đề mà tôi không thể giải quyết, tôi sẽ yêu cầu hỗ trợ từ người khác
Tự kiểm soát/ Tự chủ
25 Tôi thích tự đưa ra quyết định cho chính mình 1 2 3 4 5
26 Tôi chịu trách nhiệm về các quyết định / hành động của mình
27 Tôi tự làm chủ cuộc sống của mình 1 2 3 4 5
28 Tôi có tiêu chuẩn cá nhân cao 1 2 3 4 5
29 Tôi thích đặt ra mục tiêu học tập của riêng mình 1 2 3 4 5
30 Tôi tự đánh giá hiệu quả công việc của chính mình 1 2 3 4 5
31 Tôi là người có tư duy logic 1 2 3 4 5
32 Tôi là người có trách nhiệm 1 2 3 4 5
33 Tôi có kỳ vọng cá nhân cao 1 2 3 4 5
34 Tôi có thể tập trung vào một vấn đề 1 2 3 4 5
35 Tôi nhận thức được những hạn chế của chính mình 1 2 3 4 5
36 Tôi có thể tự tìm kiếm thông tin cho mình 1 2 3 4 5
37 Tôi rất tin tưởng vào khả năng của mình 1 2 3 4 5
38 Tôi thích đặt ra các tiêu chí của riêng mình để tự đánh giá hiệu quả công việc
Tôi muốn mời bạn tham gia một cuộc phỏng vấn sẽ được thực hiện tại HUB trong khoảng 2 tuần tới (khoảng 30 phút) để có hiểu biết chuyên sâu về khả năng sẵn sàng học tập tự định hướng của bạn Vui lòng cung cấp chi tiết liên lạc của bạn bên dưới nếu bạn đồng ý tham gia Địa chỉ email của bạn: _
APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR STUDENTS (ENGLISH
1 How do you manage your time?
2 Do you have a specific time set for your study? If yes, please let me know the details
3 Do you plan your studies for each semester, each academic year? If yes, what is your study plan?
4 How do you search for information for your studies?
5 Do you often encounter difficulties in the learning process? If yes, what are those difficulties? What have you learned from those challenges?
6 How do you evaluate the effectiveness of your study?
7 Do you set your study goals for the entire 4 years of university? If yes, what are they specifically?
8 What criteria do you use to evaluate the effectiveness of your learning?
9 What are your limitations in studying?
APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR STUDENTS
(VIETNAMESE VERSION) Câu hỏi phỏng vấn
1 Bạn quản lý thời gian của mình như thế nào?
2 Bạn có đặt thời gian cụ thể cho việc học của mình không? Nếu có thì bạn hãy cho biết cụ thể
3 Bạn có lập kế hoạch học tập cho từng học kỳ, từng năm học không? Nếu có thì kế hoạch học tập của bạn là gì?
4 Bạn tìm kiếm thông tin cho việc học bằng cách nào?
5 Bạn có thường gặp phải khó khăn trong quá trình học tập không? Nếu có, những khó khăn đó là gì? Bạn đã học được điều gì từ những khó khăn đó?
6 Bạn đánh giá hiệu quả học tập của bạn bằng cách nào?
7 Bạn có đặt mục tiêu học tập của bạn trong suốt 4 năm đại học hay không?
Nếu có thì cụ thể là gì?
8 Bạn dựa vào tiêu chí nào để đánh giá hiệu quả việc học của bạn?
9 Những hạn chế của bạn trong việc học là gì?
APPENDIX E: THE INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT OF STUDENTS
1 Bạn quản lý thời gian của mình như thế nào?
S01: “em sử dụng công cụ calendar để mà quản lý thời gian.Em take not công việc hàng ngày của mình, ghi nhớ và đánh dấu các bài kiểm tra sắp tới để em biết và có thể ôn tập
S02:” em đi học Khoảng thời gian rảnh, em có thể đi làm partime hoặc phụ gia đình, hoặc là ôn tập thêm học phần.”
S03:” em không có cách quản lý thời gian nào cả, bởi vì thời gian học tập trên trường chủ yếu là do giảng viên giảng dạy,thời gian còn lại chủ yếu là em muốn về nhà giải trí hoặc là phụ giúp gia đình.” Em dựa vào thời khóa biểu do nhà trường sắp đặt để xác định ngày nào đi học và học môn gì S04:”em lập một cái thời gian biểu ở trên Google calendar Sáng em sẽ làm gì rồi chiều em sẽ làm gì Có những task gì trong ngày, nếu ngày đó có nhiều task quá thì em mới lập cái bảng.” Em thường lên kế hoạch trước một tuần đó
S05:”Em học theo như lịch học ở trường của em Ví dụ như, tuần sau có môn tiếng trung vào thứ 5, em sẽ giành 2 ngày thứ 2 và thứ 3 để luyện viết Còn cái thời gian cuối tuần thì thường em sẽ dành ra để tham gia thể thao Cho nên là cuối tuần em thường không học cái ngày đấy.” Em cũng có lên cho 1 tuần còn 1 tháng thì chưa S06:” em sẽ không đặt thời gian cụ thể Nói chung là theo cá nhân em thì em sẽ đặt nó trong một ngày thôi Trong
74 ngày đó sẽ có những sự kiện quan trọng như thế nào Em sẽ lưu ý những sự kiện đó, chứ em không tỉ mỉ lên kế hoạch.” S07: “em thường dùng Google calendar để Em ghi lại các việc trong ngày Ví dụ như em sẽ dựa vào lịch học ở trường Sau đó, em sẽ trừ lịch học ở trường ra, rồi em sắp xếp lịch tự học riêng của em Ví dụ như là em học tiếng Trung hoặc là học Ielts hoặc hay là thậm chí là tập thể dục, học bài trên lớp thì sẽ sắp xếp vô Google calendar
S08:” em không có sử dụng ứng dụng cụ thể để quản lý thời gian Em dựa vào lịch học của trường để sắp xếp thời gian của em Sau khi học trên trường, em phân chia thời gian thành các buổi như sáng, trưa và chiều tối Tiếp theo, em chia nhỏ các khoảng thời gian đó thành trước bữa sáng, sau bữa sáng và sau bữa tối Ví dụ, vào buổi sáng em học, sau đó đi ăn sáng và tiếp tục học hoặc đi làm dạy kèm vào buổi trưa Buổi chiều, nếu không có công việc nào, em sẽ đến quán café học bài hoặc đi đánh bóng bàn Em phân chia thời gian dựa trên lịch học trường và chỉ phân loại cụ thể nếu có các lịch cố định như dạy gia sư
S09: “Em khá linh hoạt trong việc quản lý thời gian Ví dụ, trong một ngày, sau thời gian học trên trường, tôi dành khoảng 3 đến 4 tiếng để dạy tại nhà Sau khi trừ đi thời gian dạy và thời gian học, tôi có thời gian còn lại cho bản thân Đôi khi, em nhận thêm các công việc bên ngoài và tận dụng những khoảng thời gian trống để học Em thường viết lại trên giấy những việc cần làm ngày hôm đó, như các deadline cần hoàn thành Em thực hiện các công việc đó sau khi đã dành hết thời gian cho việc học và dạy, để em có thể làm công việc bên ngoài đó.”
2 Bạn có đặt thời gian cụ thể cho việc học của mình không?
Nếu có thì bạn hãy cho biết cụ thể