Framing the Picture: A Preliminary Investigation into Experts’ Beliefs about the Roles and Purposes of Self-Access Centres

Abstract

This paper presents results from phase one of a large-scale, two-phase research project investigating self-access centre (SAC) experts’ (Centre Directors; Centre Managers; Centre Coordinators; Learning Advisors) beliefs about the roles and purposes of SACs. The project adopts both the fundamental assumptions and approaches of learner belief studies in SLA and teacher cognition research in education. However, it examines neither learners nor teachers; instead, all the participants are SAC practitioners. Phase one of the study begins by surveying, through an online questionnaire, the different beliefs these practitioners have about self-access learning and SAC practice. This paper describes how the data was collected and analysed, as well as selecting a few interesting findings to highlight the value of conducting beliefs study on SAC experts. The findings reported in this paper need to be triangulated with follow up interviews (phase two) in order to construct a more accurate understanding of the beliefs held by the participants. Therefore, any conclusions or implications regarding the relationship between practitioners’ beliefs and SAC practice remain incomplete. Nevertheless, the findings from phase one provide an insightful preliminary picture of the diversity of both practice and practitioner from SACs across the world and open up a valuable avenue for further discussion.

Room 101: A Movement towards Social Learning Spaces? A Survey of SAC Managers in UK Higher Education

“…In Navarro's (2014) Navarro's finding that the SAC managers confirmed the importance of providing access to 'target culture contact' and 'successful language users' is particularly interesting in relation to this study; these are things which Room 101 and other social learning SACs do through interaction-based activities.…”

“…To what extent is Room 101's social learning approach used in other UK HE SACs? Navarro (2014), when looking at different SACs, found that "there exists an array of mission statements, principles, descriptions of services, and outlines of goals and objectives. I was left with a highly eclectic picture of SACs."…”

“…This phenomenon has also been observed by researchers such as Reinders (2012), who has suggested that so many new ways of connecting with resources and learners online have emerged that the need for a physical space for materials-based self-access has to be questioned. Navarro (2014) in his study of SAC managers found that "one of the most significant challenges faced by SAC educators is finding (or creating) material that motivates learners to take more control over the actual learning process" (p. 22). This has been the experience of Room 101 which found that even physical authentic texts developed with Language Centre staff did not appeal to users, getting very little usage.…”

Balancing Competing Needs among Stakeholders: Lessons from the Self-access Language Learning Centre (SALL) of the Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen)

“…To promote students' ownership of the Centre, their use of English, and learner autonomy (as in Heigham, 2011, Malcolm, 2011, and Navarro, 2014, apart from giving workshops and consultations, the Centre could recruit a volunteer team comprising students who are keen to help out with daily administration and maintenance of the SALL's resources. The benefit is mutual; students will have more exposure to English as they will be required to interact in English at the SALL while providing the SALL with a greater human resource.…”

Have a Look Around: The Effect of a ‘Push’ Activity on Future SAS Use

“…Yet, it is interesting to note that required use of SACs appears quite prevalent. Indeed, Navarro (2014) surveyed 38 self-access experts from various self-access centres regarding their beliefs about the purposes of self-access centres and found that "61% reported mandatory SAC attendance" (p. 15). When the experts were asked if they believed SAC use should not be required, only 16% responded that voluntary use was essential with 58% stating that such use was preferable, and 26% saying it should be compulsory.…”