The Autonomous Self: A Way to Go With Overcoming Limitations in English Learning

Edson Estarneck, PGLA, Interdisciplinary Graduate Program in Applied Linguistics (PIPGLA), Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Estarneck, E. (2023). The autonomous self: A way to go with overcoming limitations in English learning. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 15(1), 29–48. https://doi.org/10.37237/150105

Abstract

When students first enter the Teaching English and Portuguese Program at a private university in Rio de Janeiro, some of them struggle with their English literacy. However, despite these initial difficulties, some students persist and successfully graduate. This study examines the role of the autonomous self in this process, and how it is shaped by the learner’s experiences in the learning process. The research is based on sociocultural theories and uses narrative inquiries and Complexity Theories as methodological foundations. The research question aims to understand what allows some students to overcome their initial language barriers and remain in the program, while others tend to drop out. The results show that the autonomous self acts as a motivator and a learner’s potential, becoming a crucial factor in their success.

Keywords: autonomy, narrative, complexity, English language learning

This article analyzes the interface between a person and their social-historical-cultural context. Having the sociocultural aspect (Vygotsky, 1978 [1991]) and the participant’s life stories as the central axis of the work, this research helps reflect more critically on epistemological bases which seem to overlook learners’ experiences.

This study contributes to a more precise understanding of the L2 Learning Experience within Dörnyei’s (2009) L2 Motivational Self System. It demonstrates the role of the autonomous self in integrating present relevance, past experiences, and possible future selves. 

More specifically, this work shows how the autonomous self can be viewed as a motivational and identity force in learners’ efforts to overcome limitations in English language learning. Thus, it considers the intricate relationship between autonomy, motivation, and identity, as highlighted by Murray et al. (2011), and the social background as part of such a dynamical system, as highlighted by Ushioda (2011), when a self from the learners emerges to achieve their learning goals.

From the Notion of Autonomy to its Complexity

Autonomy has been assumed to be learners’ capacity to control their learning language process (Benson, 2006). Some scholars also correlate it to a more complex perspective (Benson, 2011b; Paiva, 2005, 2006, 2011; Resende, 2009), regarding the correlation of two or more elements in the L2 learners’ system.

Ushioda (2011) points out that it seems clear the relation between motivation and identity when, for instance, teachers allow or create opportunities for students to express their identities, and such overture ends up in a motivational learning force. Likewise, autonomy and identity have been understood in mutual development (Benson, 2006; Huang & Benson, 2013). In the study of sociocultural background, the interconnection between different elements is emphasized, with the historical context being one of the factors in this landscape.

Ushioda (2011) argues that motivations and identities develop through socially constructed processes involving opportunities, negotiations, and activities. They “emerge as dynamically co-constructed process” (p. 21) and can be seen through different angles, taking motivation as a part of the self-system (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2009). Hence, the vision of the landscape depends on where and how the lenses are located. And taking this for granted, what should one say about autonomy in the self-system as one of the angles in the L2 learning process?

Autonomy in the Self-System of a Language Learner

Although autonomy may be a broad notion, it is seen here both as an element of the L2 learning system, so to speak, interconnected with other equally complex systems, and as the main angle through which the others are brought together to clarify the language learning scenario focused on this article.

To begin with, one can correlate autonomy and agency since the former is a way of identifying oneself, and the latter is its key factor (Benson, 2006). According to Huang and Benson (2013), acting autonomously involves more than just fulfilling a duty or a short-term need. Reading a book, for instance, might help one acquire knowledge or fulfill a purpose, but it may not necessarily reflect an individual’s identity. Huang and Benson argue that autonomy is only achieved after a prolonged period of exercising agency. Thus, one can be identified by acting autonomously when being autonomous becomes a way to go in one’s self-system, i.e., autonomous identity can be seen as one of the facets of one’s identity and can reveal how one acts in the L2 learning process.

Another perspective of the autonomous identity in the self-system is understanding the organic process between the individual and the world according to the self-determination theory (SDT) (Deci & Ryan, 1985). In line with SDT, there is a natural and dialectical order between the individual and the social level that leads people to correspond to their psychological needs of competence, relatedness, and autonomy (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Deci et al., 1991; Ryan, 1995; Ryan & Deci, 2000, 2002, 2004; Vansteenkiste & Ryan, 2013). These elements work in conjunction, and they are reciprocally supportive because “when people experience feelings of autonomy and relatedness and engage in optimal challenges that enhance their sense of competence, their motivation will be increasingly internalized and self-regulated” (Ushioda, 2014, p. 135).

Based on this, Ryan and Deci (2004) expose the complexity of the SDT’s self through the notion of authenticity coined by Kierkegaard (1849 [1954]). They explain that people implicitly and explicitly guide themselves when they review their own goals and beliefs in themselves. Kierkegaard (1849 [1954]) says that it is the ongoing synthesis of the self to itself. Noels (2009) explains that Kierkegaard is referring to the self that is continually “relating itself back to itself” (p. 296) and is offering a way to view learners’ authentic self and their sense of authorship. It takes place when autonomous learners consider for themselves possibilities, realities, and necessities while they engage in interaction and action processes. So, this authenticity is highly seen by the self because it has to do with the learners’ responsibility for the action (Noels, 2009). Ryan and Deci (2004) expose that “selfhood is thus not a matter of making fantastic choices but rather a struggle to realize one’s potential in this world, within this culture” (p. 452).

The authentic self includes the possibilities of selves through conceptual dynamics between cognition and motivation. The acknowledgment of this authentic self reflects the existence of an autonomous self that plays a fundamental role in the evaluative center of the self-system (Markus & Nurius, 1986). Such possible selves, according to Markus and Nurius, “represent individuals’ ideas of what they might become, what they would like to become, and what they are afraid of becoming” (p. 954). Thus, they are representative elements of hope, fear, goals, and challenges. They should be seen not only as imagined states but also as personified representations. They play the role of self-relevance because they offer meanings and directions to the individual (Markus & Nurius, 1986). They are then a cognitive manifestation of emotive components related to identities and future states. 

According to Dörnyei (2014), the self-concept refers to an individual’s self-knowledge. Markus and Nurius (1986) claim that self-concepts are developed through self-schemes, which are based on past experiences and selectively used to interpret the world and oneself. These past selves serve as a reference point for the self-concepts and connect them to possible selves.

Higgins (1987) also acknowledges the significance of sociocultural factors in shaping an individual’s self-concept. He argues that an individual’s evaluative center is formed from relevant experiences and significant others. Additionally, the concept of possible selves can act as a guide for an individual’s future aspirations. Dörnyei (2009) adds to this idea by explaining that people use images and senses to engage with their purposes, which can help them envision their future selves. It means that possible selves are taken to the level of psychological experiences.

One way to clarify the view of the selves is to understand their multiplicity as in layers with different scopes, i.e., although they evolve in different timescales, the selves are in interconnections with other agents in various levels because they are not only nested but also permeable (Mercer, 2015b). The multiple views of the self may likely give the impression of its fragmentation. However, it does not mean that the self lacks a sense of unity in the self-system. In these terms, although it is at least dynamically set up, the self develops looking for balance. Furthermore, to observe autonomy, it must be embodied by someone’s image who takes responsibility for their goals. By listening to them, there comes in this study the participants’ voice that asserts to exist an element in their self-system, which plays the role of their autonomous self.

The L2 Autonomous Self

Having found references that learners recognize in themselves the potentiality to take charge of their ventures and pursue their goals, there is a close relationship between the autonomous self of this research and McCombs and Marzano’s (1990) concept of the self as agent. Both stand for a self-concept that exerts control and self-regulation over metacognitive outcomes, aligning identities and affection states through a volitive and motivational force. McCombs and Marzano (1990) explain it as a self-concept element that illustrates a teleologic knowledge integrating an individual’s will and skill and standing for people’s understanding that “they are creative agents, responsible for and capable of achieving self-development and self-determination goals, and they must appreciate and understand their capabilities for reaching these goals” (p. 51). Accordingly, many features of the self as agent coincide with the ones of the autonomous self. However, based on the scope of this research about L2 learning, the L2 autonomous self, differently from the self as agent, cannot be categorically said that it encompasses the whole individual’s self as McCombs and Marzano assert about “the experience of being” (p. 56) – another way they refer to the self as agent. The autonomous self of this study is circumscribed to the scope of L2 learning, in which learners outstand their autonomous self to overcome limitations to learn English.

It is fundamental to understand what experience means because it is the base through which the autonomous self acts to evaluate the individuals’ potential and consistently inform them that it is possible to keep their purposes. Falout (2016) says it can be understood retrospectively or prospectively. On one hand, a retrospective experience has much to do with what Markus and Nurius (1986) say about past selves, so, it represents one’s relevant sociocultural background. On the other hand, a prospective experience has to do with Dörnyei’s (2014) future selves, when he exposes his idea of vision. Dörnyei (2014) says that “this quasi-perceptual experience is often described in everyday parlance as ‘visualising’ or ‘seeing in the mind’s eye’ (a term originally coined by Shakespeare in Hamlet) or ‘hearing in the head’ or ‘imagining the feel of’” (p. 13). An overall view of the self offers, for this reason, a wide dimension considering that the self comes to be conceived critically and dialogically through retrospective and prospective experiences (Falout, 2016).

Simultaneously into its constant flow, the self is given to a self-assessment element that works through transtemporal experiences when “every experience takes up something from those which have gone before and modifies in some way the quality of those which come after” (Dewey, 1997, p. 35). In such a manner, the experiences take part of the self-system through an internalization process, as Falout (2016) describes.

To sum up, the view of the self-system is built ecologically. The self evolves considering factors of space – which includes not only physical and social but also symbolic parameters – and time (van Lier, 2004). Therefore, the evaluated experiences asserted by the autonomous self are perceived at different moments in time and gathered in evaluations in the learner’s self-system. According to Falout (2016), “as past selves inform ongoing emergent motivational predispositions, learners’ personal academic histories are forever at the forefront of their futures” (p. 62). Thus, the L2 autonomous self is the category of one’s identity that propels learners to evaluate (past, present, and future) experiences and tells them there is a way to go confirmed in their self-systems.

The Study and its Research Questions

Observing first-year students lacking proficiency in English within the Teaching English and Portuguese Program at a private university in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, I became intrigued by the remarkable resilience demonstrated by a few students who persisted and achieved their academic goals. I questioned what factors enabled these students to overcome their initial language barriers and avoid dropping out of the program, unlike many of their peers in similar circumstances. Given their insufficient English proficiency for adequate program participation, what resources or motivations sustained them? What underlying force drives them to persist in their pursuit of second language (L2) acquisition, and how does this force operate?

Methodology

This research integrates narrative inquiry (Barcelos, 2006; Barkhuizen et al., 2014; Bastos & Santos, 2005, 2013; Bell, 2002; Swain et al., 2015) and complexity theories (King, 2016; Larsen-Freeman, 1997; Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008; Paiva, 2005, 2006; van Lier, 2004; Mercer, 2014a, 2014b, 2015a, 2015b, 2016) as its theoretical and methodological foundation. According to Swain et al. (2015), narratives allow for the referencing of artifacts that mediate understanding and interaction processes. Thus, narratives are essential for this investigation, as they help comprehend how people derive meaning from their experiences and stories (Bell, 2002). Through storytelling, participants reconstruct their perceptions of experiences, which aids in understanding identity construction (Reissman, 1993).

The term “complexity” refers broadly to theoretical frameworks that consider the interrelationships between elements, each seen as a system. These elements interact in chains, forming connections with other systems and subsystems over time and space. The interactions involve unpredictable, emergent, and non-linear actions and results. This metaphorical language supports theoretical notions such as complex dynamic systems (Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008), adaptive systems (Paiva, 2005, 2006, 2011), ecological systems (van Lier, 2004), and networked systems (Mercer, 2014a, 2014b, 2015a, 2015b, 2016).

Narrative inquiry and the complexity perspective are vital to this research, recognizing that connections between isolated events are crucial for understanding the whole, leading to change, development, and learning (Mishler, 2006; Paiva, 2005, 2006). This approach provides an alternative to traditional linear causal models, offering insights into narrators’ identities, meaning systems, and social and cultural contexts (Lieblich et al., 1998).

Data Collection

         Next follows information about participant selection, research setting, and investigation steps.

Participant and Context

This work focuses solely on the stories of one of the four research participants, referred to by the pseudonym Leandro to protect his privacy.

Leandro was selected as a research participant because he had reported in a semi-structured questionnaire that his proficiency level in reading, writing, speaking, and listening in English was below average when he enrolled in the Program. He had also indicated as a newcomer that he had less than two years of experience with English from attending a private English course that usually offers three hours of classes weekly. It is generally believed that private English courses are more effective for learning English in Brazil than school-based programs due to different views, policies, and programs for English in Brazil, as noted by Finardi (2016). Leandro joined the university in 2012 and was interviewed for the first time in the first semester of 2014, when he was 22 years old.

Tools and Research Steps

To meet the research goal, the participant had to complete at least half the program and report lacking the required English proficiency for day-to-day tasks ¹. Then, I checked Leandro’s academic progress and records on the institutional electronic platform with the permission of the university research department.

I have interviewed him three times in three different semesters. The first two interviews happened individually, and the third in a group with other research participants. I translated into English the excerpts that I will show here.

Findings and Discussion

Analyzing the participants’ narratives, I identified three categories in the learners’ self-system based on their life experiences. These categories include 1) the learner’s historical-sociocultural representation, 2) the identity of the L2 autonomous learner, and 3) the reconciler autonomous self. They provide different perspectives on the autonomous self from various angles.

Learner’s Historical-sociocultural Representation

The first category corresponds to a system of interconnections that reflects the sociocultural perspective in psychological representations. In other words, the social environment is viewed in an internalized way through complex associations that simultaneously point out the fragmentation and the unit in the self. This understanding reflects the context not merely as an external and static variable (King, 2016; Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008). It also reinforces that such interaction with the world comes from a human’s psychological need to integrate with the context (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2002; Noels et al., 2000).

Excerpt 1

Interview III. Held on June 13, 2015

Interviewer: To what instance, institution, would you say that you learned English? Where?

Leandro: I learned it at the faculty, I learned it at home, in my headphone, in my walks on the street, in the books that I bought, in many places. I think I learned English by myself, in me.

As Leandro exposes, language learning does not depend only on a place or an action but on different contexts, elements, and instruments at his disposal, which are represented in him. According to Vygotsky (1979), this is the outcome of an internalization process in every learner. However, this dynamic does not refer to mere accommodation (an input) activity. It corresponds to an intense process, an extremely personal struggle because it involves overcoming an unfavorable social condition and an inner need (Deci & Ryan, 1985). That is why the sociocultural context has a diverse picture not just as outside layers overlapping the learner but in permeability and nested in correspondence to the center of the self-system (Mercer, 2016). So, the individual aspect is not built in isolation, even when one acts on one’s own.

Excerpt 2

Interview I. Held on June 3, 2014

Interviewer: And why to be an English teacher and not a teacher of other language or subject?

Leandro: We as students of English, not only in the academic scope but also worldwide, English is a world language and so to know English is of significant importance nowadays, and also because I, I already had the books in English, I was given books in English by my teacher in the third year of high school, so he said, ah, you are so fond of reading you can read these books here. As I already had the books in my house I said, I need to do something for me to manage to read them. And I insisted. I read, I read the whole book doing it with a dictionary. It was a super intense work in about five months with a book and a dictionary, but I got it.

Leandro’s narrative shows the dynamic aspect of a system when a minor event in his self-system may produce unpredictable effects (Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008). It exposes Leandro’s understanding of learning English at a macro level correlated to a more immediate level for him. He exemplifies the interconnections of levels between the individual and the context in different timescales. Having been given a book in English by his high school teacher not only made him believe in himself through a significant other (Higgins, 1987) but also took up his need to be the source of his aspirations (McCombs & Marzano, 1990). Likewise, this inscription in his self-system was reproduced when he decided to study in the Teaching English and Portuguese Program, yet not having an adequate initial level of literacy in English. Using the framework of SDT (Deci & Ryan, 1985), the excerpt above highlights the dialectical relationship between Leandro, as a second language learner, and the social contexts he engages with through English (“in the academic scope” and “worldwide”). This relationship corresponds to his psychological needs for competence (“I read the whole book using a dictionary”), relatedness (“My teacher gave me books in English in the third year of high school”), and autonomy (“I need to do something to manage to read them”). Therefore, Leandro’s narrative illustrates the complex perception that it is possible to acknowledge that the learner is in the world, and the world is in the learner (Ushioda, 2015).

Leandro’s interconnection with the context also demonstrates an inner mobilization of relevance towards his taken-up need to read the books in English that his teacher gave him. The self-determination theory explains that competence, relatedness, and autonomy are associated. In other words, this part of Leandro’s life story involves his need to be capable of reading the book, correspond to his teacher’s expectations, and align with his self-determination (Deci & Ryan, 1985). On this wise, Leandro shows his autonomous potential is so marked in his self-concept that his overcoming stories correspond to a survival narrative. So, existence is an integrated sphere of various levels (biological, psychological, and social) (van Lier, 2004). Leandro’s past experience also worked in his self-system to surpass current barriers and make him reach his future self. Leandro’s overcoming process relates such an inscription in his self to his autonomous identity as an L2 learner.

The Identity of the L2 Autonomous Learner

Through this analysis category, the autonomous self is seen according to a time-scale approach (Huang & Benson, 2013) when the experiences reinforce the autonomous self and make it stronger. It acknowledges the notion of “exerting control of one’s own learning” (Benson, 2001, 2006, 2011a) as an identity potential, which assigns the learner a more well-marked perception of his autonomy (Huang & Benson, 2013), and how he socio-culturally evolved until his present moment as a language learner. Due to an asserted autonomy over time, autonomous identity then works as a motivation propeller.

Excerpt 3

Interview III. Held on June 13, 2015

Interviewer: What represents for you to study in the Teaching English and Portuguese Program?

Leandro: It represents in my life an overcoming. It apparently seemed to be impossible, but it was not, it was laborious, actually laborious, overcoming and hard work, I think that it was what it represents.

“Overcoming” refers to a learning stage where learners gain empowerment. Leandro seems to be talking about a new stage of acquiring knowledge based on previous experiences of hard work (Barcelos, 2006). Such learning evidences the development of a learner’s identity and autonomy. Changes in self-concept occur gradually over time, according to Henry (2015), who notes that “the changes that take place in the self-concept will be a function of the timescale” (p. 89).

Excerpt 4

Interview III. Held on June 13, 2015

Interviewer: Was there a discovery, I don’t know, ah, something, a discovery about yourself?

Leandro: In in my case, there were many changes, right? But nothing that I hadn’t acknowledged, right? Ah, so I think that it is more, in the sense of self-assertion, right? Tere is all of that, in the matter of strength, but I already knew that I had it, right? I had that stuff of being diligent, that I have always been. Many things took place, in many things I am different.

Interviewer: But if you hadn’t got into the Teaching English and Portuguese Program, could you have made this discovery?

Leandro: I don’t think so because I started feeling free. When, ah, I could see myself as someone, huh, I think that you only manage to feel and see yourself as someone when you start doing something that you like, when you are in an environment that you like, and you feel supported somehow. So, I knew that even if the rest goes wrong, I will have a base to be someone in the future and then say to the community, you see? I got it.

Autonomy then can be understood as the result of an identity process. Firstly, due to the comprehension that identity, autonomy, and experience are related (Huang, 2009). Secondly, assuming that agency is bounded to a short time scale, it originates autonomous behavior and reinforces the individual’s self as an autonomous identity attested through a long scale (Huang & Benson, 2013). Leandro’s narrative highlights the pervasive and permeable nature of identity and autonomy, which seem to exist as one element – the autonomous self. This self is a significant source in Leandro’s self-system, emerging in distinct moments of his life. To this extent, Leandro’s autonomous identity is a fractal that brings his self-concept wholeness in different moments of his learning process (Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008). Although framed in distinct parts of his stories, Leandro’s autonomous self still brings one perspective of his self (“to be someone”), which confirms to himself who he is in every timescale (“I already knew that I had it”).

Leandro’s actions and understandings refer to a self-concept that performs in different moments in his life, exerting control and supporting metacognitive, cognitive, and affective subsystems (McCombs & Marzano, 1990). Therefore, it supports a self of the action, evidenced by the outcome of experiences. This autonomous self is a reference of self-concepts and makes the self-system evaluate what is relevant (“I knew that even if the rest goes wrong, I will have a base to be someone in the future”), exerting force as a motivational attractor and guiding the self-system to a dynamical order towards Leandro’s purposes, towards his future self. Accordingly, the autonomous self also contributes to keeping dynamical stability in the self-system, which also corresponds to an inner conflict (“then say to the community, you see? I got it”).

Nevertheless, the autonomous self plays the role of reconciling experiences, informing what is in the individual’s self-concepts, and allowing him to keep images of future selves (Dörnyei, 2005, 2009; Falout, 2016; Markus & Nurius, 1986). The next category will exemplify this perspective.

The Reconciler Autonomous Self

The third category is related to the self in conjunction with its multifaceted perspective in time and space. Bringing back past experiences, represented by memories, the individuals’ sociocultural experiences (Falout, 2016; Markus & Nurius, 1986) make reliable future visions when goals, motivations, affections, and imagined personified identities are interconnected (Dörnyei, 2005, 2009; Falout, 2016; Higgins, 1987; Markus & Nurius, 1986). In this category, personified visions of selves are taken in the self-system through various times, in retrospection and prospection (Fallout, 2016). The autonomous self reconciles relevant past and future experiences in the learner’s present moment. (Csizér & Magid, 2014; Dörnyei, 2005; Dörnyei & Ushioda, [2001] 2011, 2009; Dörnyei et al., 2015; King, 2016; McCombs & Marzano, 1990; Markus & Nurius, 1986; Mercer, 2016). As Leandro strives to achieve his goals, his identity visions motivate his English learning and play roles as motivational forces, helping him overcome language barriers to fulfill his purposes.

Excerpt 5

Interview I. Held on June 3, 2014

Interviewer: I selected your file, OK? I wondered, that guy has a successful story. Does it have to do with any moment of your history, of your life?

Leandro: Yeah. With six years oldI first broke my femur, and I learned to read Portuguese by myself. I broke the femur three times. I underwent four surgeries, probably I wouldn’t walk anymore, so, I surrounded myself with books

Interviewer: It was with the language that you

Leandro: Yeah, that I was taken out of the hole, right? I was turning six to seven. In adolescence, I got huge. I was with a hundred and forty-two kilos, and then I started to lose weight. Today, I weigh eighty-six. Yeah, all of it just closing my mouth. I think that all of this is a matter of overcoming. So, if I overcame to have broken femur three times, to undergo four surgeries, almost to die with the complications of the last surgery, ah, not to know how to read, not to do anything, to be in bed, then to lose weight more than fifty kilos, I think that I can do anything I put in my mind but flying because I don’t have wings.

Leandro’s narrative exemplifies how he acts through his autonomous potential when he faces adversities. Barcelos (2006) explains that learning reflects what we set up in our experiences. Paiva (2005) says that despite the obstacles, autonomous learners go against the opposing forces, focusing on what is more meaningful for their learning. According to her, autonomy is a complex system and a means for the learner’s resistance and adaptation against hindrances.

Although Dörnyei (2005, 2009) exposes that the L2 learning experience is a different level that does not work as a future guide such as the ‘L2 ideal self’ and ‘L2 ought to self’ do, Leandro’s story tells us how much his past selves allow him to take up what is presently relevant in his self-system and to have future visions. Dörnyei (2014) says that people see themselves through their ‘mind’s eyes’ as self-personification in future-identity states, promoting self-regulation that guides them toward the future.

Thinking on this force of imagery (Chan, 2016), it is not to imagine future possibilities without any support from his self-concept; if so, it would be a daydream, an illusion, or a delirium and not a prospective experience (Falout, 2016) or a vision (Dornyei, 2009). Thus, the autonomous self acts as an evaluative hub that takes up experiences and allows the learner to accept challenges.

Excerpt 6

Interview III. Held on June 13, 2015

Leandro: So my greater focus, my solid base was to have a perspective of one day, right, something, to have something better one day, it’s like, it’s to target on future (…) look over there, look at the horizon (…) look at the future, bring focus on future, at least this has always been my base, right? If it’s difficult now, it will keep being difficult tomorrow, right? Something actually terrible can be waiting for you over there on the corner, right? But I will turn the corner even if I have to pass over it and step on what is over there on the corner waiting for me because there is a need of overcoming, right? It’s what we have been talking from the beginning. You got into the university, you are willing for that, you put in your mind that you will achieve it, so you will, that’s all.

Leandro’s autonomy is a system of nested representations of his motivational identities. In other words, Leandro’s ‘ought-to self’ interacts with his ‘ideal self’’(Higgins, 1986; Markus & Nurius, 1986) to achieve his future aspirations (Markus & Nurius, 1986). This journey also involves dealing with negative emotions. As Leandro narrates, he personifies these emotions as “what’s waiting for you on the corner,” either as the selves he fears becoming or as potential others (Higgins, 1987). Nevertheless, he feels compelled to confront them, focusing on his ideal self or the person he wants to become (Markus & Nurius, 1986). This autonomy dimension is part of a system representing several instances in which individuals are in tune with their needs.

In a nutshell, Leandro’s stories showcase how an individual’s autonomous self can shape their sense of self and project them into the future.

Final Considerations

Leandro’s ability to overcome his initial limitations in English was due to a complex system of his historical-sociocultural background, identities, and motivations, with his autonomous self playing a crucial role. Through his narratives, autonomy is understood as a self-concept that informs the self-system of the learner’s potential to act and achieve their goals, as in correspondence with the world they interact with.

On this account, the L2 learners’ autonomous self acts as a force that projects them to the future, asserting in the self-evaluative center what was once experienced in the past. If there is a self-assertion, it is because learners have already inscribed in their self-concept their autonomous identity. This allows them to conceive of their purposes and move for them.

Language learners not only acquire knowledge about the language they are learning but also develop a deeper understanding of themselves through their learning experiences. This process involves building and strengthening their identities. Therefore, teaching and learning a language should consider what is relevant to the learner.

If language learning is influenced by learners’ motivational identities, shaped by past and future experiences, teaching practices should consider learners’ self-system. Lessons, classes, books, self-access centers, and all other learning resources should provide ample room for learners to explore their ongoing processes dynamically interconnected with their macro and micro contexts, present, past, and future selves. This approach can help language education harness the powerful force of learning when learners feel empowered to pursue their aspirations and work toward their future selves.

Endnotes

1. Answering an open-ended question, Leandro stated in the questionnaire that, before joining the university, he had studied English for only six months in an NGO, which provided classes on various subjects to economically disadvantaged communities in Baixada Fluminense, a suburb of Rio de Janeiro.

Notes on the Contributor

Edson Estarneck is an English teacher at a Rio de Janeiro city hall school. Besides his dedication to basic education, he has also lectured undergraduate students. Interested in observing students’ processes as additional language learners, he became a researcher in sociocultural autonomy who pursued such a goal in applied linguistics, taking part in the Interdisciplinary Graduate Program in Applied Linguistics at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Acknowledgements

This article is one of the products of my doctoral scholarship held in Australia as a Visiting Scholar in the Department of Linguistics – Faculty of Human Science (Macquarie University), where I was supervised by Philip Benson, whom I thank for the first suggestions to this text. I also render thanks to Walkyria Magno for reading it and making some observations that helped me to accomplish this work.

Funding: This work was supported by the Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education – CAPES, from June 1st until September 30th, 2017) [Grant number: PDSE – 88881.135108/2016-01].

References

Barcelos, A. M. F. (2006). Narrativas, crenças e experiências de aprender inglês [Narratives, beliefs and experiences of learning English]. Linguagem & Ensino, 9 (2), 145–175.

Barkhuizen, G., Benson, P., & Chik, A. (2014). Narrative inquiry:Language teaching and learning research. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203124994

Bastos, L. C. (2005). Contanto estórias em contextos espontâneos e institucionais: Uma introdução ao estudo da narrativa [Telling stories in spontaneous and institutional contexts: An introduction to the study of narrative]. Calidoscópio (Ed. Ensinos), 3(2), 74–87.

Bastos, L. C., & Santos, W. S. (2013). A entrevista na pesquisa qualitativa: Perspectivas em análise da narrativa e da interação [The interview in qualitative research: Perspectives on narrative and interaction analysis]. Quartet/FAPERJ.

Bell, J. S. (2002). Narrative inquiry: More than just telling stories. TESOL Quarterly,36(2), 207–213. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588331

Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Longman.

Benson, P (2006). Autonomy in language teaching and learning: State of the art article. Language Teaching, 40(1), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003958

Benson, P. (2011a). Teaching and researching autonomy. 2nd edition. Pearson.

Benson, P. (2011b, November). Autonomy in language teaching and learning: How to do it “here.” Paper presented at the JALT2011: 37th Annual International Conference on Language Teaching and Learning & Educational Materials Exhibition, National Olympics Memorial Center, Tokyo, Japan.

Chan, L. (2016). The dynamic interplay of the ideal self, mental imagery and context: A language learner’s journey of success. In J. King (Ed.), The dynamic interplay between context and the language learner (pp. 29–46). Palgrave MacMillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137457134_3

Deci, E. L., & Ryan. R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7

Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G, & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26, 325–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653137

Dewey, J. Experience and education (First Touchstone edition) (1997). Touchstone.

Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum.

Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9–42). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691293-003

Dörnyei, Z. (2014). Future self-guides and vision. In K. Csizér & M. Magid (Eds.), The impact of self-concept on language learning (pp. 7–18). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783092383-003

Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (Eds.) (2009). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691293

Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. [2001] (2011). Teaching and researching motivation. (2nd ed.). Pearson.

Falout, J. (2016) Past selves: Emerging motivational guides across temporal contexts. In J. King (Ed.), The dynamic interplay between context and the language learner (pp. 47–65). Palgrave MacMillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137457134_4

Finardi, K. R. (2016). English in Brazil: Views, policies and programs. Eduel.

Henry, A. (2015). The dynamics of possible selves. In Z. Dörnyei, P. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 83–94). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783092574-011

Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319

Huang, J. P. (2009). Autonomy, agency and identity in foreign language learning and teaching [PhD dissertation, University of Hong Kong].

Huang, J. P., & Benson, P. (2013). Autonomy, agency and identity in foreign and second language education. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 36(1), 7–28. https://doi.org/10.1515/cjal-2013-0002

Jefferson, G. (1983). Issues in the transcription of naturally occurring talk: Caricature versus capturing pronunciational particulars. Tilburg Papers in Language and Literature, 34, 1–12.

Kierkegaard, S. [1849] (1954). Fear and trembling and the sickness unto death. Doubleday.

King, J. (Ed.). The dynamic interplay between context and the language learner. Palgrave MacMillan, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137457134

Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/Complexity science and second language acquisition.  Applied Linguistics,18(2), 141–165. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/18.2.141

Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.

Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., & Zilber, T. (1998). Narrative research: Reading, analysis, and interpretation. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412985253

Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954–969. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.954

McCombs, B. L., & Marzano, R. J. (1990). Putting the self in self-regulated learning: The self as agent in integrating will and skill. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_5

Mercer, S. (2014a) The self from a complexity perspective. In S. Mercer & M. Williams (Eds.), Multiple perspective on the self in SLA (pp. 160-176). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783091362-012

Mercer, S. (2014b). Re-imagining the self as a network of relationships. In K. Csizér & M. Magid (Eds.), The impact of self-concept on language learning (pp. 51-69). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783092383-005

Mercer, S. (2015a). Social network analysis and complex dynamics systems. In Z. Dörnyei; P. MacIntyre & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 73–82). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783092574-010

Mercer, S. (2015b). Dynamics of Self: A multilevel nested systems approach. In Z. Dörnyei, P. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 139–163). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783092574-014

Mercer, S. (2016). The contexts within me: L2 self as a complex dynamic system. In J. King  (Ed.), The dynamic interplay between context and the language learner (pp. 11–28). UK: Palgrave MacMillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137457134_2

Mishler, E. (2006). Narrative and identity: The double arrow of time. In A. De Fina, D. Schifrrin, & M. Bamberg (Eds.), Discourse and identity (pp. 30–47). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511584459.003

Murray, G., Gao, X., & Lamb, T. (2011). Identity, motivation and autonomy in language learning. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847693747

Noels, K. A. (2009). The internalization of language learning into the self and social identity. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 295–313). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691293-016

Noels, K. A., Pelletier, L. G., & Vallerand, R. J. (2000). Why are you learning a second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language Learning, 50(1), 57–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00111

Paiva, V. L. M. O. (2005). Autonomia e complexidade: Uma análise de narrativas de aprendizagem [Autonomy and complexity: An analysis of learning narratives]. In M. M. Freire; M. H. V. Abrahão, & A. M. F. Barcelos (Orgs.), Lingüística Aplicada e Contemporaneidade (pp. 135–153).  Pontes e ALAB.

Paiva, V. L. M. O. (2006) Autonomia e complexidade [Autonomy and complexity]. Linguagem e Ensino, 9(1), 77–127.

Paiva, V. L. M. O. (2011). Identity, motivation, and autonomy from the perspective of complex dynamical systems. In G. Murray; X. Gao & T. Lamb (Eds.), Identity, motivation and autonomy in language learning (pp. 57–72). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847693747-006

Reissman, C. K. (1993). Narrative analyses. SAGE Publication.

Resende, L. A. S. (2009). Identidade e aprendizagem de inglês sob a ótica do caos e dos sistemas complexos [Identity and learning English from the perspective of chaos and complex systems]. [Ph.D. Thesis, The Federal University of Minas Gerais].

Ryan, R. M. (1995). Psychological needs and the facilitation on integrative progress. Journal of Personality,63, 397–427. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1995.tb00501.x

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 66–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical prospective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination theory (pp. 3–33). University of Rochester Press.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Autonomy is no illusion: Self-determination theory and the empirical study of authenticity, awareness, and will. In J. Greenberg, S. L. Koole, & T. Pyszczynski (Eds.), Handbook of experimental existential psychology(pp. 449–479). Guilford Press.

Swain. M., Kinnear, P., & Steinman, L. (2015). Sociocultural theories in second language education: An introduction through narratives (2^nd ed). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783093182

Ushioda, E. (2011). Motivating learners to speak as themselves. In G. Murray, X. Gao, & T. Lamb (Eds.), Identity, motivation and autonomy in language learning (pp. 11–24). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847693747-003

Ushioda, E. (2014). Motivational perspectives on the self in SLA: A developmental view. In S. Mercer & M. Williams (Eds.), Multiple perspective on the self in SLA (pp. 127–141). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783091362-010

Ushioda, E. (2015). Context and complex dynamic systems theory. In Z. Dörnyei, P. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 47–54). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783092574-008

van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocultural perspective. Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-7912-5

Vansteenkiste, M., & Ryan, R. M. (2013). On psychological growth and vulnerability: Basic psychological need satisfaction and need frustration as a unifying principle. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 23(3), 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032359

Vygotsky, L. S. [1978] (1991). A formação social da mente [Mind in Society]. (4ª ed). Martins Fontes.