terms to identify this dyad: source∕target, fιrst∕second, start∕end. They seem to convey part
of the idea but they also carry connotations that I certainly want to avoid. For that reason, I
have decided to use the terms initiator and developer to identify each of these cultures.
'Initiator', it seems to me, is a rather neutral term that clearly indicates the role of the
European school in the approach to autonomy in SLA. In the same way, 'developer' conveys
the idea of adapting and working with the concept, and avoids the sense of passiveness of
words like 'recipient' or 'target'. In this way I am also avoiding the use of an antonymous
dyad, for I truly believe that the two cultures involved are not in opposition at all.
Some authors have stated their concern about the relationship between the initiator
and the developer culture in terms of autonomy as an approach to language learning. For
example, Jones, who was responsible for setting up and running a SAC in Cambodia, talks
very openly about the non-authenticity of autonomy in such a context:
Concepts of autonomy and individual responsibility and freedom as they
figure in social as well as educational context, come laden with Western
values. (Jones, 1995,229)
And states that adopting autonomy as "an undiluted educational objective" in a society with
different values is "to be at guilty at least of cultural insensitivity" (ibid.). In the same line,
Sheerin states that independence "may not be valued as highly in all cultures as it is in the
West" (1997,56), and proposes then, to consider it as a means to an end and not an end in
itself. David Boud, who has become an acknowledged writer on autonomous educational
issues, seems to share the same concern:
In a static, unchanging society there maybe less need for an emphasis on
autonomous approaches than there is in one which learners need to adapt
to frequent change and need to Ieam new forms Ofknowledge and how
to use that knowledge (Bond; 1988,25)
I do not wish to discuss this argument in opposition to the autonomy Benson and
Pennycook envisage for language education (see previous section). However, it is obvious
that Boud is referring to the autonomy I prefer to call self-direction, as it was defined in the
last section.
Considering this issue from a different perspective. I think that the cultural difference
is an indisputable concept, nevertheless it is not an argument against autonomy and self-