direction, and there are several reasons that underlie this position. Some refer to the situation
of the Western culture and some look into the non-westem cultures' features.
On the one hand, one could argue that, if autonomy is a product bom and conceived
particularly in and for the Western culture, it should be more successful and welcomed in
West than anywhere else. But this is not the case. According to Little,
learner autonomy is not notably easy to implement in Western systems
of schooling and, despite the aspirations of many national curricula, is
certainly not a widespread phenomenon in Western classrooms (1996b, 1)
Macaro, who has recently carried out very interesting research on foreign language
education in England, supports this view and, based on his findings, concludes that, in spite
of the National Curriculum and its promotion of autonomy, "autonomy is...not at a very
advanced stage"(1997,168-9).
Referring to a non-European, but still Western culture, Riley refers to the case of the
USA:
interestingly enough the self-directed approach to language learning has
never really caught on in the USA, despite the fact that much of the
inspiration and justification in terms of educational philosophy,
psychology and second language learning has in fact come from the States.
(1996b,18)
On the other hand, the Western vs non-westem argument implies that because
autonomy is a construct of the Western culture, then it is very difficult to apply it in other
cultures. Let me consider what other people have to say about the "Western construct" of
autonomy. Pierson, writing from a Chinese context, has delved into traditional sources in
order to discuss the suitability of self-directed language learning in that culture, It
conclusion is that
There is an ancient Chinese pedagogical tradition congruent and consistent with
the best practice of autonomous learning (1996,55)
Riley, who has shown a particular interest on the cultural aspect of autonomy, argues
against the cultural bias of the autonomy approach. Two of his arguments are relevant for
this discussion. Considering autonomy from a diachronic perspective, he argues that it has
been a constant in the history of civilisation.
the ability to think, act and study independently has been highly regarded by most,
perhaps all of the world's societies, even if such independence has usually been the
privilege of an elite, because of the power it generates and bestows (1996b,19).