GUIDE: They laugh at________________________________________.
They know language learning takes and it can
get.
They Ieam to work with their.
(121,122)
The reader will have noticed that filling the gaps is just a matter of copying exactly from the
text, which is reproduced almost intact. I doubt that this type of activity promotes critical
reading in learners.
Second, the way Wenden draws on the research about the good language learner is, I
think, inappropriate, at least for certain type of students. Let me explain myself. After
providing the learner with the characteristics of the GLL (see Appendix 2) and the
comprehension exercise I referred to in the last paragraph, she gives the following
instructions:
Procedures
(a) Students compare themselves with the good language learner,
i.e. are they very different? To what extent are they autonomous? (122)
If I, as learner, were using this book and compared myself (and my situation) as a second
language learner with the statements about the GLL, my assumptions would be that in order
to be a successful language learner I need to travel abroad, have money to hire tutors, find
the time to Ieam three or four languages, spend the whole day learning and practising the
target language, etc, etc. And I would certainly be discouraged! In the context I teach, the
vast majority of my students do not travel abroad, go to the university to Ieam a language
because it is the cheapest place, and work and study at the same time. For them, then, being
a good language learner is not a matter of cognitive or affective strategies but a matter of
socio-economic opportunities.
The limitations of the GLL study have been often highlighted (MacIntyre and Noel;
1994, Little; 1995, 1997, Riley; 1990, Widdowson; 1983, 102, van Lier; 1988,31). It is
necessary that researchers in the area of self-direction take these limitations into account
since it has been a foundation for self-directed learning research. As Piper states, "the
74