System, Vol. 23, No, 2, pp. 235-243, 1995
~
Elsevier Science Ltd
Printed in Great Britain
0346-251X/95 $9.50 + 0.00
Pergamon
0346-251X(95)00011-9
BREAKING WITH CHINESE CULTURAL TRADITIONS:
LEARNER AUTONOMY IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING
JUDYHO*andDAVIDCROOKALLt
*City University of Hong Kong, "?Universit~de Technologie de Compikgne
and IUFM de Picardie
Basic thinking regarding certain aspects of learner autonomy is presented as well as certain
cultural traits (such as the Chinese concern with face) which may be an obstacle to the
promotion of autonomy, especially in the more traditional organization of some
classrooms. The use of large-scale simulation can, however, transform the ordinary
classroom into a learning environment that powerfully promotes learner autonomy. A
concrete example of how this actually happened is discussed in detail, as are the cultural
traits that both hinder and encourage autonomy in such a setting. The conclusion is that
it is through concrete actions of taking responsibility that autonomy is learned.
THE PATH TO AUTONOMY
The pursuit of learning after the completion of a formal course is now generally recognized as a
legitimate need and goal in the field of education. "[B]ecause of the complexity and rapidity of
change in our highly technological societies", it is important to help our learners "to develop the
attitude that learning is a life-long process and to acquire the skills of self-directed learning"
(Knowles, 1976: p. 23, cited in Wenden, 1987: p. 9). However, due to the highly complex nature
of language and language learning (Dickinson and Carver, 1980), encouraging autonomy in
language learners often proves to be a doubly difficult objective. In aiming for such an objective,
it is useful to ask the following questions. What is learner autonomy? What kinds of obstacles
might be encountered by a teacher in promoting autonomy in a traditional classroom setting? How
might these obstacles be overcome? Specifically, how might the classroom be transformed into
a learning environment that facilitates the promotion of autonomy?
In this paper we will, first, provide a glimpse of some of the basic thinking regarding certain aspects
of autonomy. Next, we will consider how certain aspects of a learner' s cultural background may
impede the promotion of autonomy. Finally, we will give an account of how a simulation can
transform the traditional classroom into a learning environment that is able to deal with the
constraints to the promotion of autonomy presented by culture.
ASPECTS OF LEARNER AUTONOMY
Learner autonomy is generally recognized as an important "pedagogical goal" (Wenden, 1987),
a philosophy of learning" (Henner-Stanchina and Riley, 1978: p. 75), "an unavoidable
235
236
JUDY HO and DAVID CROOKALL
methodological option" (Narcy, 1994) and as representing "the upper limit of self-directed
learning measured on a notional scale from fully directed to fully autonomous learning" (Dickinson,
1978). As the terms goal, philosophy, method and notion would suggest, autonomy is not easily
defined in a concrete and tangible manner. Nevertheless certain kinds of knowledge, skills and
attitudes can be said to characterize and/or lead towards autonomous learning.
First among these is self-knowledge--knowing what one needs to learn and why. This knowledge
provides the basis for the exercise of the following skills, considered key to self-directed or
autonomous learning (see Dickinson, 1987; Holec, 1981, 1989):
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Choosing instructional materials;
Setting learning objectives and prioritizing them;
Determining when and how long to work on each objective;
Assessing progress and achievements;
Evaluating the learning programme.
Learners also need skills to manage their time and to cope with stress and other negative affective
factors that may interfere with learning. They also require some basic knowledge about the
learning process and the nature of language (see Crookall, 1983; Ellis and Sinclair, 1989;
Wenden, 1991). Finally, learners should learn to be self-motivated and self-disciplined.
The extent to which a learner will acquire the above skills and knowledge depends on a host of
factors. One of these is the learner's and the teacher's views of and actions in regard to their
relationship and roles. Fernandes et al. (1990: p. 101) express it clearly:
In their everyday lives adults are required t o . . . make choices and decisions regarding their lives,
accept responsibility and learn to do things for themselves. However, language learners in the
classroom often tend to revert to the traditional role of pupil, who expects to be told what to do . . . .
As a result, some learners have become teacher-dependent and often feel that it is the teacher alone
who is responsible for any learning and progress that takes place.
Therefore, it is generally agreed that for learners to become autonomous, they must redefine their
views about teacher-learner roles. However, the burden of the responsibility for such a redefinition
should not be assigned solely to learners. The teacher also has a role to play in helping learners
realize that they, too, must take on responsibility for their learning.
One way in which this can be done is for the teacher to create an environment in which
responsibility is shared. While selected and structured by the teacher, such an environment can
allow learners to exercise increasing responsibility through decision making that is either done
independently of others or in a situation where they choose to be part of a group and, therefore,
to be dependent upon it for their learning. As Dickinson (1978: p. 12) points out "free choice may
in fact be a choice to relinquish (the learner's) autonomy over a particular stretch for a particular
purpose".
AUTONOMY AND CULTURE
While personal autonomy appears to be a universally desirable and beneficial objective, it is
important to remember that learner autonomy is exercised within the context of specific cultures.
BREAKING WITH CHINESE TRADITIONS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING
237
Therefore, in choosing the skills and kinds of knowledge to develop and in selecting the procedures
or methods that are to be used to help learners develop skills for autonomy, the culturallyconstructed nature of the classroom setting needs to be taken into account. We must also consider
how certain cultural traits might either facilitate or inhibit the acquisition of these skills and
knowledge and, thus, restrain or assist the development of autonomy.
In societies influenced by Chinese culture, one such trait is social relations in the classroom. Both
teachers' and leamers' views of classroom roles are deeply rooted in the Chinese tradition of seeing
oneself as a part of a "relational hierarchy" (Chang and Holt, 1994: p. 105). Indeed, the importance
of "social relations" and "hierarchy" in Chinese culture has been observed by a number of
scholars (see, e.g. Hsu, 1985; Chu, 1985; Hwang 1987). This hierarchy of human relations sets
the general context within which we must understand Chinese students' respect for authority and
their view of the teacher as the authority figure. Scollon and Scollon (1994a: p. 21) make
insightful observation about fundamental differences in the way Asians and westerners perceive
authority.
The Asian focuses on the care, nurture and benevolence (or their absence) of the person in authority
while the westerner tends to focus on the restriction, limitation and dependence of the person over
which the authority is exercised.
The writers go on to suggest that according to the Asian notion of authority, the teacher is
expected to exercise authority, that is, to look after or nurture her students and take charge.
Closely related to Chinese respect for authority is the Chinese pre-occupation with face. The multiple
meanings and importance of face to the Chinese have been discussed in many cross-cultural studies
(see, e.g. Ho, 1976; Hwang, 1987; Scollon and Scollon, 1994b; Chang and Holt, 1994). In
particular, Chang and Holt (1994: p. 115) have made the point that in communicating with
another person, one must "protect the other's self-image and feelings, he or she is not confronted
directly." This point explains, at least in part, why many Chinese students will not challenge their
teacher's position on a given point (or even indeed authority in general). Chinese students have
a great respect for and wish to maintain their teacher' s mien-tzu (face). With similar concern for
mien-tzu, the teacher is also reluctant to admit any inadequacies on his/her part. It is very difficult
for a Chinese teacher to say "I am sorry. I don't know. Let's work out a solution together."
Being autonomous often requires that students work independently of the teacher and this may
entail shared decision making, as well as presenting opinions that differ from those of the teacher.
It is, thus, easy to see why Chinese students would not find autonomy very comfortable,
emotionally or indeed intellectually. One might even draw the conclusion that it is impossible for
Chinese students to learn to exercise responsibility for their learning in the classroom. This does
not necessarily have to be the case, however, as we will show.
SIMULATION: CHANGING THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
In seeking to create learning environments that will facilitate and enhance the development of learner
autonomy teachers need to take into account the obstacles that may impede its development. This
includes the barriers that are put up by cultural values and the norms for appropriate classroom
238
JUDY HO and DAVID CROOKALL
behaviour that reflect these values. One methodology that can facilitate the creation of such an
environment is simulation/gaming (well known to System readers). In fact, simulations and
games are used routinely by countless language teachers the world over. However, they are underused as a direct means of providing learner training (for examples of such use, see Ellis and Sinclair,
1989; Fernandes et al., 1990).
Here we describe how a large-scale simulation was used to provide learner training in a classroom
setting without coming into conflict with cultural values that appear to be diametrically opposed
to autonomy. Specifically, one of the main objectives of this learning experience was to provide
learners with an opportunity to exercise responsibility for their learning.
Participants and tasks
Twenty-one students enrolled in the first year of the BA in English for Professional Communication
at the City University of Hong Kong participated in a large-scale, world-wide, computer-mediated
simulation, called Project IDEALS (supported by a major grant from FIPSE, USA). They were
one of 27 student teams located in a variety of countries around the world that participated in the
simulation. Communication (both asynchronous and real-time) among teams was made possible
via the Internet and specialized interactive software. (For more information on the project, see
Crookall and Landis, 1992.) Each team of students was assigned the role of a particular nation-the class of students we focus on here was assigned the role of a poor landlocked country called
Mountainia, which was very keen on gaining access to the sea. The participants' overall goal was
to negotiate with the other country-teams the text of an international treaty on how the world's
ocean resources should be managed. To do this, the team had to carry out a series of tasks, such
as preparing a two-page policy statement, a 10-page position paper and various drafts of the treaty.
This particular simulation was run in February 1993 and lasted for seven weeks, with several weeks
preparation and follow-up work.
Simulations and autonomy
We describe below how participation in the simulation provided learners with an opportunity to
take responsibility for their learning (i.e. make decisions about their learning, plan, evaluate, monitor
and assess). We show how such a methodology can be used to create a learning environment that
contributes to the development of autonomy and why it can be considered an important method
for learner training.
(1) Deciding to engage in the simulation. Making choices about what one wants to learn or even
whether one wants to learn at all is one of the first decisions required of autonomous learners (see,
e.g. Logan, 1973; Dickinson, 1978, 1987; Allwright, 1988). Therefore, a learning environment
or methodology which intends to help students develop the skills and attitudes that sustain
autonomous learning must provide students with an opportunity to make such decisions. In the
present case, this meant that the students themselves should be committed to or choose to get
involved in the simulation.
To ensure this commitment, the teacher gave students information about the project, the benefits
and potential problems. Terms of the learning contract such as the use of English in all activities,
both inside and outside classrooms, were also presented. The students were then asked to decide
whether or not they would participate in the simulation. Thus, right from the start, students
BREAKING WITH CHINESE TRADITIONS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING
239
made an important decision about their own learning and accepted the responsibilities that such
a decision would entail. Moreover, to make this decision, it was necessary for them to become
aware of their learning needs, interests and abilities--the kind of self-knowledge mentioned earlier.
(2) Taking responsibility for the simulation tasks. As ministers of Mountainia, participants (i.e.
the students) were expected to work out an international treaty on how the world's ocean
resources should be managed. To do so, they were required to take responsibility for the following
tasks:
(a) Organizing their country. Students had to organize themselves in fundamental ways. They
had to take ownership of their country by deciding on their form of government--a democracy,
with ministries and a Prime Minister. They then decided on ministry membership, elected a Prime
Minister and ministers and allocated other individual specialist responsibilities. All this was
accomplished after lengthy debates on what ministries would be the most important and relevant
for the type of country they represented. These actions provided further opportunities to take on
responsibility and, therefore, to promote autonomy.
(b) Policy making and goal setting. Once learners had set up their own sovereign (i.e.
autonomous!) country, they had to establish policy--they had to make their country work.
Ministers and specialists worked in collaboration with the elected Prime Minister in setting
goals for the country team and in drawing up the terms of the policy statement and position paper.
This constituted a steep learning curve in terms of taking responsibility and exercising autonomy,
but it was to pay off as the simulation progressed and the team quickly began to face real-world
tasks and to communicate with other countries. Participants' responsibilities as ministers inevitably
involved responsibilities as learners.
(c) Weekly meetings to discuss the affairs of state. As ministers, students held formal meetings
every week to discuss the business of the state. In these meetings, information was presented, matters
discussed, priorities set and decisions made. Learners had to decide what to include in their
discussions, how and when to conduct their meetings and what course of action to take. Participants
spent much time outside class in preparing such meetings. All of this was achieved in a real-life
situation, which was preset by the simulation. In other words, the simulation enabled all these
decision-making and responsibility-taking processes to take place in a natural manner.
(3) Taking responsibility for the learning and use of skills necessary to the simulation task. In
the context of fulfilling their responsibilities as ministers of state, simulation participants (i.e. the
students) were also provided with an opportunity to self-direct their learning of the following
skills:
(a) Conflict resolution skills. Working in groups not only means completing a series of given
tasks in time; it also requires that group members work through conflict situations and accommodate
different opinions. In the case of Mountainia, students learned how to deal with differences of
opinion and personal clashes. In other words, besides providing learners with an opportunity to
make decisions to organize and manage their country, the simulation required that learners learn,
autonomously, the skills for resolving conflicts amongst themselves. When asked how they
solved problems involving opinion differences or emotional conflicts among group members, most
learners said they would negotiate and come to a compromise (76%), recognize the existence of
conflicts and talk about them honestly with their group members (76%) and state their views and
vote (43%). In addition, the majority of respondents felt that, by participating in the project, they
240
JUDY HO and DAVID CROOKALL
had also learned how to understand their classmates (62%) and deal with conflicts in a group (57%).
When reflecting on the development of their inter-personal relationships, the majority of
participants (76%) thought that the project had brought them closer to their classmates. Again,
as in the case of the skills required to organize and manage their country, the conflict-resolution
skills were acquired through the exercise of responsibility and on an autonomous basis.
(b) Language skills for professional communication. The range of language tasks was wide and
included all four skills. Students read writings of different genres: the background readings
included academic articles, legal documents and journalistic reports. Learners also dealt with nearly
1750 simulation communications (e.g. editorials, arguments and proposals) of varied lengths that
arrived electronically from many other teams and from the Project Director. Several thousand other
messages were exchanged during live, real-time teleconferences. From these various sources of
written input, learners developed skimming and scanning skills essential to sorting out relevant
information for their group; they learned to summarize significant points and prepare for meetings.
Soon after decisions were reached in their meetings, Mountainians wrote the necessary and
appropriate diplomatic messages to send out to other countries.
(c) Time management and contingency planning. The ability to manage one's time and to
work out contingency plans are skills that are strong indicators of autonomy. The simulation provided
opportunities to exercise these skills as well. The Project Director set very tight schedules, with
specific documents due by certain dates. Students could not wait for the teacher to tell them what
to do since tutorials were held only twice a week. Students learned to be responsible not only for
themselves, but also for their own group (their own country), and ultimately for other teams. In
a post-activity questionnaire when learners were asked whether participation in the simulation had
any influence on their management styles and learning approaches, the majority pointed out that
they had learned how to deal with matters that cropped up suddenly (62%) and how to work under
pressures and meet deadlines (57%).
In sum, here we see how a simulation can provide an authentic context for language learning and
for promoting learner autonomy. Moreover, in the present case, language tasks were integrated
into and became continuous with students' learning how to manage their learning. Participants
thus became responsible for both their own country and their own learning.
Simulation, culture and autonomy
How does a simulation contribute to the development of autonomy in students from a cultural
background that is almost diametrically opposed to autonomy? Here we will consider two
characteristics of the simulation that made it possible for learners to overcome certain cultural
constraints to the exercise of autonomy.
First, simulations are unpredictable. There was no way in which the Project Director, let alone
the local facilitators, could predict what course the negotiations would take or what their outcome
might be. Moreover, it was also observed that when faced with an influx of rapid messages from
the telecommunications network, students had to exercise their own discretion and learn to
negotiate with other participants as fully responsible state officials. Thus, the precarious nature
of the simulation erodes the sense of security to which Chinese students traditionally cling, by
relying on the all-nurturing, all-benevolent, all-knowing teacher.
Second, simulations require problem sharing among learners and between learners and teachers.
An example was the technical break-downs which occurred in the course of the simulation. Nothing
BREAKING WITH CHINESE TRADITIONS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING
241
that either the students or their teacher could do would remedy the situation--the teacher allowed
herself to be seen as helpless as the students themselves. In a sense, the technical failures tore apart
the mien-tzu (face) of the teacher. It allowed the teacher to admit that she did not know how to
solve the problem, and by declaring herself to be in the same situation as the participants,
initiated a change in the teacher-student relationship. Moreoever, because this occurred within
the relatively less threatening context of the simulation, it was easier (than in more threatening,
traditional classrooms) for both the teacher and learners to redefine the role of the teacher. By
explicitly taking on the role of "counsellor, lecturer and adviser" (Rogers, 1969: p. 165, cited in
Dickinson, 1978: p. 22) and "helper" (Henner-Stanchina and Riley, 1978: p. 75) in the context
of the simulation, the teacher was able, relatively easily, to initiate a new type of relationship with
her learners. This was then carried over into non-simulation situations. In a word, simulation helps
to "declassroom" the classroom (Sharrock and Watson, 1985; Watson and Sharrock, 1990).
Moving a step further, we should note that, whereas some aspects of Chinese culture appear to
be impediments to autonomy, it also appears to be the case that other aspects of Chinese culture
may actually contribute to the development of autonomy, given the right situation--in this case,
the simulation. In other words, it seems that a simulation provides a context that both counters the negative
and enhances the positive aspects of Chinese culture. Thus, although certain cultural traits may make
autonomy difficult to achieve, other cultural Waits actually facilitate its attainment under certain
circumstances. We now look at two autonomy-enhancing traits in the context of the simulation.
(1) Achievement orientation. Although Chinese children have been frustrated in their "active
or exploratory demands" from infancy (Ho, 1986: p. 4), they are, nevertheless, under pressure to
achieve educationally (Ho, 1986; Wu, 1994). Both these needs can be satisfied more easily and
happily if students are given learning tasks which do not require a fixed examination to assess
their comparative success or failure, thus thwarting their exploratory inclinations. In addition, such
tasks should provide ample opportunities for them to set concrete goals to assess to what extent
they have been achieved by their own standards. A simulated negotiation, such as in project
IDEALS, is an example of such a type of task.
By taking part in a project like IDEALS, students can, on the one hand, be active and exploratory
and yet on the other, satisfy their culturally-imposed need to be achievers. In the present case, the
members of Mountainia did achieve two of the most important objectives that they had set for
themselves in their initial position paper--gain access to the sea and fight againist pollution with
other countries. Thus, the cultural emphasis on achievement contributed to the carrying out of actions
and the accomplishments of tasks, which together moved the learners towards autonomy. From
another point of view it may be said that such achievement-motivated actions and tasks actually
constituted acts of autonomy. This cultural trait probably would have played a far less prominent
role in promoting autonomy in an ordinary (non-simulation) classroom.
(2) Inside-outside. Another aspect of Chinese culture which facilitates the promotion of
autonomy through simulations is the "inside and outside relationships" (Scollon and Scollon, 1994b:
pp. 16--18). According to Tajfel (1984: p. 699) in such a situation:
[w]hen social groups differ in status and power, strategies aiming to maintain a satisfactorysocial identity
and to achieve positive distinctiveness from other relevant groups on certain relevant dimensions of
comparison do undoubtedly continue to play an important role in collective behaviour.
242
JUDY HO and DAVID CROOKALL
In other words, the fact that students have to work as members of a team puts them in an inside
relationship (an ingroup) in which they can bond and express their opinions freely. On the other
hand, other teams with whom they have to negotiate are put into an outside relationship (the
outgroup). Such a sense of group identity has an intrinsic motivational power. It engages learners
in their learning tasks and motivates them to utilize all their resources in defending the interests
of the ingroup. That is, the power of ingroup cohesion on members' motivation to enhance their
self-image cannot be underestimated. Such motivation impels participants to take responsibility
for their sovereign country, to make autonomous decisions and act upon them with a force and
conviction that would not be conceivable in an ordinary classroom. This deep involvement, a key
to autonomous learning, is poignantly expressed by a student in her reflections on taking part in
Project IDEALS.
It was very exciting to be people of one of 27 countries in the world. We enjoyed to be Mountainians.
We did our best to keep "national information" in extremely secret. We would feel worry and angry
when our favour was harassed by other countries. We would feel happy if we were successful to grasp
our interest. Although we would finish the "Project Ideals" in approaching days, we still could not
forget we were once the people of peaceful and nature-loving country, Mountainia.
CONCLUSION
Through Project IDEALS, our students took part in an important and memorable experience. They
were keenly aware of dealing with people from other cultures; they became critical thinkers; they
learned to argue intelligently and to write effectively; they worked collaboratively with others and
they made informed decisions. Not least of all, underlying these more practical pursuits, they rose
to the challenge and opportunity of taking greater responsibility for their own learning. In
addition, they shared in each other's learning; thus while they became autonomous from the teacher,
they maintained the important social and collaborative aspect of the learning enterprise. We have
also shown how, despite cultural constraints, the simulation project enabled them to develop certain
knowledge, skills and attitudes which are characteristic of learner autonomy.
What general lessons can be drawn from this experience? We offer the following. Autonomy cannot
be conferred by a teacher, at least not directly. Taking responsibility can only be encouraged,
sometimes necessitated, by learner participation in a personally-meaningful, real-world context,
such as a simulation. In the end, while it is the role of teachers to engineer situations in which
autonomy can be exercised, it is the learner who must actually do the exercising--perhaps with
some initial reassurance from the teacher. Indeed, learning to take responsibility is very much like
learning to do other things. Only the learner can learn--not the teacher. Moreover, the learner can
only learn by doing. In other words, only by taking steps towards autonomy and exercising that
autonomy will the learner be and become autonomous.
Acknowledgement--The authors are extremely grateful to Anita Wenden for her tremendous help in writing this article.
REFERENCES
ALLWRIGHT, D. (1988) Autonomy and individualization in whole class instruction. In Individualization and Autonomy
in Language Learning. ELT Documents 131. Modern English Publications and the British Council.
BREAKING WITH CHINESE TRADITIONS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGETEACHING
243
CHANG, H. and HOLT, R. (1994) A Chinese perspective on face as inter-relational concern. In Ting-Toomey, S. (ed.),
The Challenge of Facework. Albany: State University of New York Press.
CHU, G. (1985) The changing concept of self in contemporary China. In Marsella, A. J. et al. (eds), Culture and Self"
Asian and Western Perspectives. London: Tavistock Publications.
CROOKALL, D. and LANDIS, P. (1992) Global network simulation: An environment for global awareness. In Crookall,
D. and Arai, K. (eds), Global Interdependence: Simulation and Gaming Perspectives. Tokyo: Springer-Verlag.
CROOKALL, D. (1983) Learner training: A neglected strategy (Parts 1 and 2). Modern English Teacher 11(1 ), 41-42
and 11(2), 31-33.
DICKINSON, L. (1978) Autonomy, self-directed learning and individualization. In Individualization in Language
Learning. ELT Documents 103. British Council, ETIC Publications.
DICKINSON, L. (1987) Self-Instruction in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
DICKINSON, L. and CARVER, D. (1980) Learning how to learn: Steps towards self-direction in foreign language learning
in schools. English Language Teaching Journal 35( 1), October. pp. 1-7.
ELLIS, G. and SINCLAIR, B. (1989) Learning to Learn English: A Course in Learner Training. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
FERNANDES, J., ELLIS, G. and SINCLAIR, B. (1990) Learner training: Learning how to learn. In Crookall, D. and
Oxford, R. (eds), Simulation, Gaming and Language Learning. Boston, MA: Newbury House/Heinle and Heinle.
HENNER-STANCHINA, C. and RILEY, P. (1978) Aspects of autonomous learning. In Individualization in Language
Learning. ELT Documents 103. British Council, ETIC Publications.
HO, D. (1976) On the concept of face. American Journal of Sociology 81,867-884.
HO, D. (1986) Chinese patterns of socialization: A critical review. In Bond, M. (ed.), The Psychology of the Chinese People.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
HOLEC, H. (1981 ) Autonomy and Foreign lxmguage Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
HOLEC, H. (ed.) (1989) Autonomy and Self-Directed Learning: Present Fields of Application. Strasbourg: Council of
Europe.
HSU, F. (1985) The self in cross-cultural perspectives. In Marsella, A. J. et al. (eds), Culture and Self" Asian and
Western Perspectives. London: Tavistock Publications.
HWANG, K. (1987) Face and favour: The Chinese power game. American Journal of Sociology 92(4), January.
pp. 944-974.
LOGAN. G. E. (1973) Individualized Foreign Language Learning: An Organic Process. Boston: Newbury House.
NARCY, J. P. (1994) Autonomie: Evolution ou revolution? Die Neueren Sprachen, October, in press.
SCOLLON, R. and SCOLLON, S. (1994a) The Post Confucian Confusion. Research Report No. 37. Department of English,
City Polytechnic of Hong Kong.
SCOLLON, R. and SCOLLON, S. (1994b) Face parameters in east-west discourse. In Ting-Toomey, S. (ed.), The
Challenge of Facework. Albany: State University of New York Press.
SHARROCK, W. W. and WATSON, D. R. (1985) Reality construction in L2 simulations. System 13(3), 195-206.
TAJFEL, H. (1984) Intergroup relations, social myths and social justice in social psychology, in Tajfel, H. (ed.), The Social
Dimension, Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
WATSON, D. R. and SHARROCK, W. W. (1990) Realities in simulation/gaming. In Crookall, D. and Oxford, R. (eds),
Simulation, Gaming and Language Learning. Boston, MA: Newbury House/Heinle and Heinle.
WENDEN, A. (1987) Conceptual background and utility. In Wenden, A. and Rubin, J. (eds), Learner Strategies in Language
Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall International.
WENDEN, A. (1991) Learner Strategies for Learner Autonomy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall International.
WU, D. (1994) Childhood Socialization. Paper presented at International Conference on Chinese Psychology, Chinese
University of Hong Kong, 31 May-2 June.