In an ever-changing world where we can complete a Google search or watch a YouTube video to learn something new, postsecondary educators must do more than simply impart their discipline’s body of knowledge to their students. They must also support students in developing the skills required to become adaptive, independent, lifelong learners.
Two interrelated concepts can support this goal. Student autonomy, a term coined more than four decades ago, refers to a student taking charge of their learning. Examples of classroom practices that encourage student autonomy are:
- Learner contracts with personalised learning objectives
- Critical self-reflection
- The application of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles (for example, providing students with the choice of assessment modes).
We can support student autonomy by using a self-directed learning model. This is when a learner takes initiative in identifying learning needs and gaps, setting related goals, finding resources to help achieve those goals and monitoring and evaluating outcomes. Fostering student autonomy and self-directed learning can increase students’ intrinsic motivation, engagement, confidence and pride.
The case for ‘self-driving’ students
Nurturing student autonomy and self-directed learning is imperative for Generation Z students, many of whom are products of either “helicopter” or “lawnmower” parenting. The former involves parents hovering over their child in an attempt to control every aspect of their lives. Lawnmower parenting involves the quick removal of potential obstacles and challenges for their child, ensuring a clear path to success and shielding them from discomfort or disappointment.
When children have their lives micromanaged in these ways, decisions are made for them, which may lead them to lose independence and faith in their own capabilities. Some theorists go as far as arguing that these parenting styles overprotect children and weaken their resilience, thus fuelling the surge in rates of mental illness in young adults.
To restore some balance on the scale of independence, instructors should move away from the traditional “sage on the stage” teaching model that spoon-feeds information to students, toward a “guide on the side” approach that encourages supportive exploration and student growth.
Another central influencing factor is technology. With knowledge more readily available at our fingertips than ever before, the rise and proliferation of GenAI in higher education has moved the “sage” from the stage to the screen. There has been much debate about the human qualities that these types of technology would have difficulty replicating, and therefore would be valuable to teach post-secondary students eager to enter the workforce. A common point of convergence is soft skills such as critical thinking, adaptability and collaboration – all of which are well primed for self-directed learning.
Self-directed or self-destructed? When student autonomy goes too far
Too much dependence may weaken resilience and increase the likelihood of poor mental health but too much independence can also lead to similar outcomes. For instance, when a student’s autonomy exceeds their coping capacity, they are likely to feel anxious, stressed and less confident. Furthermore, too much independence may overwhelm students with analysis paralysis and decision fatigue. Student autonomy could also be too much to handle if students don’t have equal access to support and resources. For example, a student who is working full-time might not be able to attend an instructor’s office hours.
- Spotlight guide: Get your students workplace-ready
- Teach the skills required for a future we can’t yet imagine
- What does it mean for students to be AI-ready?
Self-directed learning can also backfire when it is mismatched with a student’s learning style and preferences. Some students thrive when learning in a structured environment rather than a flexible, customisable environment. Others might learn best when they are in pursuit of external rewards such as high grades or entry into their chosen profession, rather than intrinsic motivation. Additionally, students may feel more invested in their learning when they are collaboratively working toward a common goal rather than making personal choices.
When we consider the larger systems that impact students, the pursuit of student autonomy and self-directed learning intuitively fits into a Western educational context and an individualistic culture where freedom is valued and independence is rewarded. These values are not necessarily shared with other cultures. In addition, some people may feel uncomfortable exerting student autonomy because they were raised in cultures where instructors are viewed as authority figures treated with the utmost respect and deference. Turning inward rather than deferring to the wisdom of their elders may be viewed as disrespectful or arrogant.
Tips for removing the training wheels
Student autonomy and self-directed learning work best when they are pursued with personalised, scaffolded supports and resources provided by instructors, peers and the learning ecosystem. Yet, it is difficult to get the right balance between offering guidance and allowing independence.
To do this, students should have a degree of autonomy and opportunities for self-directed learning as appropriate for their developmental stage. Learning and assessments should have clear frameworks that offer choices within boundaries. First-year students could have structured autonomy with clear expectations and regular check-ins. For example, students might choose an essay topic from a provided list and submit an outline and draft for formative feedback. An example of self-directed learning at this stage is a structured reflection assignment guided by prompts. As the student progresses, they can be given increased independence and more unstructured methods for reflection and goal-setting.
We should also provide students with a variety of support resources that meet their learning styles and other influencing factors (for example, peer mentoring or learning communities and access to instructor support via office hours and email). To facilitate this, instructors would benefit from training on effective mentoring, scaffolding and recognising when students need more or less support.
As students get into the driver’s seat of their own learning journeys, instructors must support them to take calculated risks and stretch their capabilities.
Daniella Sieukaran is senior educational developer (programme development) at Dalhousie University’s Centre for Learning and Teaching and teaches in the department of psychology and neuroscience.
If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.
comment