Structured Autonomy in a Chinese Innovative EFL Classroom: Supporting Low-Motivation Learner Engagement

Qianhui Cui

doi:10.62177/jetp.v3i3.1682

Authors

Qianhui Cui Independent Researcher

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62177/jetp.v3i3.1682

Keywords:

Structured Autonomy, Innovative EFL Classroom, Low-Motivation Learners, Learner Engagement, Scaffolding, Peer Support

Abstract

Innovative, student-centred EFL classrooms are often expected to increase learner autonomy and engagement. However, low-motivation learners may struggle when autonomy is offered without sufficient structure. This paper presents a qualitative case study of Jayden, a low-motivation student in a Chinese secondary EFL classroom informed by the 271 model. Drawing on classroom observation, teacher interview, student dialogue, and reflective journals, the study examines how structured autonomy shaped his participation. Informed primarily by Self-Determination Theory, with ATRiUM used as a sensitising framework, the analysis shows that clear task steps, achievable goals, group-leader mediation, peer support, affirming feedback, and reflective scaffolding gradually supported Jayden’s engagement and self-management. Yet open tasks, uneven group participation, limited reflection time, and exam-oriented classroom routines still constrained deeper engagement. The study argues that learner autonomy in innovative EFL classrooms should be structured through clear pathways, supportive relationships, and formative feedback.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

Reeve, J. (2006). Teachers as facilitators: What autonomy-supportive teachers do and why their students benefit. The Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 225-236. https://doi.org/10.1086/501484

Bian, M. (2015). Weifang jichu jiaoyu zheyang gai (kan shenhua gaige, dao jiaoyu redian) [How Weifang is reforming basic education (Deepening reform: Addressing educational issues)]. Renmin Ribao. https://edu.people.com.cn/n/2015/0414/c1006-%0926840183.html

Li, J., & Zhang, Z. (2021). Shandong zhe suo zhongxue, ruhe yong suzhi jiaoyu zhai le yingshi jiaoyu de “guo”? [How did this Shandong school reap the “fruits” of exam-oriented education through quality education?]. Liaowang. https://lw.xinhuanet.com/2021-08/11/c_1310116555.htm

Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571-581. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1

Cook-Sather, A. (2006). Sound, presence, and power: “Student voice” in educational research and reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(4), 359-390. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2006.00363.x

van Lier, L. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 245-259). Oxford University Press.

Ushioda, E. (2009). A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 215-228). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691293-012

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4

Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

Graham, L., Berman, J., & Bellert, A. (2015). Sustainable learning: Inclusive practices for 21st century classrooms. Cambridge University Press.

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Patton, M. Q. (1999). Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. Health Services Research, 34(5 Pt 2), 1189-1208.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

British Educational Research Association. (2024). Ethical guidelines for educational research (5th ed.). https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-fifth-edition-2024-online