Oldal 25 [25]
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
self-directed learning, on the other hand, occurs when “the learner engages in
language use for pleasure or interest, but also with the broader intention of
learning” (Benson 2011b: 139). In this kind of learning, learners knowingly
pursue opportunities for L2 exposure with the intention of learning from them.
Similarly, Lee (2019b) connected digital environments with naturalistic self¬
directed learning and claimed that EE activities might enable learners to acquire
L2 linguistic elements from them. This is also emphazised by Boyer and
Usinger (2015) and Grover (2015), who claim that control and active involve¬
ment from the learner is a prerequisite for this type of learning.
However, it is important to emphasize that Benson’s (2011b) three concepts
of autonomous learning, namely self-instruction, naturalistic learning, and
self-directed naturalistic language learning, are all incorporated in the term
extramural activities. Self-instruction occurs when the learner wishes to learn,
naturalistic learning may occur without the learner’s conscious attention, and
self-directed naturalistic learning, the combination of the former two, may
occur when a learner consciously engages in EE activities with hopes of learn¬
ing English. Consequently, extramural activities serve as an umbrella term for
all activities taking place outside the classroom and independent of a classroom
setting where learners are exposed to a particular L2.
All in all, these three types of learning may involve a certain degree of in¬
tention and consciousness (or a lack thereof) from the learner’s perspective,
so the following section aims to investigate the role of intention and conscious¬
ness in the foreign language processes when learning through EE activities.
2.2.2 Learning processes in SLA through extramural
English activities
Conscious and unconscious language learning has been a long-debated issue
in the field of second language acquisition (SLA). Krashen (1982) argued that
these were separate processes, thus the two learning processes are distinct,
and the knowledge gained through them results in conscious and unconscious
knowledge. Krashen (1982) calls the conscious learning process learning and
the unconscious learning process acquisition. The former involves explicit,
formal instruction, while the latter resembles the way children acquire their
first language (L1), i.e., implicitly, with no formal instruction involved. How¬
ever, it is difficult to test Krashen’s (1982) acquisition vs learning hypothesis.
For instance, Ellis and Shintani (2014: 176) point out that Krashen’s theory “no
longer figures in current thinking in SLA” because attention to linguistic form
is needed even in incidental and implicit learning. In this book, therefore,
similarly to most researchers in the field, I use the terms learning and acquisi¬
tion interchangeably because the fundamental difference between conscious
+ 23 +