Learner autonomy is a cornerstone of effective foreign language acquisition and is deeply intertwined with the principles of lifelong learning (Nakata, 2010). Holec (1979) defines autonomy as the ability to take charge of one’s learning journey, while Dickinson (1994) emphasizes the learner’s complete accountability for every decision made and implemented during the learning process.

Mastering the host country’s language is an indispensable step for adult immigrants’ successful integration into the new society (Dustmann & van Soest, 2001). To achieve this goal, self-directed language learning plays a pivotal role (Dörnyei, 1994; Robles, 2008).

Despite its immense social significance, the process of immigrant language acquisition remains an understudied area, encompassing limited understanding of the factors influencing the learning journeys of migrants. The heterogeneity of the immigrant population in Germany, characterized by diverse educational backgrounds and learning paths (Hünlich et al., 2018) further complicates the research landscape. In response to this need for comprehensive insights, this study embarked on the development and validation of a questionnaire designed to assess autonomous language learning among adult immigrants in Germany.

A pilot study preceding this one employed the concept of self-regulated language learning strategies (Oxford, 1990, 2011, 2016) to examine the characteristics of participants' independent learning. While the language learning strategy use questionnaire (Habók & Magyar, 2018) yielded valuable insights into participants' strategy usage, it fell short in addressing several facets of autonomy, including the ability to take responsibility for one's learning.

As the first step of this study, a comprehensive literature review identified six key factors (beyond the self-regulated language learning strategies) influencing autonomous language learning, including 1. Motivation, 2. The planning, monitoring, and evaluating of learning, 3. Attitudes towards learning, 4. Managing learning, 5. Taking responsibility, 6. Being engaged in autonomous learning activities. These factors served as the foundation for developing a comprehensive questionnaire comprising 106 items.

Following thorough translation and expert review, the questionnaire underwent pilot testing to ensure its validity and reliability (Tsang et al., 2017). Based on the pilot sampling, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis to refine the questionnaire, reducing its original 106 items to a smaller number (38). This refined questionnaire will be employed in the next phase of the research, involving a larger cohort of German language learners at A1, A2, and B1 levels (Council of Europe, 2001), to gain a deeper understanding of their autonomous learning practices.

The pilot testing utilized convenience sampling (Cohen et al., 2002) to recruit readily available participants. The 43 language learners who completed the initial (extensive) version of the Autonomous Language Learning Questionnaire for Adult Migrants are enrolled in German language courses at B1 and B2 levels, specifically designed to facilitate the social and labor-market integration of adult immigrants. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the participants' demographic characteristics. This pilot testing faced the challenge of a relatively small sample size. As Field (2009) points out, a sample size of 5-10 times the number of questionnaire items is typically recommended for robust statistical analysis. In our case, the 106-item questionnaire would have necessitated a minimum of 550 participants, which was not feasible within our constraints. However, Field (2009, p. 679) suggests an alternative approach, utilizing the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy (Kaiser, 1970). To streamline the analysis and ensure data adequacy, we organized the questions into thematic groups based on the results of the initial comprehensive literature review. We selected those items with factor loadings (≥ 0.7) for each aspect. By analyzing responses separately for each thematic unit, we were able to gather sufficient data from a smaller number of participants to achieve statistically significant results (p ≤ 0.05) and a satisfactory KMO value (> 0.500). Exploratory factor analysis revealed 14 distinct factors: 1. Intrinsic motivation (interest and pleasure), 2. Extrinsic motivation (practical language need), 3. External pressure (family pressure), 4. Planning and preparation for learning, 5. Perceived effort, 6. Anxiety and apprehension, 7. Self-confidence, 8. Determination and self-efficacy, 9. Personal responsibility for learning, 10. Transfer of responsibility to the teacher (making progress and choosing content), 11. Transfer of responsibility to the teacher (objectives and activities), 12. Solitary exercise habits, 13. Collaborative learning habits, 14. Listening exercise habits. Cronbach's alpha reliability analysis established acceptable internal consistency for all 14 factors (0.8 ≤ a) (DeVellis, 2012). The results imply that these 14 distinct factors collectively contribute to shaping immigrants' language learning behavior. The diversity of these factors highlights the multifaceted nature of language acquisition, encompassing elements of internal and external factors that contribute to individuals' learner autonomy development. Finally, based on the factors, we made a shortlist of 38 questions and thus obtained a new questionnaire which will be used in the next phase of the research for learning more about the autonomous language learning of adult migrants in Germany.

Developing learner autonomy is essential (Chan, 2001; Ellis & Sinclair, 1989; Karlsson et al., 2007). Utilizing a comprehensive questionnaire can thus effectively assess the various facets of immigrants’ autonomous learning, paving the way for new learning approaches that may empower them to gain a deeper understanding of autonomy development and transfer successful study habits to new learning environments. This study successfully developed and validated a questionnaire to assess the autonomous language learning of this particular population. This valuable tool thus serves as a resource for researchers and educators to delve into and promote autonomous learning among immigrants aiming to learn German as a Second Language. The study shed light on the influential factors shaping autonomous learning in their language acquisition journey. Subsequently, the findings serve as a foundation for further exploration and dissemination in international journals dedicated to the foreign language education of this specific audience. Our analyses and interpretations would benefit from the integration of additional international perspectives from diverse contexts and regions. Accordingly, we anticipate that our findings will spark scholarly engagement and foster a constructive dialogue on this topic.

1.Chan, V. (2001). Readiness for Learner Autonomy: What do our learners tell us? Teaching in Higher Education, 6(4), 505–518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562510120078045 2.Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2002). Research methods in education. Routledge. 3.Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Council of Europe. https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages. 4.DeVellis, R. F. (2012). Scale development: Theory and applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 5.Dickinson, Leslie (1994). Preparing Learners: Toolkit requirements for Preparing/Orienting Learners. In E. Esch, Self-access and the Adult Language Learner, pages 39 to 49, London: CILT. 6.Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and second language acquisition. Language Teaching, 27(1), 1-27. 7.Dustmann, Christian & van Soest, Arthur (2001). Language Fluency And Earnings: Estimation With Misclassified Language Indicators. The Review of Economics and Statistics. 83. 663-674. 10.1162/003465301753237740. 8.Ellis, G. & Sinclair, B. (1989). Learning to learn English learner's book: A course in learner training (Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press. 9.Field, Andy (2009). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS (third edition). 10.Habók A and Magyar A (2018). Validation of a Self-Regulated Foreign Language Learning Strategy Questionnaire Through Multidimensional Modelling. Front. Psychol. 9:1388. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01388. 11.Holec, H. (1979). Autonomy and foreign language learning. 12.Hünlich, David, Wolfer, Sascha, Lang, Christian, Deppermann, Arnulf (2018). Wer besucht den Integrationskurs? Soziale und sprachliche Hintergründe von Geflüchteten und anderen Zugewanderten. Institut für Deutsche Sprache und Goethe Institut, Mannheim. 13.Kaiser, H. F. (1970). A second generation little jiffy. Psychometrika, 35, 401–415. 14.Karlsson, L., Kjisik, F., & Nordlund, J. (2007). Language counseling: a critical and integral component in promoting an autonomous community of learning. System, 35(1), 46–65. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0346251X06001187 15.Nakata, Y. (2010). Toward a framework for self-regulated language-learning. TESL Canada Journal, 1, 1. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v27i2.1047. 16.Oxford, R. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House. 17.Oxford, R. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Harlow: Longman. 18.Oxford, R.L. (2016). Teaching and Researching Language Learning Strategies: Self-Regulation in Context, Second Edition (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315719146. 19.Robles, T. R. (2008). Learning for life: Adult immigrant and international students adopting self-directed learning skills. Unpublished master‘s thesis, Saint Fransis Xavier University, Canada. 20.Tsang, S., Royse, C. F., & Terkawi, A. S. (2017). Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia, 11(1), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_203_17.