Week 10 Reflection: Learner Autonomy and Tandem Learning

The author first defined 3 pespectives on learner autonomy, namely individual-cognitive, social-interactive and experimental-participatory approach. These 3 aspects are well defined and comprehensive as they include major factors in language learners' interaction with oneself, peers and the tool.
The author then evaluated asynchronous and synchronous projects with view to the above perspectives. The ETR mail system (asynchronous communication) cited is very amazing. The most impressive function is that it can show corrections of a preceeding mail with new incoming mail below and at the same time showing reference tools on the left column. This can help learners reflect one's work and easily make reference in need.
Another example cited is the Tandem MOO project as synchronous communication tool. The author listed some limitations, but I think synchronous communication in form of MOO CMC is still a valuable tool in language learning.
We can improve such approach by asking students to engage in MOO synchronous communicatio with the teacher and peers or other L1 learners using ICQ or MSN. Of course, some tasks need to be given to them to somehow control and monitor their conversation, not letting conversation to go too loose and without focus. The "chained story" task is quite interesting, especially for senior primary and junior secondary students. Students will find synchronous CMC communication more interesteing as teenagers nowadays are too getting used to instant stimulus from environment and media. One constructive advice to learners is to ask them get their browser ready for online dictionary. In this way, the 3 kinds of autonomy can be satisfied, with self-reflection, peer interaction and tools in order.
However, autonomy is still not the same as motivation. For students really lack the mood and move to learn, I still wonder how we can use CMC and CALL to lure them to learn English.