Thank you for you additional contribution @vera-t. Yes, that’s true, the learner’s perspective needs to be taken into consideration; we, teachers, have had years of training and experience and can see the value of choices we make in our teaching practices. If I were to respond to the learner that Timmis (2015) mentioned, I would perhaps tell them that ‘telling’ is not the same as ‘teaching’ :P We do need to emphasise the importance of X, Y, Z tool for autonomous learning, but I think it’s even more important to demonstrate the effective use of the tool. Below is an extract from Gilquin and Granger (2010, p.367), the one that Timmis referred to; I thought you might find it interesting.
For learners too, DDL may sometimes appear rather oﬀ-putting. Working with corpora is not straightforward and necessitates quite some training to acquire the basic skills – what Mukherjee (2002: 179) calls ‘corpus literacy’ (see also Sripicharn, this volume on the importance of preparing learners for using language corpora). Whistle (1999: 77) reports the case of some students who ‘failed to see anything’ and ‘failed to formulate any clear rules’. Students may have ‘diﬃculty devising eﬀective search strategies’ (O’ Sullivan and Chambers 2006: 60) because of faulty spelling, for example, or simply because of the complexity of the processes involved (see Sun 2003: 607–8 for a good example of ineﬀective search strategy), and they may draw wrong inferences on the basis of the evidence (cf. Sripicharn 2004). It must also be stressed that DDL (and, in particular, the inductive learning strategies that it often entails) may be suitable for certain learners only, depending on their learning style.
Gilquin, G. and Granger, S. (2010) How can data-driven learning be used in language teaching? In: O’Keeffe, A. and McCarthy, M. (eds.) The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics. London: Routledge, 359–371.