the application of communicative language teaching
TRANSCRIPT
The Application of Communicative Language Teaching
Approach within English as Foreign Language Context:
Saudi Arabia Private Education Case Study
Saleh Mohammed Alqarni
B. Ed. (English), King Saud University
M. App. Ling. (TESL, TEFOL), The University of Newcastle
Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Faculty of Education and Arts
The University of Newcastle
NSW, Australia
October 2017
ii
Statement of Originality
This thesis contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other
degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution and, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, contains no material previously published or written by another
person, except where due reference has been made in the text. I give consent to the final
version of my thesis being made available worldwide when deposited in the
University’s Digital Repository, subject to the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968.
Saleh Alqarni
Signed: …………………………………………………..
Date: 10 October 2017
iii
Dedication
To my parents
To my wife and my daughter and my son
To my brothers and my sisters
iv
Acknowledgments
In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful
First of all I thank Allah, my God, for helping me to accomplish this project.
I would then like to express my sincere gratitude to my principal supervisor, Dr. Mitch
O’Toole for giving me the opportunity to participate in this research. His endless
support and advice has provided me with important guidance in improving the quality
of my research and thesis. Despite his significant work commitments, Professor has
always made himself available to provide constructive input and suggestions for
improvement regarding this thesis. With English as my second language, Professor has
been very patient in correcting me in the finer nuances of the language. He has provided
me with the support that I have needed to complete this work.
I would also like to thank my co-supervisor, Dr. Heather Sharp, not only for her
insightful comments and encouragement but also for her hard questions, which
motivated me to widen my research from various perspectives.
My thanks also go to the University of Newcastle, particularly the Faculty of Education
and Arts, for arrangements of several workshops and learning development
opportunities which prove their extraordinary attitude of taking care of the students.
Last but not the least, I would like to thank my family: my parents, to my brothers and
sister and my wife for supporting me spiritually throughout writing this thesis and my
life in general.
v
Table of contents
Statement of Originality .................................................................................................... ii Dedication ....................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................ iv Table of contents ............................................................................................................... v List of Appendices ........................................................................................................ viii List of Tables.................................................................................................................... ix List of Figures .................................................................................................................. ix Acronyms .......................................................................................................................... x Abstract ............................................................................................................................ xi Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Motivation for the research ............................................................................................. 1 1.3 Background ..................................................................................................................... 5
1.3.1 Saudia Arabian Government .................................................................................... 5 1.3.2 Acceptance of CLT .................................................................................................. 6 1.3.3 Use of activities in CLT ........................................................................................... 7 1.3.4 Development of Language Teaching Methods ......................................................... 8 1.3.5 Comparison of CLT Approach with Grammatical and Audiolingual .................... 10 1.3.6 Communicative Competence .................................................................................. 13
1.4 Interpretations of CLT.................................................................................................... 17 1.5 CLT in Practice .............................................................................................................. 19 1.6 CLT and error correction ............................................................................................... 23 1.7 Research Project ............................................................................................................. 24 1.8 Saudi Arabian context .................................................................................................... 25 1.9 Operational definitions ................................................................................................... 28 1.10 Research objectives ........................................................................................................ 29 1.11 Research questions ......................................................................................................... 30 1.12 Research significance ..................................................................................................... 30
Chapter 2: A review of literature ................................................................................ 32 2.1 Chapter overview ........................................................................................................... 32 2.2 Theoretical review .......................................................................................................... 32 2.3 Methods of English language teaching prior to the communicative language teaching
approach ...................................................................................................................... 32 2.4 Definition of CLT approach ........................................................................................... 40 2.5 History of CLT approach ............................................................................................... 42 2.6 The goal of the CLT approach ....................................................................................... 43 2.7 The features of the CLT approach.................................................................................. 45 2.8 Education in Saudi Arabia ............................................................................................. 48 2.9 Previous studies .............................................................................................................. 52
2.9.1 Content CLT analysis studies ................................................................................. 52 2.9.2 Studies of participants’ attitudes and awareness .................................................... 54
2.10 Cross-national policy borrowing .................................................................................... 60 2.11 Attitude assessment ........................................................................................................ 66 2.12 Language assessment ..................................................................................................... 69 2.13 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 73
Chapter 3: Research Design and Methodology .......................................................... 74 3.1 Chapter overview ........................................................................................................... 74 3.2 Research design ............................................................................................................. 75
3.2.1 Sampling Methodology .......................................................................................... 76 3.2.2 The population and the sampling ........................................................................... 77
vi
3.2.3 Survey sample ........................................................................................................ 77 3.2.4 Experimental sample .............................................................................................. 77
3.3 Qualitative study ............................................................................................................ 78 3.4 Teaching approach ......................................................................................................... 78 3.5 Data collection tools ....................................................................................................... 79
3.5.1 Interview ................................................................................................................. 80 3.5.2 Questionnaires ........................................................................................................ 80 3.5.3 Pre-test and post-test exams ................................................................................... 83
3.6 Mixed methods .............................................................................................................. 84 3.7 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................. 84
3.7.1 Statistical analysis .................................................................................................. 85 3.7.2 Qualitative analysis ................................................................................................ 86
3.8 Exploratory factor analysis ............................................................................................ 87 3.9 Chi-square test of students’ attitudes ............................................................................. 87 3.10 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 87
Chapter 4: Quantitative Results .................................................................................. 89 4.1 Chapter overview ........................................................................................................... 89 4.2 Results of the quasi-experimental design ....................................................................... 89 4.3 ANCOVA Assumptions ................................................................................................. 92 4.4. Survey results ................................................................................................................. 92
4.4.1 Student survey ........................................................................................................ 92 4.5 Exploratory factor analysis ............................................................................................ 93
4.5.1. Step 1: Extraction method: Principle component analysis ....................................... 93 4.5.2 Step 2: Eigenvalues and scree plot ........................................................................... 93 4.5.3. Step 3: Extraction method: Interpretation of factors ................................................ 94
4.6 Chi-square results of students’ attitudes......................................................................... 96 4.7 Chi-square results of teachers’ attitudes....................................................................... 100 4.8 Correlations .................................................................................................................. 104 4.9 Analysis of Exploratory Factor Analysis ................................................................... 104 4.10 Analysis of Student Attitudes ...................................................................................... 106 4.11 Analysis of Teacher Attitudes ..................................................................................... 108 4.12 Summary of findings .................................................................................................... 109
Chapter 5: Qualitative data results ........................................................................... 111 5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 111 5.2 EFL teaching approaches used in Saudi Arabia ........................................................... 112 5.3 Teachers’ beliefs about effective EFL teaching approaches used in Saudi Arabia ...... 115 5.4 Teachers’ beliefs about EFL teaching resources .......................................................... 116 5.5 Teachers’ beliefs about using CLT .............................................................................. 118 5.6 Teachers’ beliefs about benefits of CLT for students in Saudi Arabia ........................ 120 5.7 Teachers’ awareness of students’ opinions of CLT ..................................................... 121 5.8 Teachers’ beliefs about support given to them to use CLT in Saudi Arabia ................ 122 5.9 Teachers’ awareness of the difficulties of applying CLT in the classroom ................. 124 5.10 Teachers’ beliefs about the effectiveness of CLT in Saudi Arabia .............................. 126 5.11 Teachers’ beliefs about solving difficulties of applying CLT in the classroom........... 127 5.12 Teachers’ suggestions for improving EFL teaching at the intermediate level in Saudi
Arabia ........................................................................................................................ 128 5.13 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 130
Chapter 6: Discussion and conclusion ...................................................................... 132 6.1 Chapter overview ......................................................................................................... 132
6.1.1 Sub-Research Question 1: What is the level of awareness and comprehension of
CLT among teachers and students at Saudi private schools? .................................. 132 6.1.2 Sub-Research Question 2: To what extent does CLT influence Saudi teacher and
student attitudes to learning English? ................................................................... 134 6.1.3 Sub- Research Question 3: What impact does CLT have on students’ assessment
results in Saudi English language classes? ........................................................... 138
vii
6.1.4 Research Question : What is the effect of applying the CLT approach for Saudi
Arabian students learning English in the participating private schools? .............. 139 6.2 Discussion of findings ................................................................................................... 142
6.2.1 GTM versus CLT ................................................................................................. 143 6.2.2 Teacher Preparation .............................................................................................. 145 6.2.3 Teacher’s attitudes to CLT ................................................................................... 145 6.2.4 The Learning Context ........................................................................................... 146 6.2.5 Tension Between Theory and Practice ................................................................. 148 6.2.6 Creating a Change ................................................................................................ 153
6.3 Limitations .................................................................................................................. 161 6.4 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 162
References .................................................................................................................... 171 Appendices ................................................................................................................... 192
viii
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Information statement for school principals (English version) ........................... 192
Appendix B: Information statement for school principals (Arabic version) ............................. 195
Appendix C: Consent form for school principals (English version) ......................................... 198
Appendix D: Consent form for school principals (Arabic version) .......................................... 199
Appendix E: Information statement for teachers (English version) .......................................... 200
Appendix F: Information statement for teachers (Arabic version) ........................................... 203
Appendix G: Consent form for teachers and students (English version) .................................. 206
Appendix H: Consent form for teachers and students (Arabic version) ................................... 207
Appendix I: Information statement for parents and students .................................................... 208
Appendix J: Information statement for parents and students (Arabic version) ......................... 211
Appendix K: Consent form for parents (English version) ........................................................ 214
Appendix L: Consent form for parents (Arabic version) .......................................................... 215
Appendix M: Approval letter from The General Directorate of Education in Riyadh ............. 216
Appendix N: Pre-test ................................................................................................................. 217
Appendix O: Post-test ............................................................................................................... 219
Appendix P: Result of achievement test for experimental group.............................................. 221
Appendix Q: Result of achievement test for control group ...................................................... 222
Appendix R: Students’ survey (Arabic version) ....................................................................... 223
Appendix S: Students’ survey (English version) ...................................................................... 227
Appendix T: Teachers’ surveys (English version) .................................................................... 230
Appendix U: Teachers’ interview ............................................................................................. 233
Appendix V: Approval letter of the Human Research Ethics Committee ................................ 235
Appendix W: Summary sheet for qualitative method ............................................................... 236
ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Comparison of Grammatical, Audiolingual, and CLT Approaches ............................. 10
Table 2: Summary of Research Method ..................................................................................... 75
Table 3: Study Participants ......................................................................................................... 78
Table 4: Reliability Test of the Students’ and Teachers’ Questionnaires by Cronbach α
Contingency Test ...................................................................................................... 83
Table 5: Methods and Research Questions ................................................................................. 88
Table 6: ANCOVA Output of Students English Grammatical Knowledge Skills Pre-Test and
Post-Test ................................................................................................................... 90
Table 7: Factor Interpretation ..................................................................................................... 95
Table 8: Summary of Chi-Square of Students’ Attitudes Regarding Approaches Used for
Teaching English Language ...................................................................................... 97
Table 9: Summary of Chi-Square of Students’ Attitudes Regarding the Importance of the CLT
Approach for Teaching English Language ............................................................... 98
Table 10: Summary of Chi-Square of Students’ Attitudes Regarding General Opinions for
Teaching English Language ...................................................................................... 99
Table 11: Summary of Chi-Square of Teachers’ Attitudes Regarding Approaches for Teaching
English .................................................................................................................... 100
Table 12: Summary of Chi-Square of Teachers’ Attitudes Regarding the Importance of Using
CLT ......................................................................................................................... 101
Table 13: Summary of Chi-Square of Teachers’ General Opinions about CLT ....................... 103
Table 14: Correlation between Teachers’ Demographic and CLT Items ................................. 104
Table 15: Private School Teachers’ Interview .......................................................................... 112
Table 16: Summary of Qualitatative and Quantitative Findings .............................................. 142
List of Figures
Figure 1: Policy borrowing in education: Composite processes ................................................. 62
Figure 2: Profile plot of groups at pre-test and post-test ............................................................. 91
Figure 3: Scree plot of student’s questionnaire ........................................................................... 94
x
Acronyms
CLT Communicative language teaching
CA Communicative approach
GTM Grammar translation method
EFL English as a foreign language
ESL English as a second language
KSA Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
L1 First language
L2 Second language
TPR Total physical response
EAP English for academic purposes
EFA Exploratory Factor Analysis
xi
Abstract
This thesis documents an investigation of communicative language teaching (CLT) in
student English language learning in Saudi Arabia. The adoption of CLT requires
adjustment of teaching materials, assessments, and other components of English
programs. CLT also requires a change in the learning paradigm, as teachers,
supervisors, administrators, and curriculum designers direct their interest to the value of
communicative learning approaches in developing language competence.
There has been international research into teacher behaviour regarding CLT but not into
teacher and student attitudes concerning its use. This forms the gap in the existing
literature that this investigation seeks to fill. CLT had been mandated in Saudi Arabia
for over a decade at the time of this research. This investigation involved 149 students
and 15 teachers from 5 private intermediate, schools in Riyadh.
The thesis documents a mixed method investigation, the core of which was a quasi-
experimental design where the experimental group experienced the CLT approach and
the control group was taught by the conventional methods prevailing in the participating
schools. Simultaneous teacher and student surveys enriched analysis of pre- and post-
test results and subsequent teacher interviews further enlightened this data.
The results of this investigation revealed clear superiority of CLT but negative attitudes
towards it on the part of both teachers and students. These negative attitudes may be due
to mismatch between mandated CLT and centrally produced external tests of student
English language proficiency.
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Introduction
This chapter provides an introduction and background details, including a problem
statement, research objectives, research questions, limitations of the study, significance
of the study, and operational definitions.
1.2 Motivation for the research
The need to be fluent in English has grown rapidly (Crystal, 2003; Dearden, 2014;
Doms, 2003; Ke, 2015). Globally, people are employing a wide range of instructional
methods to improve their English communication skills for business, leisure, and
educative reasons (Dearden, 2014; Eaton, 2010; Oxford, 2003; Thomson, 2012).
Moreover, the importance of English has increased as it has become universally
accepted in a range of fields (Crystal, 2003; Dearden, 2014). Having English
proficiency enables a person to travel and communicate with people all around the
world without having to know the local language. According to J. C. Richards:
“The worldwide demand for English has created an enormous demand for
quality language teaching and language teaching materials and resources.
Learners set themselves demanding goals. They want to be able to master
English to a high level of accuracy and fluency. Employers, too, insist that their
employees have good English language skills, and fluency in English is a
prerequisite for success and advancement in many fields of employment in
today’s world. The demand for an appropriate teaching methodology is therefore
as strong as ever.” (2006, p. 5)
It is essential for everyone to know this global language to stay connected with the
world. In Arab countries, learning English has become part of the education systems.
However, the starting point differs from country to country (Eaton, 2010). English is
2
learnt by students to study subjects at the college and university level. Some subjects
like medicine and engineering are taught in English. So, without having a good
proficiency in English, it is not easy to graduate from such schools. In addition to its
importance in specialization, English proficiency is required to deal with English
speaking people around the world. English is a compulsory subject at schools in most
of the Arab countries and a prerequisite for study. English in Saudi Arabia has been
studied as a fundamental subject after finishing the basic educational phase since the
1970s. However, in spite of spending many years studying English at school, most
students are unable to use the English language effectively in different situations
(AlHarbi, 2015; Al-Nasser, 2015; Al-Seghayer, 2015; Assalahi, 2013).
Communicative language teaching (CLT) is a functional approach to the nature of
language and of language learning and teaching (Richard & Rodgers, 1986). It
comprises of a set of principles about the aims of teaching language, how language is
learnt, the type of activities that engender learning and the roles required from teachers
and learners in the classroom (Richards, 2006). The aim of CLT is to develop
communication competence in the student (Richards, 2006). This involves the
understanding of how language is used to achieve different purposes and functions
(Richards, 2006). CLT seeks to develop in the student an awareness of how to vary
language in a variety of settings (Richards & Rodgers, 1986). The learner develops the
competence to create a variety of texts and understands "how to mainain
communication despite having limitations in one’s language knowledge" (Richards,
2006, p. 3). In essence, CLT seeks to develop knowledge in the student that can enable
them to be a competent communicator within a speech community (Hymes, 1972).
Speaking and listening are the main foci of attention. Learnig a language occurs through
3
the spoken interaction between people in a specific context. Dialogue is the primary
focus in CLT. CLT encourages learning through trial-and-error. Communicative
competence is developed through the inductive approach. The language of instruction is
in the language that the learner is seeking competence in.
CLT is often compared to the grammatical approach to language teaching (Richards &
Rodgers, 1986). The grammar translation method has seven characteristics (Richards &
Rodgers, 1986). Firstly, its purpose is to enable the learner to read through the analysis
of the grammatical rules and then applying the rules to the translation of sentences.
Secondly, reading and writing are the major foci of attention. Thirdly, vocabulary
selection is based on written texts and learning of vocabulary lists. Fourthly, the
sentence is the basic construct for learning a language. Fifthly, accuracy is important.
Sixthly, grammer in learnt through the deductive process. Seventh, the medium of
instruction is in the learner’s native language. It can be seen that CLT is the antithesis of
the grammatical approach to language.
The Situational Langauage Teaching method was developed by British applied linguists
in the period from 1930 to 1960 (Richards & Rodgers, 1986). The approach was based
on a theretical position that speech was the basis of language and an individual gained
competence in the spoken language through understanding the structure (Richards &
Rodgers, 1986). The target language is the language of instruction. Students learn
vocabulary and practice the vocabulary in a spoken context. The skills of reading and
writing are introduced after spoken competence has been achieved (Richards &
Rodgers, 1986). The audio-lingual method seeks to develop a mechanical approach to
learning language (Richards & Rodgers, 1986). Students are taught in the target
4
language in the spoken form using analogies (Richards & Rodgers, 1986). The cultural
and social context becomes important in learning language (Richards & Rodgers, 1986).
Communicative language teaching (CLT) provides the opportunity for students to
understand both the functional and structural nature of language (Thamarana, 2015).
The student-centred orientation of the approach exposes learners to a wide range of
language contexts, increases the level of interaction and develops fluency and
communicative competence (Assassfeh, Khwaileh, Al-Shaboul, & Alshboul, 2012;
Dardig, 2015; Thamarana, 2015). CLT provides a flexibility for both the teacher and the
student in the learning environment for the development of communicative competence
as it is not a model but a concept (Manalullaili, 2015). The provision of a set of guiding
principles, coupled with a focus on the development of communicative competence,
provided learners and teachers with the opportunity to develop a broader range of
approaches than was possible under preceding methodologies (Breshneh & Riasati,
2014; Sreehari, 2012).
The adoption of CLT as a teaching approach in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA)
has the potential to improve current outcomes. However, the use of this approach may
require adjusting the taught materials, assessments and other components of English
programs. The Ministry of Education, Riyadh, implemented the CLT approach in 2005.
More recent studies (Al-Hashash, 2007) suggested that, as English language teachers
play an important role in improving students’ abilities to communicate with English as a
foreign language, they should be trained to be more proficient in their field of teaching.
This would qualify teachers to use the innovative technologies and computer-conveyed
systems then being deployed for teaching English in Saudi Arabia. The CLT approach
orients English teachers toward acting more as facilitators for their students in
5
understanding the language skills. Thus, it is important to know teachers’ and students’
attitudes toward the CLT approach and its impact on improving student skills.
Administrators, teachers, pupils and parents are all stakeholders in educational
processes intended to improve student English language proficiency. These stakeholders
must change their attitude and resulting behaviours towards the teaching of English if
that teaching is to change. The shift from the current dominant model of the
grammatical approach to CLT is a significant shift in the prevailing educational
paradigm. Opposition from any one of the stakeholder groups may be a significant
restraining force that might prevent the change from occurring. This research seeks to
consider the forces that both support and inhibit change, particularly amongst the
teaching and student stakeholder groups. Through an increased understanding of the
nature of these forces, it should be possible to recommend more effective change
programmes for the incorporation of CLT as the dominant approach for teaching
English in the Saudi Arabian educational system.
1.3 Background
1.3.1 Saudia Arabian Government
In order to meet the modern world’s economic and political advancements, the
Saudi Arabian government is taking measures for the teaching of English language to
Saudi citizens. Regional governors control the three levels of school education:
elementary, intermediate, and secondary. Before 2005, the teaching of English as a
foreign language was confined only to the intermediate and secondary schools. In
2005, the Ministry of Education in Saudi Arabia published a set of new objectives
regarding the teaching of English within the school system. In 2004, the government
decided to expand the coverage of English within the school system to include Grade
6
six in the elementary schools. The government also designed and published new
curriculum documents that attempted to encourage more interactive communication in
the classroom. Its goal was to develop new communication skills among the learners by
conducting new activities such as group work and games. Moreover, a new series of
books titled English in Saudi Arabia was released (Batawi, 2006) that described the
expansion of Saudi Arabia’s interaction with other countries and how its modernization
programs have required the development of English language training. In response to
the request of the Saudi government and driven by a rise in foreign initiatives,
foreigners have been working as researchers, curriculum developers and consultants,
English teachers, and teacher trainers at both the intermediate and secondary levels.
Initiating change in an educational system is highly challenging and problematic. The
teachers are often faced with learning new skills and a high level of uncertainty. Fullan
(1991) points to this idea and states, “Learning a new skill and entertaining new
conceptions create doubts and feelings of awkwardness or incompetence” (p. 46).
Students often prefer the safety and comfort of existing educational approaches and are
often concerned that the new approaches will be more demanding and challenging to
them (Yilmaz & Kilicoglu, 2013). Parents are often concerned that the changes will
have a negative impact on the performance of their children (Alamassi et al., 2015).
Educational administrators, although the primary drivers of the change, may be
unwilling to adopt the organisational-level change that is required for the change to be
effective.
1.3.2 Acceptance of CLT
As a result of the unsatisfactory results of many approaches in the field of teaching
English as a second or foreign language, such as grammar-translation, situational
7
language teaching and audiolingual methods among others, the communicative
approach has appeared and been introduced by those who are interested in education in
general and teaching English in particular (Koosha & Yakhabi, 2013; Richards &
Rodgers, 1986). In the United States, audio lingualism had been rejected as failing to
assist learners to understand the nature of language (Richards & Rodgers, 1986).
Situational language teaching had been rejected as understanding language solely from
context (Richards & Rodgers, 1986). It was considered by many linguists and teachers
that students needed to develop communicative competency and to gain a better
understanding of the uniqueness of language (Richards & Rodgers, 1986). CLT
appeared to offer this.
Educators, linguists, psycholinguists have shown a remarkable interest in CLT
(Nicholas & Starks, 2014). The Saudi Arabia government recognised the global shift
towards the communicative approach as a preferred approach to improving competence
in English (Batawi, 2006). This was a shift to valuing communication and the actual
usage of the language over grammatical rules and vocabulary. The previous approach
whereby learners spent their time memorizing grammatical rules and vocabulary
without, in most cases, paying any attention to how rules and words are used effectively
in communication was deemed to have been ineffective in improving the English
language students in Saudi Arabia.
1.3.3 Use of activities in CLT
Many different types of activities can be introduced in CLT such as games, role-play, or
simulation (Jacobs & Farrell, 2003; Liton, 2012; Manalullaili, 2015; Nunan, 1991;
Oxford, 2003; Rajab, 2013; Richards & Rogers, 2003; Thomson, 2012; Wong, 2012;
Yang & Cheung, 2003). These activities promote speaking, listening, writing, and
8
reading practice. Teachers sometimes create their own activities to suit their students’
needs. Any activities employed in the classroom have to be carefully designed to suit
the level of the students. If not, students could be bored if the activities are too easy, or
lose their self-confidence if too difficult. In role-play, for instance, students are asked to
act or to perform the role of a certain person, such as a policeman, a driver, or a
shopkeeper. The teacher creates a situation or asks the students to create their own
situation. Then they start their role in the target language. The importance of this task
(role-play) lies in the fact that it gives the students the opportunity to practise the target
language in different social contexts.
1.3.4 Development of Language Teaching Methods
Second language (L2) acquisition has historically been dominated by the grammatical
method (Richards & Rogers, 2001). This method was characterised by the provision of
vocabulary lists and grammatical rules to the learner. The student was often involved in
the translation of text and there was little or no oral component (Richards & Rogers,
2001). The lack of an oral element fostered calls for new approaches from
educationalists and linguists (Richards & Rogers, 2001). In response to this need, the
Direct Method was developed that sought to teach people language in natural and
spontaneous manner (Richards & Rogers, 2001). Only the target language was spoken
in the classroom. The student’s competence was developed gradually and in a learning
environment where oral communication dominated. The greatest barrier to the
widespread adoption of the method was the lack of native speakers in the language. The
other method that gained some degree of acceptance was the Audiolingual Method that
focused on students mimicking and memorising oral language (Rivers, 1964). The main
problems with this method were teacher assumption of the role of the drillmaster and
9
the lack of engagement by the learner. The focus on removing all errors meant that this
overshadowed the communication of meaning (Willis, 2004). The Direct and
Audiolingual methodologies foreshadowed the development of CLT.
The implementation of CLT has rapidly increased since the mid-1970s, and the practice
was subsequently influenced by the early version of Long’s (1996) Interaction
Hypothesis. Long’s Interaction Hypothesis evolved in the 1980s from the work of Hatch
(1978). The Interaction Hypothesis is founded on the belief that second language
acquisition is enhanced through comprehensible input and that, through interaction, the
changes that a learner has to make in order to make the input comprehensible improves
their second language acquisition (Ellis, 1991). The learners signal to others through
negotiation that they do not understand, and the resulting interaction enables the
learners to “understand and use the language that was incomprehensible” (Mackey,
1999, p. 558). The learner might also “receive more or different input and have more
opportunities for output” (Mackey, 1999, p. 558). Through language production, the
learner comes to understand syntax (Swain, 1995). It is the role of the teacher to create a
learning context that gives the learner access to comprehensible input (Thu, 2009). Pica
empirically tested Long’s interaction hypothesis. Pica (1987) established the importance
of the social context in the development of proficiency in second language acquisition.
Over time, the interaction hypothesis has broadened out to form CLT. Since then,
teachers of second and foreign languages have been encouraged to introduce
communicative methods in their teaching. The centre point of CLT depends exclusively
on engaging students in a positive way through pair and/or group work. Swarbrick
(1994) describes the CLT approach for British secondary schools as a revelation in the
10
educational process and “the revolution in languages education which has taken place in
recent years under the banner of the ‘communicative approach’” (p. 1).
1.3.5 Comparison of CLT Approach with Grammatical and Audiolingual
Table 1 presents a comparison of the grammatical, audiolingual and CLT approaches,
compiled from the research of Badger and Yan (2008).
Table 1: Comparison of Grammatical, Audiolingual, and CLT Approaches Components Grammatical Audiolingual CLT
Pedagogical
orientation Focus on student’s
knowledge of L2
Emphasis on formal
accuracy
Balanced attention to
the four language skills
Attention to reading and
writing
Predominant attention to
aural and oral skills
Focus on students’
ability to use the L2
Emphasis on formal
accuracy
Instructional
content and
presentation Explain grammar rules
Explicit and direct
correction of learner
errors
Use of the L2 in
conducting the lesson
Illustrate grammar rules
Use of L2 in conducting
the lesson
Inductive teaching of
grammar
Explain texts sentence by
sentence
Inductive teaching of
grammar
Teaching of
communicative
functions
Parsing of sentences in
texts
Cultures of L2-speaking
peoples
Contrastive analysis of L1
and L2
Use of open-ended
questions
Explicit and direct
correction of learner
errors.
Language practice
activities Grammar activities Sentence pattern practice Teacher-student
interaction in L2
Translation exercises Reading-aloud of
dialogues and texts
Games & activities
resembling real-world
tasks
Memorisation of
dialogues and texts
Constant exposure to
new language input
Prepared language
performance
Communication in L2
among students
Integrated practice in
the four language skills
Reading & writing abut
various topics
Listening and speaking
about various topics
11
Teacher and
learner roles Teacher talks to the class Teacher-fronted
instruction
Pair and small group
work
Teacher-fronted
instruction Teacher controls the class
Peer feedback and
evaluation
Teacher controls the class
Learner materials Structure-based textbooks Structure-based textbooks
Teacher-developed
materials
Adherence to prescribed
textbooks Authentic materials
Knowledge about
grammar & vocabulary Ability to use the L2
Inauthentic texts
Competence/ Demonstrate structural Understand rules Communicate
Assessment competence govern communication in target language in
variety of situations
Translation exercises Prepared language Role plays
Comprehension tests
(Source: Badger & Yan, 2008, pp. 5–8)
According to Penner (1995), the CLT approach considers that learning involves skill
development. This is a shift from the knowledge receiving process inherent within the
grammatical approach. The underlying philosophy of the CLT approach is that students
learn through the usage and experimentation of language within defined contexts. Errors
are accepted as being part of the learning process and signal that the student is engaged
in learning the language. The CLT approach is founded in the belief that English is
“knowing how to,” involving the three elements of skills, proficiency, and functions,
while the traditional grammatical approach focuses on the “knowledge of grammar,
lexicon, and rules” (Penner, 1995, p. 5). The change from grammatical to
communicative language teaching is therefore is a significant second-order change that
is challenging with a potentially high level of resistance from the stakeholders.
As Table 1 indicates, there is considerable difference between the grammatical and
audiolingual approaches and CLT. On the dimension of pedagogical orientation, the
grammatical approach focuses on student knowledge, reading and writing and formal
accuracy. As the approach to teaching second language competence shifted through the
12
audiolingual approach, the pedagogical orientation was to aural and oral skills. CLT
seeks to restore the balance between reading, writing, listening and speaking and
emphasising usage over knowledge. On the dimension of instructional content and
presentation, the grammatical approach focused on teaching rules through text, the
correction of errors and establishing linkages between the first language and the second
language of the learner. The audiolingual approach retained the explicit correction of
errors but adopted a more inductive approach using the second language. CLT adopted
the elements of the audiolingual approach and introduced a stronger contextual
component to the learning situation. In respect to language practice activities, the
grammatical approach involved grammatical and translation exercises. The audiolingual
approach saw a significant shift towards language performance exercises, sentence
pattern practice, the reading aloud of texts and memorisation. For CLT, the dominance
of context meant that interaction in real-world experiences between both learners and
the teachers extended the range of activities and practices adding to the complexity of
lesson planning for teachers. The teacher role shifted from a teacher-orientated
approach in the grammatical approach to a learner-orientated approach for CLT. The
highly structured textbooks used for the grammatical approach survived into in the
audiolingual approach; but were replaced by individualised teacher developed materials
in the CLT approach (Warschauer & Kern, 2000). The shift from grammatical to CLT
therefore increased the expectations placed on the teacher in terms of classroom
management, lesson design and activity development.
Richards and Rodgers (1986) stated that this approach arose because the audio-
lingual and grammatical approaches were judged to be inadequate for the teaching of
foreign languages. However, as Pica (2000) points out, cultural, social, and educational
13
contexts may influence the success of the application of this approach and some of the
available paradigms may present shortcomings or not achieve the goals sought.
Teachers may change the strategies in delivering English courses, and this will need to
be examined and investigated according to the different aspects deployed in classrooms.
This is very important in the context of this research as the investigation considers the
impact of the cultural, social and educational contexts on the implementation of CLT in
Saudi Arabia.
Well-known scholars and educators such as Richards and Rodgers (1986), Rosenthal
and Sloane (1987), and Pica (2000) suggest that the audio-lingual and grammatical
approaches may not be enough to ensure desired learner outcomes, as they do not
ensure sufficient competence in all the components of language: speaking, reading,
writing and listening. Teaching grammar only to learners is insufficient for them to
communicate with others. Applying the rules of grammar to real life situations in
society and other practical applications does not give sufficient competence to
communicate. Despite the global reach of the communicative approach and its adoption
for teaching English at all levels of education: elementary, middle and secondary
school, and post-secondary, contextual factors often made it difficult for teachers to
apply the concept (Kianiparsa, 2015). The introduction of CLT has met with limited
success in non-Western countries.
1.3.6 Communicative Competence
Hymes (1971) first coined the concept of “communicative competence” in contrast to
Chomsky’s (1965) theory of competence. For Chomsky, the focus of linguistic theory is
to identify the abstract skills of speakers that allow them to create structurally accurate
sentences in a language. On the other hand, according to Hymes (1971), such an
14
interpretation of linguistic theory is fruitless. Instead, linguistic theory has to be viewed
as belonging to a broader theory encompassing communication and culture. That is, the
focus of Hymes’ theory of communicative competence is the knowledge a speaker
needs to communicate effectively in a speech community. Communicative competence
alludes to a speaker’s capacity to employ language correctly in various social situations
and to speak, write, read and listen with linguistic accomplishment.
According to Hymes (1971), people become communicatively effective when their
language understanding allows them to decide:
1. “whether something is formally possible and to what degree;
2. whether something is feasible by virtue of the means of implementation
available;
3. whether something is appropriate (adequate, happy, successful) in relation to
a context in which it is used and evaluated;
4. whether something is in fact done, actually performed, and what its doing
entails.” (p. 385).
First, the formal possibility of language refers to the grammatical, cultural and
communicative possibilities in a language. The communicator is able to make a
judgment as to the whether the communication meets the grammatical rules. Second,
feasibility concerns the psycholinguistic factors and the cultural elements that influence
the communication. At this level, the communicator can apply their knowledge to a
practical interaction. Third, appropriateness refers to the contextual elements and
requires the learner to have tacit knowledge of language and context. Fourth, the
individual must be involved in the actual performance of the language. The effective
communicator in a language understands the rule of use to achieve communicative
competence. The individual is able to select the appropriate response from a range of
15
possibilities given the contextual factors. These factors consequently combine so that
the person understands the people that they are communicating with, the subject of the
communication, the purpose of the communication, the context in which the
communication is occurring, the nature of the relationship between the people
communicating, the impression and the information conveyed within the
communicative time constraints.
Communicative competence contrasts sharply with grammatical competence, which
aims at mastering grammatical rules (Table 1). Communicative competence, on the
other hand, comprises the following features of language knowledge:
a. “Knowing how to use language for a range of different purposes and
functions;
b. Knowing how to vary our use of language according to the setting and the
participants (e.g., knowing when to use formal and informal speech or when
to use language appropriately for written as opposed to spoken
communication);
c. Knowing how to produce and understand different types of texts (e.g.,
narratives, reports, interviews, conversations);
d. Knowing how to maintain communication despite having limitations in
one’s language knowledge (e.g., through using different kinds of
communication strategies).” (Richards, 2006, p. 3)
Hymes (1972) indicated that CLT encompasses a number of elements in the way it
addresses language teaching and is now the “norm” in this sector. Hymes invented the
term “communicative competence” to refer to the social and functional characteristics
of our capacity to impart and understand messages and to negotiate meanings
interpersonally within a specific context. Developiong communicative competence
involves not only grammatical knowledge of the language, but also knowledge of
16
when, where and to whom to use appropriate language in a communicative event. A
decade later, Dolle and Willems (1984) showed that CLT was the most acceptable
language approach for English language teachers. The communicative approach
focuses on how to order a language syllabus and the resources to be used as
communicative tools for achieving the expected outcomes of teaching a language.
Many scholars (including Canale, 1983; Canale & Swain, 1980; Swain, 1985) argue that
communicative competence cannot be achieved unless learners are competent in the
following four aspects:
a. Grammatical competence: also called grammatical competence, it refers to
how learners employ lexis, syntax, and structures.
b. Sociolinguistic competence: refers to the learners’ correct use of language in
a variety of contexts and situations.
c. Discourse competence: refers to the speakers’ capacity to speak and write
correctly and meaningfully.
d. Strategic competence: refers to how strategies are used to compensate for
deficiencies in other areas of competence.
Savignon (2001) differentiates between communicative competence and communicative
ability. According to him, communicative competence relates to the capacity to
understand input, express oneself, and deal with meaning. Communicative ability, on
the other hand, refers to the ability to understand meaning and the correct use of forms.
Accordingly, grammar is important to achieve a good proficiency in communication,
which suggests the learning of grammar is important for improved communication
skills. Richards (2006) points out,
“While grammatical competence is an important dimension of language
learning, it is clearly not all that is involved in learning a language since one can
master the rules of sentence formation in a language and still not be very
17
successful at being able to use the language for meaningful communication. ” (p.
3).
1.4 Interpretations of CLT
CLT is not a method. CLT is a broad theoretical position drawing on a wide range of
theories that has spawned a wide variety of different approaches and methodologies
(Badger & Yan, 2008; Richards & Rogers, 2001). This has given rise to a wide range of
interpretations. For some CLT could mean focusing on conversation and unrestricted
discussion activities to the detriment of grammar. That is, its focus is spoken language,
with grammar and grammatical rules considered to be less important. Over a generation
after Hymes, Richards considers the common understandings supporting CLT to be:
1. “People learn a language best when using it to do things rather than through
studying how language works and practicing rules.
2. Grammar is no longer important in language teaching.
3. People learn a language through communicating in it.
4. Errors are not important in speaking a language.
5. CLT is only concerned with teaching speaking.
6. Classroom activities should be meaningful and involve real communication.
7. Dialogs are not used in CLT.
8. Both accuracy and fluency are goals in CLT.
9. CLT is usually described as a method of teaching.” (Richards, 2006, p. 6)
Richards sees CLT as including classroom activities emerging from changing roles for
teachers and learners in pursuit of the nine principles governing the aims of language
teaching. However, other proponents of CLT are more orientated to the theoretical
position of CLT.
CLT has its roots in Halliday’s (1970) functional account of the way language is used.
In Halliday’s words: “Linguistics is concerned with the description of speech acts or
18
texts, since only through the study of language in use are all the functions of language,
and therefore all components of meaning, brought into focus” (1970, p. 145). According
to Halliday, language carries out seven elementary functions for children learning their
first language:
1. “the instrumental function: using language to get things;
2. the regulatory function: using language to control the behavior of others;
3. the interactional function: using language to create interaction with others;
4. the personal function: using language to express personal feelings and
meanings;
5. the heuristic function: using language to learn and to discover;
6. the imaginative function: using language to create a world of the
imagination;
7. the representational function: using language to communicate information.”
(1975, pp. 11–17)
Berns (1984) points out that central to language learning is interaction. This indicates
that for language learning to be effective there needs to be interpersonal activity.
Furthermore, this interpersonal activity is grounded in a social context that the student
needs to understand:
“… language is interaction; it is interpersonal activity and has a clear
relationship with society. In this light, language study has to look at the use
(function) of language in context, both its linguistic context (what is uttered
before and after a given piece of discourse) and its social, or situational, context
(who is speaking, what their social roles are, why they have come together to
speak). ” (Berns, 1984, p. 5)
Willis suggests that CLT has six types of tasks:
1. “Listing tasks: For example, students might have to make up a list of things
they would pack if they were going on a beach vacation.
19
2. Sorting and ordering: Students work in pairs and make up a list of the most
important characteristics of an ideal vacation.
3. Comparing: Students compare ads for two different supermarkets.
4. Problem-solving: Students read a letter to an advice columnist and suggest a
solution to the writer’s problems.
5. Sharing personal experience: Students discuss their reactions to an ethical or
moral dilemma.
6. Creative tasks: Students prepare plans for redecorating a house.” (Willis,
1991, cited in Richards, 2006, pp. 31–32)
Long (1985) proposes one of the most important meanings for “task”. According to
Long a task is:
“… a piece of work undertaken for oneself or for others, freely or for some
reward. Thus examples of tasks include paiting a fence, dressing a child, filling
out a form, buying a pair of shoes, making an airline reservation, borrowing a
library book, taking a driving test, typing a letter, weighing a patient, sortiong a
letters, making a hotel reservation, writing a check, finding a street destination
and helping someone across the road.” (p. 89).
1.5 CLT in Practice
The focus of CLT is on meaningful communication not structure or grammatical rules,
while recognising that both still have a role to play in assisting the learner to
communicate more effectively. The students, in this approach, are to use language to
accomplish tasks, instead of studying the language and memorizing its rules. A
communicative syllabus is based primarily on functional development, which replaced
structural development in previous methods. Functional development depends on using
language, whereas structural development depends on knowing grammatical rules, such
as past tense, conditionals and passive. In addition to this, since fluency and
communication are more important than accuracy in CLT method, there is less
20
emphasis on error correction. Errors are considered natural and expected (Badger &
Yan, 2008). The teacher should not correct every sentence immediately. Accordingly,
the importance of real and significant language input, drawn from real-world
experiences and authentic texts, becomes central. CLT changes the roles of both teacher
and student. The teacher becomes more of an observer while students engage with each
other to perform their tasks.
A classroom during a communicative activity is far from quiet, as students leave their
seats to work as groups to complete a task. Larsen-Freeman (1986) indicates greater
onus on participation may mean that students gain confidence in their overall ability to
use a particular language. Students are more responsible for management of their own
learning. Sometimes the student could lack the knowledge or have incomplete
knowledge, but still be able to communicate in an effective way. For instance, if a
student does not know the meaning of something he can describe it. Instead of saying
“knife” if he does not know the term, he can say “something to cut with”. Accordingly,
“teachers become active facilitators of their students’ learning” (Larsen-Freeman,
1986). In communicative classrooms, students are encouraged to talk and interact with
others in order to develop competence in the language. The teacher behaves as a guide
or moderator since the aim is more fluent student performance.
The CLT teacher has two main roles:
1. To assist the progress of communication in the classroom
2. To be an autonomous contributor inside the learning-teaching class.
The teacher must also organise, analyse, research resources, motivate, counsel, and
guide students in the learning process. In addition, the teacher must be an actor and
21
entertainer in order to engage students and stimulate their interest, or risk losing their
attention with the result that they learn nothing.
Therefore, the traditional role of the teacher changes from that enacted in classes
working under more traditional methods. The teacher’s main duty in traditional
classrooms is to impart their knowledge to the students: “The language teacher has the
sole authority in the classroom and therefore should not be questioned, interrupted or
challenged” (Yen, 1987, p. 53). Such an authoritative status changes in CLT. Although
the role of teachers has changed and their apparent authority reduced, their proficiency
becomes an essential issue. Good teaching still requires a good teacher. Penner states:
“near native-speaker language proficiency and confidence are essential for
teachers using the CLT approach. Teachers are encouraged to utilize authentic
English language materials (radio broadcasts, newspaper articles, real-life
dialogues, etc.) rather than a prescribed textbook. Some of the activities that
encourage language use and learner autonomy involve group discussions, role
plays, creative writing, peer correction of errors, extensive reading skills
(skimming, scanning, etc.), guessing vocabulary meanings from context, playing
games, and singing songs. All these activities are based on assumptions about
learning.” (1995, p. 10).
Natural and real-life situations that make communication necessary are the centre of
CLT. Situations should be close to the students’ real life, connected with the student
social life. The role of the teacher is to set up a situation that students generally face or
encounter in real life. Where the grammar-translation and audio-lingual methods of
language teaching rely on memorization, repetition and drills, the communicative
approach can leave students in suspense with regard to the results of a class exercise,
which depend on the students’ reactions and responses. The fact that the real-life
simulations are changeable from day to day will create a sort of motivation to learn and
22
communicate. This arises from the students’ desire to communicate in significant ways
about topics to which they can relate.
So, the priority given to grammatical rules and competence in traditional approaches as
the center of language proficiency has been reduced in CLT, but not eliminated. In
previous methods, grammar was taught directly by the teacher with endless practice and
drills. Theories associated with traditional methods follow what is called “deductive”
methodology. However, in CLT, an “inductive” approach is used and students are
required to discover the rules on their own from given examples of grammar rules in
sentences. Grammar is not ignored in the CLT approach (Pica, 2000).
Stern (1992) argues that the absence of native speakers is one of the most difficult
problems faced by teachers wanting to make classroom learning communicative.
Apparently, CLT has more success when English is taught as a second language in a
country where English is regularly spoken in the home environment because the
learning environment away from school is generally very supportive of development
within the “new” language. More opportunities arise for students to interact in the target
language with native speakers in real life, thereby strengthening what they learn at
school. Moreover, students are motivated to improve their spoken English as it is
essential in day-to-day living. On the other hand, in the EFL context, CLT encounters
many more difficulties due to a lack of genuine resources, uninterested students, an
inadequate learning environment, and teachers unskilled in English.
Motivation can be considered a serious challenge that CLT could face. How to motivate
the students to participate in different tasks is one of the constant questions faced by
teachers. Belchamber (2007) states that motivation includes two main issues, the first
23
one is to engage students in the tasks and to build their confidence. He adds that
students are more likely to contribute if trust and support in the classroom are available.
The starting point of participation is to do things such as pair-checking of answers and
the opportunity to discuss topics in small groups before performing them in front of the
class.
1.6 CLT and error correction
Error correction, which communicative language teachers may ignore, has been a
subject of much debate. Over-correction affects students’ confidence, as they may feel
intimidated or discouraged if their conversation is continually interrupted for minor
errors. As a result, students may forget what they wanted to say and lose confidence in
their ability to get anything right. Over-correction of written work can be just as
damaging to students. When a teacher covers a student’s written work with profuse
corrections and comments in red ink, the student may feel like giving up in defeat.
Thus, in previous theories, the focus on accuracy rather than fluency or comprehension
has been detrimental to students. A principle basic tenet of language teaching is that the
teacher’s role is to encourage and support students, not the opposite. Fluency is
emphasised rather than accuracy in CLT (Ahmad & Rao, 2013; Al-Mekhlafi, 2011;
Ansarey, 2012; Asassfeh, Khwaileh, Al-Shaboul, & Alshboul, 2012; Belchamber, 2007;
Brehneh & Riasati, 2014; Canale, 1983; Jacobs & Farrell, 2003; Richards, 2006).
Willis (2004) points out the effect correcting grammatical mistakes has on students. He
argues that students often had high anxiety levels due to the teacher over-correcting
student mistakes. Many traditional methods such as the Audiolingual Method have not
succeeded in aiding learners to become proficient speakers in the CLT. Willis states,
24
“This was because the emphasis was on eradication of errors and accurate production of
the target forms, not on communication of meanings” (2004, p. 4).
1.7 Research Project
According to Jacobs and Farrell (2003), CLT constitutes a great shift in the way we
look at teaching and learning processes, teachers and learners. This is a key reason for
this research project, as an assessment of the effective introduction of CLT requires an
assessment of the degree that the attitudes of both teachers and students have changed in
respect to teaching and learning processes. Such a shift should lead to a greater
acceptance of the 10 key components of CLT as compiled by Jacobs and Farrell (2003).
1. “Focusing greater attention on the role of learners rather than the external
stimuli learners are receiving from their environment. Thus, the center of
attention shifts from the teacher to the student. This shift is generally known
as the move from teacher centered instruction to learner-centered instruction.
2. Focusing greater attention on the learning process rather than the products
that learners produce. This shift is known as the move from product-oriented
to process-oriented instruction.
3. Focusing greater attention on the social nature of learning rather than on
students as separate, decontextualized individuals
4. Focusing greater attention on diversity among learners and viewing these
differences not as impediments to learning but as resources to be recognized,
catered to, and appreciated. This shift is known as the study of individual
differences.
5. In research and theory-building, focusing greater attention on the views of
those internal to the classroom rather than solely valuing the views of those
who come from outside to study classrooms, investigate and evaluate what
goes on there, and engage in theorizing about it. This shift is associated with
such innovations as qualitative research, which highlights the subjective and
affective, the participants’ insider views, and the uniqueness of each context.
25
6. Along with this emphasis on context comes the idea of connecting the school
with the world beyond as means of promoting holistic learning.
7. Helping students to understand the purpose of learning and develop their
own purpose.
8. A whole-to-part orientation instead of a part-to-whole approach. This
involves such approaches as beginning with meaningful whole text and then
helping students understand the various features that enable texts to function,
e.g., the choice of words and the text’s organizational structure.
9. An emphasis on the importance of meaning rather than drills and other forms
of rote learning.
10. A view of learning as a lifelong process rather than something done to
prepare students for an exam.” (p. 8).
In conclusion, although there has been global acceptance of CLT, there are many issues
involved in its implementation that create significant barriers. The social, cultural and
attitudinal barriers of both teachers and students can be sizeable in non-Western
countries. These barriers can result in the misunderstanding of the nature of CLT and at
worst create an insurmountable obstacle that prevents the effective implementation of
CLT. It is therefore important to consider the introduction of CLT into an educational
system at an attitudinal level in order to determine the degree to which both student and
teacher’s attitudes have changed towards learning EFL. If an attitudinal change has not
occurred, it is highly likely that the attempt to implement CLT has not been effective.
This need within the Saudi Arabian EFL system that has prompted the present research.
1.8 Saudi Arabian context
In the Saudi Arabian context, Al-Hazmi suggests that the majority of teachers in Saudi
Arabia, whether locals or expatriates, are not sufficiently qualified or experienced to
respond to the challenges of an EFL classroom. He explains that most of them “are not
26
well trained, nor do they receive in-service education upon assuming their posts at
schools” (2003, p. 342). Many EFL teachers in Saudi schools have insufficient skills
and are out of date with regard to EFL teaching methodologies. The recent adoption of
the communicative approach requires adjusting the taught materials, assessments and
other components of English programs. Although the global and national trend has
favoured the use of teaching resources relevant to the communicative approach (CA),
the training of teachers themselves has been neglected and they lack the expertise and
knowledge required for teaching English. At the research level, there have been a
considerable number of studies to investigate the success of adopting CLT in EFL
countries. Some of these studies promote the CA as an effective means of developing
competence in a second language. Other studies have suggested that CLT has failed to
deliver the anticipated benefits over traditional teaching methods and report certain
problems in implementing CLT. For the most part the focus of research has been on
teacher behavior, while their attitudes and beliefs have been overlooked, thus creating a
gap in understanding the use of CLT that could be investigated. This study aims to
investigate teacher and student attitudes regarding the utilisation of the CLT approach
in the Saudi context.
English was first taught in Saudi schools around the middle of the 19th
century with an
emphasis on the Direct and Structure-based methods (Alsobaihi, 2005). Between the
1950s and 1980s, other methods were rarely used within the education system. For
example, English language teachers in Saudi Arabia shunned the Audio-lingual
approach as they believe that this method is inadequate as a tool for underachieving
students (Zaid, 1993). In recent times, the communicative approach was recommended
with minor changes. However, Alsobaihi (2005) contends that a new teaching
27
paradigm (similar to the CLT) is needed to produce better outcomes for learners and for
improving professional competencies.
The adoption of the communicative approach as a teaching method in Saudi Arabia was
driven by the belief that the approach would provide positive outcomes. CLT was
introduced by educational administrators in 2005 as being an effective means of
addressing the poor performance of Saudi Arabia students in their acquisition of
English. The effective implementation of CLT requires the adjustment of teaching
resources, changing, how assessments are conducted and the reorientation of the
teacher–student relationship but these things do not appear to have been considered in
the Saudi context. Questions of visibility, the challenges, critical success factors, the
design of pedagogical methods in relation to applying the CLT within the Saudi public
educational system also remain unanswered, particularly with regard to the use of and
deployment of the new technologies and computer-mediated methods for teaching
English in Saudi Arabia as recommended by recent studies (Al-Hashash, 2007). This
study investigates some of the problems that the introduction of the CLT method has
encountered.
Such problems are intensified by the fact that the local assessment process did not
undergo the same changes that occurred in terms of teaching approaches or learning
materials. The Saudi Arabia Department of Education retained a summative assessment
that was grammatical in its orientation (Alrashidi & Phan, 2015; Al-Seghayer, 2015; Al
Shumaimeri, 2003; Assalahi, 2013; Gulnaz, Alfaqih, & Mashhour, 2015; Rahman &
Alhaisoni, 2013; Shah, Hussain, & Naseef, 2013). Assessment in a subject influences
results of both students and teachers. Aware that they will be assessed by a grammatical
methodology, students may undervalue the benefits of the CLT approach and view it as
28
an intrusion that interferes with their capacity to achieve an excellent grade in the final
assessment. The performance of teachers is linked to the performance of their students.
Knowing that the assessment is grammatically based, the teacher will seek to develop
the skills of the student in this approach rather than develop their language competence
through the use of CLT. This can create a professional dilemma for the teacher
(Assalahi, 2013; Mowlaie & Rahimi, 2010).
1.9 Operational definitions
Attitude: is defined as a state of mind or view in relation to CLT.
Audiolingual method: This methodology focuses on the accuracy of the student’s use
of aural and oral skills. The instructional language used in instruction is the second
language. Grammar is taught in an implicit or inductive manner. The teacher corrects
errors immediately. The teacher is the primary means of instruction. The use of
technology through language laboratories is a primary means of instruction under this
methodology.
Communicative language teaching (CLT): is an approach that focuses on language
communication practices and skills depending on a number of features such as, self-
confidence and personal experience. It is founded on the theory that communication is
the primary purpose of language.
Communicative approach (CA): is an approach for the development of L2
competence that encourages meaningful and real communication.
Communicative competence: the ability to be able to interpret and enact appropriate
social behaviours in the target language.
29
EFL learner: is a person who is learning English whose first language is not English.
Grammar translation: is a methodology of teaching language that focuses on
knowledge of the language rather than on its use. The orientation of the approach is
towards reading and writing. Students learn the rules of grammar from the teacher.
Interaction hypothesis: Second language acquisition occurs when learners
communicate with native speakers and are required to make modifications to their
communication in order to be understood. The Interaction Hypothesis centres on two
constructs: input and interaction.
Task: Skehan (1998) gives a comprehensive definition for task:
a. “meaning is primary,
b. learners are not given other people’s meanings to regurgitate,
c. there is some sort of relationship to comparable real-world activities,
d. task completion has a priority, and
e. the assessment of tasks is in terms of outcome.” (p. 147)
1.10 Research objectives
This project will investigate the attitudes of teachers using the CLT approach for
designing and teaching English courses in Saudi Arabian high schools, 10 years after
central mandate of the approach. This study is intended to achieve the following key
objectives:
To examine the level of awareness and comprehension of the CLT among
private school teachers and students.
To examine teachers’ attitudes regarding the use of the CLT method in
language classrooms.
30
To examine the extent of the CLT approach influence on Saudi students’
attitude towards learning English language.
To examine the effect of applying the CLT approach on Saudi English
language students’ assessment outcomes.
To compare the attitudes of students and teachers involved in CLT with
those involved with the traditional grammatical approach.
1.11 Research questions
To achieve the objectives, the research will address the following key question:
What is the effect of applying the CLT approach for Saudi Arabian students
learning English in the participating private schools?
The sub-questions are as follows:
1. What is the level of awareness and comprehension of communicative
language teaching (CLT) among teachers and students in Saudi private
schools?
2. To what extent does CLT influence Saudi teacher and student attitudes to
learning English?
3. What impact does CLT have on students’ assessment results in Saudi
English language classes?
1.12 Research significance
The study aims to shed light on teachers’ and students’ attitudes and awareness
regarding the use of the CLT approach in English language classrooms, while
simultaneously assessing the impact of CLT on learning outcomes. This research will be
31
beneficial to Saudi educational managers, educational leaders and decision makers to
improve the achievement of their goals in the area of teaching the English language.
The research results have the potential to contribute to the design and development of
improved policies and processes in the field of teaching English as a foreign language
that could be accepted or applied within other environments and workplaces in the
region and/or worldwide in areas with characteristics resembling the Saudi educational
marketplace.
Although there is previous research on understanding the effectiveness of CLT, it has
not been undertaken widely in the cultural and social context of Saudi Arabia. This
research specifically focuses on the use of CLT as one of the latest approaches for
teaching English language. The practices and methods used for the curriculum design,
students’ evaluation, teaching and learning procedures, and other practices in Saudi
private schools differ considerably from those used in the Western world as evidenced
from the above literature reviewed above and in the following chapter. It should be of
interest to assess whether the use and deployment of the CLT approach within the Saudi
educational workplace improves the quality of teaching outcomes and the motivation of
Saudi students and teachers. Improving the quality of teaching English language is
crucial for students, the education system and even for the Saudi economy. This
research hopes to exposed issues related to teaching English language in the Saudi
workplace are exposed for the benefit of educational organisations, researchers, students
and consequently to benefit the Saudi nation.
32
Chapter 2: A review of literature
2.1 Chapter overview
This chapter provides a review of literature on the research into teaching approaches to
English as a second language (ESL). Without overstatement, English is a second
language for a large percentage of Saudi Arabian society (EF, 2016). The challenges of
teaching English as a foreign and second language are discussed in this chapter. The
chapter assesses the development of different approaches from the grammatical
approach through to the communicative language approach. The second section of the
chapter focuses on the CLT approach’s features and development. The third section
looks at the use of CLT within the Saudi Arabia context. Finally, the chapter looks at
the research into teacher’s and student’s attitudes towards the introduction of CLT. This
is followed by an overview of cross-national policy borrowing. Finally, the chaper
concludes with a review of attitude and language assessment.
2.2 Theoretical review
Many language researchers have considered the CLT approach. This section of the
literature review touches a number of topics such as: Methods of English language
teaching prior to the CLT approach, definition of CLT, history of CLT, goals of CLT,
features of CLT, and views and opinions of language researchers on CLT.
2.3 Methods of English language teaching prior to the communicative language
teaching approach
A number of methods have historically characterised the teaching of foreign languages,
in on-going attempt to discover more effective and efficient ways of helping foreigners
to learn the language(s) of other places. Each method was based on different ideas of
33
what constitutes a language and of how outsiders might best learn a language, so
constituting the “changing winds and shifting sands of language teaching” (Brown,
1994, p. 52). For Stern (1983), “The conceptualization of language teaching has a long,
fascinating, but rather tortuous history” (p. 453). This section will review the
methodological history of language teaching by charting contemporary methods of
language teaching against the background of a broad historical analysis from the
grammatical methodology to the CLT approach.
Stern (1983) puts forward the criteria that are considered relevant to theory
development in language teaching. Pages 27 to 31 suggest that they are:
“Usefulness and applicability: Practical effects on FL learning;
Explicitness: Principal assumptions stated and defined;
Coherence and consistency: Elements ordered and organized within a
system;
Comprehensiveness: Capacity to accept other special theories;
Explanatory power and verifiability: Capacity to predict events and admit
research and;
Simplicity and clarity: Easy to understand and direct”.
The various methods for English teaching classify the language and define it in many
ways. Few of them recognise the language in terms of language and terminology
(Richards & Rodgers, 1986). The English language teaching methods were classified
into customary and pre-communicative methods just before the introduction of CLT.
Every type is intended to help students converse in the desired language (Larsen-
Freeman, 2004).
The Grammatical approach had its main prominence between the 1840s and 1940s. It
was the first modern approach introduced for teaching English as a second or foreign
34
language. The sentence structure associated with the grammar and vocabulary
components of the target language were the main units of this approach for teaching
English to EFL students (Richards & Rodgers, 1986). Prior to this, the Greek and Latin
languages codes were taught using the grammar translation method (GTM). Recently,
GTM has been used generally “for teaching modern languages particularly English for
EFL students” (Fogiel, 1996, p. 75). The features of the approach were presented in
Table 1 of the previous chapter. The features of this approach have had some effect on
teaching approaches in a number of countries. It is used widely throughout Asia (Chang,
2011). Disconnected lists of words and descriptions of grammar elements are used to
teach the vocabulary component. This way of introducing grammar teaching furnishes
the rules for assembling words to make sentences that focus on the shape and timbre of
words. In general, the reading element is introduced early on in the course being taught
by reading through difficult texts. There is little attention paid to the content of text
itself with emphasis placed on using the exercises for grammatical context and analysis
(Fogiel, 1996). This direction extended for a considerable period during the beginning
to the middle of the last century. However, in the late 1950s, this direction was
criticised when it was argued that structural theories of language are not capable of
accounting for humans’ main language property as well as the ingenuity and singularity
of individual sentences. In that period, the idea of “linguistic expertise” was introduced
to recognise that the student is an active and key element in the learning practice, also
known as the “cognitive paradigm” (Richards & Rodgers, 1986).
However, early challenges to the grammatical approach emerged between 1840 and the
1920s. Backlash against the structure-based approach led to the development of the
35
Natural Method, implemented for a period in Boston’s language schools. However, the
Natural Method involved a large amount of introductory grammar teaching and critique
of this furnished the foundation for the Direct Reading Approach (Pica, 2000), which
was widely used in France, Germany, and the USA. The Direct Reading Approach had
a lot of success in private language schools and later in non-commercial schools dating
from the 1920s. This method concentrated on the target language as a means of
communicating in the classroom focusing on commonplace vocabulary and sentences as
linguistic outcomes. However, its use of grammar and form as a starting point for
teaching led to serious critiques of the Direct Reading Approach late in the 1920s.
The audio-lingual approach emerged more recently, recommending that English should
be taught by “explaining the meaning of the linguistic components of the language
using nonverbal methods” (Nunan, 1991, p. 91). Structuralist theory, focusing on aural
and oral processes, provided the original foundation for the Audio-lingual Approach,
which was also supported by Behaviourist Psychology. The oral process proposes that
students learn to speak before moving on to reading and writing. Behaviourist
Psychology recommends practices based on repetition or drills to surmount the
variations between the mother language and the second or foreign language. However,
the passive student role within classes implementing this approach led to widespread
criticism and the question of formal language learning within everyday, communicative
situations remained unresolved. The elements underpinning the audio-lingual method
can be summarised as follows:
1. “Languages are different.
2. A language is a range of customs.
3. Language is speech not written.
36
4. A language is what is spoken by natives.
5. The language itself is taught not about the language.” (Moulton, 1961, p. 63)
The reason for the importance of this theory is best summarised by Brown (1980), who
points out:
“Then World War II broke out and suddenly the United States was thrust into a
worldwide conflict, heightening the need for Americans to become orally
proficient in the languages of both their allies and their enemies. The time was
ripe for a language teaching revolution. ” (p. 70)
The Reading Method contrasts with the Audio-Lingual Method, giving priority to
reading. This method depends on the following aspects:
1. “Vocabularies are taught within reading texts.
2. Graded reading text.
3. Intensive and extensive reading exercises are important.
4. Reading is the best way to language.
5. Spoken activity should not be neglected when using reading texts.”
(Alyousef, 2005, p. 148)
The Community Language Learning approach appeared as a major new approach
during the contemporary stage and operated by “introducing English through
counselling services and treating learners as customers or clients rather than as
students” (Curran, 1972, p. 125). The approach concentrates on the emotional needs of
the students to enable the learning process of the foreign language. However, the
approach has come under criticism because of the reported psychological aspects
connected with the student that could result in a challenge to provide further orientation
and specialist training with the teacher receiving counselling beforehand (Nunan, 1991).
37
Because of the perceived failings of the audio-lingual method, the situational method
(also known as oral) appeared as well during the modern stage in Britain. This method
suggested that the spoken component of a foreign language should be taught first by
oral transmission before presenting other modes of the language such as the textual or
written aspects. Furthermore, the reading and other elements should be given only after
the learner has attained oral proficiency (Richards & Rodgers, 1986). The situational
approach is also thought of as more of a communicative approach than a structural
approach with its goal of teaching grammar founded in contextual and communicative
situations. This contextual method is built on the concept that the linguistic elements of
the language are presented and practiced in a situation before any assimilation and
teaching of formal abstract elements. Many linguists and language teachers still find this
method to be adequate.
The Modern school and Contemporary stage also introduced the Silent Way approach
which recommended employing “a set of coloured rods and verbal commands to create
simple lingual situations controlled by the teacher and learners acquire the expressions
explaining the meanings and functions of these situations” (Gattegno, 1972, p. 80). The
learning hypotheses in this approach suggests that the learning process is promoted
when the student is actively involved, through the use of physical objects and by
problem-solving, rather than simply repeating or recalling teacher language (Richards &
Rodgers, 1986). The approach uses wall charts to display words and their equivalents in
different languages and colours. By manipulating colour, students learn the sequences
and relationships between words. As the students become more proficient the role of the
teacher diminishes.
38
The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages establishes a common
framework for language teaching across Europe to establish consistency (Council of
Europe, 2011). The approach advocated by the Framework is that language learning is
an active process that is involved in the performance of a specific task in a specific
context (Council of Europe, 2011). The Framework seeks to develop communicative
competence in the learner (Council of Europe, 2011). The Framework does not take a
theoretical position but requires that the language programme must state the theroeotical
framework upon which it is based (Council of Europe, 2011).
Total physical response (TPR) was a methodology that sought to integrate information
and skills using an individual’s kinaesthetic system. This approach was introduced in
1977 close to the contemporary stage. According to Asher, “TPR treats a second
language learning process in an adult similarly to the acquisition of a native language by
a child” (1979, p. 57), consequently placing great importance on learners acquiring a
basic level of speaking ability. TPR asserts that both adults and children should first be
taught a language through physical involvement before moving on to productive action
once they have acquired a sufficient level. The student listens in the classroom to
instructions from the teacher using the vaocabulary that forms the focus for a lesson.
The students respond by performing the physical action that they have been requested to
perform. Students learn words from listening and structure from deoding the
instructions. The instructions are repeated until the student is able to follow the
instructions. The designer of this method suggests using it as an addition to other
methods (Asher, 1979). This method’s effectiveness has also been questioned (Hunt,
Barnes, Powell, Lindsay, & Muijs, 2005).
39
The CLT “approach involves participants, their behaviour and beliefs, the objects of
linguistic discussion and word choice” (Richards & Rodgers, 2003, p. 58).
Fundamentally, this approach gives emphasis to practice as a means of improving
communicative abilities. With a communicative method, language teaching makes use
of everyday situations that demand communication. Thus, students have the possibility
of being involved in communicative situations in using the language. Therefore, the
activities are equipped towards encouraging “self-learning, interaction in authentic
situations, peer teaching, negotiation of meaning, completing tasks through language,
etc. where the lessons focus on some operation which the student would want to
perform in the target language” (Richards & Rodgers, 2003, p. 84). The teacher’s
involvement in this method is transformed to that of a coordinator or monitor of their
learner’s improvement or progress in language learning. The students, on the other
hand, will become actively involved in the learning process, where they do the majority
of the talking and take on the responsibility of their own learning.
Hunter (2009) has clearly summarised the advantage of CLT over all the previous
theories by pointing out that the CLT approach has privilege to be the last of a sequence
of methods. Each previous method was an attempt to solve the problems of language
and language learning, and a reaction against the inadequacies of the previous, partly- or
wholly-failed approach. Moreover, CLT arose as a response and solution to the
inadequacies of discredited audiolingual and structuralist teaching methods. The many
factors affecting language teaching, and determining or modifying the teaching process,
make it difficult to decide how to teach languages. However, the language teacher could
play a vital role in this respect. Stern (1983) points to this idea and states, “A language
40
teacher can express his theoretical conviction through classroom activities as much as
(or indeed, better than) through the opinions he voices in discussions at professional
meetings” (pp. 24–25).
2.4 Definition of CLT approach
The traditional view towards communication is that it involves the processes of
speaking and listening (Lewis, 2009). CLT arose from the need to elevate the
importance of the processes of speaking and listening when learning a language over the
processes of reading and writing (Koutropoulos, 2011). The goal of CLT is to develop
communicative competence in the individual (Richards & Rogers, 2001). CLT
recognises that language skills are required across the four dimensions of reading,
writing, speaking and listening (Hymes, 1972).
Academics, linguists and applied linguists adopt a range of differing views of the
acquisition of language. This has changed over time. They have considered language to
be a system, an ability that an individual developes and as a process of communication.
Berns (1990) defines the CLT as language teaching that “is based on a view of language
as communication, that is, language is seen as a social tool which speakers use to make
meaning; speakers communicate about something to someone for some purpose, either
orally or in writing” (p. 142).
Richards and Rodgers (2003) define CLT as an approach comprising a set of principles
as distinct from a methodology. CLT is a set of principles that reflect the communicated
opinion of language and language learning and that can underpin a broad array of
classroom procedures. At this moment in time, the most current misunderstanding of
41
CLT is that it is a way of teaching foreign language that concentrates on meaning to the
detriment of learning language forms. According to Widdowson (1990), CLT:
“… concentrates on getting learners to do things with language, to express
concepts and to carry out communicative acts of various kinds. The content of a
language course is now defined not in terms of forms, words and sentence
patterns, but in terms of concepts, or notions, which such forms are used to
express, and the communicative functions, which they are used to perform. ” (p.
159)
Richards and Rodgers (2003) define communicative competence as what the speaker
has to understand to be able to communicate in a particular speech sector. This requires
both knowledge and the capacity to employ language with regards to what is possible,
feasible, and appropriate in a language, and knowledge as to whether something (a
particular expression or grammatical construction for instance) is indeed done.
It could be seen from the above that students can use language through role play, games,
solving real-life problems instead of studying language as a subject with grammatical
rules, using dialogue as a tool of learning, acquiring the four skills (listening, speaking,
reading, and writing), students play an important role in the learning process while the
teacher is a facilitator.
CLT recognises the social purpose of communication: the language learner has to say or
find out something. This teaching method focuses on aiding the learner to deliver the
message. What is most important is that the learner can understand and be understood.
Communicative methodology concentrates on aiding the learner to improve particular
skills and competences: oral participation and expression, listening and reading
cognizance, and writing expression. In each class, students will be given the opportunity
42
to practice the target language in contextualised, practical, and real-life situations
through exercises with pre-defined outcomes.
2.5 History of CLT approach
Approaches for teaching ESL started late in the 1840s (Curran, 1972). Curran indicates
that the first approach was grammar-translation followed by the direct methods used in
the 1920s for teaching English. Gattegno (1972) reports that other new approaches have
developed in the 60 years that followed to construct and introduce new paradigms and a
broad spectrum of familiarly employed methodologies, including a range of approaches
that were instructional, situational, and audio-lingual in their approach. Yet, the CLT
method also developed in the 1970s founded on endorsed methods to restructure the
functional-based approaches (Curran, 1972; Gattegno, 1972; Howatt, 1984; Pica, 2000;
Richards & Rodgers, 1986). In the late 1950s, the CLT method was criticised when it
was argued that structural theories of language are unable to explain human language’s
principle aspect and the genius and oneness of individual sentences. During that time,
the concept of linguistics competence was brought in to back up this criticism which
believes that the student is an active and key element in the learning process (known as
the cognitive paradigm; Richards & Rodgers, 1986).
CLT had its origins in Britain in the 1960s as a substitute for the earlier structural
method.
“The work of the Council of Europe; the writings of Wilkins, Widdowson,
Candlin, Christopher Brumfit, Keith Johnson, and other British applied linguists
on the theoretical basis for a communicative or functional approach to language
teaching; the rapid application of these ideas by textbook writers; and the
equally rapid acceptance of these new principles by British language teaching
43
specialists, curriculum development centers, and even governments gave
prominence nationally and internationally to what came to be referred to as the
Communicative Approach, or simply Communicative Language Teaching. ”
(Richards & Rodgers, 1986, p. 154)
Michael (1998) indicates that CLT was the most important paradigm within the second
language teaching sector by the early 1980s. He points out that it was actually
performed in classrooms in numerous fashions. Simultaneously, there had been an
increase of L2 research of processes in classrooms, instead of the early research which
had focused completely on outcomes or products.
2.6 The goal of the CLT approach
Michael (1998) describes the CLT scheme developed by Spada and Frohlich (1995) that
was designed to equalise the balance and relationship between process and product not
only by outlining classroom processes, but also to highlight how those processes added
to successful learning outcomes.
CLT is born out of the requirement to concentrate on communicative competence in
language teaching rather than a simple mastery of forms. Richards and Rodgers indicate
that the “CLT approach aims to make communicative competence the goal of language
teaching and to develop procedures for teaching the four language skills (reading,
writing, speaking, and listening) that acknowledge the interdependence of language and
communication” (2003, p. 123).
44
Piepho (1981) tries to give a comprehensive idea about what CLT is. He considers that
there are many levels of the communicative approach. He points out the following
levels:
1. “An integrative and content level.
2. A linguistic and instrumental level.
3. An affective level of interpersonal relationships and conduct.
4. A level of individual learning needs.
5. A general educational level of extra-linguistic goals.” (p. 8)
One of the main objectives of the communicative language approach is to help the
students to talk instead of listening to the teacher who in turn becomes a listener.
The primary goal of the Communicative approach (to language teaching) is for students
to improve their “communicative competence”, which means that the learners would
acquire understanding of communicative roles within the language and the linguistic
ability to carry out the different types of functions (Spada, 2007). Therefore, a number
of teachers believe that CLT focuses on speaking and listening so as to improve
learners’ communicative skills by concentrating on meaning, and not worrying too
much about error correction to maintain the flow of conversation (Wu, 2008). Classes
using the structural method are usually taught in the learners’ native tongue with
minimal usage of the target language. Isolated word lists are used as part of the learning
process. The words on the vocabulary list contain an explanation of their grammatical
element. The grammatical explanation provides the rules that the learner can use to
construct sentences.The reading element generally starts near the beginning of the
taught course by introducing difficult texts to read. For the most part, the content of the
45
text itself is ignored and is looked on as exercises in grammatical context and analysis
(Fogiel, 1996).
As Dolle and Willems (1984) state, the CLT method is used by many teachers under a
variety of names: notional-functional, proficiency teaching, and CLT. Berns (1984) and
others explain that language is a relational activity with a defined relationship to society
and culture rather than just dry components.
2.7 The features of the CLT approach
Spada and Frohlich (1995) were answering worries that other programs had no
psychological validity. They also identified some issues to be considered in
communication and interaction approaches which are strongly held to be significant
contributors to successful language learning. Spadsa and Frohlich point out that the
CLT approach is not a teaching approach based on a range of classroom activities; it is
often distinguished as a broad approach that has the following features and principles:
1. “Acquiring communication skills through involvement in the target
language.
2. Providing opportunity for students to concentrate on both language and the
Learning Management process.
3. The improvement of the student’s personal experience at classroom learning.
4. Linking between language learning in the context of a classroom and
language practices external to the classroom.
5. The introduction of real texts into the learning situation.” (Spada & Frohlich,
1995, p. 22)
By adopting the previous features, teachers show interest in their students’ needs and
their desire to improve language connections inside and outside the classrooms for those
46
students. Thus, the CLT classroom usually takes the form of pair and group work
entailing bargaining and collaboration between students, activities based on fluency that
promote students to improve their self-confidence, and role play in which learners
improve the function of language with a sensible use of grammar and articulation-
focused activities.
This study adopts the paradigm of CLT by Jacops and Ferrall (2003) that has resulted in
the following adaptations in approaches to language teaching:
1. “Learner autonomy: Learners are allowed more choice with regards to their
own learning such as using small groups.
2. The social nature of learning: Learning depends upon learners’ interactions
(co-operative learning).
3. Curricula integration: All subjects connect with each other; as English
language is not a separate subject. This reflects a “text-based approach”.
4. Focus on meaning: Make exploration of the meaning through content, this
reflects “content-based teaching”.
5. Diversity: Using different ways and strategies in teaching.
6. Thinking skills: Developing higher–order thinking such as, creativity and
critical thinking. This discloses that students learn language in order to
explore the surroundings outside classical classes.
7. Alternative assessment: New styles of evaluation are needed to create a
detailed picture of what students can do, such as observation and interview.
8. The teacher is co-learner: A facilitator who is trying various methods as
alternatives (learning through doing).” (p. 9)
Applying CLT requires that the teacher distinguish and modify his role according to the
level of the students (Richards, 2006). As an example, the educator in a communicative
classroom for beginners could start by distributing name cards. The educator then
demonstrates two people introducing themselves in the target language. He combines
47
the target language and gestures to help the participants to introduce themselves and
orally gather information from their classmates.
To reinforce student listening the teacher could play a recorded conversation between
two native speakers of the target language the first time they meet at a certain place.
Then the teacher could explain the difference, for instance in greeting, between the first
and the target language in different social situations. Finally, the students would learn
about a number of the grammar points and structures used.
Another task, which could be used in CLT, is the “picture-strip story” where the
students are set in small groups, the first one is provided with a strip story, then he
shows the first picture of the tale to the other group members and asks them to imagine
what the second picture will be. Again, the students have no idea about the pictures or
the story. They choose to predict and use their own words to describe the picture and to
tell the story. The teacher feedback relates to the content of the prediction not the form.
When viewing the pictures, students compare their prediction with the prediction of the
teacher. Such picture strip story activities are a communicative technique built around a
problem solving task. This task includes the three main features of CLT. The students
discuss and share information about the story until they arrive at a solution. This task
provides students the opportunity to practice the target language.
A third type of task used in CLT is “scrambled sentences”. In this task, students face a
passage with sentences scrambled into the wrong order. It could be a new passage,
which they have not seen before, or a passage that they have already read. The task
requires the students to rearrange the sentences into the correct order to produce a
48
meaningful passage. Scrambled-sentences tasks require the students to connect
sentences with each other using different sentence-level devices, such as pronouns
(“cohesion”) and reconstruct semantic relations within the passage (“coherence”).
Richards and Rogers (1986) state, “Learning activities are selected according to how
well they engage the learner in meaningful and authentic language use (rather than
merely mechanical practice of language patterns” (p. 72).
2.8 Education in Saudi Arabia
All Saudi Arabian students from year 4 to year 12 are obliged to study English with
some starting earlier. Besides playing a prominent role in education, the English
language dominates through a commercial youth culture that has been Americanised or
internationalised, through English language films that have not been dubbed into
Arabic, television, popular culture, a broad variety of imported goods, and advertising.
The language is highly regarded in schools by both teachers and students and is thought
of as necessary and unquestioned knowledge. In general, the first language (L1) is not
considered to be under threat from English as a foreign language (EFL). Linguistic
imperialism by English is not considered an issue in learning a second language in
Saudi Arabia.
In 1992, the Saudi Arabia Ministry of Education set up separate regional educational
offices across the country with local representatives and governance (Al-Hajailan,
2003). The three phases of school education—primary, intermediate, and secondary—
are under the control of the governor of each region. EFL is only taught at the second
and third levels. The English curriculum is academically oriented, centrally developed
and does not allow for teacher modifications. English was first introduced into the
49
education system in Saudi Arabia around the middle of the 19th
century. The Direct and
Structure-based approaches have been the major English teaching methods (Al-
Hashash, 2007) to the exclusion of other approaches within the education system from
the 1950s to the 1980s. As an example, Saudi Arabian English language teachers have
not implemented the Audio-lingual method because of their belief that this approach
does not help underachieving students (Al-Hazmi, 2003).
The government of Saudi Arabia has adopted the policy position that English is
important in order for its citizens to be able to operate globally in the business world
(Mitchell & Alfuriah, 2017). Understanding the importance of English as the language
of business, the Ministry of Education recently published a set of objectives designed to
change the approach towards English teaching within Saudi Arabian schools. In 2004,
the government extended the grades where English would be compulsory. The 2004
edict extended learning English to grade six in elementary schools (Mitchell & Alfuriah,
2017). At the same time, the government introduced a new curriculum 2005 that
elevated the importance of competency in communication over grammatical
competency (Mitchell & Alfuriah, 2017). The new curriculum’s aim was to develop the
learner’s communicative ability using new CLT textbooks to provide teachers with the
necessary content in order to implement CLT in the classroom. The textbooks contained
a range of speaking, listening, and group work activities. However, the grammatical
orientation of the national summative tests remained unchanged. A series of formative
assessments were introduced to assist teachers in determining the progress of their
students. These assessment instruments focused on student fluency in the classroom (Al
Hashash, 2007).
50
The summative tests that are used in Saudi Arabia for the assessment of the
development of English proficiency are written examinations that are designed by the
teacher (Alhareth & Al Dighrir, 2014). They test rote learning of the grammatical
structures of the English language and tend to have a high multiple-choice component
where students are required to select the grammatically correct sentence from five
choices (Alhareth & Al Dighrir, 2014). These tests are conducted at the end of the unit.
There is a formal written test that is conducted at the end of the school term that is set
by the school (Alsadaawi, 2010). These tests involve the student answering multiple-
choice questions and producing a text using a provided vocabulary list. There is no oral
examination. A formal national test provided by the Ministry of Education is conducted
in the final year of secondary schooling.
The effective development of proficiency in Saudi Arabia faces many challenges. The
significant difference between the grammatical structure of English and Arabic
languages and the different tonal intonations makes learning English very difficult (Al-
Nasser, 2015). There is resistance from fundamentalists to learning English due to
concerns regarding dilution of the Islamic culture (Al-Nasser, 2015). Teachers are often
poorly trained in language teaching and teaching methods are outmoded (Al-Nasser,
2015; Al Shumaimeri, 2003). The grammatical methodology survives in the Saudi
Arabian classroom despite the mandate for change from the Saudi Arabian government
(Al-Nasser, 2015; Al Shumaimeri, 2003). The majority of language programmes rely on
the development of the written skill above all other skills (Fageeh, 2011; Rababah,
2003; Tahaineh, 2010). Generally, Saudi students demonstrate poor proficiency in
English (Asmari & Javid, 2011) especially their oral communication skills (Al
51
Shumaimeri, 2003). The delivery approach tends not to be student-centred (Al
Shumaimeri, 2003). English is taught in a compartmentalised approach using rote-
learning methodologies (Al Shumaimeri, 2003). CLT is used on a very limited basis (Al
Shumaimeri, 2003). The paradigm shift top move from Grammar Translation Method
GTM to CLT is significant (Gulnaz, Alfaqih, & Mashmour, 2015).
The application of CLT in the Saudi context is not easy for many reasons, such as:
1. The student is the centre of the CLT process, which is unusual in schools
where the teacher is the centre and does most of the work (Khan, 2011).
2. Saudi language classes are not prepared for group teaching, which is the
focus of this theory (Elyas, 2011).
3. Spoken language, that is the use of language in everyday situations, is the
focus of CLT and that can be considered a great shift in teaching, for which
neither teachers nor students are ready (Alnadhi, 2014).
4. Grammatical rules and corrections are less emphasised, although many
teachers and learners continue to believe that they are important (Al-Nasser,
2015; Al Shumaimeri, 2003).
5. The objectives of this approach require teachers to modify the syllabus, tools
and teaching materials but to do so, teachers must receive training programs
to modify their approach (Al Shumaimeri, 2003).
6. Communicative activities may not be suitable for beginners or low
proficiency students. The students should have the necessary communicative
competence (Asmari & Javid, 2011).
52
2.9 Previous studies
This section deals with a number of key studies that are important in informing and
understanding the findings from this research.
2.9.1 Content CLT analysis studies
Al-Saif (2005) conducted research into the resource book used by sixth graders in Saudi
elementary schools. The goal of the quantitative study was to determine the strengths
and the weaknesses of the textbook focusing on how suitable it is to teachers, social
situations and young students. The study used a sample of 144 male and 149 female
English teachers, supervisors, and trainers. The sample were involved in teaching within
elementary schools. Al-Saif (2005) formulated 93 specific criteria across 12 categories.
Analysis of the questionnaires returned by participants indicate that the effective
introduction of CLT requires teachers to be trained and that competency needs to be
developed in the use of the textbook.
Madkhali (2005) considered the design of effective syllabi to develop English
competence. The focus was on the replacement of the syllabus within the Institute of
Public Administration (IPA) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The new syllabus sought to
improve the use of English in both an academic setting and within the work
environment. Madkhali used a multi-modal approach that involved the collection of
data through questionnaires, focus groups and interviews. His results indicate that
English for academic purposes (EAP) students encounter problems in three English
language abilities: reading, writing, and speaking. In a similar fashion, private sector
department (PSD) students thought that to a certain point all four language skills pose
problems. Consequently, the researcher proposes teaching two business courses:
53
Business Correspondence and Business Communication, through a CLT approach to the
teaching of English.
Kim (2001) formulated a set of CLT criteria to research the national Korean English
curricula for 6th
and 7th
grade. The study had two goals: to formulate CLT criteria for 4th
grade elementary school students learning English in Korea; and to analyse the impact
that a change in curriculum has on available resources. Kim considered the impact on
the teachers, policy makers, and researchers. The study found that views vary
considerably across the three stakeholders. The research discovered that in spite of the
recent endeavour to adopt CLT-based elementary EFL, deficiencies still exist in the
Korean elementary EFL curriculum and resources, including the use of the Audio-
lingual method in teaching the 7th curriculum material set.
Ereksoussy (1993) evaluated girls’ learning approaches using the then-First Grade
Intermediate English Textbook within Saudi Arabia schools. At the time of the study,
the English course books for both sexes differed to those in current use. Ereksoussy
based her evaluation on a 126-item checklist. The checklist was composed of six main
categories that contained a number of CLT characteristics: the objectives, content
selection, gradation and recycling, presentation frames, practice activities, and
assessment models. While such a detailed checklist produces accurate results, it can be
onerous for both researcher and participating teachers. This may influence the reliability
of the research results as respondents may pay little heed when stating their opinions.
Ereksoussy identified very high adherence (82.38%) to the pre-set textbook. However,
the study recognised that there cannot be one ideal textbook because of the variety of
54
possibilities including the student’s needs and the situation where the textbook will be
introduced.
These studies suggest that a shift to a communicative approach requires significant
changes to the source material, assessment items and programme structure. The nature
of the change requires training in the new processes for teachers. The change process is
such that there is a tendency for teachers to rely on the familiar and to use the new
approaches in a limited manner. Stakeholder attitudes inevitably influence the degree of
uptake. The review of attitude amongst stakeholders and the impact on the adoption of
CLT is important and will be discussed in more detail later in this section.
2.9.2 Studies of participants’ attitudes and awareness
Nurul Islam (2012) writes an article that attempts to evaluate the misconceptions about
CLT that many language teachers hold in Bangladesh. While the local National
Curriculum & Textbook Board (NCTB) recognised CLT and a great number of English
teachers as one of the best methods in English language teaching, misconceptions about
it still remained. Through a comparison of Sato and Kleinsasser (1999), Thompson
(1996), and Spada (2007), Nurul Islam concentrated on four of the principal
misconceptions that language teachers and researchers commonly hold. The first
misapprehension is that CLT focuses exclusively on meaning. This viewpoint ignores
the inclusion of formal grammatical structures within the CLT approach. Research by
Savignon (1972) found that CLT can enhance other approaches to teaching a foreign
language. The second misapprehension is that CLT avoids the explicit focus on errors
made by the learner. This is an extreme view, given that the approach often involves the
teacher recasting the statement made by the learner. The third misconception is that
55
CLT is only concerned with listening and speaking. CLT is involved across the four
disciplines of reading, writing, listening and speaking. The fourth misconception is that
CLT ignores the first language of the learner. It is widely recognised that a high level of
exposure to the first language enhances second language acquisition. The first language
has an important role to play in dealing with cultural shock, language understanding and
efficiency (Turnbull, 2001).
Sreehari (2012) has written a paper concerning English teaching at undergraduate
colleges in the state of Andhra Pradesh (AP), India. This study was conducted within
the Andhra Pradesh English Lecturers’ Retraining Program under the auspices of the
Directorate of Collegiate Education, Government of AP and the US State Department
English Language Fellow Program. The primary aim of the programme was to develop
the competencies of English language teachers in in the State studying in undergraduate
schools. Teachers were trained in the use of CLT. The paper tries to label the
possibilities and issues in the adaptation of CLT principles and techniques in these
colleges. Students tended to prefer a teacher-directed approach due to cultural factors
making CLT difficult to implement. Change in teaching practices was seen as being
highly dependent on the willingness of the teacher to embrace CLT. Teachers need to be
trained and administrators need to ensure that they are provided with the necessary
resources. The outcomes show that teachers should adopt more learner-cantered
methods in their teaching of English but this can be challenging in a situation where
teacher-directed learning is the preferred approach
Wong (2012) published an article that analyses the interrelation between college-level
L2 teachers’ perceptions and their adoptions of CLT. Six Spanish instructors (three
56
males and three females) teaching at the beginning or intermediate level took part in this
research at a Southern U.S. university. The teachers who participated in this research
were also taking an L2 approach course as part of their Master’s or doctoral degrees in
Applied Linguistics or Spanish. Two of the participants were non-native speakers of
Spanish, and the remaining four were native speakers. Their teaching experience varied
between one semester and five years. The outcomes of this research indicate that most
of the teachers participating agreed that a communicative method could enhance
students’ learning but said that they did not comprehend what exactly CLT stood for.
These teachers would like to employ various approaches in their work with no regard
for the instructions furnished by the program coordinators. The results also show that
certain teachers promote CLT as they consider it is the best means of achieving
communicative aptitude. This research suggests the significance of partnerships
between program coordinators and instructors.
Al-Yousef (2007) carried out a study that examined the Third Grade Intermediate
English Course book (CB) with reference to the CLT method in Saudi Arabia. The
course book was developed by the Ministry of Education, Riyadh and adopted in 2005.
This is the first study into the impact that the introduction of a new course book. Not
only did the research look at the impact of the new course book on student learning
outcomes but also assessed the strengths and weaknesses of the course book. The
research sought to identify how the course book might be improved in order to improve
student outcomes. The approaches that were used by the researcher involved a
retrospective mixed-methodology research design approach. The research involved both
quantitative and qualitative approaches using both interviews and document analysis
57
approaches. The research involved a sample comprising of 184 students, teachers and
supervisors. There were five types of data analysis used to process the data that were
collected.
1. Statistical descriptive analysis
2. Content analysis
3. Document analysis of the CB and the general and specific goals
4. Interview description
5. Researcher’s evaluation of the course book.
The findings from the research suggest that the course book was considered by all
stakeholders to be adequate. The content and the visual elements of the text were the
areas that appeared to be more important in impacting on the level of satisfaction of the
users. The areas that needed improvement involved the gradation of the difficulty of the
exercises and the provision of supplementary material (Al-Yousef, 2007).
Batawi (2006) conducted a study that investigated the level of teachers’ understanding
and attitude towards the use of CLT innovation in the Saudi Arabia classroom. The
study also investigated the practices that teachers employed in the classroom using the
CLT approach. The study explored the major difficulties that teachers in Saudi Arabia
encounter when they seek to implement the CLT approach. The study involved
surveying 100 Saudi Arabian female teachers. Twelve teachers were randomly selected
to be involved in a focus group discussion to identify the level of understanding of the
teachers towards CLT and to identify the obstacles that the teachers faced when
implementing CLT. Batawi found that there was a wide variety of approaches employed
by the teachers. They often mixed the traditional grammatical approach with elements
58
of CLT. Batawi found that the grammatical approach was dominant. This was because
there were significant obstacles that existed that prevented the holistic use of CLT in the
classroom. These difficulties arose from three sources: the teacher, the students, and the
education system. In order that the difficulties might be addressed, Batawi suggested
that additional training needs to be provided to the teachers, that greater efforts need to
be made to promote the benefits of the CLT approach to the wider community and that
the CLT approach needs to be modified in order to be congruent with the cultural
context of Saudi Arabia.
Although the emphasis of CLT is on “fluency” over “accuracy”, the CLT approach has
paid attention to spelling in the EFL classroom. Error-analysis research in the Arab
World show that spelling is the most commonplace mistake in Arab students’ English
writing. Al-Shabbi (1994) discusses three types of activities for the Arab EFL classroom
which retain a CLT “fluency” orientation in their approach to spelling but that promote
“accuracy” in spelling:
1. reading activities,
2. inductive-reasoning activities, and
3. language-focusing activities.
Results revealed that the five activities found to be valuable were corrections, oral
corrections of grammar, pronunciation practice in class, oral grammar practice in
sentences, and memorising vocabulary activities. Al-Shabbi suggests some orientations
the EFL classroom in an Arabic dominant environment can take to maintain a fluent
communicative competence base while stressing the accuracy that any consideration of
59
spelling must demand. His main point is that it is possible for the CLT classroom to
integrate spelling into the methodology.
Savignon (1972) undertook experimental research to analyse how CLT contributes to
L2 learning in a university-level audio-lingual classes in the French language.
Comparing learners who had been given the extra element with those who were given
either an extra cultural element or more audio-lingual practice showed that students
taught with the CLT approach performed better in their communicative ability in the
French language than students taught in cultural or audio-lingual approaches. Students
in the communicative group also did at least as well on the linguistic exercises as
students in the other two groups. Since Savignon’s study, studies in other classrooms
have revealed that CLT contributes in a positive way to the L2 learners’ fluency and
communicative skills (Brandl, 2008; Norris & Ortega, 2000; Spada, 2007). What is
more, in some cases (e.g., Canadian French immersion programs) CLT has helped L2
students to enhance their comprehension capacities similar to those of native speakers
(Swain & Lapkin, 2002).
A great deal of study has been dedicated to investigate the problems and issues facing
students in the process of language learning. One of the most important findings of this
research is that the students often experience nervousness in L2 classes (Price, 1991).
Several reports have showed the results of nervousness in L2 speaking, listening,
reading, and writing. All these issues come up with the intended level of a process. This
level includes specific activities for the learners, such as taking tests and speaking on
the spot, which are anxiety-provoking because students’ knowledge would be graded
and measured through these activities.
60
Movement in language education and instruction towards learner-centred methods have
been accompanied by a greater stress on affective considerations (Horwitz, 2001).
Teachers seek to improve student’s understanding. In doing so, they understand that
they need to modify their methods instruction in order to improved the level of learning
thsat occurs in the classroom. Teachers seeking to improve their communication styles
are often faced with contradictory research findings (Horwitz, 2001). Teachers are often
unsure of the balance that is required between communicative and non-communicative
activities in the classroom in order to accommodate individual differences (Chung &
Huang, 2009). Although teachers in the Arabic setting understand that a communicative
approach to learning a second language enhances a student’s communicative
proficiency, they are unsure of the balance that is required between communicative and
non-communicative activities in the classroom. Koch and Terrell (1991) argued that
oral presentation is considered as an anxiety-provoking activity among the majority of
the students. Delivering dialogue and articulating themselves through the medium of
English language in public seem as the achieved level of L2 learning. Classroom action
can move its role to a negotiator to decrease learners’ anxiety, raise learners’
motivation, and eventually support students reaching their learning goals if teachers can
make decent use of suitable activities in class.
2.10 Cross-national policy borrowing
Cross-national policy borrowing, in respect of education, is the “conscious adoption in
one context of policy observed in another” (Phillips & Ochs, 2004, p. 774). The policy
makers in a country often view the educational practices developed in other countries
with a high educational reputation as being less risky than internal development of
61
policies (Zymek & Zymek, 2004). The drivers for cross-national policy borrowing can
be to address internal problems and issues in an educational system; reduce the
uncertainty of new educational initiatives (Nedergaard, 2006); deliver quickly on policy
promises (Dolowitz & Medearis, 2009) and the need for external assistance in making
educational improvement.
Baker and Wiseman (2009) note that the pressures of globalisation and educational
modernisation are driving countries like Saudi Arabia to import educational ideas
irrespective of their contextual and historical origin. The power of cross-national
comparison of educational results in a region or internationally can place pressure on
administrations to borrow techniques and approaches rather than develop internal
approaches (Steiner-Khamsi, 2014; Wiseman, Sadaawi, & Alromi, 2008). Often these
programmes are culturally discordant leading to a clash between the prevailing internal
approach and the borrowed approach. Often cross-national policy borrowing is
characterised by a top-down approach (Baker & Wiseman, 2009).
There are stages to the process of cross-national policy borrowing (Phillips & Ochs,
2003). This is illustrated in Figure 1.
62
Figure 1: Policy borrowing in education: Composite processes
(source: Phillips & Ochs, 2003, p. 452)
The first stage (see Figure 1) involves the reasons for the cross-national policy
borrowing and can involve stakeholder dissatisfaction with the present situation, poor
performance and, a change in environmental forces. In the local context, there was top-
down pressure from the government to improve English competency amongst Saudi
Arabia students in order to improve their ability to advance the economic interests of
Saudi Arabia (Alharbi, 2015). The pressures of globalisation were an important driver
in the borrowing of CLT (Sofi, 2015). The failure of students to demonstrate a sufficient
improvement in their English language competence called into question the
grammatical approach (Al-Mohanna, 2010). Given that English was a compulsory
63
subject at University, there was pressure exerted from university academics to improve
English performance at lower levels of education within the Kingdom (Al-Seghayer,
2011).
The second stage is the decision to introduce a given process. Academics at university
informed the Saudi Arabian government that the research indicated that the CLT
approach was a more effective methodology for teaching English as a second language
than the then prevailing grammatical approach. Despite using the grammatical approach
the majority of teachers in the education system were aware that CLT was believed to
be a more effective practice for teaching English (Abdel-Salam, 2014).
The third stage is the implementation that involved the training of teachers and the
development of new resources to be used by the teachers (Al-Mekhlafi, 2011; Farooq,
2015; Hamdan, 2015). No adaptation to the Saudi Arabian context was initiated during
the speedy change process (Batawi, 2006). CLT policy was implemented in 2004, the
change process occurred over one year and was operational by 2006 (Al-Hashash,
2007).
The fourth stage is a stage of internalisation. The degree of internalisation is the subject
of this investigation. The summative assessment process was unchanged during the
implementation phase, which may account for the apparently limited degree of policy
internalisation (Abdel-Salam, 2014; Al-Hazmi, 2007; Al-Johani, 2009; Alnadhi, 2014;
Assalahi, 2013).
64
The degree to which cross-national policy borrowing is effective is influenced by five
factors (Ochs & Phillips, 2002). The first is the nature of the contextual forces that
shape the cross-national attraction. Although the education system in Saudi Arabia has
evolved out of Islamic law, in contemporary times the United States has exerted
increasing influence over educational practices in the Kingdom (US-Saudi Arabian
Business Council, 2009). The reputation of American higher education institutions and
the desire for the Saudi Arabian (KSA) government to have a level of English
competence that can enable Saudi students to study there (US-Saudi Arabian Business
Council, 2009). The second is the contextual forces that were the catalyst in sparking a
cross-national inquiry: the poor performance of Saudi students in demonstrating
competence in English (Al-Mohanna, 2010). The third is the impact of contextual
interaction on policy development. The American government and educational
institutions urged the Saudi Arabia Department of Education to improve the
performance of KSA students in respect to English language if they were to gain access
to American universities (US-Saudi Arabian Business Council, 2009). The fourth factor
influencing the effectiveness of cross-national borrowing is contextual interaction in
policy development and this is a top-down process in Saudi Arabia. The fifth is the
contextual interaction that impacts on policy implementation. Here the support of
teachers was essential to embrace the change along with changes to the assessment.
Although the teachers supported the change and saw the benefits of CLT, the measure
of successful performance did not change. Teachers were still required to ensure that
their students passed a grammatically based test.
65
The influence of the United States in the policy change meant that educational attitudes
inherent in the source country would influence the approach to policy adoption and
implementation in the host country. The United States administration adopted an
approach of education sector deregulation with central assessment prescription (Halpin
& Troyna, 1995). The role of government as the central prescriber of education was
culturally congruent with the Saudi Arabian political culture. The political influence of
the United States government over KSA policy was therefore influential in the
international policy transfer (Steiner-Khamsi, 2012). There was also the suggestion of a
degree of direct political influence in the transfer (US-Saudi Arabian Business Council,
2009). One of the key influences in the policy changes in education in Saudi Arabia was
the 9/11 attacks on New York.
Western ideas and trends have influenced the KSA education system since 1950 (Elyas,
2011). The impetus for this was the need to educate Saudi people to assume roles within
the oil industry. The education system remained Islamic and relied on rote learning
rather than critical thinking (Elyas, 2011). The events of 9/11 introduced a neoliberal
influence into the Saudi Arabian education system (Elyas & Picard, 2013). The
education system was partly blamed for the KSA citizens who were involved in the 9/11
attacks (Dankowitz, 2004; Karmani, 2005). The pressures for change arising out of 9/11
linked with a growing neoliberal culture in the KSA administration provided pressure
for improved critical thinking, English competence, greater use of technology, and
creativity within the Kingdom (Elyas & Picard, 2013). The resulting reforms sought to
improve the skills of teachers and improve the curriculum (Al-Degether, 2009). The
66
entrenched structures and Islamic orientation of the system has limited the effectiveness
of educational reform (Elyas & Picard, 2013).
Hence political events and pressure from the United States have been a significant
influence to reform the educational system in Saudi Arabia. The educational
administration of KSA were seeking to develop a neoliberal educational culture yet
were unwilling to change the examination structures, the traditional role of the teacher
in the Saudi Arabian classroom and the Islamic values that underpinned the educational
system. The effectiveness of the drive to introduce CLT would therefore be constrained
by structures in the educational system that was fixed due to cultural and religious
influences.
2.11 Attitude assessment
Attitudes are “mental entities that have a profound impact on behaviour” (De Houwer,
Gawronski, & Barnes-Holmes, 2013, p. 253). The assessment of attitude that involves
the individual presenting their view in a written or verbal form is an explicit expression
of that attitude (Chin, 2011). Attitudes are important as they are often the predictors of
behaviour (Chin, 2011). Attitudes are acquired when a stimulus creates an evaluative
response in an individual (De Houwer et al., 2013). In assessing attitudes, it is important
to consider the contextual elements that were present when the attitudes were formed
and the role that experiences play in the formation of attitudes. The Campbell paradigm
holds that the greater the sacrifices an individual makes in achieving a course of action,
the stronger the consequent attitude of that individual will be (Kaiser & Byrka, 2015).
67
Scaled instruments can provide structure and an empirical orientation to the assessment
of attitude. Wu (2010) used the Communicative Language Teaching Attitude Scale
(COLTAS: specifically designed for that purpose) to assess the attitude of teachers to
the use of CLT in the classroom. The instrument uses a five-point Likert-type scale,
which teachers use to rank their attitudes towards CLT around the four domains of
“group/pair work, place of grammar, student/teacher roles and peer/teacher corrections”
(Wu, 2010, p. 178). COLTAS uses a 50/50 mix of 36 positive and negative statements
on a score that ranges from “5” for strongly agree to “1” for strongly disagree. The
instrument provides a means of quantifying the level of support of the teacher towards
CLT. The reliability of any instrument for measuring attitude is dependent upon the
statements that are selected (Karavas-Doukas, 1996). Reliability is tested using the split
half method that divides the scale into two matching halves and correlates the scores for
each half. The correlation score for COLTAS has been identified as being 0.81
(Karavas-Doukas, 1996, p. 191).
Another quantitative instrument that can be used to collect quantitative data on the
attitudes of teachers to CLT is the Attitudes toward Communicative Approach Scale
(ATCAS; Jafari, Shokrpour, & Guetterman, 2015). The instrument uses the 5-point
Likert-type scale of COLTAS. It evaluates attitude in five areas: grammar, group/pair
work, role of the learner, the role of the teacher, and the degree that errors are corrected
(Jafari et al., 2015). The reliability of this instrument has fallen between 0.78 and 0.81
(Cronbach’s α). In this research, both approaches were used.
Another approach to the assessment of attitudes is to observe behaviours and infer the
attitudes from the behaviours that are observed. This approach can be problematic (De
68
Houwer, Gawronski, & Barnes-Holmes, 2013; Fazio, 2007). To be valid and reliable as
a means of assessing attitude, this approach needs to understand the relationship
between the mental construct and the behaviour exhibited by the person. Determining
the link and the degree to which it is consistent is extremely difficult. Adding the
attitudes of the observer into the mix decreases the reliability of the observation being
an accurate assessment of attitude. The problem is that there is often inconsistency
between the attitudes and the behaviours of individuals (Ajzen & Fishbein, 2005; Kaiser
& Byrka, 2015). This inconsistency can result in a gap between attitudes espoused and
actions taken.
The assessment of attitude faces the problem of “post-decisional dissonance” (De
Houwer et al., 2013, p. 255). When an individual has made a choice between two
options, they are more likely to give the alternative that they have selected a favourable
response while the rejected alternative is given an unfavourable response. The
assessment of attitude can become particularly problematic on consideration of the
potential for a gap between what is espoused and what actually occurs. Added to this
are issues that arise from the question format chosen to assess attitude. The format and
length of the question can significantly influence the manner in which participants
respond to attitude questions (Kieruj & Moors, 2010).
All these elements encourage great care in the development of a research study that
seeks to collect attitudes and assess them. The collection instruments, nature of the
questions, research process and potential inconsistencies in the attitudes of the subjects
can present an unreliable view of the actual attitudes. The careful framing of the
69
research and construction of the questions can improve the reliability. The use of a
mixed methodology can also assist in the assessment of attitudes.
2.12 Language assessment
Effective language assessment is goal-oriented, is systematic, and gathers information
in a verifiable manner (Bachman & Palmer, 2010). The need for the ESL learner to be
able to develop the skills to be able to process information and collaborate with others
in the L2 drives the methodology of CLT. The role of assessment is to determine that
the L2 learner has developed the necessary proficiencies and competencies to engage
with others in a range of different social contexts. Language assessment is “the
systematic procedure for eliciting test and non-test data for the purpose of making
inferences or claims about certain language-related characteristics of an individual”
(Purpura, 2016, p. 191). This definition indicates that language assessment include
formal tests and processes such as observation, self-reporting, and peer assessment.
L2 assessment will contain measurement instruments that allow the assessor to control
intended learner behaviour in a different context and under a set of specified conditions
(Purpura, 2016). The process for obtaining these behaviours will involve the use of a
systematic procedure that has a scoring mechanism and record keeping methodology
that allows accurate recording of learner performance. The challenge for language
assessment is the development of the constructs that are to be developed that indicate
L2 proficiency.
One approach to the development of such constructs is trait-based (Chapelle, 1998).
Under this approach, a theoretical model provides the knowledge, skills and abilities to
70
be tested. The test involves the development of tasks that constrain the learners’
performance so that they only exhibit the desired trait (Chapelle, 1998). The assessed
trait is assumed to operate in a number of other contexts (Chapelle, 1998). This
approach formed the cornerstone of the grammatical approach to assessment (Canale &
Swain, 1980) but the contextual base of CLT poses a problem. Tests based on
decontextualised traits may not capture the contextualised knowledge developed
through CLT.
In the grammatical context, the performance of the student is often assessed using a
performance test (Neumann, 2014). The most commonly used written assessment task is
the individual production of a timed class essay. This ensures that the individual has
produced the piece of writing and its effectiveness depends on assessor-inferred
information on student skills (Weigle, 2012). Traditional testing includes “discrete-point
structure-based tests and integrated tests like cloze and dictation” (Wall & Taylor, 2014,
p. 171). Discrete-point tests separately challenge student grasp of grammatical elements
and grammatical skills. Theya rise from the belief that a number of discrete structural
points indicate that a person understands how to use a language (Aitken, 1976). The
most common format is multiple-choice questions used to test the mechanics of
language. The problem with conventional testing under the grammatical model is that
there is no evaluation of the interaction that occurs between the language user and the
recipient of the language (Morrow, 1979). It fails to test the instantaneous nature of
language processing and response (Morrow, 1979). It ignores the contextual elements
that influence the exchange. It fails to consider the purpose of the communication and
the need to taper language to the nature of the intended target (Morrow, 1979).
71
A second approach to the development of constructs is task-centred, with performance
assessed in real-life domains. The task therefore includes contextual elements and the
intended purpose of the communication within that context (McNamara, 1996). This is
the most dominant form of language assessment driven by the widespread adoption of
CLT (Purpura, 2016).
A third approach is the interactionist approach that seeks to merge the trait-based
approach and the task-centred approach. In this approach, the traits, the context and the
strategies being used by the learner are assessed (Purpura, 2016).
A fourth approach is the socio-interactional approach that uses instantaneous
interactions in a specified context to achieve a specific communication goal (Jacoby &
McNamara, 1999). Debate still continues as to the relative merits of each approach.
Testing for communication often involves an interaction between the learner and the
examiner. The learner listens to the examiner and then responds. Often learners will be
required to ask the examiner a question. At higher levels of competence, the individual
contributes more information and opinions in the interaction. The examiner requirement
that the learner maintain the interaction allows evaluation of the learner’s ability to deal
with unpredictability. Such evaluation may also require the individual to deliver a
formal presentation. The challenge for CLT testing is to be able to create assessment
instruments that are authentic and can take context into consideration (Wall & Taylor,
2014). Assessment in CLT is more demanding than the grammatical approaches and
therefore the training of assessors is all the more important to ensure the validity and
reliability of the test results (Wall & Taylor, 2014). Teachers need to be trained,
72
mentored, evaluated, and monitored on a regular basis to ensure that they are assessing
student competence in a valid and reliable manner. The lack of training and ongoing
support for assessor training in Saudi Arabia is a significant issue.
The tests used to assess ESL competence in the learner often also assess the competence
of the teacher. Tests form a multiple function of encouraging student progress,
providing feedback, evaluate achievement, identify deficiencies and determine the
effectiveness of the approach and the materials that are used. The skill level of ESL
teachers in Saudi Arabia in respect to assessment is very low (Al-Saadat, 2004; Rauf,
2015). There is a high level of distrust in the accuracy of the test instruments in
measuring student’s ability (Al-Saadat, 2004). The KSA Ministry of Education has
developed a formal EFL examination, containing an oral test and a written test (Al-
Seghayer, 2015). The oral test comprises only 5% of the final grade of the student’s
result. This often involves only two or three questions and the students are required to
read a section from their textbook. The class numbers and time restrictions limit the
effectiveness of the oral testing and because speaking and listening makes up such a
small component of the final score, both teachers and students undervalue this element
of the assessment. The written and reading skills comprise 25% of the student’s final
grade. Often the students know the passages and questions by rote and provide the
answers from memory. The poor assessment is due to the lack of assessment skill
amongst the teachers, the absence of assessment training within the training of English
teachers (Alsamaani, 2012), the tight schema imposed by the Ministry of Education and
the punitive approach towards teachers by school administrators where students fail to
perform (Al-Seghayer, 2011).
73
2.13 Conclusion
The teaching of ESL has evolved from the grammatical approach to communicative
language teaching. The development of various teaching and learning strategies has
been driven by the need to develop a more effective and efficient method of improving
students’ competence in a second language. The grammatical-translation (GT) approach
has had the greatest historical influence on language teaching. It dominated the KSA
English language-learning environment and has proved very difficult to change. Its
rules-based teacher directed rote-learning approach is very congruent with the cultural
orientation of Saudi Arabia. A number of different approaches have been attempted as
alternatives to GT, such as the Natural Approach and the Direct Reading Approach, but
they failed to displace GT. The Audio-Lingual approach was the first approach that
offered a viable alternative to GT and paved the way for the development of CLT.
The shift from a teacher-directed learning environment to a student-directed learning
environment; the shift from a focus on the individual student to group activities; the
elevation of spoken and listening skills above reading and writing skills; the shifting of
grammatical rules from a primary role to a secondary role in the learning process; the
need to significantly modify learning materials and the challenge of accommodating
mixed abilities in the learning environment have all made the introduction of CLT quite
problematic. Implementation is further challenged by a lack of clarity regarding the
nature of CLT. The very flexibility of its approach is both a strength and weakness as it
allows the teacher to develop materials that are suited to the needs of the student whilst
lacking the definitive structure of the GT approach.
74
Chapter 3: Research Design and Methodology
3.1 Chapter overview
This chapter deals with the methodological approach adopted in this study, explaining
the research design, the population and the sampling method of this study. This chapter
also describes the development and delivery of the questionnaire, data analysis methods,
and the ethical clearance process.
A combination of quantitative and qualitative approach appears most suitable to capture
the opinions of a diverse population of teachers and students, so a mixed methods
approach is an appropriate methodology to evaluate the suitability of using the CLT
method for English education programs in the Saudi private education context. Attitude
assessment can also use a mixed methods approach, where a questionnaire is used to
collect quantitative data, followed by interviews or focus groups to acquire the
qualitative data (Jafari, Shokrpour, & Guetterman, 2015). The mixed methods approach
for the assessment of attitudes can provide a deeper assessment than a single approach
(Soukup, 2015). The combination of approaches can assist in identifying the
dichotomies that often exist in a person’s attitudes.
A case study design is appropriate when researchers are “interested in the experiences,
insights, and voices of a particular group of second language teachers” (Wong &
Barrea-Marlys, 2012, p. 64). Interviews of individual teachers allow the researcher to
hear what they had to say about the place of grammar teaching in CLT, for example.
Case study, in general, and interview analysis, in particular, both both require
researchers to apply qualitative methods.
75
3.2 Research design
This thesis documents a mixed method investigation that used three types of research
activity as primary data sources. The first activity, analysed according to quantitative
methodology approaches, was a quasi-experimental study with pre- and post-testing of
participating classes, some of which acted as experimental and others as control groups.
The students in the experimental group experienced the CLT approach and the teachers
in the control group used more conventional teaching methods. The second activity
consisted of simultaneous teacher and student surveys, also analysed quantitatively. The
third activity involved teacher interviews, which were analysed qualitatively.
Table 2 presents a summary of how the methods are used in research. Table 2 lists the
three phases of the research method and the duration of each phase. The first seven
weeks of the research were used in the pre-testing and post-testing of the experimental
group and control group. This was followed by a two-week phase were students and
teachers were surveyed to collect quantitative data. In the final week of the research,
teachers were involved in a qualitative interview. This was the structure of the research
approach indicated that it used a mixed methods approach.
Table 2: Summary of Research Method
Activity
Pre-test and post-test
Experimental Group and
Control Group
Teacher and student
surveys Teacher interviews
Duration 7 weeks 2 weeks 1 week
Methodology Quantitative methodology
quasi-experimental design
Quantitative
methodology
correlational design
Qualitative
methodology (in-
depth interviews)
76
3.2.1 Sampling Methodology
The sampling methodology that was used to identify the schools to incorporate into the
study was stratified sampling. Stratified sampling was used because it enabled the
identification of the five leading private schools who had been adequately resourced for
the teaching of English. This eliminated the variable that the schools lacked sufficient
resources to deliver a quality English language programme. The sampling of the classes
within the schools was determined by convenience sampling as principals and teachers
had to be approached to allow the study to be conducted. It was decided to select classes
at the same grade level to eliminate bias that might enter the research from differing
levels of competence according to the grade level of the student. The sampling sought to
gather the same number of students from each school but this was difficult to achieve
due to differences in class sizes.
The use of criterion samplingas part of the purposive sampling approach was to
eliminate variables that were not a part of the scope of the research. The approach
enables the researcher to select groups that will provide information-rich date given the
limited resources of the research project (Patton, 2002). The selection of students in
their second year of intermediate school meant that the students were acclimatised to the
school. The second year of the three-year intermediate school programme is not subject
to the pressures of testing of the third year (Alnadhi, 2014). The sampling methods
employed achieve the maximisation of efficiency and validity and provided the required
breadth and depth of information that was required (Patton, 2002). Because Saudi
Arabian schools are single sex schools and the gender of the researcher was male, the
research was confined to male intermediate schools.
77
3.2.2 The population and the sampling
The population of this study was all the English language teachers and their students at
selected private teaching institutes in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Out of fifty intermediate
private schools, the five schools with the best facilities provide the sample for this
study. The facilities provided to the students while studying English language include
language labs, special classrooms for teaching languages, and the availability of
procedures and policies for organisation purposes. Given the high level of resourcing
and support for CLT, it would be expected that the teaching administration, teaching
staff and students have embraced CLT, more than a decade after it became Saudi policy.
Consequently, the results should represent a “best case scenario” of the KSA
implementation of CLT.
3.2.3 Survey sample
The students were chosen from the second grade of the five intermediate schools. The
students were aged 14 years. The survey’s sample includes 10 classes, two per school,
149 students, and 15 teachers. The ratio of students from each English centre was
almost equal: School A: (n = 31, 20.8%), School B (n = 32, 21.5%), School C (n = 26,
17.4%), School D (n = 30, 20.1%), and School E (n = 30, 20.1%). Patton (1990, p. 172)
points to the importance of the use of maximum variation in the sample as it enables
research to choose participants who would maximise the diversity of potential
participants.
3.2.4 Experimental sample
According to Wilson (2005) 25 persons to each group is sufficient for an experimental
study. Table 3 shows that of the groups in this study has more than 25 students. To run
78
the experimental study, four classes were randomly chosen out of the ten targeted
classes and thereby randomly assigning two classes for experimental (15 students per
class) and two for control (15 students per class).
Table 3: Study Participants
Schools Students Teachers
A 31 3
B 32 3
C 26 3
D 30 3
E 30 3
Total 5 149 15
3.3 Qualitative study
Each of the 15 teachers who participated in the survey was interviewed in an open
structured interview to collect their beliefs and insights about the foreign language
program at their school. The interviews were conducted for fifteen minutes per teacher
where the teacher was canvassed on five areas. This interview was conducted
subsequent to the study. The interview covered five broad areas: teacher knowledge of
approaches, teacher opinion regarding approaches, teacher knowledge of CLT, teacher
views of implementation of CLT, and teacher opinions about English teaching in
general. This enabled a collection of data that had the depth in order to consider the
stated with the actual performance.
3.4 Teaching approach
The control group was taught using the current approaches that their classroom teachers
had been using. This reflected the dominant grammatical approach interspersed with
79
some CLT elements that involved students involved in discussion on topics using the
English language. The dominant learning approach involved lectures where the student
was passive rather than active. The focus remained on structural competence founded
on understanding the rules of grammar rather than on developing communicative
competence. Students were involved predominantly in written language production.
The experimental group involved teachers trained in the CLT approach. They were
required to implement the syllabus and approach that was approved by the educational
administration with the experimental group. The teachers were required to use the CLT
resources provided by the government. The activities that were used in the classroom
included role-plays in specific contexts, speeches, discussions, conversations, word
games, quizzes, problem solving tasks and simulations. The materials that were used in
the classroom were authentic such as television programmes, music, movies, public
announcements, notice boards, advertisements, commercials, radio broadcasts, tourist
information pamphlets, forms, photographs, menus, letters, e-mails, Internet material
and recorded conversations and associated transcripts.
3.5 Data collection tools
The study uses multi-method for collecting data with regard to mixed method research
that provided multiple sources of evidence: pre- and post-test, and the questionnaires.
This study uses two questionnaires each with a five-point Likert-type scale for
participants to indicate their response to statements, two semi-structured interview
protocols with five open-ended questions, and pre- and post-tests for collecting data on
student performance. All data collection tools were presented in English and each will
be discussed separately in the following sections.
80
3.5.1 Interview
The interviews were conducted in English, as participants are English language
teachers. They were used to collect qualitative data. The researcher developed a list of
semi-structured open-ended questions. The interview protocol forms Appendix U to this
thesis .Examples of the questions include:
A. Knowledge of approaches such as:
What are the approaches used in Saudi Arabia for teaching English?
B. Your opinion regarding these approaches such as:
How do you feel about the effectiveness of the current methods for
teaching English language in Saudi Arabia?
C. CLT such as:
Have you heard about CLT?
D. Difficulties of CLT such as:
What are the difficulties you have faced personally when attempting
CLT in your classroom?
E. General questions such as:
Tell me about where you teach the English language?
3.5.2 Questionnaires
Two questionnaires were used to ascertain student and teacher responses to a series of
statements reflecting the influence of social and cultural norms on the adoption and
implementation of the CLT approach. The questionnaires are provided in Appendices
R–T. The questionnaires elicited demographic information (student: gender, age,
school, and class; teacher: gender, university, and experience in teaching English
81
language), and a guide for answering its items. The questionnaires contained the
following sections.
Student’s questionnaire: 24 items composing three sub-scales:
A. Approaches for teaching English: 6 items such as “I prefer activity with
a partner in English language rather than alone.”
B. The importance of using CLT: 14 items such as “My teacher is not
using the Communicative Language Approach to teach us speaking
English Language skills.”
C. General opinions: 4 items such as “I would like to have my classes in
the language labs rather than in classrooms.”
Students responded on five-point Likert-type scales: Strongly Agree, Agree, Uncertain,
Disagree, and Strongly Disagree, which were coded 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1, respectively. The
5-point scale questionnaire is apt for research of this type because it can record the
participants’ answers and “measure the attitudinal scales and trends of these responses”
(Neuman, 2005). According to Neuman, “[t]his quantitative survey method is also the
best to differentiate the minimum differences between such five-point scales” (2005, p.
224).
Teacher’s questionnaire: 24 items comprising three sub-scales:
A. Approaches for teaching English: 5 items such as “Group work activities
are essential for students to develop co-operative relationships.”
B. The importance of using CLT: 10 items such as “I believe using the CLT
will be very easy within the Saudi social context.”
82
C. General opinions: 9 items such as “I think the Saudi students are willing
to accept any new methods that can help them learning English easily.”
It is important that the questions in any questionnaire cover the concepts that it intends
to measure (Bolarinwa, 2015; Moores, Jones, & Radley, 2012). The face validity of
these questionnaires was determined by exposing them to “a panel of judges/experts” at
a number of Saudi universities. They reviewed the questions and verifyied face validity.
The experts on teaching Englih in an Arabic setting explored the theoreticl construct of
the questionnaire to evaluate whether the questions measured the elements of approach,
importance and attitude as they pertain to CLT. They found that the questionnaire was
valid in assessing teacher’s attitudes and behaviours in respect to CLT.
The reliability of the data collection instruments was estimated by calculation of
Cronbach α contingency coefficient (scale from 0 to 1) for the completed student and
teacher questionnaires (Tavakol & Dennick, 2011). Table 4 contains this data,
indicating that the internal consistency for the student scales ranges from 0.64 to 0.86.
The internal consistency for the three teacher sub-scales ranges from 0.59 to 0.72. Both
questionnaires and the scales within them are reliable enough to permit discussion.
83
Table 4: Reliability Test of the Students’ and Teachers’ Questionnaires by
Cronbach α Contingency Test
Scale
Approaches
for teaching
English
The
importance
of using CLT
General
opinions Total
Item
number
Student 6 14 4 24
Teacher 5 10 9 24
Cronbach α Student 0.64 0.72 0.86 0.80
Teacher 0.61 0.72 0.59 0.77
Mean Student 20.89 50.22 11.61 82.72
Teacher 20.33 38.26 34.80 93.40
SD Student 4.33 8.64 4.84 13.22
Teacher 2.71 5.88 4.18 9.63
3.5.3 Pre-test and post-test exams
The difference between the pre-test and post-test provides a measure of student learning
(Dimitrov & Rumrill, 2003). Comparison of the mean pre-test scores of two groups will
reveal differences between them on the constructs measured by the test. If two groups
have similar mean pre-test scores, comparison of their mean post-test scores will reveal
differing control of those constructs. In this case, one of the groups experiences
“ordinary” English teaching and the other CLT. This quasi-experimental phase of the
investigation will indicate the comparative effectiveness of the two approaches to
teaching English.
The pre-test and the post-test were different. The pre-test occurred at the beginning of
the 2013–2014 semester, before any intervention happened. The post-test was given
seven weeks after the semester began. The test included 30 items regarding English
Grammatical Knowledge Skills (EGKS), in addition to social understanding about how
and when to use appropriate utterances. There were twenty questions in total. The test
84
was drawn from the mandatory text used by the KSA Department of Education for
assessment purposes (Lannuzzi & Strying, 2012, Appendix N & O). The tests were
equivalent in that the questions were drawn randomly from the list of questions that are
used for assessment purposes within the Saudi Arabian English curriculum.
3.6 Mixed methods
The research used a mixed methods approach in order to gain both quantitative data on
student performance and teacher attitudes and behaviours regarding CLT. The
qualitative data enabled the collection of attitudes that were held by the teachers in
order to identify if there were gaps between actual performance and the views that were
espoused. The mixed methods approach can provide a richness of data that can increase
the researcher’s insight into the issue (Cameron, 2015). It was important in the context
of the study to not only determine quantifiably the changes in the competence of the
students when faced with the CLT approach but also to understand the underlying
variables that exist in respect to the attitudes and behaviours of the teachers.
3.7 Data Analysis
Quantitative and qualitative methods are used for analysing data, to improve the quality
of research outcomes and results. This research project uses the three stages of Creswell
and Piano Clark’s embedded mixed methods model for data analysis:
a. analyzing the primary data to answer the research questions,
b. analyzing the secondary data (qualitative or quantitative) where it is
embedded within the primary design by merging or connecting using the
steps involved in the convergent, explanatory, or exploratory designs, and
85
c. interpreting how the primary and secondary results answer the qualitative,
quantitative, and mixed methods questions (Creswell & Piano Clark, 2011).
For this particular research, first of all, the univariate analysis of covariance
(ANCOVA) of the pre and the post test results for the experimental and the control
groups was carried out. The second analysis was the quantitative correlational analysis
of the survey data obtained from the teachers and the students. Finally, the third
investigation was for the qualitative analysis of the survey data obtained from the
second interviews with the teachers, which includes the opinion, views, and ideas about
the CLT in Saudi Arabia.
3.7.1 Statistical analysis
The quantitative data collected for this study were analysed by using SPSS (Statistical
Package for Social Sciences) the SPSS ® program software (IBM SPSS Statistics
Version 21) was chosen for this study. SPSS enables comprehensive data access and
preparation, analytical reporting, graphics, and modelling. Numbers encoded into the
system represent participant answers, which are the actual data collected. This software
allows thorough data management, provides a wide range of options and better
organization of outputs relative to other software and therefore it was chosen for this
study.
Univariate analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with pre-test score as a covariate were
used to indicate experimental effect through comparison of experimental and control
group post-test performance on the mandated English grammatical knowledge and skills
exam (Lannuzzi & Strying, 2012, Appendix N&O). ANCOVA includes and controls
86
interactions between the pre-test and the post-test as covariates. This experimental
design, with two groups plus pre-test and post-test measurements, makes ANCOVA less
problematic than comparison of the means of two variables by the more frequently used
t-test and ANOVA (Wilcox, 2005). Moreover, ANCOVA helps the researcher to
calculate the statistical power of the test and the resultant effect size, potentially
avoiding the close link among statistical significance, effect size, and sample size. For
instance, differences in sample size can cause two studies with totally different results
in terms of statistical significance yield exactly the same results in terms of effect.
Sample size can be an ethical issue. If you recruit too few people to take part, a study is
highly likely to be statistically non-significant and then you have wasted your
participants’ time as well as your own. Conversely, recruiting far more people than is
necessary to achieve statistical significance could also waste many people’s time.
Effect size can measure the strength of the relationship between the occurrence of a
phenomenon within an experimental and a control group. A score of 0.00 indicates no
difference between the two groups; a positive score that the experimental group
performed better than the control group and a negative score reveals the reverse. The
larger the decimal number the greater the difference. (Whalberg, 1984).
3.7.2 Qualitative analysis
The goal of qualitative research is to comprehend human behaviour and the plausible
reasons behind such behaviour (Bogdan & Biklen, 1997): the “why” and “how” of
decision-making, not just “what”, “where”, and “when”. Consequently, qualitative
researchers frequently use focused, but smaller, participant samples to collect data.
87
This study uses open-response survey questions and interviews to provide context for
the test and Likert item survey results as well as deeper information on participant
opinions.
3.8 Exploratory factor analysis
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is a statistical approach that seeks to identify the
nature of relationships and structure in an extremely large set of variables (Norris &
Lecavalier, 2010). This style of analysis is most relevant to this study, first as the scale
being developed by the researcher needs to be supported by the data. Second, the study
explores students’ attitudes toward the CLT approach in Saudi Arabia, as EFA is also an
appropriate method for analysis when developing a scale and serves to identify a set of
latent constructs underlying a series of measured variables (Costello & Osborne, 2005).
The latent variable is regarded as a cause of an item score (DeVellis, 1991).
3.9 Chi-square test of students’ attitudes
Chi-square statistic (denoted 2) is used to compare observed cell frequencies with
theoretical expected distribution. If the chi-square statistic is significant, the null
hypothesis is rejected and it is inferred that observed frequency distribution is
significantly different from expected distribution. When there is not any prior expected
value for cells, it is assumed that the theoretical expected distribution is equal in the
cells.
3.10 Conclusion
This chapter deals with the overall methodological approach applied in this research.
Three activities were performed to achieve the target research questions. The first
88
activity involves quantitative analysis of pre- and post-test of the CLT approach
including ANCOVA test based on the responses of the students who were under the
experimental and the control groups. The second activity includes the quantitative
analysis of the responses of the teachers and the students by the use of chi-square test.
The third activity included the qualitative analysis of the responses of teachers for the
implementation of CLT in the Saudi schools.
Table 5: Methods and Research Questions
Q Research questions Data type Collection method Analysis methods
What is the effect of applying Communicative Language Teaching for Saudi students
learning English in the participating private schools?
1. What is the level of
awareness and
comprehension of
CLT among the
teachers and students
at Saudi private
schools?
Teacher and student
answers about their
awareness towards
CLT approach
Answers recorded,
analysed, and
classified into
categories that
clarify the features
of CLT approach
Open-ended questions
on teacher
questionnaires
Teacher interviews
Qualitative:
Content analysis of
written and
transcribed interview
answers at questions
2. To what extent does
CLT influence Saudi
teachers’ and
students’ attitude to
learning English?
Teacher and student
answers about their
awareness towards
CLT approach
Two questionnaires for
teachers and students.
The five-point Likert-
type scale statements
to specify their level of
agreement and
disagreement with the
categories; Strongly
Agree, Agree,
Uncertain, Disagree,
and Strongly Disagree
(5,4,3,2,1)
Quantitative:
Exploratory Factor
Analysis to identify
scales within the
survey data
Correlational analysis
to identify influential
factos within and
between scales
3. What impact does
CLT have on
students’ results in
Saudi English
language classes?
Identifying
students’
performance and
achievement under
the CLT approach
Pre-test and post-test
around CLT
implementation
(Appendices N&O)
Quantitative:
Descriptive analysis
and univariate
analysis of covariance
(ANCOVA)
89
Chapter 4: Quantitative Results
4.1 Chapter overview
This chapter presents the results of the data analysed according to the mixed methods
approach used for this research. The two data sets presented here emerge from the
survey questionnaire and the pre- and post-investigation language tests. The data
collected were entered into SPSS version 22, and descriptive and inferential statistical
techniques have been used to analyse it. The main objective of this chapter is to report
the findings with regard to the following research questions:
What is the effect of applying the CLT approach on Saudi English language
students’ assessment outcomes?
What is the level of awareness and comprehension of communicative
language teaching (CLT) among teachers and students at private schools?
To what extent does CLT influence Saudi teachers’ and students’ attitudes to
learning English?
4.2 Results of the quasi-experimental design
An ANCOVA is a sort of ANOVA model that can be used where there is a linear
relationship between the dependent and independent variables. In this study, the
covariates are unrelated to the independent variables and are not correlated with each
other. The use of ANCOVA enables the comparison of a response variable (the test
score) with a factor and continuous independent variables. Student performance at the
pre-test stage influenced the post-test result. A covariate is a variable that is predictive
of the outcome of the study. In this study the performance of the student in the pre-test
is a predictor of the performance of the student in the post-test. The comparison of the
90
means of two variables by the more frequently used t-test could not control the
covariate effects in an experimental design with two groups plus pre-test and post-test
measurements, so the most suitable statistical analysis is ANCOVA (Wilcox, 2005).
ANOVA is an appropriate approach to use to determine the differences that exist
between means of three or more variables where the observations are independent, the
distributions of the residuals are normal and there is homogeneity in the variances
(Hoekstra, Kiers, & Johnson, 2012). If these assumptions are violated, then Type I and
Type II errors can arise. ANOVA enables the testing of a number of null hypotheses
simultaneously. ANOVA assesses differences between groups on a continuous variable
whereas ANCOVA determines the degree of difference that arises where a covariable is
controlled. The result of ANCOVA helps the researcher to calculate the effect size and
statistical power of the test and the resultant effect size.
The summary of ANCOVA output is presented in Table 6.
Table 6: ANCOVA Output of Students English Grammatical Knowledge Skills
Pre-Test and Post-Test
n M SD F Df P Effect
size Power
Pre-test
Ex-group 30 40.22 10.22 3.60 57, 1 0.06 0.06 0.46
Co-group 30 39.37 10.31
Post-test
Ex-group 30 46.18 4.72 8.32 57, 1 0.01 0.56 0.81
Co-group 30 40.21 10.22
Ex = Experimental.
Co = Control.
91
It can be seen from Table 6 that ANCOVA results revealed no significant difference
between the means of the experimental and control groups at the pre-test. This suggests
that the experimental and control group students have the same level of English
grammatical knowledge and skill before the intervention. On the other hand, when
teachers applied CLT, ANCOVA analysis indicated a significant difference (f (57, 1) =
8.32, p < 0.01) between the mean of Experimental group exam (M = 46.18, SD = 4.72)
and Control group exam (M = 40.21, SD = 10.22).
The score of students in the experimental group was significantly greater than students
in the control group (class mean of 46.18 as opposed to 40.21) and the student results
are much more tightly grouped (SD of 4.72 as opposed to 10.22). CLT appears to
improve student performance in learning a foreign language for these Saudi students.
The post-test power of 0.81, generating a moderate effect size of 0.56, reported in Table
6 support the appearance of impact emerging from the significance calculations.
Figure 2: Profile plot of groups at pre-test and post-test
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
Pre-test Post-test
Experimental Control
92
4.3 ANCOVA Assumptions
It was assumed that there would be a relationship between the scores that students
received in the pre-test and the score that they received in the post test. Students would
not demonstrate a decline in score from the pre-test to the post-test. This would suggest
that there was not a similarity between the tests. All students showed an improvement
and no students showed evidence that there was a decline (Table Six). The assumptions
that the observations are independent, that the residuals are normal and homogeneity
were met by the study resulting in an absence of Type I and Type II errors in the data.
Each student’s test was independent of theirs and each other student’s test. The scores
were kept as being raw. There was a clear relationship between the score that the
student received in the post-test and the pre-test based onn whether they were exposed
or not exposed to CLT.
4.4. Survey results
4.4.1 Student survey
An exploratory factor analysis was executed on the 149 student survey questionnaires
that were collected to identify scales forming any underlying structure of the data. The
results of the factor analysis will be discussed in the following section. Great care needs
to be talen in conducting an exploratory factor analysis (Preacher & MacCallum, 2003).
This includes taking care in the model that is used, the criteria that is selected and the
rotation method (Preacher & McCallum, 2003). The researcher acknowledges the
limitations of the use of the explanatory factor analysis model.
93
4.5 Exploratory factor analysis
The following is an outline of the steps taken in the process of factor analysis of the data
generated by the surveys used in this investigation.
4.5.1. Step 1: Extraction method: Principle component analysis
The factor extraction was run for the 24 items using the Extraction Method: Principal
Component Analysis with varimax rotation (orthogonal rotation) to provide simplicity
and conceptual clarity (Tabachnick, 2007). A varimax solution yields results which
make it as easy as possible to identify each variable with a single factor. To determine
the number of factors the eigenvalues and scree tests were used and compared with each
other.
4.5.2 Step 2: Eigenvalues and scree plot
The number of elements that have eigenvalues greater than 1 suggested dividing the
number of variables by three to five. Eigenvalues below one are not significant
(Tabachnick, 2007). In research, the expected number of factors according to this
criterion is between 5–8 factors. This criterion is matched with the results of
eigenvalues over one that is seven factors. To make a decision on how many constructs
are suited to a scale, one method is running a scree plot. Figure 3 has shown a scree plot
of component’s eigenvalues greater than 1. (See the scree plot.)
94
Figure 3: Scree plot of student’s questionnaire
As can be seen in the Figure 3, the scree plot for the survy result displays the number of
factors on the x-axis and the eigenvalues on the y-axis. A scree plot should always
display a downward curve. The “elbow” curve point, where the curve’s slope levels off,
reveals the number of factors that the analysis should generate. There are three
observable ‘elbows’ in the scree plot and, suggesting that there are 3 student attitude
factors in this study.
4.5.3. Step 3: Extraction method: Interpretation of factors
The values in the matrix loading, after orthogonal rotation, are correlations between
variables and factors. Tabachnick (2007) suggests that 0.32 or larger is a useful criterion
for meaningful correlation: a general rule of thumb is that only variables with loading of
0.32 and above are interpreted; a greater loading value indicates the variables are more
the pure measure of the factor. Comrey and Lee (1992) suggest loadings are considered
excellent when they are greater than 0.71; loadings of 0.63 are considered very well
ELBOW CURVE POINT
95
correlated; 0.55 are considered good; 0.45 are considered fair; and loadings below 0.32
are considered poorly correlated. Table 7 arranges the survey items by factors which
retain the names of the survey sections.
Table 7: Factor Interpretation
No Components
Factors
General
opinion
CLT
imp.
Applied
CLT
20 My teacher is not using the communicative language approach to
teach us writing English language skills
.82
21 I want to change the current way of learning English .76
22 I would like to change the current materials and curriculum
when I am learning English
.74
19 My teacher is not using the communicative language approach to
teach us reading English language skills
.72
16 I don’t know when my teacher uses the communicative language
approach
.66
23 I would like to have my classes in the language labs rather than
in classrooms
.66
24 I would like to study English skills using case studies and real
objects and samples
.64
18 My teacher is not using the communicative language approach to
teach us listening English language skills
.47
13 I have never heard about the communicative language approach .35
17 My teacher is not using the communicative language approach to
teach us speaking English language skills
.34
7 I believe learning English using the CLT is very important .79
6 I do not know about the approach used by my teacher for
teaching English language and he did not tell us about it
.73
10 It will be very helpful to use the CLT for learning to write
English
.72
11 It will be very helpful to use the CLT for learning to listen
English
.69
8 It will be very helpful to use the CLT for learning to speak
English
.68
9 It will be very helpful to use the CLT for learning to read
English
.61
4 The active method to be more active in speaking English is to
read English newsletters and to think in English.
.46
12 I believe learning English needs the CLT approach .36
14 I have heard about the communicative language approach but
don’t know what it means in teaching the English language
.36
96
No Components
Factors
General
opinion
CLT
imp.
Applied
CLT
15 I have heard about the communicative language approach but
don’t know how it works for teaching the English language
.33
1 I prefer activity with a partner in English language rather than
alone.
.55
3 Discussing language questions with your friends is better than
receiving the answer from your teacher.
.53
2 The best way for oral communication is studying by myself
rather than learning from the teacher.
.49
5 asking questions is better than gaining the knowledge from
your teacher
.46
Extraction method: principal component analysis. (a. Three components extracted.)
4.6 Chi-square results of students’ attitudes
The chi-square results of students’ views on the approaches for teaching English are
displayed in Table 8, which indicates that item distributions are considerably different
from the expected value, except for the fifth item, which is not significant. The degrees
of freedom for the data is 148, 1. The meaning of each of the significant items will be
illustrated in the following section.
97
Table 8: Summary of Chi-Square of Students’ Attitudes Regarding Approaches
Used for Teaching English Language
Strongly
disagree Disagree Uncertain Agree
Strongly
agree 2 p
f % f % f % f % f %
1. I prefer activity with a
partner in English
language rather than
alone.
12 8.1% 10 6.7% 12 8.1% 35 23.5% 80 53.7% 119.9 0.01
2. The best way for oral
communication is
studying by myself
rather than learning
from the teacher.
53 35.6% 32 21.5% 30 20.1% 11 7.4% 23 15.4% 31.63 0.01
3. Discussing language
questions with your
friends is better than
receiving the answer
from your teacher.
20 13.4% 20 13.4% 24 16.1% 42 28.2% 43 28.9% 18.4 0.01
4. The active method to
be more active in
speaking English is to
read English newsletter
and to think in English.
17 11.4% 5 3.4% 28 18.8% 32 21.5% 67 45.0% 72.4 0.01
5. Asking questions is
better than gaining the
knowledge from your
teacher.
27 18.1% 18 12.1% 37 24.8% 31 20.8% 36 24.2% 8.1 N.S
6. I do not know about the
approach used by my
teacher for teaching
English language and
he did not tell us about
it.
10 6.7% 8 5.4% 35 23.5% 38 25.5% 58 38.9% 58.9 0.01
The chi-square results of students attitudes regarding the important of the CLT approach
for teaching English language is presented in Table 9. The degree of freedom is 148, 1.
98
Table 9: Summary of Chi-Square of Students’ Attitudes Regarding the
Importance of the CLT Approach for Teaching English Language
Strongly
disagree Disagree Uncertain Agree
Strongly
Agree 2 p
f % f % f % f % f %
1. I believe learning
English using the CLT is
very important.
6 4.0% 4 2.7% 25 16.8% 56 37.6% 58 38.9% 91.8 0.01
2. It will be very helpful to
use the CLT for learning
to speak English.
9 6.0% 11 7.4% 34 22.8% 43 28.9% 52 34.9% 49.4 0.01
3. It will be very helpful to
use the CLT for learning
to read English.
14 9.4% 14 9.4% 35 23.5% 35 23.5% 51 34.2% 33.6 0.01
4. It will be very helpful to
use the CLT for learning
to write English.
10 6.7% 5 3.4% 24 16.1% 42 28.2% 68 45.6% 88.6 0.01
5. It will be very helpful to
use the CLT for learning
to listen English.
14 9.4% 13 8.7% 28 18.8% 37 24.8% 57 38.3% 44.5 0.01
6. I believe learning
English need using the
CLT approach.
24 16.1% 8 5.4% 26 17.4% 29 19.5% 62 41.6% 52.3 0.01
7. I have never heard about
the communicative
language approach.
38 25.5% 14 9.4% 20 13.4% 20 13.4% 57 38.3% 41.9 0.01
8. I have heard about the
communicative language
approach but don’t know
how it works for
teaching English
language.
12 8.1% 7 4.7% 17 11.4% 21 14.1% 92 61.7% 116 0.01
9. I have heard about the
communicative language
approach but don’t know
what it means in
teaching English
language.
12 8.1% 6 4.0% 35 23.5% 30 20.1% 66 44.3% 75.4 0.01
10. I don’t know when my
teacher uses the
communicative language
approach.
26 17.4% 22 14.8% 39 26.2% 22 14.8% 40 26.8% 10.8 0.05
11. My teacher is not using
the communicative
language approach to
teach us speaking
English language skills.
27 18.1% 21 14.1% 42 28.2% 26 17.4% 33 22.1% 8.6 N.S
99
The chi-square results of students’ attitudes regarding general opinions for teaching
English language are displayed in Table 10. The degrees of freedom is 148, 1.
Table 10: Summary of Chi-Square of Students’ Attitudes Regarding General
Opinions for Teaching English Language Strongly
disagree Disagree Uncertain Agree
Strongly
agree
2 p
f % f % f % f % f %
1. I want to change the
current way of
learning English. 37 24.8% 21 14.1% 40 26.8% 12 8.1% 39 26.2% 21.3 0.01
2. I would like to change
the current materials
and curriculum I am
learning English.
37 24.8% 19 12.8% 40 26.8% 22 14.8% 31 20.8% 11.2 0.05
3. I would like to have
my classes in the
language labs rather
than in classrooms.
42 28.2% 19 12.8% 36 24.2% 19 12.8% 33 22.1% 14.4 0.05
4. I would like to study
English skills using
case studies and real
objects and samples.
52 34.9% 13 8.7% 28 18.8% 20 13.4% 36 24.2% 30.6 0.01
12. My teacher is not using
the communicative
language approach to
teach us listening
English language skills.
13 8.7% 19 12.8% 40 26.8% 31 20.8% 46 30.9% 25.7 0.01
13. My teacher is not using
the communicative
language approach to
teach us reading English
language skills.
28 18.8% 12 8.1% 46 30.9% 33 22.1% 30 20.1% 19.8 0.01
14. My teacher is not using
the communicative
language approach to
teach us writing English
language skills.
40 26.8% 13 8.7% 45 30.2% 10 6.7% 41 27.5% 38.1 0.01
100
4.7 Chi-square results of teachers’ attitudes
The chi-square results of teachers’ attitudes regarding approaches for teaching English
are presented in Table 11. The degree of frredom is 14, 1.
Table 11: Summary of Chi-Square of Teachers’ Attitudes Regarding Approaches
for Teaching English
Strongly
disagree Disagree
Neither
agree nor
disagree Agree
Strongly
agree
2 p
f % f % f % f % f %
1. Meaning-focused
activities are more
effective to develop
communicative
ability than from
focused activities.
0 0.0% 1 6.7% 0 0.0% 9 60.0% 5 33.3% 6.4 0.05
2. Group work helps
your students who
are not willing to
speak in front of the
class.
0 0.0% 1 6.7% 0 0.0% 10 66.7% 4 26.7% 8.4 0.05
3. Grammar teaching
may be included in a
lesson as a mean of
communication, not
as the main goal of
teaching.
0 0.0% 1 6.7% 3 20.0% 6 40.0% 5 33.3% 3.9 N.S
4. Group work
activities are
essential for students
to develop co-
operative
relationships.
0 0.0% 1 6.7% 4 26.7% 1 6.7% 9 60.0% 11.4 0.01
5. Understanding
language use is
better than studying
language rules while
teaching English in
the class.
0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6 40.0% 6 40.0% 3 20.0% 1.2 N.S
The chi-square results of teachers’ attitudes regarding the importance of using CLT and
general views are displayed in Tables 12 and 13. The degree of frredom is 14, 1.
101
Table 12: Summary of Chi-Square of Teachers’ Attitudes Regarding the
Importance of Using CLT
Strongly
disagree Disagree
Neither
agree nor
disagree Agree
Strongly
agree
2 p
f % f % f % f % f %
1. I believe teaching
English using the
CLT is very
important for my
students.
0 0.0% 1 6.7% 3 20.0% 6 40.0% 5 33.3% 3.6 N.S
2. It will be very
helpful to use the
CLT for teaching
speaking skills.
0 0.0% 1 6.7% 2 13.3% 8 53.3% 4 26.7% 7.7 N.S
3. It will be very
helpful to use the
CLT for teaching
reading skills
0 0.0% 3 20.0% 3 20.0% 4 26.7% 5 33.3% 0.77 N.S
4. It will be very
helpful to use the
CLT for teaching
writing skills
1 6.7% 2 13.3% 2 13.3% 3 20.0% 7 46.7% 7.3 N.S
5. It will be very
helpful to use the
CLT for teaching
listing skills.
0 0.0% 3 20.0% 3 20.0% 5 33.3% 4 26.7% 0.73 N.S
6. I believe teaching
English is better
using the CLT
approach
0 0.0% 3 20.0% 2 13.3% 6 40.0% 4 26.7% 2.33 N.S
7. I think the Saudi
government will be
able to fund the
requirements for
the implementation
of the CLT
approach.
0 0.0% 1 6.7% 2 13.3% 6 40.0% 6 40.0% 5.53 N.S
8. I think the private
schools will be
able to fund the
requirements for
the implementation
of the CLT
approach.
1 6.7% 4 26.7% 2 13.3% 5 33.3% 3 20.0% 3.33 N.S
9. I believe using the
CLT will be very
easy within the
Saudi social
context
0 0.0% 3 20.0% 3 20.0% 2 13.3% 7 46.7% 3.93 N.S
102
10. I think the Saudi
students will not
face difficulties
using the CLT for
English learning.
0 0.0% 1 6.7% 3 20.0% 7 46.7% 4 26.7% 5 N.S
103
Table 13: Summary of Chi-Square of Teachers’ General Opinions about CLT
Strongly
disagree Disagree
Neither
agree nor
disagree
Agree Strongly
agree
2 p
f % f % f % f % f %
1. I would like to have
my classes in the
language labs rather
than in classrooms.
0 0.0% 2 13.3% 1 6.7% 7 46.7% 5 33.3% 6.06 N.S
2. I would like to teach
English skills using
case studies and real
objects and samples.
1 6.7% 2 13.3% 2 13.3% 4 26.7% 6 40.0% 5.33 N.S
3. I think the Saudi
students will not face
difficulties in
changing the current
textbooks for
learning English
language.
1 6.7% 0 0.0% 4 26.7% 8 53.3% 2 13.3% 7.66 N.S
4. I think the Saudi
students are willing
to accept any new
methods that can help
them learning
English easily.
0 0.0% 1 6.7% 3 20.0% 7 46.7% 4 26.7% 5 N.S
5. I think the Saudi
students will accept
working in groups
and pairs.
0 0.0% 1 6.7% 4 26.7% 6 40.0% 4 26.7% 3.40 N.S
6. I think the Saudi
students will like
learning English with
real examples.
0 0.0% 2 13.3% 3 20.0% 4 26.7% 6 40.0% 2.33 N.S
7. I think the Saudi
students will not
hesitate practicing
English in front of
other students and
teachers in the
classroom.
0 0.0% 3 20.0% 6 40.0% 6 40.0% 0 0.0% 1.20 N.S
8. I would like to
change the current
materials and
curriculum I am
using to teach
English.
0 0.0% 1 6.7% 2 13.3% 7 46.7% 5 33.3% 6.06 N.S
9. I would like to
change the current
way I am teaching
English.
0 0.0% 1 6.7% 0 0.0% 7 46.7% 7 46.7% 4.80 N.S
104
4.8 Correlations
To estimate the relationship between teachers’ demographic features like their
experience and academic level with CLT items, a numbers of correlations coefficients
were calculated. Table 14 reports these correlations: apparently, teacher experience has
a negative correlation with group work, grammar teaching, reading skill and writing
skill, while it has a positive correlation with language use. It can also be seen that
teacher academic level has a positive significant association with language use.
Table 14: Correlation between Teachers’ Demographic and CLT Items
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
4.9 Analysis of Exploratory Factor Analysis
Many of the variables on Table 7 show loadings between very good, good, fair and
poor. As mentioned above, the survey section labels were retained for the factors, which
have been consolidated by identifying high-loading items. Ten components comprised
the ‘General Opinion’ factor, so labelled because of the presence of four items from the
original section, expanded by six additional items transferred from ‘An important CLT’
factor. In the general opinion factor, the items: “my teacher is not using the
communicative language approach to teach us writing English language skills” with
factor loading (0.82), “I want to change the current way of learning English” (0.76), “I
would like to change the current materials and curriculum I am learning English” (0.74)
and “my teacher is not using the communicative language approach to teach us reading
English language skills” (0.72), are the highest items loading in the factor.
Variables
Group work
Grammar
teaching
Reading
skill
Writing
Skill Language use
Teaching experience –.546* –.448 –.254 –.721
** .429
Academic level .341 .152 –.073 –.083 .691**
105
The second factor with 10 items includes many items from the original survey section
titled “the importance of using CLT”, so this factor has the same title. In the importance
of using CLT factor, the items: “I believe learning English using the CLT is very
important” with factor loading (0.79), “I do not know about the approach used by my
teacher for teaching English language and he did not tell us about it” (0.73), “It will be
very helpful to use the CLT for learning to write English” (0.72), are the highest items
loading in the factor.
The third factor involves 4 items from the ‘Approaches for teaching English’ survey
section which is called with the same name in the analysis. In this factor, the items: “I
prefer activity with a partner in English language rather than alone”, with factor loading
(0.55) and “Discussing language questions with your friends is better than receiving the
answer from your teacher”, (0.53) are the items loading highest in the factor.
The initial conceptual model identified 24 factors divided into three groups: the
approach to teaching English, the importance of using CLT and the general opinons that
were held. As a consequence of the empirical model, the key factors within these 24
were identified. The four factors in the approach to teaching English section were
reduced to two factors: having a learning partner and peer discussion. The ten factors in
the use of CLT were reduced to three factors: the positive attitude towards CLT, the
need for the student to understand the reasons for the approach and the perceived value
of using the CLT approach to improve the writing of the student. The ten general factors
were reduced to three factors. These factors are the need for the teacher to use the CLT
approach to teach reading and writing; the desire to change the way English is learnt;
and the need to change the resources and curriculum to accommodate CLT. Hence the
106
empirical model is more refined and focused for the specific context than the initial
conceptual model. This enables the educational change agent to focus on specific areas
that will have a major effect on the adoption and acceptance of CLT in the Saudi
Arabian classroom.
4.10 Analysis of Student Attitudes
When students were being asked to provide their opinions regarding if they prefer the
activity with a partner in English language rather than alone, the results in Table 8
confirmed that the majority of the students (77.2%) prefer activity with a partner in
English language rather than alone.
Regarding the approaches for teaching English language, the attitudes of student
participants supported the active method, involving reading English newsletters and
thinking in English. Table 8 shows that 66.5% agreed (combining strongly agree and
agree), whereas 18.8% neither agreed nor disagreed, whereas those holding negative
attitudes make up 14.8%.
A majority of students (64.4%) either agreed or strongly agreed that they did not know
about the approach used by their teacher for teaching English language, while 23.5%
were not sure and only 12.1% thought they did know. Although more than half (57.1%)
of the participants agreed that discussing language questions with friends is better than
receiving the answer from the teacher, there was still a substantial percentage (42.9%)
that either were uncertain or disagreed with this perspective. This may be related to the
fact that discussion among friends is important, and at the same time the teacher must
have a role in supporting the discussion. Finally, only 22.8% of students either agreed or
107
strongly agreed with the statement, “The best way for oral communication is studying
by myself rather than learning from the teacher”; whereas 20.1% were not sure and
more than half (57.1%) either disagreed or strongly disagreed. These results suggest that
the majority of students in the private schools participating in this study lack the desire
or confidence to learn English language alone. They prefer help from their teachers.
Table 9 indicates that the chi-square values suggest that the observed distributions of all
13 items exceeded the theoretical value, except for the 11th
item. The differences
between the observed values of each item are significant. The meaning of each separate
item will be described below.
When student participants of the study were being asked to provide their responses
regarding the statement: “I believe learning English using the CLT is very important.”
The result has shown that the majority of the students (76.5%) strongly agreed that CLT
is important.
When students were being asked to provide their opinion if it would be helpful for them
to use the CLT for learning speaking, reading, writing, and listening skills of English,
the results in Table 9 show that the majority of the students support the notion that it
would be helpful to use the CLT for learning to speak, read, write, and listen to English.
Furthermore, the majority of the students (64.4%) support that they have heard about
the communicative language approach, but they do not know what it means in teaching
English language.
108
The output of Table 10 revealed that the observed value of all four items of general sub-
scale are significantly different from the expected value distribution. It means that most
students disagreed with changing the current way of learning English (38.9% against
34.3), changing the material (37.6% against 35.6), having class in the lab (41% against
34.9) and using case studies (43.6% against 37.6). It can be concluded that students’
attitudes with regard to changing the method of teaching English are negative. This
forms an interesting contrast to the results discussed above and will be further explored
through the qualitative component of this investigation.
In summary, regarding students’ preference of the approaches used to teach them
English, the results indicate that the majority of the students prefer activities with a
partner rather than learning English alone. Furthermore, the majority of the students
believed that an active method was best, that is reading English newsletters and thinking
in English. The attitudes of student participants of the study concerning the importance
of using the CLT approach to English, discovered various findings, the most important
being, although the majority of the students have heard about the CLT approach, at the
same time they do not know what it means in teaching English language. Furthermore,
the majority of students believe that learning English through the CLT approach is very
important to them and most of the students also thought that it would be very helpful to
use the CLT approach for learning to write English.
4.11 Analysis of Teacher Attitudes
Table 11 shows that the first, second, and fourth items of attitudes concerning teacher
attitude to the approaches used to teach English language in Saudi Arabian private
schools were significantly different from the expected value. This means the teachers
109
agreed with the meaning-focused activity and group work activity of the CLT approach.
The third and fifth items observed distribution have not exceeded the theoretical
expected value and it means that the teachers have various opinions with regard to
grammar teaching and study rules.
Table 12 indicates that the observed frequency of teachers’ responses towards the
importance of CLT are not significantly different to the expected value of each cell.
This observation means the teachers had various attitudes to the issues and there is no
agreement among them about the CLT approach.
According to Table 13, the output of the chi-square test indicates that observed
frequency of teachers’ general opinions about CLT are not remarkable further than the
expected value of each cells. This observation means the teachers had various attitudes
to the issues and there is not an agreement among them about the CLT approach.
4.12 Summary of findings
Analysis of the quantitative data suggests the following:
1. There are statistically significant variations between students taught by the
CLT approach and those who were not taught using this approach. The
results indicate that those students who were taught English language by
using the CLT approach have significantly higher academic achievements
compared to students taught by more traditional methods.
2. Student general opinion about the CLT approach is the first factor loading
onto the explanatory model, importance of CLT as second factor and finally
applying the CLT approach loads third. The order of factor loading in the
110
EFA indicates the importance of the separate factors on student attitude. The
fact that “applying the CLT approach” loads last suggests that students
learning English in these private schools are less prepared to apply the CLT
approach, even though they know about it and appreciate it in principle and
this was supported by analysis of their actual responses to questions within
this scale.
3. Teachers have shown various significantly different beliefs regarding the
CLT approach. While numbers of the teachers chose the “agree” and
“strongly agree” responses in the questionnaire, the distribution of observed
frequency is not remarkable far from expected distribution. This suggests
that teachers are not prepared to accept the CLT approach as an effective
teaching method.
111
Chapter 5: Qualitative data results
5.1 Introduction
The aim of the following qualitative data analysis of the semi-structured interviews with
the 15 participating teachers is to examine the teachers’ awareness and application of
CLT in the Saudi context from their own perspectives. Eleven categories were
constructed from the teachers’ responses to the interview questions. These categories
are as follows:
EFL teaching approaches used in Saudi Arabia,
teachers’ beliefs about effective EFL teaching approaches used in Saudi
Arabia,
teachers’ beliefs about EFL teaching resources,
teachers’ beliefs about using CLT,
teachers’ beliefs about benefits of CLT for students in Saudi Arabia,
teachers’ awareness of students’ opinions of CLT,
teachers’ beliefs about support given to them to use CLT in Saudi Arabia,
teachers’ awareness of the difficulties of applying CLT in the classroom,
teachers’ beliefs about solving difficulties of applying CLT in the classroom,
teachers’ beliefs about the effectiveness of CLT in Saudi Arabia, and
teachers’ suggestions for improving EFL teaching at intermediate level in
Saudi Arabia.
112
Table 15: Private School Teachers’ Interview
TEACHER GENDER QUALIFICATION TEACHING
EXPERIENCE
CLT
TRAINING
T1 Male Bachelor of English Education 5 years 6 Months
T2 Male Master of English Education 7 years 4 Months
T3 Male Bachelor of English Education 5 years NO
T4 Male Master of English Education 3 years NO
T5 Male Bachelor of English Education 11 years 6 Months
T6 Male Bachelor of English Education 5 years NO
T7 Male Master of English Education 3 years 3 Months
T8 Male Bachelor of English Education 10 years NO
T9 Male Bachelor of English Education 2 years NO
T10 Male Bachelor of English Education 3 years 2 Months
T11 Male PhD English Education 10 years 4 Months
T12 Male Master of English Education 12 years NO
T13 Male Bachelor of English Education 5 years NO
T14 Male Bachelor of English Education 9 years NO
T15 Male Master of English Education 15 years 5 Months
5.2 EFL teaching approaches used in Saudi Arabia
Fourteen out of the fifteen participating interviewed teachers made either explicit or
implicit mention of CLT as one of the EFL teaching approaches used in Saudi Arabia.
This was expected, as CLT has been mandated by government policy since 2005.
However, CLT is not the only teaching approach used. Grammar Translation Method
(GTM) was reported in the interview by one third of the participants, which made it the
second most commonly used EFL teaching method used by the participants. T9, who
had been teaching in a private school in Riyadh, for two years stated:
There are several methods used in teaching English language. The
approaches used in Saudi Arabia are: grammar translation method, this
method is based on the assumption that studying vocabulary, grammar
113
and sentence structure is crucial when it comes to understanding a foreign
language. Communicative approach is yet another method of teaching and
learning a foreign language; this method entails placing a lot of emphasis
on the ability to interpret essential instructions written in foreign
languages. (T9)
The teacher’s understanding of the grammatical translation method matches with the
theoretical basis of this approach (Mart, 2013). The teacher’s interpretation of the
communicative approach does not demonstrate the same level of understanding. As
described by Badger and Yan (2008), CLT is broader and more expansive than the
interpretation of essential instructions written in the foreign language. This comment
suggests that the level of understanding of CLT by some Saudi Arabian teachers is very
narrow and limited in its perspective.
The participants mentioned other EFL teaching methods and approaches used in Saudi
Arabia such as constructive language learning, active and cooperative learning, silent
way, direct method, the PPP model (Presentation, Practice, Production), audio-lingual
method, engage/study/activate model, peer-assisted learning, and eclectic method.
Obviously, the participants are aware of a variety of EFL teaching methods and
approaches. They mentioned various aspects of these methods and approaches that
reflected their underlying knowledge, awareness and comprehension of such methods
and approaches. According to T15:
It is important to focus on orderly teaching of grammatical rules that is
significant for the students’ capability of producing grammatically correct
sentences.
The comments of T15 demonstrate that the teachers in the survey are very aware of the
GTM. T15, who is Jordanian and had as long as 15 years of EFL teaching experience,
114
chose to prioritise language accuracy; a feature of GTM. T14, an Egyptian teacher with
nine years of teaching experience seemed to agree with the above statement. He stated:
Grammar teaching mainly leads to language acquisition. The most
important domain of language proficiency is to be grammatically
competent. (T14)
T13, who is from Pakistan and had no CLT training, was aware of one of the basic
principles of the audio-lingual method. He stated:
The Audiolingual Method is a method of foreign or second Language
teaching which emphasizes the teaching of speaking and listening before
reading and writing. (T13)
Knowledge of the direct method was revealed by T14 who had no CLT training stating:
The Direct Method is better I think. But it requires native-speaker teachers
who have fluency in the English language. (T14)
An eclectic approach—there is no best method to teach, but the most appropriate one is
situational—was highlighted by T9 who mentioned:
English teaching depends on the objectives and the situation. Sometimes
one method, approach can yield result, but in a different situation, it may
completely fail. Therefore, this is the responsibility of the English
language teacher to choose the most appropriate one to teach effectively.
(T9)
T9 preferred the eclectic method and suggested students’ level as a criterion to choose
the most suitable method. He further added:
There are different types of methods that are used in teaching English. I
select the method that I use in teaching English according to the level of
my students. (T9)
This flexibility in the teacher choosing the methodology to instruct the student appears
to be in contradiction to the instructions from the administrators of the Saudi Arabian
education system that L2 teachers need to use the CLT approach. There is no academic
research that supports the need to select differing approaches for different levels of
115
student ability. Rather, the research suggests that the learning materials need to be
modified to match the levels of student’s ability (Barnes & Lock, 2013).
Knowledge of CLT was also revealed by the participants. For example, T6 stated:
CLT really focuses much more on learning through interaction and a lot
of communication. So, I like it, especially with active learning,
cooperation, debates, discussion and arguments. (T6)
5.3 Teachers’ beliefs about effective EFL teaching approaches used in Saudi
Arabia
Two-thirds of the participants believed that current methods for teaching EFL in Saudi
Arabia are effective. Various reasons were given to rationalise the use of these methods.
It was stated:
In Saudi Arabia, teachers are using best methods because of the
availability of all necessary tools and materials. (T4)
The communicative approach is the most applicable one to be applied in
this environment. (T8)
CLT should be integrated through courses in private institutions because
the language is badly needed for communication with non-Arabic
speakers. (T6)
I think CLT is okay. Language proficiency depends on your opportunity of
using. (T14)
However, as suggested by one participant (T7), CLT is demanding. He stated:
Teaching English language using CLT is certainly effective, but it’s a
challenge for teachers. (T7)
Two participants viewed CLT as not effective, with one of them – a Sudanese teacher
with two months of CLT training – favoring to use GTM. He stated:
116
Well, grammar translation method is an old method but it’s traditionally
favored over the new communicative method. (T10)
Some teachers’ reluctance to use CLT is spite of being viewed as effective seems to be
due to the challenges or demands of its application in the classroom. An EFL teacher
may have the intention to use CLT, but does not implement it in actual practice. Though
a teacher may be aware of its benefits; in reality, its application is not guaranteed. At an
intended level, CLT is viewed as effective; however, at an actual level of practice, it is
not implemented. Perhaps, more support is required to close the gap between the
intended and actual levels of implementing CLT in the Saudi Arabia EFL classroom.
Three teachers in particular (T11, T12, and T15) reported not using CLT in their
classrooms in spite of the fact the two of them had CLT training. Interestingly, these
three teachers who were from Turkey, Yemen and Jordan had the most years of
teaching experience (ten, twelve and fifteen years of experience). These teachers were
comfortable with the teaching methods they used to teach students English and were
reluctant to change to new teaching methods and approaches. Shifting from an
established system of instruction that reflects the cultural ideology of the teacher-
student relationship and that is supported by assessment strategies is a first order change
that requires significant structural and ideological change. Where the implementation of
CLT does not consider the cultural elements and fails to modify the assessment
processes and instructional materials, teacher and student resistance is likely to be high
(Ahmad & Rao, 2013; Hu, 2002; Savignon, 2007).
5.4 Teachers’ beliefs about EFL teaching resources
Learning and teaching resources are an integral component of the EFL curriculum. They
reflect how teachers view and deal with the leaning/teaching environment. They also
117
facilitate communication in the EFL classroom. All the participants highlighted the need
and importance to use learning and teaching resources such as textbooks, story books,
the board, real objects, and computer technology and web resources such as CDs and
videos. Various reasons were given by the participants to justify the use of such
resources, it was mentioned:
Learning resources make it easier for students to learn. (T4)
Tools are necessary in the learning situation. They increase the
involvement of both students and teachers in the process. (T7)
Computer technology and web services are being widely used in
classrooms as a means of supporting instruction. (T9)
Although the participants viewed it necessary and important to use learning/teaching
resources, some reported a number of challenges that made it not possible to realise
their views in actual practice. The reported challenges were related to context and lack
of time. It was highlighted:
The tools provided are quite good but they don’t fit well with the social,
cultural and intellectual outlook of the learning community in Saudi
Arabia. (T1)
Learning resources are carefully selected and well-served by the
government and the publishers, but lack of time represents a hard
obstacle. (T6)
The above-mentioned obstacles highlight the discrepancy between what is intended and
what is actually implemented in classroom reality. The teachers did not complain of
lack of resources. Instead, they complained of lack of positive attitude and time
management skills to make use of learning/teaching resources which are an integral part
of the process.
118
5.5 Teachers’ beliefs about using CLT
Most teachers except three (T11, T12, and T15) reported using CLT. Of the 12 teachers
who used CLT, 10 of them viewed it as having a positive impact on their classroom
practice and the classroom and school learning environment. CLT was reported to
facilitate cooperative learning in mixed-ability classes. Teaching to mixed-ability
students poses a challenge for the teacher because it is difficult for the teacher to ensure
that what is presented is suitable to students with different abilities. Teachers need to
focus on creating a positive classroom atmosphere (Lessow-Hurley, 2003; Wright,
2005). Different tasks need to be provided to the students based on their ability (Bowler
& Parminter, 2002).
Pair and group work activities which are characteristic of CLT provide the teacher with
the opportunity to prepare activities that are suitable to everyone in class and to make
sure that no student is left behind (Coskun, 2011; Lasito & Storch, 2013; Richards,
2006). T13 stated:
CLT addresses an important area which constantly challenges teachers,
the mixed-ability class. (T13)
A teacher who uses cooperative learning activities such as pair work and group has
access to a lot of information about students’ abilities and to improve teaching.
According to participant T5:
CLT enables the teacher to know about weak and smart students easily.
(T5)
The participants also reported that CLT had positive impacts in terms of improving
students’ achievement, motivation, and communication skills. It was stated:
CLT ensures the mastery of English for our students. (T8)
119
I think it is very important to use CLT because students will be more
motivated by learning to communicate and will learn to communicate
effectively. (T9)
CLT was also viewed to have an impact on views about school environment.
Interviewee T6 states:
CLT changes the traditional school into a vividly developing and
attractive center of learning. (T6)
Three participants (T2, T4, and T7) viewed using CLT as ‘relaxing for both students
and teachers’. Their opinion highlights the change of view with regard to student and
teacher roles when CLT was used in the classroom. With CLT, the teacher is no longer
a knowledge transmitter who spoon-feeds the students; those empty vessels waiting to
be filled with information as they have been long traditionally viewed. Instead, the
teacher facilities the learning process for students who have become active and engaged
in communicative activities (Badger & Yan, 2008). The approach requires that the
teacher and students become partners who jointly exert efforts to make learning happen
(Badger & Yan, 2008). This is not evident from the responses of the participants.
According in, CLT create different demands on both parts and encourages each partner
to value their new roles. This last point was highlighted by T10 who stated:
CLT is quite fruitful particularly with advanced students. Students,
however, need to be trained to deal with its activities and requirements.
(T10)
The worry about students’ ability level while using CLT was shared by T1 who stated:
I think CLT seems sometimes hard for students whose levels are lower
than their expected grade level. (T1)
The use of cooperative learning as part of CLT with well-planned group activities could
support low-level students to learn more not only from the teacher, but also from
advanced peers.
120
5.6 Teachers’ beliefs about benefits of CLT for students in Saudi Arabia
All participants except two (T11 and T15) viewed CLT as beneficial to students in
Saudi Arabia. Although T11 had four months of CLT training and T15 had five months
of CLT training, they were not sure about whether CLT would benefit students or not.
These two teachers in particular previously stated that they did not use CLT in their
teaching. Lack of participation in CLT could justify why the two teachers did not make
up their minds with regard to the benefits of CLT for students. Other teachers viewed
CLT favorably. For example, T1 viewed CLT as beneficial to some of the students
stating, “Benefits are limited to some good students.” T1 previously reported that
having students with a level lower than their expected grade level prevented him from
making the most out of CLT for the benefit of his students. T6 had two conditions for
CLT to be beneficial to students. He stated, “Students should like and the teacher should
be qualified.” He, thus, highlighted the role of student motivation and teacher
qualification as two considerations for CLT to be beneficial to students in Saudi Arabia.
Other participants agreed that CLT would benefit students in Saudi Arabia. For
example, T4 stated:
Yes, students could benefit from CLT, because it concentrates on
promoting the four English language skills. (T4)
As it could be inferred from the account given by T4, CLT advocates a whole language
approach to EFL learning and teaching. Thus, CLT is beneficial to students because it
enables them to use the language as whole in both verbal and non-verbal
communication. The move towards CLT in Saudi Arabia was to overcome the
limitations of other methods such as GTM and the audio-lingual method which
prioritised certain language skills at the expense of others. For example, listening and
121
speaking were essential neglected skills in GTM. Similarly, in the audio-lingual
method, reading and writing were less important than aural-oral skills. CLT, however,
places equal emphasis on all language skills and encourages students to use them in
communication. Students realise that language is a whole. Language is an organic unit,
with each one of the four language skills reinforcing the others.
5.7 Teachers’ awareness of students’ opinions of CLT
The main reason mentioned by six out of the fifteen participants for students’ preference
of CLT in Saudi Arabia was because it encouraged them to participate and become
more active in the learning process. It was mentioned:
Students like CLT activities such as group work, role play and games. (T3)
Students are challenging themselves to communicate in English. They are
happy with the way they try to make sentences and express their ideas.
(T5)
Students like CLT a lot, since it includes many interaction activities such
as role play, interviews, games, pair work. (T6)
In my class, students are enjoying it as it is different from traditional
methods. (T7)
I think students do like CLT. In the CLT, the students have to participate in
the classroom activities that are based on a cooperative rather than
individuals. Students have to become comfortable with listening to peers
in pair or in group work task. (T14)
It could be understood that students like CLT because their contributions are
acknowledged. With CLT, the students have a role and responsibility. They are
expected to be more active in CLT activities and to be more responsible for their own
work. They also feel valued by the teacher as well as their peers. Being valued could
improve their self-esteem and self-efficacy. Shy students start to speak to peers and in
122
groups instead of apprehension to speak in public and expose themselves to ridicule.
With CLT cooperative learning activities, students learn from one another and all
students benefit. Students are naturally curious and CLT provides a wide array of
activities such as games, role play, interviews, pair work and group work that appeal to
various and diverse learners’ curious minds. Although CLT provides benefits for all
kinds of EFL learners in the Saudi context, four participants related the extent of benefit
to the students’ level with advanced students benefiting more from it. For example, it
was mentioned:
Most of the students do like CLT especially the smart students. (T2)
Good students find CLT activities motivating and exciting but low level
students find them hard to handle. (T15)
Being preferred by good students, CLT could be suitable approach to teach a EFL in the
Saudi context. Evidently, mixed-ability classes pose a challenge for some of the
teachers to implement CLT in the classroom. To overcome this problem, a teacher
needs to design well-planned activities with specific role for each student according to
their ability level. Alternatively, the teacher could group students with similar ability
level and adjust the learning task to their level. The teacher could also use peer learning
with each pair of students with different ability level. If these arrangements are made,
students could enjoy new roles while learning. They could also learn, in addition to
language skills, generic skills such as leadership, negotiation, and communication skills.
5.8 Teachers’ beliefs about support given to them to use CLT in Saudi Arabia
Nine out of the fifteen participants viewed that EFL teachers in Saudi Arabia were
encouraged to use CLT mainly because the facilities were provided. For example, T7
stated:
123
Yes, the teachers are encouraged to use CLT because of the facilities that
are offered.
The remaining six participants (T5, T9, T11, T12, T14, and T15) did not agree that
teachers in Saudi Arabia were encouraged to use CLT. Unfortunately, they did not give
any reason for this, perhaps, because they did not want to criticise the administration.
However, some remarks could be highlighted based on previous accounts given by
these six teachers and the background knowledge they provided about themselves. T11,
T12, and T15 previously reported not using CLT, and therefore, were not in a position
to soundly judge whether appropriate support and encouragement to use CLT was given
or not. Similarly, T14 is an advocate, as previously stated, of GTM, and not a great fan
of CLT.
Participants (T5 and T9) however, use CLT in spite of reporting not receiving
encouragement and support in the Saudi context. They did not consider the provision of
facilities as the means of encouraging CLT in the EFL Saudi classroom. T5 who is very
experienced (with elven years of teaching experience) and six months of CLT training
highlighted the need for more “workshops to use the newest methods.” Thus, he
highlighted the lack of professional development activities as a sign of not being given
the support he wanted to use CLT more effectively. Perhaps this was the case for T9
who is an advocate of CLT in spite of not having a lot of teaching experience (only two
years) and with no CLT training. T9 had an eclectic orientation to EFL teaching and
reported using GTM as well as CLT. He used either method based on the situation and
students’ level. It was possible that T9 faced difficulties while attempting to use CLT
due to lack of student engagement and could not handle the situation because of lack of
experience and training.
124
5.9 Teachers’ awareness of the difficulties of applying CLT in the classroom
Five difficulties identified by the 15 participants related to the application of CLT in the
EFL classroom in Saudi Arabia. These difficulties were: lack of student motivation,
difficulty to manage the class, time and content, large class size, and lack of teacher
experience. Lack of motivation to participate in the EFL classroom activities was
reported by two-thirds of the interviews as a major difficulty to apply CLT in the EFL
classroom in Saudi Arabia. For example, it was mentioned:
It is difficult to apply CLT because of lack of student participation during
the lesson. (T5)
The major problem is when students don’t respond. (T7)
One difficulty is the absence of student participation in the class. (T4)
Obviously, lack of student participation was reported as a common problem of applying
CLT activities in the EFL classroom in Saudi Arabia. One reason for lack of student
motivation to participate—as suggested by six participants—was the students’ level
which was lower than the expected grade level. It was highlighted:
The level of some students is not good enough. (T8)
There are several difficulties including the low level of some of the students. (T10)
Those who are good at English read positively, whereas those who are not
are always silent. (T1)
CLT needs students with a good level of competence which is not the case
of students in my class. (T7)
The low level of students was coupled with a personality trait, that is, being shy which
complicated the application of CLT in the EFL classroom in Saudi Arabia. Four
participants highlighted that their students were shy. For example, it was mentioned:
I noticed students most of the time the students feel shy to practice the
foreign language. (T8)
125
Also, they were extremely hesitant practicing just to avoid making
mistakes. (T8)
Many good students feel shy to practice the language in front of the
classroom. (T10)
Unfortunately, not only low-level students were shy, but also good ones. It is expected
that shy students feel reluctant to participate because they do not have a good
contribution. However, being a good student and avoiding participation is not common
sense. It is a problematic situation, and could have a negative influence on the
application of CLT in the EFL classroom in Saudi Arabia because as long as the act of
communication is concerned, successful EFL learners are expected to be extroverted
and participate actively in CLT activities. Gaining theoretical knowledge is neither
enough not consistent with the tenets of CLT. However, it was complained that the
learners in Saudi Arabia were not keen about performance and participation in the act of
communication. This reality was bolstered by T10, who stated:
Many learners just want to know about the language rather than practice
it.
Difficulty to manage the class, time and content was another difficulty of applying CLT
in the Saudi EFL classroom as indicated by four participants. They mentioned:
I found it difficult to manage the students during CLT activities. (T13)
Keeping students engaged in group work proved to be difficult. (T1)
Sometimes priority is given to the syllabus and no enough time is given to
the practical activities. (T10)
Short period is one of the difficulties I face while using CLT. (T4)
Large class size was reported by two participants as a third difficulty of applying CLT
in the Saudi EFL classroom. “Large number of students in class” was highlighted by T4
as a difficulty while using CLT. Similarly, T3 highlighted the same problem and
126
considered large class size as a reason of the previously mentioned difficulty of
managing the class. He stated:
Sometimes the number of students inside the classroom makes it difficult
for me to control the students.
The fourth difficulty of applying CLT in the EFL classroom in Saudi Arabia was “lack
of teacher experience” as highlighted by T14 who had nine years of experience, but not
CLT training. Lack of CLT training was, thus, underscores as a requirement for making
the best use of CLT in the classroom.
5.10 Teachers’ beliefs about the effectiveness of CLT in Saudi Arabia
All the participants who used CLT (11 out of 15 teachers) agreed that CLT was
effective in spite of the previously mentioned difficulties. Obviously, the participants
had positive attitudes towards using CLT in the EFL classroom in Saudi Arabia.
Surprisingly, the majority of participants (six out of eleven participants) who viewed
CLT as effective had no training in CLT. They constructed their views based on the
application of CLT in their classrooms. One point to be highlighted here is the role of
practice in shaping one’s attitudes. Applying CLT proved to be effective in reality as
indicated by those who used it even with no CLT training. Although they faced
challenges and difficulties in applying CLT in the classroom, these difficulties did not
make CLT ineffective for them. In reverse, lack of engagement in CLT activities would
be the real obstacle that prevent from realizing the benefits of CLT even if CLT
theoretical training is provided. The provision of training alone does not guarantee that
the introduced teaching approach is viewed as effective. This view proved to be the case
with the participants in the current study. Two of the four teachers who did not use CLT
had CLT training. However, these two teachers could not judge whether CLT was
127
effective or not because they did not apply it in their classrooms. Accordingly, it could
be inferred that the application of CLT resulted in teachers’ positive attitudes towards
CLT.
5.11 Teachers’ beliefs about solving difficulties of applying CLT in the classroom
Twelve out of the fifteen participants responded to the question whether the difficulties
of applying CLT in the classroom can be overcome or not. The majority of the
participants (nine out of twelve) viewed it possible to overcome the difficulties of
implementing CLT in classroom practice. T2 highlighted the need for time to get
adapted with CLT. He stated:
Yes, they could be overcome, and most students could do well. With time
students will get used to it.
T4 suggested the need to reduce class size to facilitate the running of communicative
activities. He mentioned:
Yes, there are several solutions, for example, it is necessary to reduce the
number of students in one class.
T6 and T7 highlighted the role of affective factors such as persistence and motivation.
They highlighted:
Yes, the difficulties can be overcome through insistence and motivation.
(T6)
With more care from the teachers the problem could be overcome;
students should be praised and encouraged. (T7)
T10 emphasised the need for a shared vision of all stakeholders responsible for the
delivery of the educational service. He indicated:
Yes, problems can solved if many authorities collaborate together
including teachers, head teachers and education department (T10).
128
T13 and T15 highlighted the need to adopt a new teacher role and culture suitable for
CLT, that is, the teacher as facilitator of students’ interaction and communication
instead of being a knowledge transmitter; the latter role is linked to an environment
conducive to passivity and lack of participation, whereas the former is pertinent to a rich
environment for active learning. T13 and T15 stated:
Yes through changing the role of English teachers. (T13)
I am hoping to change. I think CLT needs change in teaching culture.
(T15)
As for those who disagreed with the possibility of overcoming the difficulties of
applying CLT in the EFL classroom in Saudi Arabia, no reason was given by the three
teachers who disagreed. Two of the three teachers (T1 & T3) had five years of teaching
experience whereas the third teacher (T9) had only two years of experience. It seems
strange for a fairly less experienced teacher to be pessimistic about change. It is worth
noting that two out of the three teachers (T3 & T9) who did not see the possibility of
overcoming the difficulties of using CLT had no CLT training.
5.12 Teachers’ suggestions for improving EFL teaching at the intermediate level
in Saudi Arabia
Fourteen out of the fifteen participants provided suggestions for improving EFL
teaching at intermediate level in Saudi Arabia. T9 did not provide any suggestions. It is
worth noting that T9 viewed it not possible to overcome the difficulties of applying
CLT in Saudi Arabia. The participants’ suggestions for improvement varied widely, but
were grouped under five categories that represented various aspects of the learning and
teaching process. These aspects are students, teachers, curriculum, teaching methods,
and administration. Students are the main centre of the educational process. Their
129
participation, motivation and engagement are key to success of the process. Students
need to find value of learning a foreign language to learn it purposefully. T2 highlighted
the need to focus on this aspect stating:
My suggestion is that the government should make students more aware of
the importance of English language.
Teachers play a significant role in supporting students to learn effectively. Well-
qualified teachers with up-to-date knowledge and positive attitudes are the ones who
can provide their students with the helpful support and assistance. T5, T11, T12, and
T13 highlighted the need to improve teacher professional development activities and
attitudes as suggestions for improving the teaching process. They stated:
I think we have to give the teachers some courses and workshops to train
them how to teach EFL using the newest methods. (T5)
Teachers’ need more training on updated teaching methods. (T11)
Changing teaching attitude in needed. (T12)
Teachers’ need training and awareness on CLT method. (T13)
A set of teaching methods were suggested by T6 to improve EFL teaching in Saudi
Arabia including “active and cooperative learning, inquiry, debates, project,
interviews.” Obviously these teaching methods share one common feature—that is, they
are student-centred. Focusing on these methods is in alignment with the positive
attitudes held by most of the participating teachers with regard to the effectiveness of
the implementation of CLT in the EFL classroom in Saudi Arabia.
A set of suggested improvements related to curriculum were highlighted including the
need for prolonged time, the need for a national curriculum, the emphasis on whole
language teaching, increased exposure to target language, more opportunities for
130
language practice, updating the goal of learning and teaching EFL to highlight modern
teaching methods and approaches, and the need for textbook revision. It was stated:
Yes, I think it is better to reduce the number of lessons per week and I
suggest two consecutive sessions instead of separated ones. That means
one session = 40 min. Two sessions = 80 min. (T1)
Yes, the best way to improve EFL is to organize the learning process. For
example, to unify the teaching methods starting from primary school. (T7)
The suggestion is by practicing the four skills of the language or keeping
in touch with the native speakers. (T8)
More attention is given to the practice of the language. More time should
be allocated to classroom activities that enable students to use the
language rather than know about it. Traditional methods such as loud
reading and grammar focused lessons should be minimized. (T10)
What is needed is change in the goal of English teaching. (T12)
There is a need for textbook revision. (T14)
The role of administration is integral in the success of the learning/teaching process.
School rules provide an atmosphere of commitment and trigger achievement.
interviewee four suggested an administrative style to ensure the success of the
educational process in Saudi Arabia. He stated:
I think the most important solution is to have a more strict administration
in schools. (T4)
5.13 Summary
The Grammar Translation Method (GTM) is still prevalent amongst teachers of English
despite the government mandate to use CLT. This is due to tradition, concerns and
unfamiliarity with CLT and the demands of using CLT. Teachers are lacking an
understanding of the CLT theoretical underpinnings. Teachers find the implementation
of CLT very demanding. Teachers feel that they lack support from the educational
131
administration in order to meet the challenges of implementing CLT. The majority of
teachers had received no training in the implementation of CLT. Although there is
general agreement that CLT is the optimal method, the teachers find its implementation
a significant challenge and often fall back to using GTM. Large class sizes, lack of
experience, student management issues, time constraints and student reluctance were
cited as barriers to implementing CLT. The learning resources and materials that have
been supplied to the teachers are time-intensive to implement and culturally
incongruent. Teachers were aware of the teaching methodologies of CLT and the
positive impact that it had on student’s motivation and achievement. Many teachers felt
that many students lacked the skills to be active participants in the CLT approach. In
order to improve the situation, the teachers felt that students need to understand the
value of CLT, teachers need training, improvement in the curriculum and support from
school administration.
132
Chapter 6: Discussion and conclusion
6.1 Chapter overview
This chapter discusses the research findings in relationship to the research questions.
The research sought to investigate a research gap concerning the attitudes of students
and teachers engaged in the use of CLT for the teaching of the English language to
Saudi Arabian students. The exploration of this research gap was important in order to
understand the effectiveness of the strategy of the Saudi Arabia government to
implement CLT across the school levels. The chapter explores each of the four research
questions that were developed to achieve the objectives of the research. The research
established that prior to the implementation of the CLT the experimental and the control
group had the same level of English language knowledge. Key findings and
implications in the context of the key research of the three sub questions and the
research question are as follows:
6.1.1 Sub-Research Question 1: What is the level of awareness and
comprehension of CLT among teachers and students at Saudi private
schools?
Amongst the cohort, the level of awareness of CLT was surprisingly high. In response
to the question, My teacher is not using the communicative language approach to teach
us reading, the coefficient was 0.72. The students were able to make a judgment on the
learning strategy employed by the teacher. However, there was also a high proportion of
the students who were unable generally to discern if the teacher employed CLT
strategies (0.66) indicating that the students lacked the theoretical and conceptual
knowledge to make anything more than a superficial assessment of the use of a CLT
133
approach. It is more difficult for the cohort to discern if CLT is being used to teach
listening (0.47) and speaking skills (0.34) than reading skills (0.74). This may be
because of the more interpersonal nature of spoken English development as opposed to
the more passive book approach of developing reading skills. There is still however a
high number of students that cannot discern that the CLT approach is being used to
develop their English skills (0.73). However, students when exposed to CLT are still not
totally committed to the approach (0.36).
The qualitative research suggests that there is a high level of awareness of CLT amongst
teachers. This appears to conform the high levels of awareness of teaching strategies
evidenced in the quantitative research. Trained teachers should be aware of the different
approaches of teaching and the research confirms this. One third of the teachers were
able to identify alternative methodologies for the teaching of English. The teachers were
not only able to explain the CLT approach but also compare the approach to the
Grammar Translation Method (GTM), active and cooperative learning, silent way,
direct method, PPP (Presentation, Practice, Production) model, audio-lingual method,
engage/study/activate model, peer-assisted learning, and eclectic method. The teachers
voiced that GTM was the most common approach to language learning used in Saudi
Arabia. The low level of understanding of the students regarding CLT suggests that
there is a need for greater explanation of the process for students. By helping students
gain a clearer understanding of the pedagogy surrounding CLT, students may gain an
understanding of the benefits that the approach will have in increasing their competence
in the English language. This might counter the resistance that arises from the cultural
dissonance of the CLT approach in respect to the teacher-student relationship. There is a
134
strong sense of the importance of grammar understanding as a means for
comprehending language. There is a wide range of preferences of approaches to
teaching language amongst the teachers suggesting that students in Saudi Arabia are
exposed to a wide range of language learning approaches.
6.1.2 Sub-Research Question 2: To what extent does CLT influence
Saudi teacher and student attitudes to learning English?
An interesting aspect of the research was the finding of the high level of resistance
amongst students towards changing the approach towards learning English despite an
overall recognition of the value of CLT. This suggests that the capability of CLT to be
able to modify existing behaviours is not significant. The preference for the familiar
suggests that the influence of CLT as a catalyst for students to request a change in the
teaching approaches is significantly limited. Only 34.3% of the students wanted to
change the existing approaches. Support for the changes of the curriculum and materials
were similar with only 35.6% seeking change. This is despite these two areas featuring
significantly in the analysis of students’ views on dissatisfaction with the current
teaching approach, curriculum and materials. Further analysis is required in this area to
determine whether the driving factors for resisting change are culturally-based, arising
from fear of the unknown, a reflection of the presence of risk-averse behaviour, due to a
lack of understanding of the nature of the change, a respect for the authority of teachers
or a failing in the research process. This is not reflected in the responses of teachers.
This awareness of resistance to change is not evident amongst the teachers. From this
research, 63.6% of the teaching staff considers that teachers will not have any
difficulties in the use of new textbooks for learning English. A high percentage of staff
135
(73.4%) think that the Saudi Arabian students will not have any difficulty with the new
methods. This gap between the teacher’s perception of the readiness of students and
their voiced resistance to change gives rise to potential problems that might arise in the
change process as the Saudi Arabia system encompasses CLT. The introduction of CLT
will therefore require the use of change strategies designed to reduce student resistance
prior, during and after implementation. It does appear that teachers desire change with
80% wanting to change their course materials and 93.4% of the teachers wanting to
change the way that they teach. There is significant doubt regarding the degree of
support for the change amongst the students.
Teachers are highly supportive of CLT approaches. Studies show that 99.3% of teachers
understand that meaning-focused activities are more effective in improving the
communication ability of students than simply focused activities. In addition, 93.4% of
the teaching staff understands the importance of group work in building students’
confidence. To a lesser extent, 73.4% of the teachers consider that learning grammar
should be embedded in the learning experience rather than taught separately. Also,
66.7% of the teaching staff understand that group work is key to developing positive
student relationships. Finally, 60% of teachers understand that understanding language
use is more valuable to students than learning language rules.
Teachers favour CLT with 73.5% considering that students benefit from being taught
with CLT. A high percentage of teachers (66.7%) are with the view that using CLT
improves teaching English. CLT is seen as being most helpful in teaching speaking
skills (80%), writing skills (66.7%), listening skills (60.0%), and reading skills (57%).
In this study, 80% of the teachers believe that the Saudi government would be prepared
136
to finance the implementation of CLT, whereas 53.3% consider that private schools can
fund the requirements for implementing the CLT approach. In addition, 60% of teachers
consider that the implementation of CLT will be easy. The view of 73.4% of teachers
that Saudi students will readily accept CLT appears to be in opposition to the findings
that students are not highly supportive of any changes.
CLT appears from the qualitative research to exert a high level of influence over the
manner in which English language is taught in Saudi Arabia. The teachers believe that
effective language development for students is dependent upon the use of CLT. There
does appear to be a belief that CLT places a high level of demands on teachers and this
may result in teachers choosing to use other methods that are less demanding. All
teachers do not share the view that CLT is the optimum means for teaching language.
Many teachers favour the less demanding approach of GTM. The demands of using
CLT on the teacher will be a source of resistance from teachers if CLT is introduced as
the required approach for teaching English in Saudi Arabia schools. Any change
programme will need to address this issue if teachers are to use CLT for teaching
English. Even where CLT training has been provided to teachers, there is still resistance
to its use in the classroom. Teachers who have used a style of teaching language over a
long period of time will also demonstrate a high level of resistance to change. Although
they are more supportive of the CLT approach, they understand that the requirements
placed upon them to implement CLT are significant. Hence they are resistant to the
change. Attitudinal change and classroom support programmes will need to be used in
order to support students.
137
Teachers experienced in CLT are aware of the need for there to be adequate resources in
order that CLT can be implemented. Evidence was identified of a gap between the need
for resources and the actual practice. The current resources being used appear to be
dated and so not reflect the current social and cultural reality of Saudi Arabia. This lack
of relevance can diminish the impact of CLT in the classroom. There is a high degree of
control exerted by the government on the materials that can be used in the classroom. It
will be necessary to involve those responsible for the administration of resources in the
classroom in Saudi Arabia to be involved in training and awareness of CLT. Any
teacher development in the use of CLT will need to contain elements of training in time
management and the effective use of resources.
The implementation of CLT often requires a change in the culture of the educational
institution. This is a high order change that can be very challenging and demanding for
teachers and educational administrators. Schools shift towards becoming a centre of
learning where the traditional approaches and attitudes may have to be discarded. The
traditional role as the teacher as the person of authority and transmitter of all knowledge
must be transformed. For both teachers and students this can be highly challenging. The
teacher facilitates learning and provides activities that engage the student. The student
becomes a more active participant in the learning process. The relationship between the
teacher and the student shifts from an authoritarian relationship to one that is more
collaborative in its orientation. Students are as responsible for their learning as the
teacher. Hence not only will teachers need to be educated in how to implement CLT,
but students will also need to have the necessary skills developed to be effective
participants in a learning environment characterised by CLT. The more able students
138
have the confidence and capability to be able to perform irrespective of the approach.
However, as the students’ ability declines, it becomes more challenging to be able to
develop the skills necessary to be able to perform confidently within the CLT
classroom.
6.1.3 Sub- Research Question 3: What impact does CLT have on
students’ assessment results in Saudi English language classes?
The research identified through an ANCOVA analysis that after the experimental group
had become involved in the CLT approach, they showed a significant improvement in
their understanding of English language grammar compared to the control group that
continued with traditional training methods. The experimental group evidenced a higher
mean of 46.18 compared to the mean of 40.21 of the control group. This supports the
finding of Hanafiyeh (2015) that the CLT approach is clearly better than the traditional
approach to teaching English grammar to students as there is a clearly measurable
difference in the outcomes of the students. In the study, the improved performance of
the students engaged with the CLT approach was significantly higher than the control
group in a quantitative justifiable manner. The increase of the effect size from 0.06 to
0.56 suggests that CLT is a very effective form of teaching grammar to students
involved in learning a second language. Those teachers using CLT report that the
mastery of English for students is improved. The level of motivation of students
increased and their communication improved significantly.
139
6.1.4 Research Question : What is the effect of applying the CLT
approach for Saudi Arabian students learning English in the
participating private schools?
The analysis of the components that the students identified as being important through
their involvement is interesting. It is interesting because although the students enjoy the
CLT approach, they indicate a strong preference for the familiarity of the grammatical
approach. The students exposed to the CLT approach valued the approach above the
traditional methodology that they had been using for learning. According to table 7 that
shows factor loading of items in chapter four, prior to exposure to CLT, the students
expressed a high degree of dissatisfaction with the current approach to how they were
learning English with factor loading (0.82). They desired to be involved in a different
learning environment (0.76). The student saw the curriculum and the materials that they
were using as being ineffective in supporting their learning (0.74). Within the cohort,
there was a strong desire for the use of the language lab (0.66) and case studies (0.66) as
methodologies for developing their skills in English. Teachers place a higher value on
learning labs as a positive environment for teaching English than students with 80% of
teachers preferring language labs as an environment for learning English. The value of
case studies as a means of learning English is similarly valued with 66.7% of teachers
valuing case studies as a means of teaching English. Once the students experience CLT,
they become increasingly aware of the importance of the approach in the development
of the necessary language skills (0.79). Students who were exposed to CLT understand
that CLT is helpful in the development of their writing skills (0.72), their listening skills
(0.69) and speaking skills (0.68).
140
The exposure to CLT suggests that students value the opportunity to be able to partner
with a peer to help develop their skills. A majority 77.2% of the cohort prefer this
approach. Teachers understand this preference (66.7%). The high score might be
reflective of the strong cultural orientation of the cohort towards collective activity as
opposed to individual activity. This supports the research of Algonhaim (2014) who
found that Saudi Arabian students show a preference for the CLT approach over the
grammatical approach. However, the high levels of anxiety of the student created by the
CLT approach creates a high level of resistance amongst the students towards changing
from the grammatical approach to the CLT approach. Furthermore, the students
demonstrate a cultural preference for the teacher as being the source of knowledge and
the centre of the educational process. CLT seeks to change this relationship. This
warrants further exploration in future studies in order to explore the impact that cultural
variation might have on attitudes towards CLT. The resistance to an individual
orientation and the importance of the teacher as a symbol is suggestive in 57.1% of the
students needing the teacher figure to direct their learning. This creates dissonance in
the learner as the CLT approach seeks to change this relationship. The cultural change
required of the nature of the relationship between the teacher and the student is so
significant as to create a strong source of resistance of change from the grammatical
approach to the CLT approach. The role of both peers and teachers in the learning
process is evidenced in an equal emphasis in the sample to having both peers and
teachers involved in language assessment and in the comparison between asking
questions and being provided with knowledge from the teacher. There is a strong
orientation in the sample towards an active orientation in the learning process (65.5%).
141
Teachers who use CLT have identified that it promotes a higher level of interaction in
the classroom and a greater level of co-operation between the students. The shift in
focus from individual learning to team learning requires teachers to develop the skills
necessary to teach to a wider range of students. Often CLT involves mixed ability
classes that create a more challenging learning environment for the teacher. CLT
requires teachers to be more aware of the student’s unique skills and abilities in order to
effectively deliver the programme. The greatest degree of uncertainty of the learning
outcomes for students involved in CLT was found in inexperienced teachers. This
suggests that the lack of experience of new teachers and the high skill requirements of
CLT makes it challenging for teachers. More experienced teachers were highly
supportive of CLT.
142
6.2 Discussion of findings
Table 16: Summary of Qualitatative and Quantitative Findings
Qualitative Findings Quantitative Findings
Student Response Students enjoy CLT but prefer
the familiarity of GTM due to
the anxiety that they
experience.
Students find it difficult to
adjust to the change in the
teacher-student relationship of
CLT.
High level of resistance to
adopting CLT.
Students dissatisfied with
GTM.
Students exposed to CLT
understand the value of CLT.
Students have a low
understanding of the
theoretical and conceptual
elements of CLT.
Low desire to change the
approach to teaching English.
Students involved in CLT
showed a greater improvement
in their language results than
the control group.
Teacher Response Teachers believe that CLT
develops a higher level of
teacher-student and student-
student interaction.
Teachers need to be more
aware of the unique abilities of
students when using CLT.
Teachers are aware of CLT.
Teaching CLT places
excessive demands on teachers.
Teachers using the CLT
approach need to be adequately
resourced.
Teachers are aware of the
teaching strategies associated
with CLT and their associated
benefits.
Teachers are unaware of the
student resistance to changing
teaching strategies.
Teachers want to change their
approach to teaching language.
Learning
Environment
Mixed ability classes present a
challenge to the use of CLT.
The more inexperienced the
teacher, the more uncertain
they are in respect to using
CLT.
GTM is still the most preferred
approach to teaching English.
Greater support by the
education administration must
be provided to teachers.
The government needs to
provide better resources to
assist teachers.
Students and teachers show a
preference for language
learning that uses language
labs and case studies.
Students value the opportunity
to peer partner enabled by
CLT.
143
6.2.1 GTM versus CLT
These findings inform the following discussion. In a study conducted by Khan (2011),
Saudi Arabia teachers use two approaches for teaching English: The Grammar
Translation Method (GTM) and CLT. GTM is the dominant approach in Saudi Arabia
(Al-Seghayer, 2015). This traditional approach is characterised by “structural analysis,
chorus work, answering questions, corrections, and translating texts” (Al-Seghayer,
2015, p. 90). Students are often required to read passages and then repeat the passages
out loud (Al-Seghayer, 2015). The student is often a passive learner in this approach
(Al-Seghayer, 2015, p. 90). Vocabulary, grammatical rules and the memorisation of
words are central to the process (Ahmad, 2014; Al-Hazmi, 2007). The “teacher-centred
transmission model” (Al-Seghayer, 2015, p. 91) is suited to the GTM. Teachers lack the
skills to be able to effectively manage a communicative approach to language learning
(Rahman & Alhaisoni, 2013).
There is a considerable difference between GTM and CLT. GTM seeks to generate
knowledge that enables the person to construct sentences based on their understanding
of the grammatical rules that are used to construct sentences. Rules are learnt and the
learner then practices the use of the rule (Richards, 2006). This is a deductive approach.
The basic unit of analysis is the sentence (Richards, 2006). It is possible to understand
the grammatical rules of a language but not develop the necessary communicative
competence (Richards, 2006). Under this model, learning a language is achieved
through mechanical rote learning (Richards, 2006). This approach is highly teacher
directed. CLT is contextual and assists the learner in understanding the different ways
that the language is used in different contexts (Richards, 2006). The learner is taught
144
how to create different texts (Richards, 2006). This is an inductive approach. Under this
model, there is a high level of interaction between people that generates the learning.
The learning orientation is more practical and experimental in its orientation. Group
work and interaction are preferred over memorisation and drills (Richards, 2006). The
consequence of the differing learning approaches is that the role of the teachers and the
students changes in the classroom.
The GTM that dominates the Saudi Arabian education system uses “the Presentation-
Practice-Production methodology” (Al-Seghayer, 2015, p. 94). This is a “rule-driven
deductive approach” (Al-Seghayer, 2015, p. 94). Language is divided into grammatical
segments and the segments taught independent of the other options (Al-Seghayer, 2015,
p. 94). The focus is on grammatical correctness and knowledge (Assalahi, 2013).
Spoon-feeding is emphasised over exploration (Al-Seghayer, 2015, p. 94). The
classroom is dominated by “form-focused grammar instruction” (Al-Seghayer, 2015, p.
95). The use of the communicative approach is rare (Al-Musharraf, 2007). The process
that is commonly used is a three-stage process. In the first stage, the student is taught
new concepts by the instructor (Al-Seghayer, 2015, p. 95). In the second stage, the
student practices the grammatical rule through teacher-directed activities through a
range of drills (Al-Seghayer, 2015, p. 95). The third stage involves the students
providing examples to the class (Al-Seghayer, 2015, p. 95). There is no
contextualisation of the grammatical rule, there is a limited opportunity for practice and
the classes are conducted in Arabic (Zohairy, 2015). This approach has been strongly
criticised and discredited (Richards, 2006).
145
6.2.2 Teacher Preparation
Teacher preparation programmes in Saudi Arabia are “non-systematic and inadequate”
(Al-Hazmi, 2003, p. 341). There is only a minimal focus on EFL strategies and
approaches (Al-Hazmi, 2003, p. 342). Often teachers teach English only in Arabic
language and this is considered to be the most significant factor in the failure of students
to develop a high level of English language competency (Al-Nofaie, 2010; Al-Seghayer,
2015; Alshammari, 2011; Kharesheh, 2012; Machaal, 2012; Mahmoud, 2012). The
strong focus on the Arabic language in the English classroom means that it becomes
more difficult for students to develop competence in the language. Teacher preparation
programmes do not receive “documented guidance on how to integrate communicative
language-learning techniques into their classroom” (Al-Seghayer, 2015, p. 91).
6.2.3 Teacher’s attitudes to CLT
Little is known about “what teachers really think, know and believe about CLT”
(Woods & Cakir, 2011, p. 386). The majority of the research in the field has been
restricted to the views of teachers regarding CLT (Karavas-Doukas, 1996; Mangubhai,
Harland, Dashwood, & Son, 2005). Little knowledge is available regarding how
teachers develop an understanding of CLT. A small study was conducted in Turkey by
Woods and Cakir (2011) with only six newly graduated teachers. They found a high
level of contradictions in what is espoused and what actually happens. These
contradictions were evident in this study.
Assalahi (2013) conducted one of the few existing studies on teacher attitudes towards
EFL in Saudi Arabia. Teachers’ attitudes towards grammar teaching are important, as it
is a significant influence over the approach that is adopted (Borg, 2003; Ellis, 2003).
146
The teacher’s attitude might be strongly oriented towards the learning approaches that
they experienced when they were learners (Busch, 2010). The other sources important
in the formation of the attitude are also the training that the teacher receives (Busch,
2010). Unfortunately, the study conducted by Assalahi (2013) only involved four
teachers and the findings cannot be taken as reflective of all EFL teachers in Saudi
Arabia. Further research was needed in this area and this study is an attempt to bridge
the research gap.
6.2.4 The Learning Context
The context has a significant impact on the cognition of teachers (Borg, 2006; Feryok,
2008). Often teachers seek a balance between student expectations and the ideals of the
teacher (Golombek, 1998). Western teaching methods, such as CLT, may not be suited
to non-Western educational settings (Holliday, 1994; Hu, 2005). Research into the
contextual factors in an educational setting in Armenia by Feryok (2008) found that
institutional expectations that might differ from the classroom practices of a teacher
practising CLT might place increased stress or pressure on staff. A lack of resources and
materials can restrict a teacher’s capability to implement CLT. New teachers often face
difficulty in being able to implement classroom experiences that meet theoretical
understanding (Feryok, 2008).
An assessment of the sociocultural context was conducted by Syed (2003). English
language teachers are confronted with low levels of student motivation, a learning
climate dominated by rote learning and the use of memorised learning (Liton, 2012;
Syed, 2003, p. 337). The methodologies, resources, and curriculum is outdated, and the
development of teachers is often very poor (Syed, 2003, p. 337). There is no motivating
147
reason for the students to develop their English as there is little or no exposure outside
of the classroom (Syed, 2003, p. 338). The high level of expatriate teachers in the
teaching staff creates a cultural and linguistic distance between the teacher and the
student (Shaw, 1997). Expatriate teachers have a lower investment in seeking to
improve the existing system (Shaw, 1997).
A study by Al-Mohanna (2010) found that English language teachers are orientated to
the GTM and lack the theoretical understanding of communicative practices. The small
and overcrowded classrooms in Saudi Arabia make it difficult to organise
communicative activities. It is very difficult to taper the learning experience to the
individual needs of the students. The heavy administrative loads placed on teachers
often teaching as many as 200 students means that teachers are required to focus on the
textbook in order to cover the course content. The time required for lesson planning,
grading students’ work and preparing and grading exams leaves little time for the
development of communicative approaches (Al-Mohanna, 2010). The safety and
familiarity of the GTM is favoured over the unfamiliar CLT. The Ministry of Education
provides a curriculum for each age level that provides strict guidance on what the
teacher is required to do (Shah, Hussain, & Nasseef, 2013). Students have developed a
high level of comfort with the traditional teaching methods and are often resistant to a
change in approach. Shah et al. (2013) found that students express a preference for rote
learning, memorisation, teachers asking questions and students answering them and an
exam-oriented approach.
Teachers and their teaching methodologies are strongly influenced by the requirements
of the institution, the long established practices and the strong exam orientation (Al
148
Mazroui, 2005). Teachers are required to use set instructional materials often because
these materials are directly related to the testing requirements (Al Mazroui, 2005). The
instructional process focuses exclusively on grammatical competency (Al Mazroui,
2005). This is only minimal attention provided to the communicative approach (Al
Mazroui, 2005). Very few techniques are taught to the students in interpreting spoken
and written English and how to adjust approaches to the socio-linguistic context (Al-
Seghayer, 2015). The primary instructional methodology is the textbook and the
blackboard (Al-Seghayer, 2015). There is little or no student involvement in the lesson
other than “parrot-like repetition of chunks of text from a set of books read aloud by the
teacher” (Al-Seghayer, 2015, p. 90). The primary approach is the GTM because the
teachers appear to be the most comfortable with this approach (Al-Seghayer, 2015).
Consequently, students are comfortable with the approach and resistance to change (Al-
Seghayer, 2015).
6.2.5 Tension Between Theory and Practice
Research has found that teacher claims regarding their use of CLT are often not
supported by the actual practice (Karavas-Doukas, 1996; Mangubhai, Harland,
Dashwood, & Son, 2005). This suggests that their theoretical framework is different
from their practical conceptualisation (Mangubhai et al., 2005). There is a wide range of
reasons for this gap. Research by Feryok (2008) found that there is a tension between
theory and practice arising from lack of experience, institutional resistance, lack of
resources and student’s resistance towards teaching methods that do not involve guided
instruction. This disparity between what is espoused and the reality suggests that there
149
is a lack of teacher training in order that teachers can make accurate judgements
(Shawer, 2013).
The present study indicated a –0.546 correlation between the level of teaching
experience and the belief that group work helps students who are shy improve their
language skills. This suggests that the more experienced that the teacher is the less
likely that they are willing to promote group work. This suggests that the development
of CLT in the Saudi Arabia educational system is more likely to be achieved where the
teacher is not entrenched in the GTM approach and has received a high level of
professional training in CLT (Al-Mekhlafi, 2011; Chang, 2011). Teacher’s experience
has a significant influence over their adoption of CLT (Al-Mekhlafi, 2011). There is a
negative correlation (–0.448) between teaching experience and the view that grammar
teaching may be included in a lesson as a means of communication. More experienced
teachers are more likely to prefer making grammar as the main goal of the teaching
programmes compared to new teachers trained in the CLT approach. Facilitating
effective change in a shift from the GTM approach to the CLT approach is more likely
to be facilitated through introducing the approach as part of teacher training.
There was a significant negative correlation (–.721) between the attitude that CLT is
helpful in teaching writing skills and the level of teaching experience. This level of
resistance was not as high for reading skills (–0.254) and listening skills (–0.083).
Experienced teachers appear to consider that the grammar approach is best suited to the
written format. If change programmes are to be implemented to develop systemic
change, it may well be necessary to introduce programmes that are focused on speaking
and listening, rather than on writing.
150
The correlation score of 0.429 for experienced teachers understanding that language use
is better than studying language rules suggests that there is a degree of acceptability
amongst experienced teachers to understand some of the benefits of CLT. This is also
reflected in a correlation of 0.691 between the academic level of the teacher and the
value of CLT. The great challenge is being able to leverage the positive attitude
amongst the teaching body towards CLT to overcome the sources of resistance. These
obstacles are often inherent within the educational system (Jafari, Shokrpour, &
Guetterman, 2015). Experienced teachers are more likely to understand the nature of
these barriers and have reached a point of acceptance that the system cannot be
changed. Therefore, although CLT may provide greater opportunities for language
learning, the systemic problems limit initiating change.
It does appear from the qualitative comments that those teachers that have adopted some
of the CLT strategies and approaches still hold on to the grammatical approaches.
Teachers who implement CLT struggle in the current educational environment to create
a learning context that supports CLT. The materials used tend to be more authentic.
Teachers appear to shift the class from a formal grammatical approach at the beginning
of the lesson to a more informal conversational and contextual lesson in the second-half
of the lesson. There are a significant number of teachers that can espouse the theory of
CLT and understand its principles but fail to translate the principles into practice. These
teachers continue with the GTM despite understanding that CLT produces improved
outcomes for the student. There is heavy reliance on the textbook and the teacher
teaches vocabulary out of context. Students are continually corrected on their mistakes.
The primary language of instruction is Arabic.
151
Penner (1995) investigated the challenges of introducing CLT into China. The change
had a significant impact on both teachers and students. The nature of the change was
second order creating enormous pressures on the system, administrators, teachers and
students (Penner, 1995). As evidenced in Saudi Arabia, there was a high level of
resistance. The nature of the change to CLT was viewed by the teachers as simply
learning more about the language rather than changing their practices of instruction.
This meant that the change was slow as it has been in Saudi Arabia. The traditional
grammatical approach and the new CLT approach clashed (Penner, 1995). Both the
teachers and the students were unable to make the conceptual shift that was required for
the effective implementation of CLT. The administrators were unable to make the
required changes to the assessment approach in order to support the shift to CLT. The
problems and issues identified by Penner (1995) in China mirror the same issues that
have been identified in this research.
The problems experienced by Saudi Arabia students can be attributed to the failure of
the Saudi Arabia educational system to effectively implement a change from GTM to
CLT. Despite a high level of exposure to English teaching throughout their educational
life, students struggle to communicate effectively in English contexts. The dominant
instructional format remains the GTM with students having minimum exposure to CLT.
The large gap between the understanding of teachers and their actual implementation of
CLT practices in the classroom prevents the effective implementation of CLT. If change
is to occur it is necessary to develop new teacher’s knowledge and practice of CLT.
Despite the Saudi Arabia government making a commitment to improving the quality
and standards of English teaching in Saudi Arabia, progress has been minimal. Despite
152
widening the years of compulsory education in English, the introduction of a new
curriculum that had as one of its aims the use of CLT and the introduction of new
textbooks and resources, change, as evidenced by this study has been minimal.
Assessment is still orientated towards the traditional grammatical approach and this has
restricted the willingness of teachers to adopt the new approach. The assessment of
student’s progress under CLT is formative and within the classroom. It does not
contribute to the final mark of the student. In the final analysis, although teachers are
aware of the benefits of CLT they fail to adopt the practices in the classroom. The GTM
still prevails as the dominant form of English language instruction in the Saudi Arabia
education system. Despite the changes that have been made by the government, GTM
remains as the predominant language instructional form in Saudi Arabia. There is a high
level of resistance from experienced teachers and new teachers lack the necessary level
of training to be able to implement CLT.
The great problem with a grammatical orientation to language learning is that the
student finds it difficult to be able to operate effectively in English outside of the
classroom (Rababah, 2003). Students are deficient in “communicative competence and
self-expression” (Rababah, 2003, p. 17). This is due to the prevalence of the GMT
approach, the ineffective practices of teachers and the structural limitations of the
system (Al-Hazmi, 2003; Deckert, 2004). It does appear from the research that the
majority of teachers have a mix of GTM and CLR methodologies. The overall
orientation is towards the GTM approach. The focus remains on the teaching of
grammar rather than oral communication skills. The research revealed a high level of
ambiguity and confusion in the response of both teachers and students. This reflects a
153
clash between the knowledge of the teacher, the discrepancy between theory and
practice and the systemic pressures that still promote the GTM. The study found that
there is a high level of inconsistency between what students and teachers espouse and
the actualities of the situation. The lack of effective training and a system where the
evaluation remains orientated to the grammatical approach has limited the adoption of
CLT. Difficulties cited by both teachers, students and the system have meant that CLR
has not been widely adopted as the dominant means of teaching English in Saudi
Arabia. The research has identified that there is a clear need for further training of new
staff, a need for administrators to implement assessments orientated towards CLR and a
need to improve student’s understanding of CLR.
6.2.6 Creating a Change
There needs to be an acceptance amongst all the stakeholders that there should be a shift
towards CLR. If only a few stakeholders are committed to the change, then the forces of
resistance will be too great as to oppose the change. Despite the espoused will of the
government to improve the standard of English proficiency amongst students in Saudi
Arabia, the English proficiency has failed to improve (Alrashidi & Phan, 2015). Across
the stakeholders, “teachers, students, parents, administrators and other stakeholders
must shift their conceptions of what constitute good English teaching” (Li, 1998, p.
696). The general philosophy towards English learning needs to undergo a
metamorphosis with all stakeholders agreeing that the use of memorisation, rote
learning and grammatical rules are in effective in developing English competence. This
will be the catalyst for change in the assessment structure, classroom format and
resources that will create a learning environment that is more supportive of the CLR
154
approach. Currently the structural barriers that nurture and support the adoption of CLR
are still orientated towards the grammatical approach. There needs to be a systemic
acceptance across all stakeholder groups that the ultimate goal of language learning
programmes is to promote a high level of language use amongst the participants.
Students must have the confidence to be able to speak and write in the language. The
rules-based approach of the grammatical approach is unable to deliver this.
It does appear that there is a need to revaluate the training that teachers receive.
Training exerts an important influence on the skills, practices and attitudes of teachers,
particularly beginning teachers. The current system of teacher training in Saudi Arabia
lacks a systematic approach. It is highly unstructured resulting in teachers having an
understanding of CLR but lacking the capabilities to be able to implement the approach
effectively. Given the findings in this research it is clear that teachers need to become
aware of the potential gaps between knowledge of CLR and the practical adoption of
the practices in the classroom. Strategies need to be provided to teachers to assist them
in identifying the incongruence that might arise from their beliefs and their actual
practices. To complement this, structures and processes need to be put into place that
can provide the teacher with the necessary feedback on the degree to which they are
delivering CLT in the classroom environment. Mentors, a peer support group or a
professional network of evaluators, might provide this.
Given the apparent difficulty of teachers to be able to integrate the theoretical and
practical of CLT, it is important that any teacher training provides the teacher with the
understanding of the underlying principles of CLT. In order that a teacher can be
cognisant that they are in fact implementing the principles of CLT in the classroom,
155
they need to be able to discern the differences between CLT and other forms of English
language approaches. Teachers need to have the skills to be able to operate larger
groups for the development of language competency. It is important that teachers are
made aware of the benefits of the CLT approach over text-centred and grammar-
centered approaches (Gahin & Myhill, 2001; Heip, 2005). The current theoretical
knowledge presented to teachers, along with language teaching methodologies, is
lacking. The teacher training that is provided needs to have a more extensive coverage
of English language learning than is currently the case.
The educational system must also undergo a transformation if CLT is to be adopted as
the methodology for the developing of English competence. Those tasked with
assessing teacher competence must understand the elements that are required for a
teacher to be able to demonstrate competency and proficiency in CLT. Clear criteria
needs to be developed that will be used to assess teacher’s competence. Great care
needs to be taken in the development of these measures and what you measure is what
you get. Both students and their parents need to be educated in the benefits of CLT and
the classroom practices that facilitate improved student performance with the English
language. By involving both students and their parents in the fostering of greater
awareness of CLT, the problems identified in this research of students arguing for a
grammatical approach while acknowledging the benefits of CLT might be resolved. The
research indicates that all stakeholder groups need assistance in being able to
understand and endorse the CLT approach. Any concerns and reservations that might be
held by these groups can be addressed. In this way, educational administrators, teachers,
156
parents and students can adopt a congruent supportive position towards CLT. This
currently does not exist.
There needs to be a discussion amongst the stakeholder groups as to the nature of CLT
and the modifications that might be needed in order for CLT to be suited to the Arabic
context. The teacher–student role in the Arabic education setting that emphasises the
religious authority of the teacher will impact on how CLT is delivered (Gahin & Myhil,
2001). Historically there has been a gap between the students valuing a more
conversational approach while teachers have favoured a grammatical approach (Kuntz
& Belnap, 2001). This is not evidenced in this research with the data reflecting that
there is a high level of resistance amongst both teachers and students towards shifting
from the grammatical approach towards CLT. It appears that the resistance is highest
amongst students who prefer the status quo of the grammatical approach. Teachers
indicate that they prefer the CLT approach but the demands of the system and the
pragmatic challenges of implementing CLT are so great that teachers prefer the safety
of the grammatical approach.
If CLT is to be implemented across the Saudi Arabia educational system, all
stakeholders need to develop a unique version of CLT that is suited to the Arabic
culture. Arabic is the dominant language that is taught in the educational process
(Alhawsawi, 2013; Alrashidi & Phan, 2015; Fareh, 2010). This is not suitable to the
CLT approach as the level of exposure to the English language is not immersive
enough. Thought will need to be given to extending the use of English as a language of
instruction in other areas in order to improve the competence of the student
(Alhawsawi, 2013). Saudi Arabian teachers often lack the necessary level of proficiency
157
in the English language to be able to use it as an instructional method. If CLT is to be
implemented, Saudi Arabian teachers will need to undergo training in order to improve
their English proficiency. The competence of Arabic students will not improve until the
level of English competence of the teachers is improved (Alfahadi, 2014). The learning
of English under the CLT model must be culturally bound (Piatkowska, 2015).
For CLT to be effective, the learner must be socioculturally competent. Sociocultural
competence is “an understanding of the social context in which language is used: the
roles of the participants, the information they share, and the function of the interaction”
(Savignon, 2001, p. 18). The learner is required to learn the social rules of the language
in order to be competent with the language. CLT promotes this cultural awareness as
part of its process. The learner must be able to “negotiate cultural meanings, the ability
to suspend evaluation and divorce oneself from all sorts of stereotypes and, finally,
awareness of cross-cultural differences in language use, appropriateness, values, beliefs
and conventions” (Piatkowska, 2015, p. 402). Therefore in the classroom, cultural
meaning and the language must be negotiated.
The nature of educational delivery in Saudi Arabia will need to change if CLT practices
are to become a standard part of the educational system. The orientation of the Saudi
Arabia educational system is towards a teacher-directed approach (Ahmad, 2014;
Alkubaidi, 2014; Alrashidi & Phan, 2015; Rajab, 2013). This approach needs to change
if CLT is to be implemented. This will be difficult as the dominance of the teacher in
the learning process is culturally embedded (Al-Johani, 2009; Alkubaidi, 2014; Alrabai,
2014; Alrashidi & Phan, 2015). The shift from teachers passing information to students
while they listen passively is more suited to the grammatical approach. It is
158
incompatible with the CLT approach. The quiet passive approach of the classroom is
contrary to the highly interactive environment characteristic of CLT (Fareh, 2010). If
CLT is to be the dominant approach to developing English competence in students, then
teachers will need to develop a new set of skills and the educational system will need to
redefine the role of the teacher in the learning process.
There is a clash between the ideologies of CLT and the culture of Saudi Arabia. The top
down movement to reform ELT in Saudi Arabia through the importation of CLT has not
been successful. The expected change has not eventuated. Rather this research suggests
that teachers and students appear to paying lip service to CLT. The grammatical
approach remains dominant in the classroom as the methodology of instruction. The
constraints of class size, inadequate resources, lack of language proficiency amongst
teachers, the orientation of exams to the grammatical approach, cultural issues and
increased preparation time have acted as significant restraining forces to prevent the
change from occurring. The Arabic culture of learning appears to be in conflict with the
CLT approach. The Muslim culture has a deep reverence for learning as a process for
self-improvement and development. Education therefore is deeply entwined with the
development of a moral and ethical Muslim. The teacher is treated with a high level of
religious respect. The role of the teacher is therefore to provide the student with
knowledge that is both a blend of the spiritual teachings of Allah and the physical
requirements of the world. There is a strong orientation to books as a source of that
knowledge that places reading very high on the learning agenda.
The primary focus of reading in English is in order that the text might be understood in
order to translate the text into Arabic. This has resulted in the establishment of the
159
grammatical approach as the dominant approach. This has tended to overshadow the use
of the CLT approach to reading that advocates the development of reading for
understanding (Li, 1998). There needs to be a shift away fro the traditional orientation
towards the translation of texts into Arabic. The result of this primary focus is that skills
of speaking and listening have become less valued in the classroom environment. The
CLT approach elevates speaking and listening language skills. It is important that a
unique Arabic communicative style is developed (Hiep, 2005). The reticence to express
opinions and points of view in the traditional classroom where the teacher fills “the
empty vessels” with knowledge is a significant barrier for the adoption of CLT. To
allow for CLT to become more dominant in the Saudi Arabia classroom, the teacher
needs to re-prioritise the activities that are performed in the classroom. Grammar needs
to remain as a form of English development that is used not as an end in itself but as a
means to improve the reading and writing skills of the learner. The teacher needs to
understand that the goal is not to be proficient in the knowledge of the rules of grammar
but to be proficient in communicating. One of the many challenges is that this requires
the teacher to reconfigure their classroom approach, the exercises and activities that
they use and the nature of the relationship that they have with their students (Yang &
Cheung, 2003).
The educational system will need to redesign the assessment system in Saudi Arabia in
order to foster the teaching of CLT in the classroom. Assessment methodologies need to
consider the use of student portfolios that maintain a record of the activities that the
student has performed and their progress. The use of the portfolio is not a familiar form
of assessment in Saudi Arabia. It will be necessary to train teachers in the use of the
160
student portfolio, the benefits of the approach, the potential problems that might arise
and how these problems can be resolved (Chen, 2006). Other stakeholders such as the
student and their parents will need to be instructed in the use of portfolios and their
benefits. The introduction of the portfolio as a means of assessment will take time.
Students will need to develop the skills of self-assessment. The portfolio can be
complemented with traditional testing. If portfolio assessment is to be introduced, then
Saudi Arabia educational administrators need to reorientate the existing total reliance on
the grammatical orientated exams that exists as the only assessment methodology.
161
6.3 Limitations
The findings of this study cannot be generalised to the total population of Saudi Arabia
as only 15 teachers were involved in the study. Fifteen teachers are a very small sample
given the large number of teachers in Saudi Arabia. The small sample size is a notable
limitation. The sample of 149 students selected from five intermediate schools was
limited in that they were restricted to one grade within intermediate private schools in
Riyadh. It also can be a limitation for current study in term of were using male student
without sampling from female population as a result the finding could generalise only in
male student population. The reason the researcher could not choose from female
students in KSA is that a cultural boundary, which banned male students’, reach to
female schools. The use of only interviews and questionnaires limited the findings in
that classroom observation could have verified the degree of discrepancy between
theory and actual practices. The findings of the great difficulty in implementing CLT in
Saudi Arabia provide a starting point for the development of new integrated strategies
that can support a shift towards the widespread dominance of CLT in the Saudi Arabia
educational system. A more adaptive approach needs to be adopted than the top-down
approach that exists. All stakeholders need to be involved in the process. Wider
consultation needs to occur and further studies need to be conducted into the attitudes
and behaviours of parents and educational administrators. Ongoing research needs to be
conducted on the difficulties that teachers have in implementing CLT. The findings in
this study, the recommendations and the implementation plan provide a solid starting
point for addressing the shift from the grammatical approach to CLT. The starting point
has to be reaching agreement amongst all stakeholders on a culturally suitable model of
CLT for the Saudi Arabia context. The methodologies for introducing the change need
162
to be founded on a valid change model that recognises the environmental factors that
promote and inhibit the change, understands how to use the enabling factors to provide
the energy for the change and is able to empower and support staff as they initiate the
change.
It must also be understood that the study faced the limitation inherent in incorporating
Exploratory Factor Analysis as part of the study design. Although attempts were made
to limit the negative elements inherent in the approach, there is no certainty that the
limitations were not present. The research also faced the limitation of having to use a
test that was orientated to evaluating competence in Grammar Translation rather than
Communicative Language Teaching.
6.4 Conclusion
The level of experience of the teacher is a factor that must be considered when
implementing CLT. In a study in an Iranian educational context conducted by Jafari,
Shokrpour, and Guetterman (2015), teachers with more than 13 years of experience
were the group that was most resistant to change. Their research identified that there
was no link between the teacher’s experience and the teacher’s attitude towards CLT.
This finding was supported in this study and suggests that although more senior teachers
understand the benefits of CLT, they are also aware that the system acts to enable the
effective implementation of CLT in the classroom. The limiting factor of teacher
experience is reflected in the comment that “It is difficult for teachers who themselves
have learnt English trough the traditional approaches to suddenly turn their backs on
familiar classroom methods in favour of newer ones” (Kamhi-Stein & Galvin, 1997, pp.
12–13).
163
The higher the academic level of the teacher, the more likely that they will hold the
view that group work helps students gain confidence (Pearson coefficient = 0.341). This
is not significant indicating that the majority of teachers have not yet appreciated the
benefit of group interaction and communication. This attitude may limit change efforts
to create a more dynamic and interactive learning environment. It may be necessary to
focus on the development of group work within the wider educational context as a
means of developing the skills of the student. The importance of the examination
system and its focus on educational outcomes for the individual is a significant
structural barrier to this important change. It is interesting to note that there is a
significant difference between the correlation scores of the responses of experienced
teachers and their academic level. This indicates that newer teachers entering the
teaching profession are more qualified than those teachers who have been in the system
for a long time.
Saudi Arabian educational authorities support the shift in the educational system
towards CLT. This is reflective of a global trend away from the grammatical approach
and towards CLT (Ansarey, 2012; Jafari et al., 2015; Ozsevik, 2010; Richards, 2006).
The effectiveness of any change is dependent upon teachers’ perceptions of the benefits
of CLT (Carless, 2003; Chang, 2011; Wong & Barrea-Maryls, 2012). It does appear
from the research that the teachers are indifferent to CLT as a key tool in improving
student proficiency. Despite the level of knowledge, teachers have yet to appreciate
CLT as an effective tool. There is clearly a need for greater awareness of the benefits if
CLT amongst English teachers in Saudi Arabia. There is a high level of inconsistency in
the findings as the view that CLT improves teaching English correlates to the higher
164
academic level of the staff (Pearson correlation = 0.435). The high level of
inconsistencies identified in this research between their attitudes, their beliefs and what
they did correlates to similar findings in the research of Mowlaie and Rahimi (2010).
This has been found to be an important factor in negative learning outcomes for
students despite teachers espousing that they use CLT practices (Feryok, 2008; Orafi &
Borg, 2009). The disparity reflects the challenge of being able to place CLT into
practice (Meskill & Anthony, 2007; Safar & Kormos, 2008).
It is important to facilitate the change from GTM to CLT through new teacher training
rather than through a systemic change as the sources of resistance amongst established
teaching staff may be too large a barrier to overcome. Any effective change
implementation requires that there is a significant level of support amongst the teaching
fraternity (Jafari et al., 2015) and this is not evident from the study. When this is
coupled with a high level of resistance from the students towards adopting new
approaches, there is little wonder that the implementation of CLT within the Saudi
Arabia educational system has been thwarted.
It is a challenge to develop training that can be effective in initiating the changes
required for non-native speakers. Therefore, it will be important to ensure that the
educators of teachers in Saudi Arabia have an understanding and the skills in order to
develop CLT skills. If a training programme is to be effective it must develop the skills
of the teachers (Shawer, 2013). Teachers, in particular, need to be assisted in how to put
the principles of CLT into practice (Chowdhury & Ha, 2008; Feryok, 2008). In Saudi
Arabia, teacher training lacks a structured and formalised process (Al-Seghayer, 2015).
Educational change and reform is difficult in the Saudi Arabian context (Alnadhi, 2014;
165
Al-Seghayer, 2015). If teachers are to be skilled in the use of CLT, the education system
in Saudi Arabia needs to undergo change.
One of the challenges identified in the research is that even where the teachers may seek
to adopt a CLT approach, the implementation of CLT may be thwarted by the high level
of resistance of students to non-traditional methodologies. The study found that students
have indicated that they prefer a traditional language classroom. They appear to prefer
the traditional teaching methodologies of grammar, worksheets, rote learning, and
memorisation. There appears a strong level of resistance to adopt differing practices.
This is a significant barrier to shifting the system to using CLT. As Brown (2001) and
Bateman (2008) have identified, student resistance can be attributed to the fear of
greater risk and more involvement. Even the most ardent supporters of CLT are likely to
find that the demands on their energy, stamina and commitment will be challenged. The
intensity of this challenge suggests that teachers will often opt for the least point of
resistance. This is evident in this study.
Any attempt to introduce a systemic change towards the widespread use of CLT should
initially focus on speaking and listening skills. The belief that writing is best improved
through the grammatical approach is likely to be a significant barrier that might nullify
the effectiveness of any change effort. Given that the more experienced the teacher, the
more likely that they will consider that writing is best taught through the GTM, there is
likely to be minimal support for change amongst those in the decision-making hierarchy
within the educational system.
166
Attention needs to be directed towards the use of group work as an effective
instructional methodology across the subjects and the curriculum. Elements of
assessment of an individual’s capability of performing effectively in a team needs to
become part of the competencies that are formally assessed in order to promote new
teaching strategies. Workshops need to be conducted across the curriculum to develop
teacher’s skills in facilitating group work and evaluating the performance of an
individual student in this context.
The assessment in English is still orientated towards grammatical assessment
approaches. What is assessed and how it is assessed has a significant influence over
what is taught and how it is taught. Because the Ministry of Education has failed to
change the assessment approaches towards a CLT assessment orientation and has
preferred to retain the grammatical approach to testing. This is a significant structural
barrier to the adoption of CLT as teachers are evaluated on the success of their students
that in turn is measured by their performance in the examinations. Hence in order that
CLT is adopted, assessment instruments need to be developed that use the CLT
approach.
Improvements need to be made to teacher preparation and education in Saudi Arabia.
Teachers need to be trained within a best practices framework that seeks to develop the
competencies for teachers to be able to implement their theory into practice. The new
teacher needs to know the knowledge that underpins CLT but they must also have a
high level of knowledge of the content, the pedagogical skills and knowledge of CLT
and need to have developed a professional disposition towards the use of CLT. The
teacher-training programme needs to develop teachers skilled and knowledgeable in
167
CLT who are able to implement the theory in practice. Teaching strategies needs to be
developed in order that the teacher has the approaches necessary to implement CLT in
the classroom.
The key findings from this research is that the CLT approach that has been nationally
mandated by the Saudi Arabia government has been demonstrated as a superior
approach than the previous grammar-based approach. The research indicates that for the
participating students their second language competence improved when the CLT
approach was used. The ANCOVA analysis found that there was a significant statistical
difference between the test scores of CLT and the non-CLT groups on the completion of
the quasi-experimental element of the study. The mixed method survey component
found that both the students and teachers participating in the CLT approach understood
the benefits of CLT but both stakeholder groups were unwilling to commit to the
complete implementation and acceptance of the mandatory CLT approach as prescribed
by the Saudi Arabia government.
The teachers have a high understanding of the CLT approach despite the majority of the
teaching staff lacking any formal training in CLT. Although the reasons for this were
not identified in this study, it suggests that the teaching staff keep themselves up to date
with the current trends or that they misrepresented their level of understanding of CLT.
The comments on CLT provided by the teachers in the interview indicate that it is more
likely to be the former. Despite formal training in CLT, the teachers indicated that CLT
was their preferred form of instruction. The reason for their unwillingness to adopt
CLT, despite the urgings of the educational administration appears to be due to a
number of reasons. The most significant is that the assessment instrument used to assess
168
student performance remains unchanged. It is therefore still orientated to the
grammatical approach. Teacher performance is evaluated on student performance.
Hence despite teachers voicing awareness that CLT is their preferred mode of
instruction the change has not occurred. There are some secondary reasons that also
need to be considered as causing resistance to the change. These include the difficulty to
implement change of approach to teachers who have been using the grammatical
approach for a long period of time, the demanding nature of CLT compared to the
grammatical approach and the lack of adequate training provided by the educational
administration.
The research indicates that the students prefer the more active approach of CLT.
However, the cross-national policy borrowing of CLT from the United States context
means that CLT has not been adapted to a culture where the teacher is still viewed as
having the primary role in imparting knowledge. The student centred focus of CLT is
problematic for students operating in a culture that is teacher orientated in the learning
environment. The level of resistance to educational change is very high amongst the
students. The high level of resistance appears to be due to the extra demands that it
places on the student, the cultural incongruity in the approach and the understanding
that the assessment is still orientated towards the grammatical approach. This creates a
paradox.
The primary reason for this apparent paradox seems to be explained by the failure of the
Saudi Arabia government to change the summative evaluation of students. Although
changes have been made to the formative assessment approaches to accommodate the
CLT, the summative assessment approach is still entrenched in the grammatical
169
approach. Given that the effectiveness of both the teachers and the students are based on
the cumulative assessment, it is to be expected that there is resistance to the acceptance
of the CLT approach despite both teachers and students understanding the value of the
approach. This disparity highlights the importance of addressing assessment issues
when seeking to make changes to a pedagogical approach within an education system.
The issues and problems associated with cross-national policy borrowing; the challenge
in changing attitudes; and the influence that assessment has on subject content and
subject teaching are important contributors to the inherent resistance to the
implementation of CLT despite international recognition of its advantages in developing
language competence. The paradigm shift from a teacher-centred approach to a student-
centred approach has been difficult to achieve (Gulnaz, Alfaqih, & Mashhour, 2015).
The lack of effective teacher training and the failure to modify the assessment process
has resulted in limited changes in classroom practices have resulted in the teacher
retaining their preeminent role in the classroom, a position that is contrary to the CLT
approach. The paradigm shift that is needed to effectively implement and sustain CLT
has not been achieved. The paradigm shift displacing the teacher as the central role in
the CLT classroom would have implications on other subject areas (Gulnaz et al.,
2015). The transfer of new educational practices borrowed from other educational
systems needs to consider the social and cultural characteristics of the environment into
which it is being inserted. The nature of the change that is required can be quite
significant and require a paradigm shift in thinking that not has implications for the ESL
classroom but wider implications to the educational system. The challenges and
problems that teachers face in the overcrowded classrooms, the lack of effective
170
resources, the resource constraints of time, the low proficiency levels of the students,
the lack of change in the examination system are significant barriers that have restricted
the implementation of CLT (Farooq, 2015).
Despite efforts to introduce CLT as the dominant approach in Saudi Arabia to improve
the language competence of students, CLT has not been able to displace GT as the
dominant instructional method. The cultural dissonance of the CLT approach, the
challenges of using CLT and fear of the unknown have proven to be formidable barriers
to the introduction and acceptance of CLT by teachers and students in Saudi Arabia.
The challenge of changing teachers’ and students’ attitudes towards CLT and to be able
to provide teachers with the skills has proved to be a formidable barrier to the
implementation of CLT. This research seeks to understand the nature of these barriers in
order that strategies can be implemented that can encourage and support the effective
introduction of CLT into the Saudi Arabia educational system.
171
References
Abdel-Salam, A. S. (2014). Exploring CLT practices in Saudi international schools.
Exeter, England: University of Exeter.
Ahmad, A. (2014). Kumaravadivelu’s framework as a basis for improving English
language teaching in Saudi Arabia: Opportunities and challenges. English
Language Teaching, 7(4), 96–110. doi:10.5539/elt.v7n4p96
Ahmad, S., & Rao, C. (2013). Applying communicative approach in English as a
foreign language: A case study of Pakistan. Porta Linguarium, 20, 187–203.
doi:10.1191/1478088706qp0673oa
Aitken, K. G. (1976). Discrete structure – Point testing: Problems and alternatives.
TESL Reporter, 9(4), 7–12.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behaviour. In D.
Albaracin, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp.
173–221). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Alamassi, S. M. S., Al Jneibi, F. S., Al Kaabi, F., Dela Cruz Recio, C. H., El Zaatari,
W., & Panitsides, E. A. (2015). What hinders educational change? School
principals’ perspectives in the UAE context. Multilingual Academic Journal of
Education and Social Sciences, 3(1), 52–73. doi:10.6007/MAJESS/v3-i1/1702
Al-Degether, R. (2009). Teacher educators’ opinion and knowledge about critical
thinking and the methods they use to encourage critical thinking skills in five
female teacher colleges in Saudi Arabia (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA.
Alfahadi, A. (2014). Saudi teachers’ views on appropriate cultural models for EFL
textbooks: Insights into TESOL teachers’ management of global cultural flows
and local realities in their teaching worlds (Unpublished doctoral thesis).
University of Exeter, England.
Algonhaim, A. (2014). Saudi university students’ perceptions and attitudes towards
communicative and non-communicative activities and their relationship to
foreign language anxiety. Research Journal of English Language and Literature,
2(2), 83–101.
Al-Hajailan, T. A. (2003). Teaching English in Saudi Arabia. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia:
Aldar Alsawlatia.
Alharbi, H. A. (2015). Improving students’ English speaking proficiency in Saudi
Arabia. International Journal of Instruction, 8(1), 105–116.
172
Alhareth, Y.A., & Al Dighrir, I. (2014). The assessment process of pupil’s learnkgn in
Saudi Education System: A literature review. American Journal of Educational
Research, 2(10), 883-891.
Al-Hashash, S. (2007). Bridging the gap between ESL and EFL: Using computer
assisted language learning as a medium. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics,
33(1), pp. 1–27. Retrieved from http://faculty.ksu.edu.sa/alhashash/Publications
/Bridging%20the%20Gap%20Between%20ESL%20and%20EFL%20Using%20
Computer%20Assisted%20Language%20Learning%20as%20a%20Medium.pdf
Alhawsawi, S. (2013). Investigating student experiences of learning English as a
foreign language in a preparatory programme in a Saudi University
(Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Exeter, England.
Al-Hazmi, S. (2003). EFL teacher preparation programs in Saudi Arabia: Trends and
challenges. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 341–344. doi:10.2307/3588509
Al-Hazmi, S. (2007). Current issues in English language education in Saudi Arabia.
Journal of Modern Languages, 17, 129–150. doi:10.1108/17537981011047961
Al-Johani, H. M. (2009). Finding a way forward: The impact of teachers’ strategies,
beliefs and knowledge on teaching English as a foreign language in Saudi
Arabia (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Arkansas,
Fayetteville, AR, USA.
Alkubaidi, M. A. (2014). The relationship between Saudi Arabia major university
students’ writing performance and their learning style and strategy use. English
Language Teaching, 7(4), 83–95. doi:10.5539/elt.v7n4p83
Al Mazroui, M. (2005). Teaching English to higher grade students. Muscat, Oman: Al
Nahda Printing Press.
Al-Mekhlafi, A. (2011). Expectation versus reality: Communicative approach to ELT
teaching. Studies in Learning, Evaluation, Innovation and Development, 8(1),
98–113. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Al-Mohanna, A. (2010). English language teaching in Saudi Arabian context: How
communicatively oriented is it? Journal of King Saud University—Languages
and Translation, 22, 69–88. doi:10.5539/ijel.v4n5p17
Al-Musharraf, A. (2007). Teaching and assessing grammar in English primary stage
classrooms that promote communicative language (Unpublished master’s
thesis). Imam University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Alnadhi, G. H. (2014). Educational change in Saudi Arabia. Journal of International
Education Research, 10(1), 1–6. doi:10.19030/jier.v10i1.8342
173
Al-Nasser, A. S. (2015). Problems of English language acquisition in Saudi Arabia: An
exploratory-cum-remedial study. Theory and Practice in Language Studies,
5(8), 1612–1619. doi:10.17507/tpls.0508.10
Al-Nofaie, H. (2010). The attitudes of teachers and students towards using Arabic in
EFL classrooms in Saudi public schools—A case study. Novitas-ROYAL
(Research on Youth and Language), 4(1), 64–95. doi:10.2307/3586949
Alrabai, F. (2014). A model of foreign language anxiety in the Saudi EFL context.
English Language Teaching, 7(7), 82–101. doi:10.5539/elt.v7n7p82
Alrashidi, O., & Phan, H. (2015). Education context and English teaching and learning
in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: An overview. English Language Teaching,
8(5), 33–44. doi:10.5539/elt.v8n5p33
Al-Saadat, A. I. (2004). A close look at Saudi EFL teachers preparation in language
testing. Scientific Journal of King Faisal University, 5(2), 227–250.
Alsadaawi, A. (2010). Educational assessment in Saudi Arabian schools. Assessnment
in Education, 7(1), 143-155.
Al-Saif, A. (2005). An evaluation of the TEFL textbook for the 6th
elementary class in
Saudi Arabia (Unpublished master’s thesis). Essex University, Colchester,
England.
Alsamaani, A. (2012). Assessing Saudi learners’ beliefs about English language
learning. International Journal of English and Education, 1(2), 31–55.
Al-Seghayer, K. (2011). English teaching in Saudi Arabia: Status, issues and
challenges. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Hala Printing.
Al-Seghayer, K. (2015). Salient key features of actual English instructional practices in
Saudi Arabia. English Language Teaching, 8(6), 89–99. doi:10.5539/elt
.v8n6p89
Al-Shabbi, A. E. (1994). A communicative approach to spelling for Arab students of
English. Journal of King Saud University, 6(2), 21–35.
Alshammari, M. (2011). The use of the mother tongue in Saudi EFL classrooms.
Journal of International Educational Research, 7(4), 95–101.
doi:10.19030/jier.v7i4.6055
Al Shumaimeri, Y. A. N. (2003). A study of classroom exposure to oral pedagogic tasks
in relation to the motivation and performance of Saudi secondary learners of
English in a context of potential curriculum reform (Unpublished doctoral
thesis). University of Leeds, England.
174
Alsobaihi, M. (2005). The role and function of directors of English as a foreign
language programmes in SA (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of
Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA.
Al-Yousef, H. (2007). An evaluation of the third grade intermediate English course
book in Saudi Arabia (Unpublished master’s thesis). Scientific Repository King
Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Al-Yousef, H. S. (2005). Teaching reading comprehension to ESL/EFL learners. The
Reading Matrix, 5(2), 143–154.
Anderson, T. (2008). The theory and practice of online learning (2nd
ed.). Edmonton,
Canada: AU Press.
Ansarey, D. (2012). Communicative language teaching in EFL contexts: Teachers’
attitude and perception in Bangladesh. ASA University Review, 6(1), 61–78.
doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Asassfeh, S. M., Khwaileh, F. M., Al-Shaboul, Y. M., & Alshboul, S. S. (2012).
Communicative language teaching in an EFL context: Learners attitudes and
perceived implementation. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(3),
525–535. doi:10.4304/jltr.3.3.525-535
Asher, J. J. (1979). Learning another language through actions. San Jose, CA:
AccuPrint.
Asmari, A. A., & Javid, C. Z. (2011). Motivational constructs: A cross-sectional study
of EFL students at Taif University. Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities,
15(2), 73–104. doi:10.1080/09500780208666826
Assalahi, H. (2013). Why is the grammar-translation method still alive in the Arab
world? Teachers’ beliefs and its implications for EFL teacher education. Theory
and Practice in Language Studies, 34(4), 589–599. doi:10.4304/tpls.3.4.589-599
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice. Oxford,
England: Oxford University Press.
Badger, R., & Yan, A. (2008). To what extent is communicative language teaching a
feature of IELTS classes in China? IELTS Research Reports, 13, 1–44.
doi:10.17507/tpls.0505.20
Baker, D., & Wiseman, A. (2009). Gender, equality and education from international
and comparative perspectives (Vol. 10). Bingley, England: Emerald Group.
Barnes, B. D., & Lock, G. (2013). Student perceptions of effective foreign language
teachers: A quantitative investigation from Korean University. Australian
Journal of Teacher Education, 38(2), 19–36. doi:10.14221/ajte.2013v38n2.2
175
Batawi, G. (2006). Exploring the use of CLT in Saudi Arabia (Unpublished master’s
thesis). American University of Sharjah, UAE.
Bateman, B. E. (2008). Student teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about using the target
language in the classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 41(1), 11–28.
Belchamber, R. (2007). The advantages of communicative language teaching. The
Internet TESL Journal, 13(2). Retrieved from http://iteslj.org/Articles
/Belchamber-CLT.html
Berns, M. S. (1984). Functional approaches to language and language teaching: Another
look. In S. Savignon & M. S. Berns (Eds.), Initiatives in communicative
language teaching. A book of readings (pp. 3–21). Reading, PA: Addison-
Wesley.
Berns, M. S. (1990). Contexts of competence: Social and cultural consideration in
communicative language teaching. New York, NY: Plenum.
Bogdan, R. G., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education. An
introduction to theory and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Bolarinwa, O. A. (2015). Principles and methods of validity and reliability testing of
questionnaires used in social and health science researches. Nigerian
Postgraduate Medical Journal, 22(4), 195–201. doi:10.4103/1117-1936.173959
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what
language teachers think, know, believe and do. Language Teaching, 39(6), 81–
109. doi:10.1017/S0261444803001903
Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice.
London, England: Continuum.
Bowler, B., & Parminter, S. (2002). Mixed-level teaching: Tiered tasks and bias tasks.
In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.). Methodology in language teaching:
An anthology of current practice (pp. 59–68). Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Brandl, K. (2008). Communicative language teaching in action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative
Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. Retrieved from
http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/11735
Breshneh, A. H., & Riasati, M. J. (2014). Communicative language teaching:
Characteristics and principles. International Journal of Language Learning and
Applied Linguistics World, 6(4), 436–445.
176
Brown, H. D. (1980). Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching by principles. An interactive approach to language
pedagogy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language
pedagogy (3rd
ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
Busch, D. (2010). Pre-service teacher beliefs about language learning: The second
language acquisition course as an agent for change. Language Teaching
Research, 14(3), 318–337. doi:10.1177/1362168810365239.
Cameron, R. (2015). Mixed Methods Research. Retrieved from
https://www.deakin.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/681023/Dr-r-
cameron_mixed-methodology.pdf.
Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language
pedagogy. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University round table on
languages and linguistics: Language, communication, and social meaning (pp.
223–237). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to
second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.
Carless, D. (2003). Factors in the implementation of task based teaching in primary
schools. System, 31, 485–500. doi:10.1093/applinl.1.1
Chang, M. (2011). EFL teachers’ attitudes toward communicative language teaching in
Taiwanese college. Asian EFL Journal, 53, 17–34.
doi:10.1016/j.system.2003.03.002
Chapelle, C. A. (1998). Construct definition and validity inquiry in SLA research. In
L. F. Bachman & A. D. Cohen (Eds.). Interfaces between second language
acquisition and language testing research (pp. 32–79). London, England:
Routledge.
Chen, Y. (2006). EFL instruction and assessment with portfolio: A case study in
Taiwan. Asian EFL Journal: English Language Teaching and Research Articles,
8(1). Retrieved from http://www.asianm-efl-journal.com
Chin, G. (2011). Attitude assessment. Science, 334(6059), 1033.
doi:10.1126/science.334.6059.1033-c
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chowdhury, R., & Ha, P. (2008). Reflecting on Western TESOL training and
communicative language teaching: Bangladesh teachers’ voices. Asian Pacific
Journal of Education, 28, 305–316. doi:10.1080/02188790802236006
177
Chung, I. F., & Huang, Y. C. (2009). The implementation of communicative language
teaching: An investigation of students’ viewpoints. Asia-Pacific Education
Researcher, 18(1), 67–78.
Coskun, A. (2011). Investigation of the application of communicative language teaching
in the English language classroom—A case study of teachers’ attitudes in
Turkey. Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching, 2(1), 85–109.
doi:10.1.1.226.1524.
Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practice in exploratory factor analysis:
Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical
Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 10(7), 1–9.
Council of Europe. (2011). Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Creswell, J. W., & Piano Clark, V. L. P. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed
methods research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd
ed.). Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press.
Curran, C. A. (1972). Counseling-learning: A whole-person model for education. New
York, NY: Grune and Stratton.
Dankowitz, A. (2004). Saudi society offers critical analysis of the Kingdom’s religious
curricula. Enquiry and Analysis Series, 195. Washington, DC: The Middle East
Media Research Institute.
Dardig, M. H. (2015). Using the communicative language teaching approach (CLT) in
teaching English for specific purposes. Journal of American Science, 11(3),
126–131.
Dearden, J. (2014). English as a medium of instruction—A growing global
phenomenon. London, England: British Council.
Deckert, G. (2004). The communicative approach: Addressing frequent failure. English
Teaching Forum, 42(1). Retrieved from http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols
/vol42/no1/p12.htm.
De Houwer, J., Gawronski, B., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2013). A functional-cognitive
framework for attitude research. European Review of Social Psychology, 24(1),
252–287. doi:10.1080/10463283.2014.892320.
DeVellis, R. (1991). Scale development: Theory and applications. Newbury Park, CA:
SAGE.
Dimitrov, D. M., & Rumrill, P. D., Jr. (2003). Pretest-posttest designs and measurement
of change. Work, 20(2), 159–165.
178
Dolle, D., & Willems, G. M. (1984). The communicative approach to foreign language
teaching: The teacher’s case. European Journal of Teacher Education, 7(2),
145–154. doi:10.1080/0261976840070204.
Dolowitz, D., & Medearis, D. (2009). Considerations of the obstacles and opportunities
to formalising cross-national policy transfer to the United States: A case study of
the transfer of urban environmental and planning policies from Germany.
Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 27(4), 684–697.
doi:10.1068/c0865j.
Doms, D. (2003). Roles and impact of English as a global language (Unpublished
master’s dissertation). University of Birmingham, England.
Eaton, S. E. (2010). Global trends in language learning in the twenty-first century.
Calgary, Canada: Ornate Press.
EF. (2016). EF EPI. Retrieved from http://www.ef-australia.com.au/epi/regions/middle-
east-and-north-africa/.
Ellis, R. (1991). The interaction hypothesis: A critical evaluation. Singapore: Regional
Language Seminar.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based learning and teaching. Oxford, England: Oxford University
Press.
Elyas, T. (2011). Diverging identities: A ‘contextualised’ exploration of the interplay of
competing discourses in two Saudi university classrooms (Unpublished doctoral
thesis). University of Adelaide, Australia.
Elyas, T., & Picard, M. (2013). Critiquing of higher education policy in Saudi Arabia:
Towards a new neoliberalism. Education, Business and Society: Contemporary
Middle Eastern Issues, 6(1), 31–41. doi:10.1108/17537981311314709.
Ereksoussy, Z. M. (1993). Evaluating the English language textbook studied in the first
year at girls’ intermediate schools in Saudi Arabia (Unpublished master’s
thesis). King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Fageeh, A. I. (2011). EFL learners’ use of blogging for developing writing skills and
enhancing attitudes towards English learning: An exploratory approach. Journal
of Language and Literature, 2(1), 31–48. doi:10.13054/mije.13.79.4.1
Fareh, S. (2010). Challenges of teaching English in the Arab world: Why can’t EFL
programs deliver as expected? Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 2(2),
3600–3604. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.559.
Farooq, M. U. (2015). Creating a communicative language teaching environment for
improving students’ communicative competence at EFL/EAP university level.
International Education Studies, 8(4), 179–191. doi:10.5539/ies.v8n4p179.
179
Fazio, R. H. (2007). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations of varying strength.
Social Cognition, 25(5), 603–637. doi:10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.603.
Feryok, A. (2008). An Armenian English language teacher’s practical theory of
communicative language teaching. System 36(2008), 227–240.
doi:10.1016/j.system.2007.09.004.
Fogiel, M. (1996). REA’s handbook of English grammar, style and writing. Piscataway,
NJ: Research and Education Association.
Fullan, M. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York, NY: Teachers
College Press.
Gahin, G., & Myhill, D. (2001). The communicative approach in Egypt: Exploring the
secrets of the pyramids. TEFL Web Journal, 1(2). Retrieved from
http://www.teflweb-j.org/v1n2/Ghain_Myhill.html.
Gass, S. (1997). Input, interaction and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gattegno, C. (1972). Teaching foreign languages in schools: The silent way. New York,
NY: Educational Solutions.
Golombek, P. R. (1998). A study of language teachers’ personal practical knowledge.
TESOL Quarterly, 32(3), 447–464. doi:10.2307/3588117.
Gulnaz, F., Alfaqih, A. M., & Mashhour, N. A. (2015). Paradigm shift: A critical
appraisal of traditional and innovative roles of an English teacher in Saudi ELT
classrooms. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(5), 939–946.
doi:10.17507/tpls.0505.07.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). Language structure and language function. In J. Lyons (Ed.),
New horizons in linguistics (pp. 140–165). Harmondsworth, England: Penguin.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1975). Learning how to mean: Exploring in the development of
language. London, England: Edward Arnold.
Halpin, D., & Troyna, B. (1995). The politics of education policy borrowing.
Comparative Education, 31(3), 303–310.
Hamdan, A. K. (2015). Teaching and learning in Saudi Arabia: Perspectives from
higher education. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Hanafiyeh, M. (2015). A comparative study of the effect of grammar translation method
and communicative language teaching on Iranian lower-intermediate EFL
learners’ language proficiency. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods,
5(4), 334–344.
180
Hatch, E. (1978). Acquisition of syntax in a second language. In J. Richards (Ed.),
Understanding second and foreign language learning (pp. 34–70). Rowley,
MA: Newbury House.
Hiep, P. H. (2005). “Imported” communicative language teaching: Implications for
local teachers. English Teaching Forum, 43(4), 2–9.
Hoekstra, R., Kiers, H. A. L., & Johnson, A. (2012). Are assumptions of well-known
statistical techniques checked, and why (not)? Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 137.
doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00137.
Holliday, A. (1994). The house of TESEP and the communicative approach: The special
needs of state English language education. The English Language Teaching
Journal, 48(1), 3–11. doi:10.1093/elt/48.1.13.
Horwitz, E. (2001). Language anxiety and achievement. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 21, 112–126.
Howatt, A. (1984). A history of English language teaching. Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press.
Hu, G. (2002). Potential cultural resistance to pedagogical imports: The case of
communicative language teaching in China. Language, Culture and Curriculum,
15(2), 93–105. doi:1080/07908310208666636.
Hu, G. (2005). Contextual influences on instructional practices: A Chinese case for an
ecological approach to ELT. TESOL Quarterly, 39(4), 635–660.
doi:10.2307/3588525.
Hunt, M., Barnes, A., Powell, B., Lindsay, G., & Muijs, D. (2005). Primary modern
languages: An overview of current research, key issues and challenges for
educational policy and practice. Research Papers in Education, 20(4), 371–390.
Hunter, D. (2009). Communicative language teaching and the ELT Journal: A corpus-
based approach to the history of a discourse (Unpublished doctoral thesis).
University of Warwick, Coventry, England.
Hymes, D. (1971). On communicative competence. Philadelphia, PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.),
Sociolingusitcs (pp. 269–293). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School.
IBM. (2011). IBM SPSS statistics 20 core system user's guide. Chicago: IBM.
Jacobs, G., & Farrell, T. (2003). Understanding and implementing the communicative
language teaching (CLT) paradigm. RELC Journal, 34(1), 5–30.
doi:10.1177/003368820303400102.
181
Jacoby, S., & McNamara, T. (1999). Locating competence. English for Specific
Purposes, 18(3), 213–241. doi:10.1016/S0889=4096(97)00053-7.
Jafari, S. M., Shokrpour, N., & Guetterman, T. (2015). A mixed methods study of
teachers’ perceptions of communicative language teaching in Iranian high
schools. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(4), 707–718.
doi:10.7507/tpls.0504.06.
Kaiser, F. G., & Byrka, K. (2015). The Campbell paradigm as a conceptual alternative
to the expectation of hypocrisy in contemporary attitude research. The Journal
of Social Psychology, 155, 12–29. doi:10.1080/00224545.2014.959884.
Kamhi-Stein, L., & Galvin, J. (1997). EFL teacher development through critical
reflection. TESOL Journal, 7(1), 12–17.
Karavas-Doukas, E. (1996). Using attitude scales to investigate teachers’ attitudes to the
communicative approach. ELT Journal, 50(3), 187–198.
doi:10.1093/elt/50.3.187.
Karmani, S. (2005). English, terror and Islam. Applied Linguistics, 26(2), 262–267.
doi:10.1093/applin/ami006.
Ke, I. (2015). A global language without a global culture: From “Basic English to
Global English.” EaGLE Journal, 1(1), 65–87.
doi:10.6294/EaGLE.2015.0101.04.
Khan, I. (2011). Learning difficulties in English: Diagnosis and pedagogy in Saudi
Arabia. Educational Research, 2(7), 1248–1257. doi:10.1093/elt/50.3.187.
Kharesheh, A. (2012). Exploring when and why to use Arabic in the Saudi Arabian EFL
classroom: Viewing L1 use as eclectic technique. English Language Teaching,
5(6), 78–88.
Kianiparsa, P. (2015). Communicative language teaching in different countries:
Teachers’ and students’ subjective theories on CLT concerning cross-cultural
awareness in Iran, the Netherlands and Sweden. Göttingen, Germany: Cuvillier
Verlag.
Kieruj, N. D., & Moors, G. (2010). Variations in response style behaviour by response
scale format on attitude research. International Journal of Public Opinion
Research, 22(3), 320–342. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edq001.
Kim, H. J. (2001). A case study of curriculum and material evaluation: Elementary
English as a foreign language in South Korea (Unpublished master’s thesis).
McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Koch, A. S., & Terrell, T. D. (1991). Affective reactions of foreign language students to
natural approach activities and teaching techniques. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J.
182
Young (Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom
implications (pp. 109–126). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Koosha, M., & Yakhabi, M. (2013). Problems associated with the use of communicative
language teaching in EFL contexts and possible solutions. International Journal
of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 1(2), 63–76.
Koutropoulos, A. (2011). Modernising classical language education: Communicative
language teaching & educational technology integration in Classical Greek.
Human Architecture: Journal of Self-Knowledge, 9(3), 55–69.
Kuntz, P., & Belnap, R. K. (2001). Beliefs about language learning held by teachers and
their students at two Arabic programs abroad. Al-Arabiyya, 34, 91–113.
Lannuzzi, S., & Styring, J. (2012). Look up KSA (1st ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford,
England: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2004). CA for SLA? It all depends .... The Modern Language
Journal, 88(4), 603–607.
Lasito & Storch, N. (2013). Comparing pair and small group interactions on oral tasks.
RELC Journal, 44(3), 361–375. doi:10.1177/0033688213500557.
Lessow-Hurley, J. (2003). Meeting the needs of second language learners: An
educators guide. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum
Development.
Lewis, P. M. (Ed.). (2009). Ethnologies (16th
ed.). Dallas, TX: SIL International.
Retrieved from http://www.ethnologue.com.
Li, D. (1998). “It’s always more difficult than you plan and imagine”: Teachers’
perceived difficulties in introducing the communicative approach in South
Korea. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 677–703.
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1993). How languages are learned. Oxford, England:
Oxford University Press.
Lightbown, P. M. (1991). Getting quality input in the second/foreign language
classroom. In C. Kramsch & S. McConnell-Ginet (Eds.), Text and context:
Cross-disciplinary perspectives on language study (pp. 187–197). Lexington,
MA: D.C. Heath and Company.
Liton, H. A. (2012). Developing EFL teaching and learning practices in Saudi colleges:
A review. International Journal of Instruction, 5(2), 129–152.
183
Long, M. H. (1985). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based
language teaching. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.). Modeling and
assessing second language development (pp. 77–99). Clevedon, England:
Multilingual Matters.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language
acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language
acquisition (pp. 413–468). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Mabdkhali, H. (2005). A language curriculum model: A case study in Saudi Arabia
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ball State University, Muncie, IN, USA.
Retrieved from http://www.bsu.edu/libraries/virtualpress/student/ dissertations/
pdfs/M33_2005MadkhaliHusamM.html.
Machaal, B. (2012). Assessing the role of Arabic in Saudi EFL classes. In W. Al-Amri,
H. Noor, & I. McGee (Eds.), Saudi preparatory year English program: The
future and beyond: Student, teacher, pedagogy and curricular issues. Madinah,
Saudia Arabia: Taibah University.
Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction and second language development: An empirical
study of question formation in ESL. SSLA, 21, 557–587.
Mahmoud, S. (2012). The effect of using L1 (Arabic language) in the L2 (English
language) classroom on the achievement in general English of foundation year
students in King Abdulaziz University. Sino-US English Teaching, 9(12), 1734–
1738.
Manalullaili (2015). Applying communicative language teaching in teaching English for
foreign language learners. Ahmad Dahlan Journal of English Studies, 2(3), 1–8.
Mangubhai, F., Marland, P., Dashwood, A., & Son, J. B. (2005). Similarities and
differences in teachers’ and researchers’ conceptions of communicative
language teaching: Does the use of an educational model cast a better light?
Language Teaching Research, 9(1), 31–66. doi:10.1191/1362168805lr153oa.
Mart, C. T. (2013). The grammar-translation method and the use of translation to
facilitate learning in ESL classes. Journal of Advances in English Language
Teaching, 1(4), 103–105.
McNamara, T. F. (1996). Measuring second language performance. London, England:
Longman.
Meskill, C., & Anthony, N. (2007). Form-focused communicative practice via CMC:
What language learners say. CALICO Journal, 63, 69–90.
Michael, C. (1998). [Review of the book COLT—Communicative Orientation of
Language Teaching Observation Scheme: Coding Conventions and
Applications, by Frolich, M., & Spada, N.]. Australian Journal of Language and
Literacy. Macquarie University, Sydney.
184
Mitchell, B., & Alfuriah, A. (2017). English language teaching in the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia: Past, present and beyond. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences,
8(2), 317-325. doi: 10.5901/mjss.2017.v8n2p317.
Moores, K. L., Jones, G. L., & Radley, S. C. (2012). Development of an instrument to
measure face validity, feasibility and utility of patient questionnaire use during
health care: The QQ-10. International Journal for Quality in Health Care,
24(5), 517–524. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzs051.
Moran, P. R. (2001). Teaching culture: Perspectives in practice (1st ed.). Boston, MA:
Heinle & Heinle.
Morrow, K. (1979). Communicative language testing: Revolution or evolution? In C. J.
Brumfit & K. Johnson (Eds.), The communicative approach to language
teaching (pp. 143–159). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Moulton, W. G. (1961). Linguistics and language teaching in the United States: 1940-
1960. In C. Mohrmann, A. Sommerfelt, & J. Whatmough (Eds.), Trends in
European and American linguistics: 1930-1960 (pp. 82–109). Utrecht, the
Netherlands: Spectrum.
Mowlaie, B., & Rahimi, A. (2010). The effect of teachers’ attitude about
communicative language teaching on their practice: Do they practice what they
preach? Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences, 9(2010), 1524–1528.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.359.
Nedergaard, P. (2006). Which countries learn from which? A comparative analysis of
the direction of mutual learning processes within the open method of
coordination committees of the European Union and among the Nordic
countries. Cooperation and Conflict, 41(4), 422–442.
doi:10.1177/0010836706069870.
Neuman, W. L. (2005). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative
approaches (6th
ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Neumann, H. (2014). Teacher assessment of grammatical ability in second language
writing: A case study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 24(2014), 83–107.
doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2014.04.002.
Nicholas, H., & Starks, D. (2014). Language education and applied linguistics:
Bridging the two fields. Abingdon-on-Thames, England: Routledge.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis
and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.
Norris, M., & Lecavalier, L. (2010). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in
developmental disability psychological research. Journal of Autism &
Developmental Disorders, 40(1), 8–20. doi:10.1007/s10803-009-0816-2.
185
Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology: A textbook for teachers. New
York, NY: Prentice Hall.
Nurul Islam, M. (2012). Communicative approach: Some misapprehensions.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences,
2(1), 211-219.
Ochs, K., & Phillips, D. (2002). Towards a structural typology of cross-national
attraction in education. Lisbon, Portugal: EDUCA.
Orafi, S. M., & Borg, S. (2009). Intentions and realities in implementing communicative
curriculum reform. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology
and Applied Linguistics, 37, 243–253.
Oxford, R. L. (2003). Language learning styles and strategies: An overview. Oxford,
England: Oxford University Press.
Ozsevik, Z. (2010). The use of communicative language teaching (CLT): Turkish EFL
teachers’ perceived difficulties in implementing CLT in Turkey (Unpublished
master’s thesis). University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, IL, USA.
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, England:
Oxford University Press.
Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage Publications.
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evalution Methods (3rd
edn.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Penner, J. (1995). Change and conflict: Introduction of the communicative approach in
China. TESL Canada Journal, 12(2), 1–17.
Phillips, D., & Ochs, K. (2003). Processes of policy borrowing in education: Some
explanatory and analytical devices. Comparative Education, 39(4), 451–461.
doi:10.1080/0305006032000162020.
Phillips, D., & Ochs, K. (2004). Researching policy borrowing: Some methodological
challenges in comparative education. British Education Research Journal, 30(6),
773–784. doi:10.1080/0305006032000162020.
Piatkowska, K. (2015). From cultural knowledge to intercultural communicative
competence: Changing perspectives on the role of culture in foreign language
teaching. Intercultural Teaching, 26(5), 397–408. doi:10.1080
/14675986.2015.1092674.
Pica, T. (1987). Interlanguage adjustment as outcome of NS-NNS negotiated
interaction. Language Learning, 38(1), 45–73.
186
Pica, T. (2000). Tradition and transition in English language teaching methodology.
System, 28(1), 1–18.
Piepho, H. E. (1981). Establishing English in the teaching of English. In J. C. Richards
& T. S. Rodgers (Eds.), Approaches and methods in language teaching.
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Preacher, K.J., & MacCullum, R.C. (2003). Repairing Tom Swift’s Electric Factor
Analysis Machine. Understanding Statistics, 2(1), 13-23.
Price, M. L. (1991). The subjective experience of foreign language anxiety: Interviews
with highly anxious students. In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.), Language
anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Purpura, J. E. (2016). Second and foreign language assessment. The Modern Language
Journal, 100(S1), 190–208. doi:10.1111/modl.12308.
Rababah, G. (2003). Communication problems facing Arab learners of English: A
personal perspective. TEFL Web Journal, 2(1), 15–30. Retrieved from
http://webspace.buckingham.ac.uk/kbernhardt/journal/jllearn/3_1/rababah.pdf.
Rahman, M., & Alhaisoni, E. (2013). Teaching English in Saudi Arabia: Prospects and
challenges. Academic Research International, 4(1), 112–118.
Rajab, H. (2013). Developing speaking and writing skills of L1 Arabic EFL learners
through teaching of IPA phonetic codes. Theory and Practice in Language
Studies, 3(4), 653–659. doi:10.4304/tpls.3.4.653-659.
Rauf, M. (2015). Best practices in English language testing at the university preparatory
year programs. In A. K. Hamdan (Ed.), Teaching and learning in Saudi Arabia:
Perspectives from higher education (pp. 185–206). Rotterdam, the Netherlands:
Sense Publishers.
Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and methods in language
teaching. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching
(2nd
ed.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2003). Approaches and methods in language
teaching. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Rivers, W. (1964). The psychologist and the foreign language teacher. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
187
Rosenthal, A. S., & Sloane, R. A. (1987). A communicative approach to foreign
language instruction: The UMBC project. Foreign Language Annals, 20(3),
245–253.
Safar, A., & Kormos, J. (2008). Revisiting problems with foreign language aptitude.
International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 46, 113–
136.
Sato, K., & Kleinsasser, R. C. (1999). Communicative language teaching (CLT):
Practical understanding. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 494–517.
Savignon, S. (1972). Communicative competence: An experiment in foreign language
teaching. Philadelphia, PA: Center for Curriculum Development.
Savignon, S. (2001). Communicative language teaching for the twenty-first century. In
M. Celce-Murcia (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp.
13–28). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Savignon, S. J. (2007). Beyond communicative language teaching: What’s ahead?
Journal of Pragmatics, 39(1), 207–220. doi:10. 1016/j.pragma.09.004.
Shah, S., Hussain, M., & Nasseef, O. (2013). Factors impacting EFL teaching: An
exploratory study in the Saudi Arabian context. Arab World English Journal,
4(3), 104–123.
Shaw, K. E. (1997). Higher education in the Gulf: Problems and prospects. Exeter,
England: Exeter University Press.
Shawer, S. (2013). Preparing adult educators: The need to develop communicative
language teaching skills in college-level instructors. Journal of Literacy
Research, 45(4), 431–464. doi:10.1177/1086296X13504868.
Shuttleworth., M. (2009). Pretest-posttest designs. Retrieved
from https://explorable.com/pretest-posttest-designs.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press.
Sofi, L. (2015). Teaching English in Saudi Arabia through the use of multimedia.
Master’s Projects, Paper 138.
Soukup, B. (2015). Mixing methods in the study of language attitudes: Theory and
application. In A. Prikhodkine & D. R. Preston (Eds.), Responses to language
varieties: Variability, processes and outcomes (pp. 55–84). Amsterdam, the
Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Spada, N. (2007). Communicative language teaching: Current status and future
prospects. In U. Jessner & J. Cenos (Eds.), International hand book of English
language teaching (Part I). New York, NY: Springer.
188
Spada, N., & Fröhlich, M. (1995). Communicative orientation of language teaching
observation scheme. Coding conventions and applications. Sydney, Australia:
NCELTR, Macquarie University.
Sreehari, P. (2012). Communicative language teaching: Possibilities and problems.
English Language Teaching, 5(12), 87–93.
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2012). Understanding policy borrowing and lending. Building
comparative policy studies. In G. Steiner-Khamsi & F. Waldow (Eds.), Policy
borrowing and lending in education (pp. 3–18). Oxon, England: Routledge.
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2014). Cross-national policy borrowing: Understanding reception
and translation. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 34(2), 153–167.
doi:10.1080/02188791.2013.875649.
Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford, England:
Oxford University Press.
Stern, H. H. (1992). Issues and options in language teaching (Edited posthumously by
P. Allen & B. Harley). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input
and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.),
Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–256). New York, NY: Newbury
House.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook &
B. Seidhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in
honour of H.G. Widdowson. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’
response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37,
285–304.
Swarbrick, A. (1994). Teaching modern languages. London, England: Routledge.
Syed, Z. (2003). The sociocultural context of English language teaching in the Gulf.
TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 337–341.
Tabachnick, B. G. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson Allyn &
Bacon.
Tahaineh, Y. S. (2010). Arab EFL university students’ errors in the use of prepositions.
MJAL, 2(1), 76–112. Retrieved from http://www.mjal.org/removedprofiles/2013
/Arab%20EFL%20University%20Students’%20Errors%20in%20the%20Use%2
0of%20Prepositions%20by%20Yousef%20Sharif%20Tahaineh%20Pages%207
6-112.pdf.
189
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International
Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. doi:10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd.
Thamarana, S. (2015). A critical overview of communicative language teaching.
International Journal of English Language, Literature and Humanities, 3(5),
90–100.
Thompson, G. (1996). Some misconceptions about communicative language teaching.
ELT Journal, 50, 9–15.
Thomson, N. (2012). Language teaching strategies and techniques used to support
student learning in a language other than their mother tongue. Kongsberg,
Norway: Kongsberg International School.
Thu, T. (2009). The interaction hypothesis: A literature review. San Diego, CA: Alliant
International University.
Turnbull, M. (2001). There is a role for the L1 in second and foreign language teaching,
but…. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 531–540.
U.S.-Saudi Arabian Business Council. (2009). The education sector in the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia. Vienna, VA: U.S.-Saudi Arabian Business Council. Retrieved
from http://www.us-sabc.org/files/public/education_brochure.pdf.
Wall, D., & Taylor, C. (2014). Communicative language testing (CLT): Reflections on
the “issues revisited” from the perspective of an examination board. Language
Assessment Quarterly, 11(2), 170–185. doi:10.1080/15434303.2014.902058.
Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (2000). Network-based language teaching: Theory and
practice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Weber, R. P. (1985). Basic content analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
Weigle, S. C. (2012). Assessing writing. In C. Coombe, P. Davidson, B. O’Sullivan, &
S. Stoynoff (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to second language assessment (pp.
218–224). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Whalberg, H. J. (1984). Improving the productivity of America's schools. Educational
Leadership, 41(8), 19-27.
Widdowson, H. G. (1990). Aspects of language teaching. Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press.
Wilcox, A. (2005). The validity of reconviction studies (Unpublished doctoral thesis).
University of Oxford, England.
Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Harlow, England: Longman.
Willis, J. R. (2004). Perspectives on task-based instruction: Understanding our
practices, acknowledging different practitioners. In B. L. Leaver & J. R. Willis
190
(Eds.), Task-based instruction in foreign language education: Practices and
programs. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Wilson, M. (2005). Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wiseman, A. W., Sadaawi, A., & Alromi, N. H. (2008). Educational indicators and
national development in Saudi Arabia. Paper presented at the 3rd
IEA
International Research Conference, 18–20 September 2008. Taiwan.
Wong, C. C. Y., & Barrea-Marlys, M. (2012). The role of grammar in communicative
language teaching: An exploration of second language teachers’ perceptions and
classroom practices. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 9(1),
61–75.
Wong, C. Y. (2012). A case study of college level second language teachers’
perceptions and implementations of communicative language teaching. The
Professional Educator, 36(2), 1–17.
Woods, D., & Cakir, H. (2011). Two dimensions of teacher knowledge: The case of
communicative language teaching. System, 39(2011), 381–390.
doi:10.1016/j.system.2011.07.010.
Wright, T. (2005). How to be a brilliant English teacher. New York, NY: Taylor and
Francis.
Wu, K. (2010). The relationship between language learners’ anxiety and learning
strategy in the CLT classrooms. International Education Studies, 3(1), 174–191.
Wu, W. (2008). Misunderstandings of communicative language teaching. English
Language Teaching, 1(1), 50–53.
Yang, A., & Cheung, C. (2003). Adapting textbook activities for communicative
teaching and cooperative learning. English Teaching Forum, 41(3). Retrieved
from http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol41/no3/p16.htm.
Yen, Y. R. (1987). Foreign language teaching in China: Problems and perspectives.
Canadian and International Education, 1(1), 48–61.
Yilmaz, D., & Kilicoglu, G. (2013). Resistance to change and ways of reducing
resistance in educational organizations. European Journal of Research on
Education, 1(1), 14–21.
Zaid, M. (1993). Comprehensive analysis of the current system of teaching English as a
foreign language in Saudi Arabian intermediate schools (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA.
191
Zohairy, S. (2015). Applying DDL approach in teaching grammar interactively.
Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/8234438
/Applying_DDL_Approach_in_Teaching_Grammar_Interactively.
Zymek, B., & Zymek, R. (2004). Traditional-national-international. Explaining the
inconsistency of educational borrowers. In D. Phillips & K. Ochs (Eds.),
Educational policy borrowing: Historical perspectives. Oxford, England:
Symposium Books.
192
Appendices
Appendix A: Information statement for school principals (English version)
Dr. John Mitchell O’Toole
Principal supervisor
School of education
Faculty of Education and Art
University of Newcastle
Callaghan NWS 2308
AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61-249216647
Fax: +61-249216987
Email: [email protected]
The Application of Communicative Language Teaching Approach
within English as Forging Language context
Saudi Arabia private Education Case Study
(No H-2014-0079)
You are invited to permit your students and teachers to participate in the research project
identified above which is being conducted by Mr. Saleh Mohammad Alqarni, a PhD student in
Education at the University of Newcastle, and supervised by Dr. Mitch O’Toole (Principal
Supervisor), and Dr. Heather Sharp, (Co- supervisors) from the School of Education at the
University of Newcastle.
Why is the research being done?
This project will investigate the attitudes of teachers using the communicative language
teaching (CLT) approach for teaching and designing English courses in Saudi Arabia. This
study will be undertaken to achieve the following focal objectives:
To examine the level of awareness and comprehension of the CLT among
the Private school.
To examine the teachers’ attitudes concerning the use of the CLT approach in
language classrooms.
To examine the extent of the CLT approach influence upon Saudi students’
attitude towards learning English language.
To examine the effect of applying the CLT approach in Saudi English
Language students’ outcomes.
As part of the study, students in some classes will learn using CLT for 6 weeks
and others will using the traditional method.
193
Who can participate in the research?
The English language teachers and their students who teach level one at your intermediate
private school. Two classes will be selected randomly from your schools one for the
experimental group and one for the control group. This study uses two questionnaires for
teachers and students, teacher interview protocols with open ended questions, and pre and post
tests for collecting data on student performance. Information statements for Teachers, students
and parents are attached. The researcher will distribute these with your permission.
What choice do you have?
Participation in this research is entirely your choice. Only those people who give their informed
consent will be included in the project. Whether or not you decide to participate, this decision
will not disadvantage you. If you choose to participate, you will be acknowledged for your
contribution in reports of the research, unless you say that you want to remain anonymous. You
can stop participating at any time without giving a reason, and withdraw any data that could
identify you.
What would teacher and student participants be asked to do?
Teachers will be asked to participate as a part of one of the CLT groups, CLT material
provided for them. Often will be asked to teach as usual.
If you agree to permit teachers and students to respond freely and honestly to a number
of statements which will investigate the attitudes of teachers and students to the
communicative language teaching (CLT) approach for teaching and designing English
courses in Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire will be provided in Arabic.
Teachers will administer a written pre-test of language proficiency in the classroom at
the start of the study and then again 6 weeks later at post-test.
Students will be asked to participate in a language proficiency testing section, pre and
post-test, and survey in an attitude.
Teachers will be asked to participate in an interview. The questions of the interview will
be in English language. The interview will be recorded and participants have the right to
review and edit the recording of their response.
What are the risks and benefits of participating?
We cannot promise you any direct benefit from participating in this research but you will be
contributing to research that may help to improve English language teaching. This project will
not involve any potential risks, physical or psychosocial harm for participants.
How will privacy be protected?
Any information collected by the researchers, which might identify you, will be stored securely
and only accessed by the researchers. Data collected during the research will be kept securely
and only accessed by the researcher and his supervisors, and will be stored for at least 5 years at
the University of Newcastle. The data will be retained until no longer required for reference
purposes, and then destroy. Disposal of data will then occur after permission from the Head of
School to submit the Request to Destroy Research Data.
194
How will the information collected be used?
The results will be reported in research project reports and in Mr. Saleh Mohammad Alqarni
thesis, and may be presented at conferences and in professional journals. All paper-based
materials collected in Saudi Arabia which contain identifying information about participants
(e.g. consent forms, completed questionnaires, interviews, achievement test scores, etc.) will be
kept safely locked in a secure cabinet the office of student researcher until they are transported
by the student researcher to Australia. Once in Australia, all these documents will be kept safely
locked in a secure cabinet in the principal supervisor’s office at the University of Newcastle. A
summary of the findings will be sent to you at your school when the study is completed.
What do you need to do to participate?
Please provide introduction to your teachers and answer any questions from teachers, parents
and students if asked. Please read this Information Statement and be sure you understand its
contents before you consent to the participation of your school. If there is anything you do not
understand, or you have questions, contact the researcher. If you would like your school to
participate, please complete the attached Consent Form and return it to the researcher.
I agree for the name of my school to be listed in acknowledgements only as
participating in this research in any published reports.
Further information
If you would like further information please contact Dr Mitch O’Toole, whose address is shown
above, or Mr Saleh Mohammad Alqarni by email: [email protected]
Thank you for considering this invitation.
Your participation would be greatly valued.
Dr. John Mitchell O’Toole Mr. Saleh Mohammed Alqarni
Project Supervisor PhD student in Education
Complaints about this research
This project has been approved by the University’s Human Research Ethics Committee,
Approval No. H- 2014-0079.
Should you have concerns about your rights as a participant in this research, or you have a
complaint about the manner in which the research is conducted, it may be given to the
researcher, or, if an independent person is preferred, to the Human Research Ethics Officer,
Research Office, The Chancellery, The University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan
NSW 2308, Australia, telephone +61-2-4921- 6333, email [email protected].
Alternatively you could approach Supervisor of the Planning and Development Department in
the General Directorate of Education in Riyadh Mohammed Suleiman Phone: +96614779571,
Fax +96614741165
195
Appendix B: Information statement for school principals (Arabic version)
الدكتور ميتشل أوتل
مشرف أبحاث والآداب التربية كلية
نيوكاسل جامعة 8032ويلز ساوث نيو بولاية كالاهان مبنى +91 – 846819942: هاتف +91 – 846819622: هاتف
[email protected] الكتروني: بريد
رسالة المعلومات لمدير المدرسة
تطبيق اللغة التواصلية لتدريس منهج اللغة الإنجليزية كلغة أجنبية: حالة دراسية عن التعليم الخاص
بالمملكة العربية السعودية
(H-2014-0079 ( الرقم
درجة على الحصول متطلبات من كجزء. القرني محمد صالح. أ ريهيج والذي أعلاه المعنون البحث في للمشاركة مدعو أنت
والدكتورة ،(الأساسي المشرف) أوتل ميتشل الدكتور إشراف تحت نيوكاسل بجامعة التربية كلية في التربية في الدكتوراة
.نيوكاسل بجامعة التربية التربية بكلية(. المساعد المشرف) شارب هيثر
لماذا يتم إجراء هذا البحث؟
اللغة مناهج وتصميم لتعليم التواصل طريقة تطبيق استخدام تجاه المعلمين مواقف عن الكشف هو البحث هذا من الغرض
:الآتية الرئيسية الأهداف الاهداف تحقيق الدراسة هذه وستتطلع. السعودية العربية المملكة في الانجليزية
لغة بين المدارس الخاصة.دراسة مستوى الفهم والوعي لطريقة التواصل لتعليم ال .دراسة مواقف المعلمين بشأن استخدام طريقة التواصل لتعليم اللغة الانجليزية في الحصة الدراسية .دراسة مدى تأثير منهج طريقة التواصل لتعليم اللغة تجاه مواقف الطلاب السعوديين لتعليم اللغة الانجليزية للغة على نتائج طلاب اللغة الانجليزيةدراسة تأثير تطبيق طريقة التواصل لتعليم ا .
اسابيع ٦ لمدة اللغة لتعليم التواصل طريقة استخدام يتعلمون سوف الفصول بعص في الطلاب الدراسة، هذه من وكجزء
.التقليدية التعليم طرق يستخدمون سوف الاخر والبعض
196
البحث؟ هذا في المشاركة له يحق من
عشوائيا فصلين اختيار يتم وسوف. الخاصة المتوسطة المدرسة في الاولى المرحلة في الذين هموطلاب الانجليزية اللغة معلمو للمعلمين الاستبيانات تستخدم سوف الدراسة هذه. الضابطة المجموعة والأخرى التجريبية المجموعة منها واحدة مدرستكم في
المعلومات رسالة. الطلاب آداء بيانات لجمع والبعدي القبلي روالاختبا المفتوحة، الاسئلة مع المعلمين مع والمقابلة والطلاب، .موافقتكم أخذ مع هذه بتوزيع قومي سوف الباحث. ارفاقها تم والمعلمين الطلاب للمعلمين،
لك؟ المتاح الخيار هو ما
وسوف الموافقة نيعطو الذين الاشخاص الا البحث هذا يشمل ولن بالكامل، تطوعيا خيارا تعتبر البحث هذا في المشاركة
بشكل ستبقى مشاركتك تشارك، ان قررت اذا. سلبا عليك يؤثر لن هذا لا ام المشاركة قررت سواء. البحث هذا في يشملون
الحاجة دون وقت أي في المشاركة عن التوقف يمكنك أنه إلى بالإضافة. البحث هذا عن الناتجة العلمية الأوراق في تام سري
.تعريفك يمكن التي قدمتها التي تالبيانا جميع سحب ايضا وتستطيع سبب أي لإعطاء
يفعلوا؟ ان المشاركين والطالب المعلم من سيطلب ماذا
سيطلب من المعلمين المشاركين كجزء من مجموعات طريقة التواصل لتعليم اللغة، وادوات التواصل لتعليم اللغة كالعادة. المقدمة لهم. سيطلب في كثير من الاحيان منهم تدريسهم
إذا وافقت للسماح للمعلمين والطلاب للرد بكل صراحة وامانة لعدد البيانات التي تحقق تحديد اتجاه مواقف المعلمينوالطلاب تجاه طريقة التواصل لتعليم منهج اللغة الانجليزية وتصميمها في السعودية. سوف يتم توفير الاستبانة
باللغة العربية. اسابيع ٦ارة اجادة الاختبار القبلي التحريري داخل الحصة في بداية الدراسة، ثم بعد سوف يقوم المعلمين بإد
الاختبار البعدي. .سيطلب من الطلاب المشاركة في اجادة اختبار اللغة، القبلي والبعدي والمشاركة في المسح لتحديد مواقفهم تكون باللغة الانجليزية. المقابلة سوف تكون سيطلب من المعلمين المشاركة في المقابلات، اسئلة المقابلة سوف
مسجلة، وللمشاركين الحق في مراجعة تعديل استجابتهم المسجلة.
؟المشاركة من والفوائد المخاطر ماهي
اللغة تدريس وتحسين تطوير مساعدة في ستساهم ولكنك البحث، هذا في المشاركة من فوائد بأي وعود أي هناك يوجد لا
.للمشاركين والنفسي البدني الإيذاء او محتملة، مخاطر أي المشروع هذا على ينطوي ولا. الانجليزية
خصوصيتك؟ حفظ سيتم كيف
سوى عليها الاطلاع أحد يستطيع ولن آمن بشكل حفظها سيتم شخصيتك تحدد ان يمكن والتي الباحث سيجمعها معلومات أي
والمشرفين الباحث سوى عليها يطلع ولن آمن بشكل بشكل حفظها سيتم البحث هذا في جمعها سيتم التي البيانات. الباحثين
.نيوكاسل جامعة في القل على سنوات ٥ لمدة تخزينها وسيتم البحث على
البحث؟ هذا في جمعها تم التي البيانات استخدام سيتم كيف
العلمية المؤتمرات في تنشر أن الممكن ومن القرني محمد صالح للأستاذ الدكتوراة رسالة في ستنشر البحث هذا نتائج
خلال من البحث لهذا العامة النتائج ملخص من نسخة يطلبوا آن لهم يحق الدراسة بهذه المشاركين آن كما. العلمية والمجلات
. للباحث ايميل ارسال
197
؟البحث هذا في تشارك لكي تفعل ان يجب ماذا
رسالة قراءة الرجاء. ذلك طلب اذا والطلاب الامور، واولياء ،المعلمين من اسئلة اي واجابة لمعلمينك مقدمة تزويد الرجاء
كان أو مفهوم غير شيء اي هناك كان اذا. مدرستك في المشاركة على توافق ان قبل محتوياتها فهم من والتأكد المعلومات
الى واعادتها المرفق الموافقة نموذج تعبئة يرجى مدرستك مشاركة تود كنت اذا. الباحث مع تواصل سؤال، اي لديك
. الباحث
.اوافق على ادراج اسم مدرستي في الاعترافات فقط عن المشاركة في هذا البحث في اي تقارير منشورة
آخرى معلومات
في معلوماته ذكر سبق الذي أوتل ميتش الدكتور مع التواصل الرجاء البحث، هذا حول أكثر معلومات على الحصول تود اذا
[email protected] :الايميل خلال من القرني محمد صالح. أ مع او الصفحة، اعلى
شكرا على وقتك لقراءة هذه الدعوة
مشاركتك ستكون ذات قيمة كبيرة
.
القرني محمد الحص. أ اوتل ميتش. د
التربية في دكتوراة طالب البحث على المشرف
:البحث هذا على لشكاوى ا
.H-2014-0079 الموافقة رقم بالجامعة، البحثية الأخلاقيات لجنة قبل من عليه الموافقة تم البحثي المشروع هذا
قد البحث، اجراء طريقة حول شكوك لديك أو البحث، هذا في كمشارك الشخصية بحقوق تتعلق ماتاهتما لديك كان ذاإ
جامعة في البحث اخلاقيات مكتب مع التواصل فيمكنك مستقل شخص مع التواصل تفضل كنت إذا أو الباحث مع تتواصل
[email protected] ايميل 3391846819000 رقم هاتف. استراليا ،8032 كالاهان، نيوكاسل،
بديلا تستطيع التواصل مع المشرف على ادارة التخطيط والتطوير في ادارة التعليم بالرياض أ. محمد سليمان. هاتف
3369911424119٥فاكس 33699114226٥21
198
Appendix C: Consent form for school principals (English version)
Dr. John Mitchell O’Toole
Principal supervisor
School of education
Faculty of Education and Art
University of Newcastle
Callaghan NWS 2308
AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61-249216647
Fax: +61-249216987
Email: [email protected]
The Application of Communicative Language Teaching Approach
within English as Forging Language context
Saudi Arabia private Education Case Study
(No H-2014-0079)
I agree that students and teachers in my School can participate in the above research project and
give my consent freely.
I understand that
the project will be conducted as described in the Information Statement, a copy of
which I have retained
participants can withdraw from the project at any time and do not have to give any
reason for withdrawing
participants can stop talking with the researcher at any time, or choose not to answer
any question(s)
participants can review their interview transcript to edit or erase their contribution
after participants have approved the recording, the digital file will be kept safely on a
password protected computer and accessed only by the researchers
audio-recorded materials will be transcribed in electronic form by the teacher researcher
and will be kept safely on a password protected computer and accessed only by the
researchers
participants’ personal information will remain confidential to the researchers.
I consent to the researcher:
distributing the project information to students and teachers in my School.
giving permission to conduct research on the premises, and during class time.
I have had the opportunity to have questions answered to my satisfaction.
Name: Position:
Signature: Date:
Please hand this to the researcher next visit.
199
Appendix D: Consent form for school principals (Arabic version)
الدكتور ميتشل أوتل مشرف أبحاث
والآداب التربية كلية نيوكاسل جامعة 8032ويلز ساوث نيو بولاية كالاهان مبنى+91 – 846819942: هاتف +91 – 846819622: هاتف
[email protected] :إلكتروني بريد
نموذج الموافقة لمدير المدرسة
الخاص التعليم عن دراسية حالة: أجنبية كلغة الإنجليزية اللغة نهجلتدريس م يةالتواصل اللغة تطبيق
السعودية العربية بالمملكة
(H-2014-0079 ( الرقم
.حرية بكل موافقتي واعطي اعلاه عنوانه المشار البحث في المشاركة على مدرستي في والمعلمين للطلاب اوافق انا
:بأنه أعلم أنا
حه في رسالة معلومات المشارك التي قد احتفظت بنسخة منه.سيتم إجراء البحث كما تم توضي .المشاركون يستطيعون الانسحاب من هذا البحث في أي وقت ولا يجب على إعطاء أي سبب للانسحاب .المشاركون يستطيعون التوقف عن التحدث مع الباحث في أي وقت أو عدم الاستجابة عن سؤال ما يل بعد الانتهاء من المقابلة أو استلام نسخة الكترونية نصية وسوف تبقى المشاركون يستطيعون مراجعة التسج
. محفوظة على الكمبيوتر برقم سري والباحث فقط هو من يستطيع الدخول اليها .معلومات المشاركون الشخصية ستظل سارية لدى الباحث
أوافق للباحث على:
لا نعم . تيتوزيع معلومات الباحث على الطلاب والمعلمين في مدرس
لا نعم . إعطاء الإذن لإجراء البحث على هذا الأساس وخلال وقت الدرس
لقد أتيحت الفرصة للإجابة على الاسئلة باقتناع تام.
: .........................................المنصب. ..................: .........................الاسم
: .............................................التاريخ. : .........................................التوقيع
.القادمة الزيارة في الباحث ليد تسليمها الرجاء
200
Appendix E: Information statement for teachers (English version)
Dr. John Mitchell O’Toole
Principal supervisor
School of education
Faculty of Education and Art
University of Newcastle
Callaghan NWS 2308
AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61-249216647
Fax: +61-249216987
Email: [email protected]
The Application of Communicative Language Teaching Approach
within English as Forging Language context
Saudi Arabia private Education Case Study
(No H-2014-0079)
You are invited to permit your students and teachers to participate in the research project
identified above which is being conducted by Mr. Saleh Mohammad Alqarni, a PhD student in
Education at the University of Newcastle, and supervised by Dr. Mitch O’Toole (Principal
Supervisor), and Dr. Heather Sharp, (Co- supervisors) from the School of Education at the
University of Newcastle.
Why is the research being done?
This project will investigate the attitudes of teachers using the communicative language
teaching (CLT) approach for teaching and designing English courses in Saudi Arabia. This
study will be undertaken to achieve the following focal objectives:
To examine the level of awareness and comprehension of the CLT among
the Private school.
To examine the teachers’ attitudes concerning the use of the CLT approach in
language classrooms.
To examine the extent of the CLT approach influence upon Saudi students’
attitude towards learning English language.
To examine the effect of applying the CLT approach in Saudi English
Language students’ outcomes.
Who is participate in the research?
The English language teachers and their students who teach level one at your intermediate
private school. Two classes will be selected randomly from your schools one for the
experimental group and one for the control group. This study uses two questionnaires for
teachers and students, teacher interview protocols with open ended questions, and pre and post
tests for collecting data on student performance. Information statements for Teachers, students
and parents are attached. The researcher will distribute these with your permission. No
experience in CLT is required.
201
What choice do you have?
Participation in this research is entirely your choice. Only those people who give their informed
consent will be included in the research. Whether or not you decide to participate, this decision
will not disadvantage you. If you choose to participate, you will be acknowledged for your
contribution in reports of the research, unless you say that you want to remain anonymous. You
can stop participating at any time without giving a reason, and withdraw any data that could
identify you.
What would you be asked to do?
Teachers will be asked to participate as a part of one of the CLT groups, CLT material
provided for them. Often will be asked to teach as usual.
If you agree to respond freely and honestly to a number of statements which will
investigate the attitudes of teachers and students to the communicative language
teaching (CLT) approach for teaching and designing English courses in Saudi Arabia.
Teachers will administer a written pre-test of language proficiency in the classroom at
the start of the study and then again 6 weeks later at post-test.
Students will be asked to participate in a language proficiency testing section, pre and
post-test, and survey in an attitude.
Teachers will be asked to participate in an interview. The questions of the interview will
be in English language. The interview will be recorded and participants have the right to
review and edit the recording of their response.
How much time will it take?
The questionnaires should take no longer than 40 minutes to complete on each of the two visits.
For the interview, it should take about 20 minutes to complete.
What are the risks and benefits of participating?
We cannot promise you any direct benefit from participating in this research but you will be
contributing to research that may help to improve English language teaching. There are no
identified risks associated with language consultation.
How will your privacy be protected?
Participants can choose whether or not to be acknowledged by name as a contributor to the
research. Personal data collected during the research will be kept securely and only accessed by
the researcher, and will be stored for at least 5 years at the University of Newcastle.
How will the information collected be used?
The results will be reported in research project reports and in Mr. Saleh Mohammad Alqarni
thesis, and may be presented at conferences and in professional journals. All paper-based
materials collected in Saudi Arabia which contain identifying information about participants
(e.g. consent forms, completed questionnaires, interviews, achievement test scores, etc.) will be
kept safely locked in a secure cabinet the office of student researcher until they are transported
by the student researcher to Australia. Once in Australia, all these documents will be kept safely
locked in a secure cabinet in the principal supervisor’s office at the University of Newcastle. A
summary of the findings will be sent to you at your school when the study is completed.
202
What do you need to do to participate?
Please read this Information Statement and be sure you understand its contents before you
consent to participate. If there is anything you do not understand, or you have questions, contact
the researchers. If you would like to participate, please complete the attached Consent Form and
return it to the student researcher.
Further information
If you would like further information please contact Dr Mitch O’Toole, whose address is shown
above, or Mr Saleh Mohammad Alqarni by email: [email protected]
Thank you for considering this invitation.
Your participation would be greatly valued.
Dr. John Mitchell O’Toole Mr. Saleh Mohammed Alqarni
Project Supervisor PhD student in Education
Complaints about this research
This project has been approved by the University’s Human Research Ethics Committee,
Approval No. H- 2014-0079.
Should you have concerns about your rights as a participant in this research, or you have a
complaint about the manner in which the research is conducted, it may be given to the
researcher, or, if an independent person is preferred, to the Human Research Ethics Officer,
Research Office, The Chancellery, The University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan
NSW 2308, Australia, telephone +61-2-4921- 6333, email [email protected].
Alternatively you could approach Supervisor of the Planning and Development Department in
the General Directorate of Education in Riyadh Mohammed Suleiman Phone: +96614779571,
Fax +96614741165
203
Appendix F: Information statement for teachers (Arabic version)
ميتشل أوتل الدكتور مشرف أبحاث
والآداب التربية كلية نيوكاسل جامعة 8032ويلز ساوث نيو بولاية كالاهان مبنى +91 – 846819942: هاتف +91 – 846819622: هاتف
[email protected] الكتروني: بريد
رسالة المعلومات للمعلمين
تطبيق اللغة التواصلية لتدريس منهج اللغة الإ نجليزية كلغة أجنبية: حالة دراسية عن التعليم الخاص
بالمملكة العربية السعودية
(H-2014-0079 الرقم)
درجة على الحصول متطلبات من كجزء. القرني محمد صالح. أ يجريه والذي أعلاه المعنون البحث في للمشاركة مدعو أنت
والدكتورة ،(الأساسي المشرف) أوتل ميتشل الدكتور إشراف تتح نيوكاسل بجامعة التربية كلية في التربية في الدكتوراة
.نيوكاسل بجامعة التربية التربية بكلية(. المساعد المشرف) شارب هيثر
لماذا يتم إجراء هذا البحث؟
اللغة مناهج وتصميم لتعليم التواصل طريقة تطبيق استخدام تجاه المعلمين مواقف عن الكشف هو البحث هذا من الغرض
:الآتية الرئيسية الأهداف الاهداف تحقيق الدراسة هذه وستتطلع. السعودية العربية المملكة في نجليزيةالا
.دراسة مستوى الفهم والوعي لطريقة التواصل لتعليم اللغة بين المدارس الخاصة ية.دراسة مواقف المعلمين بشأن استخدام طريقة التواصل لتعليم اللغة الانجليزية في الحصة الدراس .دراسة مدى تأثير منهج طريقة التواصل لتعليم اللغة تجاه مواقف الطلاب السعوديين لتعليم اللغة الانجليزية دراسة تأثير تطبيق طريقة التواصل لتعليم اللغة على نتائج طلاب اللغة الانجليزية .
البحث؟ هذا في المشاركة له يحق من
عشوائيا فصلين اختيار يتم وسوف. الخاصة المتوسطة المدرسة في الاولى المرحلة يف الذين وطلابهم الانجليزية اللغة معلمو للمعلمين الاستبيانات تستخدم سوف الدراسة هذه. الضابطة المجموعة والأخرى التجريبية المجموعة منها واحدة مدرستكم في
المعلومات رسالة. الطلاب آداء بيانات لجمع البعديو القبلي والاختبار المفتوحة، الاسئلة مع المعلمين مع والمقابلة والطلاب، تدريس في خبرة وجود يتطلب لا. موافقتكم أخذ مع هذه بتوزيع يقوم سوف الباحث. ارفاقها تم والمعلمين الطلاب للمعلمين،
.التواصلية اللغة
204
لك؟ المتاح الخيار هو ما
وسوف الموافقة يعطون الذين الاشخاص الا البحث هذا شملي ولن بالكامل، تطوعيا خيارا تعتبر البحث هذا في المشاركة
بشكل ستبقى مشاركتك تشارك، ان قررت اذا. سلبا عليك يؤثر لن هذا لا ام المشاركة قررت سواء. البحث هذا في يشملون
الحاجة دون وقت أي في المشاركة عن التوقف يمكنك أنه إلى بالإضافة. البحث هذا عن الناتجة العلمية الأوراق في تام سري
.تعريفك يمكن التي قدمتها التي البيانات جميع سحب ايضا وتستطيع سبب أي لإعطاء
به؟ لتقوم منك سيطلب ماذا
سيطلب من المعلمين المشاركين كجزء من مجموعات طريقة التواصل لتعليم اللغة، وادوات التواصل لتعليم اللغة هم تدريسهم كالعادة. المقدمة لهم. سيطلب في كثير من الاحيان من
إذا وافقت للاستجابة للرد بكل صراحة وامانة لعدد البيانات التي تحقق تحديد اتجاه مواقف المعلمين والطلاب تجاه طريقة التواصل لتعليم منهج اللغة الانجليزية وتصميمها في السعودية.
اسابيع ٦صة في بداية الدراسة، ثم بعد سوف يقوم المعلمين بإدارة اجادة الاختبار القبلي التحريري داخل الح الاختبار البعدي.
.سيطلب من الطلاب المشاركة في اجادة اختبار اللغة، القبلي والبعدي والمشاركة في المسح لتحديد مواقفهم سيطلب من المعلمين المشاركة في المقابلات، اسئلة المقابلة سوف تكون باللغة الانجليزية. المقابلة سوف تكون
سجلة، وللمشاركين الحق في مراجعة تعديل استجابتهم المسجلة.م
؟المشاركة من والفوائد المخاطر ماهي
اللغة تدريس وتحسين تطوير مساعدة في ستساهم ولكنك البحث، هذا في المشاركة من فوائد بأي وعود أي هناك يوجد لا
.للمشاركين والنفسي البدني الإيذاء او محتملة، مخاطر أي المشروع هذا على ينطوي ولا. الانجليزية
الاستبانة؟ هذه اكمال يستغرق كم
.لإكمالها دقيقة 83 تستغرق سوف للمقابلة وبالنسبة. الزيارتين كل في دقيقة، 43 من اطول ليست بمدة الاستبانة اكمال يمكن
خصوصيتك؟ حفظ سيتم كيف
سوى عليها الاطلاع أحد يستطيع ولن آمن بشكل حفظها مسيت شخصيتك تحدد ان يمكن والتي الباحث سيجمعها معلومات أي
والمشرفين الباحث سوى عليها يطلع ولن آمن بشكل بشكل حفظها سيتم البحث هذا في جمعها سيتم التي البيانات. الباحثين
.نيوكاسل جامعة في القل على سنوات ٥ لمدة تخزينها وسيتم البحث على
البحث؟ هذا في جمعها تم التي البيانات استخدام سيتم كيف
العلمية المؤتمرات في تنشر أن الممكن ومن القرني محمد صالح للأستاذ الدكتوراة رسالة في ستنشر البحث هذا نتائج
خلال من البحث لهذا العامة النتائج ملخص من نسخة يطلبوا آن لهم يحق الدراسة بهذه المشاركين آن كما. العلمية والمجلات
. احثللب ايميل ارسال
؟البحث هذا في تشارك لكي تفعل ان يجب ماذا
رسالة قراءة الرجاء. ذلك طلب اذا والطلاب الامور، واولياء المعلمين، من اسئلة اي واجابة لمعلمينك مقدمة تزويد الرجاء
كان أو مفهوم غير شيء اي هناك كان اذا. مدرستك في المشاركة على توافق ان قبل محتوياتها فهم من والتأكد المعلومات
205
الى واعادتها المرفق الموافقة نموذج تعبئة يرجى مدرستك مشاركة تود كنت اذا. الباحث مع تواصل سؤال، اي لديك
. الباحث
آخرى معلومات
في معلوماته ذكر سبق الذي أوتل ميتش الدكتور مع التواصل الرجاء البحث، هذا حول أكثر معلومات على الحصول تود اذا
[email protected]: الايميل خلال من القرني محمد صالح. أ مع او حة،الصف اعلى
الدعوة هذه لقراءة وقتك على شكرا
كبيرة قيمة ذات ستكون مشاركتك
........................................ . ...........................................
القرني محمد صالح. أ اوتل ميتشل. د
التربية في دكتوراة طالب البحث على المشرف
:البحث هذا على وى لشكاا
.H-2014-0079 الموافقة رقم بالجامعة، البحثية الأخلاقيات لجنة قبل من عليه الموافقة تم البحثي المشروع هذا
قد البحث، اجراء طريقة حول شكوك لديك أو البحث، هذا في كمشارك الشخصية بحقوق تتعلق اهتمامات لديك كان ذاإ
جامعة في البحث اخلاقيات مكتب مع التواصل فيمكنك مستقل شخص مع التواصل تفضل كنت إذا أو الباحث مع تتواصل
[email protected] ايميل 3391846819000 رقم هاتف. استراليا ،8032 كالاهان، نيوكاسل،
التخطيط والتطوير في ادارة التعليم بالرياض أ. محمد سليمان. هاتف بديلا تستطيع التواصل مع المشرف على ادارة
3369911424119٥فاكس 33699114226٥21
206
Appendix G: Consent form for teachers and students (English version)
Dr. John Mitchell O’Toole
Principal supervisor
School of education
Faculty of Education and Art
University of Newcastle
Callaghan NWS 2308
AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61-249216647
Fax: +61-249216987
Email: [email protected]
The Application of Communicative Language Teaching Approach
within English as Forging Language context
Saudi Arabia private Education Case Study
(No H-2014-0079)
I agree to participate in the above research project and give my consent freely.
I understand that:
the project will be conducted as described in the Information Statement, a copy of
which I have retained
I can withdraw from the project at any time and do not have to give any reason for
withdrawing.
my personal information will remain confidential to the researchers.
I consent to
completing a structured questionnaire Yes No
completing an English proficiency test Yes No
being quoted anonymously in reports of the research Yes No
I have had the opportunity to have questions answered to my satisfaction.
Name: Position:
Signature: Date:
Please return at school reception in collection box.
207
Appendix H: Consent form for teachers and students (Arabic version)
شل أوتلالدكتور ميت مشرف أبحاث
والآداب التربية كلية نيوكاسل جامعة 8032ويلز ساوث نيو بولاية كالاهان مبنى +91 – 846819942: هاتف +91 – 846819622: هاتف
[email protected] :بريد الكتروني
نموذج الموافقة للمعلمين والطلاب
الخاص التعليم عن دراسية حالة: أجنبية كلغة لإنجليزيةا اللغة لتدريس منهج يةالتواصل اللغة تطبيق
السعودية العربية بالمملكة
(H-2014-0079 ( الرقم
.حرية بكل موافقتي واعطي اعلاه عنوانه المشار البحث في المشاركة على اوافق انا
:بأنه أعلم أنا
تفظت بنسخة منه.سيتم إجراء البحث كما تم توضيحه في رسالة معلومات المشارك التي قد اح .أستطيع الانسحاب من هذا البحث في أي وقت ولا يجب على إعطاء أي سبب للانسحاب .معلوماتي الشخصية ستظل سارية لدى الباحث
أوافق على:
لا نعم . إكمال اجراءات الاستبانة
نعم لا . إكمال الاختبار التحصيلي القبلي والبعدي
نعم لا . أن يتم اقتباسي بشكل غير صريح في الأوراق العلمية البحثية
لة باقتناع تام.لقد أتيحت الفرصة للإجابة على الاسئ
: .........................................المنصب. : ...........................................الاسم
: .............................................التاريخ. : .........................................التوقيع
. لذلك المخصص الصندوق في المدرسة في الاستقبال الى اعادتها الرجاء
208
Appendix I: Information statement for parents and students
Dr. John Mitchell O’Toole
Principal supervisor
School of education
Faculty of Education and Art
University of Newcastle
Callaghan NWS 2308
AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61-249216647
Fax: +61-249216987
Email: [email protected]
The Application of Communicative Language Teaching Approach
within English as Forging Language context
Saudi Arabia private Education Case Study
(No H-2014-0079)
You are invited to permit your students and teachers to participate in the research project
identified above which is being conducted by Mr. Saleh Mohammad Alqarni, a PhD student in
Education at the University of Newcastle, and supervised by Dr. Mitch O’Toole (Principal
Supervisor), and Dr. Heather Sharp, (Co- supervisors) from the School of Education at the
University of Newcastle.
Why is the research being done?
This project will investigate the attitudes of teachers and students about different of teaching
and designing English courses in Saudi Arabia.
Who can participate in the research?
Participants in this project will be 150 Saudi students learning English in private schools.
What choice do you have?
Participation in this research is voluntary. Only children who agree and whose parents give their
informed consent will be included in the research. Whether or not you allow your child to
participate, this decision will not disadvantage your child. If you do allow your child to
participate, your child will be acknowledged for their contribution in reports of the research,
unless you wish your child to remain anonymous. Your child can stop participating at any time
without giving a reason, and withdraw any data that could identify him.
What would your child be asked to do?
If you agree to permit your child to participate, students are asked to respond freely and
honestly to a number of statements which will investigate the attitudes of students to
communicative language teaching approach for learning English. The questionnaire will
be provided in Arabic
Your child be asked to participate in a language proficiency test.
209
Students in some classes will learn using CLT for 6 weeks and others will using the
traditional method.
How much time will it take?
The questionnaires should take no longer than 40 minutes to complete on each of the two visits.
The achievement test should take no longer than 45 minutes on each of the two visits.
What are the risks and benefits of participating?
We cannot promise you or your child any direct benefit from participating in this research but
you will be contributing to research that may help to improve English language teaching. There
are no identified risks associated with language consultation.
How will your child’s privacy be protected?
Any information collected by the researchers, which might identify you, will be stored securely
and only accessed by the researchers. Data collected during the research will be kept securely
and only accessed by the researcher and his supervisors, and will be stored for at least 5 years at
the University of Newcastle. The data will be retained until no longer required for reference
purposes, and then destroy. Disposal of data will then occur after permission from the Head of
School to submit the Request to Destroy Research Data.
How will the information collected be used?
The results will be reported in research project reports and in Mr. Saleh Mohammad Alqarni
thesis, and may be presented at conferences and in professional journals. All paper-based
materials collected in Saudi Arabia which contain identifying information about participants
(e.g. consent forms, completed questionnaires, interviews, achievement test scores, etc.) will be
kept safely locked in a secure cabinet the office of student researcher until they are transported
by the student researcher to Australia. Once in Australia, all these documents will be kept safely
locked in a secure cabinet in the principal supervisor’s office at the University of Newcastle. A
summary of the findings will be sent to the school when the study is completed.
What do you need to do to participate?
Please read this Information Statement and be sure you understand its contents before you give
the permission for your child consent to participate. If there is anything you do not understand,
or you have questions, contact the researcher. If you would like to give the permission for your
child to participate, please complete the attached Consent Form and return it to the researcher.
Further information
If you would like further information please contact Dr Mitch O’Toole, whose address is shown
above, or Mr Saleh Mohammad Alqarni by email: [email protected]
210
Thank you for considering this invitation.
Your participation would be greatly valued.
Dr. John Mitchell O’Toole Mr. Saleh Mohammed Alqarni
Project Supervisor PhD student in Education
Complaints about this research
This project has been approved by the University’s Human Research Ethics Committee,
Approval No. H- 2014-0079.
Should you have concerns about your rights as a participant in this research, or you have a
complaint about the manner in which the research is conducted, it may be given to the
researcher, or, if an independent person is preferred, to the Human Research Ethics Officer,
Research Office, The Chancellery, The University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan
NSW 2308, Australia, telephone +61-2-4921- 6333, email [email protected].
Alternatively you could approach Supervisor of the Planning and Development Department in
the General Directorate of Education in Riyadh Mohammed Suleiman Phone: +96614779571,
Fax +96614741165
211
Appendix J: Information statement for parents and students (Arabic version)
الدكتور ميتشل أوتل مشرف أبحاث
والآداب التربية كلية نيوكاسل جامعة 8032ويلز ساوث نيو بولاية كالاهان مبنى +91 – 846819942: هاتف +91 – 846819622: هاتف
[email protected] :بريد الكتروني
رسالة المعلومات للآباء والطلاب تطبيق اللغة التواصلية لتدريس منهج اللغة الإنجليزية كلغة أجنبية: حالة دراسية عن التعليم الخاص
بالمملكة العربية السعودية(H-2014-0079 ( الرقم
درجة على الحصول متطلبات من كجزء. القرني محمد صالح. أ ريهيج والذي أعلاه المعنون البحث في للمشاركة مدعو أنت
والدكتورة ،(الأساسي المشرف) أوتل ميتشل الدكتور إشراف تحت نيوكاسل بجامعة التربية كلية في التربية في الدكتوراة
.نيوكاسل بجامعة التربية بكلية(. المساعد المشرف) شارب هيثر
لماذا يتم إجراء هذا البحث؟
اللغة مناهج وتصميم لتعليم التواصل طريقة تطبيق استخدام تجاه المعلمين مواقف عن الكشف هو البحث هذا من الغرض
:الآتية الرئيسية الأهداف الاهداف تحقيق الدراسة هذه وستتطلع. السعودية العربية المملكة في الانجليزية
المدارس الخاصة.دراسة مستوى الفهم والوعي لطريقة التواصل لتعليم اللغة بين .دراسة مواقف المعلمين بشأن استخدام طريقة التواصل لتعليم اللغة الانجليزية في الحصة الدراسية .دراسة مدى تأثير منهج طريقة التواصل لتعليم اللغة تجاه مواقف الطلاب السعوديين لتعليم اللغة الانجليزية نتائج طلاب اللغة الانجليزية دراسة تأثير تطبيق طريقة التواصل لتعليم اللغة على .
البحث؟ هذا في المشاركة له يحق من
.الخاصة المدارس في سعوديا طالبا ٠٥١ يكونوا سوف البحث هذا في المشاركين
لك؟ المتاح الخيار هو ما
آبائهم من فقةالموا يعطون الذين الطلاب الا البحث هذا يشمل ولن بالكامل، تطوعيا خيارا تعتبر البحث هذا في المشاركة
مشاركة يشارك، ان قررت إذا. سلبا عليك يؤثر لن هذا لا ام المشاركة لابنك اذنت سواء. البحث هذا في يشملون وسوف
في المشاركة عن التوقف يمكنك أنه إلى بالإضافة. البحث هذا عن الناتجة العلمية الأوراق في تام سري بشكل ستبقى ابنك
.ابنك تعريف يمكن التي قدمها التي البيانات جميع سحب ايضا وتستطيع سبب يأ لإعطاء الحاجة دون وقت أي
212
به؟ لتقوم منك سيطلب ماذا
إذا وافقت للاستجابة لابنك بكل صراحة وامانة لعدد البيانات التي تحقق تحديد اتجاه مواقف الطلاب تجاه طريقة ية. سيتم توفير الاستبانات باللغة العربية.التواصل لتعليم منهج اللغة الانجليزية وتصميمها في السعود
.سيطلب من الطلاب المشاركة في اجادة اختبار اللغة، القبلي والبعدي والمشاركة في المسح لتحديد مواقفهم اسابيع والاخرين ٦سيطلب من الطلاب في بعض الفصول التعلم باستخدام الطريقة التواصلية لتعليم اللغة لمدة
طريقة التقليدية في تعليمهم.سوف يستخدمون ال
؟المشاركة من والفوائد المخاطر ماهي
اللغة تدريس وتحسين تطوير مساعدة في ستساهم ولكنك البحث، هذا في المشاركة من فوائد بأي وعود أي هناك يوجد لا
.كينللمشار والنفسي البدني الإيذاء او محتملة، مخاطر أي المشروع هذا على ينطوي ولا. الانجليزية
الاستبانة؟ هذه اكمال يستغرق كم
دقيقة 4٥ يتجاوز لا ان ينبغي للاختبار وبالنسبة. الزيارتين كل في دقيقة، 43 من اطول ليست بمدة الاستبانة اكمال يمكن
. الزيارتين من لكل
خصوصيتك؟ حفظ سيتم كيف
سوى عليها الاطلاع أحد يستطيع ولن آمن بشكل حفظها سيتم شخصيتك تحدد ان يمكن والتي الباحث سيجمعها معلومات أي
والمشرفين الباحث سوى عليها يطلع ولن آمن بشكل بشكل حفظها سيتم البحث هذا في جمعها سيتم التي البيانات. الباحثين
.نيوكاسل جامعة في القل على سنوات ٥ لمدة تخزينها وسيتم البحث على
البحث؟ اهذ في جمعها تم التي البيانات استخدام سيتم كيف
العلمية المؤتمرات في تنشر أن الممكن ومن القرني محمد صالح للأستاذ الدكتوراة رسالة في ستنشر البحث هذا نتائج
خلال من البحث لهذا العامة النتائج ملخص من نسخة يطلبوا آن لهم يحق الدراسة بهذه المشاركين آن كما. العلمية والمجلات
. للباحث ايميل ارسال
؟البحث هذا في تشارك لكي تفعل ان جبي ماذا
رسالة قراءة الرجاء. ذلك طلب اذا والطلاب الامور، واولياء المعلمين، من اسئلة اي واجابة لمعلمينك مقدمة تزويد الرجاء
كان أو مفهوم غير شيء اي هناك كان اذا. مدرستك في المشاركة على توافق ان قبل محتوياتها فهم من والتأكد المعلومات
الى واعادتها المرفق الموافقة نموذج تعبئة يرجى مدرستك مشاركة تود كنت اذا. الباحث مع تواصل سؤال، اي لديك
. الباحث
213
آخرى معلومات
في معلوماته ذكر سبق الذي أوتل ميتش الدكتور مع التواصل الرجاء البحث، هذا حول أكثر معلومات على الحصول تود اذا
[email protected]: الايميل خلال من القرني محمد صالح. أ مع او الصفحة، اعلى
الدعوة هذه لقراءة وقتك على شكرا
كبيرة قيمة ذات ستكون مشاركتك
........................................ . ...........................................
القرني محمد صالح. أ اوتل ميتشل. د
بيةالتر في دكتوراة طالب البحث على المشرف
:البحث هذا على لشكاوى ا
.H-2014-0079 الموافقة رقم بالجامعة, البحثية الأخلاقيات لجنة قبل من عليه الموافقة تم البحثي المشروع هذا
قد البحث، اجراء طريقة حول شكوك لديك أو البحث، هذا في كمشارك الشخصية بحقوق تتعلق اهتمامات لديك كان ذاإ
جامعة في البحث اخلاقيات مكتب مع التواصل فيمكنك مستقل شخص مع التواصل تفضل كنت إذا أو الباحث مع تتواصل
[email protected] ايميل 3391846819000 رقم هاتف. استراليا ،8032 كالاهان، نيوكاسل،
على ادارة التخطيط والتطوير في ادارة التعليم بالرياض أ. محمد سليمان. هاتف بديلا تستطيع التواصل مع المشرف
3369911424119٥فاكس 33699114226٥21
214
Appendix K: Consent form for parents (English version)
Dr. John Mitchell O’Toole
Principal supervisor
School of education
Faculty of Education and Art
University of Newcastle
Callaghan NWS 2308
AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61-249216647
Fax: +61-249216987
Email: [email protected]
The Application of Communicative Language Teaching Approach
within English as Forging Language context
Saudi Arabia private Education Case Study
(No H-2014-0079)
I agree to participate in the above research project and give my consent freely.
I understand that:
the project will be conducted as described in the Information Statement, a copy of
which I have retained
I can withdraw from the project at any time and do not have to give any reason for
withdrawing.
my personal information will remain confidential to the researchers.
I consent to my child
completing a structured questionnaire Yes No
completing an English proficiency test Yes No
being quoted anonymously in reports of the research Yes No
I have had the opportunity to have questions answered to my satisfaction.
Name: Position:
Signature: Date:
Please return at school reception in collection box.
215
Appendix L: Consent form for parents (Arabic version)
الدكتور ميتشل أوتلشرف أبحاث م
والآداب التربية كلية نيوكاسل جامعة 8032 ويلز ساوث نيو بولاية كالاهان مبنى+91 – 846819942: هاتف +91 – 846819622: هاتف
[email protected] إلكتروني بريد:
نموذج الموافقة للآباء
الخاص التعليم عن دراسية حالة: أجنبية كلغة الإنجليزية اللغة لتدريس منهج يةالتواصل اللغة تطبيق
السعودية العربية بالمملكة
(H-2014-0079 ( الرقم
.حرية بكل موافقتي واعطي اعلاه عنوانه المشار البحث في المشاركة على اوافق انا
:بأنه أعلم أنا
توضيحه في رسالة معلومات المشارك التي قد احتفظت بنسخة منه.سيتم إجراء البحث كما تم .أستطيع الانسحاب من هذا البحث في أي وقت ولا يجب على إعطاء أي سبب للانسحاب .معلوماتي الشخصية ستظل سارية لدى الباحث
:على لابني أوافق
نعم لا . إكمال اجراءات الاستبانة لا نعم . إكمال الاختبار التحصيلي القبلي والبعدي لا نعم . أن يتم اقتباسي بشكل غير صريح في الأوراق العلمية البحثية
.تام باقتناع الاسئلة على للإجابة الفرصة أتيحت لقد
: .........................................المنصب. : ...........................................الاسم
.............: ................................التاريخ. : .........................................التوقيع
. لذلك المخصص الصندوق في المدرسة في الاستقبال مكتب الى اعادتها الرجاء
216
Appendix M: Approval letter from The General Directorate of Education in
Riyadh
217
Appendix N: Pre-test
218
219
Appendix O: Post-test
Post – Test Name: …………………………………………………………
Class: ………………………………………………………….
5 The sandwiches are in a plastic .
2 p 3 b 6 There’s plastic, glass, and in a car.
1 Look at the pictures. Write the words.
sandwich 1 j
1 point for each correct answer. Total 3 points.
2 Reorder the letters. Write the words.
Where’s my money? I’m d i r o w e r worried!
1 This desk is a v e h y . I can’t
move it.
2 We can swim in the sea. The water is
a l c e n .
3 There’s litter in my room. Mum is g a r n y
!
4 He can’t pick up that chair. His arms are
e w k a .
5 Jess isn’t happy. She’s a d s .
6 Where’s the juice? I’m i t h y r t s .
1 point for each correct answer. Total 6 points.
3 Write the words for parts of the body.
head 1
4 Complete the sentences with the words below.
bag bottle drop metal paper put stop
Stop ! Pick up that litter!
1 Give me that of juice, please.
2 The blue bin is for . You can recycle
notebooks and magazines in the blue bin.
3 Don’t my sunglasses!
4 You can your English CDs on this
table.
1 point for each correct answer. Total 6 points.
5 Complete the lists with the words below.
arm burger glass hand hungry pizza plastic
strong
1 Materials: glass
2 Food:
3 Parts of the body:
4 Adjectives:
1 point for each correct answer. Total 4 points.
6 Rewrite the sentences with the adjectives.
The girl is Maria. (tall)
The tall girl is Maria.
1 Celia is a student. (popular)
2 Where’s my shirt? (white)
3 Syria is a country. (hot)
4 How much is the surfboard? (blue)
5 That’s a T-shirt. (cool)
2 3
1 point for each correct answer. Total 5 points.
1 point for each correct answer. Total 3 points.
220
Post – Test Name: …………………………………………………………
Class: ………………………………………………………….
1 Where can we sit down? b
2 Who can you see in the classroom?
3 What can we listen to?
4
Where can I put this bottle?
5 When can they go to the sports
centre?
a
b
c
d
e
In the yellow bin.
On those chairs.
On Saturday.
This English CD.
Four students.
7 Complete the sentences with have got or has
got.
10 Read the text. Underline T (True) or F (False).
Jana and Lena have got short hair.
1 My friend a cool computer.
2 I two friends from Ireland.
3 My brother a clean room.
4 My mother and father a black car.
5 Jon and I brown eyes.
6 Our class twenty-eight students.
1 point for each correct answer. Total 6 points.
8 Write questions with can. Complete the answers.
(your sister – draw animals?)
Ken: Can your brother draw animals?
Liam: No, he can’t.
1 (you – climb?)
Ken:
Liam: No, .
2 (your mum – make chips?)
Ken:
Liam: Yes, .
3 (your brothers – swim?)
Ken:
Liam: No, .
4 (we – put these bottles in the bin?)
Ken:
Liam: Yes, .
2 points for each correct answer. Total 8 points.
9 Match the questions and answers.
I’m Alan. I’m thirteen, and I’m from the United States. I’m
tall, and I have got brown hair. I can run, but I can’t swim.
My favourite food is pizza. I don’t like burgers. I love
reading! I have forty books.
I have got two brothers. My brother Harry is seven. He is
short. He has got strong arms and legs. He can swim, and
he can run. My brother Matt is fifteen. He’s tall. He can
run, but he can’t swim.
Alan is a short boy. T / F
1 Alan and Matt can run. T / F
2 Burgers are Alan’s favourite food. T / F
3 Alan has got forty books. T / F
4 Alan has got two sisters. T / F
5 Harry isn’t weak. T / F
1 point for each correct answer. Total 5 points.
TOTAL / 50
1 point for each correct answer. Total 4 points.
221
Appendix P: Result of achievement test for experimental group
No. Pre-test Post-test Group
1 42.00 46.00 Experimental
2 48.00 33.00 Experimental
3 28.00 50.00 Experimental
4 50.00 50.00 Experimental
5 9.00 38.00 Experimental
6 33.00 44.00 Experimental
7 50.00 50.00 Experimental
8 49.00 50.00 Experimental
9 37.00 48.00 Experimental
10 41.00 49.00 Experimental
11 38.00 50.00 Experimental
12 32.00 48.00 Experimental
13 47.00 45.00 Experimental
14 44.00 50.00 Experimental
15 38.00 50.00 Experimental
16 50.00 50.00 Experimental
17 49.00 50.00 Experimental
18 48.00 50.00 Experimental
19 47.00 46.00 Experimental
20 49.00 37.00 Experimental
21 50.00 48.00 Experimental
22 45.50 48.00 Experimental
23 45.00 43.50 Experimental
24 50.00 43.00 Experimental
25 33.00 41.00 Experimental
26 29.00 48.00 Experimental
27 34.00 38.00 Experimental
28 37.00 43.00 Experimental
29 17.00 50.00 Experimental
30 37.00 49.00 Experimental
222
Appendix Q: Result of achievement test for control group
No. Pre-test Post-test Group
1 50.00 42.00 Control
2 50.00 48.00 Control
3 35.00 28.00 Control
4 44.00 50.00 Control
5 31.00 9.00 Control
6 18.00 33.00 Control
7 26.00 50.00 Control
8 17.00 49.00 Control
9 43.00 37.00 Control
10 49.00 41.00 Control
11 44.00 38.00 Control
12 42.00 32.00 Control
13 50.00 47.00 Control
14 44.00 44.00 Control
15 49.00 38.00 Control
16 50.00 50.00 Control
17 48.00 49.00 Control
18 48.00 48.00 Control
19 42.00 47.00 Control
20 37.00 49.00 Control
21 38.00 50.00 Control
22 50.00 45.50 Control
23 43.00 45.00 Control
24 46.00 50.00 Control
25 15.00 33.00 Control
26 40.00 29.00 Control
27 31.00 34.00 Control
28 30.00 37.00 Control
29 39.00 17.00 Control
30 32.00 37.00 Control
223
Appendix R: Students’ survey (Arabic version)
الدكتور ميتشل أوتل مشرف أبحاث
والآداب التربية كلية نيوكاسل جامعة 8032ويلز ساوث نيو بولاية كالاهان مبنى+91 – 846819942: هاتف +91 – 846819622: هاتف
[email protected] إلكتروني بريد:
للطلاب استقصائية دراسة
عن دراسية حالة: أجنبية كلغة الإنجليزية اللغة لتدريس منهج التواصلية اللغة تطبيق السعودية العربية بالمملكة الخاص التعليم
كاسيل نيو جامعة
التربية كلية
القرني صالح/ السيد
باحث طالب التربية في دكتوراه طالب
التربية كلية كاسيل نيو جامعة
+91 – 48٥92228: اتفه [email protected] إلكتروني بريد:
224
عزيز الطالب
باللغة الخاصة الدراسية البرامج وتدريس تصميم بشأن والطلاب المعلمين موقف استقصاء هو الدراسة هذه من الغرض واحدة في)+( علامة بوضع التالية الأسئلة على أجبت لو لك ممتنا أكون وسوف. السعودية يةالعرب المملكة في الإنجليزية
يتم وسوف. الأسئلة هذه بشان موقفك تعكس بحيث ”بشدة أوافق لا أوافق، لا متأكد، غير أوافق، بشدة، أوافق“ خانات من.تامة بسرية إجاباتك مع التعامل
المعلومات العامة3 2 1صف( . المرحلة )ال1
تدريس اللغة الإنجليزية طرق . 1
ب. أهمية استخدام الطريقة التواصلية في التعلم
لاأوافق بشدة
لا أوافق
غيردمتأك
أوافق أوافق بشدة
رقم السؤال
التواصلية الطريقة باستخدام الإنجليزية اللغة تعلم أن أعتقد .للغاية مهم التعليم في
2
مفيد التعليم في التواصلية الطريقة استخدام أن أعتقد.الإنجليزية باللغة التحدث تعلم في للغاية
8
لاأوافق بشدة
لا أوافق
غير متأكد
أوافق أوافق بشدة
رقم السؤال
القيام عن بدلا يشاركني طالب مع بالنشاط القيام افضل.وحدي بالنشاط
1
عن بدلا بنفسي أتعلم أن هي الشفوي للتواصل طريقة أفضل .المعلم من التلقي
8
من الإجابة تلقي من أفضل الأصدقاء مع الأسئلة مناقشة .المعلم 0
التحدث في نشاطا أكثر الطالب يكون لكي المثلى الطريقة إن والتفكير الإنجليزية باللغة الخبر قراءة هي الإنجليزية باللغة
.الإنجليزية لغةبال
4
.المعلم من المعرفة تلقي من أفضل الأسئلة توجيه
٥
الذي معلمنا يستخدمها التي الطريقة عن شيئا أعرف لا .عنها يخبرنا ولم الإنجليزية اللغة يدرسنا
9
225
لاأوافق بشدة
لا أوافق
غير متأكد
وافقأ أوافق بشدة
السؤال
رقم
للغاية مفيد التعليم في التواصلية الطريقة استخدام أن أعتقد.الإنجليزية باللغة القراءة تعلم في
6
للغاية مفيد التعليم في التواصلية الطريقة استخدام أن أعتقد .الإنجليزية باللغة الكتابة تعلم في
13
للغاية مفيد التعليم في التواصلية الطريقة استخدام أن أعتقد .الإنجليزية باللغة الاستماع تعلم في
11
استخدام إلى يحتاج الإنجليزية اللغة تعلم أن اعتقد.التعليم في التواصلية الطريقة
18
اللغة لتدريس التواصلية الطريقة عن قط اسمع لم.الإنجليزية
10
لا ولكنني التعليم في التواصلية لطريقةا عن سمعت.الإنجليزية اللغة لتدريس استخدامها يتم كيف أدري
14
لا ولكنني التعليم في التواصلية الطريقة عن سمعت.الإنجليزية اللغة لتدريس استخدامها يتم كيف أدري
1٥
الطريقة يدرسنا الذي المعلم يستخدم متى أدري لا.التدريس في يةالتواصل
19
لتدريس التواصلية الطريقة يستخدم لا يدرسنا الذي المعلم
.الإنجليزية باللغة التحدث مهارات 12
التواصلية الطريقة يستخدم لا يدرسنا الذي المعلم.الإنجليزية للغة في الاستماع مهارات لتدريس
٠8
التواصلية قةالطري يستخدم لا يدرسنا الذي المعلم.الإنجليزية باللغة القراءة مهارات لتدريس
16
لتدريس التواصلية الطريقة يستخدم لا يدرسنا الذي المعلم.الإنجليزية باللغة الكتابة مهارات
83
226
ج. وجهات النظر العامة
لاأوافق بشدة
لا أوافق
غير متأكد
أوافق أوافق بشدة
لسؤالا
رقم
.الإنجليزية اللغة لتعلم الحالية الطريقة غييرت أحبذ
81
اللغة بتعلم الخاصة الحالية والمواد المقرر تغيير أحبذ.الإنجليزية
88
مختبر في الإنجليزية اللغة دروس أتلقى أن أحبذ.الدراسة حجرة عن بدلا اللغات
80
خلال من زيةالإنجلي اللغة تعلم مهارات أتعلم أن أحبذ .الحقيقية والعينات والمواد الدراسية الحالات
84
227
Appendix S: Students’ survey (English version)
Student Survey (English Version)
The Application of Communicative Language Teaching Approach
within English as a Foreign Language Context
Saudi Arabia Private Education Case Study
University of Newcastle
School of Education
Dr. John Mitchell O’Toole Mr. Saleh Mohammed Alqarni
Principal supervisor PhD student
School of Education School of Education
Faculty of Education and Art Faculty of Education and Art
University of Newcastle University of Newcastle
Callaghan NWS 2308 Callaghan NWS 2308
AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61-249216647 Ph: +61-421568872
Fax: +61-249216987 Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected]
Dear Student
The aim of this study will investigate the attitudes of teachers and students about
different of teaching and designing English courses in Saudi Arabia. I would be
grateful if you answer the following questions by setting a mark (+) under Strongly
Agree, Agree, Uncertain, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree that best reflects your
attitudes. Your answers in will be processed under total privacy. General information
1. Stage (Class) 1 2 3
228
A- Approach for Teaching English
No Question Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
1 I prefer activity with a partner in English
language rather than alone.
2
The best way for oral communication is
studying by myself rather than learning
from the teacher.
3
Discussing language questions with your
friend is better than receiving the answer
from your teacher.
4
The active method to be more active in
speaking English is to read English
newsletter and to think in English.
5 Asking questions is better than gaining
the knowledge from your teacher.
6
I do not know about the approach used
by my teacher for teaching English
language and he did not tell us about it.
B- The Importance of Using Communicative Language Teaching (CLT).
No Question Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
7 I believe learning English using the CLT
is a very important.
8 It will be very helpful to use the CLT for
learning to speak English.
9 It will be very helpful to use the CLT for
learning to read English.
10 It will be very helpful to use the CLT for
learning to write English.
11 It will be very helpful to use the CLT for
learning to listen English.
12 I believe learning English need using the
CLT approach.
13 I have never heard about the CLT for
teaching English language.
229
No Question Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
15
I have heard about the CLT but do not
know how it works for teaching English
language.
16 I don’t know when my teacher uses the
CLT.
17 My teacher is not using the CLT to teach
us speaking English Language skills.
18 My teacher is not using the CLT to teach
us listening English Language skills.
19 My teacher is not using the CLT to teach
us reading English Language skills.
20 My teacher is not using the CLT to teach
us writing English Language skills.
C- General Opinions
No Question Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
21 I want to change the current way of
learning English.
22
I would like to change the current
materials an curriculum I am learning
English.
23 I would like to have my classes in the
language labs rather than in classrooms.
24
I would like to study English skills using
case studies and real objects and
samples.
230
Appendix T: Teachers’ surveys (English version)
Teacher Survey (English Version)
The Application of Communicative Language Teaching Approach
within English as a Foreign Language Context
Saudi Arabia Private Education Case Study
University of Newcastle
School of Education
Dr. John Mitchell O’Toole Mr. Saleh Mohammed Alqarni
Principal supervisor PhD student
School of Education School of Education
Faculty of Education and Art Faculty of Education and Art
University of Newcastle University of Newcastle
Callaghan NWS 2308 Callaghan NWS 2308
AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61-249216647 Ph: +61-421568872
Fax: +61-249216987 Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected]
Dear Teacher The aim of this study will investigate the attitudes of teachers and students about
different of teaching and designing English courses in Saudi Arabia. I would be
grateful if you answer the following questions by setting a mark (+) under Strongly
Agree, Agree, Uncertain, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree that best reflect your
attitudes. Your answers in will be processed under total privacy. General information 1. Teaching Experience (year) (1-5) (5-10)
Academic level BSc Ma PhD
231
A- Approach for Teaching English
No Question Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
1
Meaning-focused activities are more
effective to develop communicative
ability than form-focused activities.
2 Group work helps your students who are
not willing to speak in front of the class.
3
Grammar teaching may be included in a
lesson as a mean of communication, not
as the main goal of teaching.
4
Group work activities are essential for
students to develop co-operative
relationships.
5
Understanding language use is better
than studying language rules while
teaching English in the class.
B- The Importance of Using Communicative Language Teaching (CLT).
No Question Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
6 I believe teaching English using the CLT
is very important for my students.
7 It will be very helpful to use the CLT for
teaching speaking skills.
8 It will be very helpful to use the CLT for
teaching reading skills.
9 It will be very helpful to use the CLT for
teaching writing skills.
10 It will be very helpful to use the CLT for
teaching listing skills.
11 I believe teaching English is better using
the CLT approach.
12
I think the Saudi government will be
able to fund the requirements for the
implementation of the CLT approach.
13
I think the private schools will be able to
fund the requirements for the
implementation of the CLT approach.
232
No Question Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
14 I believe using the CLT will be very easy
within the Saudi social context.
15
I think the Saudi students will not face
difficulties using the CLT for English
learning.
C- General Opinions
No Question Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
16 I would like to have my classes in the
language labs rather than in classrooms.
17 I would to teach English skills using case
studies and real objects and samples.
18
I think the Saudi students will not face
difficulties in changing the current
textbooks for learning English language.
19
I think the Saudi students are willing to
accept any new methods that can help
them learning English easily.
20 I think the Saudi students will accept
working in groups and pairs.
21 I think the Saudi students will like
learning English with real examples.
22
I think the Saudi students will not
hesitate practicing English in front of
other students and teachers in the
classroom.
23
I would like to change the current
materials and curriculum I am using to
teach English.
24 I would like to change the current way
I am teaching English.
233
Appendix U: Teachers’ interview
Teacher Interview (English Version)
The Application of Communicative Language Teaching Approach
within English as a Foreign Language context
Saudi Arabia Private Education Case Study
University of Newcastle
School of Education
Dr. John Mitchell O’Toole Mr. Saleh Mohammed Alqarni
Principal supervisor PhD student
School of Education School of Education
Faculty of Education and Art Faculty of Education and Art
University of Newcastle University of Newcastle
Callaghan NWS 2308 Callaghan NWS 2308
AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61-249216647 Ph: +61-421568872
Fax: +61-249216987 Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected]
234
Answer the following questions, please.
1. Knowledge of approaches:
1. What are the approaches used in Saudi Arabia for teaching English?
2. What do you know about the approaches for teaching English language?
3. Which approach you generally use in teaching English?
2. Your opinion regarding these approaches:
4. How do you feel about effectiveness of the current methods for teaching English
language in Saudi Arabia?
5. What do you think about the tools you use for teaching English language?
6. What do you think about the method which you use in teaching English?
3. CLT:
7. Have you heard about CLT?
8. Have you used it?
9. In your opinion how do students like CLT activities?
10. Do feel that teachers in Saudi Arabia are encourage to use CLT?
11. Do you feel that students in Saudi Arabia would benefit from CLT?
12. How do you feel about using CLT in teaching English?
4. Difficulties of CLT:
13. What are the difficulties you have faced personally when attempting CLT in
your classroom?
14. Do you think those difficulties can be overcome? If yes, how and to what
extent?
15. Do you think that CLT is effective in spite of some of these difficulties?
16. What could be the difficulties in using CLT?
5. General questions:
17. Tell me about where you teach English Language?
18. Are you concerned about the methods you use in teaching English if not CLT?
19. Do you have suggestion for improving EFL teaching at intermediate level in
Saudi Arabia? If so, what are they?
235
Appendix V: Approval letter of the Human Research Ethics Committee
HUMAN RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE
Notification of Expedited Approval
Thank you for your Response to Conditional Approval submission to the Human Research
Ethics Committee (HREC) seeking approval in relation to the above protocol.
Your submission was considered under Expedited review by the Chair/Deputy Chair.
I am pleased to advise that the decision on your submission is Approved effective 24-Jun-
2014.
In approving this protocol, the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) is of the opinion
that the project complies with the provisions contained in the National Statement on Ethical
Conduct in Human Research, 2007, and the requirements within this University relating to
human research.
Approval will remain valid subject to the submission, and satisfactory assessment, of annual
progress reports. If the approval of an External HREC has been “noted” the approval period is
as determined by that HREC.
The full Committee will be asked to ratify this decision at its next scheduled meeting. A formal
Certificate of Approval will be available upon request. Your approval number is H-2014-0079.
If the research requires the use of an Information Statement, ensure this number is
inserted at the relevant point in the Complaints paragraph prior to distribution to
potential participants You may then proceed with the research
To Chief Investigator or
Project Supervisor: Doctor Mitchell O’Toole
Cc Co-investigators /
Research Students: Mr. Saleh Alqarni
Doctor Heather Sharp Re Protocol: The Application of Communicative Language Teaching
Approach within English as Foreign Language Context.
Saudi Arabia Private Education Case Study. Date: 24-Jun-2014 Reference No: H-2014-0079 Date of Initial Approval: 24-Jun-2014
236
Appendix W: Summary sheet for qualitative method
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing
the
responses
Kn
ow
led
ge
of
ap
pro
ach
es
Wh
at
are
th
e ap
pro
ach
es/m
eth
od
s u
sed
in
Sau
di
Ara
bia
for
teach
ing E
ngli
sh?
T1 Communicative language approach,
constructive language
EF
L t
each
ing a
pp
roach
es u
sed
in
Sau
di
Ara
bia
T2
Some teachers use the traditional
ways for teaching, others use the
active and cooperative learning
T3 The communicative approach.
T4
I think there is diversity in the use of
English language approaches in
Saudi Arabia (traditional and new
methods).
T5 The communicative Language
The cooperative Language
T6
There are many, such as cooperative
learning, grammar translation, silent
way, communicative approach
T7
The constructive approach is the
most used approach; another is the
CLT.
T8 The communicative approach.
The direct method.
T9
There are several methods used in
teaching English language. The
approaches used in Saudi Arabia are:
grammar translation method, this
method is based on the assumption
that studying vocabulary, grammar
and sentence structure is crucial
when it comes to understanding a
foreign language. Communicative
approach is yet another method of
teaching and learning a foreign
language, this method entails placing
a lot of emphasis on the ability to
interpret essential instructions
written in foreign languages.
T10 Grammar translation method
Communicative approach method
T11 Present, practice and production
T12 Direct method
T13 Audio-lingual Method
T14 Engage, study and activate
T15 Peer Assisted Study approach
237
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
You
r op
inio
n r
egard
ing t
hes
e ap
pro
ach
es
How
do y
ou
fee
l ab
ou
t th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
of
the
curr
ent
meth
od
s fo
r te
ach
ing
En
gli
sh l
an
gu
age
in S
au
di
Ara
bia
?
T7
Teaching English language
according to method is certainly
effective. It’s a challenge for
teachers.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t ef
fect
ive
EF
L t
each
ing a
pp
roach
es u
sed
in
Sau
di
Ara
bia
T8
The communicative approach is the
most applicable one to be applied
in this environment.
T9
I think that the effectiveness of the
current methods for teaching
English language in Saudi Arabia
is helping the students to
understand a foreign language and
interpret essential instructions
written in foreign languages.
T10
Well, grammar translation method
is an old method but it’s
traditionally favored over the new
communicative method.
T11
It is effective to enable student to
acquire basic language skills
(listening, speaking, reading and
writing).
T12
I don’t think it is effective for
linguistic competence required in
modern communication
T13
In terms of different professions it
is not possible to achieve sufficient
skill in English language through
the current method.
T14
I think CLT method is okay.
Language proficiency depends on
your opportunity of using.
T15 I am fine with the method.
You
r op
inio
n r
egard
ing t
hes
e
ap
pro
ach
es
Wh
at
do y
ou
th
ink
ab
ou
t th
e to
ols
you
use
for
teach
ing E
ngli
sh
lan
gu
age?
T1
The tools provided are quite good
but they don’t fit well with the
social, cultural and intellectual
outlook of Saudi Arabia.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t E
FL
teach
ing r
esou
rces
T2
I think we should use CDs and
video listening to help students to
develop good contact with the
language
T3
Modern and effective tools are
used in teaching English language
especially in private schools.
T4
When teaching a foreign language,
I’m obliged to use as many tools as
possible in order to make it easier
for students.
238
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
You
r op
inio
n r
egard
ing t
hes
e ap
pro
ach
es
Wh
at
do y
ou
th
ink
ab
ou
t th
e to
ols
you
use
for
teach
ing E
ngli
sh
lan
gu
age?
T5
There are many good tools that are
used for teaching English.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t E
FL
tea
chin
g r
esou
rces
T6
Carefully selected and well-served
by the government and the
publishers, but lack of time
represents a hard obstacle.
T7
Tools are necessary in the learning
action. They increase the
involvement of both students and
teachers in the process.
T8
Many tools are usable such as the
board, flash memory and real
objectives.
T9
Teachers are always looking for
effective tools in the classroom.
Computer technology and web
services are being widely used in
classrooms as a means of
supporting instruction.
T10
We’re using various tools to help
qualify our learners to reach to the
required level of knowledge.
T11 Instruction and Communication
Technology
T12 Textbook, story books
T13 Web resources
T14 Activities and Games
T15 Small group activities.
You
r op
inio
n r
egard
ing t
hes
e ap
pro
ach
es
Wh
at
do y
ou
th
ink
ab
ou
t th
e m
eth
od
th
at
you
use
in
tea
chin
g E
ngli
sh?
T1
I diversify my method of teaching
according to the lesson itself. So,
diversification of methods is
effective within its limits.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t E
FL
tea
chin
g
reso
urc
es
T2
I am using cooperative learning
and brain storming and I think it is
effective with students
T3
As a teacher I’m using the facilities
inside the classroom such as
monitor, projector. Learners have
to participate in classroom
activities and be cooperative.
T4
Peer learning is the best for me,
because it enables me and the
students to work as a group and
share the whole lesson together.
T5
I’m using the communicative
approach for teaching English, and
I think it is effective with the
students.
239
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
You
r op
inio
n r
egard
ing t
hes
e ap
pro
ach
es
Wh
at
do y
ou
th
ink
ab
ou
t th
e m
eth
od
th
at
you
use
in
tea
chin
g E
ngli
sh?
T6
CLT really focuses much more on
learning through interaction and a
lot of communication. So, I like it,
especially with active learning,
cooperation, debates, discussion
and arguments.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t E
FL
tea
chin
g r
esou
rces
T7
In general, I feel better when using
the communicative approach,
because it is relaxing for the
teachers.
T8
No doubt, that will increase the
grasping power of our students in
order to reach their mastery in
English.
T9
There are different types of
methods that used in teaching
English. I select the method that I
use in teaching English according
to the level of my students.
T10
It meets our students’ expectations
as well as what we aspire to give to
them.
T11 It is frustrating.
T12
English language teachers in Saudi
Arabia have no advantage over
their students.
T13
Teachers are advised to employ
successful techniques derived from
CLT and I am following this.
T14
Grammar teaching mainly leads to
language acquisition. The most
important domain of language
proficiency is to be grammatically
competent.
T15
Group work, fluency / accuracy,
correction of error by the students
each other and teacher’s role.
CL
T
Have
you
hea
rd a
bou
t
CL
T?
T1 Yes.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t
usi
ng C
LT
T2 Yes.
T3 Yes.
T4 Of course.
T5 Yes.
T6 Yes, I have.
T7 Yes, I have.
240
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
CL
T
Have
you
hea
rd a
bou
t C
LT
? T8
Yes, sure.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t u
sin
g
CL
T
T9 Yes, I have. (Communicative
Language Teaching)
T10 Yes, long time ago.
T11 Of course.
T12 Sure.
T13 Yes, I do.
T14 Yes.
T15 Yes.
CL
T
Have
you
use
d i
t?
T1 Yes.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t u
sin
g C
LT
T2 Sometimes.
T3 Yes, I have frequently used it.
T4 Sure, I have used it.
T5 Sure.
T6 Sure.
T7 Yes, I have.
T8 Most of the time.
T9 Yes, I have.
T10 Yes, of course.
T11 I don’t think so.
T12 Not really.
T13 Yes.
T14 Yes.
T15 Not exactly.
CL
T
In y
ou
r op
inio
n h
ow
do
stu
den
ts l
ike
CL
T
act
ivit
ies?
T1 I don’t know.
Tea
cher
s’ a
ware
nes
s of
stu
den
ts’
op
inio
ns
of
CL
T
T2 Most of the students do like it
especially the smart students.
T3
CLT benefits students because
there are some activities they like
such as group work, role play and
games
T4 It is accepted by students, but not
all of them.
241
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
CL
T
In y
ou
r op
inio
n h
ow
do s
tud
ents
lik
e C
LT
act
ivit
ies?
T5
Students are challenging
themselves to communicate in
English. They are happy with the
way they try to make sentences and
express their ideas.
Tea
cher
s’ a
wa
ren
ess
of
stu
den
ts’
op
inio
ns
of
CL
T
T6
A lot, since they include many
interaction activities such as role
play, interviews, games, pair work.
T7
In my class students are enjoying it
despite it being different to
traditional methods.
T8
By motivating and encouraging
them regarding the role and the
importance of this app. As well.
T9 N/A
T10 N/A
T11
If there is a climate of trust and
support in the classroom, then
students are more likely to
contribute.
T12 N/A
T13
A large number of students were
not comfortable with this approach.
Some of them liked it.
T14
I think they do like. In the CLT, the
students have to participate in the
classroom activities that are based
on a cooperative rather than
individuals. Students have to
become comfortable with listening
to peers in pair or in group work
task.
T15
Good students find the activities
motivating and exciting but low
level students find them hard to
handle
CL
T
Do y
ou
fee
l th
at
teach
ers
in
Sau
di
Ara
bia
are
en
cou
raged
to u
se C
LT
?
T1 Yes.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t
sup
port
giv
en t
o t
hem
to u
se
CL
T i
n S
au
di
Ara
bia
T2 Yes they are, because tools are
available.
T3 I feel the teachers in Saudi Arabia
encourage to CLT.
T4 Yes, they are encouraged because
of the abilities that are offered.
T5 Not really.
T6 Yes.
T7
Yes, they are encouraged because
of the facilities provided by
schools.
242
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
CL
T
Do y
ou
fee
l th
at
teach
ers
in S
au
di
Ara
bia
are
en
cou
rag
ed t
o u
se
CL
T?
T8 I think so.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t su
pp
ort
giv
en t
o t
hem
to u
se C
LT
in
Sau
di
Ara
bia
T9 No, they don’t.
T10 To some extent yes.
T11 Not really.
T12 I don’t think so
T13 Yes they do when teachers’
training happens.
T14 No.
T15 No, they don’t.
CL
T
Do y
ou
fee
l th
at
stu
den
ts i
n S
au
di
Ara
bia
wou
ld b
enef
it f
rom
CL
T?
T1 Benefits are limited to some good
students.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t b
enef
its
of
CL
T f
or
stu
den
ts i
n S
au
di
Ara
bia
T2 Yes they would.
T3 Yes, I think the CLT is one of the
best methods.
T4
Yes, they could benefit from it,
because it concentrates on
promoting the four English
language skills.
T5 Yes, to some extent.
T6 If they like it, and it depends on the
qualified teachers.
T7 Yes.
T8 Sure they will.
T9 Yes, they do.
T10 Absolutely yes.
T11 Not sure.
T12 I think so.
T13 Absolutely.
T14 Of course.
T15 I don’t know.
CL
T
How
do y
ou
feel
ab
ou
t
usi
ng C
LT
in
teach
ing
En
gli
sh?
T1
I think it seems sometimes hard for
students, they resemble beginners
though they are in intermediate
school.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs
ab
ou
t b
enef
its
of
CL
T f
or
stu
den
ts
in S
au
di
Ara
bia
T2
I think it’s more relaxing for the
teacher and beneficial for students.
243
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
CL
T
How
do y
ou
fee
l ab
ou
t u
sin
g C
LT
in
tea
chin
g E
ngli
sh?
T3
The exchange and confidant
delivery will grow with the
student’s ability.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t b
enef
its
of
CL
T f
or
stu
den
ts i
n S
au
di
Ara
bia
T4 I think it’s relaxing for both
students and teachers.
T5
It gives more possibility for the
teacher to know about weak and
smart students easily.
T6
Change the traditional into a
vividly developing and attractive
centre of learning.
T7 It is relaxing and beneficial for
both teachers and students
T8 This method will ensure the
mastery of English for our students.
T9
I think, it is very important to use
CLT because, students will be
more motivated by learning to
communicate and will learn to
communicate effectively.
T10
It’s quite fruitful particularly with
advanced students. Students,
however, need to be trained to deal
with its activities and requirements.
T11 N/A.
T12 N/A.
T13
CLT addresses an important area
which constantly challenges
teachers, the mixed-ability class.
T14 It is difficult to manage the
classroom.
T15 Not sure.
Dif
ficu
ltie
s of
CL
T
Wh
at
are
th
e d
iffi
cult
ies
you
have
face
d p
erso
nall
y w
hen
att
emp
tin
g
CL
T i
n y
ou
r cl
ass
room
?
T1 Keeping students engaged in group
work.
Tea
cher
s’ a
wa
ren
ess
of
the
dif
ficu
ltie
s of
ap
ply
ing C
LT
in
th
e
class
room
T2
I thinks difficulties are only seen
with weak students who always
feel shy.
T3
Sometimes the number of students
inside the classroom make it
difficult for me to control the
students.
T4 The short period lesson is major
difficulty.
T5 The lack of student participation
during the lesson.
244
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
Dif
ficu
ltie
s of
CL
T
Wh
at
are
th
e d
iffi
cult
ies
you
have
face
d p
erso
nall
y w
hen
att
emp
tin
g C
LT
in
you
r cl
ass
room
? T6
The poor response of weak
achievers and the shock on the side
of students when they are first
exposed to it.
Tea
cher
s’ a
wa
ren
ess
of
the
dif
ficu
ltie
s of
ap
ply
ing
CL
T i
n t
he
class
room
T7
The major problem is when
students don’t respond and feel
shy.
T8
The level of some students is not
good enough.
I noticed students most of time the
students feel shy to practice the
foreign language. Also, they were
extremely hesitant practicing just to
avoid making mistakes.
T9
Grammar rules are not presented;
students expected to interact
primarily with each other rather
than with the teacher and
correction of errors may be absent.
T10
There are several difficulties
including:
- Low level of some of the
students.
- Many good students feel
shy to practice the language
in front of the classroom.
- Sometimes priority is
given to the syllabus and no
enough space is given to the
practical activities.
- Many learners just want to
know about the language
rather than practice it.
T11 N/A.
T12 N/A.
T13
- How to motivate students.
- Sometimes the
participation is hard.
- Difficult to manage the
students.
T14 Lack of experience.
T15 N/A.
Dif
ficu
ltie
s of
CL
T
Do
yo
u t
hin
k
tho
se d
iffi
cult
ies
can
be
ov
erco
me?
If
yes
ho
w a
nd
to
wh
at
exte
nt?
T1 In Saudi Arabia No. in other
devolving countries Yes.
Tea
ch
ers’
bel
iefs
ab
ou
t so
lvin
g
dif
ficu
ltie
s o
f
ap
ply
ing
CL
T i
n t
he
cla
ssro
om
T2
Yes, they could be overcome, and
most students could do well. With
time students will get used to it.
T3 No, I don’t think so.
245
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
Dif
ficu
ltie
s of
CL
T
Do y
ou
th
ink
th
ose
dif
ficu
ltie
s ca
n b
e over
com
e? I
f yes
how
an
d t
o w
hat
exte
nt?
T4
Yes, there are several solutions,
for example, we have to reduce
the number of students in one
class.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t so
lvin
g d
iffi
cult
ies
of
ap
ply
ing C
LT
in
the
class
room
T5 Yes, they can be overcome
T6 Yes, through insistence and
motivation.
T7
With more care from the
teachers the problem could be
overcome; students should be
praised and encouraged.
T8 Of course, by practicing more
and more. T9 No.
T10
Yes if many authorities
collaborate together including
teachers, head teachers and
education department. T11 N/A. T12 N/A.
T13 Yes through change the aim of
English teaching. T14 I have no idea.
T15
I am hoping to change. I think it
needs change in the approach to
teaching culture.
Dif
ficu
ltie
s o
f C
LT
Do y
ou
th
ink
th
at
CL
T i
s ef
fecti
ve
in s
pit
e of
som
e of
thes
e d
iffi
cult
ies?
T1
It depends. It is effective when the
approach is used in the right
setting. T
each
ers’
bel
iefs
ab
ou
t so
lvin
g d
iffi
cult
ies
of
ap
ply
ing C
LT
in
th
e cl
ass
room
T2 CLT is effective if it is well used.
T3 Yes, CLT is an effective method.
T4 Yes, it is effective despite the
difficulties
T5 Yes, it’s effective.
T6 Yes, it is.
T7 Yes, it is effective and it will give
the best result.
T8 Yes.
T9 Yes.
T10 Yes, of course.
T11 N/A.
T12 N/A.
T13 Absolutely it is.
T14 N/A.
T15 N/A.
246
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
Dif
ficu
ltie
s of
CL
T
Wh
at
cou
ld b
e th
e d
iffi
cult
ies
in u
sin
g C
LT
?
T1
Those who are good at English
read positively, whereas those who
are not are always silent.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t so
lvin
g d
iffi
cult
ies
of
ap
ply
ing C
LT
in
th
e cl
ass
room
T2 Again, I think that weak and shy
students are the major difficulty.
T3 As I said before, the number of
students.
T4
Large number of students.
Short period.
The absence of student.
participation in the class.
T5 Sometimes the materials can make
it difficult to use CLT.
T6
Students’ feelings of being exposed
to it for the first time.
Weak achievers.
Frequent absence.
Lack of seriousness available tools.
T7
CLT needs students with a good
level of competence; students
should be active all through the
lesson.
T8 No Answer.
T9 No Answer.
T10 The things I stated above.
T11 N/A.
T12 N/A.
T13 Students motivation. Hard to
manage the classroom.
T14 N/A.
T15 N/A.
Gen
eral
qu
esti
on
s
Tel
l m
e ab
ou
t w
her
e yo
u t
each
En
gli
sh L
an
gu
age?
T1
Tunisian, Saudi Arabian private
school. 5 years’ experience, 6
months training in CLT.
Tea
cher
s’ s
ugges
tion
s fo
r
imp
rovin
g E
FL
tea
chin
g a
t
inte
rmed
iate
lev
el i
n S
au
di
Ara
bia
T2
Egyptian, Saudi Arabian
intermediate private school. 7
years’ experience, 4 months
training in CLT.
T3
Sudanese, Saudi Arabian
intermediate private school. 5
years’ experience, no CLT training.
T4
Algerian, Saudi Arabian private
school. 3 years’ experience, no
CLT training.
247
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
Gen
eral
qu
esti
on
s
Tel
l m
e ab
ou
t w
her
e yo
u t
each
En
gli
sh L
an
gu
age?
T5
Tunisian, Saudi Arabian
intermediate private school. 11
years’ experience and 6 months
training CLT.
Tea
cher
s’ s
ugges
tion
s fo
r im
pro
vin
g E
FL
tea
chin
g a
t in
term
edia
te l
evel
in
Sau
di
Ara
bia
T6
Moroccan, Assumou private
school. 5 years’ experience and no
CLT training.
T7
Egyptian, Saudi private school, in
Saudi Arabia. 3 years’ experience
and 3 months training CLT.
T8
Libyan, private school in Saudi
Arabia. 10 years’ experience and
no CLT training.
T9
Egyptian, private school in Riyadh.
2 years’ experience and no CLT
training.
T10
Sudanese, private school in Riyadh.
3 years’ experience and 2 months
CLT training.
T11
Turkish, private school in Saudi
Arabia. 10 years’ experience and 4
months training CLT.
T12
Yemeni, private school in Saudi
Arabia. 12 years’ experience and
no training in CLT.
T13
Pakistani, private school in Saudi
Arabia. 5 years’ experience and no
CLT training.
T14
Egyptian, private school in Saudi
Arabia. 9 years’ experience and no
CLT training.
T15
Jordanian, private school in Saudi
Arabia. 15 years’ experience and 5
months training.
Gen
eral
qu
esti
on
s
Are
you
con
cern
ed a
bou
t th
e
met
hod
s you
use
in
tea
chin
g
En
gli
sh i
f n
ot
CL
T?
T1 Not sure.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t th
e
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
CL
T i
n S
au
di
Ara
bia
T2 Yes, I’m concerned. I should teach
according to a teaching method.
T3 Yes, I’m concerned.
T4 Yes, sometimes I am.
T5 Yes.
T6 Yes. I’m concerned about all
methods.
T7 Of course, teachers should not
avoid different ways of teaching.
248
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
Gen
eral
qu
esti
on
s
Are
you
con
cern
ed a
bou
t th
e
met
hod
s you
use
in
tea
chin
g
En
gli
sh i
f n
ot
CL
T?
T8 Yes, by all means and tools.
Tea
cher
s’ b
elie
fs a
bou
t th
e
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
CL
T i
n S
au
di
Ara
bia
T9 Yes.
T10 Yes.
T11 Yes I am.
T12 I know very well about the method
I am using.
T13 Yes, I am.
T14 N/A.
T15 Yes, I am familiar with it.
Gen
eral
qu
esti
on
s
Do y
ou
have
sugges
tion
s fo
r im
pro
vin
g E
FL
tea
chin
g a
t in
term
edia
te l
evel
in
Sau
di
Ara
bia
? I
f so
, w
hat
are
th
ey?
T1
Yes, I think it is better to reduce
the number of lessons per week and
I suggest two consecutive sessions
instead of separated ones That
means one session = 40 min. Two
sessions = 80 min.
Tea
cher
s’ s
ug
ges
tio
ns
for
imp
rovin
g E
FL
tea
chin
g a
t in
term
edia
te l
evel
in
Sau
di
Ara
bia
T2
My suggestion is that the
government should make students
more aware of the importance of
English language
T3 I think with more stimulation the
educational process will be well
established.
T4
I think the most important solution
is to have a more severe
administration in schools in order
to cope the traditional methods.
T5
I think we have to give the teachers
some courses and workshops to
train them how to teach EFL using
the newest methods.
T6 Active and cooperative learning
Inquiry, Debates, Project and
Interviews.
T7
Yes, the best way to improve EFL
is to organize the learning process.
For example, to unify the teaching
methods starting from primary
school.
T8
The suggestion is by practicing the
four skills of the language or
keeping in touch with the native
speakers.
T9 No.
249
Question
Category Questions Teachers Responses
Themes for
analysing the
responses
Gen
eral
qu
esti
on
s
Do y
ou
have
sugges
tion
s fo
r im
pro
vin
g E
FL
teach
ing a
t in
term
edia
te l
evel
in
Sau
di
Ara
bia
? I
f so
, w
hat
are
th
ey?
T10
More attention is given to the
practice of the language. More time
should be allocated to classroom
activities that enable students to
use the language rather than know
about it. Traditional methods such
as loud reading and grammar
focused lessons should be
minimized.
Tea
cher
s’ s
ug
ges
tio
ns
for
imp
rov
ing
EF
L
teach
ing
at
inte
rmed
iate
lev
el i
n S
au
di
Ara
bia
T11 Teachers’ need more training on
updated teaching methods
T12 Changing teaching attitude, change
in the goal of English teaching.
T13 Teachers’ need training and
awareness on CLT method.
T14 Text book revision.
T15 More strategies need to work on.