CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 18Artificial Intelligence in EducationEnglish Language Learning and TeachingEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning

Using artificial intelligence for English language learning: Saudi EFL learners' opinions, attitudes and challenges

Open access
Jamshed, Mohammad, Alam, Iftikhar, Sultan, Sultan Al, Banu, Sameena·2024·Journal of Education and e-Learning Research
DOI 10.20448/jeelr.v11i1.5397
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The study investigates EFL (English as a Foreign Language) learners' opinions, attitudes and the challenges of incorporating AI-powered teaching and learning. It also examines how their ideas and attitudes are affected by demographic variables. 258 students were selected using a random sampling method from a population comprising students studying in different levels of programs at the College of Science and College of Business Administration, Prince Sattam bin Abdul-Aziz University, KSA. A questionnaire was self-developed using some modified items from prior studies as the study looks at how certain independent variables (e.g., study level, residential background and parents' educational level) affect the dependent variable (e.g., learners' opinions, attitudes and challenges for AI-powered learning and teaching). The quantitative approach (descriptive quantitative design) revealed that Saudi EFL students held a high level of positive opinions and attitudes towards AI-powered learning. However, the analysis found that many students thought implementing AI-powered learning was challenging. A one-way ANOVA showed no significant difference based on respondents' residential background and parental education. However, respondents differed significantly based on their level or year of study. The study findings will assist administrators and course teachers in using AI-powered technologies to overcome challenges and prepare students for achievement in the English language.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.20448/jeelr.v11i1.5397

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The experimental group's substantially larger writing gains-from virtually identical pretest baselines-corroborate evidence that AI tools improve EFL writing most effectively when embedded within explicit pedagogical frameworks.

    “The experimental group’s substantially larger writing gains—from virtually identical pretest baselines—corroborate evidence that AI tools improve EFL writing most effectively when embedded within explicit pedagogical frameworks (Al-Mahmud, 2023; Abduljawad, 2024; Jamshed et al., 2024).”

    From From tool to scaffold: structured human–AI collaboration and its effects on academic writing and digital critical thinking among Saudi EFL learners (2026) · cites this paper as Jamshed et al., 2024

    The Literature Review (page unavailable) reports that AI can improve EFL instruction when appropriately adopted in educational settings. That lends limited support to the importance of implementation, but it does not establish that AI improves EFL writing most effectively within explicit pedagogical frameworks. The paper’s Results and Findings (page unavailable) concern learners’ attitudes and implementation challenges, not measured writing outcomes; the citing authors’ pretest and writing-gain comparison is their own finding, not one attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.80)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 20 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Hussein, G. (2010). The attitudes of undergraduate students towards motivation and technology in a foreign language classroom. International Journal of Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 14-24.
  2. Limna, P., Jakwatanatham, S., Siripipattanakul, S., Kaewpuang, P., & Sriboonruang, P. (2022). A review of artificial intelligence (AI) in education during the digital era. Advance Knowledge for Executives, 1(1), 1-9.
  3. Sumakul, D. T. Y., Hamied, F. A., & Sukyadi, D. (2022). Artificial intelligence in EFL classrooms: Friend or foe? LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 15(1), 232-256.
  4. Zou, B., Liviero, S., Hao, M., & Wei, C. (2020). Artificial itelligence technology for EAP speaking skills: Student perceptions of opportunities and challenges. In Technology and the Psychology of Second Language Learners and Users In (pp. 433-463). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Asian Online Journal Publishing Group is not responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability, etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. Any queries should be directed to the corresponding author of the article.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Jamshed, M., Alam, I., Sultan, S. A., & Banu, S.
Affiliations
  • Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University (SA)
  • Umm al-Qura University (SA)
  • Ministry of Education (SA)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Education and e-Learning Research
Publisher
Asian Educational Journal Publishing Group
Published
2024-02-16
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
135-141
ISSN
  • 2410-9991 (ISSN-L)
  • 2518-0169
DOI
10.20448/jeelr.v11i1.5397
OpenAlex
W4392013009
Cited by
18
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2
FWCI
6.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Education and e-Learning Research (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University ((PSAU/2023/R/1444))
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Keywords
artificial intelligence in education, English as a foreign language, student attitudes, learner opinions, Saudi EFL learners, demographic factors, study level, parental education, university students

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review