CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 28EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Learning and TeachingMultilingual Education and Policy

Kumaravadivelu’s Framework as a Basis for Improving English Language Teaching in Saudi Arabia: Opportunities and Challenges

Open access
Masaoud Ahmad, Afnan·2014·English Language Teaching
DOI 10.5539/elt.v7n4p96
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This paper discusses the issues with EFL teaching in Saudi Arabia, including the reliance on traditional teaching methodologies and banning use of first languages in classrooms. As a result, these traditional teaching practices produce less proficient learners who have limited knowledge about proper linguistic use. In order to overcome these issues and have proficient learners who can effectively use the language, however, language teachers should understand an effective change is required. Kumaravadivelu’s framework (2006) is an opportunity for teachers to adopt new methods because it relies on global-level strategies, macrostrategies, that are general enough to allow teachers the opportunity to freely adjust their precise implementation in relation to individual teaching demands, along with more particular implementation tactics, microstrategies, that operationalize the macrostrategies in flexible and customizable ways according to perceived needs during the in-context process of teaching.

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 · 10.5539/elt.v7n4p96

Cites

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?

  • Ahmad (2014) and Al-Seghayer (2014) emphasize that Saudi teachers follow traditional methods of language teaching such as the audio-lingual and grammar-translation methods.

    “Ahmad (2014) and Al-Seghayer (2014) also emphasize that Saudi teachers follow traditional methods of language teaching such as the audio-lingual and grammar-translation methods.”

    From Factors Underlying Low Achievement of Saudi EFL Learners (2016) · cites this paper as Ahmad (2014)

  • A teacher-centered learning environment tends to prevent students from developing satisfactory language competence.

    “This teacher-centered (as opposed to student-centered) learning environment tends to prevent students from developing satisfactory language competence”

    From Factors Underlying Low Achievement of Saudi EFL Learners (2016) · cites this paper as Ahmad, 2014

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 51 · Cited by 28

Research works printed but not linked: 36

  1. Adair-Hauck, B., Donato, R., & Cumo-Johanssen, P. (2000). Using a story-based approach to teach grammar. In J. L. Shrum, & E. W. Glisan (Eds.), Teacher's handbook: Contextualizing language instruction (2nd ed., pp. 146-163). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
  2. Al-Ahaydib, M. E. A. (1986). Teaching English as a foreign language in the intermediate and secondary schools of Saudi Arabia: A diagnostic study (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/58165897?accountid=9744
  3. Al-Hazmi, S. (2003). EFL teacher preparation programs in Saudi Arabia: Trends and challenges. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 341-344. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.2307/3588509/asset/3588509.pdf?v=1&t=hkcoa52l&s=260c5e7f5ad 1c2359d071b7fb1968ef36315ac01 · DOI
  4. Al-Muaini, H. A. (2006). The effect of referential questions on learners' oral contributions. In S. Borg (Eds.), Classroom Research in English Language Teaching in Oman (pp. n.d.). Muscat: Ministry of Education, Sultanate of Oman.
  5. 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. Retrieved from http://www.novitasroyal.org/Vol_4_1/al-nofaie.pdf
  6. Al-Zahrani, R. (2011). Teaching of English in schools "successful outcome". Al-Riyadh Journal. Retrieved from http://www.alriyadh.com/iphone/article/676444
  7. Auerbach, E, R. (1993). Reexamining English only in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 27(1), 9-32. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/58241808?accountid=9744
  8. Bateman, B. E. (2002). Promoting openness toward culture learning: Ethnographic interviews for students of Spanish. The Modern Language Journal, 86(3), 318-331. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/85564973?accountid=9744
  9. Brock, C. A. (1986). The effects of referential questions on ESL classroom discourse. TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), 47-59. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/85473222?accountid=9744
  10. Crossley, S. A., Louwerse, M. M., McCarthy, P. M., & McNamara, D. S. (2007). A linguistic analysis of simplified and authentic texts. Modern Language Journal, 91(1), 15-30. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00507.x · DOI
  11. Doye, P. (1996). Foreign language teaching and education for intercultural and international understanding. Evaluation & Research in Education, 10(2), 104-112. Retrieved from http://journals1.scholarsportal.info/tmp/14962184124906306780.pdf
  12. Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  13. Fotos, S., & Ellis, R. (1991). Communicating about grammar: A task-based approach. TESOL quarterly, 25(4), 605-628. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/85497180?accountid=9744
  14. Fuente, M. J. D. L. (2002). Negotiation and oral acquisition of L2 vocabulary: The roles of input and output in the receptive and productive acquisition of words. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(1), 81-112. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/85552542?accountid=9744
  15. Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. Essex, UK: Pearson Longman.
  16. Herron, C., & Tomasello, M. (1992). Acquiring grammatical structures by guided induction. The French Review, 65(5), 708-718. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/58252036?accountid=9744
  17. Khan, I. A. (2011). Learning difficulties in English: Diagnosis and pedagogy in Saudi Arabia. International Research Journal, 2(7), 1248-1257. Retrieved from http://interesjournals.org/ER/pdf/2011/July/Khan.pdf
  18. Kumaravadivelu, B. (1992). Macrostrategies for the second/foreign language teacher. The Modern Language Journal, 76(1), 41-49. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/58244229?accountid=9744
  19. Kumaravadivelu, B. (1994). The postmethod condition: Emerging strategies for second/ foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 27-48. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/85577048?accountid=9744
  20. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Beyond methods: Macrostrategies for language teaching. Hartford, CT: Yale University Press.
  21. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2012). Language teacher education for a global society: A modular model for knowing, analyzing, recognizing, doing, and seeing. New York, NY: Routledge.
  22. 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. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/85681390?accountid=9744
  23. Liton, H. A. (2012). Developing EFL teaching and learning practices in Saudi colleges: A review. International Journal of Instruction, 5(2), 129-151. Retrieved from http://www.e-iji.net/dosyalar/iji_2012_2_8.pdf
  24. Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie, & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  25. Oxford, R. (2001). Integrated skills in the ESL/EFL classroom. ERIC digest ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/62284310?accountid=9744
  26. Qashoa, H. S. (2013). Effects of teacher question types and syntactic structure on EFL classroom interaction. The International Journal of Social Sciences, 7(1), 52-62. Retrieved from http://www.tijoss.com/7th%20volume/sulaiman.pdf
  27. Rezvani, E. (2011). The effect of output requirement on the acquisition of grammatical collocations by Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(3), 674-674. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/878347945?accountid=9744
  28. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
  29. Selinker, L., & Tomlin, R. (1986). An empirical look at the integration and separation of skills in ELT. ELT Journal, 40(3), 227-235.
  30. Stern, H. H. (1992). Issues and options in language teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  31. Su, Y. (2007). Students' changing views and the integrated-skills approach in Taiwan's EFL college classes. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(1), 27-40. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/62031956?
  32. Su, Y. (2008). Promoting cross-cultural awareness and understanding: Incorporating ethnographic interviews in college EFL classes in Taiwan. Educational Studies, 34(4), 377-398. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/61981698?accountid=9744
  33. Thornbury, S. (2012). How to teach grammar. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.
  34. Vanichakorn, N. (2009). Re-examine the use of the student's first language in the English as a foreign language classrooms: A cross-case analysis from undergraduate engineering students in Bangkok, Thailand. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 6(5), 1-16. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/757173364?accountid=9744
  35. Vogel, S., Herron, C., Cole, S. P., & York, H. (2011). Effectiveness of a guided inductive versus a deductive approach on the learning of grammar in the intermediate-level college French classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 44(2), 353-380. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1010699652?accountid=9744
  36. Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Authors
Masaoud Ahmad, A.
Venue
English Language Teaching
Publisher
Canadian Center of Science and Education
Published
2014-03-06
Volume
7
Issue
4
ISSN
  • 1916-4742 (ISSN-L)
  • 1916-4750
DOI
10.5539/elt.v7n4p96
OpenAlex
W1982434812
Cited by
28
References
51
Citations by year
2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1
FWCI
21.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
English Language Teaching (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Second Language Learning and Teaching
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Multilingual Education and Policy
Keywords
macrostrategies, MicroStrategy, EFL teaching, traditional teaching methods, first language use in the classroom, language proficiency, teacher practice change

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