Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>This research tends to ascertain several traditional and socio-cultural barriers to English language learning in Saudi Arabia and to explore more ways than before for making teaching and learning more effective. The findings of four quantitative and qualitative surveys conducted in this regard reveal a unique traditional and socio-cultural milieu, which turns the Saudi EFL learners lackadaisical towards English. The belief that prosperity and prestige are blessed by divine force rather than proficiency in English has influenced Saudi parents and Saudi EFL learners since time in memorial. In addition, a laissez-faire attitude to English language teaching in Saudi schools, lack of motivation for English, inadequacy of competitive and learning environment both at home and schools, and the appointment of some unskilled school-teachers were investigated as some of the major barriers to learning English in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. A piecemeal reform taken over a period was found ineffective. Therefore, implementation of culturally relevant English curricula, learner-centered instruction, appointment of skilled English teachers and establishment of boarding schools were recommended to address the aforementioned challenges. The findings of the present research is no doubt specific to Saudi EFL context but the traditional and socio –cultural barriers and the exclusion of local culture in EFL textbooks may have exactly the same impact in many non-native English speaking countries.</p>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".