The Impact of EFL Teachers’ Pedagogical Beliefs and Practices: Communicative Language Teaching in A Saudi University Context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to explore the pedagogical beliefs of Saudi instructors of English as a foreign language (EFL), and the extent to which they apply the values of the communicative language teaching (CLT) approach in their classroom practice. The study was conducted with 42 Saudi EFL teachers and employed a mixed methods approach. A descriptive analysis of classroom observation data was conducted. The results showed that teachers hold positive views of CLT, but that there are some discrepancies between their beliefs and their implementations of the approach. For example, most of the instructors continued to apply traditional teaching methods (i.e., grammar translation and the audio-lingual approach). The study concludes that it is essential in the Saudi EFL context for teachers to cultivate relations between their beliefs and practices to assure better language learning outcomes. The key contribution of this study lies in disclosing the reasons for the discrepancies between Saudi EFL teachers’ beliefs and practices to help them develop congruence, and in highlighting the pedagogical implementations.  
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".