Inclination of Teachers to Implement Outcome-Based Education in English Courses in Saudi Universities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the inclination of English teachers in different Saudi universities to implement outcome-based education (OBE) in their English courses. OBE represents a nontraditional educational approach that depends on setting clear outcomes at both course and program levels. This approach emphasizes student competency through theoretical and practical demonstration of these outcomes with clear evidence of performance. OBE is a student-centric pedagogy that prioritizes students’ benefits. The present study employed a survey as a data collection method, and the data were subsequently analyzed using IBM SPSS. The survey included three main dimensions: learning, teaching, and measuring students’ performance (assessment), all of which are directly linked to the tenets of OBE. Participants in the survey were exclusively English language academic staff currently employed in different universities across Saudi Arabia. The study included participants from various Saudi institutions located in different regions to ensure broader representation and more comprehensive analysis. The findings of this investigation show that English teachers working in Saudi universities are inclined toward implementing OBE. Also, the findings demonstrate that biodemographic factors, such as gender and age, as well as other professional aspects such as job title, academic rank, or institutional affiliation, do not interfere with teachers’ inclination toward OBE implementation. In conclusion, the study demonstrates a positive attitude among English teachers toward OBE, emphasizing its viability and potential applicability in the Saudi higher education context.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".