Students’ Perceptions of English as a Medium of Instruction in Saudi Universities with Respect to Their Intellectual and Linguistic Abilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
English is the primary medium of instruction (EMI) in Saudi universities, especially in science and technical disciplines, where English language proficiency is essential. However, students hold mixed perceptions regarding the use of EMI, with their intellectual and linguistic capabilities playing a significant role. This study surveyed 108 students from four Saudi universities to explore their views on EMI and its effect on their intellectual and linguistic abilities. Results showed that even though 68% of students prefer English as the medium of instruction, 32% face comprehension difficulties, and 58% need to devote additional time due to language barriers. Moreover, 74% reported noticeable improvements in their linguistic abilities. The study also demonstrates challenges such as the necessity for instructors to code-switch between Arabic and English. It suggests short-term strategies such as adopting translanguaging, as well as long-term solutions. A balanced instructional approach is recommended while remedial measures are implemented to enhance English language proficiency.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".