Derterinants of efl achievement among arab college bound learners

Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues
Determinants of EFL achievement among Arab college-bound learners
Ghazi Ghaith Hassan Diab
Article information:
To cite this document:
Ghazi Ghaith Hassan Diab, (2008),"Determinants of EFL achievement among Arab college-bound
learners", Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues, Vol. 1 Iss 4 pp. 278 -
286
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17537980810929993
Downloaded on: 17 March 2015, At: 20:22 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 18 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 470 times since 2008*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Tariq Elyas, Michelle Picard, (2010),"Saudi Arabian educational history: impacts on English language
teaching", Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues, Vol. 3 Iss 2 pp. 136-145
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17537981011047961
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 434496 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
DownloadedbyUniversitiTeknologiMARAAt20:2217March2015(PT)

Determinants of EFL
achievement among Arab
college-bound learners
Ghazi Ghaith and Hassan Diab
American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to determine the degree of interrelatedness and the role of a
number of context-specific factors in the English language proficiency development of Arab
college-bound learners. These factors include: language class risk-taking, sociability, discomfort,
motivation, and attitude toward class.
Design/methodology/approach – The study employed a one-group pretest-posttest experimental
design. In total, 67 (n ¼ 67) male English as a foreign language college-bound learners participated in
the study. All participants took general English language proficiency pretests and posttests in order to
determine the effect size of improvement in their language proficiency after an intensive treatment of
200 contact hours. The calculated effect sizes of improvement were correlated with learners’ scores on
the factors under study as measured by a modified version of the Ely classroom climate measure. In
addition, Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were computed and a step-wise multiple
regression analysis was run in order to determine the degree of interrelatedness among the variables
under study and to determine their extent of their role in the effect size of the proficiency gains of the
participants.
Findings – The findings indicated that language class sociability is positively related to students’
motivation to learn and to a positive class attitude. Conversely, language class risk-taking was found
to be negatively related to class discomfort which in turn was negatively related to student motivation
to learn. The findings also indicated that none of the affective variables under study predicted the
effect size of the proficiency gains realized by learners.
Research limitations/implications – The findings of this study suggest that language acquisition
is a complex process determined by interaction among a number of learner-related and contextual
factors. Furthermore, the findings suggest that motivation for learning is related to learners’ affective
feelings and may impact their class participation. A limitation of the study is that it employed a
one-group experimental design and, as such, there was no control or comparison group.
Practical implications – Using humanistic/affective methods of teaching could decrease students’
feelings of class discomfort and increase their motivation and class sociability.
Originality/value – The study provides insights into the language acquisition process of Arab
college-bound learners based on empirical evidence.
Keywords English language, Students, Saudi Arabia
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Considerable numbers of high school graduates in Saudi Arabia and the Arabian Gulf
region remain largely unprepared to join English-medium universities and perform at
the levels they must in order to succeed in all-English curricula at the college level.
This lack of preparedness limits the access of these graduates to quality higher
learning and may hinder their academic achievement. Consequently, there are several
“foundation year” and intensive English programs that are associated with many
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1753-7983.htm
EBS
1,4
278
Education, Business and Society:
Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues
Vol. 1 No. 4, 2008
pp. 278-286
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1753-7983
DOI 10.1108/17537980810929993

universities in the Arabian Gulf region. These programs aim to bridge the gap between
high school and college education as well as equip the limited-English proficient
learners with the requisite proficiency levels and academic literacy skills that they need
in order to pursue their college education in their intended fields of specialization.
It is important to determine the factors and conditions that impact the efficacy of
instruction within the foundation year and the intensive English programs in order to
design and deliver effective instruction. Previous research on the efficacy of teaching
and learning a second/foreign language has suggested a number of context-specific
variables as possible determinants of proficiency. For instance, Ely (1986) proposed a
theoretical-causal model of second language (L2) learning which maintained that the
variables of class participation, concern for grade, strength of motivation for learning,
and aptitude are possible major determinants of L2 proficiency. Furthermore, this
researcher maintained that the variables of language class risk-taking, language class
discomfort, language class sociability, and attitude toward the language class are the
determinants of class participation, which in turn influences proficiency. Along similar
lines, Naiman et al. (1978) have explored the role of a number of affective variables such
as the degree of certainty required while raising one’s hand, embarrassment when
speaking the L2, and other affective reactions as possible determinants of language
proficiency gains. On the other hand, Heyde Parsons (1983) and Gardner et al. (1976)
developed the task self-esteem scale and the French class anxiety scale as operational
measures of the affective measures that may impact second/foreign language
acquisition.
The present study set to explore the degree of interrelatedness and the role of the
preceding context-specific affective variables in the proficiency development of
English as a foreign language (EFL). A basic assumption behind the study is that there
is at present a need to investigate the role of affective factors in L2 proficiency using
variable conceptualizations and operational measures of these variables that are
specific to the context of second/foreign language instruction. Although considerable
attention has already been given to the role of affective personality constructs related
to extraversion-introversion in L2 proficiency, global personality instruments such as
Eysenck and Eysenck (1968) inventory, rather than second/foreign language measures
were used. Furthermore, previous research into the role of extraversion-introversion
personality construct and language proficiency has yielded mixed and less than
conclusive results. For instance:
[. . .] while some studies have indeed found extraversion and language proficiency to be
positively related (Chastain, 1975; Rossier, 1975), others have found either a negative
association (Busch, 1982) or a no relationship at all (Naiman et al., 1978) (cited in Ely, 1986,
p. 2).
Consequently, there is a need for further research that employs the second/foreign
language specific conceptualizations and measures of the components of
extraversion-introversion. These components and variables were determined and
defined by Ely (1986) as:
.
language class risk-taking defined as the learner’s tendency to assume risk in
using the L2;
.
language class sociability defined as a desire to interact with others in class by
means of the L2; and
Determinants
of EFL
achievement
279

.
language class discomfort concerned with the degree of anxiety,
self-consciousness, or embarrassment felt when speaking the L2.
Ely (1986) also included the variables of strength of motivation for learning defined the
individual’s desire to learn and aptitude as determinants of proficiency.
Specifically, the present study addressed the following questions:
.
To what extent the situation-specific constructs of language class risk-taking,
language class sociability, language class discomfort, and strength of motivation
for learning are internally related?
.
What is the role of the situation-specific constructs of language class risk-taking,
language class sociability, language class discomfort, and strength of motivation
for learning in learners’ achievement?
Methodology
Participants and study context
The participants in this study were 67 university-bound learners of EFL who intend to
major in computer engineering, business administration, and other related fields.
The participants were all males who have completed their high school education but
remained largely unprepared to pursue their college education in English. The average
age of the participants was 22 years.
The study was conducted at a newly established English-medium university
located in Tabuk, Saudi Arabia. The native language of the participants, Arabic, is
dominant in daily communication and in all aspects of life. As such, English is not a
lingua franca in the context of the present study and the native speakers of English are
remote from the learners. Consequently, the social significance of English is not very
much appreciated in the context of the present study, despite awareness among the
participants of the vitality of English as an international language in the domains of
technology, commerce, and education.
The study context is characterized by very limited opportunities for authentic
communication in the target language of English. Furthermore, the classroom setting
where the study was conducted could be described as an “educational” rather than a
“natural” setting for learning English. Participants do not have social contact with the
native speakers of English. Moreover, the majority of the teachers tend to aim at
fostering the “competent bilingual” model of the learner rather than the “native-like”
model because the culture and pragmatics of English are not emphasized. Likewise, the
teaching methods that are normally used in teaching English are in line with the tenets
of the transmission model of teaching. Learners are considered and treated as passive
recipients of linguistic knowledge, vocabulary, and the rules of the target language.
Treatment
The treatment lasted for eight weeks and aimed to increase the general English
language proficiency of the current students at the university. Specifically, the
treatment consisted of a grand total of 600 contact hours of instruction at the rate of
75 h per week distributed across three sections. Each section was instructed for a total
of 200 contact hours.
The treatment followed an integrated instructional approach to language teaching
that provided students with opportunities to develop their reading, writing, speaking,
EBS
1,4
280

and listening skills as they acquire new vocabulary and linguistic knowledge. This
was made possible through the adoption of the New Interchange series of textbooks
and the preparation of weekly course plans in order to provide a scope and sequence
for instruction. Each weekly course plan specified the student book topics and the
workbook exercises that need to be completed during each class period. This was
coupled with a series of weekly achievement tests designed and scored in order to
assess the degree of attaining the targeted objectives, competencies, and skills of each
week. Finally, upon completion of eight weeks of instruction (200 h for each section) the
final proficiency post-test was administered at the end of the program.
Instruments
In order to measure the variables under study (language class risk-taking, language
class sociability, language class discomfort, motivation, and attitude), a modified
version of the Ely (1986) measure was translated into Arabic and administered to all
participants (Appendix). The scores on the negatively worded items were reversed in
order to consider that high scores meant agreement with the statement. Table I
presents the variables, the number of items, and the Cronbach a reliability (internal
consistency) values based on data from the present study.
In addition, a 60-item multiple-choice proficiency pre-test specifically designed for
the purpose of the study was administered prior to instruction. Eighteen items measure
linguistic knowledge, seven items measure language pragmatics, 25 items reading
comprehension, and ten items global ability. In addition, the test included a writing
component that was scored holistically. Scores on the proficiency pre-test were used to
provide baseline data in order determine the effect size of improvement for each
student by comparing the pretests and posttests scores as well as assess overall
program effectiveness.
Data collection and analysis
Five composite scores were computed for each participant by adding the scores on the
sub-scales in the study instrument, respectively, measuring the variables of language
class risk-taking, language class sociability, language class discomfort, and strength of
motivation for learning. The scores on the negatively worded items were reversed in
order to ensure that high scores meant agreement with the truth of the statements
in the sub-scales. Descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) and simple
Pearson correlation coefficients were computed in order to determine the degree of
interrelatedness among the variables under study.
In addition, a step-wise multiple regression analysis was conducted in order to
determine the possible roles of the context-specific factors in explaining the proficiency
gains realized by the participants. The variables of language class risk-taking,
Scale No. of items Reliability n
Language class risk 6 0.51 67
Language class sociability 5 0.49 67
Language class discomfort 5 0.97 67
Motivation 7 0.78 67
Attitude to language class 4 0.61 67
Table I.
Scales included in the
classroom life instrument
Determinants
of EFL
achievement
281

language class sociability, language class discomfort, and strength of motivation for
learning were used as factors (predictor variables) the effect size of achievement was
used as dependent variable.
Results
Table II presents the correlation coefficients for the variables in the study.
The data shows positive statistically significant correlations between language
class sociability on the one hand and students’ motivation for learning (r ¼ 0.44,
p , 0.01) and students’ attitudes towards the language class on the other (r ¼ 0.33,
p , 0.01). Conversely, the data indicates a negative statistically significant correlation
between language class risk-taking and language class discomfort (r ¼ 20.30,
p , 0.05). Likewise, there were negative statistically significant correlations between
language class sociability and language discomfort (r ¼ 0.28, p , 0.05) and between
language class discomfort and students’ motivation for learning (r ¼ 0.26, p , 0.05).
It should also be noted that the data indicates that none of the context-specific
variables under study predicted the effect size of students’ achievement gains
(Table III).
Discussion
The results of the present study suggest the following aspects of interest. First, the
variable of language class sociability was found be positively related to motivation for
learning and to a positive attitude towards the language class. Specifically, students
who enjoyed their classes and socially interacted with their peers and teachers in the
medium of the target language of English were actually more motivated for learning
1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Language class risk –
2. Language class sociability 0.17 –
3. Language class discomfort 20.30* 20.28 * –
4. Motivation 20.14 0.44 * * 20.26 * –
5. Attitude to language class 20.02 0.33 * * 20.01 0.03 –
6. Effect size of achievement 20.00 20.08 0.09 0.10 0.00 –
n 67 67 67 67 67 67
Mean 16.26 20.62 14.60 30.00 15.25 0.67
SD 2.53 2.17 1.50 3.12 1.29 0.43
Notes: Significant at *p , 0.05; * *p , 0.01
Table II.
Pearson product-moment
correlation coefficients
Variable R 2
(0.29) Adjusted R 2
(20.02) B b t p
Language class risk taking 0.04 0.29 0.95 0.36
Language class sociability 20.09 20.39 21.18 0.26
Language class discomfort 0.08 0.37 1.34 0.20
Motivation 0.01 20.11 20.37 0.71
Attitude to language class 0.01 0.04 0.14 0.88
Table III.
Step-wise multiple
regression of influence
variable on proficiency
gains
EBS
1,4
282

and had more favorable attitudes towards their classes. Second, language class
discomfort was found to be negatively related to language class risk-taking and
language class sociability. That is, the more students felt uncomfortable when
speaking English in class, the less they took risk to speak up and express their
responses and views in class. This, in turn, made them less popular in class,
uninterested in class activities, unwilling to interact in class with their peers and
teachers, and less willing to participate in group activities. Third, the results indicate
that none of the affective variables under study predicted the effect size of the
proficiency gains realized by learners. This suggests that the process of language
acquisition is a complex and multifaceted process that involves a range of linguistic,
paralinguistic, learner-related, and context-related factors that may impact learners’
acquisition of a language other than their own.
The preceding findings indicate that the affective variables of class sociability,
motivation, and positive attitudes towards learning EFL are internally positively
interrelated; whereas feelings of class discomfort and class risk-taking are negatively
related to class sociability. These findings underscore the need for and the importance
of cultivating a supportive and stress reduced class climate in the context of the
present study. Of particular importance in this regard is the provision for every learner
considerable degrees of personal and academic support from peers and teachers alike.
This is because the more the learners feel that their classmates like them as individuals
and want to be their friends, and the more the teachers make the learners feel that they
like them as individuals, the better are the chances for fostering the feelings of class
sociability and decreasing feelings of alienation. Similarly, learners should also receive
considerable academic support from their peers and teachers alike through sharing
resources, setting and achieving common goals, providing information, and solving
problems.
The pedagogical implications of the preceding findings call for using instructional
methods and procedures that break the ice among learners, reduce their feelings of
anxiety and discomfort, and help them develop positive self-concepts as learners. In
this regard, sheltered instruction that relies on slow speech, clear enunciation and
pronunciation coupled with humanistic-affective methodologies, cooperative learning,
and developmentally appropriate practice based on interesting, motivating, and
reader-friendly material also seem to be needed in the context of the present study.
Specifically, competitive and individualistic forms of instruction should be replaced
with cooperative learning methods. Presently, there are many cooperative learning
methods that lend themselves quite well for teaching the various language skills and
for addressing the communicative and learning needs of the Arab college-bound
learners of EFL. The Theoretical relevance and efficacy of these methods have already
been established in various English as a second language (ESL)/EFL contexts. It has
also been empirically proven that these methods are effective in helping learners
achieve proficiency in a language other than their own (Kagan, 1995; Kessler, 1992;
McGroarty, 1989, 1993; Ghaith, 2003). Furthermore, proponents of cooperative learning
in language teaching and in other subjects have already operationalized it into
numerous forms of classroom applications and instructional procedures. These forms
and procedures include:
.
the structural approach (Kagan, 1989);
.
group investigation (Sharan and Sharan, 1992);
Determinants
of EFL
achievement
283

.
student team learning (Slavin, 1995); and
.
learning together (Johnson et al., 1993) (cited in Ghaith, 2003, p. 452).
The primary applications of these methods in English language have also been
explicated by Ghaith and Shaaban (2005). These researchers maintain that the learning
together, model is well-suited for teaching reading, writing, speaking, and culture,
group investigation for writing and culture, Jigsaw from the student team learning
model for reading and literature, TGT and STAD, also from the student team learning
model, for grammar, and cooperative structures for reading, writing, speaking,
vocabulary, literature, and culture.
It is also equally important to create print-rich environments in the educational
setting of the present study as well as in similar settings in order maximize learners’
opportunities to get meaningful exposure to the target language. As such, learners’
should be given extensive opportunities to hear as well as read developmentally and
culturally appropriate language. They need also to interact in the target language of
English in order to perform daily functions.
Finally, further research is needed in order determine the factors that impact the
proficiency gains of the foreign language learners who participated in this study and of
those studying in similar socio-linguistic and cultural contexts. Despite the significant
role of the affective variables in the process of second/foreign language acquisition,
these variables did not reach the level of statistical significance in explaining the
proficiency gains of the participants in the present study. This suggests that
the process of language acquisition is a multifaceted and complex process that may be
impacted by various contextual, learner-related, linguistic, and pedagogical factors.
References
Busch, D. (1982), “Introversion-extraversion and the EFL proficiency of Japanese students”,
Language Learning, Vol. 32, pp. 109-32.
Chastain, K. (1975), “Affective and ability factors in second-language acquisition”, Language
Learning, Vol. 25, pp. 153-61.
Ely, C.M. (1986), “An analysis of discomfort, risk-taking, sociability, and motivation in the L2
classroom”, Language Learning, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 1-25.
Eysenck, H.J. and Eysenck, S.B.G. (1968), Manual for the Eysenck Personality Inventory,
Educational and Industrial Testing Service, San Diego, CA.
Gardner, R.C., Smythe, P.C., Cle´ment, R. and Gliksman, L. (1976), “Second-language learning:
social psychological perspective”, The Canadian Modern Language Review, Vol. 32,
pp. 198-213.
Ghaith, G. (2003), “Effects of the learning together model of cooperative learning on English as a
foreign language reading achievement, academic self-esteem, and feelings of school
alienation”, Bilingual Research Journal, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 451-74.
Ghaith, G. and Shaaban, K. (2005), “The theoretical relevance and efficacy of using cooperative
learning in teaching English as a foreign language”, TESL Reporter, Vol. 38 No. 2,
pp. 14-28.
Heyde Parsons,A.(1983),“Self-esteemandtheacquisition ofFrench”,inBailey, K.M. andLong, M.H.
(Eds), Second Language Acquisition Studies, Newbury House, Rowley, MA, pp. 175-87.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T. and Holubec, E.J. (1993), Cooperation in the Classroom, Interaction
Book Company, Edina, MN.
EBS
1,4
284

Kagan, S. (1989), “The structural approach to cooperative learning”, Educational Leadership,
Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 12-15.
Kagan, S. (1995), “We can talk: cooperative learning in the elementary ESL classroom”,
ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 382035, Washington, DC.
Kessler, C. (1992), Cooperative Language Learning: A Teachers’ Resource Book, Prentice-Hall
Regents, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
McGroarty, M. (1989), “Cooperative learning arrangements in second language instruction”,
NABE Journal, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 127-43.
McGroarty, M. (1993), “Cooperative learning and second language acquisition”, in Holt, D.D.
(Ed.), Cooperative Learning, D.C. Center for Applied Linguistics ERIC Clearinghouse on
Languages and Linguistics, Washington, DC, pp. 19-46.
Naiman, N., Frohlick, M., Stern, H.H. and Todesco, A. (1978), The Good Language Learner,
Research in Education Series No. 7, The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education,
Toronto.
Rossier, R.E. (1975), “Extraversion-introversion as a signiﬁcant variable in the learning of
English as a second language”, PhD dissertation, University of Southern California,
Los Angeles, CA.
Sharan, Y. and Sharan, S. (1992), Expanding Cooperative Learning Through Group Investigation,
Teachers College Press, New York, NY.
Slavin, R. (1995), Cooperative Learning Theory, Research, and Practice, Allyn & Bacon, Needham
Heights, MS.
Appendix
Indicate your level of agreement with the following statements on the scale ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Language class risk taking
(1) I like to wait until I know exactly how to use an English word before using it. (__)
(2) I don’t like trying out a difﬁcult sentence in class. (__)
(3) At this point, I don’t like trying to express complicated ideas in English in class. (__)
(4) I prefer to say what I want in English without worrying about the small details of
grammar.
(5) In class, I prefer to say a sentence to myself before I speak it. (__)
(6) I prefer to follow basic sentence models rather than risk misusing the language. (__)
Language class sociability
(1) I’d like more activities class where the students use English to get to know each other
better.
(2) I think learning English in a group is more fun than if I h ad my own tutor.
(3) I enjoy talking with the teacher and other students in English.
(4) I don’t really enjoy interacting with the other students in the English class. (__)
(5) I think it’s important to have a strong group spirit in the language classroom.
Determinants
of EFL
achievement
285

Language class discomfort
(1) I don’t feel very relaxed when I speak English in class.
(2) Based on my class experience so far, I think that one barrier to my future use of English
is my discomfort when speaking.
(3) At times, I feel somewhat embarrassed in class when I’m trying to speak.
(4) I think I’m less self-conscious about actively participating in English class than most of
the other students. (__)
(5) I sometimes feel awkward speaking English.
Strength of motivation
(1) Outside of class, I almost never think about what I’m learning in class. (__)
(2) If possible, I would like to take a second year English course.
(3) Speaking realistically, I would say that I don’t try very had to learn English. (__)
(4) I want to be able to use English a wide variety of situations.
(5) I don’t really have a great desire to learn a lot of English. (__)
(6) Learning English well is not really a high priority for me at this point. (__)
(7) I don’t really feel that learning English is valuable to me. (__)
Attitude toward the language class
(1) I ﬁnd English class to be very boring. (__)
(2) I would say that I’m usually very interested in what we do in English class.
(3) I don’t really like the English class. (__)
(4) In general, I enjoy the English class.
Concern for grade
(1) It is very important to me to get a good grade in English this quarter.
About the authors
Ghazi Ghaith is Professor of English Language Education at the American University of Beirut.
He also directs the University Preparatory Program. His research focuses on the applications of
cooperative learning in language teaching and on reading and writing in foundation programs
and other contexts. Ghazi Ghaith is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
gghaith@aub.edu.lb
Hassan Diab is Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the American University
of Beirut and vice president for research and external programs. His research focuses on
performance evaluation and parallel processing systems and applications. He also researches the
applications of simulation in engineering education and educational development more generally.
EBS
1,4
286
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

This article has been cited by:
1. Mohammad Khatib, Saeid Najafi Sarem, Hadi Hamidi. 2013. Humanistic Education: Concerns,
Implications and Applications. Journal of Language Teaching and Research 4. . [CrossRef]
2. Ghazali Yusri, Nik Mohd Rahimi, Wan Haslina Wah. 2011. Value And Resource Management Strategies
Among Students Of Arabic As A Third Language Course. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 29,
1635-1644. [CrossRef]

Derterinants of efl achievement among arab college bound learners

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to Derterinants of efl achievement among arab college bound learners

Similar to Derterinants of efl achievement among arab college bound learners (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Derterinants of efl achievement among arab college bound learners