EL MOMENTO DE INTERVENCIÓN POLÍTICA DE LA SOCIEDAD

First, NNES lecturers understand their role as being that of knowledge transmitters and they emphasise the importance of the textbook in their teaching. They see their roles as transmitting the knowledge from the textbook to the students. Lecturers who view their role in such a way often focus on the knowledge and information as detailed in the curriculum or textbook. This is exemplified in the following quote:

I believe that my primary job is to teach students a certain syllabus. I have a set of topics in the textbook that I need to cover. I choose the topics that I think are most relevant to the students…in doing so, students are able to understand what they need to learn and can use the textbook as guide when they study.

NNES Lecturer B, Interview, Sunday D]th October BCDH

The above-described teaching strategy is mostly teacher-led. LB discusses the way in which he views his role as a lecturer as well as that of the students. The lecturer considers his role as being that of a knowledge transmitter in which his “job” is to teach the students a “certain syllabus”. Here, the lecturer and the textbook are the source of knowledge and the students are at the receiving end of such knowledge. As such, the emphasis is on the lecturer and the syllabus and not on the students. This strategy implies that LB creates a controlled learning environment where students learning is confined to the textbook. In this case, the focus of teaching is around the lecturer’s own expertise which is supported by the textbook, while students are expected to absorb the knowledge transmitted by him.

Moreover, when asked about the role that students have in the decision-making in relation to the topics they are being taught, LB (see below) states that the lecturer alone has the power to change anything in the syllabus. This demonstrates how the lecturer carefully follows the textbook with little consideration of the students’ prior knowledge or individual needs.

The lecturers are those who have the power to make such decisions, you know, change something in the syllabus or textbook.

NNES Lecturer B, Interview, Sunday D]th October BCDH

LP similarly describes his views about teaching as:

My philosophy is that I believe that we are assigned a textbook which we need to follow when teaching in the programme…Actually, for me, the textbook is the main source for the course and I think all lecturers should follow it… If they [students] are able to acquire the knowledge in the textbook, they are most likely to pass the test.

NNES lecturer P, Interview, Sunday BEth October BCDH

The above quote suggests that this lecturer largely depends on the textbook in his lesson preparation and classroom activities. In order to pass the course, students are expected to master the knowledge as presented in the textbook and transmitted by the lecturer. Students are therefore not given the chance to negotiate their learning and are instructed to follow and abide to the exact textbook. Because learning is confined to the textbook, students’ voices are limited in the teaching and learning process.

Second, data collected from classroom observations suggest that NNES lecturers take on an authoritative role in which students are somewhat submissive. Williams (BCCP) describes this issue as not being limited to teaching and learning in Saudi universities, but rather as a reflection of the overall culture. Unlike western societies in which critical thinking is encouraged, the Saudi culture is “predominantly one of uncritical submission to authority” (Allamnakhrah, BCDJ, p. BCP). These attitudes can be traced to early childhood where children are trained to defer to authority and are discouraged from challenging their parents or educators. Allamnakhrah (BCDJ, p. BCE) argues that:

In Saudi Arabia, aversion to critical thinking extends beyond educational practice and is inextricably bound up with Saudi culture…[which] actively encourages submission to authority in all spheres: social, educational, political and domestic. This is then reflected and perpetuated in the education system.

Such a cultural issue was further noticeable in the formal way these lecturers interacted with the students, who were often reluctant to engage in a two-way dialogue with the NNES lecturers or challenge the knowledge they transmitted. If the students tried to challenge the lecturer’s position this might be regarded as a disruption to the teaching-learning process. It is worth noting that Saudi lecturers were the most reluctant to allow me access to their classroom setting. This might be due to concerns that my presence would harm their image in front of their students. This fear of being judged by students or colleagues is common among NNES language educators in general, and often leads to feelings of inadequacy and self-doubt (Tum, BCDJ).

Third, a recurrent issue in NNES lecturers’ interviews is their negative attitudes toward many of the students in the EFL programme. This is mainly because of the students’ lack of knowledge and skills in relation to the English language (see section, P.H.J). As discussed before, many of the students accepted in the EFL programme are disadvantaged students (i.e. students belonging to lower-middle class families, who lack cultural capital) (see section E.J). These students join the programme with the assumption that they will learn English ‘from scratch’ and eventually struggle with the academic and linguistic demands of the programme. NNES lecturers therefore argue that their teaching strategies take into consideration the students’ weak English language levels and help to equalise the impact of their backgrounds, as well as assisting disadvantaged students to catch up with their peers (Schweisfurth, BCDD). In the following quote, LH describes the English language background of many of his students and the demands this puts on his teaching:

Many [students] come without any knowledge of English. They don’t have English, absolutely. You don’t know how they can make it. I mean, I can’t discuss this, but the majority come here without English. They come for the sake of learning English here. They think we are an English language centre

where they can learn English, but it’s not an English language centre here. So, they are way behind compared to some of their peers and we have to start teaching them the very basics for them to even have a chance…to be honest I don’t think the majority of them can make it, they just come here, waste time and then go to other departments…out of say 100 students you barely get ten who are really here to do their best.

NNES Lecturer H, Interview, Tuesday BDst October BCDH

The fourth issue affecting NNES lecturers’ teaching practices is the large number of students per class. As mentioned before (see section P.H.B), the university’s open admission policy has resulted in the overcrowding of the EFL programme. Large class sizes are an influential factor in the way lecturers implement their teaching practices (Muchiri and Kiriungi, BCDP). LH, for example, describes how the number of students determine the way in which he teaches:

Sometimes, we're forced to teach these big classes, and it becomes almost impossible to develop these basic skills in the students appropriately. For example, when I had a listening and speaking class that had over JC students, I had to focus on teaching listening for the most part, since it would've been almost impossible to do all the speaking activities, e.g. debates, mini presentations, discussions, in a way appropriate to developing the language skills of a novice LB learner.

When I taught reading to such classes, I wasn't able to allow for actual in-class student reading in which I can allow each student to read aloud in order to correct their pronunciation. Instead, I used to only allow for silent reading (skimming and scanning) then I'd read the passages aloud and ask them to do the reading activities at home.

NNES Lecturer H, Interview, Tuesday BDst October BCDH

The above quote by LH gives two important examples of how NNES lecturers use teacher-centred practices to deal with the issue of large class sizes. In the first example, LH describes how in his listening and speaking class he was not able to develop the students’ speaking skills because of the number of students, and decided to focus only on teaching listening. This indicates that students were not given the opportunity to practise such a crucial language skill. Similarly, in the reading class the lecturer “was not able to allow for actual in-class student reading” and instead asked the students to read the passage silently. What is most Interesting in both examples is that the lecturer never mentioned the use of group or pair work

as way of overcoming this issue and allowing students to actually practise these skills.