The analysis provided in the three findings chapters reflect how students’ learning experiences is an interlinked phenomenon influenced by structural issues such as CU’s policies and practices, family educational background, and teaching approaches in the EFL programme. In this understanding, learning is not viewed as being determined by structure; but rather as a dynamic and complex phenomenon in which students construct their own meaning impacted by structures in society in general and at the institutional and home level in particular. This section further reflects this understanding by discussing some of the major cross question themes that emerge from this study.
\.L.@. The tension between equitable access and quality education in CU
A significant challenge facing CU today is the complex issue of equitable access and quality education. The discussion of equitable access to higher education and quality education is central to educational policy (Escarre and Boldrini, BCDI; Tshabangu et al, BCDJ; Gidley et al, BCDC; Neves et al., BCCI). By examining the field of higher education in KSA (see Chapter P), it was obvious that the MoE-HE is focused on increasing access to higher education and has therefore founded new institutions and expanded the capacity of existing ones. This has been exemplified in the number of institutions established over the last decade in KSA, and is further demonstrated in the Ministry’s acknowledgment and praise of CU as being one of the distinguished universities in terms of its number of students. The Ministry has also established different independent bodies such the National Commission for Assessment and Academic Accreditation (NCAAA) and the National Centre for Assessment in Higher Education (NCAHE) to assure standards and quality of its institutions. However, the findings suggest a tension between the Ministry’s policy to increase access and CU’s attempts to mediate this policy whilst still ensuring the
quality of education in its programmes. The findings show that this policy placed pressures on the university’s capacity and consequently affected the quality of education in the EFL programme.
A clear example of this tension is the lowering of entry requirements for the EFL programme. Due to increased access, the CAH and the English language department were forced to lower the admission criteria for the EFL programme, and thus disadvantaged students with poor English backgrounds were allowed increased access to the programme. However, without any clear support mechanisms in place, these students’ learning was impeded in the EFL programme. This was obvious in the academic and linguistic challenges faced by disadvantaged students and the fact that some of them eventually transferred to other programmes or dropped out of university.
Many disadvantaged students expressed their concerns about the mismatch between their actual knowledge and skills and what was expected of them in the EFL programme. Such a gap in the students’ knowledge and skills is a result of the their family educational background and pre-university learning experiences. This hints to an important issue in relation to student support. While equitable access is commonly associated with social inclusion, Gidley et al. (BCDC, p. B) argue that “equitable access and success are intimately linked with the notion of social inclusion in higher education”. This suggests that social inclusion is not achieved by merely allowing students from disadvantaged backgrounds access to higher education; but rather by the provision of the necessary educational support that enables them to obtain a meaningful and enriching higher education experience. The findings suggest that CU lacks the support mechanisms and policies that can bridge the gap between its open access policy and preparing disadvantaged students for the rigours of higher education and the EFL programme (see section `.H.D for implications for policy-makers).
Another example of the tension between equitable access and quality education is the large number of students in the EFL programme. The findings show that large
class sizes significantly impact teaching and learning in the programme. The issue of large class sizes and its effects on teaching and assessment practices were common themes in the lecturers’ interviews. Both of these examples (i.e. lowering of entry requirements and class size) highlight the tension between the Ministry’s increased access policy and the way CU implements this policy while trying to maintain its position as a leading university in KSA (see section `.H.D for implications for policy-makers).
A third dimension related to the discussion of equitable access and quality at CU is the rising cost of higher education in KSA. In the past, the issue of cost was never a dilemma for the Saudi government due to high oil prices. However, in the light of falling oil prices and the ongoing attempts to manage the country’s budget, the government is seriously considering cutting down the cost of higher education. For example, the Minister of Education has recently stated that the government is moving toward a more sustainable and effective financial management of its higher education sector. He further suggests that the Ministry is revisiting its policy of increased access altogether (Shar, BCDI). This indicates that the Saudi government is experiencing serious challenges in ensuring the quality and accessibility of its higher education sector in face of competing spending priorities.
\.L.L. The impact of cultural capital on students’ learning experiences
The findings of this study (see Chapter E) discuss the significant impact that cultural capital has on students’ learning experiences in the EFL programme. The findings show that advantaged students who belong to upper middle class families and possess cultural capital were more likely to succeed in the programme. In contrast, disadvantaged students from lower middle class families lacking in cultural capital encountered academic and linguistic difficulties. However, this does not mean that cultural capital is seen as fully determining students’ learning and success in higher education and the EFL programme. Sablan and Tierney (BCDH) and Edgerton and Roberts (BCDH) argue that many educational studies using Bourdieu’s notion of cultural capital as a framework view such a social structure in a static and deterministic way in which student agency is limited.
In the context of the current study, the fact that many disadvantaged students were able to partly compensate for their lack of knowledge and skills and successfully complete their undergraduate degrees is a clear example of how they were able to mitigate such a structural constraint. These students were able to acquire cultural capital through their academic learning at the university and their interactions with lecturers and peers. Students’ active agency played an important role in enabling them to acquire the cultural capital which they could not from their family backgrounds. From this it can be inferred that class, as a social structure, is a determining factor but does not fully determine students’ learning in the EFL programme. In other words, cultural capital is a necessary but not a sufficient factor in fully explaining students’ learning experiences.
\.L.B. The diverse teaching approaches used in the EFL programme
The findings of Chapter I highlight the two teaching approaches generally used by NNES and NES lecturers in the EFL programme: namely, the teacher-centred and student-centred approaches. The discussion in that chapter further focused on how students from different backgrounds interacted with these teaching approaches and how it influenced their learning (Ahmed, BCDB; Ansari, BCDB). In regards to advantaged students, the analysis of the data indicates that there is an alignment between class and students’ preference of teaching approaches. This is because students from privileged backgrounds reacted positively to the student-centred approach used by NES lecturers. These students found that such teaching practices accounted for their past learning experiences and addressed their needs. In other words, these students disliked the teacher-centred approach used by NNES lecturers because it did not take into consideration their possession of cultural capital.
In regard to disadvantaged students, a few of them did express their preference for the teacher-centred approach used by NNES lecturers. These students were more familiar with the teaching-centred approach from their past learning experiences
and were most probably never exposed to teaching practices that required their full engagement in the process of knowledge construction. However, what was most surprising is that many disadvantaged students expressed positive attitudes towards the student-centred approach adopted by NES lecturers. This challenges contemporary knowledge that argues that students from lower class backgrounds are more likely to be satisfied with the teacher-centred approach (Alhawsawi, BCDJ; Schweisfurth, BCDJ). There seem to be two main reasons for this.
First, it appears that many of disadvantaged students were highly motivated to develop and improve their English language skills, in particular their communication skills. They understood that these skills were a necessity for an EFL student to find a job after graduation, and therefore many of them preferred the interactive nature of the lessons conducted by the NES lecturers. Second, it is further argued that the students’ positive attitude towards the student-centred approach was not only because of their preference for one approach over the other, but also due to the positive relationships that the NES lecturers had with the students. The impact of this is discussed in the theme of the following sub-section.
\.L.E. The influence of positive lecturer-student relationships on students’ learning experiences
One of the interesting themes that emerged from this study is the impact of positive lecturer-student relationships on students’ learning experiences in the EFL programme. The findings, as discussed in Chapter I, show that NES lecturers expressed strong feelings of empathy toward the students and emphasised the importance of building good relationships with them. These lecturers focused on constructing a safe and enjoyable learning environment for their students. These issues were manifested in the informal and friendly way in which these lecturers interacted with the students inside and outside the classroom setting. As a result, the majority of students in this study expressed positive attitudes towards their NES lecturers and the way in which they interacted with them and conducted the
lessons. Such positive attitudes encouraged students to participate and actively engage in classroom discussions and activities.
Within the context of higher education, many studies have examined the positive impact lecturer-student relationships has on students success (Calvo et al, BCDC; Zepke and Leach, BCDC; Parpala et al., BCC]; Wilcox et al, BCCP). These studies highlight the crucial role relationships have on students’ commitment, satisfaction, motivation, and engagement in higher education. It is therefore argued that teaching is as much about relationships as it is about pedagogy. This suggests that in order for students to successfully progress in the EFL programme, developing positive lecturer-student relationships needs to be an essential part of the overall pedagogy lecturers use in their teaching.
In addition, the findings suggest that NES lecturers were interested in identifying some of the cultural barriers that hinder students’ learning in the EFL programme. Such cultural barriers to learning are further discussed in the next theme.
\.L.C. Cultural barriers affecting students’ learning experiences
This study identified two interrelated cultural barriers that affect students’ learning experiences in the EFL programme. The first type is an educational barrier that is linked to the traditional cultural norms that define the way in which Saudi lecturers interact with students in higher education (Allamnakhrah, BCDJ). The findings of Chapter I show that these lecturers interact with students in a formal and authoritative manner in which the latter take on a passive and submissive role. Students often feel hesitant and, in some cases, threatened about engaging in a two- way dialogue with these lecturers. As a result, student participation and interactions were reduced to the minimum. However, the chapter further acknowledges that this cultural barrier is not unique to the context of higher education, but rather is a reflection of the overall culture.
Thus, the second cultural barrier is related to the rearing of children within the family and the K-DB education system. In the context of Saudi society, children are usually brought up to uncritically defer to authority (Allamnakhrah, BCDJ). This suggests that the students in the study were never encouraged to develop critical thinking during their past learning experiences. This issue was constantly mentioned by NES lecturers. They described the students as not being able to look at issues from different perspectives and their analysing skills as profoundly literal. The lecturers also identified this issue as a cultural one rooted in the family and the educational system.
However, it is important to note that NES lecturers’ critique of the Saudi culture in general and the students’ learning skills in particular could be understood differently. One could argue that these lecturers look at the students’ local culture from the prism of their own western values and culture. This might suggest that the NES lecturers’ approach to providing support and interacting with students is because they see the Saudi culture as backwards and that their role is to uplift the students. Thus, it is argued that they might be operating from a negative and deficit understanding of the Saudi culture.
Overall, section `.B. has explored some of the main themes that emerged from the findings chapters P, E, and I. The next section discusses the contribution of this study.