What question did this study set out to answer?

The aim is to explore the mismatch between formal Arabic instruction and actual classroom communication, particularly for scholarship students.

June 15, 2026Open Access

Examining the gap between the language of instruction and actual classroom communication among scholarship students

Key Points

The aim is to explore the mismatch between formal Arabic instruction and actual classroom communication, particularly for scholarship students.
Qualitatively driven mixed-methods convergent design
Classroom observations and interviews conducted across 36 sessions
Student surveys with a sample size of 70
MSA primarily used for content explanation, while dialect and code-switching are prevalent in interactional management.
Beginners experience increased cognitive load and lower participation due to frequent code-switching.
Advanced learners benefit from dialect-rich interactions which enhance comfort and communicative readiness.

Abstract

Arabic language programs for non-native speakers in Saudi universities operate in a diglossic ecology where Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) is the official medium of instruction, yet local dialect and teacher code-switching frequently surface in everyday classroom interaction. For international scholarship students—whose prior exposure to Arabic is often confined to formal registers—this instructional–interactional mismatch can shape real-time comprehension, willingness to participate, and perceptions of inclusion. This study adopts a qualitatively driven mixed-methods convergent design, integrating classroom observations and interviews with a complementary student survey ( n = 70) to examine: (1) how MSA, local dialect, and code-switching are distributed across classroom functions (e.g., explanation, management, feedback, humor); (2) how students and teachers interpret these practices; and (3) how the resulting language gap relates to perceived accessibility and engagement across proficiency levels. Across 36 observed sessions, teacher interviews ( n = 3), focus groups ( n = 12), document analysis, and survey patterns, findings reveal a structured functional specialization in which MSA anchors content explanation while dialect/code-switching concentrates in interactional management and rapport. Crucially, the gap is developmentally contingent: unmarked switching increases processing burden and suppresses participation among beginners, whereas dialect-rich interaction increasingly supports comfort and everyday communicative readiness for advanced learners, even as perceived alignment with textbook MSA declines. The study advances a conceptual account of how diglossic alternation shifts from cognitive load to engagement scaffold across proficiency, and it concludes with policy-oriented principles for linguistically responsive teaching that preserves academic MSA goals while strengthening equitable interactional access.

Bookmark

View Full Paper