3the Use of Educational Code-Switching in Saudi University EFL Classrooms A Case Study

THE USE OF EDUCATIONAL CODE-SWITCHING IN SAUDI
UNIVERSITY EFL CLASSROOMS: A CASE STUDY
by
Ali Hussain Ali Almuhayya
B.A. Qassim University, 2011
A Thesis
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Master of Arts Degree.
Department of Applied Linguistics

in the Graduate School
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
May 2015
UMI Number: 1595368
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI 1595368
Published by ProQuest LLC (2015). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
Copyright by Ali Hussain Almuhayya, 2015
All Rights Reserved
THESIS APPROVAL
THE USE OF EDUCATIONAL CODE-SWITCHING IN SAUDI

By
Ali Hussain Ali Almuhayya
A Thesis Submitted in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of
Master of Arts
in the field of Applied Linguistics
Approved by:
Jeffrey Punske, Chair
Krassimira Charkova
Dongmei Cheng
Graduate School
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
March 25, 2015
AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF
Ali Hussain Ali Almuhayya, for the Master of Arts degree in Applied Linguistics, presented on
March 25, 2015, at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.
TITLE: THE USE OF EDUCATIONAL CODE-SWITCHING IN SAUDI

MAJOR PROFESSOR: Dr. Jeffrey Punske
The present study observed the use of educational code-switching to the L1 (Arabic)
among six Arabic EFL teachers at Majmaah University, in Saudi Arabia. It used an a priori set of
purposes based on Creswell (2003) and derived categories to examine the linguistic, social, and
class management purposes behind code-switching. The instrument consisted of two parts: a
demographic questionnaire and an audio recorder used in conjunction with a classroom
observation sheet. Although some studies have suggested that educational code-switching to the
L1 in EFL classrooms is an unconscious act (e.g., Moghadam, Abdul Samad, & Shahraki, 2012),
the present study’s results concluded the reverse: that the use of educational code-switching
could be interpreted as an intentional practice among teachers in EFL classrooms.
The results provided a more in-depth understanding of the use of educational code-
switching to the L1 (Arabic). They agreed with previous studies that have found such code-
switching to be very common among EFL teachers. Although participants displayed different
linguistic, social, and class management purposes, analysis of the data revealed that certain
purposes were more common than others, with linguistic purposes being far more common than
social, class management, or other purposes. The most common linguistic purpose was to explain
new words, and for class management was to clarify activities/exercises. Only two purposes, to
engage in small talk with students and to connect between sentences, could not be categorized
into one of the three main types.
i
DEDICATION
“And your Lord has decreed that you not worship except Him, and to parents,
good treatment. Whether one or both of them reach old age while with you, say not to them so
much as ‘uff’ and do not repel them but speak to them a noble word.” (Al-Isra, 17:23)
To my parents,
Hussa Almuhayya and Hussain Almuhayya
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First of all, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to those who helped and
encouraged me all the way through completing my MA and writing this thesis. My sincere
appreciation goes to my chair, Dr. Jeffery Punske, and to the other committee members, Dr.
Krassimira Charkova and Dr. Dongmei Cheng, for guiding me toward accomplishing this work.
Furthermore, to my parents, Hussa and Hussain, and to my wife, Ibtesam, I send my
heartfelt gratitude for staying with me through the long days and months it took to put this thesis
together. I appreciate them for their prodding, patience, and understanding. I also send my deep
appreciation to my grandmothers and to my brothers and sisters, who stood with me and sent
their prayers during this journey.
In addition, thanks go to my childhood friends as well as to those who participated in this
study, the six EFL teachers in the English department at Majmaah University in Zulfi City.
Finally, I thank everyone else who gave their assistance in the research and preparation of this
thesis.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
ABSTRACT .....................................................................................................................................i
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS............................................................................................................. iii
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... v
LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................................................vi
CHAPTERS
CHAPTER 1 – Introduction ................................................................................................ 1
CHAPTER 2 – Literature Review ....................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER 3 – Methodology ............................................................................................ 20
CHAPTER 4 – Results ...................................................................................................... 25
CHAPTER 5 – Discussion and Conclusion ...................................................................... 46
REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................. 55
APPENDICES
Appendix A ....................................................................................................................... 58
Appendix B ....................................................................................................................... 60
Appendix C ....................................................................................................................... 61
VITA ........................................................................................................................................... 65
iv
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
Table 1........................................................................................................................................... 21
Table 2........................................................................................................................................... 26
Table 3........................................................................................................................................... 26
Table 4........................................................................................................................................... 27
Table 5........................................................................................................................................... 32
Table 6........................................................................................................................................... 34
Table 7........................................................................................................................................... 44
v
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
Figure 1 ......................................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 2 ......................................................................................................................................... 28
Figure 3 ......................................................................................................................................... 28
Figure 4 ......................................................................................................................................... 28
Figure 5 ......................................................................................................................................... 29
Figure 6 ......................................................................................................................................... 29
Figure 7 ......................................................................................................................................... 30
Figure 8 ......................................................................................................................................... 30
Figure 9 ......................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 10 ....................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 11 ....................................................................................................................................... 32
Figure 12 ....................................................................................................................................... 33
Figure 13 ....................................................................................................................................... 34
Figure 14 ....................................................................................................................................... 35
Figure 15 ....................................................................................................................................... 35
Figure 16 ....................................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 17 ....................................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 18 ....................................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 19 ....................................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 20 ....................................................................................................................................... 38
Figure 21 ....................................................................................................................................... 39
Figure 22 ....................................................................................................................................... 39
vi
Figure 23 ....................................................................................................................................... 39
Figure 24 ....................................................................................................................................... 40
Figure 25 ....................................................................................................................................... 40
Figure 26 ....................................................................................................................................... 41
Figure 27 ....................................................................................................................................... 41
Figure 28 ....................................................................................................................................... 41
Figure 29 ....................................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 30 ....................................................................................................................................... 44
Figure 31 ....................................................................................................................................... 44
vii
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
In English as a foreign language (EFL) and English as a second language (ESL) classes,
teachers and students need to interact for students to be able to learn. This interaction can take
the form of conversations, discussions, or even arguments. However, if the teachers are bilingual
in the students’ first language (for the purposes of this study, Arabic) and the second language
(English), while students are monolingual Arabic speakers, the target language could be a barrier
to those students, especially beginners, when they want to communicate with teachers or during
the educational process. In this case, one strategy for learning is to use the first language (L1) in
an educational code-switching system during the second language (L2) learning process (Levine,
2003).
Educational code-switching is a linguistic phenomenon that can be found during
classroom discourse (Gulzar, 2009). It refers to smoothly alternating words, phrases, and
sentences between the L1 and the L2 among students and teachers (Bista, 2010; Pei-shi, 2012).
Following this definition, the use of educational code-switching can take place by shifting to the
L1 during the pedagogical process of learning the L2. Teachers and students thus engage in
educational code-switching between their L1 and L2 for linguistic, social, and class management
purposes. Bista (2010), for example, reported bilingual English students using educational code-
switching to convey their simplified ideas and to avoid misunderstanding each other. The need
for clarification and translation is thus one of the most important linguistic purposes of
educational code-switching (Gulzar, 2009).
The present study used an a priori set of purposes, through sociolinguistic analysis, to
observe the use of educational code-switching in a Saudi university and analyze its linguistic,
2
social, and class management purposes. The first chapter defines important terms and
distinguishes the various types of code-switching. Code-switching between Arabic and English is
also discussed. The second chapter reviews previous studies that have analyzed code-switching
in general as well as educational code-switching and the use of the L1 in the EFL classroom. The
third chapter explains the methodology of this study, outlining the statement of the problem,
hypothesis, research questions, variables, participants, instruments, data collection, procedure,
and data analysis. The fourth chapter shows the results, answering all research questions. It does
so by indicating the most and least common purposes for educational code-switching in the
Saudi university EFL classrooms observed. The most interesting or representative quotes that
demonstrate these purposes are included. Finally, the fifth chapter discusses the findings,
connecting them with previous theories and studies. Limitations of the present study are also
given, as well as recommendations for further research. These are followed by the conclusion.
The following section illustrates the concept of code-switching by identifying important terms
and differentiating the various types of code-switching.
An Overview of the Concept of Code-Switching
Code-switching is a phenomenon that can be investigated from various points of view,
including a sociolinguistic prospective, as in Nilep (2006); an educational prospective, as in
Gulzar (2010); a social and behavioral prospective, as in Yavuz (2012); or a cultural prospective,
as in Alomoush and Matarneh (2010). This means that code-switching is a term widely used in
many disciplines, particularly linguistics and related fields. In linguistics, the notion of code-
switching is a social phenomenon that involves alternating between two or more codes
(languages, dialects, accents) in spoken or written communication. Many linguists have
discussed the meaning of the term code-switching (e.g., Bista, 2010; Gulzar & Al Asmari, 2013;
3
Gumperz, 1982; Hussein, 1999; Liu, 2010; Nilep, 2006). According to Bista (2010), “Code
switching…is an alternation of words and phrases between two languages or dialects” (p. 2). Liu
(2010) echoes this definition by stating that “code-switching is the shift from one language to
another within a conversation or utterance” (p. 10). Giving a more technical definition, Nilep
(2006) introduces code-switching as “the practice of selecting or altering linguistic elements so
as to contextualize talk in interaction” (p. 1). Another meaning for code-switching that clarifies
the phenomenon is explained by Gumperz (1982), who describes it as “the juxtaposition within
the same speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two different grammatical systems
or subsystems” (p. 95). Together, these definitions show general agreement on the concept of
code-switching as a linguistic phenomenon that is used by speakers to go back and forth between
two codes during the process of communication.
Within the field of linguistics, Nilep (2006) relates that the term code-switching is used in
many studies under various subfields of linguistics, including “language acquisition, second
language acquisition and language learning use,” to describe the classroom setting or student
behavior (p. 1). Nilep (2006) illustrates the use of the expression code-switching in sociocultural
work by providing practical definitions. For example, the author explains that code-switching
between languages has been considered a consequence of language contact. This definition is
supported by Weinreich’s book, Language Contact, which is “an important base for code-
switching research in the field of linguistics’’ (Nielp, 2006, p. 4).
Another idea that should be pointed out is that the association between the terms
language choice and code-switching is obvious and interrelated. Code-switching is a subtype of
language choice, which has a broader meaning. A given language has a variety of dialects,
accents, and characteristics that distinguish groups of speakers, whereas formal language and
4
informal language are two different codes in one language that speakers toggle between
depending on the situation. Since Nilep (2006) states that “the relationship between speakers
affects the choice of language variety,” speakers’ language choice, for example, to code-switch,
depends on context. If they are in a formal situation, the formal language—which is considered a
code—may be chosen; however, this language use may switch to an informal variety—another
code—at home. This procedure sometimes involves changing the dialect code as well. Gumperz
discusses language choice in his 1958 study on varieties within the Hindi language, where
speakers use the village dialect at home and with local people and switch to a regional dialect
with people from outside their village (as cited in Nilep, 2006). In attempting to understand the
relationship between code-switching and language choice, Myers-Scotton explains that code-
switching is a type of linguistic choice rule used by bilingual speakers in a conversation (as cited
in Eldin, 2014).
Code-selection is another term associated with code-switching, which is introduced in
Abalhassan and Alshalawi (2000). This expression means that if people use both the L1 and the
L2, they consciously select a code depending on the audience, social context, and location,
among other factors.
In general, previous studies indicate that code-switching is a social and linguistic
phenomenon that can be defined as alternating between two or more linguistic systems in verbal
or non-verbal communication. It is considered a result of language contact and is also affiliated
with the concept of language choice (Nilep, 2006). However, Eldin (2014) considers code-
switching to be a part of language choice. On the other hand, terminology, code-switching, and
code-selection share the same basic characteristics (Abalhassan & Alshalawi, 2000). The
different types of code-switching are discussed in the following section.

5
Types of Code-Switching
In previous studies, there has been considerable disagreement on how to categorize the
different types of code-switching. However, certain types have been generally agreed upon by
the majority of authors. According to Poplack and Romaine, code-switching consists of three
types: tag-switching, inter-sentential switching, and intra-sentential switching (as cited in
Alomoush & Matarneh, 2010).
Tag-switching involves producing a phrase in one language and at the end switching to
another language by producing a tag word, such as in the Arabic phrase ( ‫؟‬ok, ‫ سأجلس هنا‬meaning
“I am going to sit here, ok?”), which includes a tag question in English at the end. Further
illustrating this definition, Liu (2010) gives the example of addressing people in another
language when greeting them, such as when an instructor in an EFL class greets students in their
native language and then switches to speaking English, which could be considered tag-switching.
Eldin (2014) states that this type of code-switching is the easiest, because it usually includes
“minimal syntactic restrictions thus not violating syntactic rules when being inserted into
monolingual sentences” (p. 82). If the English phrase “I mean,” for example, is inserted into
Arabic speech, it might not violate Arabic syntactic rules.
Inter-sentential code-switching involves using one language in one sentence or clause and
switching to another language in the next sentence or clause. According to this definition, the
switch could not happen unless the bilingual speaker was fluent in both languages and able to
avoid violating the rules of both languages (Eldin, 2014).
Intra-sentential code-switching means that there is a switch from one language to another
in a sentence or clause boundary and then back into the original language within the same
sentence or clause, as in “I do not like traveling by car ‫ أ و‬bus” which means “I do not like
6
traveling by car or bus” where the speaker has inserted the Arabic conjunction instead of the
English conjunction. All of these types of code-switching are used when switching between the
L1 and the L2 or between two native languages when the speaker is bilingual.
A fourth type, intra-word code-switching, is described by Oco and Roxas (2012).
According to them, this change occurs in a word boundary, such as in the case of “computerai”
(computerai ‫ أحضر معك‬which means “bring my computer” in Arabic). This word derives from
English computer combined with an Arabic morpheme for masculine singular third person. The
root of the word is thus from one language (English) and the affixes from another (Arabic).
On the other hand, some studies suggest that code-switching can, depending on one’s
point of view, be divided into other types as well. An example would be situational code-
switching and metaphorical code-switching (Blom & Gumperz, 1972). These types are
categorized based on social elements, such as people or the topic of conversation. According to
Nilep (2006), situational switching is “a change in linguistic form [that] represents a changed
social setting” and metaphorical switching “relies on the use of two language varieties within a
single social setting” (p. 8). Nilep argues that due to the limitations involved in describing the
various types of code-switching, Gumperz favored the term conversational code-switching in
1982 (p. 9).
As shown in this section, distinguishing between different types of code-switching has
been an area of contention in previous studies. However, three types (tag-switching, inter-
sentential switching, and intra-sentential switching) are recognized by most studies. A fourth type,
intra-word switching, does not have the same focus as the other types mentioned. Additionally,
metaphorical switching and situational switching are types of code-switching that have been
classified as depending on social factors, although the term conversational code-switching has
7
also been used. The next section discusses the use of code-switching in the EFL classroom.
Code-Switching in the EFL Classroom
The concept of code-switching has been linked to the EFL classroom because of the
normal patterns of interaction between the L1 and English observed among students and English
teachers. The relationship between code-switching and the EFL classroom began, according to
Liu (2010), in the 1980s. In addition, many studies, such as those by Chaudron and Lightbown,
have argued against code-switching to the L1 in the EFL classroom (as cited in Nilep, 2006).
Others, such as Levine and Chen, disagree with this assertion, claiming that code-switching to
the L1 in the EFL classroom can be a helpful and useful approach (as cited in Liu, 2014). For
example, Sert (2005) explains that “code switching in [the] language classroom is not always a
blockage or deficiency in learning a language, but may be considered as a useful strategy in
classroom interaction, if the aim is to make meaning clear and to transfer the knowledge to
students in an efficient way” (p. 5). However, this controversy is outside the focus of the present
study. Instead, the important fact to take from the controversy is that code-switching to the L1 in
the EFL classroom is very common.
When the L1 (such as Arabic) is used in the EFL classroom, this type of L1 use is called
educational code-switching. Educational code-switching takes place when teachers or students
switch from the L2 (English) to the L1 (Arabic) in EFL or ESL classrooms for a variety of
purposes, which may be linguistically or socially motivated, or for class management reasons.
This chapter introduced the concept of code-switching. Based on the literature, it is a
social and linguistic phenomenon that consists of alternating between two or more linguistic
systems during spoken or written communication. It is associated with the concept of language
choice (Nilep, 2006). Although some studies distinguish between different types of code-
8
switching, three types are recognized by most studies, which are tag-switching, inter-sentential
switching, and intra-sentential switching. Other types—such as intra-word switching,
metaphorical switching, and situational switching—do not have the same focus as the first types
mentioned. On the other hand, educational code-switching occurs frequently in the EFL
classroom when teachers shift from the target L2, in this case English, to the L1, in this case
Arabic, which is the native language of both the teachers and students. The purposes for using
the Arabic L1 in EFL classrooms vary between EFL university teachers. Such teachers may
utilize the L1 in their English classes for linguistic, social, or class management purposes. The
next chapter discusses previous studies that have investigated the use of the sociolinguistic
phenomenon of code-switching among Saudi speakers as well as educational code-switching to
Arabic in EFL classrooms.

9
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Code-switching usually occurs between two or more speakers; in particular,
communication between bilingual speakers frequently results in code-switching. This chapter is
divided into three subsections. The first illustrates some of the purposes behind Arabic-English
code-switching that have been investigated in previous studies. The second subsection discusses
the different types of studies that have been carried out on the general use of Arabic-English
code-switching and their findings. Finally, the third subsection provides a more in-depth look at
studies on the use of educational code-switching to the L1 in EFL classrooms, as well as the
purposes behind this use (in those cases when they have been investigated).
General Purposes of Code-Switching Among Arabic Speakers
Several studies have analyzed the purposes behind L1-L2 code-switching. Some studies
(e.g., Abdel Magid & Mugaddam, 2013; Alomoush & Matarneh, 2010; Al-Nofaie, 2010; Hussein,
1999) have focused on the purposes of code-switching to English in Arabic conversations. Some
of these purposes were related to the influence of the media, as a way to impress other people
(Alomoush & Matarneh, 2010), and the result of borrowing from the rich technical vocabulary of
English (Hussein, 1999).
However, these abovementioned purposes for code-switching from Arabic to English do
not play the same role when code-switching from English to Arabic, while other purposes can
play the same role in both directions (from Arabic to English or English to Arabic), such as code-
switching used for simplification or translation. Hughes, Shaunessy, Brice, Ratliff, and McHatton
(2006) claimed this was the first purpose for code-switching between the L1 and the L2. They
stated that it is used “simply because the speaker does not have the facility in the primary
10
language to express himself effectively or is translating for someone else with limited English
proficiency” (pp. 14–15).
This section presented studies focusing on the purposes behind code-switching to English
during Arabic conversations (e.g., the influence of the media, Alomoush & Matarneh, 2010);
however, they may not play the same role when there is code-switching from English to Arabic,
while some purposes can play the same role (e.g., for simplification or translation, Hughes et al.,
2006). The next section describes research on code-switching among Arabic speakers.
The General Use of Code-Switching Among Arabic Speakers
Many studies have analyzed the general phenomenon of code-switching among bilingual
Arabic speakers and code-switching to their English L2. Most Arabic-English code-switching
studies have focused on the use of code-switching to English and the behavior of the participants.
Abalhassan and Alshalawi (2000), for example, investigated Saudi code-switching behavior
when using English as an L2 in the United States. For that purpose, 12 male Saudi graduate
students from Pennsylvania University were selected. Their ages were between 19 and 35. The
study aimed to examine their behavior during code-switching, its function, and the purposes
behind it. Their research questions were concerned with why and when participants code-
switched from Arabic to English in an informal context. To collect the data, they used a tape-
recorder for their instrument and recorded approximately two hours of informal meetings. For
the analysis, they transcribed the most important parts of the conversations.
Abalhassan and Alshalawi’s (2000) results showed that all of the participants code-
switched frequently and used the English words in an Arabic matrix. With a correlation between
the level of code-switching and participant proficiencies, they explained that “linguistic and
communicative competencies are related to the speaker’s linguistic repertoire” (p. 1). They
11
concluded with the finding that Arabic was the main language used and that code-switching to
English occurred when it was needed. Their findings were in contrast with Barhoum, who found
that the Palestinian participants, who were immigrants in the US, used English as the primary
language instead of their L1 (Arabic) and code-switched to Arabic (as cited in Abalhassan &
Alshalawi, 2000). Abalhassan and Alshalawi (2000) found seven purposes, called “functions,”
for code-switching during informal conversations, which consisted of “emphasis and
contextualization cues, parallel constructions for emphasis, quotation and ‘Random’ switch,
technical terms, conversation tags, linguistic repertoire, politeness and avoidance of taboo
expression” (p. 184).
While most studies have concentrated on the oral or written language, some focus on
examining code-switching in electronic situations. Eldin (2014) was one such study that
observed and analyzed the social linguistic context of Arabic code-switching in social networks.
He attempted to investigate the purposes of code-switching among bilingual (Arabic-English)
speakers during their use of Facebook. Specifically, he looked at online messages in Facebook
that contained code-switching by Arabic-English bilingual students as well as the effects of this
code-switching among Egyptian Arabic bilingual students. For the purpose of the study, the data
was collected during the chats that participants posted on their wall on Facebook. The
participants’ posts were categorized according to “to the functions they served in the Facebook
context” (p. 1). Due to the high frequency of code-switching in the online messages between
their L1 and L2, the results revealed that the participants were fully competent in both languages.
His findings were similar to those of Malik’s (1994) study, which proposed 10 reasons behind the
bilingual speaker code-switching to another language: “lack of facility, lack of registral
competence, mood of the speaker, to amplify and emphasize a point, habitual expressions,
12
semantic significance, to show identity with a group, to address different audience, pragmatic
reasons and to attract attention” (p. 82). Finally, the most reasons for code-switching were found
to be a lack of facility, lack of registrar competence, and habitual expressions.
Most of the abovementioned studies came to the same conclusion: that code-switching
from Arabic to English occurs with great frequency. Moreover, the use of code-switching among
Arabic speakers has been shown to be a common sociolinguistic phenomenon. However, these
studies varied in how they approached the topic of the general use of code-switching among
Arabic speakers. Some studies focused on the behavior of the participants (e.g., Abalhassan &
Alshalawi, 2000). Others spotlighted the social interaction in online messages (e.g., Eldin, 2014;
Malik, 1994). Their studies also found different reasons for code-switching, such as difficulty
with the L2 or to show a sense of achievement. The next section focuses on the studies related to
the use of educational code-switching to the L1 in EFL classrooms.
The Use of Educational Code-Switching to the L1 in EFL Classrooms
Several studies have analyzed and attempted to formulate a typological framework for the
phenomenon of educational code-switching and the L1’s role in the EFL classroom. These
studies have been conducted for various reasons, such as determining the functions and purposes
of this phenomenon in different parts of the world. Some researchers that have investigated this
phenomenon, such as Abdel Magid and Mugaddam (2013) and Pei-shi (2012), have
demonstrated that the use of the Arabic L1 in EFL classes may be considered a kind of
educational code-switching because teachers and students are generally expected to use English
in these classes; however, they tend to code-switch from English to Arabic, or another L1, and
use it as a medium of instruction.
In their study, Abdel Magid and Mugaddam (2013) looked for the existence of
13
educational code-switching involving the Arabic L1 in EFL classrooms in Saudi Arabia and
Sudan. They concluded that code-switching to the L1 was very common and could prove helpful
in the L2 learning process. In addition to their findings, Pei-shi (2012) looked at how code-
switching was used in a Taiwanese EFL classroom. The researcher concluded that code-
switching to the students’ L1 could facilitate L2 learning. This means that the use of the L1 was
common in most EFL or ESL classrooms.
Most of the studies consulted showed the use of educational code-switching to be normal
and frequent. In addition, it has also been investigated as a broadly used tool in the EFL/ESL
classroom. For example, Liu (2010) investigated teachers code-switching to the L1 (Chinese) in
EFL classrooms in Chinese universities. For that purpose, 261 native Chinese undergraduate
students from three different Chinese universities were selected randomly from different majors
from grades one through four. In addition, 60 teachers (professors and teaching assistants) with
teaching experience ranging from 5 to 20 years also participated. The study aimed to answer five
questions. The ones important to the present study were the reasons why instructors used the L1
and how students and instructors felt about instructors using it. Liu (2010) employed two kinds
of questionnaires, one for students and another for teachers, based on Duff and Polio (1990),
Macaro (1997), and Levine (2003). The questionnaire consisted of three parts: personal
background, guidance, and questions. The data were analyzed though qualitative and quantitative
methods and were counted by hand, with the percentages calculated through Microsoft Excel.
The results revealed that switching to Chinese was significant in the EFL classroom in different
universities and played a positive role among teachers and in their teaching methods.
As mentioned previously, Abdel Majid and Mugaddam (2013) investigated and analyzed
the role of code-switching and the use of the Arabic L1 in EFL classrooms in Saudi Arabia and
14
Sudan. For that purpose, 150 English teachers were recruited from two different cities: Jeddah,
Saudi Arabia and Khartoum, Sudan. The main question of the study was stated as “How does
[code-switching] in ESL classrooms facilitate the process of L2 learning to enrich interactions
between teachers and students at EFL classes in the Sudan and Saudi Arabia?” (p. 33). The
instruments consisted of a questionnaire, structured interviews, and audio recordings. The data
were collected and analyzed through descriptive analysis. The results revealed that for many
purposes, code-switching to the L1 was used extensively in both ESL classrooms. In this case,
use of the L1 was determined to be a very helpful tool for learning the L2. Furthermore, the
teaching methods and syllabus included code-switching by integrating Arabic with English to
make the learning more effective than only teaching in the L2 would have been.
Moreover, educational code-switching and using the L1 in EFL classes has been reviewed
as a medium of instruction. Moghadam, Abdul Samad, and Shahraki (2012) introduced the
concept of code-switching to the L1 (Persian) in EFL classes as an accidental movement by the
person engaging in code-switching. The main purpose of their research was to explore the
influence of educational code-switching to Persian on students’ understanding of the L2 language
(English), “students’ learning ability” (p. 1). For the purpose of the study, four Iranian
participants were assigned to examine educational code-switching in words and phrases. For the
instruments, three tools were applied: an audio recorder (MP3 player), observation in a
classroom in a university in Malaysia, and the “reflective journals” of students (p. 1). The
findings concluded that the use of educational code-switching to Persian was frequent. In
addition, some purposes were found to be related in particular either to the students or to the
teachers. Teachers’ purposes for educational code-switching to the L1 in EFL classes were
determined to be only “clarification and translation to L1” (p. 1).

15
Afzal (2013) investigated the use and purpose of the L1 (Persian) in the EFL classroom.
For this purpose, 100 students from one intermediate level and 10 teachers who had teaching
experience ranging from 1 to 10 years in a language institute in Shiraz were recruited. The study
asked whether Persian (the L1) was used in intermediate EFL classes as well as why and how
often it was used. In addition, it investigated student and teacher attitudes and opinions about
“using Persian in the EFL classroom” (p. 1849). The study used qualitative and quantitative
methods and three instruments: class observation, interviews with the teachers, and two kinds of
questionnaires: one for teachers and the other for students. The data were collected and analyzed
through descriptive analysis. Results agreed with the other studies consulted, showing an
extensive usage of the L1 for learning the L2.
Another study revealed that educational code-switching could facilitate L2 learning. Pei-
shi (2012) investigated the use of code-switching in an ESL classroom in Taiwan. For this
purpose, 36 sophomore students were observed during an English lecture. The study primarily
focused on how teachers used code-switching, how students reacted to its use, and how teachers
reacted to its use. The instruments consisted of a 30-minute video recording, a questionnaire in
Chinese (for students), and a post-interview with the teachers. The data were collected and
analyzed through descriptive analysis. The results revealed that code-switching to the L1 in class
could improve the acquisition of the L2.
Some researchers have also investigated the purposes for educational code-switching to
Arabic in EFL classes. A study by Khresheh (2012) showed interesting purposes behind the use
of code-switching to the L1 (Arabic) in EFL classes. For the purpose of the study, he observed
EFL classes (beginners, intermediate, advanced) on 45 occasions at random. The 45 observations
were scheduled and divided between five classes for each level and three times for each class.
16
The participants, 94 students and 15 teachers, gave structured interviews. The results showed that
the use of Arabic (L1) was an “eclectic technique” or differed depending on the student and the
EFL class (p. 1). The findings indicated several purposes for a teacher’s educational code-
switching to the L1, such as to avoid grammatical mistakes in the L2 (English). Additionally, to
avoid miscommunication between teachers and students, especially beginners, teachers tended to
code-switch to Arabic frequently. Moreover, because of cultural and religious norms, all of the
students code-switched to Arabic to use religious expressions. Finally, educational code-
switching to the L1 was found to be typical when communicating information that was hard to
express in the L2. As a result, substitutions and literal translation to the L1 were strategies
students used in EFL classes.
In addition to its use in classroom instruction, one study also looked at anxiety reduction
among teachers and students as another purpose for code-switching. Yavuz (2012) found that one
of the reasons for educational code-switching was to give instructions more effectively. This
study investigated the use and attitudes of Turkish EFL teachers of the L1 (Turkish) when
teaching English as an L2. For that purpose, 12 English teachers, mostly female, were surveyed
in 12 different primary schools in Turkey. The questions of the study were designed to be
“neutral,” for example, “What is the place of L1 in your teaching?” (p. 4342). The idea was to
compare their thoughts with the findings in the literature. The instrument included an interview,
recordings, and the participants’ answers. The results suggested that it was important for English
teachers to use their L1 in their teaching only in “structural teaching” and using English in
general (p. 4339). In addition, educational code-switching and using the L1 in the beginning of
class was found to reduce anxiety among both teachers and students. In the present study, anxiety
reduction was classified as a classroom management purpose for educational code-switching to

17
the L1 in EFL classrooms.
Similar to the foregoing studies, Al-Nofaie (2010) argued that educational code-switching
in EFL classrooms should not be used in general but rather at specific times and for different
purposes. The purposes also differed between teachers and students. Al-Nofaie investigated
educational code-switching and using L1 (Arabic) in EFL classrooms with 30 students and 3
teachers from one intermediate class of a Saudi school in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The main aim of
the study was to determine “the participants’ attitudes towards using Arabic in EFL classes” and
how their L1 was used (p. 71). The three instruments consisted of questionnaires, interviews, and
class observation. The data were collected and analyzed through SPSS 15 software for the closed
questions, and the open questions and interviews were analyzed in a qualitative way. Results
revealed that participants preferred using Arabic in certain situations and that the purposes
differed between teachers and students. For teachers, using the L1 was commonly preferred
when “Explaining grammatical terms, introducing new vocabulary and giving exam instructions”
(p. 78). At the same time, students tended to prefer the use of the L1 for “giving exam
instructions, translating words, contrasting the two languages, explaining grammar, asking
questions and participating in pair work” (p. 78). Although this study’s contrast between teacher
and student purposes for educational code-switching was interesting, the present study focused
solely on teachers’ purposes for using the L1 in an L2 classroom.
Some of the researchers mentioned above have demonstrated that the use of the Arabic
L1 in EFL classes may be considered a kind of educational code-switching because teachers and
students are generally expected to use English in these classes; however, they tend to code-
switch from English to Arabic, or another L1, and use it as a medium of instruction (e.g., Abdel
Magid & Mugaddam, 2013; Pei-shi, 2012). These studies agreed that the use of educational
18
code-switching to the L1 in EFL classes was a frequent sociolinguistic phenomenon.
Furthermore, some researchers revealed that it was used extensively and frequently (e.g., Abdel
Majid & Mugaddam, 2013; Liu, 2010; Afzal, 2013). Although the use of educational code-
switching in EFL classes has been demonstrated to be helpful (e.g., Abdel Magid & Mugaddam,
2013), a useful tool in facilitating L2 learning (e.g., Pei-shi, 2012), or serve a positive function
among teachers and in teaching methods (e.g., Liu, 2010), other researchers claimed that its use
was accidental on the part of the individuals code-switching, whether they were teachers or
students (e.g., Moghadam, Abdul Samad, & Shahraki, 2012).
On the other hand, some researchers emphasized that educational code-switching in EFL
classrooms should not be used in general but rather only at specific times and purposes. They
concluded with the finding that the purposes for switching from the L2 to the L1 in EFL
classrooms also varied between teachers and students. Following Creswell’s (2003)
recommendation to use a priori categories in qualitative research, the following such categories
were identified based on previous studies.
For linguistic purposes:
 to clarify and translate into the L1 (Moghadam, Abdul Samad, & Shahraki, 2012)
 to avoid grammatical mistakes in the L2 (English) (Khresheh, 2012)
 to explaining “grammatical terms” (Al-Nofaie, 2010, p. 78)
 to introduce “new vocabulary” (Al-Nofaie, 2010, p. 78)
 to avoid difficult expressions in the L2 (Khresheh, 2012)
 to say religious expressions (Khresheh, 2012)
For classroom management purposes:
 to reduce the anxiety of teachers and students (Yavuz, 2012)

19
 to avoid communication problems, especially with beginners (Khresheh, 2012)
 to give “exam instructions” (Al-Nofaie, 2010, p. 78)
For what Khresheh (2012) calls an “eclectic technique,” i.e., various strategies or communication
styles (p. 1).

20
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Statement of the Problem and Hypothesis
EFL teaching methods tend to utilize the L1 for different purposes, such as linguistically,
socially, or for class management. During communication between EFL teachers and their
students, teachers may use educational code-switching by going back and forth between the L1
and the L2. EFL teachers in Majmaah University, in Saudi Arabia, tend to use their L1 (Arabic)
for educational code-switching, especially with students at the beginning levels. The present
study predicted that EFL teachers in Majmaah University would use educational code-switching
to the L1 for a variety of linguistic, social, and class management purposes.
Research Methodology
The present study used an a priori set of purposes, through content analysis, to observe
the use of educational code-switching in a Saudi university and analyze its linguistic, social, and
class management purposes.
Research Questions
The following research questions were the main focus of the present study.
1. What linguistic purposes do Saudi university teachers have for using educational
code-switching?
2. What social purposes do Saudi university teachers have for using educational
code-switching?
3. What class management purposes do Saudi university teachers have for using
educational code-switching?
4. Are there any other purposes that Saudi university teachers have for using
21
educational code-switching?
Participants
The participants included six male teachers from the English department at Majmaah
University. Due to segregation between male and female teachers in Saudi Arabia, and the fact
that the researcher was male, the researcher was not able to observe female teachers. All of the
participants consisted of male EFL teachers who were native Arabic speakers and used their L1
(Arabic) in their English classes. Demographic questions were used to gather sociolinguistic
information about the participants. To keep the participants’ information confidential, they were
coded with numbers: T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6. The researcher classified them depending on their
information in the demographic questions. Table 1 provides demographic information about the
participants.
Table 1
Demographic Information of Participants.
Participants T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6
Age 25 25 27 29 32 33
Gender Male
Nationality Saudi Arabia Jordan Jordan KSA
Hometown Zulfi Zulfi
Level of education bachelor’s degree Master’s degree
Years of teaching Less than two 7 11 7

years
Language with family Arabic Arabic
and friends
Language at University Arabic and English Arabic and English
English only
As shown in Table 1, the findings distinguished the first three participants from the rest.
The participants T1, T2, and T3 were 25–27 years old, and their level of education consisted of a
22
bachelor’s degree. They had been teaching English for less than two years. The language that
they generally used with family and friends was Arabic, but when communicating with their
university colleagues, they used a combination of Arabic and English. All of them were from
Zulfi City, Saudi Arabia.
On the other hand, T4, T5, and T6 were 29–33 years old, and their level of education
consisted of a master’s degree. T4 and T6 had been teaching English for seven years, while T5
had been teaching for 11 years. The language they generally used with family and friends was
Arabic; however, with their university colleagues, T4 and T5 used both Arabic and English,
whereas T6 used English only. T4 and T5 were both from Jordan, while T6 was from Zulfi City,
Saudi Arabia. The researcher expected that there would be differences between these three
participants in terms of experience (educational background, teaching), while the three younger
participants were expected to be less perceptive of their code-switching.
Instrument
The instrument consisted of two parts: a demographic questionnaire and an audio
recorder with a classroom observation sheet. The demographic questionnaire was designed to
elicit relevant background information about the participants, including age, gender, nationality,
hometown, level of education, years of teaching, and language(s) used with family, friends, and
colleagues (See Appendix B).
The audio recorder was placed in front of the class, near the teachers, to find out when
and for what purposes they used the L1 during a normal EFL class session. The class observation
sheet was designed with an a priori set of purposes to determine why the EFL teachers used
educational code-switching (the expected purposes behind it being linguistic, social, and class
management) and how many Saudi university teachers code-switched to the L1. For the purposes
23
of recordkeeping, the sheet included the class level, topic, and date, as well as fictional teacher
names to maintain anonymity. Space was also given in this sheet for the researcher to record
specific examples of educational code-switching to the L1 and when those examples occurred
(See Appendix C).
Data Collection and Procedure
The data were collected according to certain procedures, beginning with receiving
permission from the Southern Illinois University Human Subjects Committee. Afterward, the
researcher contacted the male participants in Majmaah University. The researcher visited the
university and arranged a suitable time to meet participants. Before visiting classes, he obtained
permission from the participants by having them sign a consent form for participating and
recording in their classes (Appendix A). The consent form explained that their information would
be kept confidential, that their participation was voluntary, and that they could withdraw at any
time. The researcher explained the task and the purpose of the study before the participants
began the study. After signing the consent form, they filled out the demographic questionnaire
(Appendix B), which illustrated their social background. Next, the researcher brought two
instruments to the participants’ class: the observation checklist sheet and a tape recorder. The
researcher sat in the back of each teacher’s classroom and recorded the teachers during class. He
also determined why code-switching, if present, was used in class by filling out the classroom
observation sheet (Appendix C). After the study was finished, the participants were thanked for
their time.
Data Analysis
Following Creswell’s (2003) recommendation to use a priori categories in qualitative
research, the researcher set up a priori observation categories based on the findings of previous
24
studies as discussed in Chapter 2. These were examined and further detailed under the advice of
the researcher’s thesis committee. After the data were collected, the content analysis revealed
new emergent categories, which were added to the a priori list. This was done to allow the
researcher to observe the teachers with pre-knowledge of the types of purposes he could
reasonably be expected to encounter. The use of such a priori coding facilitated a deeper
understanding of the role and uses of educational code-switching as well as its linguistic, social,
and class management purposes.
After collecting the data, the researcher transcribed the recorded data and matched the
quotes of the participants with the purposes listed on the observation sheet. The recorder and
observation sheet were used to gather quotes that provided an in-depth understanding of the use
of educational code-switching. Additionally, by using a priori codes, the researcher was able to
identify common purposes in the narrative data. By combining the narrative data purposes as
well as synthesizing and collapsing the overlapping quotes, the researcher formulated a
hypothesis about the role of educational code-switching to the L1 in EFL classrooms.
To determine how often participants used code-switching for each purpose, the
percentage of use of each category (linguistic, social, class management) was calculated. This
allowed the researcher to determine the common purposes behind educational code-switching.
Higher percentages indicated which purposes were more common and lower percentages
indicated which were less common. The purposes for each category were analyzed separately.
25
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
In this chapter the results are presented through content analysis to observe the use of
educational code-switching in a Saudi university and analyze its linguistic, social, and class
management purposes. Following Creswell’s (2003) recommendation to use a priori categories in
qualitative research, the researcher set up a priori observation categories based on the findings of
previous studies as discussed in Chapter 2. These were examined and further detailed under the
advice of the researcher’s thesis committee. After the data were collected, the content analysis
revealed new emergent categories which were added to the a priori list. Each of these three
categories is presented individually in the following sections. The percentage of usage of each
category (linguistic, social, class management) was calculated to show which purposes for code-
switching were most common. In addition, particularly interesting quotes from the participants
are presented in excerpts to emphasize why they employed code-switching. These quotes contain
English and Arabic words (with Arabic text in bold) followed by an English translation in which
the translated words are in bold and underlined. To keep the participants’ information
confidential, they were named in the given examples in the excerpt using the numbers T1, T2, T3,
T4, T5, T6.
Overview of the Classes Observed
Table 2 shows the breakdown of the classes by number, instructor, subject matter,
duration of observation, and the number of instances of educational code-switching to the L1
observed in each class. The six classes observed covered five subjects (pragmatics, speaking and
pronunciation, public speaking, research methods, and two classes of syntax). Observation
consisted of nine hours divided into 90 minutes for each class. Within the 392 instances of
26
educational code-switching observed, the most common was in the syntax class, with 137
instances in both classes together, while it was least common in the speaking and pronunciation
class, with only 37 instances.
Table 2
Overview of the Classes Observed
Class No. Name of Subject Duration of No. of code-

teachers observation switching
1 T1 Speaking & Pronunciation 90 Minutes 37
2 T2 Syntax 90 Minutes 58
3 T3 Pragmatics 90 Minutes 80
4 T4 Syntax 90 Minutes 79
5 T5 Research methods 90 Minutes 85
6 T6 Public speaking 90 Minutes 53
TOTAL 6 classes 6 teachers 540 Minutes 392
Number of Occurrences for Each Purpose of Code-Switching
Among the six participants, 392 instances of educational code-switching to the L1
occurred. These instances were matched to the four categories, as seen in Table 3. At 392
occurrences, most code-switching was done for linguistic purposes, with the second-most
common reason being for other purposes and the least common being social purposes.
Table 3
Number of Code-Switching Occurrences
Purpose Number of Occurrences

Linguistic Purposes 212
Social Purposes 1
Class Management Purposes 96
Other Purposes 83
Total 392
Results for Research Question 1
The first question of the study consisted of seven linguistic purposes. It aimed to provide
27
evidence for linguistic purposes for educational code-switching to Arabic among Saudi
university participants and to identify their most salient common purposes. The linguistic
purposes of educational code-switching varied, with the majority depending on the topic of the
class. The most common linguistic purpose was to explain new words. On the other hand, to
explain part of a listening text was not found in any of the observation classes. Table 4
summarizes the results for the number of occurrences and percentages of educational code-
switching regarding the seven linguistic purposes.
Table 4
The Percentages and Number of Times Each Linguistic Purpose Occurred
Linguistic Purpose Times Percentage

1- To explain a grammar rule 63 30%
2- To explain new words 92 43%
3- To explain idioms 2 1%
4- To explain pronunciation 2 1%
5- To explain part of a reading text 51 24%
6- To explain part of a listening text 0 0%
7- To clarify culture expressions 2 1%
Total 212 100%
As seen in Table 4, among these purposes, to explain new words was the most common,
occurring a total of 92 times. Participants checked student understanding by code-switching to
the L1 (Arabic), such as in the follow example, in Figure 1.
T5: *…in their social awake ‫اللي هوا الوعي االجتماعي‬
T5: …in their social awakening, which means “social consciousness.”
Figure 1. Excerpt 1. Illustration of using code-switching to explain new words.
Participant 5 code-switched in order to translate the phrase immediately preceding it
(social consciousness) into Arabic. In other instances, some participants used code-switching for
28
linguistic clarification, but in a slightly different way; instead of giving their students the Arabic
translation of English words, they switched to Arabic to ask whether students were familiar with
a word. Examples of this method are given below in Figures 2 and 3.
T6: to defend your thesis, ‫?فيه حد بيعرف ديفند‬
T6: to defend your thesis, does anyone know “defend”?
T3: *it shows obscured, ‫شنو هيا االبسيكيورت؟‬ ‫الضبابية‬
T3: *it shows obscured, what does “obscured” mean? Obscured.
The second most common linguistic purpose, to explain a grammar rule, occurred with
63 times. It was found to occur very frequently in the syntax class, where the participant
sometimes code-switched to Arabic to contrast English and Arabic syntactic rules, as illustrated
in Figure 4. The example illustrates that the participant switched to Arabic in this way to explain
the grammar rule by pointing out the place of agent and object in an English sentence.
T2: ‫وين ال‬object‫? و وين ال‬agent
T2: Where is the object and where is the agent?
Figure 4. Excerpt 4. Illustration of using code-switching to explain a grammar rule.
Another purpose found during observation, which could be considered a subcategory of
to explain a grammar rule, was to explain ideas by comparison with Arabic speech. It was found
12 times out of the total 63 in a syntax class with participant 4. The participant switched to the
L1 to compare Arabic and English syntactic rules. Figure 5 illustrates this instance of code-
29
switching. In this situation, the participant had to explain the Arabic rules for using SOV or VSO
word order and compare them with English rules and examples. The participant code-switched to
the L1 while asking students about a phrase from the Holy Quran (1:5, King Fahd Complex
Edition), using it to illustrate how the grammatical object comes before the verb.
T4: ))‫ مثال ((إياك نعبد و إياك نستعين‬so,
‫ إياك ضمير مبني على السكون في محل نصب مفعول به مقدم‬.
‫ فاالستخدام يدل عاألهمية‬in which ‫ إيش‬in which to show the importance of the object.
T4: “You (Alone) do we worship, and You (Alone) we ask for help” “You” has a
pronoun that has been placed as an early object. So, the object was used early
here in which, what, in which to show the important of the object.
Figure 5. Excerpt 5. Illustration of using code-switching to explain ideas by comparison with
Arabic speech.
The third most common purpose was to explain part of a reading text. It occurred 51
times. Some of the participants code-switched between the L1 and L2 in order to explain part of
a reading text. They usually read a clause in English then switched to Arabic to explain it within
the same sentence (intra-sentential). In the next excerpt, Figure 6 provides an example.
T5: [teacher reads from textbook] The main aim of research is ‫الهدف األساسي للبحث هو‬
to find the truth ‫أن أبحث عن الحقيقه‬
T5: The main aim of research is to find the truth.
Figure 6. Excerpt 6. Illustration of using code-switching to explain part of a reading text.
Although the purposes to explain idioms and to clarify culture expressions were found
only twice, they were found only in pragmatics and public-speaking classes, while to explain
30
pronunciation was found in a pronunciation class. In addition, since no listening class was
observed, the linguistic purpose to explain part of a listening text was not found in the entire
study. This may support the hypothesis that the likelihood of a purpose being used could be
estimated based on which class the code-switching occurred in. Educational code-switching was
found to be an intentional practice among participants in EFL classrooms. Figure 7 illustrates a
typical use of to explain idioms.
T6: What is the blueprint here? ‫ما هي تركيبة المقال؟‬
T6: What is the blueprint here? What is the method for making this article?
Figure 7. Excerpt 7. Illustration of using code-switching to explain idioms.
The following example, Figure 8, illustrates to clarify culture expressions.
T6: [the teacher was explaining the following conversation between a boy and a girl]
The boy: Do you want ice-cream?
The girl: Is the Pope Catholic? So, ‫هي جاوبت بإجابه مالها عالقة لكنها تعني بالطبع‬
T6: So, her answer was not related but she means “definitely yes.”
Figure 8. Excerpt 8. Illustration of using code-switching to clarify culture expressions.
It is also important to point out that both types of code-switching, intra-sentential and
inter-sentential, were found in the linguistic purposes section, as demonstrated in Figures 9 and
10. The participants made use of inter-sentential code-switching in Figure 9.

31
T4: Went to college. [the teacher pointed to this sentence, then asked]
‫هال الفاعل بقدر استنبطه؟‬
T4: Went to college. Can the subject be known to us?
Figure 9. Excerpt 9. Illustration of using inter-sentential code-switching.
They also made use of intra-sentential code-switching, as shown in Figure 10.
T4: ‫ ال‬clause ‫ أما ال‬، ‫ ال تمتلك معنى و ال قاعده‬،‫ جمله غير كامله‬sentence .‫فتمتلك معنى و قاعده‬
T4: The clause is not a sentence, which means it does not give a meaning by itself
and it does not have a rule to follow, while the sentence has a meaning by itself
and it has a rule to follow.
Figure 10. Excerpt 10. Illustration of using intra-sentential code-switching.
After calculating the number of times code-switching occurred for linguistic purposes,
Figure 11 illustrates the percentages for the most/least common purposes for educational code-
switching to the L1. Participants’ linguistic purposes for using educational code-switching were
observed and further divided into seven subcategories. The most common one was to explain
new words, which was used in 43% of code-switching occurrences that were motivated by a
linguistic purpose. The second most common purpose was to explain a grammar rule, with 30%
and, following it, to explain part of a reading text as the third most common linguistic purpose.
On the other hand, three linguistic purposes, to explain idioms, to explain pronunciation, and to
clarify culture expressions, were equally uncommon, with only two occurrences of each. Finally,
the purpose to explain part of a listening text was not found in this study because the researcher
did not have the opportunity to observe any listening classes.

32
Series1, 5- To Series1, 6- To Series1, 7- To

explain part of a explain Linguistics Purposes
part of a clarify culture
reading text, 51, listening text, 0, expressions, 2,
24% 0% 1%
Series1, 1- To
explain a
grammar rule,
Series1, 4- To 63, 30%
explain
pronunciation, 2,
1%
Series1, 3- To
explain
idioms, 2, 1% Series1, 2- To
explain new
words, 92, 43%
Figure 11. The most/least common linguistic purposes for the use of educational code-
switching in EFL classrooms.
The second question of the study aimed to provide evidence for social purposes for using
educational code-switching to Arabic among Saudi university participants. In this category, the
only social purpose observed was to engage in small talk with students, which was only found
once in one of the observation classes. Table 5 summarizes these results.
Table 5
The Percentage and Number of Times Each Social Purpose Occurred
Social Purpose Times Percentage

1- To engage in small talk with students 1 100%
Total 1 100%
As seen in Table 5, only one social purpose was observed, to engage in small talk with
students. Due to the teaching methods observed in these classes, it appeared that participants did
33
not make much use of cooperative teaching methods. As a result, the social purpose to engage in
small talk with students was observed only once. Figure 12 illustrates the sole example of this
purpose.
T4: [after the participant divided the students into groups and asked one of the groups
about the “case ending”] …… Okay, who can give me a sentence? ‫حلو أعطيني جمله من‬
‫عندك؟‬
T4: …… Okay, who can give me a sentence?
Figure 12. Excerpt 11. Illustration of using code-switching to engage in small talk with
students.
The third question of the study consisted of class management purposes divided into 12
subcategories. It was designed to provide an indication of the class management purposes for
using educational code-switching to Arabic among Saudi university participants and to identify
their most salient common purposes. The class management purposes of educational code
switching varied among the participants. The most common purpose was to clarify
activities/exercises. On the other hand, to divide class into groups or pairs and for disciplinary
purposes were not found in any of the observed classes. Table 6 summarizes the results for the
number of times and percentages of educational code-switching in the 12 subcategories.
Among the abovementioned purposes, the most common was to clarify
activities/exercises. This purpose was found more than 32 times, which means the number of
times this purpose was used is more than one third of the total number of times (96) code-
switching occurred in this category.

34
Table 6
The Percentages and Number of Times Each Class Management Purpose Occurred
Class Management Purpose Times Percentage

1- To start the class (warm up) 1 1%
2- To clarify directions 5 5%
3- To divide class into groups or pairs 0 0%
4- To check attendance 1 1%
5- To provide feedback 22 23%
6- To get the class’s attention 5 5%
7- To assign homework/exam 17 18%
8- To clarify activities/exercises 32 34%
9- To make an announcement 1 1%
10- To welcome the students (greeting) 7 7%
11- For class instructions 5 5%
12- For disciplinary purposes 0 0%
Total 96 100%
In this purpose, participants tended to code-switch to the L1 often because they needed to
explain how to answer an exercise. They also used code-switching in this case as a tool to help
the students understand the basic idea of an exercise. The following excerpt, in Figure 13,
explains this subcategory.
T3: [a teacher in a pragmatics class explains one of the exercises] Now, ‫شنو فهمتوا‬
‫ من كالم ليلى ؟‬Yes, she changed the subject, in which she ‫ضيعتهم كمستمع‬
T3: Now, what did you understand from Lila’s answer? Yes she changed the
subject, in which she lost their attention.
Figure 13. Excerpt 12. Illustration of using code-switching to clarify activities/exercises.
As is apparent from this excerpt, the participant explained to students the background
idea of one of the exercises by switching back and forth between the L1 and L2 in this sentence
(inter-sentential code-switching). In this case, they did not understand the idea the first time it
35
was explained, which is why the participant had to code-switch to explain the exercise.
The second most common purpose, to provide feedback, occurred 22 times in the classes
observed. This purpose was used among the participants only to praise the students when they
answered questions or completed textbook exercises. Figure 14 shows an example of this
feedback from one of the participants to a student who answered one of the exercise questions.
T3: Good. ‫جزاك هللا خير‬
T3: Good. May Allah reward you well.
Figure 14. Excerpt 13. Illustration of using code-switching to provide feedback.
Two other purposes were found during the process of observation, which are similar to
and could be merged with the previous purpose. These were to explain how to be good speakers
and to give the students positive feedback (praise/compliments). The first one, to explain how to
be good speakers, was found eight times in a public speaking class with participant 6. The
participant switched to the L1 to give the students advice on how to be an excellent speaker.
Figure 15 illustrates the teacher’s suggestion and feedback.
T6: ً‫ تكلم قليال‬and ‫استعمل جمل قصيرة‬
T6: Use short sentences and do not speak too much.
Figure 15. Excerpt 14. Illustration of using code-switching explain how to be good speakers.
The purpose to give the students positive feedback (praise/compliments) was used 11
times. Participants usually praised the students in English in each class that was observed.
However, they also code-switched to Arabic as well. Participants were observed praising the
students in Arabic many times, such as in Figure 16.

36
T4: …who can answer? ‫حلو بس ليش؟‬
T4: …who can answer? Good, why?
Figure 16. Excerpt 15. Illustration of using code-switching to give the students positive
feedback (praise/compliments).
In Figure 17, another subcategory of to provide feedback was the common idea of using
religious (Islamic) expressions to praise the students. This may indicate the intentional practice
of code-switching on the part of the participants.
T3: [the participant praised a student after he got a pen from him] ‫جزاك هللا خيرا‬
T3: [the participant praised a student after he got a pen from him] May Allah
reward you.
Figure 17. Excerpt 16. Illustration of using code-switching using religious (Islamic)
expressions to praise the students.
The third most common class management purpose behind code-switching was to assign
you.
homework. This purpose was found mostly at the end of the class. The participants wanted to
make sure that students understood what the assigned homework was. To this end, they tended to
switch to the L1 to remind them about the assigned exercises. The following example, in Figure
18, illustrates this purpose.

37
T3: [teacher finishes the class, and before he leaves, says] Do not forget, ‫بتحلوا‬
‫أربعه و خمسه؟‬
T3: Do not forget, do numbers 4 and 5.
Figure 18. Excerpt 17. Illustration of using code-switching to assign homework.
Another example, in Figure 19, indicates that participants code-switched to assign new
homework. In this case, a participant was doing the exercises with students, and then he saw that
the lecture was dismissed, so he decided to make the rest of the exercise a homework assignment.
T4: ‫كملوا ال‬homework‫هذا يا إخوان‬
T4: O brothers, complete this homework.
Figure 19. Excerpt 18. Illustration of using code-switching to assign homework.
Another purpose found during the observations was to chat with students about the exam,
which occurred 9 out of 17 times. The participants switched to the L1 while talking with students
to clarify one of the main points of the final exam. Figure 20 illustrates a participant discussing
an example with his students about some important points that they needed to address during
their study for the final exams.

38
T5: ‫ راح يجيكم سؤال واحد عال‬..‫أكيد تتذكروا الورقة الثانية اللي عطيتكم اياها‬editing, punctuation,
capitalization [students ask if there is a possibility to take this question off or delete it]
‫[ ال بيكون زيادة‬then they ask him to explain about this point] ‫زي متى بتحطوا ال‬capital ، ‫مثال‬
‫و ال‬exclamation mark ‫ال‬،‫مثال‬capital ‫بيحط لألسماء ووو آخذناها من قبل‬.
T5: I am sure that you still remember having a second paper…there will be a
question on the exam regarding editing, punctuation, capitalization. [his students ask
if there is a possibility to take this question off or delete it] NO, there might be more
than that. [then they ask him to explain this point] There might be questions like
when you should use capital letters, exclamation marks, etc. Capitals are for
names…we have discussed them before.
Figure 20. Excerpt 19. Illustration of using code-switching to chat with students about the
exam.
The next purpose—as well as the others in this category—was found less than 10 times.
The class management purpose to welcome the students (greeting), was used seven times. This
purpose was observed during communication between the participants and students who had
arrived late to class. Educational code-switching to Arabic occurred when participants responded
to the greeting. In Figure 21, a student who had just entered the classroom said the following.
39
S: ‫السالم عليكم‬
T1: ‫و عليكم السالم‬
S: Peace, mercy and the blessings of God.
T1: And peace be upon you and the mercy and blessings of God.
Figure 21. Excerpt 20. Illustration of using code-switching to welcome the students
(greeting).
Other class management purposes, to clarify directions, to get the class’s attention, and
for class instructions, were all used the same number of times, only five times each. Participants
tended to use educational code-switching to the L1 for these purposes. In the case of to clarify
directions, excerpt 21 in Figure 22 shows a participant code-switching to Arabic to make sure the
students understood him when explaining ideas and telling them which page they should turn to.
T2: Open your book ‫ على‬page 101, 101 ‫صفحة‬
T2: Open your book to page 101.
Figure 22. Excerpt 21. Illustration of using code-switching to clarify directions.
The purpose to get the class’s attention only occurred in two situations. The most
common in these observed classes is explained in Figure 23, which shows that the participant
switched to the L1 after explaining an idea.
T4: Any questions, ‫يا إخوان؟‬
T4: Any questions, O’ brother?
Figure 23. Excerpt 22. Illustration of using code-switching to get the class’s attention.
40
In this excerpt, the participant switched to the L1 to get the students’ attention and to see
if they were keeping up with him during the lessons. The other case was found in the next
excerpt, in Figure 24, which is related to an individual case in the middle of a lesson in one of the
classes where the participant pointed to one of the students, calling him by his first name and
saying the following.
T3: ‫معانا؟‬
T3: Are you with us?
Figure 24. Excerpt 23. Illustration of using code-switching to get the class’s attention.
The purpose for class instructions was observed when the participant explained some
instructions for the lesson materials. He was attempting to help students understand how to use
them during or outside class. As Figure 25 shows, the participant was explaining how to
download a file for the next class.
T3: ‫ بتروح لل‬download ‫بتالقيها في ال‬music
T3: You should go to a folder called “Download” then, you will find it in the
“music” section.
Figure 25. Excerpt 24. Illustration of using code-switching for class instructions.
Three class management purposes, to start the class (warm up), to check attendance, and
to make an announcement, were only found once each during one of the classes observed. Figure
26 illustrates a participant switching to the L1 to start the class (warm up) after he entered the
classroom.
41
T6: [after entering the class, he says] ‫كيف الحال ؟‬
T6: [after entering the class, he says] How are you?
Figure 26. Excerpt 25. Illustration of using code-switching to start the class (warm up).
The second purpose found only once during the classes was to check attendance. This
purpose is illustrated in Figure 27. After the participant checked attendance, a student raised his
hand and said that he did not hear his name, so the participant asked the following.
T1: ‫أنت مضيف الماده؟‬
T1: Have you registered for this class?
Figure 27. Excerpt 26. Illustration of using code-switching to check attendance.
On the other hand, because observation took place during the two weeks immediately
before final examinations, more results were expected to involve the social purpose to make an
announcement since the participants were expected to review the final exams with students and
announce where and when the exams would be held. However, there was only one situation
where a participant code-switched to Arabic, as shown in Figure 28.
T5: [teacher discusses the exam review with students and says] … Okay, guys, ‫راح‬
‫أعطيكم سؤال عن الموضوع هذا‬..
T5: …Okay, guys, this part is included in the exam.
Figure 28. Excerpt 27. Illustration of using code-switching to make an announcement.
Moreover, it is important to note that the final two purposes were not found in all of the
classes under observation. These purposes were for disciplinary purposes and to divide class into
groups or pairs. However, this does not mean that these two class management purposes were
42
never used in the participants’ classes; rather, it means that they were simply not used in the
classes observed.
It is also important to point out that both types of code-switching, intra-sentential and
inter-sentential, were found among the class management purposes section. They made use of
inter-sentential code-switching, as in Figure 28. The participants also made use of intra-sentential
code-switching in Figure 25.
After calculating the number of times code-switching occurred for class management
purposes, Figure 29 illustrates the percentages for the most and least common purposes for code-
switching found in this study. Participants’ class management purposes for using educational
code-switching were observed and found to belong to 12 subcategories. The most common one,
to clarify activities/exercises, had a percentage of 34% and was the most common, occurring a
total of 32 times. The purpose to provide feedback had the second-highest percentage of 32%
(occurring a total of 22 times). At 18%, the purpose to assign homework was close to the second
most common purpose. Since their rates were close to each other, these three were considered the
most common. In contrast, the rest of the subcategories represented less than 10% of the total
occurrences of code-switching. The first one, to welcome students (greeting) made up 7% of all
occurrences, while to clarify directions, to get the class’s attention, and for class instructions
each occurred 5% of the time (or five times each).

43
Series1, Series1, 11- For class Series1, 1- To start Series1, 2- Series1, 3- To divide
12- For instructions, 5, 5% the class (warm up), To clarify class into groups or
disciplinary 1, 1% directions, 5, pairs, 0, 0%
Series1, 10- To purposes, 5%
welcome the Series1, 4- To check
0, 0%
students attendance, 1, 1%
(greeting), 7, 7%
Series1, 9- To make
an announcement, 1,
1% Series1, 5- To
provide feedback,
22, 23%
Series1, 8- To clarify
activities/exercises,
32, 34%
Series1, 6- To get
the class’s
attention, 5, 5%
Series1, 7- To assign
homework/exam,
Class Managments Purposes 17, 18%
Figure 29. The most/least common class management purposes for the use of educational code-
switching in EFL classrooms.
On the other hand, two purposes—to start the class (warm up) and to check attendance—
both occurred 1% of the time out of the class management purposes observed. In other words,
they occurred only once each, while the final two categories, for disciplinary purposes and to
divide class into groups or pairs, were not found in this study.
The fourth question of the study aimed to provide evidence for other purposes for code-
switching not related to linguistic, social, or class management purposes. The results revealed
only one purpose not categorized into the first three. This purpose was to connect sentences. Due
44
to the impossibility of calculating the percentages, Table 7 summarizes the results of educational
code-switching for specific purposes.
Table 7
The Number of Times Each Other Purpose Occurred
Other Purpose Times

1- To connect sentences 83
Total 83
This purpose, to connect sentences, was found 83 times. In this purpose, participants
tended to code-switch to the L1 often and extensively, using it as a tool to connect two English
phrases/sentences. Figure 30 shows some of the conjunctions or phrases that were used.
‫ أو‬،‫ مفهومة يا إخوان؟ و‬،‫ حلو‬، ‫ واضح يا إخوان‬، ‫ شنو هي؟ واضح‬،‫ اللي هو إيش‬،‫ليش؟‬،‫إيش‬
What, why? It is, what is it? Clear? Is it clear, brothers? Good? Understand it,
brothers? And, or.
Figure 30. Excerpt 28. Illustration of using code-switching to connect between the sentences.
Most of these conjunctions were instances of tag switching. Figure 31, exemplifies this
subcategory and shows how such tags were inserted into an English sentence.
T9: ‫كيف بدي أعمل ال‬Wh-questions ‫ بال‬Arabic ‫ و‬English?
T9: How can I make Wh-questions in Arabic and English?
Figure 31. Excerpt 29. Illustration of using code-switching to connect between the sentences.
This chapter illustrated through content analysis the results of observing educational
code-switching in a Saudi university and analyzed its linguistic, social, and class management
purposes. Each of these three main code-switching categories was discussed individually. A
45
fourth category was added for purposes that did not fall into the three main categories. The
results showed that 392 instances of educational code-switching to the L1 occurred among the
six participants. The rate of usage of each category (linguistic, social, class management) was
calculated to show which purposes for code-switching were more common. In addition,
particularly interesting quotes from the participants were presented in excerpts to emphasize why
they employed code-switching. The next chapter discusses the relationships between these
results and the theories and studies presented in the literature review. Afterward, it discusses
study limitations and recommendations for future research.

46
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The present study observed the use of educational code-switching in a Saudi university
and analyzed its linguistic, social, and class management purposes. This chapter provides an
analysis of the results, connecting them with related theories and studies mentioned in the
literature review. The study limitations are described and recommendations for further studies are
offered. Finally, the major conclusions of the study are presented.
The researcher expected differences between the younger and older participants in terms
of teaching and educational experience, specifically anticipating that younger participants would
be less perceptive of code-switching. However, no differences between these two groups were
found. In general, the participants behaved the same way regarding the use of educational code-
switching to the L1. One exception would be T6, who claimed to only use English with
colleagues but he was observed code-switching into the L1 in class.
Discussion
The Role of Educational Code-Switching to the L1
Previous studies varied in how they approached the topic of the general use of code-
switching among Arabic speakers. Some studies focused on the behavior of the participants (e.g.,
Abalhassan & Alshalawi, 2000), while others shed light on social interaction in online messages
(e.g., Eldin, 2014; Malik, 1994). The present study, however, covered a different topic of code-
switching. It used an a priori set of purposes, through content analysis, to observe the use of
educational code-switching in a Saudi university and analyze its linguistic, social, and class
management purposes. Six teachers from Majmaah University participated in this study. Among
the six participants, the results contained 392 instances of educational code-switching to the L1.
47
Based on these findings, the present study could be interpreted as agreeing with previous studies
that found code-switching to be used extensively and frequently (e.g., Abdel Majid & Mugaddam,
2013; Afzal, 2013; Liu, 2010).
Moreover, the results demonstrated that among those 392 occurrences of code-switching,
51% (or 212 instances) were for linguistic purposes, making it the most common reason for
code-switching in the data. These results corresponded with studies that have demonstrated that
the use of educational code-switching in EFL classes is a useful function among teachers and in
teaching methods (e.g., Liu, 2010). Because educational code-switching in EFL classes was most
commonly performed for linguistic purposes in this study, this finding contributes to studies that
have argued that educational code-switching in EFL classes is a useful tool in facilitating L2
learning (e.g., Pei-shi, 2012). The results contained 96 instances of educational code-switching
for class management purposes and 84 for social purposes and other purposes. Therefore, the
results also supported studies that suggested that code-switching for these purposes also performs
a useful function among teachers and in teaching methods (e.g., Liu, 2010) as well as being used
as a medium of instruction (e.g., Abdel Magid & Mugaddam, 2013; Pei-shi, 2012).
Controversially, other researchers have claimed that the use of educational code-
switching is accidental on the part of those code-switching, whether they be teachers or students
(e.g., Moghadam, Abdul Samad, & Shahraki, 2012). Nevertheless, based on the results, the
researcher interpreted all instances of using educational code-switching for social and other
purposes (84 instances) as an accidental practice, while the rest of the instances (308 total: 212
for linguistic purposes and 96 for class management purposes) were perceived as an intentional
practice. By contrasting the 84 instances for social and other purposes with the 308 instances of
linguistic and class management purposes, participants appeared to display a willingness to use
48
educational code-switching.
In support of this claim, the most common purpose to explain new words was observed
92 times—making up 43% of the total occurrences of linguistic purposes (212)—as well as
making up 32% of the total times code-switching occurred (392). The participants were also
sensitive to using English terms that students would not be familiar with. They checked student
understanding by code-switching to the L1 (Arabic) (see Figure 2) or code-switched to translate
an English phrase into Arabic (see Figure 1). It should be pointed out that every new English
word defined by the EFL teachers was explained by giving either an Arabic equivalent or an
explanation in Arabic. Thus, new English terms were not explained via English. The researcher
concluded that the participants’ purposes for using code-switching suggested that such code-
switching was not an accidental movement among teachers in EFL classrooms, but rather an
intentional practice.
Although previous studies varied in how they approached code-switching among Arabic
speakers—with some examining participant behavior (e.g., Abalhassan & Alshalawi, 2000) and
others, social interaction in online messages (e.g., Eldin, 2014; Malik, 1994)—the present study
applied content analysis to an a priori set of purposes and created another purpose to observe the
use of educational code-switching in a Saudi university and analyze its linguistic, social, and
class management purposes. This study supported previous studies that claimed educational
code-switching in EFL classes is a useful tool in facilitating L2 learning (e.g., Pei-shi, 2012),
serves a positive function among teachers and in teaching methods (e.g., Liu, 2010), is used as a
medium of instruction (e.g., Abdel Magid & Mugaddam, 2013; Pei-shi, 2012), and that when it
occurs it appears to be used extensively and frequently (e.g., Abdel Majid & Mugaddam, 2013;
Afzal, 2013; Liu, 2010). While some studies have suggested that educational code-switching to
49
the L1 in EFL classrooms is an unconscious act (e.g., Moghadam, Abdul Samad, & Shahraki,
2012), the present study proposed that the use of educational code-switching was an intentional
practice among teachers in EFL classrooms.
Linguistic, Social, and Class Management Purposes
Although the results showed a variety of reasons for code-switching, they also supported
some studies’ claims that educational code-switching in EFL classrooms should not be used in
general for any reason but rather only in specific situations and for particular purposes (e.g., Al-
Nofaie, 2010). Participants did not code-switch throughout the entire class period at random.
Instead, every instance of educational code-switching to the L1 that was observed showed
particular purposes behind their use (linguistics, social, class management).
Moreover, most of the purposes observed in the results supported the purposes described
in previous studies that claimed educational code-switching was a communication strategy
between students and EFL teachers. Purposes found that were also presented in Khresheh (2012)
included to avoid communication problems, especially with beginners, and for an eclectic
technique (p. 1). Since educational code-switching to the L1 in the classes observed usually
communicated information between the teachers and students, the underlying reason for code-
switching for linguistic, social, or class management purposes was to avoid difficulties in
communication. Under this perspective, all of the reasons for code-switching observed could be
seen as related to the two purposes described in Khresheh’s (2012) study.
As indicated above, the results supported some of the assertions made in previous studies
and contradicted others. This study’s connections to various aspects of previous literature are
explained in greater detail below.
Linguistic purposes. The results showed that Saudi university instructors observed code-
50
switched to Arabic for linguistic purposes. Some of the purposes found were consistent with
those presented in the literature review. For example, to explain a grammar rule occurred 63
times (30% of all instances of code-switching performed for linguistic purposes). This finding
supported the purpose to explain grammatical terms discussed in Al-Nofaie (2010, p. 78). The
purpose to explain new words occurred 92 times (43% of code-switching for linguistic purposes).
This finding was comparable to another purpose found in Al-Nofaie (2010): to introduce new
vocabulary (p. 78). This purpose was also similar to the purpose to clarify and translate into the
L1 from Moghadam, Abdul Samad, and Shahraki (2012), because to clarify and translate into
the L1 is broad enough to contain several more specific purposes, including to explain new words,
which was examined in the present study.
Not all purposes examined in previous studies were found to occur in the present study.
While to avoid grammatical mistakes in the L2 (English) and to avoid difficult expressions in the
L2 were found in Khresheh (2012), neither of these purposes appeared in the data of the present
study. Although to avoid difficult expressions in the L2 (English) was not found in the present
study, certain linguistic purposes that were found (to explain idioms, to clarify culture expression,
and to explain part of a reading text) covered essentially the same purpose from different
perspectives.
Finally, certain new linguistic purposes for code-switching not found in previous research
were presented in this study. These novel purposes included to explain pronunciation, to explain
idioms, to clarify culture expression, and to explain part of a reading text. Another unanticipated
purpose was found during the observation classes and included under linguistic purposes was to
explain ideas by comparison with Arabic speech. Together, they occurred 69 times, making up
25% of the instances of code-switching used for linguistic purposes. Thus, although some of the
51
linguistic purposes found in the present study agreed with previous studies, some of the purposes
examined could not be compared to the existing literature because they had not been previously
studied.
Class management purposes. As with some of the linguistic purposes, some of the class
management purposes observed in this study were new and had not been discussed in previous
research. New class managements purposes included to clarify directions, to check attendance, to
get the class’s attention, to clarify activities/exercises, to assign homework/exam, and for class
instructions. Other purposes were found during observation and were included under these
purposes: to welcome the students (greeting), to make an announcement, to give students positive
feedback, to chat with students about the exam, and to explain how to be good speakers. All of
these occurred in the data, although two other novel class management purposes, to divide class
into groups or pairs and for disciplinary purposes, were placed in the observation sheet but not
found in this study.
The purpose to say religious expressions had been categorized in previous studies as a
linguistic purpose (e.g., Khresheh, 2012). However, the results of the present study suggested
that it behaved more like a class management purpose. The examples for class management
purposes to welcome the students (greeting) (Figure 21), to give the students positive feedback
(praise/compliments) (Figure 16), and to provide feedback (Figure 14) showed educational code-
switching used for religious (Islamic) expressions
On the other hand, some purposes for class management found in the results supported
those presented in previous studies. The purpose to start the class (warm up) (Figure 26) fulfilled
a similar role as the purpose to reduce the anxiety of teachers and students from Yavuz (2012).
This is because the teacher switched to the L1 to make the students feel ready for the lesson;
52
consequently, this action served to reduce anxiety among the students. Also, although the class
management purpose to chat with students about the exam was found during the class
observations, it had not been included in the observation sheet before data collection began. As a
result, it was merged with to assign homework. Some of the participants used educational code-
switching to assign exam dates and explain information regarding exams (Figure 20). This
finding agreed with one of the purposes stated in Al-Nofaie (2010), which was to give exam
instructions (p. 78). Thus, although some of the categories were not borrowed from other studies,
some of those novel categories could be compared to the results of previous studies because of
shared characteristics.
Social purposes and other purposes. The results provided evidence for social purposes
and other purposes unrelated to linguistic, or class management purposes. None of the purposes
observed in either of these final categories had been examined in previous studies. The new
social purpose observed was to engage in small talk with students. A novel purpose categorized
under other purposes was to connect sentences.
Limitations and Recommendations
Several limitations may have narrowed the results of the present study. The most
important limitation was the lack of female participants, which meant that the results could not
be generalized to female Saudi university EFL teachers. To obtain a more complete picture of
code-switching among Saudi university EFL instructors, a study should be conducted that uses
gender as a variable.
The other major limitation was the relatively small number of participants, as the study
was conducted with only six teachers. The number and types of classes observed were limited as
well. Thus, although the results were interesting, they could not be generalized to a larger
53
population of Arabic-speaking EFL teachers engaging in educational code-switching. Further
research would benefit from a larger number of participants. Another recommended for future
studies is that it could be beneficial to explore students’ attitudes towards code-switching.
Since this was an observational study, all conclusion or results were subject to researcher
biases or assumptions, as is normal in qualitative research. One way to further develop this line
of research would be to conduct interviews and check whether what was assumed to be
intentional was considered intentional by the participants.
Conclusion
The results of this study provided a more in-depth understanding of the use of educational
code-switching to the L1 (Arabic). Previous studies had approached the topic of code-switching
among Arabic speakers from a variety of perspectives (e.g., Abalhassan & Alshalawi, 2000;
Eldin, 2014; Malik, 1994), but the present study focused on the use of educational code-
switching to the L1 among EFL teachers in a Saudi university.
The results agreed with previous studies that the use of educational code-switching in
EFL classes has been demonstrated to be a useful tool in facilitating L2 learning (e.g., Pei-shi,
2012), to perform a positive function among teachers (e.g., Liu, 2010), to be used as a medium of
instruction (e.g., Abdel Magid & Mugaddam, 2013; Pei-shi, 2012), and that when it occurs it is
used extensively and frequently (e.g., Abdel Majid & Mugaddam, 2013; Afzal, 2013; Liu, 2010).
Conversely, some studies have suggested that educational code-switching to the L1 in EFL
classrooms is an unconscious act (Moghadam, Abdul Samad, & Shahraki, 2012); the present
study assumed, based on the results, that the use of educational code-switching was an
intentional practice among teachers in EFL classrooms.
On the other hand, although the results showed a great frequency of different purposes for
54
code-switching, the results also agreed with previous studies that participants were not code-
switching during the whole class time but rather at specific times and for specific purposes (see
Al-Nofaie, 2010). Furthermore, the results concluded that the purposes for switching from the L2
to the L1 in EFL classes at times supported and other times contradicted or failed to confirm
claims made in previous studies.
The most common linguistic purpose was to explain new words, while the least common
was to explain part of a listening text, which was not found in this study. The most common class
management purpose was to clarify activities/exercises, making up 34% of all such purposes.
Two purposes, for disciplinary purposes and to divide class into groups or pairs, were not found
in this study. Finally, new linguistic, social, and class management purposes were presented (e.g.,
to explain pronunciation, to clarify directions, to engage in small talk with students), and another
purpose was found that could not be categorized into one of the three main types, which was to
connect between sentences.
The results provided a more in-depth understanding of educational code-switching to the
L1 (Arabic). They agreed with previous studies that have found such code-switching to be very
common among EFL teachers. Although participants displayed different linguistic, social, and
class management purposes, analysis of the data revealed that some purposes, particularly
linguistic purposes, were more common than others. Further research could extend the methods
of the present study by including a larger population consisting of participants of both genders
and explore students’ attitudes towards code-switching in EFL classrooms.

55
REFERENCES
Abalhassan, K. M., & Alshalawi, H. G. (2000). Code-switching behavior of Arab speakers of
English as a second language in the United States. Intercultural Communication Studies,
10(1), 179–188.
Abdel Magid, M. E., & Mugaddam, A. H. (2013). Code switching as an interactive tool in ESL
classrooms. English Linguistics Research, 2(2), 31–42.
Afzal, S. (2013). Using of the first language in English classroom as a way of scaffolding for
both the students and teachers to learn and teach English. International Research Journal
of Applied and Basic Sciences, 4(7), 1846–1854.
Al-Nofaie, H. (2010). The attitudes of teachers and students towards using Arabic in EFL
classrooms in Saudi public schools: A case study. Novitas-Royal (Research on Youth and
Language), 4(1), 64–95.
Alomoush, O. I., & Matarneh, M. A. (2010). The spread of code-switches into Jordanian social
settings. Cultura: International Journal of Philosophy of Culture & Axiology, 7(2), 223–
233.
Bista, K. (2010). Factors of code switching among bilingual English students in the university
classroom: A survey. English for Specific Purposes World, 9(29), 1–19.
Blom, J., & Gumperz, J. J. (1972). Social meaning in linguistic structures: Code switching in
northern Norway. In J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics (pp.
407–434). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Sage Publications.
Eldin, A. A. (2014). Socio linguistic study of code switching of the Arabic language speakers on
56
social networking. International Journal of English Linguistics, 4(6), 78–86.
Gulzar, M. A. (2009). Classroom discourse in bilingual context: Effects of code switching on
language learning in Pakistani TEFL classroom (Doctoral dissertation). National
University of Modern Languages, Islamabad.
Gulzar, M. A. (2010). Code-switching: Awareness about its utility in bilingual classrooms.
Bulletin of Education & Research, 32(2), 23–44.
Gulzar, M. A., & Al Asmari, A. (2013). Intra-sentential patterns of code-mixing between
bilingual male and female teachers: A comparative study. European Journal of Scientific
Research, 97(3), 411–429.
Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge.
Hughes, C. E., Shaunessy, E. S., Brice, A. R., Ratliff, M., & McHatton, P. (2006). Code
switching among bilingual and limited English proficient students: Possible indicators of
giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(1), 7–28.
Hussein, R. (1999). Code-alteration among Arab college students. World Englishes, 18(2), 281–
289.
Khresheh, A. (2012). Exploring when and why to use Arabic in the Saudi Arabian EFL
classroom: Viewing L1 use as eclectic technique. English Language Teaching, 5(6), 78–
88.
Levine, G. S. (2003). Student and instructor beliefs and attitudes about target language use, first
language use, and anxiety: Report of a questionnaire study. The Modern Language
Journal, 87(3), 343–364.
Liu, J. (2010). Teachers’ code-switching to the L1 in EFL classroom. The Open Applied
Linguistics Journal, 3, 10–23.

57
Malik, L. (1994). Socio-linguistics: A study of code-switching. New Delhi, India: Anmol
Publications.
Moghadam, S. H., Abdul Samad, A., Shahraki, E. R. (2012). Code switching as a medium of
instruction in an EFL classroom. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(11), 2219–
2225.
Nilep, C. (2006). “Code switching” in sociocultural linguistics. Colorado Research in Linguistics,
19(1), 1–22.
Oco, N., & Roxas, R. E. (2012). Pattern matching refinements to dictionary-based code-
switching point detection. Proceedings of the 26th Pacific Asia Conference on Language,
Information, and Computation. Bali, Indonesia.
Pei-shi, W. (2012). Code-switching as a strategy use in an EFL classroom in Taiwan. US-China
Foreign Language, 10(10), 1669–1675.
Sert, O. (2005). The functions of code switching in ELT classrooms. The Internet TESL Journal,
11(8).
Yavuz, F. (2012). The attitudes of English teachers about the use of L1 in the teaching of L2.
Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 4339–4344.

APPENDICES
58
Appendix A
Consent Form
Dear participant,
My name is Ali Hussain A. Almuhayya, and I am a graduate student in the Linguistics
Department at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, USA. I am asking you to participate in
my study, which will examine the use of educational code-switching in a Saudi university.
Participation is VOLUNTARY. If you choose to participate in this study, it will take
approximately 100 minutes of your time. You will first be asked to provide demographic
information (age, gender, education, teaching experience, etc.). Then, the researcher will visit
one of your classes (two lectures in a week, totaling roughly 100 minutes). During each visit, the
researcher will record the lectures and fill out an observation sheet. If you agree to take part in
the study, you need to sign this consent form. However, if you later change your mind, you may
withdraw at any time without hesitation.
All your responses will be kept CONFIDENTIAL within reasonable limits. Only those
directly involved with this study will have access to the data. After the study is completed, the
data will be saved for educational purposes/future research.
If you have any questions about the study, please contact me: Ali H. Almuhayya, Project
Researcher, 2943 W. Sunset Dr. Carbondale, IL, 62901, tel: (618) 434-0874, email:
ali2vip@siu.edu. You can also contact Dr. Jeffery Punske, Research Advisor, Department of
Linguistics, Fanner Hall 3230 SIUC, Carbondale, IL, 62901, tel: (618) 453-3414, email:
punske@siu.edu.
Please read the statement below and check whether you agree or do not agree to
participate in the study. Then, sign and date this form.
Thank you for taking the time to assist me in this research.
“I AGREE _____ I DO NOT AGREE _____to participate in this study.”
“I AGREE _____ I DO NOT AGREE _____that my responses will be digitally recorded.”
“I AGREE _____ I DO NOT AGREE _____ that Mr. Almuuhayya, Ali H. may keep the recorded
tape and save them for educational purposes/future research.
59
Participant Signature and Date
This project has been reviewed and approved by the SIU Human Subjects Committee. Questions
concerning your rights as a participant in this research may be addressed to the Committee
Chairperson, Office of Sponsored Projects Administration, SIUC, Carbondale, IL 62901-4709.
Phone: (618) 453-4533. Email: siuhsc@siu.edu.
60
Appendix B
Demographic Questions
Please fill in the following demographic information to the best of your ability.
1. What is your age and gender?
a) Age: _____________________ b) Gender: ________________
2. What is your nationality and hometown?
a) Nationality: _______________ b) Hometown: ______________
3. What is your level of education?
_____________________________________________________________________
4. How many years have you been teaching English?
_____________________________________________________________________
5. What is the language(s) that you generally use with your family and friends?
_____________________________________________________________________
6. What is the language(s) that you generally use with your university colleagues?
_____________________________________________________________________
61
Appendix C
Classroom Observation Sheet
LINGUISTIC PURPOSES
Teacher name (not real) Level
Class topic Date
A. Linguistic purposes Times of code-switching Examples
1- To explain a grammar rule
2- To explain new words
3- To explain idioms
4- To explain pronunciation
5- To explain part of a reading text
6- To explain part of a listening text
7- To clarify culture expressions

62
CLASS MANAGEMENT PURPOSES
B. Class management Times of code-switching Examples

purposes
1- To start the class (warm up)
2- To clarify directions
3- To divide class into groups or pairs
4- To check attendance
5- To provide feedback
6- To get the class’s attention
7- To assign homework
8- To clarify activities/exercises
9- To make an announcement
10- To welcome the students (greeting)
11- For class instructions
12- For disciplinary purposes
SOCIAL PURPOSES
63
C. Social purposes Times of code-switching Examples

1- To engage in small talk with
students
OTHER PURPOSES
64
D. Other purposes Times of code-switching Examples

65
VITA
Graduate School
Southern Illinois University
Ali Hussain A. Almuhayya
ali2vip@siu.edu
Qassim University
Bachelor of Art, English Language, February 2011
Thesis Title:
The Use of Educational Code-Switching in Saudi University EFL Classrooms:
A Case Study
Major Professor: Dr. Jeffrey P. Punske

3the Use of Educational Code-Switching in Saudi University EFL Classrooms A Case Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3the Use of Educational Code-Switching in Saudi University EFL Classrooms A Case Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE USE OF EDUCATIONAL CODE-SWITCHING IN SAUDI

UNIVERSITY EFL CLASSROOMS: A CASE STUDY

Ali Hussain Ali Almuhayya

B.A. Qassim University, 2011

Department of Applied Linguistics

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

THE USE OF EDUCATIONAL CODE-SWITCHING IN SAUDI

Ali Hussain Ali Almuhayya

A Thesis Submitted in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of

in the field of Applied Linguistics

Jeffrey Punske, Chair

TITLE: THE USE OF EDUCATIONAL CODE-SWITCHING IN SAUDI

MAJOR PROFESSOR: Dr. Jeffrey Punske

demographic questionnaire and an audio recorder used in conjunction with a classroom

could be interpreted as an intentional practice among teachers in EFL classrooms.

into one of the three main types.

Hussa Almuhayya and Hussain Almuhayya

Furthermore, to my parents, Hussa and Hussain, and to my wife, Ibtesam, I send my

their prayers during this journey.

In addition, thanks go to my childhood friends as well as to those who participated in this

LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... v

CHAPTER 1 – Introduction ................................................................................................ 1

CHAPTER 2 – Literature Review ....................................................................................... 9

CHAPTER 3 – Methodology ............................................................................................ 20

CHAPTER 4 – Results ...................................................................................................... 25

CHAPTER 5 – Discussion and Conclusion ...................................................................... 46

Educational code-switching is a linguistic phenomenon that can be found during

educational code-switching (Gulzar, 2009).

hypothesis, research questions, variables, participants, instruments, data collection, procedure,

and differentiating the various types of code-switching.

An Overview of the Concept of Code-Switching

Code-switching is a phenomenon that can be investigated from various points of view,

including a sociolinguistic prospective, as in Nilep (2006); an educational prospective, as in

(languages, dialects, accents) in spoken or written communication. Many linguists have

(2006) introduces code-switching as “the practice of selecting or altering linguistic elements so

two codes during the process of communication.

switching research in the field of linguistics’’ (Nielp, 2006, p. 4).

language choice and code-switching is obvious and interrelated. Code-switching is a subtype of

Code-selection is another term associated with code-switching, which is introduced in

among other factors.

In general, previous studies indicate that code-switching is a social and linguistic

or non-verbal communication. It is considered a result of language contact and is also affiliated

different types of code-switching are discussed in the following section.

types: tag-switching, inter-sentential switching, and intra-sentential switching (as cited in

Alomoush & Matarneh, 2010).

Arabic speech, it might not violate Arabic syntactic rules.

avoid violating the rules of both languages (Eldin, 2014).

A fourth type, intra-word code-switching, is described by Oco and Roxas (2012).

various types of code-switching, Gumperz favored the term conversational code-switching in

1982 (p. 9).

As shown in this section, distinguishing between different types of code-switching has

Code-Switching in the EFL Classroom

blockage or deficiency in learning a language, but may be considered as a useful strategy in

the EFL classroom is very common.

educational code-switching. Educational code-switching takes place when teachers or students

This chapter introduced the concept of code-switching. Based on the literature, it is a

switching, and intra-sentential switching. Other types—such as intra-word switching,

phenomenon of code-switching among Saudi speakers as well as educational code-switching to

Arabic in EFL classrooms.

Code-switching usually occurs between two or more speakers; in particular,