CHALLENGES FACED BY SYRIAN EFL UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS IN LEARNING ENGLISH: THE ROLE OF LINGUISTIC DIFFERENCES, AI TOOLS, AND PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46827/ejals.v9i3.753Keywords:
EFL education, post-conflict learning, artificial intelligence in education, Syrian higher education, Technology Acceptance Model, pedagogical integrationAbstract
This study examined the challenges Syrian EFL undergraduate students face in a post-conflict context, focusing on language challenges, perceptions of AI tools, and pedagogical practices. The study used a questionnaire to collect data from 204 undergraduate students at three Syrian universities, assessing language-learning challenges, perceptions of AI tools, and classroom contextual schooling using five-point Likert-scale items. The findings showed that expressing ideas fluently (M = 4.21) was the greatest challenge, while grammar (M = 3.04) and pronunciation (M = 3.47) were much lower. A significant gap in critical awareness of guidance emerged in that students showed moderate-high degrees of awareness of AI tools (M = 3.62) but very low difficulty levels in using the tools (M = 2.85) and overwhelmingly indicated that they needed guidance from teachers (M = 4.16) and that universities had not provided robust AI training (M = 4.03), while teachers did not utilize AI in the classroom (M = 3.67). Female students reported significantly greater challenges with vocabulary than male students. Vocabulary challenges were less significant as students progressed from Year 1 to Year 4, while awareness of inadequacy in the institution increased over time. There were positive correlations across the linguistic, AI, and institutional dimensions, indicating some clustering of challenges. These findings suggest that the Technology Acceptance Model ought to be expanded to include perceived pedagogical practice integration in addition to perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. The study demonstrates that the potential for student agency regarding accessing the technologies provides intervention clues for professional development opportunities and future curriculum design, not hardware expenditures.References
Al Azmeh, Z., Dillabough, J., Fimyar, O., McLaughlin, C., Abdullateef, S., Aloklah, W. A., … Kadan, B. (2020). Cultural trauma and the politics of access to higher education in Syria. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 42(4), 528–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2020.1715922
Al-Khresheh, M. H. (2016). A review study of error analysis theory. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research, 2(1), 49–59. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299456806_A_Review_Study_of_Error_Analysis_Theory
Belmekki, A., & Djebbari, Z. (2008). The English and Arabic vowel systems dynamics: A comparative descriptive analysis. Revue Maghrébine des Langues, 6(1), 359–370. Retrieved from https://asjp.cerist.dz/en/article/133668
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Buckland, P. (2005). Reshaping the future: Education and postconflict reconstruction. World Bank Publications. Retrieved from https://documents.worldbank.org/pt/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/860731468138857154
Bush, K. D., & Saltarelli, D. (Eds.). (2000). The two faces of education in ethnic conflict: Towards a peacebuilding education for children. UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. Retrieved from https://protectingeducation.org/wp-content/uploads/documents/documents_unicef_the_two_faces_education_in_ethnic_conflict_peace_buil.pdf
Chen, X., Zou, D., Xie, H., Cheng, G., & Liu, C. (2022). Two decades of artificial intelligence in education: Contributors, collaborations, research topics, challenges, and future directions. Educational Technology & Society, 25(1), 28–47. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48647028
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Designing_and_Conducting_Mixed_Methods_R.html?id=eTwmDwAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Dryden-Peterson, S. (2016). Refugee education: The crossroads of globalization. Educational Researcher, 45(9), 473–482. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16683398
Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
European School Education Platform. (2024). Artificial intelligence as an asset to language learning in Europe. European Commission — School Education Platform. https://school-education.ec.europa.eu/en/discover/news/artificial-intelligence-asset-language-learning-europe
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125–132. Retrieved from https://www.ling.ohio-state.edu/research/groups/lacqueys/readings/horowitz.pdf
Hubbard, P. (Ed.). (2009). Computer-assisted language learning: Critical concepts in linguistics. Routledge. Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/~efs/callcc/
Hyland, K. (2015). Teaching and researching writing. Routledge. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Teaching_and_Researching_Writing.html?id=MC5AEAAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y
Ilkka, T. (2018). The impact of artificial intelligence on learning, teaching, and education. European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/12297
INEE. (2024). Minimum standards for education: Preparedness, response, recovery (3rd ed.). Inter-agency Network for Education in Emergencies. Retrieved from https://inee.org/minimum-standards
Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2024). Incorporating AI in foreign language education: An investigation into ChatGPT's effect on foreign language learners. Education and Information Technologies, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12574-6
Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language Learning, 16(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1966.tb00804.x
Kapranov, Y., Iwanowska, B., Stadniczeńko, D., & Wierzchowski, T. (2025). Student perspectives on European language policies and positive developments in the digital context: From challenges to change. Молодий вчений, 2(133), 80–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12574-6
Kessler, G. (2018). Technology and the future of language teaching. Foreign Language Annals, 51(1), 205–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12318
Kharma, N., & Hajjaj, A. (1989). Errors in English among Arabic speakers: Analysis and remedy. Longman. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Errors_in_English_Among_Arabic_Speakers.html?id=YlrlAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/The_Input_Hypothesis.html?id=5ttoAAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). Academic Press. Retrieved from https://www.library.brawnblog.com/Long1996-Ling%20Env%20L2%20Acq.pdf
Mak, B. (2011). An exploration of speaking-in-class anxiety with Chinese ESL learners. System, 39(2), 202–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.04.002
Milton, S. (2018). Higher education and post-conflict recovery. Palgrave Macmillan. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-65349-5
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Mushimiyimana, J. B., Nzabalirwa, W., Ndayambaje, I., & Lazareva, A. (2025). ICT integration in Rwandan education: A scoping review of opportunities and challenges. African Journal of Empirical Research, 6(1), 225–234. https://doi.org/10.51867/ajernet.6.1.21
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524759
Novelli, M., Lopes Cardozo, M. T. A., & Smith, A. (2017). The 4Rs framework: Analysing the contribution of education to sustainable peacebuilding in conflict-affected contexts. Journal on Education in Emergencies, 3(1), 14–43. Retrieved from https://archive.nyu.edu/handle/2451/39660
Popenici, S. A., & Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8
Reinders, H., & Hubbard, P. (2013). CALL and learner autonomy: Affordances and constraints. In M. Thomas, H. Reinders, & M. Warschauer (Eds.), Contemporary computer-assisted language learning (pp. 359–375). Bloomsbury Academic. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323185552_CALL_and_learner_autonomy_Affordances_and_constraints
McLaughlin, C., Dillabough, J., Fimyar, O., Al-Azmeh, Z., & Jebril, M. (2019). Syrian higher education system facing 'complete breakdown' after eight years of war – study. University of Cambridge Research News. Retrieved from https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/syrian-higher-education-system-facing-complete-breakdown-after-eight-years-of-war-study
Richards, J. C. (2005). Communicative language teaching today. SEAMEO Regional Language Centre. Retrieved from https://www.professorjackrichards.com/wp-content/uploads/Richards-Communicative-Language.pdf
Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2003). Linguistic distance and initial reading acquisition: The case of Arabic diglossia. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24(3), 431–451. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716403000225
Savignon, S. J. (Ed.). (2008). Interpreting communicative language teaching: Contexts and concerns in teacher education. Yale University Press. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1npsh9
Selwyn, N. (2019). Should robots replace teachers?: AI and the future of education. John Wiley & Sons. Retrieved from https://research.monash.edu/en/publications/should-robots-replace-teachers-ai-and-the-future-of-education/
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principles and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125–144). Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://www.scribd.com/doc/105840639/Swain-1995-Three-functions-of-output-in-second-language-learning
Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–483). Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781410612700-34/output-hypothesis-merrill-swain
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
World Education News & Reviews. (2025). Rebuilding Syria’s education system: Navigating challenges and embracing opportunities. https://wenr.wes.org/2025/03/rebuilding-syrias-education-system-navigating-challenges-and-embracing-opportunities
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education: Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
