Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Researchers have long been interested in the characteristics associated with “good” teaching. However, most relevant studies have been conducted in Western contexts. As cultural background has a strong influence on the way good teaching is perceived, it was considered important to explore this issue in the Arab Gulf. The current study sought to compare Omani school students’ and teachers’ perceptions of the characteristics of good English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers in the Omani context. To achieve this, 171 Omani students and 233 English teachers responded to a seven-category, 68-item questionnaire utilizing a 4-point Likert-type response key. Descriptive statistics and t tests were used to determine perceptions of good teacher characteristics and differences between students’ and teachers’ responses. Results indicate that Omani students and teachers generally agree about the importance of all characteristic categories, with those related to English language proficiency and treating students equally being of special importance. Participants also agreed that knowledge of Western culture/s and the use of technology were relatively unimportant. Implications of these findings for EFL teaching in Oman are discussed.

Keywords

teacher characteristics EFL Oman student perceptions teacher perceptions

Introduction

The topic of the factors influencing the effectiveness of teaching has long attracted the attention of English as a foreign language (EFL) researchers. The effectiveness of teachers is not limited to teacher characteristics or merely abiding by a particular set of criteria, it is also about employing teaching practices that are valued by, and contribute to, the wider community in which the teaching takes place (Celik, 2013). The concept of a good teacher has been explored from a number of perspectives over the course of decades, yet most of these investigations have been conducted in Western contexts and have tended to explore teachers across disciplines (Zhang & Watkins, 2007). Despite this tendency toward Euro-centeredness, a few studies have nonetheless been conducted in non-Western contexts, including in Middle Eastern nations such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman, and Iran. In terms of EFL, the literature presents a number of important findings regarding the characteristics specifically related to effective English-language teaching.

The need to identify these characteristics stems from a commonly held perspective that awareness of them can help teachers identify their students’ needs and expectations and hence work on meeting them. Knowing these characteristics can help teachers improve their pedagogical practices by allowing them to enhance their good characteristics—or those that are most valued by their students—and find ways to overcome those that are less valued or considered inappropriate for a specific teaching context. Good teachers, including teachers of EFL/English as a second language (ESL), share many similar characteristics regardless of their subject area. However, although a number of studies suggest a considerable level of overlap, there are still some important differences between effective English language instructors and teachers of other subjects. The presence of these differences, whether large or small, makes it crucial to further investigate the qualities that may either enhance or impede the success of the English language learner.

Literature Review

Good Teacher Characteristics: Definitions and Categories

Given that the quality of teaching may be difficult to determine and that its perception is most likely influenced by both teachers’ and students’ values (Saafin, 2005; Sotto, 2011), the question of what makes a good teacher is one that has been approached from a number of angles. Teaching characteristics have therefore been approached differently by various researchers and educators in the field. For some, good teacher qualities are represented in the command of the subject area, appropriate teaching methods, and different teaching-related skills, whereas others highlight personal characteristics including “charisma” that teachers possess, their compassion, humor, innovation, and honesty (Zhang & Watkins, 2007). According to Brosh (1996), effective EFL teachers are those who focus on comprehension, are in command of the language, prepare interesting lessons, help students to be independent, and deal with students fairly.

Witcher (2003) divided these characteristics into three main categories: instructional competence, personality, and teacher–student relationship. According to the author, instructional competence, including the teacher’s ability to create student-centered classrooms, provide sufficient content knowledge, and maintain a professional demeanor, is the most highly valued of the three categories by learners. The teacher’s personality, on the other hand, relates to the individual traits that the instructor brings to the classroom, and can be conceived of as including their levels of patience and understanding, the warmth they display, their willingness to get to know their learners, and so on. It is personality that is often offered as an important determinant of the teacher–student relationship—the third category here—and may be especially important in those societies where interpersonal relationships in the classroom are considered more important than the nature of instruction itself. Davis (2001) contends that this relationship can directly contribute to students’ learning and achievement outcomes.

Borg (2006) builds on these categories of teacher characteristics by asserting that most of the characterizations of a good teacher tend to contain notions related to the areas of “knowledge, skills and attitudes towards learners” (p. 7). Within these areas, the author offers a number of prevalent characteristics of EFL teachers, such as creating interesting classes, good pronunciation, offering clear explanations, and speaking good English. In addition, Borg also states that these characteristics can be complemented by practices such as being friendly, giving excellent notes, conducting games, using humor, and not pushing students who are falling behind the rest of the class.

Sotto (2011) adds that good teachers are those who support learners to be “more confident and thoughtful” (p. 254). Although it is no easy task to promote these characteristics among learners, the author contends that training learners to be more confident and thoughtful can be achieved through engaging in frequent experiences that encourage these to develop. Bell (2005) states that effective EFL teachers normally use communicative approaches, arrange small groups for discussion, and adopt effective strategies in their teaching.

Generally speaking, good teachers from all disciplines share similar qualities, which entitle them to be referred to as good or effective instructors. However, English language teachers differ from teachers of other subjects in a number of ways, which may be related to the nature of English as a subject. In particular, Borg (2006) states that these differences can be said to include the contrast between native and non-native speakers of English, the focus on skills rather than objectives, the centrality of communicative abilities to the classroom, and the subsequent adoption of different teaching methods and activities.

Although Al-Maqtri and Thabet (2013) maintain that effective teachers share a number of similar qualities irrespective of their subject matter, they nonetheless state that there are several vital differences in those characteristics between effective EFL teachers and other teachers. The characteristics that Al Matqtri and Thabet offer as being more important among EFL teachers include having a good mastery of English, including sound pronunciation, and more actively involving students in classroom activities.

Factors Influencing Perceptions of Good Teacher Characteristics

Perceptions of good teaching may be influenced by a variety of factors including culture, gender, subject area, school level, and the curriculum used (Zhang & Watkins, 2007). Culture has been characterized by Finkbeiner (2008) in a number of ways, including as an iceberg that is mostly invisible, as glue that brings individuals together, and as the mind software that incorporates people’s values, norms, and ways of thinking. However, individuals cannot be simply defined within the limits of one particular culture, as people belong to various subgroups, including those based on religion, ethnicity, linguistic background, and so on. As stated above, cultural and contextual factors necessarily influence instructors’ and students’ perceptions about what and, indeed, who, a good teacher is.

A study exploring the nature of good teaching in the Turkish context revealed that some of the characteristics that seem to be of significance for Turkish students include having a command of the subject taught and the instructor’s tolerance for learner problems (Celik, 2013). Furthermore, a large-scale study of Chinese EFL teachers working in mainland China emphasized the ways in which the integration of computer skills into teaching seems to help generate positive attitudes toward teachers due to the popularity of information technology (IT) in that country (Li & Walsh, 2011). According to Saafin (2005), Emirati learners tend to favor skills related to both the humanistic side of the teacher and their classroom practice. That is, they view effective EFL teachers as being able to employ a variety of teaching methods, attempting to help students to understand what is taught, having the ability to create enjoyable classes, producing valid tests, providing worksheets and handouts, giving opportunities for students to practice their speaking skills, and maintaining efficient classroom management. These are characteristics that, given the large degree of overlap between the cultures of the Arab Gulf (Charise, 2007; Karmani, 2010), could also be argued to be valued by Omani learners.

The learner’s gender may also be another important factor that influences the characteristics they value in a teacher. For example, Chen and Lin’s (2009) investigation of 198 junior high school students of English in Taiwan revealed differences between male and female students’ perceptions of effective EFL teaching. In particular, female students tended to value the teacher’s personality, the nature of teacher–student relations, the way in which teachers motivate learners, and how aware they are of the culture/s associated with English-speaking countries. On the other hand, male students tended to consider traits like respecting students and being ethical as more important.

In addition to gender, Borg (2006) states that the teacher’s linguistic and ethnic background may also be considered important for EFL/ESL learners. In particular, certain learners may prefer their teachers to be native speakers of English—a designation which, for some, may almost exclusively refer to Caucasian citizens of the norm-defining inner circle nations (Javier, 2010)—while some may prefer teachers from their own countries as closer models of successful English language learners. Within the Gulf states, it has been claimed that non-native teachers are marginalized and that native English speakers are preferred at least at the institutional level (Karmani, 2005). Whether or not this is the case in Oman in light of the increasing pace of Omanization across sectors, including in higher education, remains, however, a question of debate.

Method

Research Questions

The following research questions were explored:

Research Question 1: What are the characteristics of a good EFL teacher according to Omani high school students?

Research Question 2: What are the characteristics of a good EFL teacher according to Omani EFL teachers?

Research Question 3: Are there differences and similarities in students’ and teachers’ perceptions of the characteristics of good EFL teachers?

Sample

The study, conducted in academic year 2012/2013, covered Omani EFL teachers and students within Oman. Two-hundred and thirty-three EFL teachers and 171 Omani students from Grades 9 to 12 took part. Students were initially contacted by three supervisors who served as research assistants and whose responsibility was to collect data from classes of English teachers they did not supervise. The questionnaires were in Arabic and were distributed in class. Prior to questionnaire distribution, all supervisors explained the purpose of the study in Arabic and later read a message in Arabic to emphasize the anonymity and confidentiality of student responses. Of the 171 student participants, 127 were female (74.3%), while only 44 males (25.7%) took part. Twenty-two participants (12.9%) were currently studying in Grade 9, with 76 in Year 10 (44.4%), 49 in Grade 11 (28.7%), and 21 (12.3%) in Grade 12, while 3 participants did not indicate their grade. The vast majority of participants (n = 151, 88.3%) stated that they had never been enrolled in a private school, with the remaining 20 students (11.7%) having at some point attended a non-government school.

The teacher sample consisted of 233 teachers of English across various regions of Oman. These participants were recruited through a snowball sampling method, with a handful of teachers contacted and informed about the nature of the research and asked, following reminders of anonymity, confidentiality, and the right to withdraw at any stage, if they would like to participate. A handful of supervisors also volunteered to email the online questionnaire link to teachers whom they supervised along with a participation information sheet and a request to take part in the study. Like the student sample, the majority of teacher participants were female (n = 155, 66.5%) with only around one third being male (n = 78, 33.5%). While most of the teacher participants were currently working in the Batinah South governorate (n = 146, 62.7%), participants were also drawn from the governorates of Muscat (n = 18, 7.7%), Musandam (n = 17, 7.3%), Dakhliya (n = 14, 6.0%), Dhahira (n = 13, 5.6%), Batinah North (n = 8, 3.4%), Sharqia South (n = 5, 2.1%), Dhofar (n = 3, 1.3%), and Sharqia North (n = 1, 0.45%). A further 6 (2.6%) identified themselves as being from the pre-division administrative region of Batinah and 2 participants (0.9%) did not indicate their governorate. Nearly all participants were teachers in Omani government schools (n = 223, 95.7%), although 10 (4.3%) taught English in Omani universities or colleges, and almost all claimed to teach across multiple grades.

Questionnaire

The research instrument employed in the current study was designed to investigate Omani EFL teachers’ and students’ perceptions of the importance of a number of teacher characteristics (see appendix). Teacher characteristics in the questionnaire are grouped into seven categories. These are content knowledge about teaching and learning, pedagogical knowledge about teaching/learning, knowledge about oneself–general characteristics, knowledge about oneself–affective variables, knowledge about oneself–professional development, knowledge about students, and knowledge about classroom management. The instrument is a modified version of the questionnaire used by Abu Rahma (2007).

Participants were asked to respond to 68 positively worded items, each introduced by the phrase “The language teacher should.” A 4-point Likert-type response key was used, with responses interpreted as follows: 1 = unimportant; 2 = somewhat important; 3 = important; 4 = very important. Questionnaire groups and individual items with means closer to 4 therefore indicate characteristics that respondents believe to be important for their English language teachers, while means closer to 1 suggest that these characteristics are not important. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were calculated for each category.

Results

Questionnaire Reliability

Cronbach’s alpha coefficients indicate that six of the seven categories reported good alpha levels above .70, while the final group of “Knowledge about oneself–general characteristics” recorded an acceptable Cronbach’s alpha of .69. Questionnaire category alpha levels are as follows:

Content knowledge about teaching and learning = .75;

Pedagogical knowledge about teaching and learning= .93;

Knowledge about oneself–general characteristics = .69;

Knowledge about oneself–affective variables = .88;

Knowledge about oneself–professional development = .88;

Knowledge about students = .83;

Knowledge about classroom management = .70.

Student Results

Student questionnaire results

Table 1 reports student questionnaire means for the seven categories. Each of the seven categories received a mean between 3.18 and 3.47, thereby suggesting that students believed each category was important for their teachers. The two categories that received the highest means were “Knowledge about oneself–general characteristics” (M = 3.47) and “Knowledge about oneself–affective variables” (M = 3.44). Despite the relatively high levels of self-awareness student participants ascribe to the areas of general characteristics and affective variables, the category of “Knowledge about oneself–professional development” (M = 3.18) recorded the lowest mean. “Knowledge about students” (M = 3.37) received the third highest mean among the seven categories, followed by two categories related to teacher knowledge about teaching and learning: “Pedagogical knowledge about teaching and learning” (M = 3.29) and “Content knowledge about teaching and learning” (M = 3.26). Closely related to these areas, “Knowledge about classroom management” received the second lowest mean of 3.25, though this is an area that student participants still believed to be important for their instructors. All questionnaire categories are explored in more detail below.

Table 1.

Student Questionnaire Category Totals.

	M	SD
Knowledge about oneself–general characteristics	3.47	0.59
Knowledge about oneself–affective variables	3.44	0.55
Knowledge about students	3.37	0.58
Pedagogical knowledge about teaching and learning	3.29	0.55
Content knowledge about teaching and learning	3.26	0.50
Knowledge about classroom management	3.25	0.80
Knowledge about oneself–professional development	3.18	0.71

The questionnaire category with the highest overall mean was “Knowledge about oneself–general characteristics” (M = 3.47). Of the four items related to this group, all received means above 3.00, which suggests that student participants believed these general characteristics to be important for their English teachers. Two of these items related to the teacher’s awareness of the importance of actual teaching practice—“speak audibly and clearly” (M = 3.65) and “write clearly and legibly” M = 3.41), with the former recording the highest mean of all items on the student questionnaire. The remaining two items are associated with teacher preparation. These are “be prepared for class” (M = 3.49) and “come to class on time” (M = 3.33).

Fifteen items were associated with the questionnaire category “Knowledge about oneself–affective variables” (M = 3.44), with each item again receiving a mean above 3.00 thus indicating that student participants believed them to all be important for their teachers. Of these items, the three that recorded the highest means were all related to warmth toward, and equal treatment of, students. These were “treat students fairly” (M = 3.61), “care about all students” (M = 3.59), and “treat students equally” (M = 3.58). Closely related to these items, student participants also believed that it was important for teachers to “be kind” (M = 3.44) and “always show care about student comprehension and progress” (M = 3.42).

Students also believed that it was important for their teachers to “be enthusiastic about teaching” (M = 3.56) and to “be confident and have self-control” (M = 3.38). In addition, participants also maintained that their English teachers should be creative in the classroom—“be creative in teaching” (M = 3.49) and “be innovative in addressing students’ difficulties and needs” (M = 3.38). Students claimed that their teachers should be patient and have an understanding of their students, stating that it was important to “be patient with pupils” (M = 3.42), including being “tolerant of students’ incomprehension” (M = 3.54), “helpful” (M = 3.45), and “willing to repeat explanations or to modify strategies for weak students” (M = 3.40). The two items that recorded the lowest means among affective variables were “have a good sense of humor” (M = 3.29) and “have an acceptable appearance” (M = 3.11).

All eight items related to the questionnaire category of “Knowledge about students” (M = 3.37) received means above 3.00 and were thus all believed to be important. The item that recorded the highest mean here was “have good rapport with pupils” (M = 3.51), which is a finding related to the importance of caring about learners. Other items from this category related to building rapport and having strong interpersonal relationships include “have positive attitudes towards pupils” (M = 3.45) and “establish a good relationship with students” (M = 3.41). Students also believed that it was necessary for their English teachers to be able to engage them in their language learning, stating it was important for their instructors to “be able to raise students’ interest levels in English lessons” (M = 3.47) even though they considered it far less important for them to “have the skills to develop autonomy in learners” (M = 3.12).

Three items from this category related to the teacher’s ability to understand the ways in which their students’ personalities and interest can impact on the learning process. These were “be able to assess learners’ strengths and weaknesses” (M = 3.39), “understand learners’ personalities, needs and learning styles” (M = 3.31), and “take into consideration students’ needs and interests” (M = 3.28).

Of the 19 items related to the questionnaire category “Pedagogical knowledge about teaching and learning” (M = 3.29), all were considered important by participants although only two received means above 3.50. These were “explain lessons clearly and confidently” (M = 3.61) and “be able to explain unfamiliar concepts in various ways” (M = 3.50). Both of these items are related to the clarity of explanations offered in the classroom, as is the item “adjust English input to match learners’ proficiency level” (M = 3.45). Students also believed that it was important for their teachers to “encourage learners’ contributions” (M = 3.50). This encouragement could be conceived of as occurring through a variety of means, including by varying “the tone of voice to attract students’ attention” (M = 3.26) and creating “a humorous and exciting class atmosphere” (M = 3.40), even if the above results indicate that participants do not believe it to be very important for their instructors to have a sense of humor. Moreover, students also believed that it was important for their instructors to offer appropriate feedback, maintaining that they should “be able to comment on pupils’ responses appropriately” (M = 3.33) and “give useful feedback on written work in appropriate ways” (M = 3.25).

The ability to “use a variety of teaching methods” (M = 3.30) was also considered important by student participants. Items related to the ability to employ a variety of pedagogical approaches include, “use different techniques for presenting language” (M = 3.41), “vary teaching methods to suit different learning styles” (M = 3.40), “vary class interaction strategies (e.g., use group and pair work, drama, role-play, debate)” (M = 3.30), “motivate learners using different instructional strategies” (M = 3.23), and “be able to present language using different techniques” (M = 3.21). Despite the relative importance student participants ascribed to the use of various teaching strategies and techniques, it is interesting to note that the item that received the lowest mean among this category was “involve pupils in various activities” (M = 3.04). Closely related to the ability to implement a variety of teaching strategies, student participants also maintained that it was important for their instructors to be aware of developments in the field of ELT. In particular, participants believed it to be important for their instructors to “be aware of current trends in ELT” (M = 3.29) and to “be aware of current teaching techniques” (M = 3.27).

Four of the six bottom-rated items from this questionnaire category related to the incorporation of various instructional resources into the English classroom. These were “use a variety of instructional resources effectively” (M = 3.17), “use the latest technology in teaching” (M = 3.09), “use audiovisual aids/multimedia in teaching” (M = 3.08), and “select appropriate supplementary materials” (M = 3.08).

Nine items were associated with the questionnaire category “Content knowledge about teaching and learning” (M = 3.26). The two items that received the highest means from this category were both related to instructors’ English language proficiency—“have a high level of English” (M = 3.63) and “be able to communicate well in English” (M = 3.56). In addition to the ability to be able to communicate well in the English language, student participants also believed that their instructors should “be able to plan appropriate lessons” (M = 3.36) and “know how to set objectives” (M = 3.19). While the ability to set and implement objectives is closely linked to a teacher’s knowledge of “how to evaluate pupils” (M = 3.46), interestingly, students also maintained that their instructors should also “be able to contribute to curriculum development” (M = 3.27) even though they did not believe that it was as important for their teachers to “be able to solve practical problems through conducting action research” (M = 3.11).

The two items from this category that recorded the lowest means were both related to the teacher’s awareness of the cultures of both the learners and the target language. These were “be familiar with the social and cultural background of the learners” (M = 3.04) and “be aware of Western cultures” (M = 2.72). It should be noted that it was this latter item that was one of only two on the student questionnaire to receive a mean below 3.00, which suggests that students believed an awareness of Western cultures to be only somewhat important.

Of the two items related to the questionnaire category “knowledge about classroom management” (M = 3.25), both were considered by participants to be important. These were “be able to manage the classroom properly” (M = 3.31), and “have effective classroom management skills” (M = 3.20).

The questionnaire category “Knowledge about oneself–professional development” (M = 3.18) recorded the lowest overall mean from all seven categories, although all bar one of the eight items featured in this category received a mean above 3.00. The item that received the highest mean was “have a positive attitude towards change and innovation” (M = 3.30), with this level of positivity perhaps expressed in caring “about developing professionally” (M = 3.25) and being “ready to learn new methods and teaching strategies” (M = 3.24). Although student participants highlighted the importance of their instructors being ready to improve their teaching practice, they considered the actual practice of acquiring these skills to be somewhat less important, with the items “be actively involved in learning new skills to improve teaching” (M = 3.03) and “participate in teacher professional growth events such as seminars, workshops, conferences etc” (M = 2.95) recording the lowest means from this category. Finally, student participants believed that it was important for their instructors to work with their colleagues to continue their professional development. Items here included “be able to co-operate with colleagues to improve current teaching practices” (M = 3.27) and “have the ability to help other colleagues to develop professionally” (M = 3.15).

Teacher Results

Teacher questionnaire results

Table 2 contains questionnaire category means for teacher participants. Again, like the student participants, all category means fell within a range that suggested teachers believed each of these categories of teacher characteristics to be important (see section “Comparison of Student and Teacher Results”). The questionnaire category that recorded the highest mean was, like the results for student participants, “Knowledge about oneself–general characteristics” (M = 3.73) while “Knowledge about classroom management” (M = 3.70) and “Knowledge about oneself–affective variables” (M = 3.69) received the next highest means. Although “Knowledge about oneself–professional development” recorded the lowest category mean for student participants, here it received a mean of 3.55, which placed it as the second lowest category, with “Content knowledge about teaching and learning” (M = 3.48) receiving the lowest teacher mean overall even though it was still considered to be important. The remaining two questionnaire categories were “Knowledge about students” (M = 3.60) and “Pedagogical knowledge about teaching and learning” (M = 3.56). Each questionnaire category is explored in more detail below.

Table 2.

Teacher Questionnaire Category Totals.

	M	SD
Knowledge about oneself–general characteristics	3.73	0.37
Knowledge about classroom management	3.70	0.44
Knowledge about oneself–affective variables	3.69	0.34
Knowledge about students	3.60	0.37
Pedagogical knowledge about teaching and learning	3.56	0.36
Knowledge about oneself–professional development	3.55	0.40
Content knowledge about teaching and learning	3.48	0.34

The questionnaire category “Knowledge about oneself–general characteristics” received an overall mean of 3.73. Teacher participants believed that the most important general characteristic was to “be prepared for class” (M = 3.80) while they also considered it important to “come to class on time” (M = 3.67). Like the student participants, teachers also valued classroom practices such as the ability to “speak audibly and clearly” (M = 3.80) and to “write clearly and legibly” (M = 3.65), thus reiterating the importance of teaching practice and preparation for English teachers in Oman.

The questionnaire category that was considered the next most important by teacher participants was “Knowledge about classroom management” (M = 3.70). Like the student participants who maintained that both items from this category were important, teachers also supported the importance of classroom management by stating that teachers should “be able to manage the classroom properly” (M = 3.72) and “have effective classroom management skills” (M = 3.67).

Fifteen items were related to the questionnaire category of “Knowledge about oneself–affective variables” (M = 3.69). Again, both student and teacher participants believed all items related to this category to represent important characteristics of English teachers. However, while teachers maintained that the most important affective variable was to “be confident and have self-control” (M = 3.77), students placed this item within the five least important variables. Despite this small disparity, both teachers and students agreed that treating students with warmth and respect was important, with teacher participants highlighting that instructors should “treat students fairly” (M = 3.77) and “treat students equally” (M = 3.73), while also caring “about all students” (M = 3.69). Teachers also believed that they should “always show care about student comprehension and progress” (M = 3.68) and should also “be kind” (M = 3.36), even if this latter characteristic featured within the three items that recorded the lowest means from this category.

Teacher participants also agreed with their student counterparts that English instructors should “be enthusiastic about teaching” (M = 3.72) while also being “creative in teaching” (M = 3.71) and displaying the ability to “be innovative in addressing students’ difficulties and needs” (M = 3.55). Moreover, both teachers and students highlighted the importance of teachers being patient with their learners, with teacher participants stating they should “be patient with pupils” (M = 3.70), “be willing to repeat explanations or modify strategies for weak students” (M = 3.65), “be helpful” (M = 3.58), and “be tolerant of students’ incomprehension” (M = 3.51). Finally, both teacher and student participants also maintained that, although having “a good sense of humor” (M = 3.28) and “an acceptable appearance” (M = 3.25) were important, they were, nonetheless, the least important of all affective variables.

Eight items were associated with the questionnaire category “Knowledge about students” (M = 3.60). Although, like results for students, all items here again received means above 3.00 thus highlighting their importance to participants, in an interesting point of divergence teacher participants considered having “good rapport with pupils” (M = 3.50) to be the least important variable related to this category even though student participants believed it was the most important. Despite this, teachers did agree that it was important to “have positive attitudes towards pupils” (M = 3.65) and to “establish a good relationship with students” (M = 3.61). Teacher participants stated that the most important quality related to knowledge about their learners was to “be able to assess learners’ strengths and weaknesses” (M = 3.68), which is closely related to the ability to “take into consideration students’ needs and interest” (M = 3.57) and “understand learners’ personalities, needs and learning styles” (M = 3.55). Finally, both student and teacher participants placed having “the skills to develop autonomy in learners” (M = 3.52) among the least important characteristics from this category, while also highlighting the importance of being “able to raise students’ interest levels in English lessons” (M = 3.66).

Of the 19 items related to “Pedagogical knowledge about teaching and learning” (M = 3.56), all received means above 3.00. Both teacher and student participants agreed that it is important for the teacher to “explain lessons clearly and confidently” (M = 3.77), which is related to the ability to “adjust English input to match learners’ proficiency level” (M = 3.59) and to “be able to explain unfamiliar concepts in various ways” (M = 3.56). The item from this category that received the second highest mean for teacher participants was “use a variety of teaching methods” (M = 3.75). Teacher participants agreed with students about the importance of implementing a variety of teaching techniques and strategies, with relatively high means for the following items: “use different techniques for presenting language” (M = 3.67), “be able to present language using different techniques” (M = 3.67), “vary teaching methods to suit different learning styles” (M = 3.66), “vary class interaction strategies (e.g., use group and pair work, drama, role-play, debate)” (M = 3.62), and “motivate learners using different instructional strategies” (M = 3.55). Despite this level of concordance, teacher participants believed that the ability to “involve pupils in various activities” (M = 3.69) was one of the most important qualities from this category, whereas student participants believed it to be the least important. However, both groups of participants agreed about the importance of teachers staying up-to-date with the latest developments in the field, with teachers highlighting the importance of instructors being aware of both “current teaching techniques” (M = 3.64) and of “current trends in ELT” (M = 3.41).

Teacher participants also maintained that it was important for English instructors to “encourage learners’ contributions” (M = 3.67), while agreeing with student participants about the potential value of varying “the tone of voice to attract students’ attention” (M = 3.57) and of creating “a humorous and exciting class atmosphere” (M = 3.40). Both student and teacher participants agreed about the importance of offering clear and appropriate feedback to learners, with teachers maintaining that it was necessary to “give useful feedback on written work in appropriate ways” (M = 3.58) and “be able to comment on pupils’ responses appropriately” (M = 3.56). Like the student participants, teacher respondents also claimed the ability to use various resources in the classroom to be relatively unimportant, with all of the following items being rated among the six least important qualities from this category: “use a variety of resources effectively” (M = 3.51), “select appropriate supplementary materials” (M = 3.49), “use audiovisual aids/multimedia in teaching” (M = 3.34), and “use the latest technology in teaching” (M = 3.16).

The questionnaire category of “Knowledge about oneself–professional development” received an overall mean of 3.55. Like the student participants, teachers also highlighted the importance of being prepared to deal with change and innovation in the field, with the two highest means ascribed by teachers to the items “care about developing professionally” (M = 3.69) and “be ready to learn new methods and teaching strategies” (M = 3.69). These two items, moreover, are closely related to having “a positive attitude towards change and innovation” (M = 3.49), which was the item student participants identified as being most important among this category, with teachers also stating that it was important to “be able to reflect upon teaching effectiveness” (M = 3.56). However, while student participants considered the actual practice of acquiring these new skills to be the least important of all professional development items, teacher participants believed being “actively involved in learning new skills to improve teaching” (M = 3.53) and participating “in teacher professional growth events such as seminars, workshops, conferences etc” (M = 3.48) to be of much more importance. Finally, although teacher participants maintained that it was important to “be able to co-operate with colleagues to improve current teaching practices” (M = 3.57), they nonetheless believed that having “the ability to help other colleagues to develop professionally” (M = 3.36) to be the least important of all characteristics associated with this category.

Of the nine items related to the questionnaire category “Content knowledge about teaching and learning” (M = 3.48), teacher participants believed that the most important was the ability to “communicate well in English” (M = 3.78), while having “a high level of English proficiency” (M = 3.59) was also considered to be quite important. Teacher participants assigned the second highest mean from this category to the ability to “know how to evaluate pupils” (M = 3.76), which, as stated above, is an item that is intricately tied to the items that received the next highest means—“be able to plan appropriate lessons” (M = 3.67) and “know how to set objectives” (M = 3.65).

Moreover, teacher participants also agreed with students about the importance of being “able to contribute to curriculum development” (M = 3.43) and about the relative lack of importance of being “able to solve practical problems through conducting action research” (M = 3.21). Finally, both groups of participants thought that being “familiar with the social and cultural background of the learners” (M = 3.36) was important while also agreeing that it was only somewhat important for English teachers in Oman to “be aware of Western cultures” (M = 2.86)—the only item that received a mean of less than 3.00 from the teacher participants.

Comparison of Student and Teacher Results

Table 3 contains the student and teacher means for each questionnaire group. Even a cursory glance at the table reveals two general trends. The first, as has been mentioned above, is that all group means for both student and teacher participants recorded values above 3.00, thus indicating that they are all considered important characteristics of English teachers in Oman. The second general trend is that teacher participants have assigned higher means to every group than student participants, thus suggesting that teachers consider each area to be of greater importance than their student counterparts.

Table 3.

Student and Teacher Questionnaire Group Means.

Questionnaire group	Student mean	Teacher mean
Group 1: Content knowledge about teaching and learning	3.26	3.48
Group 2: Pedagogical knowledge about teaching and learning	3.29	3.56
Group 3: Knowledge about oneself–general characteristics	3.47	3.73
Group 4: Knowledge about oneself–affective variables	3.44	3.69
Group 5: Knowledge about oneself–professional development	3.18	3.55
Group 6: Knowledge about students	3.37	3.60
Group 7: Knowledge about classroom management	3.25	3.70

To explore the nature of these trends in more detail, independent samples t tests were employed to determine if statistically significant differences between teachers and students existed. Due to multiple tests increasing the chance of Type I error, significance levels for these t tests were, after performing a Bonferroni correction, set at p< .01. For all tests, Levene’s tests for equality of variances reported significant results which indicate that equal variances within the student and teacher sample could not be assumed. For these reasons, results reported in Table 4 are for those that do not assume equal variances.

Table 4.

Independent t Tests for Teacher and Student Participants on Questionnaire Groups.

	t	df	Significance (two-tailed)	Mean difference	Standard error difference
Content knowledge about teaching and learning	−4.958	283.578	.000	−.2192160	.0442112
Pedagogical knowledge about teaching and learning	−5.673	273.955	.000	−.2747968	.0484374
Knowledge about oneself–general characteristics	−5.074	264.106	.000	−.26100	.05144
Knowledge about oneself–affective variables	−3.260	263.005	.001	−.1537602	.0471611
Knowledge about oneself–professional development	−6.109	250.606	.000	−.367969	.060230
Knowledge about students	−4.476	270.912	.000	−.225316	.050342
Knowledge about classroom management	−6.473	245.388	.000	−.4387	.0678

For all questionnaire groups, significant differences exist between student and teacher participants with teacher participants reporting significantly higher group means than students. This suggests that English teachers in Oman consider each of the seven groups featured in the questionnaire to be more important than do students, even though students do still consider them to be important. This finding may be due to a number of reasons, including the greater familiarity teacher participants have with the demands of the teaching profession itself compared with students who could be considered to be “consumers” of the education services their teachers and institutions provide. It could be, too, that students may have expressed any general dissatisfaction they have with their English teachers and/or classes by offering slightly more negative scores on the questionnaire, a central tendency bias from student participants, or even social desirability bias by teacher participants. However, with these cautions in mind, these findings suggest that teachers and students both agree that all questionnaire groups are important, even though teachers believe them to be significantly more important characteristics for English teachers to have.

To explore the nature of teacher and student perceptions of the characteristics of a good English teacher in more detail, the 10 highest and lowest rated qualities by both student and teacher groups are featured below. Table 5 indicates that 6 of the 10 items that received the highest means from student and teacher participants were the same. Perhaps not surprisingly, three of these items—“speak audibly and clearly,” “explain lessons clearly and confidently,” and “be able to communicate well in English”—are related to high levels of communicative ability in the English language. Another two items that student and teacher participants believed to be the most important were related to the fair and equal treatment of learners. These were “treat students fairly” and “treat students equally.” The final item that both student and teacher participants assigned 1 of the 10 highest means to was “be enthusiastic about teaching.”

Table 5.

Student and Teacher Items With Highest Means.

Student	M	Teacher	M
Item 38: Speak audibly and clearly	3.65	Item 45: Be prepared for class	3.80
Item 2: Have a high level of English proficiency	3.63	Item 38: Speak audibly and clearly	3.80
Item 44: Explain lessons clearly and confidently	3.61	Item 14: Be able to communicate well in English	3.78
Item 37: Treat students fairly	3.61	Item 44: Explain lessons clearly and confidently	3.77
Item 39: Care about all students	3.59	Item 58: Be confident and have self-control	3.77
Item 40: Treat students equally	3.58	Item 37: Treat students fairly	3.77
Item 14: Be able to communicate well in English	3.56	Item 11: Know how to evaluate pupils	3.76
Item 6: Be enthusiastic about teaching	3.56	Item 4: Use a variety of teaching methods	3.75
Item 5: Be tolerant of students’ incomprehension	3.54	Item 40: Treat students equally	3.73
Item 28: Have good rapport with pupils	3.51	Item 6: Be enthusiastic about teaching	3.72

Perhaps not surprisingly, given these findings, student participants added other items related to English proficiency and the equitable treatment of students to this list, with the following items also rated by students as being among the most important characteristics of English teachers—“have a high level of English proficiency,” “care about all students,” “be tolerant of students’ incomprehension,” and “have good rapport with pupils.” While students mostly focused on the nature of the classroom relationship and the teacher’s English abilities, teacher participants added several items associated with the actual practice of teaching itself. These included “be prepared for class,” “be confident and have self-control,” “know how to evaluate pupils,” and “use a variety of teaching methods.”

Table 6 features the 10 items that received the lowest means from student and teacher participants. The table again features a large degree of overlap between the teacher characteristics that students and teachers believed to be the least important from the questionnaire, with both groups of participants having 6 of the 10 items in common. Two of these items—“be aware of Western cultures” and “be familiar with the social and cultural background of the learners”—relate to the importance of being aware of the first language culture/s and the culture/s associated with the English language in the classroom. Moreover, another two items that respondents believed to be among the least important were related to the use of multimedia in the classroom. These were “use audiovisual aids/multimedia in teaching” and “use the latest technology in teaching.” To this list, student participants added “select appropriate supplementary materials,” though this item did not appear in the teachers’ list of the 10 least important characteristics. Of the final two items that both students and teachers believed to be least important for their English teachers, one was related to the importance of action research and the other was about the teacher’s physical appearance. These were “be able to solve practical problems through conducting action research” and “have an acceptable appearance.”

Table 6.

Student and Teacher Items With Lowest Means.

Student	M	Teacher	M
Item 3: Be aware of Western cultures	2.72	Item 3: Be aware of Western cultures	2.86
Item 63: Participate in teacher professional growth events such as seminars, workshops, conferences, and so forth	2.95	Item 55: Use the latest technology in teaching	3.16
Item 34: Be actively involved in learning new skills to improve teaching	3.03	Item 67: Be able to solve practical problems through conducting action research	3.21
Item 8: Be familiar with the social and cultural background of the learners	3.04	Item 49: Have an acceptable appearance	3.25
Item 12: Involve pupils in various activities	3.04	Item 16: Have a good sense of humor	3.28
Item 27: Use audiovisual aids/multimedia in teaching	3.08	Item 27: Use audiovisual aids/multimedia in teaching	3.34
Item 33: Select appropriate supplementary materials	3.08	Item 8: Be familiar with the social and cultural background of the learners	3.36
Item 55: Use the latest technology in teaching	3.09	Item 36: Be kind	3.36
Item 67: Be able to solve practical problems through conducting action research	3.11	Item 66: Have the ability to help other colleagues to develop professionally	3.36
Item 49: Have an acceptable appearance	3.11	Item 48: Create a humorous and exciting class atmosphere	3.40

Of the three remaining items that student participants believed to be the least important, two were concerned with teacher professional development. That is, students thought it was relatively unimportant for their English teachers to “participate in teacher professional growth events such as seminars, workshops, conferences etc” and to “be actively involved in learning new skills to improve teaching.” While this may be accounted for by student participants’ lack of awareness about the potential value of professional development opportunities for their instructors, somewhat surprisingly students rated the teacher’s ability to “involve pupils in various activities” to be among the least important characteristics featured on the questionnaire.

Three of the remaining characteristics teacher participants believed to be among the least important related to the expression of the instructor’s personality in the classroom. These were “have a good sense of humor,” “create a humorous and exciting class atmosphere,” and “be kind.” Added to this, teacher participants also believed that it was relatively unimportant for instructors to “have the ability to help other colleagues to develop professionally.”

Discussion

The current research sought to explore student and teacher perceptions about the most important teacher characteristics within the Omani context. To achieve this, the first research question examined was, “What are the characteristics of a good EFL teacher according to Omani high school students?”

The first point to note in response to this research question is that all seven questionnaire categories were considered by student participants to be important for their EFL instructors, while only 2 of the 68 questionnaire items received means below 3.00, which placed them in the somewhat important, rather than important, response range. Of the seven questionnaire categories, student participants believed that a teacher’s knowledge about themselves in terms of general characteristics and affective variables were the most important. In terms of classroom instruction, student participants maintained that, in line with Borg (2006) and Al-Maqtri and Thabet (2013), it was most important for their EFL teachers to have a good command of English and to speak and write clearly, while also being prepared for class. On an interpersonal level, student participants, like those in Brosh (1996), stated that their instructors should treat them equally and with a great deal of patience and care, and should also be enthusiastic about their teaching.

The finding that Omani students value the nature of the relationship with their teachers equally to actual classroom practice shares a number of similarities with the results of Saafin’s (2005) investigation of Emirati learners. Given the importance students place on building interpersonal relationships with their teachers, it is perhaps to be expected that they also considered the questionnaire category of instructors’ knowledge about their learners to be important. This category included the teacher’s ability to build good rapport and a strong relationship with their students while also making their English lessons interesting. The importance of these characteristics has also been highlighted by authors such as Davis (2001) and Borg (2006). Other characteristics that student participants believed to be important for their English instructors, reflecting the findings of Celik (2013) in the Turkish context, included having well-developed English language skills, including a high level of communicative competence, and the ability to explain their lessons in a clear and confident manner.

Of the seven questionnaire categories, the one that received the lowest overall mean from student participants was related to teacher’s professional development. In particular, students thought it to be relatively unimportant for their English teachers to participate in professional development events and to actively seek opportunities to develop new skills, even though, somewhat contradictorily, they nonetheless expected them to keep abreast of the latest developments in ELT. This finding may be indicative of a lack of awareness among at least some students about the importance of continued professional development opportunities for their instructors due, perhaps, to a limited understanding of the demands of the teaching profession.

The item that received the lowest overall mean on the student questionnaire was related to the importance of teachers being aware of Western cultures. The value of incorporating explicit instruction in Western cultures into EFL classrooms is an area of considerable debate, with this issue being especially relevant to the Arab and/or Muslim worlds in light of fears of the loss of traditional values and cultural beliefs as witnessed in the research and scholarship of a number of authors (see Al-Tamimi, 2009; Charise, 2007; Edge, 2003; Findlow, 2006; Karmani, 2005; Sinno, 2008). The fact that student participants here did not agree that it was important for their instructors to be well-versed in Western cultures, therefore, perhaps implies that they did not believe a knowledge of these cultures to be central to English language learning, and thus suggests that they prefer a “value-free” English, which can be tailored to meet their demands and express their own concerns—much like the Malaysian Muslim students in studies such as Mostafizar Rahman (2008) and Kim (2003).

The second research question explored the characteristics of a good EFL teacher according to EFL instructors in Oman. Like the student participants, teachers believed that all of the questionnaire categories were important, with two of the three most important again being knowledge related to general characteristics and affective variables. Here, teachers agreed with students about the importance of being prepared for class, speaking in a clear manner, and of treating students fairly, although teacher participants, in line with Sotto (2011), also highlighted the importance of displaying confidence and self-control. It could be argued that a teacher’s level of self-control is mostly apparent to learners when it is absent and, for this reason, instructors may be far more aware of this characteristic than their students. This is a finding that may be related to the importance teacher participants placed on classroom management skills, such as properly and effectively managing the classroom—a characteristic highlighted by Saafin (2005). Teacher participants also believed that, in addition to being able to communicate well in English, they should also know how to incorporate a variety of teaching methods into their classrooms and to understand how to evaluate learners. Saafin similarly stresses the importance of these points in the Emirati EFL context.

The questionnaire category that received the lowest overall mean was, somewhat surprisingly in light of the importance Witcher (2003) placed on the area, content knowledge about learning and teaching. The items from this category that received the lowest means were related to the ability to solve practical problems through action research and, like the student participants, being aware of Western cultures. The latter item has been discussed above, although it is interesting to note that not only did teacher participants see relatively little value in knowing how to conduct action research to solve any classroom issue that they may encounter despite its increasing value in teacher education programs across the Gulf (Gallagher, 2015), but they also did not think it to be especially important to help colleagues in their professional development endeavors.

The third research question explored the areas of similarities and differences in student and teacher perceptions of the characteristics of good EFL teachers. While t tests revealed statistically significant differences between the two groups of participants in their perceptions of the importance of all seven questionnaire categories, these differences were, as noted above, in strength of conviction rather than direction. That is, both student and teacher participants believed all seven questionnaire categories represented important characteristics of successful EFL teachers, although teachers assigned significantly higher means to each of these categories than their student counterparts. To better understand areas of overlap, the 10 highest and lowest rated questionnaire items for students and teachers were compared. These displayed a remarkable degree of similarity.

For example, both student and teacher participants agreed about the importance of EFL teachers displaying high levels of English-language proficiency, with it also being important for teachers to treat their learners with equality and respect. These characteristics can be readily subsumed under Borgs’ (2006) three areas of “knowledge, skills and attitudes towards learners” (p. 7). Moreover, both groups of participants believed that teachers should be enthusiastic about teaching, which is a finding that has been reported by authors such as Wood (1998) and Metcalfe and Game (2006). In terms of the characteristics that students and teachers thought to be among the least important, both agreed that it was relatively unimportant for EFL teachers to be aware of Western cultures or to understand learners’ sociocultural backgrounds. Although the former finding is perhaps to be expected given the somewhat contentious nature of the place of Western cultures in the EFL classrooms of the Gulf as discussed above, even if it does run contrary to Chen and Lin’s (2009) findings in the Taiwanese context, the latter was somewhat surprising given the often cited importance of personalizing the learning experience (Griffiths & Keohane, 2000). Although it may have been possible to explain this finding more readily if students had teachers drawn from similar cultural backgrounds to them, the diversity of teachers within the Omani high school context, with around 40% of all teachers being non-Omani (Al-Issa & Al-Bulushi, 2012), suggests that instructors may often come from very different backgrounds than their students.

Another area that both student and teacher participants agreed on was of the limited importance of EFL teachers in Oman using audiovisual and other supplementary materials. The incorporation of teaching technology was highlighted by Li and Walsh (2011) as a characteristic of good teachers in China, although this finding may be indicative of the limited use of IT in Omani classrooms due to factors including a lack of appropriate facilities and teachers who are often poorly trained in incorporating technology (Al-Issa & Al-Bulushi, 2012). Moreover, the relative unimportance of using supplementary materials may be associated with a rather packed curriculum in Omani schools that leaves little room for teaching beyond the prescribed textbook. Finally, both students and teachers agree that having an “acceptable appearance” is relatively unimportant for EFL teachers.

Conclusion

The current research sought to explore the characteristics of good EFL teachers in the Omani high school context as perceived by Omani students and teachers working in the context. Findings indicate that both students and teachers tend to agree about the importance of all seven questionnaire category areas, with characteristics related to having a high level of English language proficiency and treating students equally and with respect being of especial importance. Moreover, participants agreed that a knowledge of the Western culture/s associated with the English language and the use of technology and supplementary materials in EFL classes were relatively unimportant.

The only potential area of divergence between student and teacher participants was in relation to professional development, with teachers maintaining that participating in opportunities to enhance their pedagogical skills was important while students stated that this area was relatively unimportant even if they did expect their instructors to stay up-to-date with the latest developments in the field. However, this discrepancy in interpretations of the potential value of professional development is unlikely to have an immediate negative influence on the classroom. The area that may have a more detrimental impact, however, is the relative unimportance students and teachers place on the incorporation of IT into EFL classes. While, as discussed above, this finding may be a reflection of classrooms and/or schools poorly equipped to access the potential benefits of using technology as an integral part of instruction, it is an area that should be addressed if the Ministry of Education wants to reach one of its goals of creating globally aware citizens capable of taking advantage of the benefits of globalization (Issan & Gomaa, 2010).

Moreover, the fact that both student and teacher participants did not believe the use of supplementary materials to be of much importance in Omani high schools could be argued to result from a highly centralized and bureaucratic approach to English language instruction in the government school system that tends to focus on following the writ of the teacher’s edition at the cost of instructor flexibility (Al-Alawi, 1994; Al-Issa & Al-Bulushi, 2010). Although the ministry-produced textbooks have been reported to be somewhat effective in helping learners develop their English-language competencies (Abdenacer, 2006; Al-Issa & Al-Bulushi, 2012; Al-Mahrooqi, Denman, & Al-Maamari, 2015), it could be argued that an unwavering adherence to these books alone may deny the teacher the opportunity to allow their learners to determine the course of the lesson in a more learner-centered approach while also preventing the teacher from identifying limitations in the textbooks that could be addressed through the use of supplementary materials.

In addition, the fact that both students and teachers see little value in EFL instructors being aware of Western cultures may be an expression of either their awareness of the utility of English as an international language outside the “ownership” of inner circle nations (Ha, 2008) or of suspicion of the potential of Western values associated with the language due to their potential to alienate learners from their own cultural backgrounds (Rahman, 2005). Although this is an area of some debate in the region, it should be noted that the government-produced and mandated textbooks “English for Me” and “Engage with English” have, in fact, been reported as exposing learners to certain aspects of foreign culture/s to increase their sociocultural understanding of the language (Al Harrasi, 2012). Student and teacher beliefs that understanding these aspects of non-Arab and/or Western culture/s is not important, therefore, may not only go against one of the aims of the EFL syllabus but may also be detrimental to learning outcomes by limiting the development of learners’ cultural understanding of the language they are studying. This is an issue that has been explicitly addressed by Derbel and Al-Mohammadi (2015) in Oman.

Despite a number of limitations, such as the potential influence of self-selection and gender biases and the dominance of both teacher and student samples by participants from the Batinah South governorate, this investigation nonetheless suggests that discrepancies between student and teacher perceptions of the characteristics of a good EFL instructor in the Omani school context are not a major issue of concern and that the general overlap between participants about the relative importance of teachers’ characteristics will contribute to, rather than detract from, improving learners’ English language skills. Future research building on these findings and taking into account the limitations offered above will help provide greater clarity about whether this is true of learners and teachers of English across the Omani government school system and outside of the dominant governorate of Batinah South featured in the research.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article: We received funding from His Majesty Sultan Qaboos’ Annual Research Trust Fund (SR/ART/ENGL/12/01).

Author Biographies

Rahma Al-Mahrooqi is an associate professor of English at Sultan Qaboos University’s English Department,Oman,and the director of the Humanities Research Centre at the same institution. She specializes in English language teaching,reading,and sociolinguistics and has published widely in these areas in Oman and internationally.

Christopher Denman is an instructor at Sultan Qaboos University’s Language Centre and is currently on secondment to that university’s Humanities Research Centre. In addition to Oman,he has taught at institutions in Australia,South Korea,and Japan. His research interests include language and identity and colonial education policy.

Jamila Al-Siyabi is an assistant language lecturer at Sultan Qaboos University’s Language Centre,Oman. She is currently undertaking her doctoral studies and completed her MA in applied linguistics at the University of Queensland,Australia. Her research interests are language learning,language skills and culture.

Faisal Al-Maamari is an assistant lecturer at the Language Centre,Sultan Qaboos University,Oman. He received a BA in TEFL from Sultan Qaboos University (1999),an MA in English Language Teaching from the University of Warwick (2001),United Kingdom,and a PhD at the University of Bristol (2011). His main research interests include teacher cognition and teacher education,programme quality,and research methods.

References

Abdenacer

(2006). Textbook evaluations: The case of grade 5’s English for Me classbook B. Retrieved from http://www.scribd.com/doc/162701476/Textbook-Evaluations-The-case-of-Grade-Five%E2%80%99s-English-doc

Abu Rahma

(2007). Qualities of the good language teacher as perceived by prospective teachers of English in the Arab world. Journal of Educational and Psychological Studies, 1, 99-124.

Al-Alawi

(1994). The teaching and learning of English as a foreign language in third year secondary education in Oman with special reference to reading (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Bath, UK.

Al Harrasi

K. T.

(2012). Using stories in English Omani curriculum. English Language Teaching, 5(11), 51-59.

Al-Issa

Al-Bulushi

(2010). Training English language student teachers to become reflective teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(4). doi:10.14221/ajte.2010v35n4.4

Al-Issa

Al-Bulushi

(2012). English language teaching reform in Sultanate of Oman: The case of theory and practice disparity. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 11, 141-176. doi:10.1007/s10671-011-9110-0

Al-Mahrooqi

Denman

C. J.

Al-Maamari

(2015). Checklist analysis of Oman’s basic curriculum EFL textbooks series. In Al-Mahrooqi

Denman

C. J.

(Eds.), Issues in English education in the Arab world (pp. 283-305). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars.

Al-Maqtri

Thabet

(2013). The qualities of the good English teacher as perceived by Saudi and Yemeni college students of English. Greener Journal of Educational Research, 3(2), 72-79.

Al-Tamimi

(2009). Motivation and attitudes towards learning English: A study of petroleum engineering undergraduates at Hadhramout University of Sciences and Technology. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 9(2), 29-55. Retrieved from http://www.ukm.my/ppbl/Gema/pp%2029_55.pdf

10.

Bell

T. R.

(2005). Behaviors and attitudes of effective foreign language teachers: Results of a questionnaire study. Foreign Language Annals, 38, 259-269.

11.

Borg

(2006). The distinctive characteristics of foreign language teachers. Language Teaching Research, 10, 3-31.

12.

Brosh

(1996). Perceived characteristics of the effective language teacher. Foreign Language Annals, 29, 125-138.

13.

Celik

(2013). In the eyes of Turkish EFL learners: What makes an effective foreign language teacher? Porta Linguarum, 20, 287-297. Retrieved from http://www.ugr.es/~portalin/articulos/PL_numero20/18%20Servet%20Celik.pdf

14.

Charise

(2007). “More English, less Islam?” An overview of English language functions in the Arabian/Persian Gulf. Retrieved from http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~cpercy/courses/eng6365-charise.htm

15.

Chen

Y. J.

Lin

S. C.

(2009). Exploring characteristics for effective EFL teachers from the perceptions of junior high school students in Tainan. STUT Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2, 219-249.

16.

Davis

H. A.

(2001). The quality and impact of relationships between elementary school students and teachers. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 331-453.

17.

Derbel

Al-Mohammadi

S. A.

(2015). Integration of language skills and culture in English language teaching: Rationale and implications for practice. In Al-Mahrooqi

Denman

C. J.

(Eds.), Issues in English education in the Arab world (pp. 216-232). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars.

18.

Edge

(2003). TEFL and international politics: A personal narrative. IATEFL Issues, 175, 10-11.

19.

Findlow

(2006). Higher education and linguistic dualism in the Arab Gulf. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27, 19-36.

20.

Finkbeiner

(2008). Culture and good language learners. In Griffiths

(Ed.), Lessons from good language learners (pp. 131-141). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

21.

Gallagher

(2015). From small “r” to big “I”: The impact of classroom-based action research in pre-service teacher education. In Al-Mahrooqi

Denman

C. J.

(Eds.), Issues in English education in the Arab world (pp. 125-142). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars.

22.

Griffiths

Keohane

(2000). Personalizing language learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

23.

P. L.

(2008). Teaching English as an international language: Identity, resistance and negotiation. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

24.

Issan

S. A.

Gomaa

N. M.

(2010). Post basic education reforms in Oman: A case study. Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal, 1(1), 19-27.

25.

Javier

(2010). The foreign-ness of native speaking teachers of color. In Nunan

Choi

(Eds.), Language and culture: Reflective narratives and the emergence of identity (pp. 97-102). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

26.

Karmani

(2005). Petro-linguistics: The emerging nexus between oil, English, and Islam. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 4, 87-102.

27.

Karmani

(2010). On perceptions of the socialising effects of English-medium education on students at a Gulf Arab University with particular reference to the United Arab Emirates (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Exeter, UK. Retrieved from https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/handle/10036/99373

28.

Kim

L. S.

(2003). Multiple identities in a multicultural world: A Malaysian perspective. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 2, 137-158.

29.

Walsh

(2011). Technology uptake in Chinese EFL classes. Language Teaching Research, 15, 99-125.

30.

Metcalfe

Game

(2006). The teacher’s enthusiasm. The Australian Educational Researcher, 33(3), 91-106.

31.

Mostafizar Rahman

A. R.

(2008). Attitudes towards English among Malaysian undergraduates. Language in India, 8. Retrieved from http://www.languageinindia.com/feb2008/malayenglishattitude.html

32.

Rahman

(2005). The Muslim response to English in South Asia: With special reference to inequality, intolerance, and militancy in Pakistan. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 4, 119-135.

33.

Saafin

M. S.

(2005). An investigation into Arab students’ perceptions of effective EFL teachers at university level (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Exeter, UK.

34.

Sinno

Z. S.

(2008). The impact on language learning of Lebanese students’ attitudes towards English in the context of globalization and anti-Americanism (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Leicester. Retrieved from https://lra.le.ac.uk/bitstream/2381/4234/1/2008SirajSinnoZedd.pdf.pdf

35.

Sotto

(2011). When teaching becomes learning: A theory and practice of teaching (2nd ed.). London, England: Continuum Education.

36.

Witcher

A. E.

(2003). Students’ perceptions of characteristics of effective college teachers. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED482517.pdf

37.

Wood

A. M.

(1998). The effects of teacher enthusiasm on student motivation, selective attention, and text memory (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.

38.

Zhang

Watkins

(2007). Conceptions of a good tertiary EFL teacher in China. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 781-790.