Heliyon 9 (2023) e12772

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Heliyon
journal homepage: www.cell.com/heliyon

Research article

Instructors’ perceptions and use of first language in EFL classes

in Afghanistan
Sayeed Naqibullah Orfan
English Department, School of Language and Literature, Takhar University, Afghanistan

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The study examined instructors’ arguments for and against the use of L1 in EFL classes. It
L1 use explored the frequency use and functions of L1. It also investigated the impact of the participants’
Language teaching gender, education level and years of teaching experience on their responses. A survey question­
EFL classrooms
naire and classroom observations were used to collect data from 189 and 5 EFL instructors,
Institutional culture
Teaching strategy
respectively. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. The results
showed that EFL instructors had mixed perceptions about L1 use in EFL classes. They believed
that L1 had both facilitative roles (e.g. helping students build up their lexicon) and negative
consequences (e.g., interfering in students’ learning). Furthermore, the instructors utilized L1 for
various language, classroom management and social purposes to varying extent. L1 was more
frequently used to explain difficult grammatical points, new vocabulary and difficult concepts.
Instructors favored and used L1 more frequently in low-level classes than higher levels. The study
also revealed that there were statistically significant differences between participants’ responses
by their gender, education and years of teaching experience. The study recommends EFL in­
structors to revisit their use of L1 in EFL classes and use it judiciously and systematically to
optimize students’ English learning and prevent negative consequences of the overuse of L1 (e.g.,
learners’ dependence on L1).

1. Introduction

The use of first language (L1) in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classroom is still a controversial topic. Some researchers have
opposed the use of L1 and have called for its abandonment in EFL classes. They have argued that L1 use in EFL classes has detrimental
effects on students’ learning. Ellis [1] asserts that L1 does not play a crucial role in EFL classrooms and that too much use of L1 may
hinder foreign language learning. According to Kavaliauskiene [2], L1 use causes students to believe that there are L1 equivalents for
second language (L2) structures and vocabulary. Pan and Pan [3] concluded that L1 interfered with L2 acquisition. Kim and Elder [4]
call for exclusive use of English in EFL classes and argue that English teaching must help students develop language skills along the
same vein as L2 native speakers. Other researchers have warned of the overuse of L1 in EFL classes [5]. The overuse of L1 negatively
influences L2 learning since students are deprived of L2 input, and it increases L1 dependence in L2 learning [6,7].
On the other hand, a wide variety of studies have underscored the facilitative role of L1 in EFL classes and consider it as a helpful
tool for boosting English learning [8–16]. Jamshidi and Navehebrahim [17] revealed that the use of Persian in EFL classes increased
EFL students’ confidence and motivation. Spahiu [18] found that the exclusion of students’ L1 could demotivate students from
learning. Lasagabaster [19] found that the use of L1 helped students build up their lexicons. The participants of the studies by Rayati

E-mail address: sayeed.naqibullah@fublrightmail.org.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12772
Received 26 May 2022; Received in revised form 28 December 2022; Accepted 29 December 2022
Available online 2 January 2023
2405-8440/© 2023 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
S.N. Orfan Heliyon 9 (2023) e12772

et al. [20] and McMillan and Rivers [21] believed that selective use of L1 in EFL classes could support English learning. Sipra [22]
found that the use of L1 could foster L2 learning and concluded that bilingual EFL instructors are better equipped with teaching aids.
Some researchers have advocated for the systematic use of L1 in EFL classes [23–26].
A wide number of studies explored EFL instructors’ perception of L1 use in EFL classes [e.g., Refs. [5,8,27–30]. These studies
reported that EFL instructors supported L1 use in EFL learning. Other studies investigated EFL students’ perceptions of L1 use in the
classroom [e.g., Refs. [31–33]. They found that EFL students favored the use of L1 in their classes and considered it a useful tool for
learning L2. Moreover, a growing number of studies explored the function of L1 in L2 classes. Rolin-Ianziti and Brownlie [34] found
that French teachers used students’ L1 (English) for translation, metalinguistic and communicative uses. Other studies reported that
EFL instructors used students’ L1 for explaining structure and difficult words, clarifying difficult concepts, maintaining classroom
order and discipline, checking the meaning of new words, giving instructions, explaining course policies and praising or reprimanding
students [35–40]. Sharma [30] found that the participants used L1 to explain difficult concepts and words to save time for more class
activities.
English has been an important course at schools and universities for years in Afghanistan [41,42]. English learning was banned
during the Taliban regime that barred girls and women from going to school and universities [43]. However, English learning has
gained massive popularity since the arrival of the international community and foreign forces in the country in 2001 [44]. Since then,
in addition to English programs at private and public universities, a growing number of English language centers and institutes have
been established throughout the country to provide English education for English learners [45]. The use of students’ L1 has been
widespread in EFL classes as far as the author is concerned. The author has taught English in various universities and English language
centers in various provinces in Afghanistan.
Very few studies examined the use of L1 in foreign language classes in the context of Afghanistan. Only one case study [46]
examined lecturers’ perceptions of code switching in English classes at the university. However, the authors collected data from a small
number of male participants (4) from two public universities. Furthermore, the methodology of the study was not clear enough; how
they selected the participants and analyzed the data. Moreover, English teaching and learning is a growing trend in Afghanistan [47].
Consequently, the need for research-driven policy with respect to L1 use in EFL classes by institutions particularly English programs is
urgent. To the best of author’s knowledge, this research is the first study to investigate the L1 use in EFL classes through a mixed
approach (survey and observations) that involves instructors at university, which offers a bachelor’s degree in English language as well
as English language centers that provide general English education. The study draws data from a large number of instructors including
women with different education degrees, teaching experience and from various institutions. The findings will help English programs in
Afghanistan to develop informed policy concerning L1 use in their classes. They will help instructors to revisit their use of L1 and
approach it in a strategic way that maximize students’ learning. It contributes to the growing body of literature on L1 use in EFL classes
particularly in the context of Afghanistan. Furthermore, it provides insights about the use of L1 studies on a number of variables such as
gender, education and years of teaching experience. The study addresses the following research questions.

1. What are the instructors’ arguments for and against L1 use in EFL classes?
2. What are the instructors’ perceptions of their institutional culture and the use of L1 in different levels?
3. To what extent and for what purposes do instructors use L1 in EFL classes?
4. Are there any statistically significant differences in the participants’ responses by their gender, education level and years of
teaching experience?

2. Methodology

2.1. Design

The study is a mixed research. A survey questionnaire and classroom observations were used to collect data from EFL instructors.
They were required to respond to 33 close-ended questionnaire items on a five-point Likert Scale. The author observed five different
EFL classes in one of the English language centers (Saba Educational Academy) based in Taloqan, a northeastern city of Afghanistan in
order to gain a deeper insight into L1 use in EFL classes. The author used descriptive and inferential statistics to analyze the data.

Table 1
Participants’ demographic information.
Characteristics Frequency Percentage

Gender Female 33 17.4

Male 156 82.6
Education level Bachelor’s 76 40
Maser’s 111 59
PhD 2 1
Years of experience 0–5 65 34.4
6–10 88 46.6
11–15 36 19

2
S.N. Orfan Heliyon 9 (2023) e12772

2.2. Participants

Participants of the study were 189 EFL instructors who were teaching English in Afghanistan at the time of the study. They were all
nonnative speakers of English. Female instructors made up 17.4% of the participants while 82.6% were male (Table 1). 40% of the
participants held a bachelor’s degree whereas around 59% of them had a master’s degree at the time of the study. Only did 1% of them
have a PhD degree at the time of the study. 34% of the respondents had a teaching experience of 0–5 years while around 47% of them
had 6–10 years of teaching experience. A small number of them (19%) had a teaching experience of 11–15 years. Furthermore, five EFL
instructors were randomly selected for classroom observations, and they were all male. They were teaching English in an English
language center based in Taloqan City that provided English for learners with different proficiency levels.

2.3. Instrument

Literature review was carried out to design and develop the questionnaire. The questionnaire items were adapted from the relevant
literature [48–53]. The questionnaire consisted of three parts. The first part sought the participants’ demographic information (gender,
education level and years of teaching experience). The second part with 18 items elicited the participants’ arguments against and for L1
use in EFL classes, institutional culture around L1 use, and L1 use in various EFL classes (beginner, intermediate and advanced). They
were required to respond to the items on a five-point Likert Scale (1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = undecided; 4 = agree; and 5
= strongly agree). The last section with 15 items sought the participants’ response about the functions and frequency of L1 use in EFL
classes on a 4-point Likert Scale (1 = never; 2 = sometimes; 4 = frequently; 5 = very frequently).
The questionnaire was read by three experts in the English Department of Takhar University and problematic items were revised
based on their comments and feedback. The wording of the questionnaire is of significance, and it is crucial to conduct a pilot test to
ensure the successful administration of the questionnaire [54]. A pilot test was administered with 25 EFL instructors, and reliability
analysis of the items was carried out using SPSS version 26.0. As Table 2 shows, the value of the Cronbach’s alpha is over 0.9 coefficient
for each section of the questionnaire. Thus, it was concluded that the items in each category had high internal consistency and they
were appropriate for the study. In addition, a structured-checklist of 15 items was utilized to carry out classroom observations. The
items on the functions of L1 were adopted from the questionnaire. The checklist was used to record the frequency use of L1 for each
function.

2.4. Procedure

The study was approved by the Research Committee of Takhar University prior to its administration. The questionnaire was
designed online using Google survey tool. Snowball sampling (chain-referral sampling) was used to collect data for the study. The link
of the questionnaire was shared with EFL instructors in various universities and English language centers/institutes through emails and
social networking sites including Facebook and WhatsApp. They were requested to complete the questionnaire and share it with their
colleagues. Furthermore, the link of the questionnaire was shared on virtual groups of EFL instructors on social networking sites. The
questionnaire was available for a period of one month, June 23 – July 22, 2021. The respondents were required to read the purpose of
the study and consent statement before proceeding to complete the questionnaire. The participant’s consent was obtained through
requiring them to tick a box containing “I am willing to participate in the research”. The participants were required to read the in­
structions for each section and complete it accordingly.
Furthermore, classroom observations were carried out during quantitative data collection. Saba Educational Academy, an English
language center, was purposefully selected for classroom observations. It was based in Taloan, a northeastern city of Afghanistan, and
it was the only English language center in Taloqan City that focused solely on English education and was offering English classes for all
levels. The study and its purposes were shared with the manager of the language center who coordinated classrooms observations. Two
beginner, two intermediate and one advanced classes were randomly selected for observation from a list of classes. The study and its
purpose were shared with instructors before administering observation, and their consent was obtained through a letter, which
ensured that their participation was voluntary and that the researcher’s observation of their class would be kept confidential. The
author showed up to each class in a prearranged time and observed each class for 90 minutes. He recorded the frequency use of L1 for
each function on a checklist.

2.5. Analysis

The data were downloaded as an excel sheet and were closely examined to ensure that the questionnaires were completed
appropriately. They were numerically coded and were imported to SPSS version 26.0 for further analysis. Descriptive statistics were

Table 2
Reliability value of questionnaire items.
Category Number of items Cronbach’s Alpha

Arguments for/against L1 use, Institutional culture and L1 use in different levels 18 0.936
Functions of L1 15 0.961
Total 33 0.948

3
S.N. Orfan Heliyon 9 (2023) e12772

employed to determine the frequency, mean, and standard deviation of the data. The Independent Samples T-test was used to explore
the differences in the participants’ responses by their gender and education level. Moreover, One-Way ANOVA test was carried out to
determine the differences in the participants’ response by their years of teaching experience. With respect to data drawn from
classrooms observations, the author tabulated the number of times each instructor used L1 for each function. He also totaled the
frequency use of L1 for each function by all five instructors.

3. Findings

3.1. Quantitative data

3.1.1. Arguments for and against L1 use in EFL classes

Descriptive statistics were used to answer the first research questions “What are the instructors’ arguments for and against L1 use in
EFL classrooms?” As Table 3 shows, around 79% of the participants agreed and strongly agreed that L1 use to explain difficult concepts
could save instructors’ time for other class activities. Over 50% believed that L1 would help students build up their lexicon, make them
less anxious and would help students work together. Moreover, 48% stated that L1 use could boost students’ confidence and moti­
vation. However, 36% believed that L1 was an effective strategy for learning English and that it was a means of recognizing students.
On the other hand, 78% of the respondents agreed and strongly agreed that L1 interfered in students’ learning. Similarly, over 70%
believed that L1 use could reduce students’ exposure to English, reduce practice opportunities for EFL students and could increase their
dependence on L1. Furthermore, 66% stated that L1 use would prevent students from thinking in English.

3.1.2. Institutional culture around L1 and L1 use in different levels

Descriptive analyses were carried out to answer the second research question “What are the instructors’ perceptions of their
institutional culture and use of L1 in different levels?” As Table 4 reveals, around 85% of the participants agreed and strongly agreed
that instructors could decide on the amount of L1 use in their classes. Moreover, 67% and around 55% stated that their institutions and
students expected classes to be taught in English, respectively. The majority of the participants (66%) agreed and strongly agreed with
the use of L1 in beginner classes while 51% stated that L1 should be used in intermediate classes to a very small extent. On the other
hand, the vast majority (84%) believed that L1 should not be used in advanced classes at all.

3.1.3. Purposes and frequency use of L1

Descriptive analyses were used to answer the third research question “To what extent and for what purposes do instructors use L1 in
EFL classes?” Eight items (1–8) of the third part of the questionnaire sought the participants’ response about the language function of
L1 in EFL classes. As shown in Table 5, the first three items received a mean score of over 2.50, which indicates that EFL instructors
frequently used L1 to explain complicated grammatical points, new vocabulary and clarify difficult concepts. The other items received
a mean score of less than 2.10, which means that EFL instructors sometimes used L1 to explain L1 & L2 differences, check students’
comprehension, provide feedback, discuss assignments, translate passages and give instructions. Four items (9–12) sought their re­
sponses about the managerial functions of L1, which received a mean score of between 1.74 and 2.08. It means that the instructors
sometimes used L1 for classroom management (i.e., maintaining rapport and discipline, drawing their attention and encouraging
students). Three items (13–15) elicited the participants’ response about the social functions of L1. As Table 5 shows, ‘talking about
personal matters’ recieved a mean score of 2.31, which means that instructors frequently used L1 to talk about personal matters with
students. Furthermore, joking and greeting received a mean score of less than 2. That is, instructors sometimes used L1 to joke and to
greet with students.

3.1.4. Differences by gender, education level and years of teaching experience

Independent Samples T-test was utilized to explore the differences in participants’ responses by their gender and education. Since
the number of instructors with a PhD was a few in number (2), they were excluded from the analysis. As Table 6 shows, the p-value for

Table 3
Instructors’ arguments for and against L1 use in EFL classes.
No Items A & SA frequency (%) Mean SD

1 Using L1 to explain difficult concepts can save more time for other class activities. 149 (78.9) 3.79 1.1
2 L1 use helps students build up their lexicons. 115 (60.8) 3.18 1.352
3 L1 use makes students less anxious. 109 (57.9) 3.38 1.068
4 L1 use helps students work together. 103 (54.5) 3.48 1.055
5 L1 use can increase students’ confidence and motivation. 91 (48.3) 3.2 1.348
6 L1 use is an effective strategy for learning English. 69 (36.4) 2.88 1.259
7 L1 use is a means of recognizing and respecting students. 69 (36.4) 3.05 1.281
8 L1 use interferes in students’ English learning. 147 (78) 4.1 0.866
9 L1 use can decrease students’ exposure to English. 138 (73.2) 3.78 1.191
10 L1 use reduces the opportunities for students to practice English. 137 (72.7) 3.96 1.106
11 L1 use can increase students’ dependence on L1. 137 (72.7) 3.98 1.029
12 L1 use prevents students from thinking in English. 125 (66) 3.89 1.229

% - Percentage A - Agree, SA - Strongly Agree, SD - Standard Deviation.

4
S.N. Orfan Heliyon 9 (2023) e12772

Table 4
Institutional culture around L1 and L1 use in different classes.
No Items A & SA frequency (%) Mean SD

13 Instructors can decide for themselves on the amount of L1 use in the classroom. 160 (84.70) 4.06 1.053
14 My institution expects classes to be taught only in English. 127 (67) 3.69 1.302
15 Students expect classes to be taught only in English. 103 (54.5) 3.24 1.427
16 L1 should be used in beginner classes. 125 (66) 3.81 1.154
17 L1 should be used to a very small extent in intermediate classes. 97 (51.2) 3.26 1.093
18 L1 use should be completely prevented in advanced classes. 159 (84.2) 4.38 1.063

% - Percentage, A - Agree, SA - Strongly Agree, SD - Standard Deviation.

Table 5
Functions and frequency use of L1.
No Items Mean SD

Language functions
1 I use L1 to explain complicated grammatical points. 2.69 1.053
2 I use L1 to clarify difficult concepts. 2.58 0.863
3 I use L1 to explain new vocabulary. 2.54 0.748
4 I use L1 to give instructions. 2.09 0.998
5 I use L1 to explain differences between L1 and L2. 2.06 1.024
6 I use L1 to check students’ comprehension. 1.94 1.14
7 I use L1 to provide feedback for students. 1.92 1.071
8 I use L1 to translate reading texts. 1.88 0.982
Classroom management functions
9 I use L1 to develop and maintain rapport in the classroom. 2.08 1.122
10 I use L1 to maintain discipline in the classroom. 2.01 0.97
11 I use L1 to draw their attention. 1.77 0.965
12 I use L1 to praise and encourage students. 1.74 0.84
Social functions
13 I use L1 to talk about personal matters with students. 2.31 0.94
14 I use L1 to joke with students. 1.97 0.85
15 I use L1 to greet students. 1.8 0.958

SD - Standard Deviation.

Table 6
Differences by gender, education and years of teaching experience.
Category N Mean SD Analysis P-value

Gender Female 33 3.803 0.37141 T-test 0.023

Male 156 3.5037 0.73124
Education Bachelor’s 76 3.7027 0.54883 T-test 0.000
Master’s 111 3.5012 0.63503
Years of Teaching experience 0–5 65 3.8201 0.57442 One-Way ANOVA 0.000
6–10 88 3.5694 0.38858
11–15 36 3.191 0.79981

gender and education (0.023, 0.000) is less than the alpha level (0.05), which indicates that there is a significant difference. That is,
female instructors held more positive perceptions about the L1 use in EFL classes than male instructors did. Similarly, EFL instructors
with a bachelor’s degree carried stronger positive perceptions than those with a master’s degree. Furthermore, One-Way ANOVA test
was used to determine the differences in participants’ responses by their years of teaching experience. The p-value (0.000) for years of
teaching experience is less than the significance value (0.05). Thus, it is concluded that the participants’ years of teaching experience
had a significant impact on the instructors’ perceptions about the use of L1 in EFL classes.

3.2. Classroom observations

Five classroom observations were carried out in an English language center based in Taloqan City to get a deeper insight of the
functions and frequency use of L1 in EFL classes. The language center required the instructors to use American Headway Series as the
textbook, which has integrated four major skills of English. Pseudonyms are used to ensure the participants’ confidentiality. Each class
was observed for 90 minutes and the use of L1 (Farsi) was recorded using a checklist. EFL instructors used L1 for various purposes to
varying extent in EFL classes (Table 7). They used L1 (Farsi) more frequently to explain new vocabulary, translate texts and clarify
difficult concepts. However, beginner instructors used L1 more frequently than intermediate and advanced levels instructors, and
advanced level instructors used L1 very less frequently for a very small number of purposes.

5
S.N. Orfan Heliyon 9 (2023) e12772

Table 7
Results of classrooms observations.
Functions Frequency of L1 use (Instructors) Total

Beginner Intermediate Advanced

Ali Habib Jamil Safar Wahid

To explain complicated grammatical points 3 3 1 7

To clarify difficult concepts 3 4 5 3 2 17
To explain new vocabulary 7 9 3 4 2 25
To explain differences between L1 & L2 1 2 1 4
To check students’ comprehension 3 2 5
To provide feedback for students 2 2
To translate texts 7 5 3 2 1 18
To give instructions 3 4 1 8
To develop and maintain rapport 1 1
To maintain discipline in the classroom 4 3 1 1 9
To draw their attention 2 3 1 6
To praise and encourage students 1 1
To talk about personal matters 1 1 2
To joke with students 1 1 1 3
To greet students 0

4. Discussion

The study investigated instructors’ perception of L1 use and its functions in EFL classes. The results showed that the instructors had
various arguments against and for L1 use. The majority of them believed that L1 use could save them time for other activities, help
students build up their lexicon, facilitate their group work and reduce their anxiety. These findings are in parallel with those of the
research by Jafari and Shokrpour [55], Lasagabaster [19], Al-shammari [56] and Bruen and Kelly [5]. Around half of them believed
that L1 use boosted their students’ motivation and confidence. This is line with the studies carried out by Jamshidi and Navehebrahim
[17] and Spahiu [18]. Moreover, some participants (36%) believed that L1 was a way to recognize students, and it is an effective
strategy for learning English. This finding is consistent with that of the study by Mouhanna [57] who reported that L1 use was a means
of respecting students. The findings are inconsistent with those of the studies by Imran and Wyatt [58] and Cheng [59] whose par­
ticipants supported exclusive use of English in EFL classes.
The instructors were aware of the drawbacks of use of L1 in EFL classes. Most of them believed that L1 use interfered in students’
English learning, reduced practice opportunities and exposure to English. It is in line with the findings of the studies by Sa’d and
Qadermazi [23], Nurul Hidayati [60] and Pan and Pan [3]. The instructors also believed that L1 use increased students’ dependence on
L1 and prevented students from thinking in English. It corroborates the study by Shabir [52] whose participants believed that the use of
students’ L1 in EFL classes could make their English learning dependent on their L1 and prevent them from thinking in English.
Furthermore, the vast majority of instructors believed that they had the choice of deciding on the amount of L1 use in their class. It
contradicts the study by Cheng [59] who found that EFL instructors had no choice on the use of students’ L1. They were required to
speak English throughout the class. Moreover, most of the respondents stated that their institutions and students expected them to use
English rather than L1. The results of quantitative data and observations showed that most of the instructors favored L1 use in beginner
classes while they favored L1 in intermediate classes to a very small extent. However, the vast majority of them disfavored L1 use in
advanced classes. This finding is in parallel with Turnbull’s [61], Khresheh’s [62] and Solhi’s [63] studies that reported that the
students’ L1 was frequently used in beginner levels and its use became less frequent in higher levels.
The results of both quantitative data and classroom observations showed that L1 had various language, management and social
functions in EFL classes. It is on a par with the study by Rolin-Ianziti and Brownlie [34] who reported that EFL teachers used students’
L1 for metalinguistic and communicative purposes. L1 was frequently used for explaining complicated grammatical points, new vo­
cabulary, and clarifying difficult concepts. These findings are similar to those of the studies by Tajgozari [64], Alshehri [51], Copland
and Neokleous [65]. L1 was sometimes used to provide feedback, give instructions, explain the differences between L1 and L2,
translate texts, discuss assignments and check students’ comprehension. It is on a par with the results of the study by Lourie [66] who
found that EFL teachers used L1 to translate texts and facilitate communicative activities. Furthermore, L1 was used for classroom
management (e.g., disciplining students) and social purposes (e.g., talking about personal matters with students) to varying extent.
These findings are similar to those of the studies by Kohi and Lakshmi [50], Balabakgil and Mede [67] and Solhi [63] who reported that
their participants used L1 for classroom management and social purposes.
The findings also showed that the instructors’ gender, education and years of teaching experience had a significant impact on their
responses. Female instructors held more positive perceptions about L1 and they used L1 more frequently in EFL classes than male
instructors did. The higher the instructors’ education, the less frequently they used L1 in EFL classes. In other words, instructors with a
bachelor’s degree used L1 more frequently than those with a master’s degree. This can be accounted for by the fact that EFL instructors
learn more about the detrimental effects of the overuse of L1 in EFL classes in their graduate studies. Moreover, as nonnative English
instructors, they continue to improve their English in their graduate studies, which results in better command of English. Conse­
quently, they feel confident to communicate in English in their classes. Similarly, instructors of beginner classes used L1 more

6
S.N. Orfan Heliyon 9 (2023) e12772

frequently than those of intermediate and advanced classes. It is consistent with De La Campa and Nassaji’s [68] study, who reported
that novice instructors used half of their L1 utterances for translation purposes. It can be accounted for by the fact that novice
nonnative instructors may not feel totally confident to communicate in English in their classes and they may believe that using stu­
dents’ L1 facilitate their English learning. It is not a requirement for EFL instructors to have a TESL/TEFL certificate when they start
teaching English in Afghanistan [69]. Furthermore, those employed as EFL instructors by language centers or higher education in­
stitutions are provided with little or no training on teaching English. Therefore, they end up using more traditional approaches
including frequent use of L1 in their classes.

5. Conclusion

Like the vast majority of studies on L1 use in EFL classes, the current research revealed that instructors had mixed perceptions about
the use of students’ L1. They believed that L1 had facilitative roles in learning English (e.g., helping students build up their lexicon. On
the other hand, they had arguments against the use of L1 in EFL classes (e.g., reducing students’ exposure to English input). The study
also showed that L1 was used for various language (e.g., explaining difficult concepts), classroom management (e.g., disciplining
students) and social (e.g., talking about social matters with students) purposes to varying degree, and its use was more widespread in
beginner classes.
The study has several implications for EFL instructors particularly those teaching in Afghanistan. They should use L1 in the classes
judiciously and systematically for studies [e.g., Refs. [22,24] showed that situational and careful use of first language brought about
positive impact on students’ language learning. EFL instructors are recommended to revisit their use of students’ L1. They should use
L1 to the extent that facilitates students’ English learning and prevents its negative consequences (e.g., learners’ dependence on L1).
The author used snowball sampling to collect data online and the observations were carried out in an English language center based in
Taloqan City. Furthermore, all the participants of the study were nonnative English instructors. Therefore, the findings may not be
generalizable to all English programs and further studies with a larger sample are required to gain a deeper insight about L1 use in EFL
classes in Afghanistan. They should apply various instruments including interviews and observations to collect data from different
English programs in the country. Future research can focus on students’ views of L1 use in their classes, and their perceived effects of L1
use on their English learning.

Appendix A. Questionnaire

The questionnaire aims to collect data for a study that investigates EFL instructors’ perception and use of students’ first language
(L1) in EFL classrooms in Afghanistan. It explores instructors’ arguments for and against the use of L1 and institutional culture with
respect to L1 use in EFL classes. Moreover, it studies the functions of L1 in EFL classrooms. It also determines the impact of the
participants’ gender, education level and years of teaching on their responses.

Section 1-Demographic profile: Please check (✓) the most appropriate response.

Gender ☐ Male ☐ Female

Education ☐ Bachelor’s ☐ master’s ☐ PhD

Years of teaching: ☐ 0–5 years ☐ 6–10 years ☐ 11–15 years ☐16+

Section 2 - Arguments for/against L1 use, Institutional culture and L1 use in different levels: To what extent do you agree or disagree with the
following statements? Please read the statements below carefully and tick (✓) the appropriate choices that reflect your views.

No Item Scale

Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly

disagree agree

1 Using L1 to explain difficult concepts can save more time for other class
activities.
2 L1 use helps students build up their lexicons.
3 L1 use makes students less anxious.
4 L1 use helps students work together.
5 L1 use can increase students’ confidence and motivation.
6 L1 use is an effective strategy for learning English.
7 L1 use is a means of recognizing and respecting students.
8 L1 use interferes in students’ English learning.
9 L1 use can decrease students’ exposure to English.
10 L1 use reduces the opportunities for students to practice English.
11 L1 use can increase students’ dependence on L1.
12 L1 use prevents students from thinking in English.
13 Instructors can decide for themselves on the amount of L1 use in the classroom.
14 My institution expects classes to be taught only in English.
15 Students expect classes to be taught only in English.
16 L1 should be used in beginner classes.
(continued on next page)

7
S.N. Orfan Heliyon 9 (2023) e12772

(continued )
No Item Scale

Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly

disagree agree

17 L1 should be used to a very small extent in intermediate classes.

18 L1 use should be completely prevented in advanced classes.

Section 3: Functions and frequency use of L1: How often have you used students’ L1 for these purposes? Please read the statements below carefully
and check (✓) the appropriate choices that reflect your practices.

No Items Scale

Never Sometimes Frequently Very Frequently

1 I use L1 to explain complicated grammatical points.

2 I use L1 to clarify difficult concepts.
3 I use L1 to explain new vocabulary.
4 I use L1 to give instructions.
5 I use L1 to explain differences between L1 and L2.
6 I use L1 to check students’ comprehension.
7 I use L1 to provide feedback for students.
8 I use L1 to translate reading texts.
9 I use L1 to develop and maintain rapport in the classroom.
10 I use L1 to maintain discipline in the classroom.
11 I use L1 to draw their attention.
12 I use L1 to praise and encourage students.
13 I use L1 to talk about personal matters with students.
14 I use L1 to joke with students.
15 I use L1 to greet students.

References

[1] R. Ellis, The Study of Second Language Acquisition, second ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2008.
[2] G. Kavaliauskiene, Role of mother tongue in learning English for specific purposes, ESP World 8 (1) (2009) 2–8. Retrieved from, http://esp-world.info/Articles_
22/issue_22.htm.
[3] Y. Pan, Y. Pan, The use of L1 in the foreign language classroom, Colombian Applied Ling. 12 (2) (2010) 87–96, https://doi.org/10.14483/22487085.85.
[4] S.H.O. Kim, C. Elder, Language choices and pedagogic functions in the foreign language classroom: a cross-linguistic functional analysis of teacher talk, Lang.
Teach. Res. 9 (4) (2005) 355–380, https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168805lr173oa.
[5] J. Bruen, N. Kelly, Using a shared L1 to reduce cognitive overload and anxiety levels in the L2 classroom, Lang. Learn. J. 45 (3) (2014) 1–14, https://doi.org/
10.1080/09571736.2014.908405.
[6] J. Rolin-Ianziti, R. Varshney, Students’ views regarding the use of the first language: an exploratory study in a tertiary context maximizing target language use,
Can. Mod. Lang. Rev. 65 (2) (2008) 249–273, https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.65.2.249.
[7] R. Ellis, Principles of instructed language learning, System 33 (2) (2005) 209–224, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.12.006.
[8] K. Al Masaeed, Judicious use of L1 in L2 Arabic speaking practice sessions, Foreign Lang. Ann. 49 (4) (2016) 716–728, https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12223.
[9] H. Mohebbi, S.M. Alavi, Teachers’ first language use in second language learning classroom context: a questionnaire-based study, Bellaterra J. Teach. Learning
Lang. Literature 7 (4) (2014) 57–73, https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/jtl3.539.
[10] G. Hall, G. Cook, Own-language Use in ELT: Exploring Global Practices and Attitudes, in: ELT Research Paper, British Council, London, 2013.
[11] C.T. Mart, The facilitating role of L1 in ESL classes, Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 3 (1) (2013) 9–14. Retrieved from, https://hrmars.com/papers_submitted/
9445/the-facilitating-role-of-l1-in-esl-classes.pdf.
[12] S. Afzal, Using of the First Language in English classroom as a way of scaffolding for both the students and teachers to learn and teach English, Int. Res. J. Appl.
Basic Sci. 4 (7) (2013) 1846–1854. Retrieved from, https://irjabs.com/files_site/paperlist/r_918_130715220123.pdf.
[13] E. Carson, H. Kashihara, Using the L1 in the L2 classroom: the students speak, Lang. Teach. 36 (4) (2012) 41–48, https://doi.org/10.37546/JALTTLT36.4-5.
[14] T. Timor, Use of the mother tongue in teaching a foreign language, Language Edu. Asia 3 (1) (2012) 7–17, https://doi.org/10.5746/LEiA/12/V3/I1/A02/
Timor.
[15] J. Cummins, Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms, Can. J. Appl. Ling. 10 (2) (2007) 221–240. Retrieved from, https://
journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/CJAL/article/view/19743.
[16] W. Butzkamm, We only learn language once. The role of the mother tongue in FL classrooms: death of a dogma, Lang. Learn. J. 28 (1) (2003) 29–39, https://doi.
org/10.1080/09571730385200181.
[17] A. Jamshidi, M. Navehebrahim, Learners use of code switching in the English as a foreign language classroom, Aust. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 7 (1) (2013) 186–190.
Retrieved from, http://www.ajbasweb.com/old/ajbas/2013/January/186-190.pdf.
[18] I. Spahiu, Using native language in ESL classroom, IJ-ELTS: Int. J. Eng. Lang. Transl. Stud. 1 (2) (2013) 243–248. Retrieved from, http://www.eltsjournal.org/
archive.html.
[19] D. Lasagabaster, The use of the L1 in CLIL classes: the teachers’ perspective, Latin Am. J. Content Lang. Integr. Learn. 6 (2) (2013) 1–21, https://doi.org/
10.5294/laclil.2013.6.2.1.
[20] R.A. Rayati, B. Yaqubi, R. Harsejsani, L1 use and Language-Related Episodes (LREs) in an EFL setting, J. Teach. Lang. Skills (JTLS) 3 (4) (2012) 99–125.
Retrieved from, https://tesl.shirazu.ac.ir/article_373_d75429c94d57cdea66d67cff9d50cf2c.pdf.
[21] B.A. McMillan, D.J. Rivers, The practice of policy: teacher attitudes toward “English only”, System 39 (2) (2011) 251–263, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
system.2011.04.011.
[22] M.A. Sipra, Bilingualism as Teaching Aid in a Language Class: L1 as a Facilitator in Teaching/learning Process of L2 at Intermediate/certificate Level,
Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad, 2007.
[23] S.H.T. Sa’d, Z. Qadermazi, L1 use in EFL classes with English-only policy: insights from triangulated data, Center Edu. Policy Stud. J. 5 (2) (2015) 159–175,
https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.147.

8
S.N. Orfan Heliyon 9 (2023) e12772

[24] E.E. Elmetwally, Students’ and Teachers’ Attitudes toward the Use of Learners’ Mother Tongue in English Language Classrooms in UAE Public High Schools,
Unpublished Master’s Thesis, The British University in Dubai, 2012.
[25] H. Kafes, A neglected resource or an overvalued illusion: L1 use in the foreign language classroom, Int. J. New Trends Edu. Implicat. 2 (2) (2011) 128–140.
Retrieved from, http://www.ijonte.org/FileUpload/ks63207/File/11._kafes.pdf.
[26] V. Cook, Using the First Language in the classroom, Can. Mod. Lang. 57 (3) (2001) 402–423, https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.57.3.402.
[27] A. Kovacic, V. Kirinic, To use or not to use: First language in tertiary instruction of english as a foreign language, in: 1st International Conference on Foreign
Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, Sarajevo, 2011.
[28] H. AL-Nofaie, The attitudes of teachers and students towards using Arabic in EFL classrooms in Saudi public schools - a case study, Novitas-ROYAL (Res. Youth
Lang.) 4 (1) (2010) 64–95. Retrieved from, http://www.novitasroyal.org/Vol_4_1/al-nofaie.pdf.
[29] Y. Kim, E. Petraki, Students’ and teachers’ use of and attitudes to L1 in the EFL classroom, Asian EFL J. 11 (4) (2009) 58–89.
[30] K.C. Sharma, Mother tongue use in an English classroom, J. NELTA 11 (1–2) (2006) 80–87, https://doi.org/10.3126/nelta.v11i1.3132.
[31] A. Khati, When and why of mother tongue use in English classrooms, J. NELTA 16 (1–2) (2011) 42–51, https://doi.org/10.3126/nelta.v16i1-2.6128.
[32] N. Storch, A. Aldosari, Learners’ use of first language (Arabic) in pair work in an EFL class, Lang. Teach. Res. 14 (4) (2010) 355–375, https://doi.org/10.1177/
1362168810375362.
[33] K.A. Brooks-Lewis, Adult learners’ perceptions of the incorporation of their L1 in Foreign Language teaching and learning, Appl. Ling. 30 (2) (2009) 216–235,
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amn051.
[34] J. Rolin-Ianziti, S. Brownlie, Teacher use of learners’ native language in the foreign language classroom, Can. Mod. Lang. Rev. 58 (3) (2002) 402–426, https://
doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.58.3.402.
[35] W. Littlewood, B. Yu, First Language and target Language in the Foreign Language classroom, Cambridge Univ. Press 44 (1) (2011) 64–77, https://doi.org/
10.1017/S0261444809990310.
[36] X.F. Qian, Codeswitching in teacher talk of primary English teachers in China, in: B. Beaven (Ed.), IATEFL 2008: Exeter Conference Selections, IATEFL,
Canterbury, 2009, pp. 101–102.
[37] C. Manara, The use of L1 support: teachers’ and students’ opinions and practices in an Indonesian context, J. Asia TEFL 4 (1) (2007) 145–178. Retrieved from,
http://journal.asiatefl.org.
[38] D. Liu, G.-S. Ahn, K.-S. Baek, N.-O. Han, South Korean high school English teachers’ code switching: questions and challenges in the drive for maximal use of
English in teaching, Tesol Q. 38 (4) (2004) 605–638, https://doi.org/10.2307/3588282.
[39] G. Levine, Target language use, first language use, and anxiety: report of a questionnaire study, Mod. Lang. J. 87 (3) (2003) 343–364, https://doi.org/10.1111/
1540-4781.00194.
[40] J. Tang, Using L1 in the English classroom, Engl. Teach. Forum 40 (1) (2002) 36–43. Retrieved from, https://americanenglish.state.gov/files/ae/resource_files/
02-40-1-h.pdf.
[41] S.N. Orfan, Gender voices in Afghanistan primary and secondary school English textbooks, Curric. J. (2022) 1–23, https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.178.
[42] A. Hashemi, K. Si Na, A.Q. Noori, S.N. Orfan, Gender differences on the acceptance and barriers of ICT use in English language learning: students’ perspectives,
Cogent Arts Humanit. 9 (1) (2022), 2085381, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2022.2085381.
[43] A.Q. Noori, S.N. Orfan, S.A. Akramy, A. Hashemi, The use of social media in EFL learning and teaching in higher education of Afghanistan, Cogent Social Sci. 8
(1) (2022), 2027613, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2022.2027613.
[44] S.N. Orfan, M.Y. Seraj, English medium instruction in Higher Education of Afghanistan: students’ perspective, Lang. Learn. High. Educ. 12 (1) (2022) 291–308,
https://doi.org/10.1515/cercles-2022-2041.
[45] S.N. Orfan, Afghan undergraduate students’ attitudes towards learning English, Cogent Arts Humanit. 7 (1) (2020), 1723831, https://doi.org/10.1080/
23311983.2020.1723831.
[46] S. Narasuman, A.Z. Wali, Z. Sadry, The functions of code-switching in EFL classrooms, Social Manage. Res. J. (SMRJ) 16 (2) (2019) 137–152, https://doi.org/
10.24191/smrj.v16i2.7068.
[47] S.N. Orfan, A.Q. Noori, S.A. Akramy, Afghan EFL instructors’ perceptions of English textbooks, Heliyon 7 (11) (2021), e08340, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
heliyon.2021.e08340.
[48] S.M. Mayni, S. Paramasivam, Use of L1 in the Iranian EFL classroom, Shanlax Int. J. Edu. 9 (2) (2021) 34–45, https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v9i2.3581.
[49] T.S. Kabir, Teachers’ and students’ perception of using translation (L1) for developing reading skill, Shanlax Int. J. Eng. 8 (4) (2020) 1–11, https://doi.org/
10.34293/english.v8i3.3253.
[50] M. Kohi, S. Lakshmi, Use of L1 in ESL/EFL classroom: multinational teachers’ perceptions and attitudes, Int. J. Eng. Lang. Transl. Stud. 8 (3) (2020) 88–96.
Retrieved from, http://www.eltsjournal.org/archive/value8%20issue3/10-8-3-20.pdf.
[51] E. Alshehri, Using learners’ First Language in EFL classrooms, IAFOR J. Lang. Learn. 3 (1) (2017) 20–33, https://doi.org/10.22492/ijll.3.1.02.
[52] M. Shabir, Student-teachers’ beliefs on the use of L1 in EFL classroom: a global perspective, Engl. Lang. Teach. 10 (4) (2017) 45–52, https://doi.org/10.5539/
elt.v10n4p45.
[53] D. Tsagari, E. Georgiou, Use of mother tongue in second language learning: voices and practices in private language education in Cyprus, Mediterr. Lang. Rev.
23 (2016) (2016) 101–126, https://doi.org/10.13173/medilangrevi.23.2016.0101.
[54] L. Cohen, L. Manion, K. Morrison, Research Methods in Education, 5 ed., Routledge Falmer, London, 2000.
[55] S.M. Jafari, N. Shokrpour, The role of L1 in ESP classrooms: a triangulated approach, Int. J. Eng. Edu. 2 (3) (2013) 90–104. http://www.ijee.org/vol2_issue_3.
[56] M.M. Al-shammari, The use of the mother tongue in Saudi EFL classrooms, J. Int. Educ. Res. 7 (4) (2011) 95–102, https://doi.org/10.19030/jier.v7i4.6055.
[57] M. Mouhanna, Re-Examining the role of L1 in the EFL classroom, UGRU J. 8 (2009) 1–19.
[58] S. Imran, M. Wyatt, Pakistani university English teachers’ cognitions and classroom practices regarding their use of the learners’ first languages, Asian EFL J. 17
(1) (2015) 138–179.
[59] X. Cheng, Research on Chinese college English teachers’ classroom code-switching: beliefs and attitudes, J. Lang. Teach. Res. 4 (6) (2013) 1277–1284, https://
doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.6.1277-1284.
[60] I. Nurul Hidayati, Evaluating the role of L1 in teaching receptive skills and grammar in EFL classes, Indones. J. Appl. Ling. 1 (2) (2012) 17–32, https://doi.org/
10.17509/ijal.v1i2.82.
[61] B. Turnbull, Examining pre-service ESL teacher beliefs: perspectives on first language use in the second language classroom, J. Second Lang. Teach. Res. 6 (1)
(2018) 50–76. Retrieved from, https://pops.uclan.ac.uk/index.php/jsltr/article/view/482.
[62] A. Khresheh, Exploring when and why to use Arabic in the Saudi Arabian EFL classroom: viewing L1 use as eclectic technique, Engl. Lang. Teach. 5 (6) (2012)
78–88, https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n6p78.
[63] M. Solhi, M. Büyükyazı, The use of first language in the EFL classroom: A facilitating or debilitating device, in: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference
on Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2011.
[64] M. Tajgozari, Factors contributing to the use of L1 in English classrooms: listening to the voice of teachers and students in Iranian institutes, Int. J. Res. Eng. Edu.
2 (2) (2017) 63–75, https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.ijree.2.2.63.
[65] F. Copland, G. Neokleous, L1 to teach L2: complexities and contradictions, ELT J. 65 (3) (2011) 270–280, https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq047.
[66] I. Lourie, English only? The linguistic choices of teachers of young EFL learners, Int. J. BiLing. 14 (3) (2010) 351–367, https://doi.org/10.1177/
1367006910367849.

9
S.N. Orfan Heliyon 9 (2023) e12772

[67] B. Balabakgil, E. Mede, The use of L1 as a teaching strategyby native and non-native EFL instructors at a language preparatory program in Turkey, Adv. Lang.
Lit. Stud. 7 (6) (2016) 15–35, https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.7n.6p.15.
[68] J. De La Campa, H. Nassaji, The amount, purpose, and reasons for using L1 in L2 classrooms, Foreign Lang. Ann. 42 (4) (2009) 742–759, https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1944-9720.2009.01052.x.
[69] S.A. Akramy, A.Q. Noori, S.N. Orfan, A. Hashemi, Effective techniques of teaching vocabulary in Afghan EFL classrooms, Asian-Pacific J. Second Foreign Lang.
Edu. 7 (1) (2022) 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-00151-8.

10