Research studies

Investigating the Pedagogical Problems That Encounter Sudanese Teachers (ELT)


Prepared by the researcher

  • Dr. Ahmed   Ismail Mahmoud Ismail- Associate Professor – University of Eli mam El mahadi Elmahadi –( Sudan)
  • Dr.  Rehab  Abdelsalam  Elsanousi  MohammedAssistant   professor –University  of Hail – English Language -Department – (Saudi Arabia)
  • Dr. Mugtaba Ahmed  Elghale Eldai,  Assistant  Professor – University of  Eli mam El mahadi Elmahadi –(Sudan)

Democratic Arabic Center

Journal of Afro-Asian Studies : Twentieth Issue – February 2024

A Periodical International Journal published by the “Democratic Arab Center” Germany – Berlin

Nationales ISSN-Zentrum für Deutschland
ISSN  2628-6475
Journal of Afro-Asian Studies

:To download the pdf version of the research papers, please visit the following link


This paper investigates the pedagogical problems of teaching English to Sudanese Secondary School students in Kosti. It aims to find out the relationship between the pedagogy of teaching and the level of the linguistic competence of Proficiencies. The Study adopted the descriptive analytical method, the data collection tools were a questionnaire and classroom observations. These two instructions provide to be reliable and valid. They measure what they should measure the population of study were (80) of English teachers of secondary schools in Kosti. They were exposed to the questionnaire and observed in the classroom more than once. The sample of the study were (10) secondary schools in the city of Kosti. The White Nile State in Sudan. The statistics analytical indicates that there was a strong relationship between teaching and proficiency in English. The findings were discussed in the light of hypotheses indicated that less experienced English teachers don’t have any background of communicative language teaching. They have a positive attitudes towards using the Arabic in their English lessons and prefer it as the easiest and simplest teaching in contrary of more experienced English teachers who never use Arabic in explaining grammatical structures. Accordingly to this, the research stated its conclusions and recommendations, the main recommendation is that,  teachers of English must be trained and made competent.



English Language is termed as a global language because of the role it plays in communication and economy, Pedagogy, being a significant factor in English language teaching, the language became hard and most often by some individual regard as complicated. This is because most teachers lack the best method to use in passing their instructions to students. Methods of English language teaching are the basic ways of passing teaching and making students understand English language.

    Over the last two decades, a great emphasis has been laid upon learners and teachers of English. This shift of interest appeared as a response to discovering how learners process new information, and what kind of specific actions and behaviors they may employ in other to understand, learn or remember the information available.

    It is obviously noticed that no two learners learn a FL, or use it in exactly the same way, Ellis (1983:1). This leads us to believe that variability in the learners’ language occurs because of individual difference; first of all in the way learners learn FL , and then in the way they use their FL knowledge. In this respect, many questions have been raised starting with the question, how do learners handle the input they receive and relate it to their existing knowledge? If there was to be some sort of internal processing, in what ways is it related to the input and consequently to the output? And finally, how does each of these affect the other? To find out how the FL learners utilize the language data, which they expose to, it is necessary to consider the learning strategies that they exploit.

It can be noted that a number of learners are merely receivers more than being participants. They almost receive instructions particularly in English grammar, more than they practice English apparently. Therefore, more exposure to the language is an important resource to achieve communication. Since the classroom is the perfect place for learning, teachers are supposed to rely on the English language to provide the students with the needed exposure.

     Statement of the  problem

      It has been observed that most of students in fail English due to ineffective teaching method. Many reasons are said to be the cause of student failure. We can see in the language difficulties faced by many students at universities, therefore this research is centered on the English language teaching methods and how they are applied and their effects on student performance. English language learners will become aware of the fact that they can actually control and improve their own hands. By using such strategies, the learner will be able to participate effectively in English classes through self-directed involvement, which is useful for developing communicative competence.

The study aims to

1-Reveal the causes behind the weakness of Sudanese secondary school students to communicate in English.

2-Find out proper pedagogy, techniques and strategies for helping them to use English.

3-Identify the extend in which the FL is used in such lessons.

The questions of the study:

1-Do less experienced teachers always use L1 in their teaching.

2- Do less experienced teachers of secondary schools use less of the L1 in the FL lessons.

3- Do less experienced teachers of secondary schools never use the L1 in the FL lessons.

The Hypothesis of the study:

1-Less experienced teachers always used the L1 in their teaching.

2-Less experienced teachers of secondary schools use less of the L1 in the FL lessons.

3-Less experienced teachers of secondary schools never use the L1 in the FL lessons..

Significance of the study:

       This  study is important for teaching of the FL in  Sudanese public secondary schools. It will help English teachers  to employ different techniques and strategies among which is the use of the L1.

       Methodologists have always been advising teachers to use different techniques in teaching foreign languages. Throughout the history of teaching English languages, various techniques have been developed, and some were eradicated ( e.g. reciting a list of isolated word or phrases ). The effectiveness of any technique in the teaching-learning process gives it the validity to continue in use and to undergo improvements .

Limitation of the study :

This study is limited to survey of secondary schools  English teachers who are teaching English in  10 schools in the city of Kosti (White Nile State).  teachers of FL. The investigation is limited to use of the L1 in the aspects specified in the hypotheses

Related Literature Review :

This study deals with methods and Approaches of teaching English language and how the use of L1 in teaching the FL is viewed. Before going through this investigation, it is worth discussing the difference between the three aspects; Pedagogy/method, approach and technique. It is useful to Anthony’s definitions of these terms (in Richards and Rodgers. 1996:15). He states that “…. An Approach is a set of correlative assumptions dealing with the nature of language and learning”. It means certain theoretical brief related to the process of learning.

Methods/ Pedagogy on the other hand, represent the practical procedure chosen to put the theoretical principles of any Approach into practice. It is the level at which a theory is put into practice and at which choices are made about the particular skills to be taught, the context to be taught, and the order in which context will be presented (ibid).

Technique as defined by Richards and Rodgers (1996:15) ” … is the level at which classroom procedures are described “. They are specific activities manifested in the class and they are ” …… consistent with a method and therefore in harmony with approach, method and technique are interdependent and ” they are forming a hierarchical system with the approach at the top followed by method and technique respectively (Al-Mutawa and Kailani. 1998: 12).

However, approaches and methods may have the same technique respectively. Al-Mutawa and Kailani states that

“Although the concept of approach means certain theoretical beliefs or principles, the term is often used in the sense of method especially when talking informally, (ibid).

Therefore, teachers vary their methods and techniques to meet the level of the class they teach and to cover the linguistic units to be taught. Different methods and approached have always sought the improvement of teaching-learning processes.

The Grammar Translation Method (MTM)

            This method is still in use by many teachers not only in Sudan but also over the world although as Richards and Rodgers (1996:5) point out “It is a method for which there is no theory of language learning. The theoretical assumption come from the interpretation of the FL or as Stern (1986:455) states “… as a system of rules to be observed in texts and sentences and be related to first language meaning ” According to GMT learning is viewed as ” ….an understanding of the grammar of the language expressed in traditional terms. And at training the student to write the language accurately by regular practice in translating form native language ” (Rivers.1968: 16). Learning the Fl is considered as intellectual activity. Which involves earring and memorization of rules and facts through massive translation from the L1 into the FL and vice versa?

            Therefore, the L1 is   the vehicle on which the students and teachers heavily rely. The L1 is maintained as the reference up on which the students build the FL acquisition.

            Although the study of GTM technique shows that, the language used in class is mostly the students’ language “(Freeman. 1986: 12)/ it is the medium of instruction too.

The Direct Method (DM)

            Proponents of the DM have “…. A common belief that students learn to understand a language by listening to great deal of it and that they learn to speak it by speaking it- associating speech with appropriate action” (Rivers.1968:18). Whereas Richards and Rodgers (1997: 9). Assume that “direct and spontaneous use of foreign language in the class” help the students to “…. Be able to induce rules of grammar ” Therefore great exposure to the FL in the class enables the students to develop the ability to think in the FL through demonstration, using realia, mime and direct association between the FL and meaning, learning is viewed as analogous to first language acquisition, and the learning processes involved were often interrupted in terms of an associated psychology “(Stern.1996:459). Thus, the purpose of learning according to the DM is to communicate in the FL to achieve this, Freeman (1986:24) states that “in order to do this successfully, students should learn to think in the target language “. Hence, the relation between the students and the teachers is “… More like partners is the teaching-learning process “(ibid).

The Reading method

            This method aims at teaching reading for the purpose of the correct pronunciation, comprehension of complicated spoken language. And the use of the simple speech patterns”

(Rivers.1968:22). Students are trained to deduce meanings of words from contexts without conscious efforts to translate what they read. Although the goal of teaching is training in reading comprehension, stern (1996:461) adds that “the spoken language was not entirely neglected, but it was the reading objective that received the main emphasis”. Grammar is tough principally through the structure dealt with in the reading material.

The Audio-Lingual Method (ALM)

            New ideas about language and learning derived from descriptive linguistics and behavioral psychology were utilized in developing this method. As Brown (1983: 70) points out” ALM was firmly grounded in linguistic and psychological theory “.Throughout learning students can develop oral competence. Thus, listening and speaking receive a great emphasis in the teaching –learning process. Since the aim is communication, freeman (1986:43) believes that “Students need to over learn the target language. To learn to use it automatically without  stopping to think”. Consequently the students from new habits in the FL that help the overcome the old habits of their L1 generally.

            Therefore, dialogues are learned through imitation and repetition “… new vocabulary and structures. Are presented through dialogues “(ibid). On the other hand. There is no grammatically explanation “… Grammar is taught by inductive analogy rather than deductive explanation “(Prator and Cele. Murica. 1979 in Brown. 1983:71)

Cognitive Theory

            The theory “Lays emphasis on conscious acquisition of language a meaningful system it seeks abases in cognitive psychology and transformational grammar” (Stern.1986:469). It was developed in response to criticism leveled against ALM by Chomsky and his proponents. It was an attempt to apply the findings of research and the new insights of psychology. Psycho- linguistics  and  modern developments in linguistics to the FL teaching and learning. Learning according to the cognitive theory is controlling ‘ … the language in all its manifestations as a coherent and meaningful system ” (ibid) which the students can use in real life contexts.

The Silent Way

            This is a method, which is based on hypotheses about psychological aspects of language learning. For instance, Richards and Rodgers (1996: 101) state that “…. The silent way takes a structural approach to organization of language to be thought “. Learning is separated from the social context and based on grammatical complexity, which is broken down into elements.

 The basic unit of teaching is the sentence and “… the teacher focuses on prepositional meaning, rather than communicative value” (ibid). Silence of teachers monitors the students to interact with the teacher to create an environment that encourages the students to risk talking and facilitates learning. Either students are expected to depend on their previous knowledge in their L1 or FL to learn what is new in the FL.


            This method is not based on a theory of language nor any particular assumptions regarding language learning. Learning as freeman (1986:81) states “… is accomplished desuggesting the psychological barriers learners bring with them to the learning situation” In order to reduce the stress of learning. The teacher initiates interaction himself or herself. Using the FL. Thus ” the learner learns not only from the effect of direct instruction but from the environment in which the instruction take place ” Richards and  Rodgers 1996: 145). Everything in the classroom including the personality of teachers supports the success of the learning process. When the teacher present any learning material, the L1 is the vehicle hat is passes through.

Most methodologists have agreed that incompetent teachers can resort to L1 as a solution to their incompetence although this reduce the time allotted to FL. Certain reason may complete educational authorities to employ  incompetent teachers sometimes ( e.g. lack of teachers in certain places ).

While Gairns and redman ( 1986 : 75-76 ) on their turn point out that ” … translation can be a very effective way of convoying meaning ” especially when dealing with vocabulary items which have no L1 equivalent. L1 use can save time that can upset students more. Similarly Atkinson ( 1987 : 243 ) agrees with gairns and Redman. Using the L1 enable  the students to develop the ability to distinguish between linguistic items.

Therefore he advices teachers to employ other strategies such as paraphrasing, realia and  using the L1 when other strategies do not work. Teachers in their turn have different strategies of explaining new items. For example, Chaudron in Crooks Chaudron ( 1991 ) ( in Todd . 1997 . 79) found that :

Teachers explain vocabulary items using repetition and emphasis, analysis of morphology, antonyms and synonyms, non-verbal demonstration, verbal Examples, definition, paraphrases and  translation.

Giving instructions in the FL is one perfect of authentic language teacher’s use in classroom. The students learn a lot of things that they themselves use later on even outside the classroom.

Language of instructions seems to be easy, simple and repeated. So that the students get the idea behind it without the L1 help.

When the teachers practice any activities in the FL ,the students are encouraged to use it. Parrot ( in Todd 1997 : 37) states that ” the giving of instructions in the classroom is one of the few genuinely communicative acts which takes place and is thus a valuable opportunity for the teachers to exploit as authentic communication in L2 “. Harbord ( 1992.353) agrees with parrot and considers giving instructions genuine opportunities of communication in classroom.

            Furthermore edge ( 1996.73 – 75 ) advises teachers to run their classes in the FL to offer chances of more practice. The students know that the FL can be used for achieving communication. Consequently they can acquire the language. He adds that using the FL ” introduces forms and uses of the language which the syllabus will not cover ” (ibid). Involving the students in small English-using community is considered as one of the most important contributions to their learning the language effectively.

Discussion of results in the light of hypotheses

            On discussion of Hypotheses, W.A.Ms and the chi-square were used to test them. The W.A.Ms was used to obtain the percentage of teachers in each scale. The chi-square was used to accept or reject any of these Hypotheses.

1 – Hypothesis No.1

            ” Less experienced teachers always use L1 in their teaching ” The analysis of teachers’ response to the question of second part of the questionnaire, namely ” Do you use Arabic in English language lesions ” reveals that ( 98.33%) of the teachers use the L1 to different extents. This reflects their positive attitude towards using the L! as far as the students’ achievement is concerned by doing so. They employ certain recommendations advocated by some methods and approaches ( see.2.2-9,2-10 ) However, most of the do not realize the danger behind using the L1 excessively in contexts where the FL will be perfect. Off course some of them are unaware of the impact of overusing the L1 especially to those students who are supposed to continue their studies. Consequently the hypothesis is accepted.

2- Hypothesis No . 2

            ” More experienced teachers use less L1 in the FL lesson” . Statistical analyses show that more experienced teachers use less L1 in their teaching than their colleagues of less  experienced in general (see discussion of tables 4-1,4-2 and 4-3).going through more detailed analysis of the obtained values sheds more light on teachers of (11-15)years and(15and more years)in teaching the FL

Table No.(4-5) The percentage of more experienced teachers.       experience Years of

NO Cases 11-15 15and more
1 Give instructions in class 25% 16.66%
2 Explain difficult vocabulary 14% 10.71%
3 Explain grammatical structure 14% 10.71%
4 Translate full sentences 0% 12.05%
5 Correct pronunciation 11.11% 27.11%
6 Correct errors orally 15.78% 1.57%
7 Elicit students response 23% 15.38%
8 Motivate students 22.22% 5.55%
9 Attract students attention 22.22% 16.66%
10 Helping students cope with the subject 12.50% 31.20%
11 Get feedback in feedback sessions 18.8% 45.45%
12 Reduce the stress and tension of students 12.15% 6.25%
13 Overcome my own Language deficiencies 6.25% 0%
14 Save time 12.05% 15.70%
15 Help weak students 18.42% 23.70%
16 Invest the only appropriate technical I know well 26% 6.9%
17 Explain examination questions 10.71% 13%
18 Introduce a new item 22.72% 13%
19 Clarify idiomatic expressions 15.15% 21%
20 Teach abstract lexical items 19.04% 33%
21 Be as last resort 6.66% 20%
22 Support my English explanation 21.05% 21%
23 Review any items 21.24% 7.21%
24 Any other    

   The above table indicates the percentage of more experienced teacher using the L1 to deal with these itemsThese values ( in table 4-5 ) indicates that more experienced teachers resort less L1 while dealing with the items of the questionnaire. They have benefited a lot from their experience in teaching.

They also overcome a lot of their anxiety and become familiar with the learning situation. Therefore this hypothesis is accepted.

3 – Hypothesis No. 3

            ” Less experienced teachers of secondary schools never use the L1 in FL lessons “.

With reference to the teachers’ responses to the second part of the questionnaire , ( 93.33% ) of the sample confirm their implementation of this technique. This value indicates that the majority of teachers know the advantage of this technique and they attempt to benefit from it to a great extent. Therefore this hypothesis is rejected.

4 – Hypothesis No. 4

            ” Less experienced teachers in secondary schools translate only difficult vocabulary items and expressions” statistical analysis of teachers’ response shows that less experienced teachers advocate translation of difficult vocabulary items and expressions more often than more experienced ones. Thus, teachers of ( 1-6 ) years of experience represent ( 60.71% ) of the translation as the most suitable technique. They have got certain excuses for applying it. They lack facilities . teaching aids and in service training.

The time allotted to the subject in general and the intensity of the teaching material increase the difficulties for the teachers . both the teachers and students seem less motivated to teaching and learning.

The Examination policy conducted compels these teachers to carry out this technique . The new curricula of the secondary schools with its different subjects of different specialization present difficulties to the teachers and lead them to resort the L1 more often.

However, the FL can offer a lot of more effective technique such as paraphrasing antonym. Synonym, using realia and analysis of morphology to deal with these items. Yet the teachers should be better motivated and trained in order to implement this and students has to be motivated too.

Other facilities have to be available to obtain successful learning. But in the current situation , The L1 use seems to be dominant therefore, This hypothesis is accepted.

5 – Hypothesis No. 5

” Less experienced teachers  of secondary schools use the L1 in explaining grammatical structures of the FL “

Teachers responses reveal that the most teacher use the L1 to a very large extent to clarify grammatical structure . It is worth mentioning here that ( 60%) of the obtained value of the option ” Always ” represent less experienced teachers ( see discussion of always ).

It was observed by the present writer that many teachers are concerned with making their students understand these items. They assume that the accuracy in the main objective of teaching the FL. Therefore, They often accompany their explanations with English another in the L1. It seems as if both teachers and students  cannot be satisfied unless the L1 is used

Such findings can be attributed to many reasons. First, Many teachers still believe that accuracy is more important in achieving communication and that understanding grammatical structure is the key to going this. Hence more seriousness and interest are seen while giving sometimes long explanations of such items. Second and more importantly, all examination at all levels are mainly grammatically based with reference to secondary school diploma ( certificate ) where about ( 70% ) of the question are about grammar.

Thirds, teachers are still under the influence of GMT. ( see 2-2 ) and ALM ( see 2-5 ) concerning teaching grammar. Forth, they lack training, reference books or any supplementary materials. Fifth. Inspectors of English in their turn, usually focus on grammatical items more than other items during their regular supervision visits to schools, Sixth, the way the new textbook of secondary schools present grammatical structures through flashes gives the impression that they are not new and they are only kinds of revision. This is the situation where many of them are unable to cope at least in the current time. Thus, the teachers have to explain and re-explain these items through L1 to encourage their students’ understanding.

Seventh, many  students consider teachers who do not concentrate on grammatical items by giving a lot of explanation most of it in the L1, as unqualified. Accumulation of all these reasons makes these teachers more dependent on the L1 . Some of these points are drawn from the writer’s considerable experience in teaching the FL and what was noticed during the observation, Consequently, this hypothesis is accepted. To the contrary. The L1 is used to a very large extent.  

– Conclusion

So far, the previous chapters of the present study have investigated the problems of teaching and communicating in English concerning the use of the L1 in teaching of English. The survey included both viewpoints in favor against the L1 use supported by evidence drawn from their experience in teaching English languages.

It also dealt with opinion of experts in education and pedagogy (see.2-2.1and2.2.2).concerning TEFL in Sudanese secondary schools the new syllabuses, and curricula are based on the CLT as recommended by the educational authority (National center for Educational Planning & Vocational Training).

The new serial books of different specialization aim at developing the students’ abilities to understand and use the language communicatively. They also tend to prepare these students for long term studies.

As for employing the L1 as technique to great extent by many teachers of secondary schools, a lot of obstacles compel them to resort to such a procedure.

The new curricula with its new approach the level of the students ,lack of motivation of both teachers and students represent serious difficulties.

Summary of the findings :

Less experienced English teachers have positive attitude towards using the mother tongue in English language lessons.

Less experienced English teachers tackle the essential aspects of the English language through the use of the mother tongue.

Less experienced English teachers do not follow precisely the teachers’ book in their teaching.

The level of students is unsatisfactory in general.

Less experienced English teachers do not have any awareness or background of communicative language teaching.

 The number of students in classroom are more than required.

Some of the English teachers are not qualified enough.

Hypothesis – Methodology Conclusion

            All what has been mentioned in additional to the researcher’s considerable experience in teaching the FL at different levels have supported the researcher to draw upon the following conclusions:

Less Experienced teachers of the FL in some Sudanese secondary schools  have positive attitude towards using the L1 in the FL lesson to a very extent. This has its impact on the teaching-learning.

Less experienced teachers prefer the L1 as the easiest and simplest technique .

Less experienced teachers of the FL tend to use the L1 widely in dealing with vocabulary items, difficult abstract items, grammatical structures, and corrections in general and getting feedback.

Less experienced English teachers represent the majority in  applying this procedure.

Place of graduation, their gender and number of periods have no effect on this procedure.

Less experienced English teachers have had no background or awareness of the recommended approach of teaching the FL in reference to the syllabuses of the new curricula.

The majority of the FL teaching have had no training or in service-training.

Teachers of English tend to follow limited techniques and activities, which is attributed to their unawareness, lack of motivation and carelessness sometimes.

Most secondary schools do not have any teaching aids, language laboratories and other facilities equipment.

Most students especially males are unmotivated to learn not only the FL but also all subjects respectively.

The students’ attitude towards learning the  FL is not enough to cope with  the new changes of curricula of secondary schools.

The number of students in classroom are  big ( 44 – 55 students ) in some schools which affects the teachers’ towards giving chances to the students for more practice general and enough exposure to the FL.

– Recommendations 

            Based on the foregoing finding from this study, the following recommendations are suggested:

Urgent in- service training courses are needed for those teachers who are assigned to teach English to familiarize them with the new developments in this field, To ensure the success and practically of these courses, it is important that they should be carefully-planned, well-managed and financially supported. Another important factor that has to be considered is to encourage FL teachers to attend these courses.

Modify teaching strategies, techniques and classroom behavioral aspects to be in harmony with principles and the objective of the new language materials.

Teaching FL should start in primary schools at the age of nine years or less.

Encouraging students to promote their desire to participate and enhance their willingness to learn, Teachers can account for the following considerations :

Teacher of FL have to create an interesting atmosphere in the classroom and encourage students to participate in the class activity and try to motivate them to communicate in the FL and the teacher have to show himself as a supporter and helper to the students.

It is important the teachers’ attention to encourage students and makes them feel that they have made progress with the sense of success.

Teacher have to be firm in a gentle way and praise students when they give relatively correct answers.

Teachers have to treat the students with kindness and respect. Simple a lot and value their opinions .

Teachers have to be sincere and look for opportunities to find them doing something right. Never get frustrated, angry and impatient.

Ovoid criticizing and blaming expressions, the students are teenagers who never accept to be criticized in front of the class.


Al-Mutawa, Najat and TaiseerKailani. (1998). Methods of teachin English to Arabic students

Atkinson, David (1992) “The mother Tongue in the classroom A neglected resource : ELT Vol.41.N4.PP.241-247

BrownDoglas.H (1994). Principle of language learning and teaching  (2ndedn.) Engle Wood Clitts.N.J. prentice

EIIIS,Rod.(1996) The Study of Second Language Acquision

Oxford University Press : Oxford .

Freeman,Diane. Laren.(1998). Technique and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford University Press : Oxford.

Gairns,R,andRedman,S.(1986). Working with Words

  Cambridge University Press :   Cambridge ———- . (1999). Teach English. Longman London.

Connection ? IRAAL Vol XXXXXX ii   No.4.PP.307-320

Richards,Cullen. (1980) : Teache Talk and Classroom Context” ELT. Vol52 Ni.3.PP.179-187.

Richards,Jack.C.(1983). ” Communicative Needs in English Languag   Learning ” ELT. Vol,No.2.PP.111-12-.———(1997). The Context of Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press : Cambridge .

Richards,Jak.C.and Roders,T.(1997). Approaches And Methods in  Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press : Cambridge

Rivers,W.A.(1968). Teaching English Language Skills. Chicago University Press : Chicago.

Rivers,W, A practical Guide To The Teacher of English  As a Second or English Language, Oxford University Press : Oxford

Stern,H.H 1(1996). Fundamental Concept Of Language Teaching. Oxford University Press : Oxford.

5/5 - (1 صوت واحد)

المركز الديمقراطى العربى

المركز الديمقراطي العربي مؤسسة مستقلة تعمل فى اطار البحث العلمى والتحليلى فى القضايا الاستراتيجية والسياسية والاقتصادية، ويهدف بشكل اساسى الى دراسة القضايا العربية وانماط التفاعل بين الدول العربية حكومات وشعوبا ومنظمات غير حكومية.

مقالات ذات صلة

زر الذهاب إلى الأعلى