Reconceptualizing English Language Proficiency Through Socioeconomic and AI-Mediated Exposure Perspectives

Socioeconomic status (SES) and English language exposure have long become the most common researched factors that are linked directly to language proficiency in ESL contexts (ELP) . Recent previous studies have shown that English exposure has been proven to be the most direct and consistent determinant of language proficiency while SES remains as an important background variable. This phenomenon has been lingering in Malaysian ESL contexts and has been made even more complex due to other contributing factors like sociolinguistic diversity, access to educational resources as well as urban-rural disparities despite progressing exceptionally well socially and economically. However, there are insufficient studies that examine how exposure now equipped with the emerging, fast adopted technology-Artificial Intelligence, mediates the relationship between SES and proficiency. This gap is what this study, conceptually, aims to provide clarity in addressing these disparities. This study further separates AI exposure into 2 different aspects: Access and Skill. In addition, a conceptual framework together with 6 hypotheses is proposed as its main contribution.

Artificial Intelligence, ESL, Socioeconomic status, Exposure, English proficiency

1. Ahmad, N. A., Salleh, R., & Karim, F. (2025). English language exposure and its impact on undergraduate identity and communication in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Language Studies, 15(2), 45–60. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ali, N., Hamid, M. O., & Moni, K. (2021). English language proficiency and graduate employability in the context of Malaysia. Asian Englishes, 23(2), 237–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/13488678.2020.1736459 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Azam, M., Chin, A., & Prakash, N. (2023). The returns to English-language skills in a developing country. Economics of Education Review, 97, 102369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2023.102369 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bahari, N. F., Jalaluddin, I., & Paramasivam, S. (2025). Socio-economic factors: Impacts on English language vocabulary size and parental involvement. International Journal of Advanced Research in Education and Society, 7(2), 24. https://doi.org/10.55057/ijares.2025.7.2.24 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Berdikulova, A., Berdembayeva, N., & Nabidullin, S. A. (2025). Advantages and limitations of using artificial intelligence in teaching English. Research Retrieval and Academic Letters, (11). https://ojs.scipub.de/index.php/RRAL/article/view/7445 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). Greenwood Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Dao, J. E., Astorga, J. M., Cañezal, R., DelaSerna, A., Laigo, C. J., Macayan, A. M., Maestrado, J., Manarpiis, N., & Manimtim, E. J. (2025). Correlating socio-economic status (SES) with English language proficiency among first year college students at Granby Colleges of Science and Technology. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 46(9), 1137–1154. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Gilster, P. (1997). Digital literacy. Wiley. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Ishak, W. I., Salleh, S. M., Ibrahim Brian, M. S., Abdul Rahman, A. L., & Tirtana, A. (2025). Representing English in the graduate economy: A media analysis of language proficiency and higher education in Malaysia. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(3), 7005–7018. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0518 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Ismail, H., Rahim, N. A., & Yusoff, Z. (2025). Socioeconomic factors and vocabulary acquisition among Malaysian primary school learners. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literacy, 9(1), 21–38. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Lim, J. H., & Yunus, M. M. (2024). English exposure and communicative competence among Malaysian ESL learners. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 30(4), 112–128. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Loong, L. T., & Panicker, C. M. V. (2025). The proficiency puzzle: A mixed-methods study on declining English language standards among Klang Valley adolescents. Sciences of Conservation and Archaeology, 37(2), 1–18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Commission (2022). Internet users survey 2022. MCMC. https://www.mcmc.gov.my/skmmgovmy/media/General/pdf/Internet-Users-Survey-2022.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Omar, S., & Hamid, B. A. (2025). English proficiency and graduate employability in Malaysia: A socio-economic perspective. International Journal of Education and Development, 12(3), 77–91. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Padmanathan, H., Mohamed Isa, Z., & Nadarajan, P. (2021). An Investigation on the Challenges Faced by Early Childhood Education (ECE) Undergraduates to Speak in English Language. Jurnal Pendidikan Awal Kanak-Kanak Kebangsaan, 10(2), 103-117. https://doi.org/10.37134/jpak.vol10.2.9.2021 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Rahman, M. H., Azman, H., & Hassan, I. (2025). Socioeconomic disparities and access to English language learning in Malaysia. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 14(2), 89–104. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Rebolledo Font de la Vall, R., & González Araya, F. (2023). Exploring the benefits and challenges of AI-language learning tools. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention, 10(1), 7278–7286. https://doi.org/10.18535/ijsshi/v10i01.02 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Roslan, H., Hashim, H., & Nasri, N. (2025). Rethinking VARK’s impact on English performance in Malaysian schools. Quantum Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 6, 502–516. https://doi.org/10.55197/qjssh.v6i3.725 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Swain, M. (1985) Communicative competence; Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Newbury House. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Tan, K. H., & Low, E. L. (2025). Revisiting the relationship between socioeconomic status and English proficiency in ESL contexts. Asian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(1), 55–70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. United Nations Children’s Fund. (2020). Reopening with resilience: Lessons from remote learning during Covid-19 in Asia. UNICEF East Asia and Pacific Regional Office. https://www.unicef.org/eap/reports/reopening-resilience [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds & Trans). Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Wong, L. H., & Hamid, M. O. (2021). Digital divide and language learning: Technology access and ESL proficiency among Malaysian rural learners. Asian EFL Journal, 23(4), 88-112 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Zulkifli, N. S., & Kaur, S. (2024). English proficiency challenges among rural Malaysian undergraduates. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 24(3), 130–145. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study