Yuliana Friska


The use of technology in language learning has been extensively expanded. However, the investigation into the implementation of e-learning through video conferences (synchronous) and learning management systems (asynchronous) particularly in English Language Teaching is still lacking. This study was aimed to investigate the students' perceptions on synchronous and asynchronous e-learning in ELT. Furthermore, the study focused on exploring students’ preferences in using asynchronous and synchronous e-learning resources, and found out students’ view of the need of teachers' presence in the use of e-learning. The method used in this study is an online survey through google form. There were 167 EFL students from accounting department of Universitas Pamulang taking part as the participants. The findings show that students’ perceptions on synchronous and asynchronous e-learning in ELT are positive. This indicates that students are familiar with the use of e-learning as a medium of teaching and learning. Meanwhile, using synchronous e-learning is preferred as it facilitates students have two-way communication with the lecturer. Moreover, the presence of lecturer in e-learning are quite crucial. It shows that no matter how sophisticated the technology is, the presence of teachers is still expected by students.

Full Text:



Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student interaction and collaboration. Distance education, 27(2), 139-153.

Bonk, C. J., & Zhang, K. (2006). Introducing the R2D2 model: Online learning for the diverse learners of this world. Distance Education, 27(2), 249-264.

Boumans, J. (2004). Cross-media, e-content report 8, ACTeN—Anticipating content technology needs. Retrieved December, 10, 2008.

Buelow, J. R., Barry, T., & Rich, L. E. (2018). Supporting Learning Engagement with Online Students. Online Learning, 22(4), 313-340.

Cai, H. (2012). E-learning and English Teaching. IERI Procedia, 2, 841-846.

Chhabra, P. (2012). Use of E-Learning tools in teaching English. International Journal of Computing & Business Research, 3, 2229-6166.

Drachsler, H., & Kalz, M. (2016). The MOOC and learning analytics innovation cycle (MOLAC): A reflective summary of ongoing research and its challenges. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(3), 281-290.

Gao, F., Zhang, T., & Franklin, T. (2013). Designing asynchronous online discussion environments: Recent progress and possible future directions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), 469-483.

Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. The American journal of distance education, 19(3), 133-148.

Ghirardini, B. (2011). E-learning methodologies: A guide for designing and developing e-learning courses. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Han, H. (2013). Do nonverbal emotional cues matter? Effects of video casting in synchronous virtual classrooms. American Journal of Distance Education, 27(4), 253-264.

Hrastinski, S. (2006). Introducing an informal synchronous medium in a distance learning course: how is participation affected? The Internet and Higher Education, 9(2), 117-131.

Kim, K. J., & Bonk, C. J. (2006). The future of online teaching and learning in higher education. Educause quarterly, 29(4), 22-30.

Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2014). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: what is ‘enhanced’and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learning, media and technology, 39(1), 6-36.

Malik, M., & Fatima, G. (2017). E-Learning: Students' Perspectives about Asynchronous and Synchronous Resources at Higher Education Level. Bulletin of Education and Research, 39(2), 183-195.

Moore, M. G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. Theoretical principles of distance education, 1, 22-38.

Moore, R. (2013). Reexamining the field experiences of preservice teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 31-42.

Reese, S. A. (2015). Online learning environments in higher education: Connectivism vs. dissociation. Education and information technologies, 20(3), 579-588.

Ruey, S. (2010). A case study of constructivist instructional strategies for adult online learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(5), 706-720.

Safavi, A. A. (2008). Developing countries and e-learning program development. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 11(3), 47-64.

VanDoorn, G., & Eklund, A. A. (2013). Face to Facebook: Social media and the learning and teaching potential of symmetrical, sychronous communication. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 10(1), 6.

Walji, S., Deacon, A., Small, J., & Czerniewicz, L. (2016). Learning through engagement: MOOCs as an emergent form of provision. Distance Education, 37(2), 208-223.

Watts, L. (2016). Synchronous and asynchronous communication in distance learning: A review of the literature. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 17(1), 23.

Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2014). Blending online asynchronous and synchronous learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(2), 189-212.

Zakarneh, B. M. (2018). Effectiveness of E-learning Mode for Teaching English Language in Arab Universities. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 7(7), 171-181.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2021 Yuliana Friska

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.