Synchronous or Asynchronous: Students’ Perceptions And Learning Outcomes In Teaching English For Young Learners (TEYL) Courses
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24903/sj.v10i2.2170Keywords:
Synchronous learning, asynchronous learning, online learning, EYL course, EFL context.Abstract
Background:
Despite the growing adoption of online learning, limited research has examined how synchronous and asynchronous modalities affect pre-service teachers’ mastery of pedagogical theories in Teaching English for Young Learners (TEYL) courses. During the COVID-19 shift to remote teaching, TEYL teacher education faced the challenge of ensuring future teachers developed adequate pedagogical content knowledge despite reduced face-to-face interaction. This study addresses this gap by investigating the relationship between students’ perceptions of synchronous (Zoom) and asynchronous (Moodle) learning and their academic performance in TEYL course.
Methodology:
This quantitative ex post facto study involved 71 fifith-semester students enrolled in TEYL course, divided into a synchronous class (n=40) and an asynchronous class (n=31). Data were collected through a validated 34-item perception questionnaire (Cronbach’s α = 0.87) and midterm exam scores. While the sample size was relatively small, it provided initial evidence of how different modalities function in a teacher education context.
Findings:
Regression analysis revealed a significant positive relationship between students’ perceptions and their midterm exam scores in both modalities ((R² = .309 synchronous; R² = .325 asynchronous). However, independent t-test results showed no statistically significant difference in exam performance between the two groups (t(69) = 0.165, p = 0.87).
Conclusion:
These findings suggest that well-structured synchronous and asynchronoous learning can both support TEYL teacher education effectively, provided that instructional design aligns with students’ need and course objectives.
Originality:
This study is original in its focus on pre-service teachers in TEYL course an underexplored participant group and highlights how modality choice interacts with students’ perceptions to shape learning outcomes. Its findings offer practical insights for teacher educators designing blended or hybrid curricula in the post-pandemic era.
References
Ağçam, R., Akbana, Y. E., & Rathert, S. (2021). Dealing with Emergency Remote Teaching : The Case of Pre-service English Language Teachers in Turkey. 7(4), 16–29.
Alibakhshi, G., & Mohammadi, M. javad. (2018). Applied Research on English Language Vocabulary Learning. Applied Research on Englis the ex post facto non-equivalent groupsh Language, 7(2), 273–292. http://uijs.ui.ac.ir/are
Astutik, Y., Kurnia, F. D., & Mustofa, A. (2021). A Popperian Approach: Pre-service Teachers’ Preparation In Teaching English to Young Learners. Borneo Educational Journal (Borju), 3(1), 18–35. http://103.8.79.252/index.php/Borju/article/view/707
Astutik, Y., & Purwati, O. (2021). Verbal and Nonverbal Language: Pre-Service Teachers’ Decisiveness in TEYL. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Dan Sastra, 21(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.17509/bs_jpbsp.v21i1.36651
Astutik, Y., Setiawan, S., & Anam, S. (2022). The ambivalent students’ cognition to be English teachers for young learners: A longitudinal study. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(March). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.818883
Astutik, Y., Setiawan, S., Anam, S., & Suhartono. (2022). “I can teach with my videos”: How do teachers teach English to young learners in a technology-limited environment? International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 21(7), 158–177. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.21.7.9
Bhagat, B., Bhattacharjee, S., & Ratre, S. (2020). A Survey on Various Communication Applications. International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering Research and Development, 10(3), 1563–1570. https://doi.org/10.24247/ijmperdjun2020139
Borg, S. (2015). Teacher Cognition and Language Education. Bloomsbury Academic.
Chew, S. L., & Cerbin, W. J. (2021). The cognitive challenges of effective teaching. Journal of Economic Education, 52(1), 17–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2020.1845266
Culbreth, D., & Martin, F. (2025). Exploring the role of synchrony in asynchronous, synchronous, and quasi-synchronous online learner engagement. In Educational Technology Research and Development (Issue 0123456789). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-025-10504-y
Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. (2019). Evaluating pre-service kindergarten teachers’ intention to adopt and use tablets into teaching practice for natural sciences. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 13(1), 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMLO.2019.096479
Kim, J. (2020). Learning and Teaching Online During Covid-19: Experiences of Student Teachers in an Early Childhood Education Practicum. International Journal of Early Childhood, 52(2), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-020-00272-6
Kohnke, L., Zou, D., & Zhang, R. (2021). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of emotions and self-regulatory learning in emergency remote learning. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(13), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137111
Kumar, A., & Assistant, J. (2019). Effects of Asynchronous E-Mail Intervention on Learning Performance in Relation To Thinking Skills, Executive Functions and Attention Benefits of Indian Children. 7(3), 151–168.
Lotfi, A. R., & Pozveh, S. M. H. H. (2019). The Effect of Synchronous and Asynchronous Language Learning: A Study of Iranian EFL Intermediate Students’ Vocabulary Learning. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 9(12), 1585. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0912.16
Mulbar, U., Ismiyati, N., Zaky, A., Makassar, U. N., Balikpapan, U., Sulawesi, S., Street, P. R., City, B., & Kalimantan, E. (2023). BLENDED LEARNING APPROACHES : AN INVESTIGATION STUDY. Lentera Pendidikan : Jurnal Ilmu Tarbiyah Dan Keguruan, 26(2), 343–353.
Nor, H., & Wijaya, M. S. (2023). University Students’ Perception towards Online Learning: Synchronous and Asynchronous. SALEE: Study of Applied Linguistics and English Education, 4(1), 236–248. https://doi.org/10.35961/salee.v4i1.590
Nordmann, E., Horlin, C., Hutchison, J., Murray, J. A., Robson, L., Seery, M. K., & MacKay, J. R. D. (2020). Ten simple rules for supporting a temporary online pivot in higher education. PLoS Computational Biology, 16(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008242
Pineda, J. E. (2017). Development of language accuracy using synchronous and asynchronous learning activities. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 7(4), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.2017100105
Rahmani, E. F., Riyanti, D., Misieng, J., & Sayok, A. K. (2024). A Review on Synchronous, Asynchronous, and Blended Learning on ELT in Indonesian Context. JEELS (Journal of English Education and Linguistics Studies), 11(1), 223–260. https://doi.org/10.30762/jeels.v11i1.2326
Reyneke, M., & Botha, C. (2020). The professional orientation of first year student teachers in a non-placement work-integrated learning program. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 21(3), 303–316.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61(xxxx), 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860
Shlomo, A., & Rosenberg-Kima, R. B. (2025). F2F, zoom, or asynchronous learning? Higher education students’ preferences and perceived benefits and pitfalls. International Journal of Science Education, 47(8), 1002–1027. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2355673
Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(1), 4–14.
Stuart, J., O’Donnell, A. W., Scott, R., O’Donnell, K., Lund, R., & Barber, B. (2022). Asynchronous and synchronous remote teaching and academic outcomes during COVID-19. Distance Education, 43(3), 408–425. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2022.2088477
Young, A., & Norgard, C. (2006). Assessing the quality of online courses from the students’ perspective. Internet and Higher Education, 9(2), 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.03.001
Yulitriana. (2021). Synchronous or Asynchronous: Students’ Perceptions on Online Learning During the Pandemic. EBONY: Journal of English Language Teaching, Linguistics, and Literature, 1(1), 54–59. https://doi.org/10.37304/ebony.v1i1.3101
Zabolotniaia, M., Cheng, Z., Dorozhkin, E. M., & Lyzhin, A. I. (2020). Use of the LMS Moodle for an effective implementation of an innovative policy in higher educational institutions. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(13), 172–189. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i13.14945
Zsifkovits, M., Amplatz, L., Triebner, N., Utz, J., Kornhuber, J., & Spitzer, P. (2025). Randomized controlled trial of asynchronous vs. synchronous online teaching formats: equal knowledge after training, greater acceptance and lower intrinsic motivation through asynchronous online learning. BMC Medical Education, 25(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07481-4
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Yuli Astutik, Fika Megawati, Noly Shofiyah, Vidya Mandarani; Saltanat Meiramova; Pasya Rahma Tamara
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
