Effect of Synchronous, Asynchronous and Hybrid Learning Models on EFL Learners’ Achievement
محورهای موضوعی :
Akram Labbafi
1
,
Sorayya Behroozizad
2
,
Nahid Zarei
3
1 - Maragheh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maragheh, Iran
2 - Islamic Azad University
3 - Department of English Language, Maragheh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maragheh, Iran
کلید واژه: Synchronous, Asynchronous, Hybrid Learning Models, EFL Learners’ Achievement,
چکیده مقاله :
The COVID-19 pandemic brought immense changes into the educational environment and teaching methodologies worldwide. This study will look at the effect of synchronous, asynchronous, and blended learning on the motivation and academic achievement of EFL learners. The most important purpose of this study is to determine how synchronous, asynchronous, and hybrid learning models influence EFL students' academic achievement. A non-randomized control group design with repeated measures was followed, whereby a total of 80 pre-intermediate EFL learners were assigned into three experimental groups: synchronous, asynchronous, and hybrid learning models, and one control group. The Language Achievement Test, which comprehensively tests Speaking, Reading, and Writing skills, had its content validated through the review of language experts and criterion-related validation by standardized tests that had very high correlations. The data were analyzed using both descriptive statistics in the form of mean scores and standard deviation and inferential statistics in the form of repeated measures ANOVA testing the difference in language achievement within the teaching conditions. Results demonstrated that all instructional modes under investigation had significant differences in the language scores, as the p-value was less than .05. Most importantly, the hybrid model proved to be better in comparison with both synchronous and asynchronous models, and that could point out the fact that this hybrid model effectively enhances improvement in the proficiency of language among learners.
The COVID-19 pandemic brought immense changes into the educational environment and teaching methodologies worldwide. This study will look at the effect of synchronous, asynchronous, and blended learning on the motivation and academic achievement of EFL learners. The most important purpose of this study is to determine how synchronous, asynchronous, and hybrid learning models influence EFL students' academic achievement. A non-randomized control group design with repeated measures was followed, whereby a total of 80 pre-intermediate EFL learners were assigned into three experimental groups: synchronous, asynchronous, and hybrid learning models, and one control group. The Language Achievement Test, which comprehensively tests Speaking, Reading, and Writing skills, had its content validated through the review of language experts and criterion-related validation by standardized tests that had very high correlations. The data were analyzed using both descriptive statistics in the form of mean scores and standard deviation and inferential statistics in the form of repeated measures ANOVA testing the difference in language achievement within the teaching conditions. Results demonstrated that all instructional modes under investigation had significant differences in the language scores, as the p-value was less than .05. Most importantly, the hybrid model proved to be better in comparison with both synchronous and asynchronous models, and that could point out the fact that this hybrid model effectively enhances improvement in the proficiency of language among learners.
AbuSeileek, A. F., & Qatawneh, K. (2013). Ef-fects of synchronous and asynchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC) oral conversations on English language learners' discourse functions. Computers & Education, 62, 181-190.
Akbarov, A., Gönen, K., & Aydoğan, H. (2018). Students’ attitudes toward blended learning in EFL context. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 11(1), 61-68.
Atmojo, A. E. P., & Nugroho, A. (2020). EFL classes must go online! Teaching activi-ties and challenges during COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia.
Bailey, D. R., & Lee, A. R. (2020). Learning from experience in the midst of COVID-19: Benefits, challenges, and strategies in online teaching.
Banditvilai, C. (2016). Enhancing students’ language skills through blended learning. The Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 14(3), 220-229.
Baturay, M. H., Yukselturk, E., & Duru, E. (2010). The impact of blended learning on student performance in an instruc-tional technology course. International Journal of Instructional Media, 37(4), 305-315.
Beckett, G. H., & Miller, P. C. (2006). Project-based second and foreign language edu-cation: Past, present, and future. Infor-mation Age Publishing.
Bettor, P. (2004). Technology in language learning. The Modern Language Jour-nal, 88(4), 567-584.
Cao, Y., Griffin, T., & West, D. (2009). Syn-chronous learning: Interaction and stu-dent satisfaction. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 38(1), 21-35.
Cheng, H. F. (2008). The role of personality traits in the EFL classroom. English Lan-guage Teaching.
Crystal, D. (2012). English as a global lan-guage. Cambridge University Press.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the lan-guage learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dorsah, P., & Alhassan, R. (2021). Online learning modalities in English education.
Dudeney, G., & Hockly, N. (2016). Digital lit-eracies: Research and resources in lan-guage teaching. Pearson Education.
El-Gayar, O., & Dennis, T. (2005). Hybrid e-learning systems: The integration of tra-ditional learning and electronic learning. E-Learning and Digital Media, 2(3), 322-335.
Horwitz, E. K. (2017). Becoming a language teacher: A practical guide to second lan-guage learning and teaching. Pearson.
Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and syn-chronous e-learning. EDUCAUSE Quar-terly, 31(4), 51-55.
Huang, R., & Hsiao, E. L. (2012). The effects of synchronous online learning on deep learning and critical thinking. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 5(1), 1-13.
Hubackova, S. (2015). History and perspectives of elearning. Procedia-Social and Be-havioral Sciences, 191, 1187-1190.
Işık, A. (2023). Enhancing language learning through synchronous online environ-ments: A case study. Journal of Lan-guage and Education, 9(2), 123-135.
Ituma, A. (2011). An evaluation of students’ perceptions and engagement with e-learning components in a campus-based university. Active Learning in Higher Education, 12(1), 57-68.
Jackson, L. A., von Eye, A., Biocca, F. A., Bar-batsis, G., Zhao, Y., & Fitzgerald, H. E. (2006). Does home internet use influence the academic performance of low-in-come children? Developmental Psychol-ogy, 42(3), 429-435.
Johnson, L. F. (2014). Blended learning: Pow-erful integration of online and face-to-face instruction. The Horizon Report.
Kern, R., & Warschauer, M. (2000). Theory and practice of network-based language teaching. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teach-ing: Concepts and practice (pp. 1-19). Cambridge University Press.
LaPointe, L., & Gunawardena, C. (2004). Cul-tural context and learning technologies in synchronous environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 39-52.
LaPointe, L., & Gunawardena, C. (2008). Cul-tural context and learning technologies in synchronous environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 39-52.
Lietzau, Z., & Mann, S. (2009). Enhancing online learning through synchronous web-conferencing. Journal of Educa-tional Computing Research, 40(1), 45-60.
Martin, F., & Parker, M. (2014). Use of syn-chronous virtual classrooms: Why, who, and how? Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(2), 192-210.
Martin, F., Parker, M. A., & Deale, D. F. (2012). Examining the role of interaction in synchronous virtual classrooms. Jour-nal of Interactive Online Learning, 11(2), 76-89.
Marsh, D. (2012). Blended learning: Creating learning opportunities for language learners. Cambridge University Press.
Methanethorn, C. (n.d.). Positive attitudes to-ward e-learning writing tools. E-Learn-ing Studies Journal, 10(4), 115-127.
Motteram, G. (2001). The benefits of synchro-nous tools in education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38(2), 137-145.
Motteram, G., Arnold, P., & Gillen, J. (2013). Mobile pedagogy for English language teaching: A guide for teachers. British Council.
Murphy, K. L., Rodríguez-Manzanares, M. A., & Barbour, M. K. (2011). Synchronous and asynchronous learning: Understand-ing interactions. British Journal of Edu-cational Technology, 42(3), 403-415.
Nambiar, D. (2020). The impact of online learning during COVID-19: Students' and teachers' perspective.
Othman, H., Abdullah, N., & Hassan, R. (2024). Synchronous learning in the modern classroom. Education and Infor-mation Technologies.
Papi, M. (2010). The L2 motivational self system: Theoretical and research perspectives on
motivation in second language learning. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Mo-tivation, language identity and the L2 self. Multilingual Matters.
Park, Y., & Bonk, C. J. (2007). Synchronous learning environments and feedback mechanisms. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 3(3), 237-247.
Parsad, B., & Lewis, L. (2008). Distance edu-cation at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2006-07. National Center for Education Statistics.
Perveen, A. (2016). Synchronous and asyn-chronous e-language learning: A case study of Virtual University of Pakistan. Open Praxis, 8(1), 21-39.
Rahmani, A., Smith, J., & Liu, T. (2024). Synchronous learning: Real-time online education. Journal of Educa-tional Technology.
Rika, P., & Sulistyani, R. (2020). Blended ap-proaches in online learning platforms. In-donesian Journal of E-Learning and Ed-ucation, 5(2), 80-90.
Rofi'i, A., & Herdiawan, T. (2024). Blended learning in English language teaching: A study on effectiveness and learner engagement. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14(2), 123-135.
Salmon, G. (2023). The mandatory transition to online learning: Effects and implications for language education.
Shibley, I. A., Amaral, K. E., & Shank, J. D. (2011). Designing a blended course: Us-ing ADDIE to guide instructional design. Journal of College Science Teaching, 40(6), 80-85.
Simaye Danesh Language Institute (n.d.). Re-cruitment and instruction methodologies. Institute's internal publication.
So, H. J., & Bonk, C. J. (2010). Examining the roles of blended learning approaches in computer-supported collaborative learn-ing (CSCL) environments: A Delphi study. Educational Technology & Soci-ety, 13(3), 189-200.
Stein, P., & Newfield, D. (2006). Multiliteracies and synchronous learning. English Teach-ing: Practice and Critique, 5(1), 75-86.
Walsh, J. (2016). Blended learning in EFL: The benefits and challenges of combining face-to-face and online instruction. TESOL Journal, 7(3), 501-511.
Wang, S., Hou, H., & Wu, D. (2018). The effect of online collaboration on learning out-comes: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 24, 26-34.
Whyte, S. (2011). Learning to teach with vide-oconferencing in primary foreign language classrooms. ReCALL, 23(3), 271-293.
Yeung, M. (2020). Autonomy and competence in online learning: Insights from a study of school students. Journal of Online Ed-ucation, 15(3), 123-135.
Yuan, R. (2023). Enjoyment and motivation in online English learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: A study of Chi-nese students. Journal of Language and Education.
Zhu, C. (2018). Blended learning and its appli-cation in EFL education in China: A case study of 5376 ESL students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(2), 367-37
