Interactions Using Technology in Language and Literature University Classrooms: Optimizing Synchronous and Asynchronous Online Learning during Disruption-Covid 19 Era

Akhyar Rido


The era of COVID-19 pandemic and disruption has made thousands of educational institutions closed most of their classes and millions of educators transformed face-to-face into online mode of learning. Following this, early 2020, the Ministry of Education and Culture Republic of Indonesia required all levels of education from elementary school to university shifted in-person to online learning mode as the main learning process in all subjects. The objective of this study was to look at how lecturers atEnglish department in auniversity in Indonesia optimize interactions using technology through synchronous and asynchronous platforms during disruption-covid era. Employing a qualitative approach, this study observed thirty language skills and literature subjects for two semesters. The findings indicated that, in terms of synchronous platform, the lecturers used video conference for facilitating student-lecturer and student-student interactions mainly through lectures, presentations, and discussions. In terms of asynchronous platform, the lecturers utilized the university open online course or SPADA, the university youtube channel Kuliah Teknokrat, and the university library online public access catalogue or OPAC and e-journals for facilitating student-lecturer, student-student, and student-learning material interactions through activities such as structured assignment, independent project, autonomous learning, and peer correction. As a result, most of the students successfully completed the subjects and many of them published their works in journals, newspapers, and anthologies. This study suggests that language and literature lecturers and relevant stakeholders could implement synchronous and asynchronous platforms in their online classrooms as it could foster students’ engagement and make learning more productive.


interaction; online learning; asynchronous; synchronous; language and literature classrooms

Full Text:



E. Di Grapello,“Role of education and training sector in addressing skill mismatch in Indonesia,”in Education in Indonesia, D. Suryadharma and G.W. Jones, Eds. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2013, pp. 236-266.

A. Rido, “English for university graduate employability: students and employers’coices,”Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research,vol. 430, pp. 6–10, 2020a.

A. Rido and F.M.,“Characteristics of classroom interaction of English language teachers in Indonesia and Malaysia,” International Journal of Language Education, vol. 2, pp. 40–50, 2018.

P. Vu andP.J. Fadde,“When to talk, when to chat: student’s interaction in virtual classroom,”Journal of Interactive Online Learning, vol. 12, 41-52, 2013.

A. Rido, N. Ibrahim, and RMK. Nambiar, Interacton and Pedagogy of Indonesian Vocational English Master Teachers, Kuala Lumpur: UKM Press, 2020.

J. Valverde-Berrocoso, M. D. C. Garrido-Arroyo, C. Vurgos-Videla, andM.B. Morales-Cevallos, “Trends in educational research about e-learning: a systematic literature review (2009-2018),”Sustainability, vol. 12, pp. 1-23, 2020.

M. Aparicio, F. Bacao, and T. Oliveira, “An e-learning theoretical framework,”J. Educ. Technol.Soc., vol. 19, pp. 292-307, 2016.

J. Dron andT. Anderson, “The future of e-Learning,”in The Sage Handbook of e-Learning Research, Haythornwaite, C.A.: Sage, pp. 537-556. 2016

G. Salmon, E-tivities: the key to achieve online learning, London: Routledge, 2013.

B. O’Rourke and U.Strickler, “Synchronous communication technologies for language learning: promise and challenges in research and pedagogy,”CercleS, vol. 7: pp. 1–20, 2017

N Ziegler, “Synchronous computer-mediated communication and interaction,”Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 38, pp. 553–586, 2016.

B. Wilkins, “Asynchronous collaboration integrating online learning in foreign language classroom,”The Journal of Language and Teaching, vol. 8, pp. 101-108, 2018.

G. Moore, “Three types of interaction,” The American Journal of Distance Education, vol. 3, pp. 1-7, 1989.

A. Rido, RMK. Nambiar, N. Ibrahim, “Teaching and classroom management strategies of Indonesian master teachers: Investigating a vocational English classroom,” 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, vol. 22, pp. 93–109, 2016.

A. Rido, RMK. Nambiar, N. Ibrahim, “Interaction strategies of master teachers in Indonesian vocational classroom: A case study,”3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, vol. 21, pp. 85–98, 2015.

A. Rido,“Why they act the way they do?: Pedagogical practices of experienced vocational English language teachers in Indonesia,” International Journal of Language Education, vol. 4, pp. 24–37, 2020.

A. Rido, H. Kuswoyo, and R. Ayu, “Interaction management strategies in English literature lectures in Indonesian university setting,”Indonesian Journal of EFL andLinguistics, vol. 5, pp. 315–337, 2020.

D. Shi, “Teacher-student interaction in novel and poetry classrooms in the Hong Kong tertiary setting,” Theory and Practice in Language Studies, vol. 3, pp. 1975-1982, 2013.

Ministry of Education Republic of Indonesia, Mendikbud terbitkan SE tentang pelaksanaan pendidikan dalam masa darurat covid-19,availableonline: (accessed on 20 October 2020).

M. Long, “Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of meaning,”Applied Linguistics, vol. 4, pp. 126-141, 1983a.


  • There are currently no refbacks.