Practice-Oriented Paper
Setting up an Asynchronous
Communicative Classroom for FirstYear Students
Akihiko A. Tohei
Sakura no Seibo Junior College
At the beginning of the 2020 school year, due to the threat of a global pandemic andsubsequent decision by universities to shift to emergency online teaching, students often
had their first interactions with peers through synchronous online systems (e.g., Zoom) that
did not always perform up to par. These students reported concerns not only with being
unable to access online classrooms at the required times, but also whether or not they would
be able to make new friends while being socially distanced from each other. In responseto these concerns, I sought to create an asynchronous online classroom environment thatgave the students opportunities to communicate directly with each other in a safe setting.
Through a post-course survey of 96 participants, students indicated that their confidence
in using English increased and their overall learning experience was more satisfying thanother online classes. Even as schools gradually returned to face-to-face teaching for the2021 academic year, learners were still required to wear face masks in the classroom andmaintain proper physical distance from each other. These conditions made interaction
and collaboration difficult for first-year students who did not know each other. After
incorporating asynchronous online activities that were successful the previous year, students
in these face-to-face classes indicated that the communicative activities which did not
require wearing masks increased their enjoyment of English and greatly improved theirrelationships with their classmates.

As tertiary institutions across Japan switched to emergency remote teaching at
the beginning of the 2020 academic year due to the Coronavirus disease 2019
(COVID-19) pandemic, many instructors scrambled to set up online classrooms
for their students. A decision was reached to start the school year in May at Sakura
no Seibo Junior College (SSJC) in Fukushima, so the month of April was used to72

Setting up an Asynchronous Communicative Classroom, OCJSI 4, pages 72-81

collect as much data as possible from the incoming freshmen class regarding their
online learning environments.
The first semester (May-August) of the 2020 academic year at SSJC was held
entirely online. Teachers were given a choice of conducting their classes either
synchronously or asynchronously, with student attendance and participation
being evaluated through real-time interaction (synchronous) or online
submission of coursework by a specific deadline (asynchronous). Based on the
results of the April questionnaires, I felt that asynchronous learning would be
more beneficial for the students for several reasons.
As defined by Moorhouse and Kohnke (2021), during asynchronous online
learning students access course material and communicate online on theirown time through a learning management system, while synchronous online
learning involves students engaging with the teacher and classmates in real timethrough video conferencing software. Although the effects of using online videoconferencing applications for English classes has been discussed from various
perspectives (e.g., Alfadda & Mahdi, 2021; Hampel, 2006; Leis & Castro,
2021), the literature related to using asynchronous systems is rather limited. In
this paper, I hope to help fill that gap by discussing the reasons for conducting
English classes asynchronously and introducing techniques that helped make thecourses successful.

Reasons for Choosing Asynchronous Learning

Although many other teachers at SSJC used the synchronous online videoconferencing application Zoom for their classes in 2020, one reason I chosean asynchronous approach was that students were not always able to access theInternet from their homes. Almost half of the students shared their devices withother family members, so it was possible that they would have difficulty attending
many synchronous courses. Another reason was the students’ relatively low
levels of English proficiency. The average TOEIC placement test scores for theincoming first-year students was 230, which put them at the lowest end (A1) of
the CEFR scale (Educational Testing Service, 2019). As Chauhan (2017) notedin his discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of synchronous learning,73

Toheialthough high motivation may result from real-time interaction in a synchronous
environment, it could prove to be a challenge for lower-level students andbecome a social obstacle for introverted learners who are not adept at interactingwith others. Also, as summarized by Hrastinski (2008), asynchronous learning
gives opportunities for reflection and the ability to process information, while
synchronous learning provides only a limited amount of time allocated forlearning.
The most important reason for choosing an asynchronous approach was thatthe students did not know each other. According to the results of the surveys
our school conducted, for incoming first-year students, anxiety about making
friends was just as high as keeping up with their studies while being outside of
the classroom and having little to no direct contact with teachers and otherstudents. While synchronous classrooms allow for real-time interaction, Blum
(2020) found that they tended to be more formal with less opportunity forcasual chats between learners. Finally, as stated by Moorhouse and Kohnke(2021), failure by the instructor to create an online learning environment witha sense of community will negatively impact student motivation. I thought
incorporating a way for the students to gradually get to know each other would
reduce their anxiety more effectively in comparison to being thrown together atthe beginning of their tertiary studies and forced to have discussions with images
on their computer screens, all in a foreign language.

Points of Consideration

After assessing the students’ responses to the April 2020 surveys, three main
points were considered when creating the asynchronous class learning system.
The first was that the system had to be easily understood and navigated. Even
though SSJC used Microsoft 365, students said they were not comfortable withthe layout. Since it also was many of the students’ first time to use an online
learning system, they required something simple, yet interesting. Notifications
from the instructor needed to be easily viewable, with ample space for providing
clear instructions to reduce confusion.
The second point was that the system had to be equally usable on both74

Setting up an Asynchronous Communicative Classroom, OCJSI 4, pages 72-81

computers and smartphones. Most online systems are already compatible withthe majority of popular operating systems like Microsoft Windows, Android,
and iOS; however, the layout can change drastically depending on the device.
Students indicated that they had difficulty in navigating the different userinterfaces when they switched between devices. The ideal learning system would
look relatively the same on both computers and smartphones.
Finally, the system and any associated applications had to be free of charge.
Many students were not able to work at part-time jobs due to COVID-19,
and they were already concerned about using up their smartphone data plansby connecting to Zoom for their other classes. The learning system shouldincorporate applications for students that could be downloaded for free orsimply be opened up in their web browser.

The Class Management System

I chose Google Sites as the class management system both for its appearance andease of use. Students could use the site freely without logging into Google andwere able to select their subjects on the top bar of the home page which was
linked to each particular class page. The current week of the class was shown at
the top and the due date and time for that week’s work also were clearly displayed.
Most importantly, the appearance of the class site was the same on computersand smartphones. Each task for the class was clearly marked with ample space for
instructions. Any files or links were visible on all devices, and students were able
to see exactly what they accessed or downloaded.
Online learning activities for my English classes included the following:• a PDF of the previous week’s homework answers (with explanations of
any questions students had particular trouble with)• an introduction to the topic with a YouTube video or an explanatory
video by the teacher uploaded to YouTube• links to textbook listening MP3s accessible through Google Drive• comprehension questions submitted and graded automatically through
Google Forms• links to outside applications for interaction75

Tohei

In an exit survey, students indicated that they appreciated the relatively fixed
format and order to the activities on the site and were able to understand therequired tasks easily since the activities were clearly numbered.

The Participants and Classes

A total of 96 Japanese female first-year college students participated in the two
asynchronous classes used in this study. Neither class was a requirement for
graduation. In the reading skills class, which focused on reading comprehension
and structures of English compositions, students submitted oral recordings oftextbook readings for evaluation and also had weekly written interaction with
their classmates. The other class was a general English class that focused ongrammar and vocabulary skills. A larger number (64) of students registered forthis class, so I decided to incorporate the spoken interaction in this asynchronouscourse in order for more of them to have a chance to get to know each otherwithout masks.

Interaction Through Writing

The writing style of interaction took place on the free interactive writing
application Padlet (https://padlet.com). On it, students were able to share theiropinions with each other about a topic provided by the teacher. The layout was
similar to a social networking system (e.g., Facebook) and looked identical on
both computers and smartphones, so it was easy for students to navigate. As
Kleinsmith (2017) found in their study of using Padlet to increase student
engagement, the application can allow students to work together with classmates
more easily and to feel more comfortable sharing information with each other.
As over 70% of first-year students indicated that they were worried about
making friends, incorporating weekly interaction with classmates was a majorpart of the reading skills class. Doing it asynchronously brought up many issues,
with the main question being how could face-to-face interaction be replicatedwith low-level learners? Simply repeating phrases to each other did not equate toreal interaction, so a three-step interaction phase was developed: adding, asking,and answering (the 3 A’s).
76

Setting up an Asynchronous Communicative Classroom, OCJSI 4, pages 72-81

The first week of interaction involved the students giving (i.e., adding)their opinions related to a topic in the textbook. The following week (Week
2) incorporated asking questions to classmates about their opinion from theprevious week (Week 1), as well as adding their opinion on the topic for thatweek. The subsequent week (Week 3) involved answering the classmate’squestion from the Week 1 topic, asking a question to another classmate about
Week 2’s topic, and finally adding their opinion about the current week’s topic.
Once the students were interacting with at least two classmates per week thepattern was repeated until the end of the course. After submitting their opinions
before class, the students were assigned a partner for their question interaction.
The teacher decided on the partners of the students in order for them to have achance to interact with different classmates each week.
While the students interacted with each other using the 3 A’s, they wereencouraged to use each other’s names as well as compliment and thank eachother as much as possible. This allowed them to get to know each other and madetheir interactions more positive and enjoyable. Also, since they had a week before
the next class to formulate their own opinions and replies, the less confident
students were able to participate more comfortably. Accuracy was not the main
goal of the interactions, but rather achieving understanding and communication
with classmates. Students received credit for their work if they completed thethree weekly tasks of adding their opinion, asking a question to a classmate, andanswering a classmate’s question. I chose to address common errors made by
students in the following week’s online material or at the beginning of the nextclass once our school had fully returned to face-to-face teaching in 2021.

Interaction Through Speaking

The free application Flipgrid (https://info.flipgrid.com) was used for the speaking
component of the general English class. According to Stoszkowski (2018), somebenefits in using Flipgrid to develop social learning are that students preferwatching each other speak on video to “boring” reading material, and those with
less-developed writing and reading skills appear to prefer video-based interaction.
Flipgrid was similar to Padlet (and appeared the same on computers and77

Tohei

smartphones) but also allowed students to interact with each other throughvideo. Since it was completely free to use, more discussion topics could be stored
on the teacher’s account compared to Padlet which had a limit on how much
could be uploaded for free. Perhaps most importantly, there was an option tolock the Flipgrid classroom with a code in order to block anyone other than theclass members from seeing the students’ videos.
In the course, students recorded themselves speaking about a topic and thenuploaded the video file directly to the Flipgrid site. They were asked to speak
for at least one minute at the beginning of the course, but the speaking time
gradually increased as the weeks progressed. Most students spoke on the week’s
topic for at least three minutes towards the end of the course.
The pattern of interaction was similar to Padlet and used the 3 A’s. Again,
the focus was not on accuracy but rather understanding. As with the Padletinteraction, students received credit for their work if they completed the three
weekly tasks of adding their opinion, asking a question to a classmate, andanswering a classmate’s question. The main difference between the Padlet andFlipgrid activities was that the students were able to see each other’s faces during
the speaking interactions. According to the results of a post-course survey,
greeting each other with a smile and being able to see the facial expressionsof their classmates increased the students’ motivation to participate in theinteractions with their own opinions and questions.
Another successful Flipgrid activity that was not related to direct interaction
was the creation of individual role plays. Since it was not possible to practicewith a partner asynchronously, each student played both roles in the dialogue.
Students were asked to change their appearance and/or voices depending on
their role and to edit together their footage so it became a seamless dialogue. This
editing was possible within the Flipgrid application, but some students choseto edit their video through other software. According to a post-course survey,
watching and commenting on each other’s video role plays was enjoyable forthe students and also increased their own motivation to match their classmates’
efforts.

78

Setting up an Asynchronous Communicative Classroom, OCJSI 4, pages 72-81

Effects of the Asynchronous Courses

The asynchronous style of learning had many positive effects on the students. In an
anonymous exit survey of 96 students who participated in the two asynchronous
English classes in 2020, 52.4% reported that their relationships with classmates
had gotten better or even much better. None answered that their relationships
had gotten worse. Considering that many students worried about making friends
at first, and that they went without real-time interaction in the online English
classroom, the asynchronous style appears to have been successful in helping themget to know each other through communicative writing and speaking activities.
Over 80% of students indicated that their confidence in English improved,some even dramatically. No students reported that their confidence decreased.
According to comments from the students, the asynchronous tasks allowed
lower level learners to learn or re-learn the material at their own pace and taketheir time in formulating opinions or replies. The positive reinforcement fromtheir classmates’ comments also seemed to help their self-confidence.
A total of 80% of students also stated that the asynchronous English classes
were more worthwhile than their other synchronous online classes for othersubjects. None answered that they were less worthwhile. 89.1% of respondents
to the exit survey chose asynchronous over synchronous as their preferred styleof remote learning. This may be attributable to the fact that many other classes atour school used Zoom for synchronous interaction and those students reported
connection issues and fatigue.
As previously mentioned, almost half of the incoming freshmen class of 2020
shared a device with other family members. A similar situation was reported in
2021. As a result, it was noticed that a large number of the first-year students
who did not have their own devices at home were forced to record and submit
their online assignments at times ranging from very early in the morning to late
at night. Students in this situation indicated on the post-course exit survey thatthey appreciated being able to submit the required classwork at a time that wasconvenient for them before the next week’s class.

79

ToheiConclusion

Sakura no Seibo Junior College returned to face-to-face classes for the fall semesterof the 2020 academic year. Although students and teachers were still required towear face masks and maintain proper physical distance from each other, everyone
generally seemed to be happy to be able to return to classroom instruction andinteract in person. However, at the beginning of the 2021 academic year, incoming
freshmen students again reported concerns with being able to make friends due
to masks and social distancing. I decided to incorporate the Padlet and Flipgrid
activities that were successful the previous year into my reading skills and general
English face-to-face classes as online communication components. Students inthese classes reported that the asynchronous online activities that did not require
wearing masks increased their enjoyment of English and greatly improved theirrelationships with their classmates.
These past two academic years have shown many students the possibilities oflearning outside of the physical classroom. As long as a classroom community isdeveloped and nurtured, learners can have the same opportunities of interaction
as a face-to-face environment. Through written and spoken exchanges onapplications such as Padlet and Flipgrid, freshmen students who have yet tophysically meet each other can get to know their peers on a deeper level. And,especially for low-proficiency level or low-confidence learners who require moretime to formulate English output, the asynchronous online environment may
even be a more productive one for them to grow.

References

Alfadda, H.A. & Mahdi, H.S. (2021). Measuring students’ use of Zoom
application in language course based on the technology acceptance model(TAM). Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 50, 883–900. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10936-020-09752-1
Blum, S. (2020). Why we’re exhausted by Zoom. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2020/04/22/professor-explores-whyzoom-classes-deplete-her-energy-opinion
Chauhan, V. (2017). Synchronous and asynchronous learning. Imperial Journal
80

Setting up an Asynchronous Communicative Classroom, OCJSI 4, pages 72-81

of Interdisciplinary Research, 3(2), 1345–1348.
Educational Testing Service. (2019). Mapping the TOEIC® Tests on the Common
European Framework of Reference for Languages. https://www.ets.org/
content/dam/ets-org/pdfs/toeic/toeic-mapping-cefr-reference.pdf
Hampel, R. (2006). Rethinking task design for the digital age: A framework
for language teaching and learning in a synchronous online environment.
ReCALL, 18(1), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344006000711
Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. Educause
Quarterly, 31(4), 51–55. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2008/11/
asynchronous-and-synchronous-elearning
Kleinsmith, C. L. (2017). The effects of using Padlet on the academic performanceand engagement of students in a fifth grade basic skills mathematics classroom.
(Master’s thesis, Rowan University), https://rdw.rowan.edu/etd/2403
Leis, A., & Castro, W. (2021). Learning from the COVID 19 online teachingexperience. JALS, 2, 55–73.
Moorhouse, B. L., & Kohnke, L. (2021). Thriving or surviving emergency
remote teaching necessitated by COVID-19: University teachers’
perspectives. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30, 279–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00567-9
Stoszkowski, J. (2018). Using Flipgrid to develop social learning. Compass:
Journal of Learning and Teaching, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.21100/
compass.v11i2.786

Author Bio

Akihiko Andrew Tohei is an associate professor in the Department of Liberal Arts
for Career Development at Sakura no Seibo Junior College in Fukushima. His main
research interests include educational technology, curriculum making, computerassisted language learning (CALL), and flipped learning. tohei@ssjc.ac.jp
Received: October 31, 2021
Accepted: September 27, 2022

81