ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 194 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi EYL Teachers’ Communication Strategies in Synchronous and Asynchronous Online Teaching and Learning Wiwik Mardiana Universitas Islam Majapahit wiwik.mardiana@unim.ac.id Taswirul Afkar Universitas Islam Majapahit Abstract This current research aims at exploring the teachers communication strategies in online learning context, i.e. synchronous and asynchronous, explaining the challenges and solutions, and finding out the factors influencing. This qualitative research employed observation and interview to collect the data. The participants were two teachers of five grade at one of Bilingual schools in Mojokerto. Source and technique triangulation were carried out to get the validity of the data. In analyzing the data, the researchers displayed the percentage to know the dominant data, then explore the characteristics and interpret the intentions, challenges, solutions, and factors. The findings revealed that translation, praising, code-switching, comprehension check, and other repetition were the most dominant strategy used in synchronous mode. The teachers did not fulfill all components of strategies in explaining the materials in asynchronous mode. The challenges coped by the teachers were not merely due to online classroom; nevertheless, the teachers initiated the solutions. There were four interrelated factors influencing the use of communication strategies. The strategies employed in both synchronous and asynchronous modes were generally to facilitates students in online context. This research suggests that teachers communication strategies are beneficial to encourge students in learning English especially in online context. Some aspects found in this research are further discussed. Keywords: communication strategies, synchronous, asynchronous, online classroom Manuscript submitted: October 9, 2020 Manuscript revised: November 2, 2020 Accepted for publication: December 1, 2020 mailto:wiwik.mardiana@unim.ac.id ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 195 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi Introduction Due to covid-19 disease in Indonesia, teaching and learning process must be conducted online. In terms of online teaching and learning, it can be divided into synchronous and asynchronous learning. Synchronous learning facilitates teacher-students interaction carrying out at the same time or real time, i.e. video-conferencing. While asynchronous learning is more flexible than synchronous learning. Teachers provide materials through video lectures and power point presentation. The materials can be accessed anytime and anywhere (Perveen, 2016). In Indonesia, most of the teachers conduct activities in synchronous mode because of the school policy (Atmojo & Nugroho, 2020). In relation to the force of change in communication mode from face-to-face to online classroom, this condition can trigger communication challenge (Kebritchi, Angie, & Lilia 2017). Teachers must strive for delivery of the content, students engagement and affective hints. Teachers do interaction linguistically and non-linguistically in a face-to-face classroom but it can be different from online classroom which is less contact visually with students (Crawley, Fewell, & Sugar, 2009; & Coppola, 2001;). Moreover, communication challenge comes also from language barriers especially in a bilingual classroom program which exposures two languages i.e. English and Indonesian language. In Indonesia, an incredibly diverse and multicultural country, English is regarded as one of the most popular foreign languages (Abrar, Mukminin, Habibi, Asyrafi, Makmur, Marzulina, 2018). Rababah (2005) states that English as a Foreign Language can cause a communication barrier in the classroom because of students environmental support and English proficiency. Hence, communication strategies are required to manage communication obstacles to achieve teaching and learning goals. In classroom interaction, teachers employ communication strategies to deliver the information in course materials, improve students communication ability, and create an effective and condusive classroom atmosphere (Trihastuti & Zamzani, 2018). Mazer (2013) revealed that teacher communication behavior is related to students cognitive interest. This indicates that through teachers communication, students can attain the course content comprehensively. Carventez and Rodriguez (2012) suggests that teachers use communication strategies to ensure students understanding and engagement. This is obvious that communication strategies play an important role in teaching and learning to create a condusive classrooom, provide students comprehension, gain students interest and engagement. Most studies investigate teachers communication strategies in a higher school and tertiary level (Rastegar & Gohari, 2016; Zubaidi, 2014; & Cervantez & Rodriguez, 2012). A very few study concerns on EYL teacher in a bilingual ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 196 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi classroom and in an online classroom. Mestriani, Ni Made, Seken and I Nyoman, 2018) explored English native speaker teacher communication strategies in a bilingual kindergarten. By using Dornyei and Scott taxonomy (1997), they found three types of communication stategies, i.e. direct, indirect and interactional strategies. Their study emphasized that communication strategies are crucial to facilitate students understanding and comprehension of the materials. Nevertheless, their study is lack information of the dominant of strategies used, challenge and factors influencing. Hence, this research attempts to explore how communication strategies are used by EYL teachers, challenge and factors influencing the use of communication strategies in a bilingual classroom and in an online context both synchronous and asynchronous mode. This study is expected to contribute a broaden knowledge and practice of communication strategies that can be considered as solutions in teaching English to young learners in online environment for succesful language learning. Referring to online context, EYL teachers in one of bilingual elementary school in Mojokerto have been utilizing both modes. They use googlemeet (synchronous mode) for discussing the exercises and provide video power point (Asynchronous mode) to explain the materials. Therefore, the analysis of teacher communication strategies employed different theories or model in both modes. Concerning above issues, the purposes of the research are describing and explaining 1) how the EYL teachers employed communication strategies in synchronous mode, 2) how the EYL teachers used communication strategies in asynchronous mode, 3) challenges coped and solutions offered by the EYL teachers, and 4) factors influencing the use of communication strategies. Literature review The term and definition of communication strategy was coined by Selinker (1972) which is related to second language acquisition but he did not go into the details. The other scholars such as Dornyei (1995) and Bialystok (1990) also confirmed that comunication strategy also influences second/foreign language development (Mei & Nathalang, 2010). Rastegar and Gohari (2016) state that communication strategies can be used to see the crucial aspect in communicative competence developed by Canale and Swain (1980), i.e. strategic competence in language learning. Communication strategies are commonly intended to handle the communication problems, especially in using second or foreign languages. Canale and Swain (1980) as cited in Trihastuti and Zamzani (2018) defined that oral communication strategy is a verbal and non-verbal communication to bridge communication barriers or breakdowns. Richards and Schmidt (2010) says that communication strategies is the way which is employed to express meaning especially in the use of second or foreign language. In other words, ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 197 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi communication strategies cover verbal and non-verbal or linguistics and non- linguistics strategies to convey the meaning of the message, handle the communication problems in an interaction. In the classroom interaction, teachers apply communication strategies to deliver the information related to materials given, share the same point of view with the students, improve students communication ability, and create an effective and condusive ambiance (Trihastuti & Zamzani, 2018). Concerning to the complexity of online learning which includes synchronous and asynchronous mode of learning. The researcher used different communication strategies pattern or model in each mode since the teachers had different purposes in using the modes, i.e. synchronous for discussing materials and asynchronous for explaining the materials. In synchronous mode, the researcher use an adapted communication strategies classification from (Chen & Wang, 2014; Avval, 2012 & Dornyei & Scott, 1997). See the following table. Table 1. Communication strategies classification Types Linguistics Strategies Non-Linguistics Strategies Direct Strategies Message abandonment, message reduction, message replacement, circumlocution, approximation, use of all purpose words, word- coinage, restructuring, literal translation, foreignizing, code- switching, use of similar sounding words, mumbling, omission, retrieval Use of body gestures / mime / Paralinguistics Interactional Strategies Appeals for help, comprehensive check, own-accuracy check, asking for repetition, clarification & confirmation, guessing, interpretive summary, responses, expressing non-understanding self-repetition, other repetition, repair/correction expressing non- understanding Use of sounds Use of pictures/paintings Use of at hand objects facilities or equipments Indirect Strategies Use of fillers, verbal strategy markers Note: adapted from Dornyei & Scott (1997), Avval (2012), and Chen & Wang (2014). ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 198 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi The classification of each type is categorized into linguistics and non- linguistics strategies based on Avval (2012). Avval’s view on non-linguistics strategies is considered more complex involving teaching media and resources. These things are vital in teaching specifically in teaching English for young learners. The use of sounds, pictures/paintings, hand objects facilities or equipment are included in interactional strategies as it is utilized for interactive purposes. In terms of repetition (self-repetition and other repetition) and repair/correction, Dornyei and Scott (1997) classified them into indirect and direct strategies. Nevertheless, Chen and Wang (2014) posited that repetitions and repair/correction in instructional purposes are interactional strategies and practices which is applied to make sure learners grasp what others and teachers said. This is precisely related to interactional strategies by Dornyei & Scott that the participants execute the barrier exchanges cooperatively to achieve mutual understanding. In teaching and learning process, teachers do repetition to ensure the students understand what teachers or other students said. This is linear to repair or correction. When the teachers correct (e.g. pronunciation or sentence structure), the students usually imitate the correction immediately to get mutual understanding (students-students and teachers-students). Consequently, the researchers agree to classify Chen and Wang (2014) ideas of repetition and repair or correction into interactional startegies. In asynchronous learning, the teachers provided video power point to explain the lesson that can be accessed anytime. This one way process invloves only to exchange information or idea without accepting a respond from the listener immediately. Considering the asynchronous online learning and one way communication context, the researcher employs an adapted teacher clarity by (Hadie, 2018; Mazer, 2013; Murray, 1987). Powell, R and Powell, L (2010) mentions that teacher clarity as a communication strategies existing in an instructional context enhances the accuracy of instructional message. The adapted teacher clarity consists of seven components presented in table 2. Table 2. Teacher clarity components Components 1. Teacher defines major concepts 2. Teacher previewing and reviewing main points of a lesson 3. Teacher gives several examples of each topic discussed 4. Teacher uses relevant and concrete everyday examples 5. Teacher repeats difficult ideas several times 6. Teacher uses table, graphs or diagrams to facilitate explanation 7. Teacher suggests ways of memorizing complicated ideas ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 199 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi Methods This qualitative research was an interpretative study since this research tried to describe and interpret a phenomenon and process of communication strategies in online learning context. Moreover, this study also found out teachers view of communication challenges and solutions in online learning environment (Ary, 2014). The data were in form of verbal and non-verbal communication ecxchanges. The participants were two teachers of fifth grade at one of Bilingual Elementary School in Mojokerto. During online learning, the teachers use synchronous and asynchronous mode to communicate with students. In synchronous learning, the teachers utilized googlemeet to discuss exercies while in asynchronous learning, teachers tended to use video powerpoint and whatsapp group; however, the researchers focused on video powerpoint used by the teachers to explain the materials. In collecting the data, the researchers carried out observation six times in synchronous mode and took two teachers video powerpoint, i.e. explaining tenses and quantifier. Moreover, the researchers also used interview to gain tecahers point of view towards the challenges and solutions in online learning. The interview was grouped-interview since the two teachers were interviewed at the same time and the researchers used interview guide (Creswell & Poth, 2018). In observation method, the researcher used card data to classify the comunication strategy used based on the adapted theory of communication strategy taxonomy from (Chen & Wang, 2014; Avval, 2012; Dornyei & Scott, 1997) and and teacher clarity as communication strategy from (Hadie, 2018; Mazer, 2013; Murray, 1987) In this case, the researchers carried out source and technique triangulation to get the validity of the data because the reasearchers employed the different sources with the same technique and vice versa (Sugiyono, 2014). The sources triangulation were two teachers investigated with the same technique i.e. observation. The techniques triangulation can be seen from the use of different techniques of data collection observation and interview to one source or participant. In analyzing the data, the researchers described the dominant use of communication strategies types, then explained and interpreted the motives and characteristics of the strategies used. After that, the researchers elucidated the fulfilled teachers clarity. Then, the teachers challenges, solutions and factors are explored and interpreted. Findings Teachers communication strategies in synchronous learning context From the Table 3, the EYL teachers in a Bilingual School employed both linguistics and non-linguistics strategies covering direct, indirect and ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 200 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi interactional strategies (ten sub-types of strategies) adapted from Chen and Wang (2014), Avval (2012), Dornyei and Scott (1997), in synchronous learning mode. Table 3. EYL teachers communication strategies in synchronous learning context Communication Strategies F % Linguistics Direct Code-switching Translation Self-rephrasing 10 14 2 12% 18% 2% Linguistics Interactional Comprehension check Asking for confirmation Self-repetition Other repetition Repair/correction 11 2 2 8 2 14% 2% 2% 10% 2% Non- linguistics Showing Picture in the Book 6 7% Linguistics Indirect Fillers 11 14% Linguistics Uncategorized* Clarity Check* Praising* 4 10 5% 12% Total 82 100% It can be seen from the table 3 that there are three kinds of strategies found— direct, indirect, and interactional strategies. Of ten strategies, the most dominant communication strategies used were translation strategy. In direct strategies, code-switching and translation were frequently applied. In interactional strategies, comprehension check and other repetition were highly employed. Fillers are the only strategy in indirect strategy. This is clearly different from Mestriani et al. (2018) study that they found four direct strategies (code-switching, self-repair, other-repair, self-rephrasing), three indirect strategies (use of fillers, self-repetition, other repetition), and six interactional strategies (asking for repetition, asking for clarification, asking for confirmation, guessing, comprehension check, responses). It is interesting to note that this research posits two strategies i.e. clarity check and praising which are not included in Dornyei and Scott (1997), Avval (2012), Chen and Wang (2014). It is surprisingly highlighted that praising is one of the most dominant used. Concerning to the purposes of each communication startegy, the description is shown by explanaining the key goals of using the specific strategies. a. Managing Communication Barriers In teaching English to elementary students, especially English as second or foreign language, they sometimes do not understand what the teachers say. ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 201 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi Hence, teachers need strategies to handle the communication breakdown. In this study, the researchers found that the teachers employed code-switching, translation, self-rephrasing, filler and clarity check* to manage communication barriers during synchronous learning. The data T1/DRE/15-18 presented the code-switching and translation strategy at the same time. Code-switching (T1/DRE/17) and self-rephrasing (T1/DRE/30-34) were used to make the students understand the intended meaning. Translation was frequently applied to inform the students the meaning of the English vocabularies in discussing reading exercise. The data T1/DRE/15-18 showed that when the students kept silent the teacher thought that the students did not understand the meaning, therefore the teacher attempted to translate the whole sentences followed by a single word “Entrepreneur”. This strategy was employed to keep the communication flow as well as in the use of fillers in (T1/DRE/15) and (T1/DRE/34). The students response in S/DRE/18 proved that the students did not recognized the meaning of entrepreneur. T1/DRE/15-18 T1 : Ok next... is Bill Gate entrepreneur? (T1/DRE/15) Students : (Silent) (S/DRE/16) T1 : Apakah Bill Gate entrepeneur? Apakah dia pengusaha? Entrepreneur in Bahasa Indonesia pengusaha. (T1/DRE/17) Students : oh I see, Yes, miss (S/DRE/18) T1/DRE/30-34 T1 : Who is usually at top of the class? (T1/DRE/30) Students : (Silent) (S/DRE/31) T1 : how about the best or at the top at the class? (T1/DRE/32) Students : Ernesto, miss. (S/DRE/33) T1 : Ok... correct! (T1/DRE/34) In terms of online learning in synchronous mode by utilizing googlemeet, the unexpected finding, i.e. clarity check (T1/DRE/54) was found. In this case, the teacher noticed through googlemeet screen that the signal was going low in Nichole’s contact. Therefore, the teacher attempted to check whether Nichole could listen the teacher voice or not. This obviously how teacher kept the communication open and flow which was also followed by giving question to another student. ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 202 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi T1/DRE/52-57 T1 : and how about Nicole. What kind of sport do you like? (T1/DRE/52) Student1 : (Silent) (S/DRE/53) T1 : Can you listen my voice? Halo Nicole? (T1/DRE/54) Student1 : (Silent) signal lost* (T1/DRE/55) T1 : How about Zaydan? (T1/DRE/56) Student2 : have no idea, miss (S/DRE/57) b. Teachers Adjustment, Students Engagement and Attention Regarding to synchronous classroom, teachers adjustment was by controlling language input and output and form that can be seen in some strategies such as comprehension check, other repetition, praising, asking for confirmation, repair/correction, self-repetition, and showing pictures in the book. Moreover, teachers adjustment encourages students involvement or engagement in online classroom. In discussing reading and listening exercise in the book, the data (T1/DRE/5), (T1/DRE/23), (T1/DRE/25) shows that the teachers were not restricted to the questions in the book. The questions were initiated by the teachers to check the students comprehension which facilitates the students to speak up in an online classroom and gain students attention. Praising strategy in data (T1/DRE/57), (T1/DRE/25), (T1/DRE/27) suggests that the teachers attempted to arouse students emotional interest for creating a fruitful online classroom atmosphere. Teachers made sure that all students listen and know the correct answer and spelling by giving other repetition (T2/DLE/20, T2/DLE/22) and repair/correction (T1/DRE/25) strategy. Another strategies, asking for confirmation (e.g have you opened your book?) and showing pictures of the book were also aimed to involve the students in classroom and gain students attention. T1/DRE/3-7 T1 : Lets go to number 2, Is it true or false? (T1/DRE/3) Student : True (S/DRE/4) T1 : In what paragraph do you think the answer? (T1/DRE/5) Student : First (S/DRE/6) T1 : Ok, good. (T1/DRE/57) T1/DRE/23-27 T1 : when bill gate was born? (T1/DRE/23) Student3 : twenty eight October one thousand nine hundred ninety nine in Seattle (S/DRE/24) ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 203 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi T1 : Ok good. But you should say nineteen fifty five to spell the year (T1/DRE/25) So, how old is he? Students3 : sixty four (S/DRE/26) T1 : Correct! Good Job! (T1/DRE/27) T2/DLE/18-25 T2 : Number 4, what is the speaker in part D (T2/DLE/18) Student1 : Pilot (S/DLE/19) T2 : Ok! Pilot. The last number 5. What is the speaker in part E? (T2/DLE/20) Student2 : nurse, perawat (S/DLE/21) T2 Students : Yes, nurse, for reading section, we discuss next week. Any question for today? : (silent) (T2/DLE/22) (S/DLE/23) T2 : Are you sure no question? (T2/DLE/24) Students : No (S/DLE/25) Teachers’ communication strategies in asynchronous learning context Table 4 describes that the teachers fulfilled five components in explaining topic of tenses (simple present, simple past and present perfect tense) and four components in delivering quantifier materials through powerpoint video. The components which were not implemented in both tenses and quantifier topics were TC 3 (teacher gives several examples of each topic discussed) and TC 4 (teacher uses relevant and concrete everyday example). The teacher tended to use TC 7 (teacher suggests ways of memorizing complicated ideas in delivering tenses topic. Table 4. Communication strategy components in asynchronous learning Teacher Clarity Components Topics Tenses Quantifier TC 1 Teacher defines major concepts √ √ TC 2 Teacher previewing and reviewing main points of a lesson √ √ TC 3 Teacher gives several examples of each topic discussed X X TC 4 Teacher uses relevant and concrete everyday examples X X TC 5 Teacher repeats difficult ideas several times √ √ TC 6 Teacher uses table, graphs or diagrams to facilitate explanation √ √ TC 7 Teacher suggests ways of memorizing complicated ideas √ X ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 204 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi Teachers communication challenge and solution Based on the data from the interview, the researchers found that the communication challenges online teaching (synchronous and asynchronous) were due to students and parents readiness, controlling all students participation and attention, and students understanding. Being proffessional teachers, they attempted to use personal approach, provide flexible communication modes, and maintain communication strategies. The teachers T2/IQ assumed that the communication challenge was from both students and parents. The movement of face-to-face classroom to online classroom provokes different response. Technology facilities readiness becomes the concern. Parents do not always pay attention to their children needs. In this case, the teachers tried to approach the parents personally to explain the condition and what to do in online classroom. T2/IQ: “I think communication challenge in online learning is because both students and parents. Some students, their handphone shares with their parents and parents sometimes do not aware of their children needs for online teaching. Some parents complained the internet kuota but we have no choice. And I think because this is the first time we go online classroom, some students adapt quickly but the others are slow”. “I usually contact the parents personally to solve the problems. We need personal approach sometimes” In synchronous classroom, teacher T1/IQ faced less visual contact to the students and they think that it was hard to control all of the students participation and attention. Students tended to keep silent although the teacher addressed directly. However, teacher tried to use comprehension check strategy to make sure that the students understand and encourage them to speak up. T1/IQ: “ehm... when we do googlemeet, I cannot see my students face although I give them rules to switch on their video. I call them one by one to make sure that they present in whole class to answer the questions but some of them are just quiet, no response. In face-to-face classroom I can easily control to make them active and pay attention. It may be because direct contact forces students to do what teachers instruction”. “I facilitate whatsapp group for sharing information when I feel googlemeet classroom was not enough. I share video powerpoint that students can watch it anytime to understand the topics. They also can ask questions if they got problem in understanding the material or tasks”. ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 205 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi “to keep students active although not all, I check students understanding by giving detail question and sometimes extended for keep going classroom communication” Factors influencing the use of communication strategies Based on the previous findings, it indicates that the possible factors influencing communication strategies used by the teachers are online communication modes (synchronous and asynchronous), learning activities types, students response and English proficiency, and teachers communication ability. The alteration in mode of communication affects learning activities types as well as communication strategy, students response and English proficiency. Teachers chose exercise discussion activity in synchronous mode by utilizing googlemeet and material explanation in asynchronous mode by creating powerpoint video. Due to the synchronous mode, the strategies such as asking for confirmation, clarity check and praising were posited. The students response and English proficiency i.e. silence, error and vocabulary mastery triggered the teachers to use comprehension check, self-rephrasing, translation, code- switching, and repair/correction. Consider the illustration in the figure 1. Figure 1. Factors influencing teachers communication strategies Teachers Communication Strategies factors Online Communication Modes (Synchronous and Asynchronous) Students Response and English Competence Teacher Communication Ability Learning Activities Types ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 206 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi Discussion Based on the findings, it can be noted that translation, code-switching, and fillers were the most frequently strategy applied to face the communication problems because the students were lack of vocabulary mastery. It made the communication stuck. Although this happened in online synchronous mode but it also commonly existed in face-to-face classroom specifically young learners (Chen & Wang, 2014). This confirms Rababah (2005) statement that language as a second language can cause a problem in communication because of students English competence. Therefore, communication strategies e.g. Translation and code-switching were applied to solve the communication barriers to create a conducive classroom ambiance (Trihastuti & Zamzani, 2018; Chen & Wang, 2014). Nevertheless, this does not reflect the effectiveness of communication but the teachers help is crucial due to the students limitation of vocabulary knowledge in thier language development process. The other dominant strategies such as comprehension check and other repetition were also the dominant strategies carried out to encourge the students engagement and attention. This is in line with Mestriani et al. (2018) finding although the context of the learning is different i.e. online and face-to-face classroom. This means that the students are required to give an attention and involve in the classroom because the teachers need to accomodate their understanding and learning activity. This is obviously intended to achieve the learning goals. Hence, both atrategies are essential for the teachers to apply in the classroom. Regarding to synchronous learning context, this research unveils two communication strategies, i.e. praising and clarity check. Powell.R and Powell.L (2010) states that praising can make communication a rewarding experience. Despite clarity check did not dominantly used, it seems significant to build a rapport with the students. The researchers also highlight the use of comprehension check as the teachers effort in involing the students to speak up in online classroom. It is suggested that this kind of emotional encouragement triggers students engagement which can help develop students language competence. The findings revealed that the whole classroom communication and interaction in a synchronous mode was teacher-initiated oriented. Eventhough Chen and Wang (2014) said that rare students initiation is poor quality of teachers interactional practices. In this study, the teachers strived for giving open questions and chance to negotiate meaning with pupils. Hence, the researchers are not sure about the quality classification since communication and interaction are in online context (synchronous) which is based on (Powell & Powell, 2010) it can be a matter for student in both behavioral and technological problems. In relation to the teachers online activity in asynchronous learning, the components of teacher clarity, i.e. TC 3 (giving several examples of each topic discussed) and TC 4 (using relevant and concrete ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 207 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi everyday examples) in delivering the materials are not applied. This is contrary to Mazer (2013) study that teacher could improve students cognitive interest by promoting TC 3 and TC 4 in conveying the materials. TC 7 in explaining quantifier topic was also not linear to Hadie (2018) research on validation toward teacher clarity used. Mazer (2013) also emphasized that obvious teaching behaviors can urge students interest cognitively in the materials because they process a comprehension of the lesson contents and its organizational connection. This means that the missing components in delivering the materials are vital for facilitating students understanding especially for young learner. They need concrete and real examples to understand the materials. This matter might due to the teachers communication ability (presenting the materials) although some factors e.g the complexity and time taking process of online teaching (Perveen, 2016) might also affect the teachers way in explaining the materials. Concerning to the teachers challenges, it reflects that the teachers showed themselves as solutive facilitators. They facilitated online learning in various ways and communication strategies. Personal approaches were also used to ensure the availabillity of the technology (i.e. laptop/handphone) and parents attention to their children during online learning. The teachers were professional in teaching to hinder online classroom obstacles. Some factors influencing the use of communication strategy in online calssroom can be inferred that the teachers communication ability and online communication mode have a vital role for students response and English language competence. Our research suggests that teachers communication strategies were responsive to the students language development and problems encountered. The researchers noted that teachers should fulfill and improve their communiction strategies in terms of clarity (TC3, TC4 and TC 7) in explaining the materials to promote the understanding of the contents of the lesson. The researchers highlight the positive points from the teachers communication strategies in this research: 1. Teachers attempt to interact with students and involve them by addressing them with comprehension questions although students may ignore or get a problem with the online classroom model 2. Another strategies such as repetition, code-switching, translation allow students to learn new vocabularies as well as language development 3. Teachers reward leads students emotional interest 4. Teachers use of different communication mode (synchronous and asynchronous) learning complements each other in teaching and learning especially English language. ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 208 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi Conclusion and Recommendations The current study explored the EYL teachers communication strategies, challenges and solutions, and factors influencing in online classroom environment (synchronous and asynchronous). The results elucidates that the most frequently employed communication strategies in synchronous mode were translation, code-switching, comprehension check, filler, praising, and other repetition. All strategies aimed to handle the communication barriers, run the teachers adjusment, and gain students engegement and attention. In asynchronous mode, it is important for the teachers to carry out the seven components of teacher clarity considering that all of the components are crucial in facilitating students understanding specifically in online learning. Teachers challenges reveal the teachers profesional teaching since the teachers tried to overcome the problems. Teachers communication strategies were influenced by the communication mode (synchronous and asynchronous) affecting learning activity type; teachers communication ability interrelated to students response (as well as communication modes) and English language competence. The results of this research recommends that communication strategies plays a significant roles in teaching especially in online context. Therefore, teachers need an adequate communication ability. They also should aware of which communication strategies can manage communication breakdown, encourgae students involvement, facilitate students understanding of the contents, and help develop young learners language competence. Due to the limitation of this research, the further research by classifying the ages or grades seems more complex to identify the communication strategies characteristics in different level. Regarding to benefit of communication strategies, i.e. influencing the students interest and engagement, the mixed method is needed to get the more comprehensive and valid evidence. Disclosure statement (No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors). Acknowledgments This research is funded by the minister of education and culture (8/EI/KPT/2020). References Abrar, M., Mukminin, A., Habibi, A., Asyrafi, F., Makmur, M., & Marzulina, L. (2018). “If our English isn’t a language, what is it?” Indonesian EFL Student Teachers’ Challenges Speaking English. The Qualitative Report, ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 209 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi 23(1), 129-145. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol23/iss1/9 Ary. (2014). Introduction to research in education. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning Atmojo, A. E. P & Arif, N. (2020). EFL classes must go online! teaching activities and challenges during COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. Register Journal. 13(1), 22-30. Avval, F.S. (2012). Communication strategies in translation: A review on taxonomies. Journal of Siberian University, Humanities & Social Sciences 5(6), 768-779. Bialystok, E. (1990). Communication strategies. Oxford: Blackwell. Cervantes, C.A.R & Ruth R. R. (2012). The use of communication strategies in the beginner efl classroom. Gist Education and Learning Research Journal. 6(1), 111-128 Chen, Z., & Qian W. (2014). Examining Classroom Interactional Practices to Promote Learning in the Young Learner EFL Classroom in China. In Sarah R. (Eds). International Perspectives on Teaching English to Young Learners. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Coppola. (2001). Becoming a Virtual professor: Pedagigical roles and ALN. System Sciences, 2001. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference. Crawley, F. E., Fewell, M. D., & Sugar, W. A. (2009). Researcher and researched: the phenomenology of change from face-to-face to online instruction. The Quarterly review of Distance Education, 10(1), 165-176. Creswell, J. W,. & Cheryl N. P. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design. California: SAGE Dornyei, Z. (1995). On the teachability of communication strategies. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 55-58. Dörnyei, Zoltan & Mary Le Scott. (1997). Communication strategies in a second language: definitions and taxonomies. Language Learning, 47(1), 173-210. Hadie, S. N. H. (2018). The teacher behavior inventory: validation of teacher behavior in interactive lecture environment. Teacher Development, 23(1),36-49. Kebritchi, M., Angie L., & Lilia S. (2017). Issues and challenges for teaching successful online courses in higher education: a literture review. Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1),4-29. Mazer, J. P. (2013). Associations Among Teacher communication behaviors, student interest, and engagement: a validity test. Communication Education, 62(1),86-96. Mei, A., & Sanooch, S. N. (2010). Use of Communication Strategies by Chinese EFL Learners. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 33(3),110-125. http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol23/iss1/9 ISSN |2355-3669| E-ISSN |2503-2518| Volume 7| Number 2|Dec 2020| 210 Available online at http://jurnal.radenfatah.ac.id/index.php/edukasi Mestriani., Ni Made., I. K Seken., & I Nyoman A. J. P. (2018). Communication strategies of English native speaker teacher in the teaching and learning process in a kindergarten. SHS Web of Conferences, 7(1),48-58. Murray, H.G. (1987). Acquiring students feedback that improves instruction. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 32(2), 85-96. Perveen, A. (2016). Synchronous and asynchronous e-language learning: a case study of virtual university of pakistan. Open Praxis, 8( 1),21-39.. Powell, R. G,. & Powell, D. L.. (2010). Classroom Communication and Diversity: Enhancing Instructional Practices. London,UK: Taylor & Francis Group. Rababah, G. (2005). Communication problem facing Arab learners of english. Journal of Language and Learning, 3(1),1740-4983. Rastegar, M & Gohari, S. S. M. (2016). Communication strategies, attitude, and oral output of efl learners: A Study of relations. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 6(1),401-419. Richards, J., & Schmidt, R. (2010). Dictionary of Languaje Teaching and Applied Linguistics. Longman,UK: Pearson Education. Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL, 10(3), 209-230. Sugiyono. (2014). Memahami Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung,Indonesia: CV. Alfabeta. Trihastuti, Y. A & Zamzani. (2018). The role of communication strategies in the classroom communication. Retrieved from https://www.atlantis- press.com/proceedings/iccsr-18/25904623 Zubaidi. (2014). Types and Frequency of Communication Strategies in a Bilingual Class by a Non-English Language Lecturer. Jurnal Linguistik Terapan, 4(1), 62-70. https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/iccsr-18/25904623 https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/iccsr-18/25904623