333 EEJ 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 English Education Journal http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej The Effectiveness of Synchronous and Asynchronous E-Learning Environments in Teaching Writing to Different Personalities Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, Abdurrachman Faridi, Rudi Hartono Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia Article Info ________________ Article History: Accepted 08 May 2022 Approved 04 July 2022 Published 15 September 2022 ________________ Keywords: E-learning environments, introvert and extrovert personalities, writing. ____________________ Abstract ___________________________________________________________________ Since the Covid-19 pandemic is affecting the new educational environments, synchronous and asynchronous e-learning environments have been integrated into the teaching and learning process. This study aims to explain how significant the students’ achievement is taught in e-learning environments in teaching writing to students with different personalities. The design of this study was a quasi-experimental design with a 2 × 2 factorial design. This study was conducted on the eighth-grade students at SMP N 2 Mantup. The questionnaire and written test were carried out by t-test and two-way ANOVA. This study discovered a relationship between the e-learning environments and students' personalities, which influences their ability to write recount texts. This research showed that an asynchronous e-learning environment was effective for students with introverted personalities, and a synchronous e-learning environment was effective for students with extroverted personalities. This study also compared the use of the e-learning environments for each personality in improving writing recount text. Thus, this study presented a new perspective on the importance of paying attention to students' personalities in selecting the e-learning environments to improve writing recount text. The contribution of this study provided to the ELT development was new insight on how effective the teaching implemented in a dual mode digital environment is, no matter what personality the students possess. Thus, it is proven that modern teaching has no boundary, spatially and temporally. Correspondence Address: Kampus Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Semarang, Jl. Kelud Utara III, Semarang 50237, Indonesia E-mail: ajenghidayatul1008@students.unnes.ac.id p-ISSN 2087-0108 e-ISSN 2502-4566 Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 334 INTRODUCTION The Corona-virus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic has affected aspects of life, including education. Distance learning is an alternative to a new educational environment. Distance Learning is a learning solution that refers to the e- learning environment applied in the learning process (Hernawati et al., 2021). The e-learning environments refer to synchronous and asynchronous e-learning environments (Shahabadi & Uplane, 2015). In synchronous e- learning, it provides an online learning environment that is very interactive and live, where the teachers and students can simultaneously communicate with each other in real-time, they can ask and answer questions directly without increasing frustration, and it is facilitated by the instructor, which means that the learning process is learning-oriented interaction (Hrastinski, 2008; Nikmah & Azimah, 2020; Shahabadi & Uplane, 2015; Skylar, 2009). In contrast, the asynchronous e-learning environment provides the flexibility for the students to access the materials and complete the assignments in the form of audio or videos, handouts, articles, power points presentations, and other materials that have already been provided by the instructor or teacher and can be accessed whenever they want (Amiti, 2020; Perveen, 2016). Here, the students have much time to think critically about the problems. Having no time-bound and giving responses at their leisure, they have sufficient time to answer the questions (Murphy et al., 2011). Moreover, the researcher obtained data on students’ and teachers’ problems from preliminary research conducted by interviewing English teachers in eighth-graders of Junior High School 2 Mantup Lamongan. The students struggled to write recount text because they did not understand how to organize the text, generate ideas, and retell their experiences using the generic structure of recount text. This statement is in line with Karani (2007) who says that organization is the next problem after grammar in writing recount text. They get confused in composing the text paragraph coherently. Furthermore, they were afraid of making mistakes in writing, so they were less motivated to practice. Sometimes the students only get a certain mark for their writing without knowing the strengths and weaknesses of their compositions, so they do not know how to improve their writing to be a better one. Aside from the issues raised by the students, the teacher also faces challenges in teaching writing in this pandemic era. The teachers are expected to create a new learning environment creatively and actively, where they should be familiar with technology and at the same time can accommodate the diversity of students’ personalities that positively influence students’ success in learning a language (Erton, 2010). It means that both establishing a new learning environment and recognizing the students’ personalities have a significant role in the accomplishment of writing teaching and learning process. Furthermore, Nezhad et al. (2014) state that individual differences have two personality variables. They have extroverted and introverted personalities. Extroverted individuals are sociable, active, risk-taking, impulsive, expressive, and enjoy being in groups, whereas introverted individuals are quiet, introspective, and reserved, except for close friends. In other words, extroverted students are more active than introverted students during teaching and learning. It means there are significant differences in the needs of the learning environment for extrovert and introvert students (Offir et al., 2007). The extrovert students are more active and show their responses to the material. It seems like introverted students become passive students. This condition can be a problem in the teaching and learning process because it can influence their achievement in writing competence. Therefore, the teacher needs to apply the appropriate e-learning environments such as a synchronous and asynchronous e-learning environment using effective, interactive, creative, and familiar applications that relate to technology which can be used to address challenges faced by the educators and students, so they can be more productive in distance learning situations, Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 335 especially when writing recount text (Ogbonna et al., 2019). Moreover, synchronous and asynchronous e-learning environments have been studied and believed to be effective for teaching and learning. Some previous studies explored e-learning environments and students’ personalities. Dealing with some studies about e-learning that were conducted by Hamid et al. (2020); Hermanto and Srimulyani (2021); and Mardiah (2020), the implementation of e-learning in the pandemic era has produced a variety of results. The findings demonstrated that e-learning implementation was effective, interactive, and suitable for distance learning in this pandemic era. The students from their homes can access the learning material delivered by the teacher or lecturer via an e-learning application that is approved by the institutions or lecturers. Synchronous e-learning with the different objects during the pandemic era (Covid-19) that had been conducted by Hatta et al. (2020); Lestari and Dewi (2021); Mutiaraningrum and Nugroho (2020); and Taraj (2021) who state that during the pandemic era (Covid-19), both of teachers and students are challenged to apply the appropriate online learning environment. One of them is synchronous e-learning. They analysed the impact of synchronous e-learning during the teaching and learning process. The results revealed that there were some advantages to using synchronous e-learning. For instance, e- learning assisting students in improving their computer skills, task negotiation, task planning, opinions, questions and answers that could be easily completed. Furthermore, they could improve critical thinking, and give direct responses in the real-time, which could reduce students’ attainment. The implementation of asynchronous e- learning was conducted by some researchers, such as Astrid et al. (2021); Delahunty (2018); Martin-Beltrán and Chen (2013); McNeil (2014); Northey et al. (2015); Pinto-Llorente et al. (2017); and Saeed and Ghazali (2017) who are exploring and examining asynchronous e-learning used in teaching writing. They focused on students’ interaction, feedback processes, commenting patterns, and how the students facilitate text revisions. Generally, the research finding illustrates the positive effects of the use of asynchronous e-learning that the teachers in EFL Classroom apply, such as having an excellent opportunity to organize and set their own pace of study and individual learning. Furthermore, they can confirm the extensive thinking opportunities brought by the teacher’s written feedback or revision, and the peer feedback activities have a more significant effect. In addition, students give a positive response which means that it reduces the students’ anxiety. Similar results to research conducted by Subiyantoro et al. (2021) showed that the students prefer to use asynchronous learning modes with low bandwidth because the internet connection is limited. Besides, they could suit their time and learning style based on their uncertain condition. Besides, Boroujeni et al. (2015); Hazrati- Viari et al. (2012); Keshavarzi and Amiri (2016), Noprianto (2017); Sofeny (2017); and Sumarno (2015) have the same ideas that the differences in students’ achievement can be based on personality types and students learning strategies, because different strategies and different personalities give impact on students’ achievement, where students’ personalities assists significantly influence the students’ writing quality. Therefore, it means that recognizing their personality traits and language learning strategy choices might be effective in helping teachers design effective teaching strategies to achieve learning objectives. However, this research was different from previous studies. This study had moderator variables, namely extrovert and introvert personalities. In addition, this study focused on the interaction between the e-learning environments and students' personalities in influencing writing recount text. This study also focused on the effectiveness of the e-learning environments in writing recount text by conducting a comparative test of the use of the e- learning environments by each personality type and the results of improvement through pre-test and post-test for each type of personality in improving recount writing text. Thus, this Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 336 research can be used to select the appropriate e- learning environments by considering the students’ personalities. METHODS The researchers used a quasi-experimental study with a 2×2 factorial design to investigate the relationships among variables. This study’s independent variables were synchronous and asynchronous e-learning environments, while the dependent variable was students’ writing achievement. The experimental classes in this study are divided into two groups. The first group experimental class was taught using synchronous e-learning and the second group experimental class was taught using an asynchronous e- learning environment. These groups got the same materials, periods, and levels, but in different e- learning environments. Moreover, the population of this study was the eighth graders of SMP N 2 Mantup, Lamongan in the academic year of 2021/2022, with six eighth grade classes totalling 153 students. Two classes were drawn from the population with a homogeneous English achievement’s scores. Both classes were experimental. They were the experimental group I, given synchronous e-learning environment treatment, and the experimental group II, got asynchronous e-learning environment treatment. The instruments of this research were the questionnaires and writing tests. The questionnaires were based on the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI) adopted and adapted into the short questionnaire in the previous study conducted by Sari (2019) which only took twenty- four questions together with the keys of extrovert personalities. The questionnaires were assigned to students first to get their categorization of students’ personalities. Then, it is divided into two groups that consist of extrovert and introvert personalities. The writing test was conducted twice in this study. They wrote recount text about their holiday. They were assessed before (pre-test) and after treatment (post-test). Both tests were administered individually and in accordance with the e-learning environments used. Each experimental group received the same pre-test and post-test time. In the first experimental group which employed a synchronous e-learning environment used the Zoom Meeting application, students did the pre-test and post-test simultaneously with real-time interaction in front of their respective devices. Then, the second experimental group used Google Classroom to create an asynchronous e-learning environment. The processing time for the pre-test and post-test was determined by the assignment upload time and was limited by the due date. Students worked concurrently at the same time but disassociated directly in real-time. Construct validation was conducted with a validation test by two English education lecturers on translating the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI) instrument into Indonesian. In addition, the syllabus and lesson plans of the two e-learning environments were also validated by three junior high school English teachers as expert validators. Pre-test and post-test were conducted to determine the effect of treatment on the experimental groups, and the results were measured using a score based on the basics aspects of writing adapted from Brown (2004) such as content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanics. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive analysis and inferential statistics using SPSS software, namely normality, homogeneity, two-way ANOVA, paired sample test, and independent samples t- test. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS According to the results of the personality questionnaire, 15 students in experimental group 1 were classified as extroverted personalities and 15 students as introverted personalities. In experimental group 2, there were 17 students who were classified as extroverted and 14 students as introverted personalities. Below are two tables which presented the result of the normality test of the pre and post-test in both experimental groups. The tests were utilizing Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 337 statistical tests in examining the normality of the pre-test and post-test data. Table 1 showed descriptive statistics of interaction among synchronous and asynchronous E-Learning environments, writing recount text, and students’ personalities obtained from the post-test. However, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for the Post-Test of introverted students in the second experimental class displayed that the data was not normally distributed (𝑆𝑖𝑔. = 0,034 < 0,05), whereas the Shapiro-Wilk test presented the opposite (𝑆𝑖𝑔. = 0,078 > 0,05), so it can be concluded that the pre-test and post-test data were normally distributed. Table 1. Normality Test of the Pre-Test and Post-Test in Both Experimental Groups Class Personalities Pre-Test Post-Test Kolmogorov- Smirnov Shapiro- Wilk Kolmogorov- Smirnov Shapiro- Wilk First Experimental Group Introvert Statistic 0,154 0,899 0,198 0,899 𝑑𝑓 15 15 15 15 𝑆𝑖𝑔. 0,200 0,093 0,116 0,092 Extrovert Statistic 0,169 0,947 0,161 0,951 𝑑𝑓 15 15 15 15 𝑆𝑖𝑔. 0,200 0,484 0,200 0,539 Second Experimental Group Introvert Statistic 0,150 0,932 0,236 0,889 𝑑𝑓 14 14 14 14 𝑆𝑖𝑔. 0,200 0,321 0,034 0,078 Extrovert Statistic 0,098 0,956 0,169 0,908 𝑑𝑓 17 17 17 17 𝑆𝑖𝑔. 0,200 0,557 0,200 0,093 Table 2. Post-Test Descriptive Statistics of Interaction among Synchronous and Asynchronous E- Learning Environments, Writing Recount Text, and Students’ Personalities Class Personalities Post-Test Mean Std. Dev 𝑁 Synchronous E-Learning Environment Class Extrovert 71,27 4,992 15 Introvert 74,80 5,747 15 Total 73,03 5,586 30 Asynchronous E-Learning Environment Class Extrovert 66,47 6,793 17 Introvert 76,79 4,209 14 Total 71,13 7,715 31 Total Extrovert 68,72 6,402 32 Introvert 75,76 5,076 29 Total 72,07 6,765 61 Prior to that, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests for pre-test and post-test results in the first experimental group taught by a synchronous e-learning environment and the second experimental group taught by an asynchronous e-learning environment revealed that both were normally distributed (𝑆𝑖𝑔. > 0,05) (see Table 1). Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 338 First, a two-way ANOVA test on the post-test results was required to determine the interaction between synchronous and asynchronous e-learning environments and students with different personalities in processed of writing recount text. Table 2 presented a summary of descriptive statistics for the post-test results. Table 3. Test between Subject Effect of Interaction between E-Learning Environments and Students’ Personalities in Writing Recount Text Source Type III Sum of Squares 𝑑𝑓 Mean Square 𝐹 𝑆𝑖𝑔. Corrected Model 965,812𝑎 3 321,937 10,310 0,000 Intercept 317573,620 1 317573,620 1,017𝐸4 0,000 E-Learning Environment Class 29,964 1 29,964 0,960 0,331 Personalities 727,581 1 727,581 23,300 0,000 E-Learning Environment Class * Personalities 174,489 1 174,489 5,588 0,022 Error 1779,926 57 31,227 Total 319546,000 61 Corrected Total 2745,738 60 Table 4. Paired Sample Test of Students with Extroverted Personality of the First Experimental Group who were Taught Writing Recount Text in Synchronous E-Learning Paired Differences 𝑡 𝑑𝑓 𝑆𝑖𝑔. (2 − 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑑) Mean Std. Deviati on Std Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Pair 1 Pretest Extrovert Sync –Post-test Extrovert Sync −5,667 9,839 2,540 −11.115 −,218 −2.231 14 0,043 Based on Table 3, there was no interaction between synchronous and asynchronous e- learning environments in affecting students’ writing recount text (𝑆𝑖𝑔. = 0.331 < 𝛼 = 0,05). Moreover, Table 3 also showed there was an interaction between students’ personalities in affecting students’ writing recount text (𝑆𝑖𝑔. = 0.000 < 𝛼 = 0,05). Furthermore, there was an interaction between e-learning environments (synchronous and asynchronous) and students’ personalities in affecting students’ writing recount text (𝑆𝑖𝑔. = 0.022 < 𝛼 = 0,05). Furthermore, the dominant result in Table 3 indicates an interaction between the variables in affecting students’ writing recount text. Furthermore, it indicates an interaction between e-learning environments (synchronous and asynchronous) and students’ personalities (extrovert and introvert) in teaching writing recount text. Therefore, the researchers concluded that e-learning environments and personalities significantly affect students’ writing achievements. It was related to Almusharraf and Almusharraf (2021) asserting that social personalities (extrovert and introvert) need to be considered in the online learning by located the teachers in the learning process used it because both of them affect students’ success. Different personalities also have different environmental preferences and learning techniques especially in writing skills (Revola et al., 2018; Sumarno, 2015). This statement was in line with Qanwal and Ghani (2019) who stated that different personalities will produce different learning outcomes, especially in writing skills. Not limited to writing skills, students' personality also affects Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 339 other language skills, and requires the selection of appropriate learning to handle them (Andriyani, 2016; Wulandari, 2017). Thus, it can be concluded that the e-learning environments and personality types contributed significantly and positively enhanced the students’ writing achievement. Second, the paired samples test in table 4 displayed that the second null hypothesis was rejected (𝑆𝑖𝑔. (2 − 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑑) = 0,043 < 𝛼 = 0,05). It means there was a significant difference in writing recount text of students with extroverted personalities in the pre-test and post-test. Therefore, it can be said that the synchronous e- learning environment effectively improved students’ writing recount text for extrovert personalities. In other words, the synchronous e-learning environments effectively improved the students’ writing recount text for students with extroverted personalities. It was in line with Zeichner (2019) who stated that extroverted students need more feedback, especially the ability feedback that can strengthen their belief in their ability to learn effectively and be satisfied in their learning process because their standard was external. It means that synchronous e-learning environments, both students and teachers can communicate in real-time, ask questions and answers, provide feedback during the study process, and access and understood the lesson materials (Bower et al., 2015; Rahayu, 2020; Zydney et al., 2020). Thus, they showed proficient writing skills. In other words, their writing achievement can be improved than before (Kafryawan, 2020). The third result for this study was based on the paired samples test that compared the pre-test and post-test of introverted students who were taught writing recount text in the synchronous e- learning environment (see table 5). Since the third null hypothesis was accepted (𝑆𝑖𝑔. (2 − 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑑) = 0,074 > 𝛼 = 0,05), it can be concluded that there was no significant difference in writing recount text of students with introverted personalities in the pre-test and post- test. Therefore, a synchronous e-learning environment did not significantly improve students’ writing recount text for introverted personalities. This result was in line with Pavalache-Ilie and Cocorada (2014) who stated that introverted students disapprove of collaborative learning in an online environment where they lack face-to- face feedback from the teacher. Instead, they prefer online learning where they can work alone, conduct experiments, solve their assignments in rhythm, and not be afraid to miss the teacher's words (Offir et al., 2007; Zeichner, 2019). Furthermore, when they have their own pace of study, they can extend their critical thinking skills and develop their creativity and motivation to be better not only about the materials but also in their skill especially writing skills (Tusino et al., 2020; Wahyuni et al., 2020). Thus, they can achieve better writing skills through the asynchronous e-learning environment. Table 5. Paired Sample Test of Students with Introverted Personality of the First Experimental Group who were Taught Writing Recount Text by Synchronous E-Learning Paired Differences 𝑡 𝑑𝑓 𝑆𝑖𝑔. (2 − 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑑) Mean Std. Deviation Std Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Pair 1 Pretest Introvert Sync – Post-test Introvert Sync −5,933 11,895 3,071 −12,521 , 654 −1,932 14 0,074 Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 340 Table 6. Paired Sample Test of Students with Extroverted Personality of the First Experimental Group who were Taught Writing Recount Text in Asynchronous E-Learning Paired Differences 𝑡 𝑑𝑓 𝑆𝑖𝑔. (2 − 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑑) Mean Std. Deviati- on Std Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Pair 1 Pretest Extrovert Async –Post-test Extrovert Async 0,294 10,469 2,539 −5,088 5.677 0,116 16 0,909 Table 7. Paired Sample Test of Students with Introverted Personality of the First Experimental Group who were Taught Writing Recount Text in Asynchronous E-Learning Paired Differences 𝑡 𝑑𝑓 𝑆𝑖𝑔. (2 − 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑑) Mean Std. Deviati- on Std Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Pair 1 Pretest Introvert Async –Post- test Introvert Async −10.857 12,745 3,406 −18,216 −3,498 −3,187 13 0,007 The fourth results showed that there was no significant difference in writing recount text of students with extroverted personalities in the pre- test and post-test since the null hypothesis was accepted (𝑆𝑖𝑔. (2 − 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑑) = 0,909 > 𝛼 = 0,05) (see Table 6). Therefore, it can be said that the asynchronous e-learning environment did not significantly improve students’ writing recount text for extrovert personalities. This result was similar to a study conducted by Borup et al. (2013) who stated that extraversion students prefer speaking directly than writing what they think about. They can explain more if they have the opportunity to discuss and can better understand the material with a direct verbal approach (Taraj, 2021; Yuliani et al., 2019). Extroverted students are less likely to participate in e-learning environments that tends to use written interactions. It means they were less motivated to express their feelings and thoughts through writing. In line with Borg et al. (2021), the writing scores of extroverted students in asynchronous e-learning environments had lower than those of extroverted students in synchronous e-learning environments. Students with extroverted personalities could be themselves when they have direct interaction (Amichai-Hamburger et al., 2002). Thus, it can be concluded that the asynchronous e-learning environment did not suggest for extroverted students in their writing class. The extroverted students need and like to communicate and discuss with other people directly rather than in text. The fifth result showed the result of paired samples test of introverted students who were taught to write recount text in the asynchronous e-learning environment. Since the fifth null hypothesis was rejected (𝑆𝑖𝑔. (2 − 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑑) = 0,007 < 𝛼 = 0,05) (see table 7). There was a significant difference in writing recount text of students with introverted personalities in the pre- test and post-test. Therefore, it can be said that the asynchronous e-learning environment significantly improves students’ writing recount text for introverted personalities. This result was similar to some studies conducted by Zaswita and Ihsan (2020) who stated that introverted students prefer online platforms where they lack face-to-face communication. Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 341 However, they can be their “real self” when they have opportunities to have more time to read, write, and try to produce the correct language (Amichai-Hamburger et al., 2002). Therefore, it was not surprising that the students who had introverted personalities were better in writing achievement in an asynchronous e- learning environment than the extrovert students because the extrovert students lack face- to-face communication which becomes their positive stimulus, and they may feel more isolated and tend to be careless and less correct in constructing the phrases when finishing their writing task (Offir et al., 2007; Revola et al., 2018; Zainuddin, 2016). Thus, it can be proved that introverted students were better at constructing their writing than extroverted students in an asynchronous e- learning environment. The sixth research objective was to test the effectiveness of synchronous and asynchronous e- learning environments in teaching writing to eighth graders with extroverted students’ personalities. Since the data was homogeneous from Levene’s test (𝑆𝑖𝑔. = 0,128 > 0,05), table 8 presents the value of 𝑆𝑖𝑔. (2 − 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑑) in a row equal variance assumed was 0,032 which is lower than the level of significance (𝛼 = 0,05). Thus, the null hypothesis was rejected and proved a significant difference in the effect of synchronous and asynchronous e-learning environments to teach writing recount text for students with extroverted personalities. Thus, based on the mean scores of the post-test, it can be said that the extrovert students who were taught writing in synchronous e-learning environments were significantly better than the extroverted students who were taught writing in the asynchronous e- learning environment. This result can be found in some studies conducted by Weiser et al. (2018) who stated that extroverted students participate more when they have a direct interaction between the teacher and students. Therefore, the synchronous environment improves learning outcomes more than the asynchronous environment where extroverted students lack interaction directly (Amichai-Hamburger et al., 2002; Offir et al., 2007). As the characteristics of extrovert personality, the extrovert students prefer real- time interaction with others in the learning process where they often contribute to sharing their ideas and apply the collaboration formats in a synchronous environment. Students with extroverted personalities also tend to understand learning using a verbal approach rather than a written one (Yuliani et al., 2019). However, they rarely contributed to an asynchronous e-learning environment (Borg et al., 2021). Therefore, it was needed to have more attention to the appropriate e-learning environments for the different students’ personalities, especially for extrovert students who like to communicate with each other in real-time interaction. The seventh research objective was to test the effectiveness of synchronous and asynchronous e-learning environments in teaching writing to eighth graders with introverted students’ personalities. Table 8. Independent Sample of Students with Extrovert personality who were Taught Writing in Synchronous and Asynchronous E-Learning Environments Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means 𝐹 𝑆𝑖𝑔. 𝑡 𝑑𝑓 𝑆𝑖𝑔. (2 − 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑑) Mean Diffe- rence Std. Error Diffe- rence 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Equal variances assumed 2,445 0,128 2,249 30 0,032 4,80 2,133 0,441 9,151 Equal variances not assumed 2,293 29,1 0,029 4,80 2,092 0,519 9,074 Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 342 Table 9. Independent Sample of Students with Introverted Personality who were Taught Writing in Synchronous and Asynchronous E-Learning Environments Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means 𝐹 𝑆𝑖𝑔. 𝑡 𝑑𝑓 𝑆𝑖𝑔. (2 − 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑑) Mean Diffe- rence Std. Error Diffe- rence 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Equal variances assumed 2.191 . 150 −1.055 27 . 301 −1.99 1.88 −5.848 1.877 Equal variances not assumed −1.066 25.61 . 296 −1.99 1.86 −5.816 1.845 Since the data was homogeneous from Levene’s test in table 9 (𝑆𝑖𝑔. = 0,150 > 0,05), the value of 𝑆𝑖𝑔. (2 − 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑑) in a row equal variance assumed was 0,301 which was higher than the level of significance (𝛼 = 0,05). Thus, the null hypothesis was accepted, which means there was no significant difference in the effect of synchronous and asynchronous e-learning environments on teaching writing recount text for students with introverted personalities. Furthermore, the mean post-test scores were quite similar in both experimental groups of introverted students. Here, students with introverted personalities outperformed extroverted personalities in writing skills in both experimental classes needed to be highlighted. It can be seen from the higher average of post-test scores, even for extroverted students taught writing in a synchronous e-learning environment. Thus, introverted students tend to be more structured in writing (Zainuddin, 2016). This result was in line with studies conducted by Boroujeni et al. (2015), Qanwal and Ghani (2019), and Zaswita and Ihsan (2020) who state that introverted students' writing achievement outperformed extroverted students. Furthermore, the good writing ability of students with introverted personalities were one of the causes for consistently having good achievements even in different e-learning environments. CONCLUSIONS This research focused on comparing synchronous and asynchronous e-learning environments in teaching writing recount text for students with different personalities. Some interactions influence each other, they were e- learning environments, students' personalities, and students' writing ability of recount text. Using a synchronous e-learning environment has proven to improve extroverted students' writing recount text ability, but the opposite was found for introverted students. Using an asynchronous e-learning environment proved ineffective in improving extroverted students' writing recount text ability but was adequate for introverted students. Then, extroverted students who were taught writing recount text using a synchronous e-learning environment proved to be better than extroverted students who were taught using an asynchronous e-learning environment. Finally, there was no significant difference between introverted students who were taught writing recount text using synchronous and asynchronous e-learning environments. However, it should be noted that overall, students with introverted personalities perform better in writing recount text skills than extroverted students. However, this study is still limited to writing recount text. Thus, the suggestion for future researchers is to explore other writing texts or skills, such as speaking, reading, and listening. In addition, the student's personalities in this study were classified only into introverted and extroverted. Therefore, future studies can discover other types of classification (e.g; gender, level of motivation, level of participation) as the other types of accessible classification. Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 343 REFERENCES Almusharraf, A., & Almusharraf, N. (2021). Socio-interactive practices and personality within an EFL online learning environments. Education and Information Technologies, 26(4), 3947–3966. Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Wainapel, G., & Fox, S. (2002). “On the internet no one knows I’m an introvert”: Extroversion, neuroticism, and internet interaction. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 5(2), 125– 128. Amiti, F. (2020). Synchronous and asynchronous e-learning. European Journal of Open Education and E-Learning Studies, 5(2), 60– 70. Andriyani, R. P. (2016). Comparative Study of Reading Comprehension between Students with Introvert and Students with Extrovert Personlaity at SMA N 2 Kalianda. Lampung University. Astrid, A., Rukmini, D., Fitriati, S. W., & Syafryadin. (2021). Experiencing the peer feedback activities with teacher’s intervention through face-to-face and asynchronous online interaction: The impact on students’ writing development and perceptions. Journal of Language and Education, 7(2), 64–77. Borg, M. E., Butterfield, K. M., Wood, E., Zhang, H. H., & Pinto, S. (2021). Investigating the impacts of personality on the use and perceptions of online collaborative platforms in higher education. SN Social Sciences, 1(1), 40. Boroujeni, A. A. J., Roohani, A., & Hasanimanesh, A. (2015). The impact of extroversion and introversion personality types on EFL learners’ writing ability. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(1), 212. Borup, J., West, R. E., & Graham, C. R. (2013). The influence of asynchronous video communication on learner social presence: A narrative analysis of four cases. Distance Education, 34(1), 48–63. Bower, M., Dalgarno, B., Kennedy, G. E., Lee, M. J. W., & Kenney, J. (2015). Design and implementation factors in blended synchronous learning environments: Outcomes from a cross-case analysis. Computers & Education, 86, 1–17. Brown, H. D. (2004). Language Asessement: Principles and Classroom Practices. Pearson Education. Delahunty, J. (2018). Connecting to learn, learning to connect: Thinking together in asynchronous forum discussion. Linguistics and Education, 46, 12–22. Erton, İ. (2010). Relations between personality traits, language learning styles and success in foreign language achievement. H. U. Journal of Education, 38, 115–126. Hamid, R., Sentryo, I., & Hasan, S. (2020). Online learning and its problems in the Covid-19 emergency period. Jurnal Prima Edukasia, 8(1), 86–95. Hatta, P., Aristyagama, Y. H., Yuana, R. A., & Yulisetiani, S. (2020). Active learning strategies in synchronous online learning for elementary school students. IJIE (Indonesian Journal of Informatics Education), 4(2), 86. Hazrati-Viari, A., Rad, A. T., & Torabi, S. S. (2012). The effect of personality traits on academic performance: The mediating role of academic motivation. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 32(2010), 367–371. Hermanto, Y. B., & Srimulyani, V. A. (2021). The challenges of online learning during the Covid-19 pandemic. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pengajaran, 54(1), 46–57. Hernawati, D., Nandiyanto, A. B. D., & Muhammad, N. (2021). The use of learning videos in order to increase student motivation and learning Outcomes during the Covid-19 pandemic. ASEAN Journal of Science and Engineering Education, 1(2), 77– 80. Hrastinski, S. (2008). The potential of synchronous communication to enhance participation in online discussions: A case Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 344 study of two e-learning courses. Information & Management, 45(7), 499–506. Kafryawan, W. (2020). The influence of extroversion personality towards EFL learners’ writing skills. Utamax : Journal of Ultimate Research and Trends in Education, 2(3), 94–100. Karani, E. (2007). Area of Problems in Writing Recount Text. Master’s Thesis. Universitas Palangkaraya, Kalimantan, Indonesia. Keshavarzi, A., & Amiri, H. (2016). The effect of teachers’ personality and corrective feedback on EFL learners’ motivation. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(5), 118129. Lestari, D. E., & Dewi, P. (2021). The impact of synchronous online learning on students attainment in maths. Jurnal Cendekia : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 5(2), 867– 879. Mardiah, H. (2020). The use of e-learning to teach English in the time of the Covid-19 pandemic. English Teaching and Linguistics Journal (ETLJ), 1(2), 49–55. Martin-Beltrán, M., & Chen, P. (2013). From monologue to dialogue: A case study on mediated feedback in a transnational asynchronous online writing tutorial. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 17(1), 145– 150. McNeil, L. (2014). Ecological affordance and anxiety in an oral asynchronous computer- mediated environment. Language Learning and Technology, 18(1), 142–159. Murphy, E., Rodríguez-Manzanares, M. A., & Barbour, M. (2011). Asynchronous and synchronous online teaching: Perspectives of canadian high school distance education teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology (Vol. 42, Issue 4, pp. 583–591). Mutiaraningrum, I., & Nugroho, A. (2020). Social cnstruction of knowledge in synchronous text-based discussion during English language learning. Journal on English as a Foreign Language, 10(2), 315– 336. Nezhad, S. H., Jahandar, S., & Khodabandehlou, M. (2014). The impact of extraversion vs introversion on Iranian EFL learners’ writing ability. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 4(1), 119–128. Nikmah, K., & Azimah, N. (2020). A study of synchronous and asynchronous approaches: Online Arabic learning during the Covid-19 pandemic. Alsuna: Journal of Arabic and English Language, 3(2), 115–139. Noprianto, E. (2017). Extrovert versus introvert students: What EFL learning strategy do they use?. ASIAN TEFL: Journal of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 2(2). Northey, G., Bucic, T., Chylinski, M., & Govind, R. (2015). Increasing student engagement using asynchronous learning. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(3), 171–180. Offir, B., Bezalel, R., & Barth, I. (2007). Introverts, extroverts, and achievement in a distance learning environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 21(1), 3–19. Ogbonna, C. G., Ibezim, N. E., & Obi, C. A. (2019). Synchronous versus asynchronous e-learning in teaching word processing: An experimental approach. South African Journal of Education, 39(2), 1–15. Pavalache-Ilie, M., & Cocorada, S. (2014). Interactions of students’ personality in the online learning environment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 128, 117–122. Perveen, A. (2016). Synchronous and asynchronous e-language learning: A case study of virtual University of Pakistan. Open Praxis, 8(1), 21. Pinto-Llorente, A. M., Sánchez-Gómez, M. C., García-Peñalvo, F. J., & Casillas-Martín, S. (2017). Students’ perceptions and attitudes towards asynchronous technological tools in blended-learning training to improve grammatical competence in English as a second language. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 632–643. Qanwal, S., & Ghani, M. (2019). Relationship between introversion/extroversion Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 345 personality trait and proficiency in ESL writing skills. International Journal of English Linguistics, 9(4), 107. Rahayu, D. (2020). Synchronous Zoom web conference system: An exploratory study on students’ e-learning experience. Journal of ELT Research, 5(1), 68–79. Revola, Y., Harahap, A., & Suwarno, B. (2018). The analysis of significance difference in writing achievement among the students who are introvert, extrovert, and ambivert. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 1(1), 84–96. , M. A., & Ghazali, K. (2017). Asynchronous group review of EFL writing: Interactions and text revisions. Language Learning and Technology, 21(2), 200–226. Sari, D. K. (2019). Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematis Ditinjau dari Kepribadian pada Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Rally Coach. Universitas Negeri Semarang. Shahabadi, M. M., & Uplane, M. (2015). Synchronous and asynchronous e-learning styles and academic performance of e- learners. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 129–138. Skylar, A. A. (2009). A comparison of asynchronous online text-based lectures and synchronous interactive web conferencing lectures. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(2), 69. Sofeny, D. (2017). The effectiveness of discovery learning in improving English writing skill of extroverted and introverted students. Jurnal Penelitian Humaniora, 18(1), 41. Subiyantoro, H., Warsono, Fitriati, S. W., & Faridi, A. (2021). Literacy practices in nautical asynchronous online teaching during the Covid-19 pandemic. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 574(Iset 2020), 438–441. Sumarno, W. K. (2015). The effectiveness of process genre and product genre approaches to teach writing to introvert and extrovert students (The case of the tenth year students of state senior high school 1 Wirosari-Grobogan in the academic year of 2013/2014). JELE (Journal of English Language and Education), 1(1), 93. Taraj, G. (2021). What do college learners think of synchronous learning?. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 20(4), 82–98. Tusino, Faridi, A., Saleh, M., & Fitriati, S. W. (2020). The effect of hybrid task-based language teaching and critical thinking on writing performance in Indonesia. New Educational Review, 61, 109–118. Wahyuni, S., Mujiyanto, J., Rukmini, D., Fitriati, S. W., & Handoyo, B. (2020). Integrating Edmodo into English instruction: Students’ perceptions and its contribution to autonomous learning. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 9(2), 1590–1595. Weiser, O., Blau, I., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2018). How do medium naturalness, teaching-learning interactions and Students’ personality traits affect participation in synchronous e- learning?. Internet and Higher Education (Vol. 37). Wulandari, D. S. (2017). Extrovert and Introvert Students in Speaking Ability of English Department at IAIN Palangkaraya. IAIN Palangkaraya. Yuliani, W., Anggani Linggar Bharati, D., & Warsono, W. (2019). The effectiveness of brainstorming and mind mapping to teach writing narrative text for students with extrovert and introvert personalities. English Education Journal, 9(4), 459– 466. Zainuddin, Z. (2016). The impact of personality: extrovert vs. introvert on the ability in syntax in essay writing. Studies in English Language and Education, 3(2), 162. Zaswita, H., & Ihsan, R. (2020). The impact of personality types on students’ writing ability. JPI (Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia), 9(1), 75. Zeichner, O. (2019). The relationship between extrovert/introvert attributes and feedback on students’ achievements. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 17(2), 1–17. Zydney, J. M., Warner, Z., & Angelone, L. Ajeng Hidayatul Maghdalena, et al./ English Education Journal 12 (3) (2022) 333-346 346 (2020). Learning through experience: Using design based research to redesign protocols for blended synchronous learning environments. Computers & Education, 143(September 2019), 103678.