Task-Based Learning Implementation through Google Classroom in Senior High School

The pandemic forces teachers to adjust their teaching methods to the online learning, which includes the implementation of Task-Based Learning. The online implementation would be different from the one in the conventional learning due to the use of learning platform. Therefore, this study was conducted to (1) analyse the implementation of Task-Based Learning through Google Classroom and (2) analyse the problems faced by the teacher in the implementation. This study took one English teacher along with 39 students as the subjects of the study. This study is descriptive qualitative study. The data collected through observation and interviews. The analysis was conducted through three stages


INTRODUCTION
Task-Based Learning is recommended to be used by EFL teachers because of its student-centered characteristic, which makes it attractive and practical (Paul, 2006;Sadiku, 2015;Weiwei et al., 2021). Task-Based learning itself is defined as a teaching model which provides the students with the opportunity to communicate within the target language by doing tasks (Budi & Nurjayanti, 2013;Sholeh, 2022). Task-Based Learning exposes the students to authentic language use across practical activities which they can find and do in their daily activities. In line with the statement, of previous study that states the Task-Based Learning model is characterized by its real-world language use as the students are asked to complete tasks that they are exposed to in their daily life (Kang & Kim, 2021;Swan, 2005). Examples of tasks that can be given to the students in the context of Task-Based Learning, which include writing a letter, doing interviews, answering questions, reporting or telling an event, and talking to someone over the phone (Hismanoglu & Hismanoglu, 2011;Sholeh, 2022).
These characteristics are the ones that make the Task-Based Learning model becomes relevant to the guidance of Curriculum 2013. In implementing Task-based Learning, several stages must be conducted by the teachers. There are three primary cycles in implementing Task-Based Learning, which include Pre-Task, Task, and Language Focus Cycles (Baralt, 2017;Sulastri & Marlina, 2017). In the Pre-Task Cycle, the teachers need to give the students an apperception about the topics they are going to learn and detailed, clear guidance and instructions on the tasks they are going to do. As the name, the Pre-Task is conducted as the initial step at the beginning of the lesson. In order to help the students, grasp what the tasks are, the teachers can also provide videos or texts as examples of how the tasks should be completed. Next, the Task Cycle is conducted through three stages: Task, Planning, and Report. In the Task stage, the students do the task independently, with the teachers monitoring them. In the Planning stage, the students prepare the reports that they will present to the whole class, either orally or in writing. Then, in the report stage, they present their reports to the whole class. Finally, at the Language Focus Cycle, the teachers conduct Analysis and Practice by respectively analysing the students' report and practicing new words.
However, since the beginning of 2020, the teaching and learning process across the world, including Indonesia, has been forcefully shifted from traditional, face-to-face learning to online learning. This is all due to the strike of the COVID-19 pandemic (Allo, 2020; Lei & Medwell, 2021;Schultz & DeMers, 2020). As a result, teachers are expected to adapt their teaching methods to the online teaching and learning process with the help of an online learning platform. All of these changes certainly affect the implementation of the learning methods and models used by the teachers regarding the Curriculum 2013, including the implementation of Task-Based Learning. Implementing a Task-based Learning model in a face-to-face teaching and learning process is certainly different from implementing it in an online situation (Baralt, 2017;Hima et al., 2021). More effort is needed in the online learning process since teachers need to manage both the interaction and the students' engagement as monitoring is harder to be done (Kandari, 2020;Stickler et al., 2020). As a result, the implementation of Task-based Learning in online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic is different from the conventional, face-to-face one. Regarding this situation, taskbased Learning can still be conducted online through some adjustments.
Previous study suggests that the online implementation is basically similar to the one implemented in conventional, face-to-face teaching (Baralt, 2017;Sholeh et al., 2021). The adjustments are made in the time of the cycle and the platform used in assisting the learning. The Pre-Task Cycle, in form of video as a model and the task instructions, can be given before the online meeting or the task's deadline. Then, in the Task Cycle, the students do the Task and Planning stages on their own at home. As for the Report stage, the students can be asked to present their report through a presentation in real-time video conference or submit it in videos. Finally, for both the Analysis and Practice stages in the Language Focus Cycle, the teachers can conduct it through the video conference after the students' presentation or through the comments feature in the platform used in the submission process.
All of the schools from every level in Indonesia were running the teaching and learning process online in order to avoid the further spread of the virus. One of the schools was SMAS Candimas Pancasari, a senior high school in Buleleng Regency, Bali. In order to conduct the learning process, the English teachers at SMAS Candimas Pancasari used Google Classroom as the online learning platform. The use of Google Classroom as the online learning platform is understandable as it is an online educational platform specifically designed to facilitate the online learning process to be as effective and interactive as the faceto-face one with the help of the features (Harjanto & Sumarni, 2019;Laili & Muflihah, 2020;Niqotaini, 2021). Furthermore, Google Classroom also offers several advantages to assist the teaching and learning process, such as quick and easy setting, convenient classroom management, collaboration promotion, flexibility, centralized data storage, and safety and security (Harjanto & Sumarni, 2019;Safira et al., 2021;Setiadi et al., 2021). Pre-observation was conducted in SMAS Candimas Pancasari to observe how the English teachers implement Task-Based Learning. The results of the pre-observation indicated that the teachers still followed the pre-task cycle, task cycle, and language focus cycle, which were the three cycles of Task-based Learning.
However, the details of the implementation were still yet to be discovered. Several studies have investigated the implementation or effect of Task-based Learning in conventional, face-to-face learning or the effects and the use of Google Classroom. Relating to the effects of Task-based Learning on the students, several studies have been conducted indicated that the implementation of Task-based Learning in teaching English has positive effects on the students' communicative competence (Carolina & Campo, 2016;Kandari, 2020). On the other hand, related to the use of Google Classroom, studies by previous research showed that Google Classroom could assist the implementation of Problem-based Learning and students actively participated in the learning process (Hikmawati & Suryaningsih, 2020). A study by other previous study also revealed that the use of Google Classroom helped improve the average achievement of students and was capable of operating effectively and assisting the lecturers and students (Syakur, 2020).
Therefore, since there is still inadequate information regarding the implementation of Task-based Learning through Google classroom, the study's novelty hinges on the procedure of implementing Task-based Learning through Google Classroom. Further, considering the importance of investigating how Task-based Learning was implemented through Google Classroom during the COVID-19 pandemic for the sake of better implementation in the future, this study becomes essential to be conducted. Therefore, this study was conducted in order to analyse the implementation of Task-based Learning through Google Classroom at SMAS Candimas Pancasari during the COVID-19 pandemic and to analyse the problems faced by the teacher at SMAS Candimas Pancasari in implementing Task-Based Learning in online class. .

METHODS
This study was a descriptive qualitative study that was conducted at SMAS Candimas Pancasari and took an English teacher along with 39 students as the subjects of this study. The data were collected through observation and interviews. Observation is an activity of observing a phenomenon or a particular behaviour in the natural environment which involves a systematic recording. Three observations were conducted in the span of 3 weeks. Then, interviews were conducted to provide detailed information and enable the interviewees to express their thoughts and feelings. The interviews were also conducted to confirm and provide more details about the implementation and the problems faced by the teachers during the implementation (Lune, H. & Berg, 2017;Terras, 2006). The collected data were then analysed by using the data analysis procedure. The analysis was conducted through three stages, which were data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing or interpretation (M. B. Miles & Huberman, 1994;Matthew B. Miles et al., 2014). In addition, to ensure the validity of the findings of this study, the researcher conducted triangulation in the form of triangulation of method as the data were collected through different methods of data collection.

Results
The findings indicated that the teacher at SMAS Candimas Pancasari followed the three cycles in implementing Task-Based Learning through Google Classroom, which included pre-task cycle, task cycle, and language focus cycle. Besides that, in order to prepare student to use Google Classroom, the teacher had conducted an orientation on the use of Google Classroom. This was conducted at the very beginning of the online learning. Therefore, both the teacher and students had already understood how to operate Google Classroom and use it to facilitate the learning process. Through the interview, the teacher explained that Google Classroom was chosen as the platform to facilitate the learning process as it was simple and easy to use, allowing all students to access it. The details of the implementation of Task-Based Learning through Google Classroom can be seen on Table 1.  Table 1, it can be seen that before conducting the three cycles, the teacher conducted a preparation in order to prepare the learning material for the task and give some instructions to the students to fill in the presence list on Google Form. In addition, the teacher also implemented Task-Based Learning through Google Classroom synchronously and asynchronously. The results also indicated that there were three problems that were faced by the teacher during the implementation. They were (1) the big number of students in a class, (2) time limitation, and (3) difficulty in preparing the learning materials.

Discussion
The teacher's implementation of Task-Based Learning following the three cycles was in line with the theory stated by previous researcher who suggest the implementation of the three cycles in Task-Based Learning (Baralt, 2017;Sulastri & Marlina, 2017). Moreover, Google Classroom was chosen as the platform to facilitate the learning process as the teacher found it to be easy to use and suitable for the implementation of Task-Based Learning model. This is in line with the findings of the empirical studies conducted by previous research, who found Google Classroom to be helpful during the online learning, as it can assist the learning process effectively, be perceived positively by the students, and make the communication and interaction, instructional delivery, and assignment submission easier and more straightforward (Salam, 2020;Syakur, 2020).
Besides that, the findings also showed that the teacher implemented the learning model both synchronously and asynchronously. Asynchronous learning was conducted due to large number of students and the limited time for the synchronous one. The combination of the synchronous and asynchronous learning during the online learning can be a good practice to compensate for the sudden shift from the face-to-face meeting (Fabriz et al., 2021;Pratiwi et al., 2021). It is because synchronous learning offers real-time interpersonal communication that allows students to receive immediate feedback and use natural language, which can further diminish the difference between the online and face-to-face learning (Blau et al., 2017;Papadima-Sophocleous & Loizides, 2016). The teacher implemented asynchronous learning as large enrolments in online class really can reduce the chance of effective online interactions (Fabriz et al., 2021;Ogbonna et al., 2019;Papadima-Sophocleous & Loizides, 2016).
Similarly, previous study also suggest that synchronous learning can be time consuming as it tries to build active real-time interaction to replace the face-to-face one (Cahyani et al., 2021). For the asynchronous Task cycle, the teacher assigned students to do a task in the form of a task on making a brochure, leaflet, or pamphlet and doing an analysis on it. The deadline for the task was three days. This implementation involved individual student in the task, planning, and report stages, whereas the report was submitted in the form of written one. In this asynchronous implementation, the role of the teacher in giving recommendations still existed. However, the feedback and recommendation could not be given immediately in real time (Panjaitan et al., 2022;Sholeh et al., 2021). Finally, the language focus cycle, which consisted of two stages, which were analysis and practice, was synchronously conducted through task repetition by answering questions related to the lesson and asynchronously through answering quizzes (Christiana, 2021;Gideon & Rahmansyah, 2021;Melvina Chung Hui Ching, 2021).
In the synchronous Language Focus cycle, the teacher conducted a discussion on Google Classroom with the students as a part of the analysis stage, whereas the teacher reviewed the correct answers for the discussion throughout the meeting, as well as pointed out at the general error that the students made. Teacher needs to review new words and forms/errors that came up in the online meeting simultaneously. Other related studies also suggest that the analysis stage in Language Focus cycle allows a closer study of some of the specific features, such as unfamiliar words, structure, and pronunciation that naturally occur in the Task cycle (Adiantika & Purnomo, 2018;Angelina, 2018;Azizah et al., 2021;Saifudin et al., 2020).
Relating to the problems during the implementation which were related to (1) the big number of students in a class, (2) time limitation, and (3) difficulty in preparing the learning materials, the results indicated that all of these problems were closely related. It was because the large number of the students made the time limitation problem became worse as the learning process could not run effectively, and the teacher needed to adjust the learning materials in order to fit in and allow all of the students to participate. Furthermore, there was a similarity between the teacher's problem regarding the difficulty in preparing the materials in this study, with the one found in the study by previous researcher. The study found that teacher also felt that the implementation of Task-Based Learning was time-consuming in terms of the preparation (Hima et al., 2021). It was just as how this study found that the teacher at SMAS Candimas Pancasari faced difficulty in preparing the right media and tools that must be adapted to the learning activities.
Likewise, the study by other previous study also pointed out at the long time the teachers need to take in preparing materials for online learning (Cahyani et al., 2021;Lasamahu et al., 2021;Wei & Chou, 2020). This difficulty is quite reasonable. Synchronous learning can be time consuming, since it tries to build active, real-time interaction to replace the face-to-face one. Due to these problems, it was already right for the teacher to implement the Task-Based learning both synchronously and asynchronously. However, even though the implementation cycles and stages had followed the findings indicated a difference in the implementation. The difference lies on how the synchronous and asynchronous learnings were being implemented. Pre-Task cycle conducted asynchronously before the synchronous learning takes place. In the asynchronous Pre-Task, teachers give detailed and clear guidance and instructions about the topic and the students' tasks, conduct a discussion, as well as provide picture or video related to the task to further help the students understand the task. However, the teacher conducted the Pre-Task cycle synchronously.
Then, in the first and the second stage of the task cycle, which are the task and the planning stages, recommended also suggest for them to be asynchronous. Thus, only the report stage suggested to be conducted synchronously. This is done in order to maximize the discussion and interaction during the synchronous learning (Baralt, 2017;Hismanoglu & Hismanoglu, 2011). Moreover, the analysis and practice stages can also be conducted fully in order to help the students deal with unfamiliar words and phrases and practice them with the teacher The implication of this research is that teachers and students gain knowledge from the application of Task-Based Learning through Google Classroom and the problems faced by teachers in implementation which is expected to be a reference for teachers in implementing task based learning in the learning process. The limitation of this study lies in the scope of the study which only involved subjects in one high school. So it is hoped that the next research will be able to broaden and deepen topics related to Task-Based Learning.

CONCLUSION
The results indicated that the teacher at SMAS Candimas Pancasari implemented Task-Based Learning through Google Classroom by following the correct three cycles and stages, including (1) the pre-task cycle, (2) task cycle with task, planning, and report stages, and (3) language focus cycle with analysis and practice stages. Several features on Google Classroom as well as other Google platforms, such as Google Drive, Google Form, and Google Jamboard were used to facilitate the learning process. The Task-Based Learning model was implemented synchronously and asynchronously, in which the implementation was quite similar. However, it was found that there was a difference in the implementation of the synchronous and asynchronous learning between the teacher's implementation with the ones that were suggested. Furthermore, the teacher faced three main problems related to the large number of students in a class, time limitation, and difficulty in preparing learning materials. As the results indicated a difference in the teacher's implementation with the suggested one, the difference could be one of the contributing factors to the problems faced by the teacher.