Persepsi Mahasiswa terhadap Instruktur Sebaya pada Praktikum Pendengaran di Laboratorium Ilmu Faal Dakultas Kedokteran Universitas Gadjah Mada

Gandes Endah Pakarti(1*), Widya Wasityastuti(2), Yayi Suryo Prabandari(3)

(*) Corresponding Author


Background:The traditional learning method applies at Physiology Laboratory of Faculty of Medicine at Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) is considered ineffective for the lecturers in managing the students. Moreover, the students perceive that their needs are not adequately accommodated by the lecturers. This downside can be resolved by an alternative learning method which provides conducive, active, creative, effective and enjoyable learning environment called peer assisted learning method. This study is aimed at discovering the students’ perceptions on peer assisted learning method and acquiring the students’ feedback and expectations on the effectiveness of peer-teaching method implementation.

Method:The study used cross-sectional design of descriptive research.

Results:From the questionnaire analysis with 150 respondents, 90 students of regular program and 60 students of international program, the result according to the frequencies of student perception were: 1) factor 1 were 45.8 % for very high category, 29.8 % for high category, 23.7 % for medium category, 0,8 % for very low category and 0 % for low category; 2) factor 2 were 45 % for high category,41.2 % for medium category,11.5 % for very high category,1.5 % for low category and 0.8 % for very low category; 3) factor 3 were 51.9 % for very high category, 31.3 % for high category,16.0 % for medium category,0.8% for very low category and 0% for low category; 4) factor 4 were 47.3 %for high category, 31.3 % for very high category,19.1 % for medium category,1.5 % for low category and 0.8% for very low category. There was no difference in perception between the students of regular and international program. Responses to open questions and FGD show a variety of students’ feedback and expectation on the peer assisted learning method.

Conclusion:The students have shown positive perception on peer assisted learning as a learning method. The peer instructors required in Implementing this model are those students with good communication skill, confirmed academic qualification and capability in managing their fellow students’ learning.


Perception, peer instructor, peer assisted learning, the Physiology Laboratory of Faculty of Medicine UGM

Full Text:



  1. Beardon T. Peer assisted learning and raising standards. In: Goodlad S, editor. Students as tutors and mentors. London: Kogan Page; 1995.
  2. Goodlad S. Students as tutors and mentors. London:Kogan Page;1995.
  3. Fisher P and Howse, J. Responding to student needs in New Zealand Polytechnic and Secondary Schools. In:Goodlad S, editor. Students as tutors and mentors. London: Kogan Page; 1995.
  4. Moody S, McCrae J. Cross year pear tutoring with law undergraduates. In: Foot HC, editor. Group and interactive learning Southampton. Computational Mechanics Publications; 1994.
  5. Djalil A. Metode penelitian. Jakarta: Universitas Terbuka; 1997.
  6. O’Donnell R. Introducing peer-assisted learning in first year accounting in Australia. Macquarie Economics Research papers 12; 2004. [cited 2008 January 15]. Available from: PALDec04.pdf
  7. Morrision K. Peer assisted study sessions: supporting quality learning & student engagement in economics & business. Synergy. 2007;24:3-7.
  8. Tariq VN. Introduction and evaluation of peer-assisted learning in first year undergraduate bioscience. Bioscience Education e-Journal; 2005. [cited 2008 January 30]. Available from:http://www.bioscience.
  9. Howman M, Bertfield D, Needleman S. The PAL project: peer-assisted learning in medicine. [Internet]. 2002. [cited 2008 Jan 30]. Available from:
  10. Aviram M, Ophir R, Raviv D, Shiloah M. Experiential learning of clinical skills by beginning nursing students: “coaching” project by fourth-year student interns. J Nurs Educ. 1998;37:228–31.
  11. Topping K. Peer-assisted learning: a practical guide for teachers. Newton, MA: Brookline Books; 2001.
  12. Congos D, Schoeps N. Does supplemental instruction really work and what is it anyway? Studies in Higher Education.1993;18:1-13.
  13. Biggs J. What do inventories of students’ learning process reallymeasure?atheoreticalreviewandclarification.British Journal of Educational Psychology. 1993;83:3-19.
  14. Cate OT, Steven D. Dimensions and psychology of peer teaching in medical education.Medical Teacher. 2007;29:546-52.
  15. Luthans F. Self-efficacy and work-related performance: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin. 1998(a); 124(2):240-61. Walgito B. Pengantar psikologi umum. Andi: Yogyakarta; 2002.
  16. Atkins N, May S, Marks-Marden D. Widening participation in subjects requiring data handling skills: the mathsaid project. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 2005;29(4):353-65.
  17. Dobbie M, Joyce S. Peer-assisted learning in accounting: a qualitative assessment. Asian Social Science. 2008;4(3):18-25.
  18. Azwar S. Validitas dan reliabilitas. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar; 1997.


Article Metrics

Abstract views : 2071 | views : 1998


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2017 Gandes Endah Pakarti, Widya Wasityastuti, Yayi Suryo Prabandari

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia (The Indonesian Journal of Medical Education) indexed by:

JPKI Stats