Sutiman Sutiman(1), Eti Poncorini Pamungkasari(2), Suprapti Suprapti(3*)

(1) Universitas Sebelas Maret
(2) Universitas Sebelas Maret
(3) Universitas Sebelas Maret
(*) Corresponding Author


Background: The education sector is adapting in order to suppress the spread of the Corona Virus-19 through distance learning policies. Universities are required to continue to carry out teaching and learning activities using online learning method, including medical education. Medical education has the characteristics of problem-based learning, which consists of theoretical lectures, tutorials, laboratory sessions, and skills labs for clinical skills. The implementation of online lectures needs to be evaluated with measurable instruments to identify obstacles and determine the direction of improvement. The study aims to determine the gap in the quality of online lecture services and the direction of service improvement using the importance-performance analysis method.

Methods: This study was conducted by the survey method using a quantitative approach. Questionnaires were distributed to 250 students from 684 populations in the Sebelas Maret University medical study program. The results of the study were analyzed using Importance-Performance Analysis.

Results: Out of the 24 attributes, the IPA analysis showed five aspects need to be improved. Attributes in quadrant I as main priorities are responsiveness of lecturers, responsiveness of education staff, technical assistance in online learning constraints, suitability of materials, access to contact lecturers, and communication between lecturers and students.

Conclusion: According to the results of the importance-performance analysis method approach, student satisfaction will be achieved by improving services that are in quadrant I, which is the implementation of online learning.


medical education, students satisfaction, online learning, importance performance analysis.

Full Text:



  1. Universitas Indonesia. Akselerasi E-Learning dan Online Education di Tanah air. 2018
  2. Rahiem MDH. Remaining motivated despite the limitations: University students’ learning propensity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Children and youth services review. 2021; 120: 105802.
  3. Siron Y, Wibowo A, Narmaditya BS. Factors affecting the adoption of e-learning in Indonesia: Lesson from Covid-19. JOTSE: Journal of Technology and Science Education. 2020; 10(2): 282-295.
  4. Mailizar M, Burg D, Maulina S. Examining university students’ behavioural intention to use e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: An extended TAM model. Education and Information Technologies. 2021; 26(6): 7057-7077.
  5. Salzano G, Passanisi S, Pira F, Sorrenti L, La Monica G, Pajno GB, Lombardo F. Quarantine due to the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of adolescents: the crucial role of technology. Italian Journal of Pediatrics. 2021; 47(1): 1-5.
  6. Amir LR, Tanti I, Maharani DA, Wimardhani YS, Julia V, Sulijaya B, Puspitawati R. Student perspective of classroom and distance learning during COVID-19 pandemic in the undergraduate dental study program Universitas Indonesia. BMC medical education. 2020; 20(1): 1-8.
  7. Bali S, Liu MC. Students’ perceptions toward online learning and face-to-face learning courses. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, IOP Publishing. 2018; 1108: 012094.
  8. Inglet S. Two Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic: What Lessons Have We Learned? Annals of Pharmacotherapy. 2022; 56(12): 1376-1381.
  9. Stoian CE, Fărcașiu MA, Dragomir GM, Gherheș V. Transition from online to face-to-face education after COVID-19: The benefits of online education from students’ perspective. Sustainability. 2022; 14(19): 12812.
  10. Simamora RM. The Challenges of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: An essay analysis of performing arts education students. Studies in Learning and Teaching. 2020; 1(2): 86-103.
  11. Lemay DJ, Bazelais P, Doleck T. Transition to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Computers in human behavior reports. 2021; 4: 1-9.
  12. Singh V, Thurman A. How many ways can we define online learning? A systematic literature review of definitions of online learning (1988-2018). American Journal of Distance Education. 2019; 33(4): 289-306.
  13. Wei HC, Chou C. Online learning performance and satisfaction: do perceptions and readiness matter?. Distance Education. 2020; 41(1): 48-69.
  14. Bashir A, Bashir S, Rana K, Lambert P, Vernallis A. Post-COVID-19 adaptations; the shifts towards online learning, hybrid course delivery and the implications for biosciences courses in the higher education setting. In Frontiers in Education. 2021; 6: 310.
  15. Herman T, Fatimah S. The Phenomenology of Indonesian Coastal Students: Are They Ready for Online Blended Learning?. European Journal of Educational Research. 2022; 11(4): 2181-2194.
  16. Ndibalema P. Constraints of transition to online distance learning in Higher Education Institutions during COVID-19 in developing countries: A systematic review. E-Learning and Digital Media. 2022; 19(6): 595-618.
  17. Turana Y, Primatanti PA, Sukarya WS, Wiyanto M, Duarsa ABS, Wratsangka R, Kurniawan F. Impact on medical education and the medical student’s attitude, practice, mental health, after one year of the Covid-19 pandemic in Indonesia. In Frontiers in Education, Frontiers Media SA. 2022; 7.
  18. Chiu TK, Hew TK. Factors influencing peer learning and performance in MOOC asynchronous online discussion forum. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 2018; 34(4): 16-28.
  19. Cleary TJ, Konopasky A, La Rochelle JS, Neubauer BE, Durning SJ, Artino Jr AR. First-year medical students’ calibration bias and accuracy across clinical reasoning activities. Advances in Health Sciences Education. 2019; 24(4): 767-781.
  20. Zarei S, Mohammadi S. Challenges of higher education related to e-learning in developing countries during COVID-19 spread: a review of the perspectives of students, instructors, policymakers, and ICT experts. Environmental science and pollution research. 2022; 29(57): 85562-85568.
  21. São João R, Correia F, Vieira E. Importance-Performance Analysis: a management tool on health decision making. Journal of Statistics on Health Decision. 2021; 3(1): 1-5.
  22. Rasmitadila R, Widyasari W, Humaira M, Tambunan A, Rachmadtullah R, Samsudin A. Using blended learning approach (BLA) in inclusive education course: A study investigating teacher students’ perception. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET). 2020; 15(2): 72-85.
  23. Padlee SF, Sulaiman A, Anuar MM, Zulkiffli SNA, Hussin NZI, Yusof JM. Student Characteristics and Perceived Service Quality Towards Sustainability of Higher Educational Institutions. Journal of Sustainability Science and Management. 2021; 16(4): 210-235.
  24. Pazila AHM, Razakb RC. The Applications of Importance-Performance Analysis in Higher Education Institutions: A Text Mining of Literature. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. 2019; 10: 70-88.
  25. Wohlfart O, Hovemann G. Using importance–performance analysis to bridge the information gap between industry and higher education. Industry and Higher Education. 2019; 33(4): 223-227.
  26. Mujahidin E, Bahagia B, Mangunjaya FM, Wibowo R. The Impact and Strategy for Combating the Outbreak Covid-19 in Student. Jurnal Basicedu. 2021; 5(4): 2145-2155.
  27. Yasmin F, Li S, Zhang Y, Poulova P, Akbar A. Unveiling the international students’ perspective of service quality in Chinese higher education institutions. Sustainability. 2021; 13(11): 6008.
  28. Nazari-Shirkouhi S, Mousakhani S, Tavakoli M, Dalvand MR, Šaparauskas J, Antuchevičienė J. Importance-performance analysis based balanced scorecard for performance evaluation in higher education institutions: an integrated fuzzy approach. Journal of Business Economics and Management. 2020; 21(3): 647-678.
  29. Chen JA, Tu YF, Hwang GJ, Wu JF. University librarians' perspectives on an importance-performance analysis of authentication system attributes and their attitudes towards authentication log visualization. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2022; 48(4): 102528.
  30. Creswell JW, Creswell JD. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications. 2017.
  31. Phadermrod B, Crowder RM, Wills GB. Importance-performance analysis based SWOT analysis. International journal of information management. 2019; 44: 194-203.
  32. Anderson S, Hsu YC, Kinney J. Using Importance-Performance Analysis to Guide Instructional Design of Experiential Learning Activities. Online Learning. 2016; 20(4): n4.
  33. Bismala L, Manurung YH. Student Satisfaction in E-Learning along the COVID-19 Pandemic with Importance Performance Analysis. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education. 2021; 10(3): 753-759.
  34. Baticulon RE, Sy JJ, Alberto NRI, Baron MBC, Mabulay REC, Rizada LGT, Reyes JCB. Barriers to online learning in the time of COVID-19: A national survey of medical students in the Philippines. Medical science educator. 2021; 31: 615-626.
  35. Katz VS, Jordan AB, Ognyanova K. Digital inequality, faculty communication, and remote learning experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic: A survey of US undergraduates. Plos one. 2021; 16(2): e0246641.
  36. Dȩbiec P. Effective learner-centered approach for teaching an introductory digital systems course. IEEE Transactions on Education. 2017; 61(1): 38-45.
  37. König J, Jäger-Biela DJ, Glutsch N. Adapting to online teaching during COVID-19 school closure: teacher education and teacher competence effects among early career teachers in Germany. European journal of teacher education. 2020; 43(4): 608-622.


Article Metrics

Abstract views : 449 | views : 413


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2023 Sutiman Sutiman, Eti Poncorini Pamungkasari, Suprapti Suprapti

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