Peer-Discussion in TOEFL Preparation Class

Nyak Mutia Ismail, Sri Wahyuni



The aim of this study was to see whether the technique of peer-discussion during the TOEFL preparation class benefits the students in increasing their score in Section Two of TOEFL Test,  Structure and Written Expression. According to Porter et al. (2001), during the process of students’ interaction with their peer(s), students have more open chances to ask conceptual questions; and as their peer(s) respond, they can understand more correctly and individually the questions. This study adopted quasi-experimental design involving  one class consisting of 24 second semester college students at Economics Faculty, Syiah Kuala University, Aceh, Indonesia. The result showed that the technique posed positive result on the students’ score in Section Two of TOEFL. The findings revealed that the Ha is accepted for the tvalue is 0.37 (df 22, α=0.05, -0.404 ≤ t ≥ 0.404 ). Also, it is significant for the sigvalue is 0.9 (sigvalue ≥ α=0.05). Hopefully, the result can contribute to the  theoretical gap in the TOEFL domain since there have not been many experimental studies about this technique used in TOEFL class. The technique indeed helps the students in overcoming the problems that they face in the Section Two of TOEFL. Besides, it can also boost their motivation in preparing for the TOEFL test.



Tujuan dari studi ini adalah untuk melihat apakah diskusi dengan teman selama kelas persiapan TOEFL dapat memberi manfaat kepada siswa dalam meningkatkan skor mereka di bagian kedua tes TOEFL, yakni Structure and Written Expression. Seperti dikatakan oleh Porter et al. (2001) bahwa selama proses interaksi dengan teman, siswa mempunyai lebih banyak kesempatan untuk menanyakan pertanyaan konseptual; dan diwaktu mereka merespon, mereka mampu untuk mengerti dengan lebih baik dan secara individu pertanyaan tersebut. Studi ini menggunakan desain quasi-experimental yang melibatkan satu kelas yang terdiri dari 24 siswa dari semester 2 di Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Syiah Kuala University, Aceh, Indonesia. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa teknik ini mempunyai hasil positif terhadap skor siswa dalam bagian kedua tes TOEFL. Hasil yang didapat menerima Ha dengan nilai t 0.37 (df 22, α=0.05, -0.404 ≤ t ≥ 0.404 ). Dan hasil ini juga signifikan dengan nilai signifikansi 0.9 (sigvalue ≥ α=0.05).  Diharapkan hasil dari studi ini dapat memberi kontribusi kepada kajian teoritis dalam karena masih belum banyak studi eksperiment tentang ini dalam pengajaran TOEFL. Teknik ini mampu membantu siswa dalam menghadapi masalah dalam TOEFL di bagian kedua. Di samping itu, teknik ini juga mampu meningkatkan motivasi siswa di dalam menghadapi tes TOEFL.


How to Cite: Ismail, N. M. Wahyuni, S. (2017). Peer-Discussion in TOEFL Preparation Class. IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 4(1), 63-70 doi:10.15408/ijee.v4i1.4837.

DOI: v4i1.4837


peer-discussion; structure and written expression; TOEFL test; language test; Diskusi dengan tema; structure and written expression; tes TOEFL; tes bahasa


Ananda, R. (2016). Problems with Section Two ITP TOEFL Test. Studies in English and Education, 3(1), 37–51.

Ismail, N. M. (2016). Using the process approach for teaching English descriptive writing. English Education Journal, 7(4), 535-548.

Kodabux, A., Hoolash, B., & Kumar. A. (2015). Peer learning strategies: Acknowledging lecturers’ concerns of the tudent Learning Assistant scheme on a new higher education campus. Journal of Peer Learning, 8(7), 59-84.

Miftah, M. Z. (2016). EFL students performance and expectation toward peer response in writing classroom. Indonesian Journal of English Education, 3(2), 208-234.

Moore, C., & Teather, S. (2013). Engaging students in peer review: Feedback as Learning. Issues in Educational Research, 23(2), 196-211.

Pisano, U., & Berger, G. (2016). Exploring peer learning to support the implementation of the 2030 agenda for SD. European Sustainable Development Network, Quarterly Report 40.

Porter, L., Lee, C. B., Simon, B., & Zingaro, D. (2011). Peer instruction: Do students really learn from peer discussion in Computing? Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, June 27-29. Darmstadt, Germany.

Postholm, M. B. (2012). Teachers' professional development: A theoretical review. Retrieved on Oct 17, 2017 from [accessed].

Rosdiana., & Ismail, N. M. (2017). Cognitive inquiry: Is English really difficult for science students? Getsempena English Education Journal, 4(1), 34-46.

Sharpe, P. J. (2008). Barron’s practice exercises for the TOEFL (6th ed.). Tangerang: Bina Rupa Aksara.

Stone, R., Cooper, S., & Cant, R. (2013). The value of peer learning in undergraduate Nursing Education: A systematic review. ISRN Nursing. Doi:

Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631–645.

Wessel, A. (2015). Peer learning strategies in the classroom. Journal on Best Teaching Practices, 2(1), 14-16.

Xia, J., Fielder, J. F., & Siragosa, L. (2013). Achieving better peer interaction in online discussion forums: A reflective practitioner case study. Issues in Educational Research, 23(1), 97-113.

Zher, N. H., Hussein, R. M. R., & Saat, R. M. (2008). Enhancing feedback via peer learning in large classrooms. Malaysian Online Journal on Educational Technology, 4(1).

Full Text: PDF

DOI: 10.15408/ijee.v4i1.4837


  • There are currently no refbacks.