Investigating the Influence of Think-Pair-Share Approach toward Students’ Reading Achievement
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21512/lc.v12i2.4011Keywords:
think-pair-share approach, student achievement, reading achievementAbstract
This research aimed at investigating the influence of think-pair-share approach on the performance of ninth-grade students’ reading achievement. This classroom action research involved 35 public secondary school students in Pandowoharjo, Sleman, Special Region of Yogyakarta. They were selected by purposive sampling method. Data collection used the naturalistic observation technique and narrative reading text in the selected meetings. After a series of reading activity, a twenty-numbers multiple choice test was given to all respondents. Data were analyzed by using mixed analysis; self-reflective spiral model and descriptive statistics. Think-pair-share stimulated students’ participation and performance in reading, in which it increased the functional communication, discussion, decision taking, and conflict reduction in groups learning. The finding also showed that students’ mean of readed performance was 63,85 in the first cycle and increased to 66,00 in the second cycle. These cyclical outputs fulfill the minimal passing grade criteria. This research concludes that applying think-pair-share as a suitably alternative learning approach that helps the students develop their collaborative skills.
Plum Analytics
References
Anderson, M. G. A., & Esquierdo, J. J. (2011). Methods & strategies: Ideas and techniques to enhance your science teaching. Retrieved from http://digital.nsta.org/publication/?i=328065&article_id=2556402&view=articleBrowser&ver=html5.
Bamiro, A. O. (2015). Effects of guided discovery and thinkpair-share strategies on secondary school students’ achievement in Chemistry. SAGE Open, 5(1), 1-7. http://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014564754.
Brown, D. (2007). Teaching by principles. New York: San Francisco State University.
Chen, C. H., & Chiu, C. H. (2016). Collaboration scripts for enhancing metacognitive self-regulation and Mathematics literacy. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(2), 263-280. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9681-y.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. London: Routledge.
Conderman, G., Bresnahan, V., & Hedin, L. (2011). Promoting active involvement in todays classroom. Kappa Delta Pi, 47(4), 174–180.
Cook, E. D., & Hazelwood, A. C. (2002). An active learning strategy for the classroom－”who wants to win … some mini chips ahoy?”. Journal of Accounting Education, 20(4), 297–306.
Cragg, L., & Nation, K. (2006). Exploring written narrative in children with Poor reading comprehension. Educational Psychology, 26(1), 55–72.
Fatimah, N. (2015). Implementasi cooperative learning tipe think-pair-share dalam pembelajaran bercerita di Sekolah Menengah Pertama. Jurnal Penelitian Humaniora, 16(2), 90–98.
Friend, M., & Bursuck, W. (2009). Including students with special needs: A practical guide for classroom teachers. New York: Pearson.
Getter, K. L., & Rowe, D. B. (2008). Using simple cooperative learning techniques in a plant propagation course. NACTA Journal, 12, 39–43.
Goldsmith, W. (2013). Enhancing classroom conversation for all students. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(7), 48–52.
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Horner, S. L., & O’Connor, E. A. (2007). Helping beginning and struggling readers to develop self-regulated strategies: A reading recovery example. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 23(1), 97–109.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., & Smith, K. (2006). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Minnesota: Interaction Book Company.
Jones, R. C. (2008). The “why” of class participation: A question worth asking. College Teaching, 56(1), 59–62.
Kaddoura, M. (2013). Think-pair-share: A teaching learning strategy to enhance students’ critical thinking. Educational Research Quarterly, 36(4), 3–24.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggert, R. (1992). The action research planner. Victoria: Deakin University Press.
Kumpulainen, K., & Wray, D. (2002). Classroom interaction and social learning: From theory to practice. London: Routledge.
Lapp, D., Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2013). It’s not impossible to acquire and expand classroom language: Instruction matters. Voices from the Middle, 20(4), 7–9.
Lems, K., Miller, L. D., & Soro, T. M. (2010). Teaching reading to English language learners: Insights from linguistics. New York: The Guilford Press.
Marzano, R. J., & Pickering, D. J. (2005). Building academic vocabulary. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
McCardle, P., Scarbough, H. S., & Catts, H. W. (2002). Predicting, explaining, and preventing children’s reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research and Articles, 16(4), 230-239.
Nessel, D. D., & Graham, M. (2007). Thinking strategies for student achievement: Improving learning across the curriculum, K-12. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
Nwaubani, O. O., Ogbueghu, S. N., Adeniyi, K. D., & Eze, D. M. (2016). Effects of Think-Pair-Share (TPS) and Student-Teams-Achievement Divisions (STAD) instructional strategies on senior secondary school students’ achievement in Economics. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 10(13), 1–9.
Othman, M., & Othman, M. (2012). The proposed model of collaborative virtual learning environment for introductory programming course. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 13(1), 100–111.
Pang, E. S., Muaka, A., Bernhardt, E. B., & Kamil, M. L. (2003). Teaching reading. Bellegarde: SADAG.
Pardeshi, K. R. (2016). Improving the student performance using think-pair-share for operating system. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 30(1), 39–46.
Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. New York: Guilford.
Raba, A. A. A. (2017). The influence of think-pair-share (TPS) on improving students’ oral communication skills in EFL classrooms. Creative Education, 8(1), 12–23. http://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2017.81002.
Rapp, D. N., van den Broek, P., McMaster, K. L., Kendeou, P., & Espin, C. A. (2007). Higher-order comprehension processes in struggling readers: A perspective for research and intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 289–312.
Rentoule, D. (2016). Learning to read: Where does it happen? International Schools Journal, 35(2), 45–56.
Robertson, K. (2006). Increase student interaction with “Think-Pair-Share” and “Circle Chats”. Retrieved from http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/13346.
Sencibaugh, J. M. (2007). Meta-analysis of reading comprehension interventions for students with learning disabilities: Strategies and implications. Reading Improvement, 44(1), 6–22.
Silver, H. F., Strong, R. W., & Perini, M. J. (2007). The strategic teacher: Selecting the right research-based strategy for every lesson. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Slavich, G. M., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2012). Transformational teaching: Theoretical underpinnings, basic principles, and core methods. Educational Psychology Review, 24(4), 569–608. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9199-6.
Street, C. (2002). Expository text and middle school students: Some lessons learned. Voices from the Middle, 9(4), 33–38.
Sumekto, D. R. (2017). The effectiveness of pre-service english teachers’ collaborative genre-based writing feedback. Lingua Cultura, 11(1) 31-38. http://doi.org/ 10.21512/lc.v11i1.1595.
Sumekto, D. R., Saleh, M., Retmono., & Sofwan, A. (2015). Pre-service english teacher’s perception on collaborative genre-based writing. The Journal of Educational Development, 3(2), 125-132.
Sumekto, D. R. (2014). Higher education students’ perception about peer assessment practice (Pp. 1137-1141). Proceedings of the 61st TEFLIN International Conference 2014, “English Language Curriculum
Development: Implications for Innovations in Language Policy and Planning, Pedagogica Practices, and Teacher Professional Development”, October 7-9, 2014, Solo, Indonesia.
Therrien, W. J., Gormley, S., & Kubina, R. M. (2006). Boosting fluency and comprehension to improve reading achievement. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(3), 22–25.
Weekes, B. S., Hamilton, S., Oakhill, J. V., & Holliday, R. E. (2008). False recollection in children with reading comprehension difficulties. Cognition, 106(1), 222–232.
Westwood, P. (2008). What teachers need to know about: Reading and writing difficulties. Victoria: ACER Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License - Share Alike that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
USER RIGHTS
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC BY-SA)
