e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha

Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris (Volume 1 Tahun 2013)

THE EFFECT OF THINK PAIR SHARE TEACHING STRATEGY TO

STUDENTS’ SELF-CONFIDENCE AND SPEAKING COMPETENCY OF
THE SECOND GRADE STUDENTS OF SMPN 6 SINGARAJA

Utama, I M. Permadi. Marhaeni, A.A.I.N. Putra, I Nyoman Adi Jaya

English Education Department Post Graduate Program

Ganesha University of Education
Indonesia

e-mail: permadi.utama@pasca.undiksha.ac.id

Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of think pair share teaching strategy to
students’ self-confidence and students’ speaking competency. This study was conducted towards
students of the second grade in SMPN 6 Singaraja, in the academic year 2012/2013. There were 121
students selected as sample put in experimental and control group. The study used a post-test only
control group design. The analysis was made by using Manova facilitated by SPSS version 16.0 for
windows. The result indicated that (1) there was a significance effect of Think Pair Share on students’
self-confidence (F = 754.104 and sig = 0.000; p < 0.05). (2) there was a significance effect of Think
Pair Share on students’ speaking competency (F = 60.325 and sig = 0.000; p < 0.05). (3)
simultaneously, there was significance effect of Think Pair Share on students’ self-confidence and
students’ speaking competency ( <0.05).

Key words: Think Pair Share, students’ self-confidence, speaking competency

INTRODUCTION
English as a language for Among those four skills that must
communication is important in this be mastered by the students, speaking
globalization era where people from many skill may be the most important skill for
countries used English as a language to success in learning a language. However,
communicate with each others in daily mastering this skill is not an easy matter to
activities. In Indonesia, the government do. It can be seen from the reality that
realizes that English competency has an there are many English learners who are
impact on global development not only for still incapable to speak English in
education purpose but also for carrier Indonesia despite they have learnt the
purpose. That is why English course is language for many years. These may be
presented since early ages. The primary caused by the lack of vocabulary,
goal of teaching English as a foreign limitation to speaking practice, or
language (TEFL) in Indonesia is the psychological factor which influences the
mastery of English in addition to the use of English to communicate with each
national language. The success of English others. Speaking in a foreign language is a
learning is usually seen from learners’ complex process because of two reasons
ability to communicate with the native (Brown, 1994 in Celce-Murcia, 2001:103).
speaker of English or people who speak The first, fluent speech contains reduced
English in daily life. There are four main forms, such as contractions, vowel
skills that must be mastered to be able to reduction; so that learners who are not
communicate well in English. Those are exposed to or who do not get sufficient
listening, speaking, reading and writing. practice with reduce speech will retain
e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris (Volume 1 Tahun 2013)

their rather formal sounding full forms. The poor speaking skill. This is due to teaching
second, spoken English is almost strategy used which is teacher-centered
accomplished via interaction with at least (in nature). Teachers in the learning
one other speaker. It means that a lot of process rarely connect the material taught
exposures and practice are needed in to the real-world situations and teaching
improving speaking achievement. and learning activities rarely emphasize
Moreover, Lazaraton (2001) states the skills that the students to need to be
that language proficiency needed by able to express their ideas orally. This
students consists of four aspects: phenomenon makes the students silent in
grammatical, sociolinguistic, discourse, the classroom. They answer the question
and strategic. Grammatical competence with low voice means that they are not
includes knowledge of vocabulary, confident with their English. Widiawati and
pronunciation, spelling, and sentence Cahyono (2006:278) states that the
formation. Sociolinguistic competence students tended to keep silent in the
means knowledge to appropriately classroom because they lack self-
understand and produce language confidence, lack prior knowledge of the
according to the topic, status of topics and because of poor teacher-
participants (super ordinate or sub learner relationship. It will certainly have
ordinate), and purposes of the interaction. an impact on students’ low speaking
Discourse competence is the ability to competence. Most of English learners in
form cohesive and unified oral discourses Indonesia are passive in speaking
in different genres that are well construct activities.
and make sense. Strategic competence In speaking a foreign language,
involves the ability to communicate or there are many factors influence the
convey topics in appropriate approach learners, one of the factors is self-
according to the circumstance to match confidence. Self-confidence is a factor that
the audience’s needs and moods. influences the learners in mastering
However, speaking skill was speaking skill. In fact, self-confidence
considered difficult. It was observed from inspire the students to rich their goals.
students’ ability to communicate in Dornyei (2001) suggests that the ways to
English. The students’ difficulties in promote students’ self-confidence were
speaking were caused by a number of through providing experience of success,
factors. Wendi (2008:3) states that the encouraging the learners and reducing
students’ speaking difficulties could be anxiety. The learners have to be
caused by inside and outside factors. The enthusiastic in achieving the goal of
inside factors such as lack of self- learning a foreign language to be success
confidence and lack of motivation could in mastering well target language.
make students felt ashamed to speak, The importance of self-confidence
scared to make mistake, and felt not for learners is crucial part in leaning
confidence. Meanwhile, the outside factor speaking English. This can achieve
is related to the teacher. The teacher teaching material and activities that can
should be able to recognize the students’ give enthusiasm, brave and stimulation to
problem and create a good atmosphere in learners, when the teacher present the
teaching learning process in the classroom material and ask student to perform with
that can raise students’ enthusiasm to their ideas, they will not to monotonous
speak English. The teacher should provide and boring in learning process.
time for the students to practice their The most teachers in teaching
speaking skill because through practice speaking are the challenging task to
students can learn to express their feeling, developing learners’ oral communication
emotion, thought, and their intention skills. Although more practicing activities is
(Widiawati&Cahyono, 2006:271). the best way to help learners speak the
In relation to the problems in language fluently, competence in English
speaking, the students of SMPN 6 language speaking they may not be
Singaraja could be considered as having enough. According Dörnei (2001) states
e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris (Volume 1 Tahun 2013)

that learners need not only to be able to producing and receiving and processing
communicate but also be willing to information (Brown, 1994; Burns & Joyce,
communicate. Dornyei, Clement, and 1997). Therefore, speaking involves
Noels (1994) states self-confidence speaker and hearer for the communication
significantly contributes to the learner’s occur. In short, speaking is an action to
willingness to communicate in a foreign communicate with other for shared
language. According to them, affective thoughts, ideas and to acquire information.
factor such as motivation, personality, According Hornby (1984:256)
intergroup climate, and self-esteem states that speaking is to utter words to
underlie willingness to communicate, and express thought by words, to utter speech,
the factor of self-esteem and self- discourse, or argue, to talk, to make
confidence in communication play an mention, to tell by writing, to communicate
important role in determining the learners’ ideas in matter. Based on definition above,
willingness to communicate. speaking includes some component which
Self-confidence is how far people should be mastered, like: vocabulary,
have confidence in their judgment to their pronunciation, structures, fluency and
abilities and how can feel the "decency" to comprehension for oral communication.
succeed. Ignoffo (1999) defines that self- In learning a foreign language,
confidence means having confident in learners should be more practice into
yourself. According to Neill (2005) states interaction of the target language with
that self-confidence is a combination of others. When people do interaction
self-esteem and self-efficacy. between one and another, they construct
Lauster (1992:4) states that self- and express their ideas, perception,
confidence is an attitude or feeling feelings and intentions. In contrast, when
confident in the ability of self so that the people do not have practice speaking,
person concerned is not too anxious in his their does not acknowledge the language,
actions, feel free to do things and take they cannot grasp meaning and ideas of
responsibility for his actions, warm and the interlocutors. However, the learners
polite in interacting with others, have cannot called success in learning English
encouragement to participate and get to if they did not have interaction in
know the advantages and disadvantages. conversation between others. So, for
In addition, Coopersmith (1967) people who want to speak English well,
explains that when individuals are more besides learning the knowledge of the
active, which aims to behave, eager to run language, they need to practice it.
day today life like the individual and the Speaking skill requires two aspects in
group are likely to have high self speaking, namely linguistic and non-
confidence. Bandura (1997) defines that linguistic aspect.
self-confidence as a person's beliefs are Linguistic aspect involves
able to behave as expected and desired. comprehension, pronunciation, grammar,
Based on explanation above it can word order, vocabulary, general speed of
be concluded that self-confidence is speech, sentence length, and etc. This
feeling confident in oneself that includes aspect is the main requirement that the
good or bad judgment and can act to English learner should possess in order to
interact in accordance what is expected by speak it well. Non-linguistic aspect
others so that the individual can be involves personality dimensions, such as
accepted by others and their environment. self-esteem and extroversion. It is an
Speaking refers to an activity aspect to support learners to achieve a
involving two or more people in whom the success in acquiring speaking skill. To be
participants are both hearers and success in learning English speaking,
speakers having reacted to what they hear learners should master the linguistic
and make their contributions at high speed aspect and possess the non-linguistic
(Johnson and Morrow, 1981). In addition, aspect.
Speaking is an interactive process of There are some criteria to be
constructing meaning that involves considered in speaking. Those criteria are
e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris (Volume 1 Tahun 2013)

variety, clarity, audience and tone. Variety theory. He suggests that speaking
includes supra segmental aspect of competence is based on four dimensions
language such as emphasis, speed, or competence. These dimensions involve
volume, pauses, rise and fall of voices. grammatical competence, sociolinguistic
Clarity is that the speaker should be able competence, discourse competence, and
to give clear, complete and whole strategic competence. Learners should
information which is understandable to develop all these abilities to acquire a high
hearer. Audience and tone from informal oral level of the foreign language.
and formal audience. These factors However, she noted some addition, with
influence how people speak. the influence of the communicative
Someone’s ability to speak in approach, more important is given to
regard of criteria of good speaking is fluency, trying to achieve a balance with
called speaking competence. Of this, there accuracy. Another theory by Bygate
are many scholars agree that being (1991) proposes domains of speaking
competent in speaking a particular competence. Bygate states that there are
language does not mean to become two aspect in order achieve a
exactly like the native speaker of the communicative goal through speaking;
language. There are many scholars in EFL knowledge of the language and skill in
or ESL teaching has general constituents using this language. Knowledge of the
of a competent speaker. language involves mastery of grammar,
Speaking competence is the ability pronunciation, vocabulary, structure,
to communicate orally in clear, coherent, fluency and accuracy. Skill in using the
and persuasive language appropriate to knowledge is a matter of social, discourse
purpose, occasion, and audience. and strategic competence. Therefore,
Speaking competence is called also the Bygate divided speaking competence into
ability to perform oral communication. two aspects; production skill and
There are various theories regarding the interaction skill. Both skills are affected by
dimension of speaking competence, which two factors namely processing condition
are proposed by Swan (1984), Lazaraton and reciprocity condition. Processing
(2001), Bygate (1991), and Harmer conditions means that speech is produced
(2001). under certain pressure of time, while
Swan (1984) states that language reciprocity condition lies on fact that there
proficiency needed by students consists of should be mutual relationship between
four aspects: grammatical, sociolinguistic, interlocutors.
discourse, and strategic. Grammatical In addition, Harmer (2001) states
competence includes knowledge of that there are two distinctive features of
vocabulary, pronunciation, spelling, and elements of speaking which are necessary
sentence formation. Sociolinguistic for fluent oral production. The two aspect
competence means knowledge to are; (1) knowledge of language features
appropriately understand and produce such as grammar, vocabulary, and
language according to the topic, status of structure. (2) ability to process information
participants (super ordinate or sub on the spot (mental/social processing).
ordinate), and purposes of the interaction. The language features which are
Discourse competence is the ability to necessary for production of fluent and
form cohesive and unified oral discourses competent speaking involve the following
in different genres that are well construct features: connected speech, expressive
and make sense. Strategic competence devices, lexis and grammar, and
involves the ability to communicate or negotiation language. Connected speech
convey topics in appropriate approach includes conveying fluent connected
according to the circumstance to match speech including assimilation, elision,
the audience’s needs and moods. linking ‘r’, contraction and stress
Theory of speaking competence patterning. Expressive devices include of
also proposes by Lazaraton (2001), it is a pitch, stress, speed, volume, physical and
restatement, if not a reformation of Swan’s non-verbal means for conveying meanings
e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris (Volume 1 Tahun 2013)

(super segmental features). Lexis and (1991) and Harmer (2001) who states that
grammar include supplying common speaking competence are of two main
lexical phrases for different functions parts; the knowledge of the language and
(agreeing, disagreeing, expressing, shock, the ability to use the language.
surprise, approval, etc.) as well as using Related with the explanation
correct grammar are two domains of above, the students must be given a
judgment. The last sub domain of chance to construct their own learning,
language features is negotiation language. and they must be given a lot of exposure
Negotiation language means to ask for to the target language uses and exercise
clarification and to show the structure of in using it in real life situation (Burns and
what we are saying which also involves Joyce, 1997:54). Cooperative learning is
coherence of the ideas (Harmer 2001, approach can be implemented by the
269-270). teacher.
Mental/social processing is a factor Killen (1996:78) states that
in order to produce a successful language cooperative learning is a type of group
interaction. Mental/social processing work in which two or more students
includes three features language interact with the common goal of
processing, interacting with others and on mastering specific academic material. In
the spot information processing. (a) addition, Killen (1996:80) states that
Language processing; processing the cooperative learning gives several
language in the head and putting it into advantages for students. Cooperative
coherent order, which requires the need learning encourages students to verbalize
for comprehensibility and convey of their ideas and to compare them with
meaning (retrieval of words and phrases ideas and feeling of other students. This
from memory, assembling them into approach also improves students’ self
syntactically and proportionally appropriate esteem, positive interpersonal relations
sequences). (b) Interacting with others; with others students, motivation to gain
including listening, understanding of how good mark, and positive attitudes towards
the other participants are feeling, a schools. Richard and Rodgers (2001:193)
knowledge of how linguistically to take states that one of language teaching goals
turns or allow others to do so. (c) On the by using cooperative learning is to
spot information processing; for example enhance learner motivation and to reduce
processing the information the listener is learner stress and to create a positive
told the moment he/she get it (Harmer, affective and classroom climate. Herrel
2001, 271). and Jordan (2004:101) also states that
From theories above, it can be cooperative learning provide an
concluded that there are two poles of opportunity for communication, planning,
theories. First Lazaraton (2001) and Swan research, oral, and visual presentation in
(1984) proposes four dimensions of the classroom. Cooperative learning
competence in speaking; grammatical, improves students’ self esteem, positive
sociolinguistic, discourse and strategic. interpersonal relations with others
Those four dimensions of competence, if students, motivation, positive attitudes in
observed from the angle of skill, are learning activity.
divided into two parts. The first part is By seeing the advantages of
knowledge of language and the second cooperative learning, this study applied
part is how to use the knowledge of Think Pair Share teaching strategy as
language. The knowledge of language cooperative learning in teaching speaking
involving grammatical and sociolinguistic in experimental class. Moreover, Think
competence, while discourse and strategic Pair Share becomes a strategy to facilitate
competence deal with how to use the students to increase the students’ self-
knowledge of language is practically used confidence in speaking English. Frank
in interaction with others. This two main Lyman (1981) purposes this strategy in
parts of competence are in accordance order to solve or at least to minimize
with second pole proposed by Bygate students’ problems. Think Pair Share
e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris (Volume 1 Tahun 2013)

teaching strategy is a strategy to accustom This research is experimental. The

students practice in speaking by their experimental group was taught with think
ideas. Think Pair Share strategy can guide pair share teaching strategies and the
the students to their prior knowledge control group was taught with conventional
background and make the students active teaching strategies.
in participating classroom discussion. In selecting the sample, the
The importance of self-confidence researcher used cluster random sampling
for learners is crucial part in leaning technique by lottery to classes. In this
speaking English. This can achieve research, the researcher only uses
teaching material and activities that can random sampling technique toward
give enthusiasm, brave and stimulation to classes.
learners, when the teacher present the There were four classes to be
material and ask student to perform with taken as sample which done by lottery
their ideas, they will not to monotonous consists of 8 B8 and 8 B9 as experimental
and boring in learning process. Dornyei group and 8 B4 and 8 B7 as control group.
(2001) suggests that the ways to promote There were 121 students to be used as
students’ self-confidence were through the samples consist of 59 students for
providing experience of success, experimental group treated by think pair
encouraging the learners and reducing share teaching strategy and 62 students
anxiety. The learners have to enthusiasm for control group treated by conventional
achieved the goal of learning a foreign teaching strategy.
language to success in mastery a target The design study based on the
language well. Students having to high variables involved and influences each
self-confidence will maximize the feedback other. Data of the variables involved in this
to improve their speaking competency and study is the result of the treatment of
reach their excellent goal in learning. samples that have been applied. Data
In short, there are two factors to have been obtained then analyzed by
influence towards speaking competency. using Manova.
Those are the internal factor like self- Data collection of instrument in this
confidence and external factor like study using two instruments, namely: (1)
teaching strategy. Therefore in this questionnaire to determine the level of
research, speaking strategy of cooperative students’ self-confidence, (2) speaking test
learning by using Think Pair Share as to determine students’ speaking
external factor and self-confidence as competency.
internal factor are investigated. Normality data test by using
Specifically, this research tried to find: (1) Shapiro-Wilk test facilitated by SPSS 16.0
significance effect of Think Pair Share on for windows and homogeneity test is a test
students’ self-confidence, (2) significance of homogeneity variances. Then
effect of Think Pair Share on students’ hypothesis testing by using Manova with
speaking competency, (3) significance facilitated by SPSS 16.0 for windows.
effect of Think Pair Share on students’
self-confidence and students’ speaking FINDING AND DISCUSSION
competency. Details of data on students’ Self-
Confidence and Speaking Competency
METHOD obtained general description of the data
Population in this research is the can be seen in table 1.
students in second grade in SMPN 6
Singaraja in academic year 2012/2013.

Table 1. Analysis Result of MANOVA test

Type III Sum
Source Dependent Variable of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
a
Corrected Self-confidence 40291.477 1 40291.477 754.104 .000
e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris (Volume 1 Tahun 2013)

Model Speaking
560.373b 1 560.373 60.325 .000
Competency
Intercept Self-confidence 1967647.873 1 1967647.873 3.683E4 .000
Speaking
55853.100 1 55853.100 6.013E3 .000
Competency
Strategy Self-confidence 40291.477 1 40291.477 754.104 .000
Speaking
560.373 1 560.373 60.325 .000
Competency
Error Self-confidence 6358.127 119 53.430
Speaking
1105.413 119 9.289
Competency
Total Self-confidence 2001562.000 121
Speaking
57276.000 121
Competency
Corrected Self-confidence 46649.603 120
Total Speaking
1665.785 120
Competency

Based on data analysis, the and skills they already have to discover
followings are the findings of the study. new knowledge. Conjecture, intuition, and
First, the results of hypothesis 1 by using trial and error are encouraged teachers as
manova test generating significant score guides that can help students to use ideas,
(sig.) < 0.050 at significant level is 0.050 concepts, and skills they already have to
which means that the null hypothesis (Ho) create new knowledge. Students can
is rejected and the alternative hypothesis express freely in accordance with their
(Ha) states that, " There is a significant capabilities in solving a problem. So that
effect of Think Pair Share on students’’ what students are learning not merely rote,
self-confidence of the second grade but they really understand by
students in SMPN 6 Singaraja.", is understanding learning that has passed.
accepted. Further test of the hypothesis 1 All this will certainly have an impact on the
shows that students’ self-confidence ability to believe in own self and better
following Think Pair Share strategy better learning competencies. This research
than students who take the Conventional seems with previous research that has
strategy. Analysis result on students’ self- been done by Tristiantari (2013) which
confidence show that there is a significant examines the "The Effect of Cooperative
difference effect of Think Pair Share Learning Model Implementation of TPS
strategy on students’ self-confidence and Type (Think Pair Share) to Speaking
conventional strategy on students’ self- Ability and Creative Thinking Ability". This
confidence in SMPN 6 Singaraja. Mean research shows that there are differences
score ( ) of the students’ self-confidence in the students’ speaking ability and
who taught by using Think Pair Share creative thinking ability who take the Think
strategy is in good qualifications with Pair Share than students who take
scores 145.81 and a standard deviation Conventional. In addition, research
(Sd) is 6.49. While the mean score ( ) of conducted by Hedriyanto (2012) with the
the students’ self-confidence who take the title "The Effect of Cooperative Learning
Conventional strategy is in good Approach Think-Pair-Share (CTPS) and
qualifications with scores 109.31 and a Achievement Motivation to Speaking
standard deviation (Sd) is 8.01. Ability”. It shows that students speaking
Active students in the Think Pair ability of whom take the Think Pair Share
Share strategy use the ideas, concepts is higher than speaking ability of who take
e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris (Volume 1 Tahun 2013)

Conventional. Furthermore, research and Conventional. Furthermore, research

conducted by Kusrini (2012) with the title from Glomo (2012), it shows that the
“Teaching Speaking For Senior High students who were subjected to the Think
School Students Using Cooperative Pair Share had enhanced performance in
Leaning Think Pair Share”. This result the English Communication Skills course.
shows that students are motivated to do Third, results test of hypothesis 3
speaking activity through Think Pair which analyzed with manova using the
Share. price of significant score (sig.) < 0.050 for
Second, results of hypothesis 2 by Pillai's Trace, Wilks' Lambda, Hotelling's
using manova test generating significant Trace, and Roy's Largest Root (sig. =
score (sig.) < 0.050 at significant level is 0.000). This case means the null
0.050 which means that the null hypothesis (Ho) is rejected and
hypothesis (Ho) is rejected and the hypothesis alternate (Ha) which stating,
alternative hypothesis (Ha) states that, "simultaneously, there is a significant
"there is a significant effect of Think Pair effect of Think Pair Share teaching
Share on students’ speaking competency strategy on students’ self-confidence and
of the second grade students in SMPN 6 students’ speaking competency of second
Singaraja.", is accepted. Mean score ( ) grade students in SMPN 6 Singaraja" is
of the students’ speaking competency who accepted. Further test of the hypothesis
take the Think Pair Share strategy is in shows that students self-confidence and
good qualifications with scores 23.64 and students’ speaking competence who
a standard deviation (Sd) is 3.08. While taught by using Think Pair Share strategy
the mean score ( ) of the students’ better than Conventional strategy.
speaking competency who take the Differences in self-confidence and
Conventional strategy is in good speaking competency that occur
qualifications with scores 19.34 and a simultaneously, Think Pair Share strategy
standard deviation (Sd) is 3.01. Further provides the opportunity for students to
test of the hypothesis 2 shows that speak spontaneously so that it is able to
students’ speaking competence who train their courage and self-confidence
taught by using Think Pair Share strategy when speaking. Thus students directly are
better than Conventional strategy. invited to be active in the learning activities
In Think Pair Share strategy in the classroom. In addition, there was no
provides the opportunity for students to intervention from the teacher when they
bring up and develop aspects that support spoke very supportive of the students in
the speaking skill. Meanwhile, teachers in building their self-confidence. Topic also is
learning only serve as a motivator and a very important factor in students’
facilitator. Students are more active in attracting and enthusiasm. Students try to
constructing understanding. So, what is use all the senses, knowledge, and skills
gained is not easily forgotten because of possessed to gather information about the
his own experience and close to the daily topic that makes them become
lives of students. So that, if students know enthusiastic. The students are given the
the purpose of the study they are doing opportunity to exchange ideas with their
and know the benefits in their everyday friends to obtain an idea, to explore
understanding of the construction will be extensively, to try and to find out about the
able to run well. This result is related with topics covered. So that, they are interest
research conducted by Tristiantari (2013), and enthusiasm be very high to be able to
which shows that there are differences in find the answers about the topics covered.
the students’ speaking ability who take the Think Pair Share is a strategy designed to
Think Pair Share than students who take provide the students with “problem of
Conventional. In addition, research from though” on given topic, which enabling
Hedriyanto (2012), it shows that there are them to formulate individual ideas and
differences between the students speaking share this idea. Think Pair Share
ability of who take the Think Pair Share incorporates the benefits of discussion.
Howe (1992) describes pair talk as a “high
e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris (Volume 1 Tahun 2013)

intensity talk arena” due to the Pillai's Trace, Wilks's Lambda, Hotelling's
responsibility placed on each person to Trace, and Roy's Largest Root of Think
become engaged directly in speaking and Pair Share strategy implementation is less
listening. In addition, Frank Lyman (1981) than 0.05. It means that all score of Pillai's
purposed Think Pair Share teaching Trace, Wilks's Lambda, Hotelling's Trace,
strategy in order to solve or at least to and Roy's Largest Root is significant.
minimize students’ problems and this Thus, simultaneously, there is effect of
strategy to accustom students practice in Think Pair Share strategy on students’
speaking by their ideas. self-confidence and students’ speaking
The use of Think Pair Share competency of second grade students in
strategy in this study seems to affect three SMPN 6 Singaraja.
aspects of the students, that is; affective, Based on the research findings
cognitive, and psychomotor that which of and discussion of the study above, it can
the three aspects of it can be seen from be proposed some suggestions to improve
the involvement of the student in class and the quality of learning in speaking, such
student outcomes. This proves there are as; (1) The results showed that students
significant influences of Think Pair Share who treated by Think Pair Share teaching
strategy than Conventional strategy. strategy had higher self-confidence
significantly than students who studied by
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS conventional teaching strategy. Therefore,
The conclusions that can be drawn educators should use Think Pair Share
from the results of this study are as teaching strategy in learning speaking to
follows: (1) There is a significant effect in improve the students’ self-confidence. (2)
mean score of Think Pair Share strategy The results showed that students who
on students’ self-confidence and studied by Think Pair Share teaching
Conventional strategy on students’ self- strategy had higher speaking competency
confidence, Think Pair Share strategy on significantly than students who studied by
students’ self-confidence with a mean is conventional teaching strategy. Therefore,
145.81 and standard deviation is 6.49 and educators should use Think Pair Share
conventional strategy on students’ self- teaching strategy in learning speaking to
confidence with mean is 109.31 and improve the students’ speaking
standard deviation is 8.01. Mean of competency. (3) The limited time and
students’ self-confidence treated by Think subject matter used in this study, it is
Pair Share strategy higher than group of suggested that other researchers to carry
students treated by Conventional strategy. out similar research with the selection of a
(2) There is a significant effect in mean different subject and longer time to obtain
score of Think Pair Share strategy on more conclusive results about Think Pair
students’ speaking competency and Share teaching strategy on students’ self-
Conventional strategy on students’ confidence and students' speaking
speaking competency, Think Pair Share competency. (4) This study focused on
strategy on students’ speaking investigating the effect of Think Pair Share
competency with mean is 23.64 and teaching strategy on students’ self-
standard deviation is 3.08 and confidence and students’ speaking
conventional strategy on students’ competency, the researcher suggest to
speaking competency with mean is 19.34 further research to be conducted related to
and standard deviation is 3.01. Mean of Think Pair Share teaching strategy in
students’ self-confidence treated by Think learning effect to other variables such as
Pair Share strategy higher than students the ability to thinking.
group treated by conventional teaching
strategy. (3) There is a significant effect of REFERENCES
Think Pair Share strategy on students' Brown, H.D. 1994. "Teaching by
self-confidence and students’ speaking principles: an interactive approach
competency of the second grade students to language pedagogy."
in SMPN 6 Singaraja. With F score for Englewood.
e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris (Volume 1 Tahun 2013)

Cambridge: Cambridge University

Burns, A. & Joyce, H. 1997. Focus on Press.
Speaking. Sydney: Macquarie
University. Swan, M. (1984). Basic English Usage,
OUP, Oxford.
Cl ment, R, Z. Dörnyei and K. A. Noels.
1994. Motivation, self-confidence Wendi, Wijarwadi. 2008. The
and group cohesion in the foreign Effectiveness of Contextual
language classroom. Language Teaching and Learning in Teaching
Speaking. Unpublished Thesis of
Learning, 44, 417-448.
Syarif Hidayahtulah Islamic
University Jakarta.
Dörnyei, Z. 2001. Teaching and
Researching Motivation. Harlow:
Widiawati, U. & Cahyono, B. Y. 2006. The
Longman.
Teaching of EFL Speaking in the
Indonesian Context: The State of
Herrell, Adrienne and Michael Jordan.
Art. Language Journal, Year
2004. Fifty Strategies for Teaching
32,No.2 retrieved at
English Language Learners. New
http://languagejournal.speakingefl
Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
on November 14th , 2012.
Hornby, A. S. 1984. Oxford Advanced
Learners’ Dictionary of Current
English. Walton Street: Oxford
University Press.

Johnson, K. and K. Morrow, (eds) (1981).

Communication in the Classroom.
London: Longman.

Killen, Roy. 1996. Effective Teaching

Strategies. Wentworth: Australian
Print Group.

Lazaraton, Anne. 2001. Teaching Oral

Skills, in Marianne Celce-Murcia
(ed) Teaching English as a Second
Foreign Language. Boston: Heinle
and Heinle.

Lyman, F. T. 1981. The responsive

classroom discussion: The
inclusion of all students. In A.
Anderson (Ed.), Mainstreaming
Digest (pp. 109-113). Collage Park:
University of Maryland Press.

Murcia, Celce, M. 2001. Teaching English

as Foreign Language. New York:
Heinle&Heinle Ltd.

Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2001).

Approaches and methods in
language Teaching (2nd ed.).