THE EFFECT OF THINK-PAIR-SHARE STRATEGY ON ...repository.uinjambi.ac.id/997/1/TE.130557_RINI SETIA...

THE EFFECT OF THINK-PAIR-SHARE STRATEGY

ON STUDENTS’ SPEAKING PERFORMANCE

AT SECOND GRADE OF JAUHARUL ISLAM

ISLAMIC JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL

MUARO JAMBI

A THESIS

By

RINI SETIA WATI

STUDENT NUMBER TE.130557

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

TARBIYAH SCIENCE AND TEACHER TRAINING FACULTY

THE STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY

SULTHAN THAHA SAIFUDDIN

JAMBI

2018

THE EFFECT OF THINK-PAIR-SHARE STRATEGY

ON STUDENTS’ SPEAKING PERFORMANCE

AT SECOND GRADE OF JAUHARUL ISLAM

ISLAMIC JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL

MUARO JAMBI

THESIS

Submitted as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Gain an

Undergraduate Degree (S.1) in English Education

By

RINI SETIA WATI

STUDENT NUMBER TE.130557

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

TARBIYAH SCIENCE AND TEACHER TRAINING FACULTY

THE STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY

SULTHAN THAHA SAIFUDDIN

JAMBI

2018

MOTTO

Meaning:

O you who believe! Be careful of (Your duty to) Allah and speak the right word.

(QS. Al-Ahzab: 70)

Artinya :

Hai orang-orang yang beriman, bertakwalah kamu kepada Allah dan Katakanlah

Perkataan yang benar. (QS. Al-Ahzab:70)

Vvi

DEDICATION

Alhamdulillahirobbil’alamin, I can finishing my thesis. I cannot finishing this

thesis without all support, affection and the power to be success without you are:

Thanks for Allah S.W.T

My parents, My beloved father Anto who always give me everlasting love,

guidance, motivation and praying and My beloved mother Murni who have

educated, attitude and affection. I believed without your support and your pray, I

cannot be success.

My youngest brother Muhammad Arif Kurniawan and My youngest sister Annisa

Wulandari That always give me support.

My Future Husband Muhammad Supriyadi, S.Pd who always give me

everlasting love guidance, motivation and praying.

Thanks to The big Family of Nurul Ihsan Islamic Boarding School (Ustadzh

Parmoko, M.Pd and all of the teachers there. Thanks for your kindness May Allah

always belss you all Aamiin…

Thanks to my housemate (Evi Hamidah, Juwairiyah, Wiji Rustarianti, Tritina

Lestari, and Dwika Ristanti) thanks for your help, support and praying for me.

Thanks to the big family of Racana UIN STS Jambi SulthanThaha – Sri Soedewi.

My Beloved Classmate BI Class C 2013, especially my best friends thanks for

your suggestion, helping, sharing and supporting for this thesis.

Thanks to my PPL and KKN group who always accompany me in learning.

Thanks to my beloved friends ( Ponimin, S.Pd, Muncar Winarti, S.Pd, Puji Astuti,

S.Pd, Rika Oktaviani, S.Pd, Rizky Takriyanti, S.Pd, Shadiqatunnisa, Sri Wahyuni,

S.Pd, Riska Yusuf, S.Pd, Yesi Suyanti, S.Pd and for everyone who always carry

with me, may Allah always bless you all, Aamiin…

The beloved Institution, English Education Program UIN STS Jambi.

VVii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

الر حمن الر حيم بسم الله

All praises and great gratitude submitted to Almighty God, Allah SWT

who always gives the gracious mercy and tremendous blessing that has helped the

writer finishing this thesis entitled: “The Effect of Think-Pair-Share Strategy

on Students’ Speaking Performance at Second Grade of Jauharul Islam

Islamic Junior High School Muaro Jambi”

Then peace and salutation always be upon to the most honorable prophet

and messenger Muhammad SAW that have brought human to the world that is

full of science and technology.

This thesis is intended to fulfill of the requirements of academic in order to

obtain the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan in the Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher

Training UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi. The writer is fully aware that in

completing and finishing this thesis has been widely involved those who have

given the contribution, motivation, either morally and materially so that this thesis

can be finished. Therefore, through this column the writer would like to deliver

this thanks and appreciation to:

1. Dr. H. Hadri Hasan MA as Rector of the State Islamic University

Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi.

2. Prof. Dr. H. Suaidi, MA, Ph.D. Dr. Hidayat, M.Pd. and Dr. Hj.

Fadhillah Husen, M.Pd as vice rector’s I, II, and III of State Islamic

University Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi.

3. Dr. Hj. Armida, M.Pd as Dean of the Tarbiyah and Teacher Training

Faculty of the State Islamic University Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi.

4. Dr. H. Lukman Hakim, M.Pd as the first vice Dean of Faculty of

Education and Teacher Training Dr. Zawaki Afdal Jamil, M.Pd as the

second vice Deans of Faculty of Education and Teacher Training, and

Dr. Kemas Imran Rosadi, M.Pd.I as the Third vice Dean of Faculty

Education and Teacher Training.

VViii

5. Amalia Nurhasanah, M.Hum as the chief of English Education

Program. And all of the lecturers of English Education Program who

had give many kind of useful knowledges. Thank you for your fully

guide and support in finishing this thesis

6. Dr. Siti Raudhatul Jannah, M.Pd.I and Hilma Suryani, M.Pd as the first

and second advisor who had guided and assisted the writer in writing

and finishing this thesis. Thank you very much for your good advice

and valuable input.

7. Uyun Nafiah, MS, M.Pd and Alif Rahman Hakim, S.Pd as the raters

for checking the reliability of speaking test made by students.

8. Yusmidar M. Daud, M.Pd.I as the headmaster of MTs Jauharul Islam

Muaro Jambi who has allowed and helped the writer conducted this

research at MTs Jauharul Islam Muaro Jambi. Thanks for your

cooperation and contribution.

9. The students of MTs Jauharul Islam Muaro Jambi for the 8th

grade

students who welcomed the writer into their environment and so

willingly involved in the research. Thanks for your time and help.

Without yours big contributions, the writer would not finish this thesis.

10. My beloved big family of English Education 2013

Jambi, June 2018

The Thesis Writer

ix

ABSTRACT

Nama : Rini Setia Wati

Jurusan : English Education Program

Judul : The Effect of Think-Pair-Share Strategy on Students’

Speaking Performance at Second Grade of Jauharul Islam

Islamic Junior High School Muaro Jambi.

This study aimed to find out the effect of Think-Pair-Share Strategy on students’

speaking performance at second grade of Juahrul Islam Islamic Junior High

School Muaro Jambi. This research was quantitative research. It was conducted by

using quasi experimental design. The subject of this research was 40 students. The

result of the analysis indicated that the score of t-obtained < t-table (-16,616 < -

2,093) and significant 2-tailed < 0,05 (0,000 < 0,05) so that H1 was accepted. It

means, there was significant improvement of students’ speaking performance after

giving the intervention. Next, researcher had computed that the score of t-obtained

< t-table (-2,115 < -2,101) and significant 2-tailed < 0,05 (0,042 < 0,05) so, H1

was accepted. It means, there was significant difference of speaking performance

between the students who were taught using Think-Pair-Share Strategy and those

who were not.

Keywords: Think-Pair-Share Strategy, students’ speaking performance

ABSTRAK

Nama : Rini Setia Wati

Jurusan : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris

Judul : Pengaruh Strategi Think-Pair-Share Terhadap Kinerja

Berbicara Siswa Pada Kelas Dua di MTs Jauharul Islam

Muaro Jambi

Penelitian ini betujuan untuk mengetahui pengaruh strategi Think-Pair-Share

terhadap kinerja berbicara siswa pada kelas dua di MTs Jauharul Islam Muaro

Jambi. Penelitian ini adalah kuantitatif, yang menggunakan quasi experimental

design. Subjek penelitian ini adalah 40 siswa. Dari hasil analisis peneliti

mengindikasi bahwasannya nilai dari t-hitung < t-table (-16,616 < -2,093) dan

signifikan 2-tailed < 0,05 (0,000 < 0,05) artinya H1 diterimaOleh karena itu, ada

peningkatan yang signifikan setelah intervensi. Selanjutnya, penulis telah

menganalisa nilai t-hitung < t-table (-2,115 < -2,101) dan signifikan 2-tailed <

0,05 (0,042 < 0,05) artinya, H1 diterima. Artinya, ada perbedaan yang signifikan

hasil kinerja berbicara siswa antara yang diajarkan dengan menggunakan Think-

Pair-Share strategi dengan siswa yang tidak.

Kata kunci: Think-Pair-Share Strategy, kinerja berbicara siswa

TABLE OF CONTENT

TITLE COVER .............................................................................................. i

RATIFICATION OF THESIS ...................................................................... ii

OFFICIAL NOTE .......................................................................................... iii

ORIGINALITY STATEMENT .................................................................... v

MOTTO .......................................................................................................... vi

DEDICATION ................................................................................................ vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................... viii

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................... x

ABSTRAK ...................................................................................................... xi

LIST OF APPENDIX .................................................................................... xiv

LIST OF TABLE ........................................................................................... xv

LIST OF FIGURE ......................................................................................... xvi

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study .................................................... 1

B. Limitation of the Problem .................................................. 4

C. Formulation of the Problem ............................................... 4

D. The Purpose of Research ................................................... 4

E. The Significant of Research ............................................... 4

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

A. Description of Theory ........................................................ 6

1. Speaking Performance ................................................. 6

2. Think-Pair-Share Strategy ............................................ 9

B. Previous Research Finding ................................................. 10

C. ThingkingFrame Work ....................................................... 11

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A. Place and time of the research ............................................ 13

B. Research Design ................................................................. 13

C. Population and Sample ...................................................... 14

D. Variable of the Study ......................................................... 14

E. Instrument of the Research ................................................ 15

F. Technique of Collecting the Data ...................................... 16

G. Validity and Reliability Test .............................................. 16

H. Technique of Analyzing the Data ...................................... 17

I. Hypothese ........................................................................... 18

J. Research Schedule ............................................................. 20

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDING AND DISCUSSION

A. Finding of The Study ........................................................ 21

1. Descriptive Analysis .................................................... 21

a. The Result of Pre- Test and Post test in Experimental 21

b. The Result of pre-test and post-test Control .......... 23

2. Statistical Analysis of the Test ..................................... 24

a. The Result of Normality......................................... 24

b. The Result Paired Sample T-test of Experimental . 27

c. The Result Paired Sample T-test of Control ......... 28

d. The Result of Independent Sample T-test ............. 30

B. Interpretations .................................................................... 32

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

A. Conclusion ......................................................................... 34

B. Suggestion .......................................................................... 34

REFERENCES ............................................................................................

CURRICULUM VITAE ................................................................................

APPENDICES ............................................................................................

TABLE ............................................................................................

LIST OF APPENDIX

Appendix 1 Scoring Rubric

Appendix 2 Classification of Scoring Grade

Appendix 3 Correlations

Appendix 4 Result of Pre-test in Experimental Group

Appendix 5 Result of Post-test in Experimental Group

Appendix 6 Result of Pre-test in Control Group

Appendix 7 Result of Post-test in Control Group

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Speaking Rubric

Table 3.1 The Pre-test and Post-test Control Group Design

Table 3.2 The Population

Table 3.3 Scoring Criterion

Table 3.4 Research Schedule

Table 4.1 Score Criterion

Table 4.2 One Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test in Experiment Group

Table 4.3 One Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test in Control Group

Table 4.4 Paired Samples Statistic

Table 4.5 Paired Samples Test of Experimental Group

Table 4.6 Paired Samples Statistic

Table 4.7 Paired Samples Test of Control Group

Table 4.8 Group Statistics

Table 4.9 Independent Samples Test

LIST OF FIGURE

Figure 4.1 The result of Pre-test in Experimental Group

Figure 4.2 The result of Post-test in Experimental Group

Figure 4.3 The result of Pre-test in Control Group

Figure 4.4 The result of Pre-test in Control Group

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background of study

In teaching learning English, Speaking is one of the important skills that

should be learned by the learner. In addition, there are some important elements

should be concerned in learning speaking such as grammar, vocabulary,

pronunciation and the fluency. Grammar and vocabulary will help the learner in

conveying the information correctly. Besides, Pronunciation should be learnt by

learner because it is very important in conveying the meaning of the speaker.

Therefore, speaking skill should be taught more in some substances that related to

communication.

The teaching of EFL speaking in Indonesia has been closely connected

on the concept of communicative competence which is emphasized within the

Communicative Language Teaching (CTL) approach. As this approach values

interaction among students in the process of language learning, classroom

activities have a central role in enabling the students to interact and thus improve

their speaking proficiency. The following section presents reports, either based on

research or classroom practice, on how speaking teaching has been carried out in

Indonesia. The reports, mostly deal with teaching problems, classroom activities,

teaching materials, and assessment. Such reports will provide a glimpse view of

teaching EFL speaking in Indonesia classroom (Bambang Yudi Cahyono, Utami

Widiati, 2011: p.36-37)

Speaking is one of communicative skills that should be mastered by the

students during learning English, especially students of junior high school.

Nevertheless, many students have difficulties in producing the utterances in the

speaking class. Some students still consider that English is a difficult lesson to be

learned at the school. In addition, most of students prefer to keep silent rather than

speaking when the teacher asked the student to practice in the class.

According to Penny Ur (1995: p.121) there are some problems in

speaking activities in the class; one of them is low or uneven participation. Only

2

one participation can talk a little time if he or she is to be heard; and in a large

group, this means that each one will have only very little talking time. This

problem is compounded by the tendency of some learners to dominate, while

others spend very little or not at all.

An issue which has been extensively discussed in the literature concerns

the level of Indonesian learners’ English as a foreign language speaking

proficiency. A number of reports show that Indonesian learners commonly have

not attained a good level of oral English proficiency. For example, Mukminatien

(1999: p.103-114) found that students of English departments have a great number

of errors when speaking. The errors include pronunciation (e.g. word stress and

intonation), grammatical accuracy (e.g. tenses, preposition, and sentence

construction), vocabulary (e.g. incorrect word choice), fluency (e.g. frequent

repair), and interactive communication (e.g. difficulties in getting the meaning

across or keeping the conversation going). Similarly, Ihsan (1999: p.222-234)

found that students are likely to make errors which include the misuse of parts of

speech, syntactical construction, lexical choice, and voice. Both Ihsan’s and

Mukminatien’s research studies supported earlier results of research conducted by

Eviyuliwati (1997: p.55-60) who reported that students had difficulties in using

grammar and in applying new vocabulary items in speaking class. With regards to

the students’ frequent errors in speaking, Mukminatien (1999: p.1-10) suggested

teachers provide their learners with more sufficient input for acquisition in the

classroom and encourage them to use English either in or outside the classroom.

Based on the teaching practice at Jauharul Islam Islamic Junior High

School Muara Jambi the writer had, it was found that the students had several

problems in speaking, such as reluctance, shyness, fear of committing oral

mistakes, besides the students showed poor speaking ability and they lacked peers

or social circles with whom they can explore their speaking potentials.

The English teacher are supposed to be creative in developing their

teaching learning process to create good atmosphere, improve the students’

speaking skill, give the attention on the elements of speaking and make the

English lesson more interest. The success of teaching learning activities is

3

determined by its programs is used bad or good and can give influence toward

learning purposes (Bahri, 2003: p.69)

There are some of strategies that can solve the students’ problem in

learning English, in this study the writer tries to choose Think-Pair-Share strategy

as one of cooperative learning strategies can be applied in speaking class. In

addition, Thinks-Pair-Share strategy is a part of cooperative learning strategy.

Cooperative learning strategy is a method that divides the class member to several

groups and arranges the students to work in a group. According to Slavin (2005:

p.4) cooperative learning refer to various kind of teaching method. There are

students working in groups. The learning processing in groups students can

discussion to exchange ideas and the working together to answer the question and

share to others. According to Isjoni (2011: p.78) Thinks Pair Share strategy is

technique gives students the opportunity to work independently and in

collaboration with others.

Several studies related to Think-Pair-Share strategy for increasing

students’ speaking performance have been conducted by different people.

Sulistiyorini (2011: p.42) was conducted Think Pair Share to Improve Students’

Speaking Ability. This study proved that the implementation of Think Pair Share

the students had a good response because this strategy in simple and very easy and

using this strategy the teacher can improve students’ speaking ability. On the other

hand, Pratiwi (2014: p.40) conducted a research Improving The Eight Grade

Students’ Speaking Skill of SMP Negeri 2 Nasawungu Through Think Pair Share

Strategy. Based on the result of her research proved that the use of think pair share

strategy can improve students speaking skill.

Based on the explanation above, the writer is interested to conduct the

research entitled The Effect of Think-Pair-Share Strategy on Students’

Speaking Performance at Second Grade of Jauharul Islam Islamic Junior

High School Muaro Jambi.

4

B. Limitation of The Problem

In this research, the writer focuses on the applying Think Pair Share

Strategy in speaking performance. The writer limits the research as follows.

1. The research is about the applying of Think Pair Share Strategy

2. The research is focused on the speaking performance

3. The research is conducted to the Second Grade of Jauharul Islam Islamic

Junior High School Muara Jambi. The classes are class VIII 1 and VIII 3

C. Formulation of The Problem

The research problem will be formulated as follows:

1. Is there any significant effect of Think Pair Share Strategy on Students’

speaking performance?

2. Is there any significant difference of speaking performance between students

who are taught by using Think Pair Share and those who are not?

D. The Purpose of Research

The purposes of the research as follows:

1. To find out any effect of Think Pair Share Strategy on students’ speaking

performance.

2. To find out the differences of speaking performance between the students who

are taught by using Think Pair Share and those who are not.

E. The Significant of Research

The significances of the research as follows:

1. For the students

The applying of Think Pair Share Strategy in the teaching and learning

process will surely attract the students’ attention. The students are motivated

to speak as they get new idea from the method that used by researcher and

their speaking performance is improved.

2. For the teacher

5

The benefit of the research is to explore and prove whether the applying of

Think Pair Share Strategy is effective to be applied in teaching speaking so

that the students can improve their English speaking skill optimally. It can

motivate teacher to find the new method or technique which is appropriate in

teaching speaking. It also can encourage the teacher to develop their

capability to improve teaching learning process. In addition the teachers’

capability to conduct the teaching and learning activity is approve as a result

the teaching and learning activity can run well.

3. For the school

The benefits of the research for school are it can increase the students’

achievement and it can develop learning methods which stimulate students’

creativity in speaking.

6

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE .

A. Description of Theory

1. Speaking Performance (Variable Y)

In this case, speaking activities is more focus on monolog better than

dialog. Function of speaking as performance happened at speeches, public talks,

public announcements, retell story, telling story and so on. And then, the types of

speaking performances there are six categories. According to Brown, (2004:

p.271) describes six categories of speaking skill area. Those six categories are as

follows.

a. Imitative

This category includes the ability to practice an intonation and focusing on

some particular elements of language form. That is just imitating a word, phrase

or sentence. The important thing here is focusing on pronunciation. The teacher

uses drilling in the teaching learning process. The reason is by using drilling,

students get opportunity to listen and to orally repeat some words.

b. Intensive

This is the students’ speaking performance that is practicing some

phonological and grammatical aspects of language. It usually places students

doing the task in pairs (group work), for example, reading aloud that includes

reading paragraph, reading dialogue with partner in turn, reading information

from chart, etc.

c. Responsive Performance

Includes interaction and test comprehension but at the somewhat limited

level of very short conversation, standard greeting and small talk, simple request

and comments. This is a kind of short replies to teacher or student initiated

questions or comments, giving instructions and directions. Those replies are

usually sufficient and meaningful.

d. Transactional (dialogue)

7

It is carried out for the purpose of conveying or exchanging specific

information. For example here is conversation which is done in pair work.

e. Interpersonal (dialogue)

It is carried out more for the purpose of maintaining social relationship

than for the transmission of facts and information. The forms of interpersonal

speaking performance are interview, role play discussions, conversations and

games.

f. Extensive (monologue)

Teacher gives students extended monologues in the form of oral reports,

summaries, storytelling and short speeches.

According to Screiber (2010: p.4) there are five aspects that were

assessed of speaking. There aspects are (1) Grammar, (2) pronunciation, (3)

vocabulary, (4) Fluency and Comprehension. And referred to as scoring rubric of

speaking.

Table 2.1

Speaking Rubric

Aspect Score

Grammar

Student was difficult to understand and had a hard time

communicating their ideas and responses because of

grammar mistakes.

Student was able to express their ideas and responses

inadequate but often displayed inconsistencies with their

sentence structure and tenses.

Student was able to express their ideas and responses fairly

well but makes mistakes with their tenses, however is able to

correct themselves.

Student was able to express their ideas and responses with

ease in proper sentence structure and tenses.

1

2

3

4

Pronunciation

Student was difficult to understand, quiet in speaking,

8

unclear in pronunciation.

Student was slightly unclear with pronunciation at times, but

generally is fair.

Pronunciation was good and did not interfere with

communication.

Pronunciation was very clear and easy to understand.

1

2

3

4

Vocabulary

Student had inadequate vocabulary words to express his/her

deas properly, which hindered the students in responding.

Student was able to use broad vocabulary words but was

lacking, making him/her repetitive and cannot expandon

his/her ideas.

Student utilized the words learned in class, in an accurate

manner for the situation given.

Rich, precise and impressive usage of vocabulary words

learned in and beyond of class.

1

2

3

4

Fluency

Speech is very slow, stumbling, nervous, and uncertain with

response, except for short or memorized expressions.

Difficult for a listener to understand.

Speech is slow and often hesitant and irregular. Sentences

may be left uncompleted, but the student is able to continue.

Speech is mostly smooth but with some hesitation and

unevenness caused primarily by rephrasing and groping for

words.

Speech is effortless and smooth with speed that comes close

to that of a native speaker.

1

2

3

4

Comprehension

Student had difficulty understanding the topics that were

being conveyed.

Student fairly grasped the topics that were being conveyed.

Student was able to comprehend the topics that were being

discussed

Student was able to comprehend to all of the information in

the topics that were being discussed with ease.

1

2

3

9

4

Based on the theory above, it can be concluded that speaking activities is

more focus on monolog better than dialog. Function of speaking as performance

happened at speeches, public talks, public announcements, retell story, telling

story and so on. And then, the types of speaking performances there are six

categories. Those six categories are imitative, intensive, responsive performance,

transactional (dialogue), interpersonal (dialogue) and extensive. And there are

some points that should be considered in assessing speaking. The students need to

know at least the pronunciation, vocabularies, and language functions that they are

going to use. When the students have been ready and prepared for the activity,

they can use the language appropriately.

2. Think-Pair-Share Strategy (Variable X)

Think-pair-share strategy is a part of cooperative learning strategy.

Cooperative learning strategy is a method that divides the class member to several

groups and arranges the students to work in group. According to Slavin (2005:

p.4) cooperative learning refer to various kind of teaching method. There are

students working in groups. The learning processing in groups students can

discussion to exchange ideas and the working together to answer the question and

share to others.

Think-pair-share is a cooperative learning strategy that can promote and

support higher level thinking. The teacher asks students to think about a specific

topic and pair with another student to discuss their own thinking. And then share

their ideas with the group. According to Isjoni (2011: p.78) think-pair-share

strategy is technique gives students the opportunity to work independently and in

collaboration with others.

Think-pair-share strategy has some advantages. According to Kagan (2000:

p.58) the purposes the benefits of think-pair-share strategy for the students and the

10

teacher. For the teachers, think-pair-share can help them to save time to prepare

the next activities while assigning the students to involve in think-pair-share

activities. Besides, think-pair-share also brings a lot of benefits. During the

activities the students have time to think before answering the question from

teacher. Students also can exchange opinion, answer question and share the

knowledge to each other while working in a group. Furthermore, think-pair-share

involves students to actively participate in the classroom activities which build

their confidence to share ideas.

Infect, there are several steps in implementing think-pair-share. Firstly, the

students are provided with questions or issues or topic to be solved. They are

given time to think to complete the task individually. The next stage is “pair”

stage. After trying to finish the task, the students are paired up. In a group of two

the students discuss about the answer or the solution they find. They then

exchange ideas to find the best solution or answer. During this stage, they can also

learn from each other. At the final stage the pair should share what they have

discussed to the class. Here, the students could learn from the bigger forum. They

could practice their speaking while building up their confidence since they are

required to speak and share what they have.

B. Previous Research Finding

There are some previous studies that relevant to this study:

1. Prawiti (2014) conducted research about Improving the Eight Grade

Students’ Speaking Skill of SMP Negeri 2 Nusawungu Through Think-

Pair-Share Strategy. This study proved that using think-pair-share strategy

can improve student speaking skill. Think-pair-share strategy benefits

students in the areas of peer acceptance, peer support, academic

achievement, self-esteem, and interest in learning and this strategy can

improve students speaking ability.

2. Sulistyorini (2011) conducted research about The Use of Think-Pair-Share

Strategy to Improve Students’ Speaking Ability. Based on the result of

research, the writer mentioned that during the implementation of think-

11

pair-share the students had a good response because this strategy is simple

and very easy. Through this strategy students can exchange ideas to friend.

Besides, by using this strategy the teacher can improve students’ speaking

ability. Using think-pair-share strategy can make students active in process

of teaching learning and students can improve their motivation to learn

with their classmates.

3. Sarah Hediyati Astuti, dkk (2014) conducted a research entitled The Effect

of Think-Pair-Share Strategy and Students’ Motivation Toward Their

Speaking Skill in Descriptive Text at The Seventh Grade of SMPN 2

Baturaja Ogan Komering Ulu (OKU). The result of this study are that

students who are taught by the strategy of think pair share have better

speech on descriptive text than students taught with conventional teaching.

From the result of the previous research, there are some similarities. First,

the using think-pair-share as strategy to solve the problems. Second, the writer has

the similar research design with Sulistyorini’s study and Sarah Hediyati Astuti’s

study that is experimental quantitative design. On the other hand, there are also

the differences. In Pratiwi’s study, she used research design while she uses

experimental design. Then, the object of research and English skills problem are

different.

C. Thinking Framework

Speaking as a part of language skill has to be comprehended by the

students in order to convey many messages and share information and idea to

others. However, the process of speaking really takes more time in order to

accomplish the learning activities. Therefore, a sufficient time for speaking is

needed in order the complete all the speaking process. On the other hand,

compared to teaching speaking in the actual situation, speaking has limited time to

be taught in the junior high school because the allowed to other skills namely,

reading, writing and listening. According to Screiber (2010: p.4) there are five

12

aspects became criteria for the teacher in evaluating students’ speaking so that the

teacher can judge the students’ speaking is good or not. They are:

1. Grammar

2. Pronunciation

3. Vocabulary

4. Fluency

5. Comprehension

To increase the students’ speaking performance the teachers have to be

smart in creates an interesting strategies in increasing students’ motivation and

attractive students’ attention. Therefore, the using of appropriate strategy can

influence students’ speaking performance.

Based on explanation above, the writer tries to choose Think-Pair-Share

as strategy in speaking performance in this study. The writer tries to find the effect

of one variable toward another variable namely independent variable and

dependent variable. Independent variable in this study is Think-Pair-Share

Strategy while dependent variable is speaking performance.

13

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY OF THE RESEARCH

A. Place and Time of The Research

The research was conducted at second grade of MTs Jauharul Islam

which is loceted in Jl. Jepang Penyengat Olak Village, Jambi Luar Kota District,

Muaro Jambi Regency. It was carried out on April 2018 – May 2018.

B. Research Design

In this research, the researcher was apply quantitative method which is

quasi experimental design. Experimental research measured the effect of one

manipulated and controlled (independent) variable to another (dependent)

variable, like the effect of different method of teaching to the students’

achievement, the effect of an English training method of teaching to participants’

English skills (Latif, 2015: p.95). Experimental research is a powerful research

method to establish cause-and-effect relationship (Borg, W.R., Gall, M.D. 1989:

p.639) as cited in Latif (2014: p.125)

The researcher examined the differences of the groups. He was given

pretest and posttest to get the differences of them and the result of treatment more

accurate, because the researcher would compare before and after giving the

treatment (Sugiyono, 2015: p.74). The design was only the pretest-posttest control

group design. Cohen et al (2007: p.283) described the design as follow:

Table 3.1 the pretest and posttest control group design.

Experiment

Group O1 X O2

Control

Group O3 – O4

14

Where:

O1 : Pre-test of experimental class

O2 : Post-test of experimental class

O3 : Pre-test of control class

O4 : Post-test of control class

X : Treatment

C. Population and Sample Technique

1. Population

The larger group to which one hopes to apply the result is called the

population ( Fraenkel and Wallen, 2009: p.90). The populations this research are

all of seventh grade students of MTs.S Jauharul Islam Muaro Jambi. The classes

are VIII.1, VIII.2 and VIII.3.

Table 3.2. The Population

No Class Male Female Total

1 VIII.1 20 20

2 VIII.2 18 18

3 VIII.3 10 10 20

Total 28 30 58

2. Sample

Researcher tries to obtain measures from some of the members of the

accessible population in a much smaller number than the accessible population.

The smaller number of the accessible population is called the sample (Latif, 2015:

p.182). In this research, researcher used purposive sampling in which two groups

of sample do not have relationship. The writer chooses the sample because those

samples have the purpose, and make the researcher is easier to collect the data.

The result is VIII.3 as experiment group who would be taught by using Think-

Pair-Share Strategy and VIII.1 as control group. The writer decided the sample

based on their daily score, in which those class had the same starting point and

had the same score in English lesson.

15

D. Variable of the Study

Sudijono (2012: p.36) states that a variable is something that may vary or

differ. This study considers two types of variables; they are dependent and

independent variable. According to Brown (2004: p.10) a dependent variable is

the variable of focus or the central variable on which other variables will act if

there is any relationship. The independent variable is the variable selected by the

writer to determine the relationship with the dependent variable and the variables

of this study are:

X : The Independent Variable (Think-Pair-Share Strategy)

Y : Dependent Variable (Students’ Speaking Performance)

E. Instrument of the Research

1. Speaking Performance ( Variable Y)

a. Conceptual Definitions

Speaking activities is more focus on monolog better than dialog.

Function of speaking as performance happened at speeches, public

talks, public announcements, retell story, telling story and so on. And

then, the types of speaking performances there are six categories. Those

six categories are imitative, intensive, responsive performance,

transactional (dialogue), interpersonal (dialogue) and extensive.

b. Operational Definitions

In this case, speaking activities is more focus on monolog better than

dialog. Function of speaking as performance happened at speeches,

public talks, public announcements, retell story, telling story and so on.

And then, the types of speaking performances there are six categories.

According to Brown, (2004: p.271) describes six categories of speaking

skill area. In this study, speaking refers to students’ speaking

performance in form of monologue. The speaking performance then is

scored by using speaking rubric adopted from Screiber (2010: p.4) there

16

aspects are: (1) Grammar, (2) Pronunciation, (3) Vocabulary, (4)

Fluency and (5) Comprehension.

2. Think-Pair-Share Strategy (Variable X)

a. Conceptual Definitions

Think-pair-share strategy is a part of cooperative learning strategy.

Cooperative learning strategy is a method that divides the class member

to several groups and arranges the students to work in a group. Think-

pair-share is a cooperative learning strategy that can promote and

support higher level thinking.

b. Operational Definitions

Think-pair-share is a collaborative learning strategy in which students

work together to solve a problem or answer a question about an

assigned speaking. This technique requires students to (1) think

individually about a topic or answer to a question (2) discuss the

answer/the task with a partner. And (3) share ideas with other

classmates. Discussing problem with a partner maximize participation,

focus attention and engage students in comprehending the speaking

material.

F. Technique of collecting the data

1. Speaking Test

To collect the data the writer would give a speaking test as the instrument.

The test will be given as pre-test and post-test. The pre-test is aimed at finding

out the prior speaking of the students, while the post-test is aimed at finding

out the students’ speaking performance after treatment is given (teaching

English speaking by using Project Based Learning Instructions). The test will

be graded on the speaking rubric (see appendix 1). The grades will be classified

in the grade category (see appendix 2).

17

G. Validity and Reliability Test

1. Validity

In validity this research used content validity and face validity. The content

validity is used in order to see whether or not the topics of speaking given in

the research in matched with the topics of speaking in first semester. Face

validity is the extent to which a test is subjectively viewed as covering the

concept it purports to measure. It refers to the transparency or relevance of a

test as it appears to test participants.

2. Reliability

Reliability refers to the consistency of the scores obtained how consistent

they are for each individual from one administration of an instrument to

another and from one set of items to another. The degree to which score

obtained with an instrument are consistent measures of whatever the instrument

measures (Fraenkel &\ Wallen, 2009: p.154). The technique that would be used

was inter rater reliability. Inter rater reliability is used to measure the reliability

of instrument that involve two raters for checking the reliability. There was a

lecturer of UIN STS Jambi and a teacher of Alfa Academy involved as the

raters. The result inter rater reliability showed that the reliability of the data

was 0,634 in control group and 0,742 was in experimental group (see appendix

3). It indicated that there was strong relationship of the data.

H. Techniques of analyzing the data

1. Descriptive Analysis

In this step, the writer tried to describe the data of the study by

explaining/exploring the frequencies of the score categories achieved by the

students before and after the treatment. The writer applied the score criterion

by Purwanto (1987: p.103). The analysis also explains the average score,

range, minimum and maximum values of the scores.

18

Table 3.3

Scoring Criterion

No Score Categories

1. 5 – 8 Needs improvement

2. 9 – 12 Satisfactory

3. 13 – 16 Good

4. 17 – 20 Excellent

Source: score criterion by Purwanto (1987: p.103)

2. Statistical Analysis

a. Normality Test

This test was carried out in order to check the whether or not the data

was normal. If the data was normal, the parametric test was used. On the other

hand, if the data was not normal, the non-parametric test was used.

b. T-test

The technique of analyze the data, the writer would employ SPSS

(Social Package for Social Science) program. In this case, the data would be

analyzed by sample t-test. There were two kinds of sample t-test, they were

independent sample t-test and paired sample t-test. Paired sample t-test is

used to see whether or not there is significant improvement of students’

speaking performance before and after the treatment. The independent sample

t-test is used to compare the means of one variable for two groups of cases

(Taniredja, 2014: p.81-83)

19

G. Hypotheses

This research is to answer the questions about the significance different

students’ speaking performance taught by using Think-Pair-Share strategy.

Therefore, writer proposed hypothesis as follows:

Ho : there is no effect of using Think-Pair-Share strategy on students’

speaking performance.

Ha : there is effect of using Think-Pair-Share on Students’

speaking performance.

20

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDING AND INTERPRETATIONS

A. Finding of The Study

The data of students’ speaking test in pre-test and post-test at

experimental and control groups were scored by raters. After the writer got the

data, the writer employed SPSS (statistical product and service solution) version

22 program. In this case, the data were analyzed by using t-test. There are two

kinds of t-test, they are independent sample t-test and paired sample t-test. The

finding include: 1) Descriptive analysis of students’ speaking test, 2) Statistical

analysis of the students’ speaking test.

1. Descriptive Analysis

In this section, the writer explained the frequencies, percentages and

means score of the test, based on the result of test before and after giving the

treatment in both experiment and control groups. The scoring criterion can be

seen in the table 4.1.

Table 4.1

Scoring Criterion

No Score Categories

1. 5 – 8 Needs improvement

2. 9 – 12 Satisfactory

3. 13 – 16 Good

4. 17 – 20 Excellent

Source: score criterion by Purwanto (1987: p.103)

a. Result of Pre-Test and Post Test in Experimental Group

The results of pre-test in experimental group before interventions show that

most of the students’ score were categorized satisfactory. From 20 students, there

were 14 students (70%) could be categorized satisfactory. Meanwhile, the rest 6

students (30%) could be categorized good. The complete calculation can be seen

in appendix (4)

21

Figure 4.1

The Result of Pre-test in Experimental Group

In the post-test, from 20 students there were 3 students (15%) could be

categorized excellent. And then, 16 students (80%) could be categorized good.

Meanwhile, the rest 1 student (5%) could be categorized satisfactory. The

complete calculation can be seen in appendix (5).

Therefore, it can be seen that there was improvement on the students’

speaking performance after the intervention. The high score in pre-test 15 and the

lower score is 11. Beside, before the intervention it can be seen that there were no

students categorized excellent. However, after the intervention there were 3

students categorized excellent.

22

Figure 4.2

The Result of Post-test in Experimental Group

t

b. Result of Pre-Test and Post Test in Control Group

After calculated the pre-test and post-test in experimental group, the writer

also calculated pre-test and post-test in control group. From 20 students there

were 12 students (60%) could be categorized satisfactory. Meanwhile, the rest

8 students (40%) could be categorized good. The complete calculation can be

seen in appendix (6).

Figure 4.3

The Result of Pre-test in Control Group

23

In the post-test, from 20 students there were 14 students (70%) could be

categorized good. Meanwhile, the rest 6 students (30%) could be

categorized satisfactory. In post-test there was improvement on students’

speaking performance. In pre-test still many students got score in

satisfactory categorized. The complete calculation can be seen in appendix

(7).

Figure 4.4

The Result of Post-test in Control Group

The mean score differences between pre-test (12.20) and post-test (13.35) in

control group show that there was improvement on students’ speaking

performance, but the improvement is not big.

2. Statistical Analysis

a. The Result of Normality

This test is carried out in order check whether or not the data is

normally distributed. The normality test was employed by using

Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. The result of the analysis was presented in

table 4.2

24

Table 4.2.

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test in Experiment Group

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Pre_test Post_test

N 20 20

Normal Parametersa,b

Mean 9.4000 12.3000

Std.

Deviation 2.08124 2.55672

Most Extreme Differences Absolute .149 .147

Positive .149 .147

Negative -.082 -.106

Test Statistic .149 .147

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .200c,d

.200c,d

a. Test distribution is Normal.

b. Calculated from data.

c. Lilliefors Significance Correction.

d. This is a lower bound of the true significance.

In the test, the level of significance was set up at 0,05, the asymp.sig of

pre-test is 0,200 and post-test is 0,200. It means the score are higher than

the level of significance (0,05), or 0,200 > 0,05 and 0,200 > 0,05. It can be

said that the data of pre-test and post-test of experimental are normally

distributed. It means, the parametric test is used. Then, the test of

normality for control group can be seen in the table 4.3

25

Table 4.3.

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test in Control Group

Pre_test Post_test

N 20 20

Normal Parametersa,b

Mean 8.9750 10.8250

Std.

Deviatio

n

1.59337 1.78646

Most Extreme Differences Absolute .180 .122

Positive .180 .122

Negative -.090 -.097

Test Statistic .180 .122

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .090c .200

c,d

a. Test distribution is Normal.

b. Calculated from data.

c. Lilliefors Significance Correction.

d. This is a lower bound of the true significance.

In the test, the level of significance was set up at 0,05, the asymp.sig of

pre-test was 0,090 and post-test was 0,200. It means the score are higher

than level significance (0,05) or 0,090 > 0,05 and 0,200 > 0,05 It can be said

that the data of pre-test and post-test of control group are normally

distributed. It means, the parametric test is used.

The statistical computation on the pre-test and post-test of the

experimental and control group using SPSS (Statistical Product and Service

Solution) version 22 program showed that the distribution of the

experimental and control groups’ scores were not different, the data of pre-

test of experimental and control group were normally distributed, and the

data of post-test of experimental and control group were normally

distributed. So, the data of pre-test and post-test of experimental and control

group were normally distributed. It means a parametric test was used.

26

b. The Result Paired Sample T-test of Experimental Group

This analysis was used to see whether or not there was significant effect

of using Think-Pair-Share strategy on students’ speaking performance.

This test could help the writer to examine the improvement of students’

speaking performance. The result could be seen in the table 4.4 and 4.5

below.

Table 4.4.

Paired Samples Statistics

Table 4.5.

Paired Samples Test of Experimental Group

Paired Differences

t df

Sig.

(2-

tailed) Mean

Std.

Deviati

on

Std.

Error

Mean

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Mean N

Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

Pair 1 Pre_test 12.15 20 1.226 .274

Post_test 14.70 20 1.625 .363

27

Pair 1 Pre-

test

-

Post

-test -2.550 .686 .153 -2.871 -2.229 -16.616 19 .000

The table 4.4 and 4.5 showed that the experimental group students’

scores in post-test are better, in which the mean score is 14,70 than their

score in pre-test, the mean score was 12,15. In addition, the 2-tailed score

was 0,000 which was lower than significant level = 0,05 (0,000 < 0,05).

Therefore, the calculation of paired t-test sample t-test sowed that there

was a significant difference between pre-test and post-test of experimental

group.

The calculation was carried out in order to know how well the treatment

worked, in terms of pre-test and post-test score for experimental group.

Based on the table above, the score of t-obtained was -16,616 and t-table

was obtained from statistical table of significant level (0,05 : 2 = 0,025)

and df score (n – 1 or 20 – 1 = 19). Finally, the score of t-table was -2,093.

It can be concluded that the score of t-obtained < t-table (-16,616 < -2,093)

and significant 2-tailed < 0,05 (0,000 < 0,05) so that H1 is accepted. It

means, there was significant effect of Think-Pair-Share strategy on

students’ speaking performance.

c. The Result Paired Sample T-test of Control Group

The writer not only analyze in experimental group but also analyze in

control group. The result of paired sample test of control group can be seen

in the table 4.6 and 4.7 below

28

Table 4.6.

Paired Samples Statistics

Table 4.7.

Paired Samples Test of Control Group

Paired Differences

t df

Sig.

(2-

tailed) Mean

Std.

Deviati

on

Std.

Error

Mean

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Pair 1 Pre-

test

-

Post

-test -1.150 .745 .167 -1.499 -.801 -6.902 19 .000

Mean N

Std.

Deviation

Std. Error

Mean

Pair 1 Pre_test 12.20 20 1.795 .401

Post_test 13.35 20 1.226 .274

29

The table 4.6 and 4.7 showed that the control group students’ scores in

post-test are better, in which the mean score is 13,35 than their score in

pre-test, the mean score was 12,20. In addition, the 2-tailed score was

0,000 which was lower than significant level = 0,05 (0,000 < 0,05).

Therefore, the calculation of paired t-test sample t-test sowed that there

was a significant difference between pre-test and post-test of control

group.

Based on the table above, the score of t-obtained was -6,902 and t-table

was obtained from statistical table of significant level (0,05 : 2 = 0,025)

and df score (n – 1 or 20 – 1 = 19). Finally, the score of t-table was -2,093.

It can be concluded that the score of t-obtained < t-table (-6,902 < -2,093)

and significant 2-tailed < 0,05 (0,000 < 0,05). It means, there was

significant difference between pre-test and post-test of control group.

d. The Result of Independent Sample T-test

This test was used to compare the mean score of speaking performance

between the students who were taught by using Think-Pair-Share strategy

and those who were not. The calculation of independent sample t-test was

used to analyze the score of post-test in experiment and control groups. The

result can be seen in the tables below.

Table 4.8.

Group Statistics

Group N Mean

Std.

Deviation Std. Error Mean

Pre_test Control 20 10.83 1.786 .399

Experiment 20 12.30 2.557 .572

30

Table 4.9.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's

Test for

Equality of

Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df

Sig.

(2-

taile

d)

Mean

Differen

ce

Std.

Error

Diffe

rence

95%

Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

P

o

s

t

_

t

e

s

t

Equal

variances

assumed 1.121 .296 -2.115 38 .042 -1.475 .697 -2.887 -.063

Equal

variances

not

assumed -2.115 33.981 .042 -1.475 .697 -2.892 -.058

Before the writer compared the mean score of students’ speaking

performance, the writer examines the F-test (homogeneity test). It means, if

the variance is equal variance assumed score is used. Based on the table 4.9

it can be seen that significant of F-test was obtained 0,296. It can be said

that significant > 0,05 (0,296 > 0,05). It can be concluded that the data

between experimental and control had the equal variance. It means, the

equal variance assumed was used.

Next, the writer analyzed the independent sample t-test. In the table 4.13

above, it showed t-obtained of equal variance assumed was -2,115 and t-

31

table was obtained from statistical table on significant level (0,05 : 2 =

0,025) and df score was 33,981. Finally, the score of t-table was -2,101. It

can be concluded that the score of t-obtained < t-table (-2,115 < -2,101) and

significant 2-tailed < 0,05 (0,042 < 0,05) so, H1 is accepted. It means, there

was significant difference of speaking performance between the students

who were taught using Think-Pair-Share strategy and those who were not.

D. Interpretations

The aims of this research were to find out whether or not there was any

significant improvement of students’ speaking performance at the second grade of

Jauharul Islam Islamic Junior High School before and after being taught by using

Think-Pair-Share strategy. Besides, it was to find out whether there was any

significant difference between the students’ speaking performance who were

taught by using Think-Pair-Share strategy and those who were not.

Based on the analysis, there was significant effect of groups who are taught

by using Think-Pair-Share strategy and those who are not. This can be seen from

the pre-test and post-test result in both of groups. The students’ score of pre-test in

experiment class were 70% satisfactory categorized and 30% good categorized.

And the students’ score of post-test were 15% excellent categorized, 80% good

categorized and 5% satisfactory categorized. Meanwhile, the students’ score of

pre-test in control class were 60% satisfactory categorized and 40% good

categorized. And the students’ score of post-test were 70% good categorized and

30% satisfactory categorized. Both experiment and control class learned English

subject two meetings in a week and the students are asked to practice for

arranging the descriptive text in the end of each meeting.

The result of the test showed that students’ score who were not taught by

using Think-Pair-Share strategy in control group improved, but the result of post-

test in control group are lower than the result of post-test in experiment group.

The students in both of groups, most of them get better score than their own test in

32

pre-test. Some students scored better, although they still had some incorrect in

pronunciation, fluency and grammar.

It can be concluded that teaching speaking by using Think-Pair-Share strategy

was effective, it is line with study conducted by Pratiwi (2014). It was found out

that Think-Pair-share strategy benefits students in the areas of pee acceptance,

peer support, academic achievement, self-esteem, and interest in learning and this

strategy can improve students speaking ability. In addition, study conducted by

Sulistiyorini (2011). In her study, it was found out that the students had a good

response because this strategy is simple and very easy and the students’ English

score improved after being taught by using Think-Pair-Share strategy. And the

study conducted by Sarah Hediyati Astuti (2014). It was found that students who

are taught by the strategy of think pair share have better speech on descriptive text

than students taught with conventional teaching.

The students interested and enjoyed learning English by using Think-Pair-

Share strategy. The class become cooperative, because all of the students

participated in these activities. By using Think-Pair-Share strategy, the situation

of learning in the class is better than before. It can be seen on the table of the

students’ speaking score that the students who learn speaking through Think-Pair-

Share strategy shows that the mean score in experimental group is 14,70 and the

mean score in control group is 13,35. They have a significant difference. It means

that there is a significant improvement of using Think-Pair-Share strategy in

teaching speaking.

33

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION .

A. Conclusion

Based on the results of research and discussion, the following conclusions can

be drawn:

There are differences in students’ speaking performance before and after the

intervention by using Think-Pair-Share strategy. Students’ speaking performance

in the class that taught using Think-Pair-Share strategy is better than the class that

taught without using Think-Pair-Share strategy. And there are difference

improvement in pre-test and post-test in experimental group. It can be seen from

the calculation of the t-test, which shows the mean in the experimental group

(12,30) and in the control group (10,83)

B. Suggestions

Based on the results above the writer would like to give some suggestion. For

teachers, it is better to apply Think-Pair-Share strategy as a part of cooperative

learning type. The teachers should also be able to apply a wide variety of learning

models to create a fun learning process to encourage students to learn optimally.

For researchers who wish to continue the results of this research, it is suggested

to apply comparison study to compare Think-Pair-Share strategy and other type of

strategy under cooperative learning type. Moreover, further research investigators

should conduct research to develop strategies, variables, and different indicators

in order to improve the quality of learning in the classroom. The writer also

suggests that then further research could control externous variable by applying

other sampling method. Finally, the writer suggest that further research could

consider teacher’s character as the variable that will effect the result of the study.

34

REFERENCES

Arikunto, S. (2010). Manajemen Penelitian. Jakarta : PT. Rineka Cipta

Astuti,S.H. (2014). The Effect of Think Pair Share Strategy and Students’

Motivation Toward Their Speaking Skill in Descriptive Text at The Seventh

Grade of SMPN 2 Baturaja Ogan Komering Ulu (OKU) South Sumatra

(Vol.2)

Brown, J.D (2004). Understanding Research in Second Language Learning. A

teacher’s guide to statistics and research design: Cambridge University

Press

Cahyono, B.Y. & Widiati,U. (2011). The teaching of English as a Foreign

Language in Indonesia. Malang: First Printing.

Cohen, L., Manion, l., & Marison, K. (2007). Research method in education.

Eviyuliawati, I.(1997). The Teaching of Functional Skill and Communicative

Expression at SMU IKIP Malang Based on thr 1994 English Curriculum

: A Case Study. English Languge Education, 3(1).

Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (1993). How to design and evaluate

research in education (Vol. 7). New York: McGraw-Hill Taniredja, T.,

& Mustafidah, H. (2014). Penelitian kuntitatif. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Ihsan, D. (1999). Speaking and Writing Errors Made by Students of English

Education. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 6(3).

Isjoni, (2011) Cooperative Learning Bandung: Alfabeta

Kagan,S.,Kagan,M.& Kagan,L. (2000) Teaching English/Language Arts

Standards Through Cooperative Learning. NY. National Professional

Resources, Inc.

Lajnah Pentaskhihan Mushaf Al-Qur’an. (2014) Al-Qur’an Transliterasi Al-Jadid.

Solo : PT. Tiga Srangkai Pustaka Mandiri

Latief, M. A. (2010). Tanya jawab metode penelitian pembelajaran bahasa.

Malang: PenerbitUniversitasNegeri Malang.

Latief, M. A. (2012). Research methods on language learning: An introduction.

Malang: PenerbitUniversitasNegeri Malang

Mukminatien, N. (1999). The Problem of Developing Speaking Skills: Limitations

35

of Second Language Acquisition in an EFL Classroom. English

Language Education, 5 (1)

Mukminatien, N. (1999). The Premature Use of English Grammar by EFL

Learners. TEFLIN Journal, 10 (1).

Pratiwi, D. (2014) Improving the eighth grade students’ speaking skills of SMPN

2 Nusawungu Through Think Pair Share Strategy

Priyatno, Duwi. (2014) SPSS 22 Pengolah Data Terpraktis. Yogyakarta : CV

Andi Offset

Santoso, Singgih (2015) Menguasai SPSS 22 From Basic To Exprert Skills,

Jakarta : PT Elex Media Komputindo

Schreiber, L.M., Schneller, B.E., & Shibley, L.R. (2010). Deconstructing oral

communication: Competencies for campus-wide assessments. Paper

presented at The 2010 Assessment Institute in Indianapolis through The

Office of Planning and Institutional Improvement. Indiana University-

Purdue University Indianapolis, October 24 –October 26, 2010

Slavin, E.R (2005) Cooperative Learning. Bandung: Nusa Media

Sugiyono. (2015) Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif dan R & D. Bandung:

Alfabeta

Sulistiyorini,Y. (2011) The Use Of Think-Pair-Share Strategy To Improve

Students’ Speaking Ability At Tenth Grade Students Of Sman 1 Karang

Kobar In The Academic Year Of 2010/2011

Tim Penyusun, (2017). Pedoman Penulisan Skripsi 2017 . UIN Sulthan Thaha

SyafudiiSyaifuddin Jambi

Ur, P. (1995). A Course in Language Teaching : Practice anh Theory, Cambridge

: Cambridge University Press

36

APPENDIX 1

Scoring Rubric

Aspect Score

Grammar



grammar mistakes.






correct themselves.



1

2

3

4

Pronunciation




generally is fair.


communication.


1

2

3

4

Vocabulary





his/her ideas.





1

2

3

4

Fluency

37








words.



1

2

3

4

Comprehension


being conveyed.



discussed



1

2

3

4

Screiber (2010: p.4)

38

APPENDIX 2

Classification of Scoring Grade

Criteria of mastery Grade

5-8 Needs improvement

9-12 Satisfactory

13-16 Good

17-20 Excellent

Purwanto (1987: p.103)

39

APPENDIX 3

Control Group

Correlations

rater1 rater2

Spearman's rho rater1 Correlation

Coefficient 1.000 .634

**

Sig. (2-tailed) . .003

N 20 20

rater2 Correlation

Coefficient .634

** 1.000

Sig. (2-tailed) .003 .

N 20 20

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Experimental Group

Correlations

rater1 rater2

Spearman's rho rater1 Correlation

Coefficient 1.000 .742

**

Sig. (2-tailed) . .000

N 20 20

rater2 Correlation

Coefficient .742

** 1.000

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .

N 20 20

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

40

PRE TEST OF CONTROL

GROUP

POST-TEST OF CONTROL

GROUP

No Students Scrore

1 S1 12

2 S2 14

3 S3 15

4 S4 14

5 S5 13

6 S6 14

7 S7 13

8 S8 13

9 S9 11

10 S10 15

11 S11 13,5

12 S12 11,5

13 S13 15

14 S14 13,5

15 S15 13,5

16 S16 12

17 S17 12

18 S18 12,5

19 S19 12

20 S20 15

No Students Scrore

1 S1 10

2 S2 13

3 S3 12

4 S4 13

5 S5 15

6 S6 13

7 S7 10

8 S8 12

9 S9 15

10 S10 11

11 S11 10

12 S12 11

13 S13 15

14 S14 15

15 S15 13

16 S16 12

17 S17 12

18 S18 10

19 S19 12

20 S20 10

41

PRE TEST OF EXPERIMENT

GROUP

No Students Scrore

1 S1 10,5

2 S2 12

3 S3 12

4 S4 12

5 S5 10,5

6 S6 11

7 S7 15

8 S8 12

9 S9 12

10 S10 12

11 S11 11

12 S12 12

13 S13 11

14 S14 10,5

15 S15 13

16 S16 11

17 S17 13

18 S18 13

19 S19 13

20 S20 15

POST-TEST OF EXPERIMENT

GROUP

No Students Scrore

1 S1 13

2 S2 14

3 S3 16,5

4 S4 13,5

5 S5 13

6 S6 14,5

7 S7 17,5

8 S8 15

9 S9 14,5

10 S10 12

11 S11 15

12 S12 15,5

13 S13 13,5

14 S14 14,5

15 S15 12,5

16 S16 12,5

17 S17 14,5

18 S18 14,5

19 S19 13,5

20 S20 17,5

Kompetensi Inti: 1. Menghayati dan mengamalkan ajaran agama yang dianutnya.

2. Menghargai dan menghayati perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggungjawab, peduli (toleransi, gotong royong), santun, percaya diri, dalam berinteraksi secara efektif

dengan lingkungan sosial dan alam dalam jangkauan pergaulan dan keberadaannya.

3. Memahami pengetahuan (faktual, konseptual, dan prosedural) berdasarkan rasa ingin tahunya tentang Ilmu pengetahuan, teknologi, seni, budaya terkait

fenomena dan kejadian tampak mata.

4. Mencoba, mengolah, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret (menggunakan, mengurai, merangkai, memodifikasi, dan membuat) dan ranah abstrak (menulis,

membaca, menghitung, menggambar, dan mengarang) sesuai dengan yang dipelajari di sekolah dan sumber lain yang sama dalam sudut pandang/teori.

No.

Kompetensi

Dasar

Materi Pokok

Kegiatan

Pembelajaran

Ranah

Kompetensi

Nilai Semangat Kewirausahaan dan Ekonomi

Kreatif

Penilaian Alokasi Waktu

Sumber Belajar

Jenis

Bentuk Instrumen/ Aktivitas

1.

2.1

2.2

Mensyukuri

kesempatan dapat

mempelajari

bahasa Inggris

sebagai bahasa

pengantar

komunikasi

internasional.

Menghargai

perilaku santun dan

peduli dalam

melaksanakan

komunikasi antar

pribadi dengan guru

dan teman.

Menunjukkan

perilaku jujur,

disiplin, percaya

diri, dan

bertanggung jawab

dalam

melaksanakan

komunikasi

transaksional

dengan guru dan

teman.

He is My

Favourite

Teacher

1. Teacher along with the

students begin the lesson by

praying to God.

2. Teacher gives motivation,

makes a condition of students

to follow the learning, as well

as explaining the learning

objectives

3. Teacher asks students to

practise the dialogue with his/her

friend about idol teacher, cute

pet, lovely house.

4. Teacher asks students to do

some activities and answer

some questions related to idol

teacher, cute pet, lovely house.

5. Teacher explains the

grammar about simple present

tense.

6. Teacher asks students to do

exercise related to the grammar.

Sikap

Sikap

Pengetahuan

dan

Keterampilan

Pengetahuan

Pengetahuan

Pengetahuan

dan

Keterampilan

• Berorientasi

pada tugas dan

hasil

• Kreatif

• Semangat

Penugasan

Pelatihan

• Kegiatan

Mandiri

• Kegiatan

Kelompok

• Kegiatan

Eksplorasi

• Ulangan/

Ulangan

Harian

• Pengamatan,

observasi,

praktikum, dan

aktivitas lainnya.

• Pengamatan,

observasi,

praktikum, dan

aktivitas lainnya.

• Pilihan ganda

dan bentuk

lainnya.

8 X 1 JP • Powerpoint

• Internet

• Majalah

• English Sentence Structure

• Fundamental of English Grammar.

• Buku Bahasa Inggris VII

• Referensi lain yang relevan

No.

Kompetensi

Dasar

Materi Pokok

Kegiatan

Pembelajaran

Ranah

Kompetensi

Nilai Semangat Kewirausahaan dan Ekonomi

Kreatif

Penilaian Alokasi Waktu

Sumber Belajar

Jenis Bentuk

Instrumen/ Aktivitas

2.3

3.7

4.11

\

4.12

4.11

4.12

Menunjukkan perilaku tanggung jawab, peduli, kerjasama, dan cinta damai, dalam melaksanakan komunikasifungsional.Memahami fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan dari teks deskriptif dengan menyatakan dan menanyakan tentang deskripsi orang, binatang, dan benda, sangat pendek dan sederhana, sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya. Menangkap makna dalam teks deskriptif lisan dan tulis, sangat pendek dan sederhana. Menyusun teks deskriptif lisan dan tulis, sangat pendek dan sederhana, tentang orang, binatang, dan benda, dengan memperhatikan fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan sesuai konteks.

7. Teacher asks students to

implicate their English skills

in a daily life.

Pengetahuan

dan

Keterampilan

Keterampilan

dan Sikap

Pengetahuan

dan

Keterampilan

Pengetahuan

dan

Keterampilan

Nilai Sikap : • Gemar membaca

• Mandiri

• Rasa ingin tahu

• Religius

• Proaktif

Cakupan Kualifikasi Kemampuan Sikap Pengetahuan Keterampilan

Menerima Mengingat Mengamati

Menjalankan Memahami Menanya

Menghargai Menerapkan Mencoba

Menghayati Menganalisis Menalar

Mengamalkan Mengevaluasi Menyaji

Mencipta

Lesson Plan of Experimental Group

RENCANA PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN

(RPP)

Satuan Pendidikan : MTs Jauharul Islam Muara Jambi

Mata pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris

Kelas/Semester : VIII 3/ Genap

Materi Pokok : Descriptive Text

Alokasi Waktu : 2 X 40 Menit

A. Kompetensi Inti (KI)

1. Menghargai dan menghayati ajaran agama yang dianutnya

2. Menghargai dan menghayati perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggungjawab,

peduli (toleransi, gotong royong), santun, percaya diri, dalam berinteraksi

secara efektif dengan lingkungan sosial dan alam dalam jangkauan

pergaulan dan keberadaannya.

3. Memahami pengetahuan (faktual, konseptual, dan prosedural)

berdasarkan rasa ingin tahunya tentang ilmu pengetahuan, teknologi, seni,

budaya terkait fenomena dan kejadian tampak mata.

4. Mencoba, mengolah, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret (menggunakan,

mengurai, merangkai, memodifikasi, dan membuat) dan ranah abstrak

(menulis, membaca, menghitung, menggambar, dan mengarang)sesuai

dengan yang dipelajari di sekolah dan sumber lain yang sama dalam sudut

pandang/teori.

B. Kompetensi Dasar

1. Mensyukuri kesempatan dapat mempelajari bahasa Inggris sebagai

bahasa pengantar komunikasi internasional.

2.1 Menghargai perilaku santun dan peduli dalam melaksanakan komunikasi antar pribadi

dengan guru dan teman

2.2 Menunjukkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, percaya diri, dan bertanggung jawab

dalam melaksanakan komunikasi transaksional dengan guru dan teman.

2.3 Menunjukkan perilaku tanggung jawab, peduli, kerjasama, dan cinta damai,

dalam melaksanakan komunikasi fungsional.

3.7 Memahami fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan dari teks

deskriptif dengan menyatakan dan menanyakan tentang deskripsi orang, binatang,

dan benda, sangat pendek dan sederhana, sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya.

4.11 Menangkap makna dalam teks deskriptif lisan dan tulis, sangat pendek dan

sederhana.

4.12 Menyusun teks deskriptif lisan dan tulis, sangat pendek dan sederhana,

tentang orang, binatang, dan benda, dengan memperhatikan fungsi sosial, struktur

teks, dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan sesuai konteks.

C. Indikator Pencapaian Kompetensi

1. Menunjukkan motivasi untuk mengembangkan kemampuan berbahasa

Inggris.

2. Mengidentifikasi ungkapan yang digunakan untuk mendeskripsikan

orang, hewan, serta benda (rumah).

3. Melakukan percakapan secara interpersonal dengan menggunakan ungkapan

yang digunakan untuk mendeskripsikan orang, hewan, serta benda melalui

kegiatan terintegrasi menyimak-berbicara bahasa Inggris dengan percaya diri.

D. Materi pembelajaran

Descriptive text

1. A description is a text that describe a particular person, place or thing.

2. A description consists of;

Identification

This part identifies a thing / person being described

Description

This part describes parts, qualities and characteristics.

3. An example of desription:

Identification identifies the person being desribed.

I live with my uncle.

Description describes the characteristic.

My uncle is big. He has oval face and handsome. My uncle has black, curly and

short hair. He is 75 kg and 170 cm. His hobbies are playing football and

swimming. My uncle is a great football player, he runs very fast. I love him so

much.

4. A description usually uses the simple present tense and adjective.

Example:

I live with my uncle

My uncle is a great football player.

E. Strategy Pembelajaran

Think-Pair-Share

F. Kegiatan Pembelajaran

Kegiatan Deskripsi Kegiatan Alokasi

Waktu

Pendahuluan Guru membuka pelajaran

Guru memeriksa kehadiran siswa, kesiapan

siswa dalam mengikuti KBM, kerapian dan

posisi tempat duduk

Melakukan brainstorming

Siswa dilibatkan dalam me-review

pelajaran sebelumnya.

Guru mengaitkan mengaitkan materi yang

akan dipelajari siswa dengan penegtahuan

yang telah diketahui oleh siswa

10 menit

Inti Observing

Guru mengajak peserta didik untuk

mengamati gambar pada papan tulis

Menanyakan beberapa hal yang berkenaan

dengan deskripsi orang: tall, short, pointed,

talkative, fat, slim, etc.

Communicating

Peserta didik mempersiapkan ide terkait

topik yang di diskusikan (Think)

Peserta didik bekerja berpasangan dan

berdiskusi dengan pasangannya tentang

topic yang dibahas (Pair)

Peserta didik menyampaikan hasil dari

60 Menit

diskusi mereka (Share)

Experimenting

Dalam bagian ini, guru menjelaskan

penggunaan “simple present tense” dalam

kalimat.

Siswa membuat descriptive text dalam

speaking monologue

Penutup Melakukan refleksi dengan bermain game

Siswa dilibatkan dalam menyimpulkan

pelajaran

Guru menyampaikan topik yang akan

dipelajari pada pertemuan selanjutnya

Guru menutup pelajaran

10 menit

G. Sumber / Media Pembelajaran

Sumber: buku paket siswa, buku When English Rings a Bell untuk

kelas VIII SMP/ MTs

Media: Gambar

H. Penilaian

Scoring rubric of speaking

Aspect Score

Grammar



grammar mistakes.






correct themselves.



1

2

3

4

Pronunciation




generally is fair.


communication.


1

2

3

4

Vocabulary





his/her ideas.





1

2

3

4

Fluency





1

2




words.



3

4

Comprehension


being conveyed.



discussed



1

2

3

4




9-12 Satisfactory

13-16 Good

17-20 Excellent

Mengetahui,

Kepala Sekolah Guru Mata Pelajaran Mahasiswa Peneliti

Yusnidar M. Daud, M. Pd. I Maria Lusi Septriani.W, S.Pd. Rini Setia Wati

NIP.197101021997032002 NIP. NIM.TE.130557

Lesson Plan of Control Group

RENCANA PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN

(RPP)

Satuan Pendidikan : MTs Jauharul Islam Muara Jambi

Mata pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris

Kelas/Semester : VIII 1/ Genap

Materi Pokok : Descriptive Text

Alokasi Waktu : 2 X 40 Menit

A. Kompetensi Inti (KI)

1. Menghargai dan menghayati ajaran agama yang dianutnya

2. Menghargai dan menghayati perilaku jujur, disiplin, tanggungjawab,

peduli (toleransi, gotong royong), santun, percaya diri, dalam berinteraksi

secara efektif dengan lingkungan sosial dan alam dalam jangkauan

pergaulan dan keberadaannya.

3. Memahami pengetahuan (faktual, konseptual, dan prosedural)

berdasarkan rasa ingin tahunya tentang ilmu pengetahuan, teknologi, seni,

budaya terkait fenomena dan kejadian tampak mata.

4. Mencoba, mengolah, dan menyaji dalam ranah konkret (menggunakan,

mengurai, merangkai, memodifikasi, dan membuat) dan ranah abstrak

(menulis, membaca, menghitung, menggambar, dan mengarang)sesuai

dengan yang dipelajari di sekolah dan sumber lain yang sama dalam sudut

pandang/teori.

B. Kompetensi Dasar

1. Mensyukuri kesempatan dapat mempelajari bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa

pengantar komunikasi internasional.

2.1 Menghargai perilaku santun dan peduli dalam melaksanakan komunikasi antarpribadi

dengan guru dan teman

2.2 Menunjukkan perilaku jujur, disiplin, percaya diri, dan bertanggung jawab

dalam melaksanakan komunikasi transaksional dengan guru dan teman.

2.3 Menunjukkan perilaku tanggung jawab, peduli, kerjasama, dan cinta damai,

dalam melaksanakan komunikasi fungsional.

3.7 Memahami fungsi sosial, struktur teks, dan unsur kebahasaan dari teks

deskriptif dengan menyatakan dan menanyakan tentang deskripsi orang, binatang,

dan benda, sangat pendek dan sederhana, sesuai dengan konteks penggunaannya.

4.11 Menangkap makna dalam teks deskriptif lisan dan tulis, sangat pendek dan

sederhana.

4.12 Menyusun teks deskriptif lisan dan tulis, sangat pendek dan sederhana,

tentang orang, binatang, dan benda, dengan memperhatikan fungsi sosial, struktur

teks, dan unsur kebahasaan, secara benar dan sesuai konteks.

C. Indikator Pencapaian Kompetensi

1. Menunjukkan motivasi untuk mengembangkan kemampuan berbahasa

Inggris.

2. Mengidentifikasi ungkapan yang digunakan untuk mendeskripsikan orang,

hewan, serta benda (rumah).

3. Melakukan percakapan secara interpersonal dengan menggunakan ungkapan

yang digunakan untuk mendeskripsikan orang, hewan, serta benda melalui

kegiatan terintegrasi menyimak-berbicara bahasa Inggris dengan percaya diri.

D. Materi pembelajaran

Descriptive text

A description is a text that describe a particular person, place or thing.

A description consists of;

Identification

This part identifies a thing / person being described

Description

This part describes parts, qualities and characteristics.

An example of desription:

Identification identifies the person being desribed.

I live with my uncle.

Description describes the characteristic.

My uncle is big. He has oval face and handsome. My uncle has black, curly and

short hair. He is 75 kg and 170 cm. His hobbies are playing football and

swimming. My uncle is a great football player, he runs very fast. I love him so

much.

A description usually uses the simple present tense and adjective.

Example:

I live with my uncle

My uncle is a great football player.

E. Metode Pembelajaran

Communicative language learning

F. Kegiatan Pembelajaran

Kegiatan Deskripsi Kegiatan Alokasi

Waktu

Pendahuluan Guru membuka pelajaran

Guru memeriksa kehadiran siswa, kesiapan 10 menit

siswa dalam mengikuti KBM, kerapian dan

posisi tempat duduk

Melakukan brainstorming

Guru mengaitkan mengaitkan materi yang

akan dipelajari siswa dengan penegtahuan

yang telah diketahui oleh siswa

Inti Observing

Guru mengajak untuk meng-Imagine

Pamannya masing-masing

Menanyakan beberapa hal yang berkenaan

dengan deskripsi orang: tall, short, pointed,

talkative, fat, slim, etc.

Communicating

Guru menjelaskan descriptive text

Siswa dikenalkan dengan kosakata yang

berkaitan dengan topik

Guru membimbing siswa dalam menyusun

descriptive text

Guru meminta peserta didik menanyakan

hal-hal yang mereka belum pahami

Experimenting

Dalam bagian ini, guru menjelaskan

penggunaan “simple present tense” dalam

kalimat.

Siswa diminta membuat descriptive text

dalam speaking monologue

60 Menit

Penutup Melakukan refleksi dengan bermain game

Siswa dilibatkan dalam menyimpilkan

pelajaran

Guru menyampaikan topik yang akan

dipelajari pada pertemuan selanjutnya

Guru menutup pelajaran

10 Menit

G. Sumber / Media Pembelajaran

Sumber: buku paket siswa, buku When English Rings a Bell untuk

kelas VII SMP/ MTs

H. Penilaian

Scoring rubric of speaking

Aspect Score

Grammar



grammar mistakes.






correct themselves.



1

2

3

4

Pronunciation




generally is fair.


communication.


1

2

3

4

Vocabulary





his/her ideas.



1

2

3

4



Fluency








words.



1

2

3

4

Comprehension


being conveyed.



discussed



1

2

3

4




9-12 Satisfactory

13-16 Good

17-20 Excellent

Mengetahui,

Kepala Sekolah Guru Mata Pelajaran Mahasiswa Peneliti

Yusnidar M. Daud, M. Pd. I Maria Lusi Septriani.W, S.Pd. Rini Setia Wati

NIP.197101021997032002 NIP. NIM.TE.130557

Instrument

Class :

Date :

Topics : 1. My Mother 3. My Friend

2. My Father 4. My Teacher

Instructions : Express the descriptive text based on the topics above

1. Choose one topic that has been given above!

2. Describe the topic in approximately 2 minutes!

(CURRICULUM VITAE)

Name : RINI SETIA WATI

NIM : TE 130557

Gender : Female

Date of Birth : Sungai Lokan, April 28th 1995

Address : Desa Sungai Lokan, Kec. Sadu, Kab. Tanjung Jabung

Timur

Motto : Man Jadda Wajada`

Identity : College Student

Email : [email protected]

Contact Person : 0823 774 523 51

Experience in organization:

The Member of Scout Racana Sulthan Thaha – Sri Soedewi UIN STS

Jambi

The Students Unity of English Department (T-SUEDE)

Educational Background:

No Level of Education Address

Year

1. SDN 39/X Sungai Lokan Sungai Lokan, Sadu, Tanjab Tim 2007

2. MTs Pon Pes Nurul Ihsan Tanjung Jabung Timur

Sungai Daun, Lagan Tengah, Geragai, Tanjab Tim 2010

3. MA Pon Pes Nurul Ihsan Tanjung Jabung Timur

Sungai Daun, Lagan Tengah, Geragai, Tanjab Tim 2013

4. UIN STS JAMBI Sei.Duren, Kec.Jaluko, Kab. Muaro Jambi 2018

Jambi, 16 July 2018 Writer

RINI SETIA WATI

NIM. TE 130557

THE EFFECT OF THINK-PAIR-SHARE STRATEGY ON ...repository.uinjambi.ac.id/997/1/TE.130557_RINI SETIA...

Documents

Transcript of THE EFFECT OF THINK-PAIR-SHARE STRATEGY ON ...repository.uinjambi.ac.id/997/1/TE.130557_RINI SETIA...