23952-Full Text

THE USE OF THINK-PAIR-SHARE STRATEGY TO DEVELOP
STUDENTS’ READING ACHIEVEMENT

(An Experimental Research at the 10thGrades of SMKN 1 Limbung, Kab. Gowa)
A THESIS
Submitted to the Faculty of Teachers Training and Education

Makassar Muhammadiyah University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement
for the Degree of Education inEnglish Department
SYAIPULLAH S.
10535 5228 12
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAININGANDEDUCATION
MAKASSARMUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY
2016
2
SURAT PERJANJIAN
Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:

Nama : SYAIPULLAH S.
NIM : 10535 5228 12
Jurusan : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
Judul Skripsi : The Use of Think-Pair-Share Strategy to Develop Students’
Reading Achievement (An Experimental Research at the 10th
Grades of SMKN 1 Limbung, Kab. Gowa)
Dengan ini menyatakan perjanjian sebagai berikut:
1. Mulai dari penyusunan proposal sampai dengan selesainya skripsi saya,

saya akan menyusun sendiri skripsi saya, tidak dibuatkan oleh siapapun.
2. Dalam menyusun skripsi, saya akan selalu melakukan konsultasi dengan
pembimbing.
3. Saya tidak akan melakukan penjiplakan (plagiat) dalam menyusun skripsi
ini.
4. Apabila saya melanggar perjanjian saya seperti yang tertera pada butir 1, 2
dan 3 maka saya bersedia menerima sanksi sesuai dengan aturan yang
berlaku.
Demikian perjanjian ini saya buat dengan penuh kesadaran.
Makassar, September 2016

Yang membuat perjanjian
SYAIPULLAH S.
3
SURAT PERNYATAAN
Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:
Nama : SYAIPULLAH S.
NIM : 10535 5228 12
Jurusan : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
Judul Skripsi : The Use of Think-Pair-Share Strategy to Develop Students’
Reading Achievement (An Experimental Research at the 10th
Grades of SMKN 1 Limbung, Kab. Gowa)
Dengan ini menyatakan bahwa skripsi yang saya buat di depan Tim
penguji adalah hasil karya saya sendiri bukan hasil ciptaan orang lain dan
dibuatkan oleh siapapun.
Demikianlah pernyataaan ini saya buat dengan sebenar-benarnya dan saya

bersedia menerima sanksi apabila pernyataan ini tidak benar.
Yang Membuat Pernyataan
SYAIPULLAH S.
4
ABSTRACT
SYAIPULLAH S., 2016. “The Use of Think-Pair-Share Strategy to

Develop Students’ Reading Achievement (An Experimental Research at 10th
Grade Students of SMK Negeri 1 Limbung”, under the thesis of English Education
Department the Faculty of Teachers Training and Education, Makassar
Muhammadiyah University (supervised by St. Asriati and Radiah).
The objective of the study is developing students’ literal reading

comprehension through Think-Pair-Share Strategy at the 10th Grade of SMKN 1
Limbung.
The research method was Pre-experimental Research. It used a purposive

sampling. The total number of sample was 36 students. The researcher used essay
test of reading test as instrument in pretest and posttest at X AK3 class.
The research findings showed that Think-Pair-Share Strategy gave greater
contribution to the students’ reading comprehension. In literal level, the students’
mean score of pretest was 73.66 and it was classified as fair good, posttest was
81.79 and it classified as fair good and the improvement of students’ achievement
in literal was 11.04%. Where the t-test is greater than t-table means that there is
significantly difference between pretest and posttest after using treatment. It
indicates that the alternative hypothesis (H1) was accepted and the null hypothesis
(H0) was rejected. Therefore, the data of posttest as the final result gave
significant improvement. It was concluded that the use of Think-Pair-Share
Strategy was able to give devalopment in teaching and learning reading
comprehension.
Keyword: Think-Pair-Share Strategy, Reading Comprehension
5
ACNOWLEDGEMENTS
In the name of Allah, most gracious, most merciful
Alhamdullilahi robbil alamin, first of all I would like to express my
deepest praise and gratitude to Allah SWT who has given me His blessing and
merciful to complete this thesis. Shalawat and salam are addressed to the final
chosen religious messenger, the Prophet Muhammad SAW.
I dedicated this thesis for my beloved parents Alm. H Sdjafruddin M. and
Hadrah T who always love, care, pray and support in my study, there is no
appropriate symbol which suitable to state my thanks to them, and for my beloved
Two Siblings.
I would like to convey my high appreciation and sincere thanks to my
supervisors St. Asriati, S.Pd and Dra. Radiah, M.Pd for their invaluable clear
perspective, professional expertise, and motivation along the researcher finished
this thesis.
The researcher realized that many people had given their helps and useful
suggestion for the finishing of this thesis. Without the assistance of them, this
thesis would never have existed. Therefore, the writer would like to express her
appreciation and sincere thanks to :
1. Dr. H. Abd Rahman Rahim, SE,.MM, the Rector of Makassar Muhammadiyah
University.
6
2. Dr. A. Syukri Syamsuri, M. Hum, the Dean Oof Training and Education
Faculty.
3. Erwin Akib, S.Pd, M.Pd, the Head English Education Department of FKIP
UNISMUS Makassar.
4. Specially thanks to all lectures of the FKIP UNISMUH especially to the
lectures of English Department for their guidance during my study.
Unforgettable thanks to all of my friends in class E.
5. Headmaster of SMKN 1 Limbung, the English Teacher and Students of
SMKN 1 Limbung.
6. Specially to my close friends that was gave me support and love starting from
the first semester until finish this thesis, of course for my best friends
(Dhani,Nuim, Aisyah,Safar,Shanti,Ahmad,Mia,AnnaRatnasari and Junaedah)
and all the members of the Students English Department that could not
mention one by one.
7. Speciall Thanks to Ni’ma Auliah that gaving me support, helping and love.
Finally, by reciting Alhamdulillahi Robbil Alamin, the researcher has been
success to finish her thesis.
The Researcher
SYAIPULLAH S.
7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TITLE PAGE.......... .......................................................................................... i
APPROVAL SHEET ........................................................................................ii
COUNSELLING SHEET..... ........................................................................... iii
SURAT PERJANJIAN .................................................................................... iv
SURAT PERNYATAAN.................................................................................. v
MOTTO.......... ................................................................................................. vi
ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT..... ......................................................................... viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................. x
LIST OF TABLE ............................................................................................ xiv
LIST OF GRAPHIC......................................................................................... xv
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. Background ............................................................................... 1
B. Problem Statement..................................................................... 2
C. Objective of the Study..... .......................................................... 3
D. Significance of the Study .......................................................... 3
E. Scope of the Study .................................................................... 3
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Previous Related Research Findings ......................................... 4
B. Concept of Reading ................................................................... 6
C. Definition of Reading Comprehension..................................... 12

8
D. Concept of Think-Pair-Share Strategy ..................................... 14
E. Theoretical Framework ............................................................ 20
F. Hypothesis ................................................................................ 21
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD
A. Research Design ....................................................................... 22
B. Population and Sample ............................................................. 23
C. Research Variable and Indicators ............................................. 24
D. Instrument of the Research....................................................... 24
E. Procedure of Collecting Data ................................................... 25
F. Techniques of Data Analysis.................................................... 25
CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
A. Findings .................................................................................... 29
B. Discussion................................................................................. 35
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion................................................................................ 39
B. Suggestion ................................................................................ 39
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDICES
CURRICULUM VITAE
9
LIST OF TABLES
page
Table 3.1 Rubric for Main Idea and Details..................................................... 25
Table 3.2 Score Classification of Reading....................................................... 26
Table 4.1 Rate Percentage and Frequency of The Students’ Literal
Comprehension in Term of Main Idea ............................................ 30
Table 4.2 Rate Percentage and Frequency of The Students’ Literal
Comprehension in Term of Details ................................................. 31
Table 4.3 The Mean Score of Students’ Literal Comprehension..................... 33
Table 4.4 The T-Test Value of Students’ Reading Comprehension ................ 34

10
LIST OF GRAPHICS
Page
Graphic 4.1 The Score Percentage and Frequency of The Students’ Literal
comprehension In Term of Main idea......................................... 31
Graphic 4.2 The Score Percentage and Frequency of The Students’ Literal
comprehension In Term of Details ............................................ 32

11
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background
As a global language, English plays an important role in the world.
Although English is not a language with the largest number of native
speakers, English has become the bridge between two or more parties with
different languages to communicate one another. It is also stated by Harmer
(2007: 1) that English has become a lingua franca that is widely adopted for
communication between two speakers whose native languages are different
from each other’s. Moreover, one or both speakers are using it as a
‘second’language. This condition makes English becomes important to be
mastered.
In Indonesia, English is taught as a compulsory subject for Senior
High School, Junior High School, and even in Elementary School. In each
level of school, there are four skills that should be mastered in learning
English, they are; listening, speaking, reading, and writing.Reading is one of
language skills which is still difficult to master for the students. It can be seen
from the general students‟ comprehension about topic in the text. They are
difficult to comprehend the topic which they read.
Reading skill is also important skill because by reading the students
can get a lot of information, they can enrich their vocabulary, knowledge,
12
spelling and their writing, so that they need to improve their ability in reading
comprehension because it is very fundamental skill. Through Reading ability,
they will show how good they understand English.
One of the most effective methods in cooperative learning to teach
reading comprehension is the Think-Pair-Share (TPS) which was developed
by Lyman. TPS consists of wait-time, verbal rehearsal, discussion, and
cooperative learning. Several research have discovered that the TPS strategy
can help the students to foster the academic performance in several
disciplines. TPS strategy has many advantages on reading comprehension
skills of the students (Glomo-Narzoles, 2012).
The observation in SMKN 1 LIMBUNG shown that the 10th Grade
Students of Accounting major have some problem in reading, especially in
comprehending a text or story. The students difficult to get the main idea and
the meaning of the text.Based on the explanation above, the researcher
conducts a research by the title “The Effectiveness of Think-Pair-Share
Stratgy to Develop Students’ Reading Achievement at 10th Grade Students of
SMKN 1 Limbung”.
B. Problem Statement
The research is aimed at discovering the use of Think-Pair-Share
Strategy to develop the students’ reading skill. In order to shape the research,
the researcher tries to answer the research question formulated as follows:

13
”How does Think-Pair-Share Strategy develop students’ reading
comprehension at the 10th Grade of SMKN 1 Limbung?”
C. Research Objectives
The purpose of this research is to answer the problem that has been
previously formulated and determined. Therefore, the objectives of the study
is to find whether the use of Think-Pair-Share develop the students’ reading
comprehension at the 10th grade of SMKN 1 Limbung.
D. Significance of The Study
For the researcher, this research contributes a useful experience. For
the teachers, this research could be used to formulate a suitable procedure for
teaching reading. Besides that, the result of the research hopefully would be
very beneficial for the other researchers. So, it could increase their knowledge
to make a new research. For the students, it could increase the students’
reading skill.
E. Scope of The Study
This researchfocused on using Think-Pair-Share Strategy in narrative
text to improve the students’ literal reading comprehension at the 10 th Grade
Students of SMKN 1 Limbung. Reading comprehension here means the
students proficiency to understand a narrative and answer the question about
the text. And the comprehension will focus on giving literal reading
comprehension in recalling main ideas and details.
.
14
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
A. Previous Related Research Findings
There are some previous researcher have conducted a study of students
reading ability. Some of them are presented below :
Sulistyorini (2011), in her thesis “The Use of Think-Pair-Share
Strategy to Improve Students ’ Speaking Ability”. The students’ speaking
ability can be improved by using think-pair-share strategy. The findings
shows that the difference of the pre-test score’s average of the experimental
and control groups was 1.21 while the difference average score of the post-
test was 3.85. In addition, the difference between the pre-test and the post-test
of experimental group is 18.09. It is higher than the control group which has
average score of 15.45. It can be concluded that think-pair-share strategy is
effective to improve the students’ speaking ability.
Widyaningsih (2014), in her thesis “Improving The Eight Grade
Students’ Reading Skill Through The Think-Pair-Share Techniqueat SMP
Negeri 3 WonosariGunungkidul”. It showed that Think-Pair-Share Strategy
was successful in improving the students reading skills. Based on the research
conducted, the use of the Think-Pair-Share technique in this research
successfully improved the students’ reading skill. The finding showed that
the Think-Pair-Share technique was successful in improving students’

15
reading skill. The improvement could be seen from the increase of students’
reading scores. Besides, the finding also showed that the Think-Pair-Share
technique was effective in enhancing the students’ participation, especially in
terms of sharing ideas, asking and answering questions.
Listiani (2014), in her thesis “Improving Reading Comprehension
Through Think Pair Share Technique At The Eight Grade Students of SMPN
2 ABIANSEMAL In Academic Year 2013/2014”. Think Pair Share Strategy
was an effective Strategy used to improve the students‟ ability in reading
comprehension.The students‟ result of the post-test in each cycle obviously
showed that there was significance improvement concerning the subjects‟
ability in Reading Comprehension in the term of narrative text in which it
improved from level low to good. This research furthermore showed that
there was changing learning behavior as the result of the positive responses
concerning the technique applied in improving the subjects‟ reading
comprehension skill. To sum up, the presentclassroom action study proved
that think pair share could improve reading comprehension at the eighth grade
students of SMPN 2 Abiansemal in academic year 2013/2014; in addition, the
subjects also responded positively in reading comprehension through think
pair share.
Astiyandha (2013), in her thesis “The Effectiveness of Think-Pair-
Share Method to Teach Reading Comprehension Viewed from Students ’
Motivation” stated that Think-Pair-Share (TPS) is an effective teaching
method for teaching reading comprehension.

16
Based on the previous findings above, the researcher using Think-Pair-
Share Strategy in teaching reading because Think-Pair-Share Strategy can
improve students’ achievement in Reading. This research has difference with
previous findings above which use Think-Pair-Share Strategy in junior high
school. Here, the researcher will apply The Think-Pair-Share Strategy in
Vocational school.
B. Concept of Reading
1. Definition of Reading
There are many definitions of reading. Leipzig (2001) states that
reading requires words recognition, comprehension, and fluency. According
to Pang, et al (2009) and Richards and Schmidts (2002), reading is to
understand written texts. It is a complex activity that involves both perception
and thought. Reading consists of two related process: word recognition and
skill. Word recognition refers to the process of perceiving how written
symbols correspond to one spoken language. Readers typically make use of
background knowledge, vocabulary, grammatical knowledge, experience with
text and other strategies to help them understand written text.
According to Aebersold and Field (1997:15), reading is what happens
when people look at a text and assign meaning to the written symbols in the
text. The similar definition is stated by Nuttal (1996:4-7) defines reading as a
way to get meaning (message) from a text. In other word, it presents about the
process of communication as the sender encodes a message in a text.

17
Patel & Jain (2008:113) state that reading is the most activity in
language class. Reading is not only a source of information and pleasurable
activity but also as a means of consolidating and extending one’s knowledge
of the language. Reading is very necessary to widen the mind and gain and
understanding of the foreign culture. Reading is certainly an important
activity for expanding knowledge of a language.
According to Nunan (1999), reading is a process of reconstructing
meaning rather than decoding form and the reader only resorts to decode if
other means fail. He also says that reading is usually conceived of as a
solitary activity in which the reader interacts with the text in isolation. Most
people do silent reading. They need an isolation environment to comprehend
the reading.
From the statements above, it can be concluded that reading is an
interactive process between the reader and the text in order to gain an
understanding of a written text. The understanding is made by reconstructing
meaning rather than decoding form. Comprehending reading needs a text, a
reader and the social context.
2. Reading Skill
Reading is a complex interactive process that is very important to
learn. By learning skills, students will have good reading competence. They
will get fewer difficulties when they do a reading activity. The reading skill,
once developed, is the one which can be most easily maintained at a high
level by the students themselves without further help from a teacher.

18
Davies in Nunan (1999) reviews studies conducted by Lunzer and
Gardner and Agustein and Tho that set out the different reading skills. The
first of these is receptive reading, where the readers read fast and it will be
done automatically. The example is when the readers read narratives. The
second is reflective reading, here the readers often stop to read and think of
what the information they need from the text. Next, skim reading is high-
speed reading that can save lots of time. The readers who are skimming get
the general sense of a passage or a book. The last, scanning is very high-
speed reading. It is the way of reading to search for specific information.
3. The Purpose of Reading
Reading as interpreting means reacting to a written text as a piece of
communication. In other words, we assume some communicative intent on
the writer’s part which the reader has some purposes in attempting to
understand. Wallace (1992:4). Purpose determines how people read a text.
Wallace (1992:6-7) classifies the reading purpose into three categories:
a. Reading for Survival
Reading for survival refers to some kinds of reading in
response to our environment. It serves immediate deeds or wishes, for
example a “stop” signs for motor rider.
b. Reading for Learning
Reading for learning serves the wider role of extending our
general knowledge of the world. A good deal of reading to support
learning takes place in academic context. For example, the situation

19
when the readers read aloud a text either individually to the whole
class with, as may become evident on questioning, little understanding
of its context.
c. Reading for Pleasure
While reading for survival involves an immediate response to
a situation and reading for learning for learning is also goal oriented,
reading for pleasure is done for its own sake.
Based on the purpose of reading above, teaching reading in
senior high school is focused on reading for learning. The students are
trying to comprehend or understand the message in this selection of
essential facts. One indication that students already comprehends the
selection is when he or she can answer the questions based on the
selection.
4. Strategies of Reading
According to Duffy in Richards and Renandya (2002), reading strategy
can be defined as “plans for solving problems encountered in constructing
meaning”. It ranges from bottom-up vocabulary strategies such as connecting
what is being read to the readers’ background knowledge.
In addition, Brown (2001) explains some strategies which can be used
in comprehending the reading text. The following are some comprehension
strategies which can be practically applied in the classroom:

20
a. Identifying the purpose in reading
b. Using graphemic rules and patterns to aid in bottom-up decoding
(especially for the beginning level learners)
c. Using efficient silent reading Strategys for relatively rapid
comprehension (for intermediate to advanced levels)
d. Skimming the text for the main ideas
e. Scanning the text for specific information
f. Using semantic mapping or clustering
g. Guessing when you are not certain
h. Analyzing vocabulary
i. Distinguishing between literal and implied meanings
j. Capitalizing on discourse markers to process relationships.
Those are some discussions about strategy in reading that can aid the
students in the classroom. Those strategies are intentionally developed in
order to enhance the reading comprehension of the students. However, it
belongs to the students themselves to determine and choose the effective
and appropriate reading strategies for them. The students should also
consider their own skill and need in practicing the reading strategy
5. Assessing Reading Skill
Assessment is measurement done by the teacher to know how far the
students have already understood the materials that has been discussed. In
teaching reading, assessment is aimed to measure how far the students
comprehend text. According to Alderson (2000), there are some Strategysthat

21
can be used by teachers to assess the reading comprehension of the students
as follow:
a. Integrative Test
These tests are designed to obtain a much more general idea of how
well students read a text.
b. The cloze and Gap-filling test
These cloze test is constructed from a collected text arranged by
applying random deletion procedure for words. The words deleted are
between five and twelve. Meanwhile, the gap-filling test does not used
random deletion, but rational deletion. The words which are deleted
represent the idea about what the whole sentences.
c. Multiple Choice Strategy
It is the common Strategy usually done by teachers in assessing
reading comprehension. This Strategy allows the students to choose the
right answer from some possible answer given
d. Matching Strategy
This Strategy allows the students to match two sets of components.
For example, the testers match the title with paragraphs.
e. Dichotomous Strategy
This Strategy allows the tester to choose two possible answers given
i.e. true and false. The students have to choose one of those two choices.
22
f. Short-answer Strategy
The short-answers Strategy is constructed by giving questions
requiring a brief response in a view words. It is possible used to interpret
and to see whether the students have really understood the specific
information of the text.
g. The Summary Test
This Strategy allows the students to summarize the main idea of each
paragraph of the whole text.
C. Definition of Reading Comprehension
There are many definitions of reading comprehension. A prevalent and
current view is that comprehension is a special kind of readers comprehend by
actively constructing meaning internally from interacting with the material that is
read (Alexander, 1977 : 160). Successful comprehension involves the readers
discovering the meaning to achieve particular purpose set for, or by, him. It may
be finding particular piece of information, solving a problem through reading,
working to understand an idea, or following a set of direction.
According to Smith and Johnson (1980) states that reading comprehension
means the understanding, evaluating utilizing of information and gained through
the interaction between reader and author. Reading comprehension means
understanding what has or have been read.

23
D. Level of Comprehension.
When the reader has no clearly defined specific, purpose but is simply
reading, he may be said to comprehend at one or more levels, the term “level”
does not mean simply different degree of difficulties it refers to the attitude and
reaction to what is read ( Alexander, 1977 :161 )
a. Literal Comprehension
If the reader is getting only literal meaning, he is reading receptively and
somewhat passively, he is reading receptively and a some what passively. He is
trying to receive only words the author has to say. This level of comprehension
involves surface meaning. Being able to read for literal meaning sated ideas is
influenced by one’s mastery of vocabulary in context.
b. Interpretive or inferential comprehension.
Higher of level comprehension involves reading beyond or between the
lines. The reader brings knowledge and experience to the act of reading and
draw inferences. Interpretive of referential comprehension includes thinking
process such as drawing conclusion, making generalization out comes.
c. Critical or Applied Reading Comprehension.
For literal comprehension, the reader needs only to understand exactly
what at is stated to receive the author literal massage. For higher level of
24
comprehension, the reader is involved in an interchange of ideas with the
author and applies reading to life situation.
E. Definition of Main Idea and Details
Main Idea is chief point an author is making about a topic. It sums up the
author’s primary message. Statement of the main idea. It is the statement
under which other material in the paragraph – examples, reasons, facts, details
and other evidence – can fit. (Lagan, 1992)
Details is paragraph contains facts, statements, examples-specifics which
guide us to a full understanding of the main idea. They clarify, illuminate,
explain, describe, expand and illustrate the main idea and are supporting
details. (Lagan, 1992)
F. Concept of Think-Pair-Share Strategy
1. The Nature of Think-Pair-Share
Think Pair Share is a cooperative learning discussion. This simple
but very useful method is developed by Frank Lyman of the University of
Maryland. Think-Pair-Share is a strategy designed to provide students with
“food for thought” on a given topics enabling them to formulate individual
ideas and share these ideas with another student. It is a learning strategy
developed to encourage students’ classroom participation. Rather than
using a basic recitation method in which a teacher poses a question and
one student offer a response, Think-Pair-Share encourages a high degree
of pupil response and can help keep students on task (Richards and
Rodgers, 2001:198).
25
According to Kagan (1994), 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, pair with another
student to discuss their thinking and share their ideas with the group.
Think pair share has grown out of the cooperative learning
developed by Frank Lyman and his colleagues at the University of
Maryland. It is an effective way to change the discourse pattern in a
classroom. It challenges the assumptions that all recitations or discussions
need to be held in whole-group settings, and it has built-in procedures for
giving students more time to think and to respond and to help each other
(Arends, 2009:370).
Furthermore, according to Himmele&Himmele (2000:32) states that
think pair share is a powerful tool, it is only as powerful as the prompt on
which students are asked to reflect. Use prompts that require students to
analyze the various points of view or the components that are inherent in
your standard target. Ask questions that require students to explain how
these components fit together or affect one another.
Arends (2009:370-371) states that think pair share has grown out of
the cooperative learning developed by Frank Lyman and his colleagues at
the University of Maryland. It is an effective way to change the discourse
pattern in a classroom. Suppose a teacher has just completed a short
presentation or students have read an assignment or a puzzling situation
the teacher has described. The teacher now wants students to consider
26
more fully what she has explained. She chooses to use think pair share
strategy rather than whole-group question and answer. Think pair share
has some steps should be followed by the teacher such as:
Step 1 : Thinking, the teacher poses a question or an issue associated
with the lesson and asks students to spend a minute thinking alone about
the answer or the issue. Students need to be taught that talking is not part
of thinking time.
Step 2 : Pairing, next, the teacher asks students to pair off and
discuss what they have been thinking about. Interaction during this period
can be sharing answer if a question has been posed or sharing ideas if a
specific issue was identified. Usually, teachers allow no more than four or
five minutes for pairing.
Step 3 : Sharing, in the final step, the teachers asks the pairs to share
what they have been talking about with the whole class. It is effective to
simply go around the room from pair to pair and continue until about a
fourth or half of the pairs have had a chance to report.
Slavin (1995:132) describes Think-Pair-Share as follows: When
the teacher presents a lesson to the class, students sit in pairs within their
teams. The teacher poses questions to the class. Students instructed to
think of an answer. Finally, the teacher asks students to share their agreed-
upon answers with the rest of the class.
According to Robertson (2006), the definition of the Think-Pair-
Share Strategy is a strategy designed to enable the students to formulate

27
their individual ideas and share these ideas with another student. It is a
learning strategy that associates the teacher to encourage students’
classroom participation. Rather than using a basic presentation method in
which teacher poses questions and the students’ offer the response, the
Think-Pair-Share Strategy encourages a high degree of students’ response
and can help keep students on task.
2. The Steps of Using the Think-Pair-Share Strategy
There are three steps of student action in the Think-Pair-Share
Strategy stated by Lyman (1981). The actions are focused on what students
are going to do at each step. The steps are think, pair and share. The first is
think; teacher begins to spark students thinking with a question, prompt or
observation. The students then pause to THINK about the question. The
“think” step may require students merely to be quiet for a few moments
and ponder their thoughts about the question. They may write thoughts in
response to the question. The second is pair; students PAIR up to talk
about the answer each come up with. They compare notes and identify the
answer they think are the most interesting or best fit the task at hand. The
third is share; students share with one another first and then the teacher
calls for pairs to SHARE their thinking with the others in the class. Go
around the groups calling on each pair. In the “share” step of strategy,
students can share their ideas in several ways. One way is to have all
students stand and after each students responds, he or she and the students
sit down with a similar response. This continues until everyone is seated.
28
Another way is to move quickly through the class, having students respond
quickly, one after the other, or to have a class vote. Responses can be
recorded on an overhead projector or on a graphic organizer for future
discussions. Another variation is to stop after the ‘pair’ step, and have
students write their ideas. Collect students’ responses and asses any
problem in understanding.
3. The Purpose of TPS
This simple questioning technique keeps all the students involved
in class discussions and provides an opportunity for every child to share an
answer to every question. It is a learning technique that provides
processing time and builds in wait-time which enhances the depth and
breadth of thinking. It takes the fear out of class discussion by allowing the
students to think carefully about their answers and talk about them with a
partner before they are called on to respond. For shy or tentative students,
this can help put the emphasis back on learning instead of on simply
surviving class (Lyman, 1981).
According to Lie (2008:46), there are some purposes of working
in pairs. First, it can increase the students’ participation. Second, the
students will have more opportunities to give their contribution. Last, it is
not washing time to build a team.
According to Millis and Cottel (1998), the Think-Pair-Share
technique has some purposes. The first is providing “think time” creating
29
the quality of the students’ answer. Second, students become actively
involved in thinking about the concept presented in the lesson. Third,
research tells us that we need time to mentally “chew over” new ideas in
order to store them in memory. When teachers present too much
information all at once, much of that information is lost. If we give the
students time to “Think-Pair-Share” throughout the lesson, more of the
critical information is retained. Fourth, when students talk over new ideas,
they are forced to make sense of those new ideas in terms of their prior
knowledge. Their misunderstanding about the topic are often revealed
(and resolved) during this discussion stage. Fifth, students are more willing
to participate since they do not feel the peer pressure involved in
responding in front of the whole class. Sixth, the Think-Pair-Share
technique is easy to use on the spur of the moment and the seventh is easy
to use in large class.
4. Using the Think-Pair-Share Strategy to Teach Reading
Various kinds of instructional Strategy can be used in teaching
reading. Teachers can prepare any Strategy that meets the needs of the
students to achieve the successfulness of the teaching and learning process.
Brown& Thompson (2000) proposes seven rules in implementing a group
Strategy in cooperative learning. They are introducing the Strategy,
designing the use of small group for Strategy, modeling the Strategy
giving clear and detailed instructions, avoiding class.

30
The implementation of Cooperative Learning in the teaching and
learning process of reading requires many preparations both theoretically
and technically. Those preparations should be understood by the teacher
and students as the main elements who involve directly in the classroom.
As a Strategy of Cooperative Learning, the Think-Pair-Share Strategy is
advantageous strategy that could be used as an active and interactive
process in teaching reading. With some stages of the Think-Pair-Share
Strategy (Thinking, Pairing, Sharing), students are promoted to a Strategy
of Cooperative Learning which is able to improve students’ academic
performance in reading comprehension.
G. Theoretical Framework
The Theoreticalframework underlying this research is given thefollowing
diagram:
Input Reading
Process Using Think-Pair-

Share Strategy
Output
Developing The
Students’ Literal
Comprehension
1. Main idea
2. Details
31
The conceptual framework above shows the process of the research to
improve the students’ reading comprehension. The comprehensions that are
going to improve in this research is literal that cover to find out main idea in
reading through Think-Pair-Share Strategy. The teacher using Experimental
Research in applying Think-Pair-Share Strategy. First the teacher explains the
Think-Pair-Share Strategy and its advantages to the students, after that students
listen to a short lecture delivered by the teacher and instruct to read and discuss.
Answer question the text given by using the strategy that was have been taught to
them. The aim of this research is the improve of students’ reading comprehension.
H. Hypothesis
The hypothesis of the research presented as follows:
H1 (Alternative hypothesis) : There is a significant difference of the
students’ reading comprehension before and after presenting reading material
by using Think-Pair-Share Strategy.
(H0) Null hypothesis : There is no significant difference of the
students’ reading comprehension before and after presenting reading material
by using Think-Pair-Share Strategy.

32
CHAPTER III
THE METHOD OF THE RESEARCH
This chapter consisted of research design, population and sample, research
variable instrument of the research, procedure of collecting data and Strategy of
data analysis.
A. Research Design
The research design was a Pre-Experimental Method, with one group
pretest and posttest design. In this research, t-test was used to test the significance
difference of students’ reading comprehension before and after conducting
treatment.
The design was presented as follows:
01 X 02
01 X 02
Where:
O1: Pre-test
X: Treatment
O2: Post-test(Gay, 1981:225).

33
1. Pretest
Before doing the treatment, the students were given pretest to know their
prior knowledge. In this case, the researcher gave pretest before presenting
reading text; pre test was administered to the students by spending 40 minutes
2. Treatment
Treatment was the teaching and learning process. The treatment was
carried out four meetings and each meeting the researcher gives one Narrative
texts as teaching materials.
3. Posttest
Post-test was given after the students do the task of reading materials.
Post test was carried out to find out the students’ achievement in learning reading
comprehension after learning by using narrative text trough Think-Pair-Share
Strategy.
B. Population and Sample
a. Population
The population of this research was the 10th Grade Students of SMKN 1
Limbung. The second grade consisted of fourteen classes. Each class consisted
of 36 students. So, the total number of the population were 504 students.
b. Sample
The researcher applied the purposive sampling technique in choosing the
sample of the research. The researcher decided to choose X AK 3 class which
consisted of 36 students. This class was taken as a sample of the research

34
based on an information from the English teacher of the class, the students’
comprehension in reading narrative text was better than the other classes.
C. Research Variables and Indicators
1. Variables
The following were the variables of the research:
a. Think-Pair-Share Strategy as independent variable is the important
process to which allow the students to improve reading comprehension.
b. Reading comprehension as the dependent variable of the research
consist of students’ literal comprehension.
2. Indicator
The indicators in this research was the students’ improve in reading a text
after learning process using Think-Pair-Share Strategy that focus on literal
comprehension.
D. Instrument of the Research
The researcher used essay test for pre-test and post-test to assess students’
reading comprehension. The pre-test was given before the treatment to know the
students’ prior knowledge in reading comprehension. The post-test was conducted
after applying Think-Pair-Share Strategy. The reading test consisted of questions
related to the text given covering the main idea and details.
35
E. Procedure of Collecting Data
In collecting the data, the researcher use some procedures as follows :
1. Giving pre test to find out students’ basic ability in reading
comprehension,
2. Applying Think-Pair-Share Strategy in the treatment.
The steps of Think-Pair-Share Strategy are:
1. Think; teacher began to spark students thinking with a question,
prompt or observation.
2. Pair; students paired up to talk about the answer each come up
with.
3. Share; students shared with one another first and then the teacher
called for pairs to share their thinking with the others in the class.
3. Conducting post-test to evaluate students’ reading comprehension using
Think-Pair-Share Strategy.
F. Teechniques of Data Analysis
1. To score the students’ answer the researcher will use the following
formula:
36
Table 3.1. Rubric for Main Idea and Detail
No. Criteria of Main Idea Criteria of Details Score
Student response is Student response includes 4

1. complete, specific, and at least 2 key details from
correct. the passage that support
the main idea of the
passage
Student response is Student response includes 3
2. accurate, but not at least 2 details with at
complete. least one key detail from
the passage that supports
the main idea of the
passage.
Student response gives Student response includes 2
3. details instead of main 2 details which does not
idea. support the correct main
idea.
Student response is not Student response includes 1
4. correct, but is one detail that does not
attempted. support the main idea.
Student did not attempt Student did not attempt to 0
5. to respond to the item. respond to the item.
(Michelle)
Scoring the students answer :
Score = x 100
(Gay, 1981)
37
Table 3.2. The Score Classification of Reading
No. Score Category

1 96-100 Excellent
2 86-95 Very Good
3 76-85 Good
4 66-75 Fair Good
5 56-65 Fair
6 46-55 Poor
7 0-45 Very Poor
(Depdikbud, 1985:6)
2. Calculating the mean score:
∑
X=
Where : X : Mean Score
∑X : The total row score
N : The total number
(Gay, 1981)
3. Calculating the percentage:
P= x 100%
Where : P = Percentage
F = Frequency
N = Number of Subject
38
4. Calculating the improvement of the students’ score of pre-test and post-
test, the researcher uses the following formula :
P= X2-X1 X 100%
X1
Where : X1 = Mean score of pre-test
X2 = Mean score of post-test
P = Improvement
(Gay,1981)
5. Finding out the significance difference between the pre-test and post-test by
calculating the value of the test. The following formula is employed:
t =
(∑ )
∑
( )
Where : t : Test of significance
D : The mean score from the differentscore of
pretest and posttest
∑D : Standard deviation
N : Number of students
(Gay, 1981)
39
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter particularly presents the findings of the research and
discussion. The findings of the research consist of the description of the result of
data collected through the pre-test and post-test. It presents the result of the
students’ reading comprehension in literal comprehension (main idea and Details)
by using Think-Pair-Share Strategy, while the discussion of the research covers
further explanation of the findings.
A. Findings
The findings of the research contains clear answer to the problem
statements as obtainable objective of the research which it aims to find out the
improvement of the students’ reading comprehension by using Think-Pair-Share
Strategy at the 10th grade students of SMK Negeri 1 Limbung. It can be seen the
result data of analysis through the result of the pre-test and post as follows:
1. The Improvement of Students’ Reading Comprehension (Main Idea and
Details)
The data of reading test of the students’ were obtained by literal
comprehension (main idea and Details). In other to know the students’ reading
comprehension, the score of the literal comprehension observer as follows:

40
Table 4.1. Rate Percentage and Frequency of The Students’ Literal

Comprehension In Term of Main idea
Pretest Posttest
Classification Score F % F %
Excellent 96-100 - - 3 8,33%
Very good 86-95 3 8,34% 9 25%
Good 76-85 14 38,89% 16 44,44%
Fair good 66-75 8 22,22% 6 16,67%
Fair 56-65 6 16.66% 2 5,56%
Poor 46-55 5 13,89% - -
Very poor 0-45 - - - -
Total 36 100% 36 100%
Base on the rate percentage above, in pretest it’s found that there was not
students’ got excellent, 3 (8.34%) students’ got very good, 14 (38.89%) students
got good, 8 (22.22%) students got fair good, 6 (16.66%) students got fair, 5
(13.89%) students got poor, and then there was not students got very poor. Then,
in posttest it’s found that there were 3 (8.33%) students’ got excellent, 9 (25%)
students’ got very good, 16 (44.44%) students got good, 6 (16.67%) students got
fair good, 2 (5.56%) students got fair, there was not students got poor and very
poor.
41
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Excellent (96- Very Good Good (76-85) Fair Good Fair (56-65) Poor (46-55) Very Poor (0-
100) (86-95) (66-75) 45)
Pretest F Pretest % Posttest F Posttest %
Graphic 4.1. The Score Percentage and Frequency of The Students’ Literal
comprehension In Term of Main idea
Based on the Table 1 and Graphic 1 above the researcher concluded that
students reading comprehension in literal comprehension (main idea) most of
them got good with 14 students (38.89%) in pretest then in posttest got good with
16 students (44.44%).
Table 4.2. Rate Percentage and Frequency of The Students’ Literal

Comprehension In Term of Details
Pretest Posttest
Classification Score F % F %
Excellent 96-100 1 2.78% 3 8.33%
Very good 86-95 5 13.88% 10 27.78%
Good 76-85 13 36.11% 17 47.22%
Fair good 66-75 12 33.02% 5 13.89%
Fair 56-65 4 10.11% 1 2.78%
Poor 46-55 2 4.16% - -
Very poor 0-45 - - - -
Total 36 100% 36 100%
42
Base on the rate percentage above, in pretest it’s found that there was 1
(2.78%) students’ got excellent, 5 (13.88%) students’ got very good, 13 (36.11%)
students got good, 12 (33.02%) students got fair good, 4 (10.11%) students got
fair, 2 (4.16%) students got poor, and then there was not students got very poor.
Then, in posttest it’s found that there were 3 (8,33%) students’ got excellent, 10
(27.78%) students’ got very good, 17 (47.22%) students got good, 5 (13.89%)
students got fair good, 1 (2.78%) students got fair, there was not students got poor
and very poor.
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Excellent (96- Very good Good (76-85) Fair good (66- Fair (56-65) Poor (46-55) Very poor (0-
100) (86-95) 75) 45
Pretest F Pretest % Posttest F Posttest %
Graphic 4.2. The Score Percentage and Frequency of The Students’ Literal
Comprehension In Term of Details
Based on the Table 2 and Graphic 2 above the researcher concluded that
students reading comprehension in literal comprehension (Details) most of them
got good with 13 students (36.11%) in pretest, and then in posttest got good with
17 students (47.22%).
43
2. The Improvement of Students’ Literal Comprehension
The students’ literal comprehension in reading can be seen in the
following table:
Table 4.3. The Mean Score of Students’ Literal Comprehension

Indicator Pretest Posttest Improvement %
Main idea 72.25 81.78 13.19%
Details 75.06 81.81 8.99%
Table 3 above shows that the score of main idea improved (13.19%) from
the mean score in pretest is 72.25 to be 81.78 in posttest and Details improved
(8.99%) from the mean score in pretest is 75.06 to be 81.81 in posttest. It indicates
that the score of literal comprehension each indicator in posttest is higher than
pretest.
Based on these result, it can be concludes that using Think-Pair-Share
Strategy can improve the students’ reading comprehension in terms of literal
comprehension.
3. Hypothesis Testing (t-test of Significant)
Hypothesis testing is needed to find out whether the hypothesis is
accepted or rejected. If the result of t-test is higher than t-table’ value, the null
hypothesis (H0) will be rejected, and if the result of t-test was lower than
the t-table’ value, the null hypothesis (H0) will be accepted. The result of the
statistical analysis of t-test at the level of significance 0.025 with degree of
freedom (df) = n – 1, where n: number of students is 36. It can be seen as follows:

44
df = n-1,
df = 36-1, df = 35
Based on the level of significance and the degree of freedom (df) =
29(p) = 0.05 above, the value of the t-table = 2.030. The result of t-test for reading
comprehension focused on main idea and supporting can be seen below:
Table 4.4.The T-test value of Students’ Reading Comprehension
Mean Mean
Comp
Variable score of score of t-test t-table Classification
arison
Pre-test Pre-test
t-test> Significantly
X2 – X1 73.66 81.79 6.947 2.030
t-table Different
Table above shows that t-test value for reading comprehension focus on
literal comprehension (main idea and Details)with the t-test value was 6.947>
2.030. It indicates that the result of t-test value in all of variable and indicator was
higher than t-table value. It means that there was a significant different between
the result of pretest and posttest in reading comprehension.
Based on these results, it can conclude that there is significant difference
of the students’ reading comprehension deal with literal comprehension (main
idea and Details) before and after using Think-Pair-Share Strategy.
B. Discussion
In this section discusses about the result of the data collected and analysis
through a testing as explained in the previous section shows about the

45
improvement the students’ reading comprehension of a text in terms of literal
comprehension (main idea and Details)
In the treatment process, the researcher had done the teaching learning
process more interesting by using Think-Pair-Share Strategy. The students would
do the different learning process, which the students made imaging what they will
be read. It indicated that the students were more active and helps them recalling
main idea towards comprehending the text.
Meanwhile, the test used on this research was aimed at finding out the
improvement of the students’ reading comprehension by using Think-Pair-Share
Strategy. The findings show that there was a improvement and significant
difference between the students’ result in pretest and posttest. It can be indicated
as follow:
1. The Students’ Reading Comprehension in literal comprehension (main
idea)
Literal comprehension represents the ability of the students to understand
the content of the text by main idea. Main idea is more than just guessing what is
going to happen next. Main idea helps students become actively involved in
reading and helps to keep their interest level high. Main idea can also hepls the
students more fully comprehend what they have read and will retain the
information for longer periods of time.
Based on the results of finding that before giving the treatment, the
students literal comprehension is categorized into fair good in main idea on pretest
46
but after treatment, categorized into good in main idea on posttest. Table 3 above
shows that the mean score of main idea in posttest was improved from the mean
score in pretest.
2. The Students’ Reading Comprehension in Literal Comprehension
(Details)
Main idea represents the ability of the students to keep track of the
important ideas and information conveyed in the text such as key of main idea.
And Details need to understand the ideas and information in the text and put those
ideas into your own words. Used Details to remember the most important
information in what you read and help to understand difficult sentences or ideas.
Based on the results of finding that before giving the treatment, the
students’ literal comprehension is categorized into fair good in answering question
and make a Details on pretest but after treatment, categorized into good in
answering question on posttest. Table 3 above shows that the score of detalis in
posttest was improved from the mean score in pretest.
3. The Improvement of the Students’ Reading Comprehension
Reading comprehension means the understanding, evaluating utilizing of
information and gained through the interaction between reader and author.
Reading comprehension means understanding what has or have been read.
Successful comprehension involves the readers discovering the meaning to
achieve particular purpose set for, or by, him. It may be finding particular piece of
47
information, solving a problem through reading, working to understand an idea, or
following a set of direction.
After the calculating the entire of score variable, the data on the table 3
show that the students’ reading comprehension in pretest was improved from the
mean score in pretest. It is indicated by the mean score posttest is higher than
pretest. Therefore, Think-Pair-Share Strategy is able to improve the students’
reading comprehension at the second grade of SMK Negeri 1 Limbung.
4. The Test of the Students’ Significant.
Hypothesis testing is needed to find out whether the hypothesis is
accepted or rejected. The result of the statistical analysis of t-test at the level of
significance (p) = 0.025 with degree of freedom (df) = 35 and the value of t-table
= 2.030. The data on table 4 show that t-test of reading comprehension is 6.947 >
2.030.
Based on these result of discussion above, it can be concludes that using
Think-Pair-Share Strategy is able to improve the students’ reading comprehension
in terms of literal comprehension (main idea and Details). It is also indicated that
there is a significant of difference between pretest and posttest which the t-test is
higher than t-table (t-test > t-table), it means that the alternative hypothesis (H1) is
accepted and the null hypothesis is rejected (H0)

48
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This chapter consisted of two parts. The first part is conclusion based on
the research findings and conclusion. The second part is suggestion based on the
conclusion.
A. Conclusion
Based on discussion proposed in previous chapter, the following
conclusionsare presented:
1. Think-Pair-Share Strategy was effective to improve the students’ reading
comprehension in term of main idea at the 10th Grade Students of SMKN 1
Limbung. The improvement is proved by the result of the statistical analysis
that the students’ ablity to recalling main idea is increase 13.19%.
2. Think-Pair-Share Strategy was effective to improve the students’ reading
comprehension in term of details at the 10th Grade Students of SMKN 1
Limbung. The improvement is proved by the result of the statistical analysis
that the students’ ablity to recalling details is increase 8.99%.
B. Suggestion
Based on the conclusion above , the researcher presents some suggestions
as follows:
1. It is suggested that the English teacher at the 10th Grade of SMKN 1
Limbung use Think-Pair-Share Strategy as alternative in presenting the

49
reading comprehension (literal comprehension) materials, because it is
effective to improve the students achievement.
2. It is suggested for the next researcher as additional reference while
conduct the same research using the same strategy.

50
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aebersold, Jo Ann and Field, Mary Lee. 1997. From Reader to Reading Teacher:
Issues and Strategies for Second Language Classrooms. New
York:Cambridge University Press.
Alderson, C. L. 2000. Assessing Reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Alexander, J. Estill, 1977. Teaching Reading Third Edition. USA : Scott
Foresman And Company.
Arends, Richard I .2009. Learning to Teach. New York : Mc. Grow Hill
Componies
Astiyandha, Tauricha. 2013. The Effectiveness of Think Pair Share Method To
Teach Reading Comprehension Viewed From Students’ Motivation.
Graduated School. Universitas Sebelas Maret.
Brown, D. and Thompson C. 2000. Cooperative Learning in New Zealand School.
Palmerston North, NZ: Dunmore Press.
Brown, H.D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language
Depdikbud. 1985. Petunjuk Proses Pelaksanaan Belajar Mengajar dan Petunjuk
Pelaksanaan System Pendidikan. Jakarta.
Gay, L.R. 1981. Education Research. (Merrin Publisher Company)
Glomo-Narzoles, D.T. (2012). Think-pair-share: Its Effect on the Academic
Performance of ESL Students. ANGLISTICUM: International Journal of
Literature, Linguistics & Interdisciplinary studies, I(1), 1-8.
Harmer, Jeremy. 2007. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Fourth
Edition. Harlow, England: Pearson Longman.
Himmele, Persida and Himmele, William. 2000. Total Participations Technique.
ASCD
Kagan, S. 1994. Cooperative Learning. San Clemente: Resource for Teachers.
Lagan, J. 1992. Ten Steps to Improving Collage Reading Skills; 2nd Edition.
Townsend Press; 2 Edition.
Leipzig, D.H. 2001. Whatis Reading? Reading Rockets:.
Http://www.readingrockets.org/article/what-reading
Lie, Anita. 2008. Cooperative Learning. Mempraktkkan Cooperatve Learning di
Ruang-ruang Kelas. Jakarta: Grasindo. E. Mulyasa
51
Listiani, Ni Kadek. 2014. Improving Reading Comprehension Through Think Pair

Share At The Eighth Grade Students of SMPN 2 ABIANSEMAL In
Academic Year 2013/2014. FKIP. Universitas Mahasaraswati Denpasar.
Lyman, F. 1981. The Responsive Class Discussion. Maryland: University of
Maryland.
Michelle, E. Main Idea and Supporting Details Rubric.
www.rcampus.com/rubricshowc.cfm?code=F44X45&sp=true
Millis, B.J. & Cottel, P.G. 1998. Cooperative Learning for Higher Education
Faculty. Phoenix: Oryx Press.
Nunan, D. 1999. Second Language Teaching. Massachusetts: Heinle and Heinle
Publisher.
Nuttal, C. 1996. Teaching Reading Skills In A Foreign Language: New Edition,

2nd edition Edition. Heinemann: 2nd Edition
Pang, Elizabeth S, A. Muaka, E. B. Bernhard and Kamil. 2009. “Teaching

Reading. International Academy of Education”,
http://www.ibe.unesco.org/publication/EducationalPracticeSeriesPdf/pract
12e.pdf. Accesssed on January 3rd, 2012.
Patel, M.F and Jain, M. Praveen. 2008. English Language Teaching (Methods,
Tools and technique). Jaipur : Sunrise. Pedagogy (2nd Ed.). New York:
Longman.
Richards, J. C. and R. Schmidt. 2002. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching
& Applied Linguistics. London: Pearson Educational Limited
Richards, J. C. and W. A. Renandya. 2002. Methodology in Language Teaching.
New York:Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J.C. and Rodgers, T.S. 2001. Approahes and Methods in Language
Teaching. New York:Cambridge University Press.
Robertson, K. 2006. Increase Students Interaction by Think-Pair-Share
Technique. MexicoCity: Colorin Colorado.
Slavin, Robert E. 1995. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice.
Allyn and Bacon, 1995. University of Michigan.
Smith, Richard J, And JohnsonDale D. 1980. Teaching Children To Read Second
Edition. Usa. Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
52
Sulistyorini, Yuliana. 2011. The Use Of Thinkthe Use Of Think-Pair-Share

Strategyshare Strategy To Improve Students’ Speaking Abilityto Improve
Students’ Speaking Abilityto Improve Students’ Speaking Ability. Faculty
Of Languages And Arts .Semarang State University
Wallace, Catherine. 1992. Reading (Language Teaching: A Scheme for Teacher
Education). Oxford University Press.
Widyaningsih, Nurjannah. 2014. Improving The Eighth Grade Students’ Reading
Skill Through The Think-Pair-Share Technique At SMP Negeri 3
Wonosari Gunungkidul. Faculty of Language And Arts. Universitas
Yogyakarta.
53
s
54
APPENDIX A
THE LIST NAME OF THE STUDENTS OF CLASS X AK 3 SMKN 1

LIMBUNG KAB. GOWA
No Sample Code
1 AYU FITRIANI NINGSIH S-1
2 ANNAJMA HAFID S-2
3 ANNISA S-3
4 AURIA SHELIANY S-4
5 CHAIRUL IMRAN S-5
6 DELA CITRA S-6
7 ERIKA RAHMAN S-7
8 HEBRIANSYAH S-8
9 FITRI S-9
10 HASRUL S-10
11 HENDRIYANI S-11
12 KURNIAWAN S-12
13 MUH. ASWAN AKBAR S-13
14 MUH. FAJAR S-14
15 MUH. AGUNG S-15
16 MURNI S-16
17 MUTHAHIDAH S-17
18 NIKEN AYU AGUSTIN S-18
19 NUR HALISAH R S-19
20 NURHILDAYANTI S-20
21 NUR ISMA DAMAYANTI S-21
22 NUR LINDAYANI S-22
23 NURRAHMADINA S-23
24 NIURUL WAHDANIAH S-24
25 PUTRI NADILA S-25
26 PUTRI RAHAGIENA CAHYANI S-26
27 RESKYANTI S-27
28 RESTU S-28
29 RINDIANI S-29
30 RISMAWATI KARIM S-30
31 ROSMIATI S-31
32 SUGIANTI SUMARDI S-32
33 SYUCHAIRA ASSUQI S-33
34 WAHYU NINGSI S-34
35 WALFAJRIN S-35
36 YUNIRA S-36
55
APPENDIX B
DAFTAR HADIR SISWA KELAS X AK 3 SMKN 1 LIMBUNG KAB.

GOWA
No Name
1 AYU FITRIANI NINGSIH √ √ √ √ √ √
2 ANNAJMA HAFID √ √ √ √ √ √
3 ANNISA √ √ S √ √ √
4 AURIA SHELIANY √ √ √ √ √ √
5 CHAIRUL IMRAN √ √ √ √ √ √
6 DELA CITRA √ √ √ √ √ √
7 ERIKA RAHMAN √ √ √ √ √ √
8 HEBRIANSYAH √ √ √ √ √ √
9 FITRI √ √ √ √ √ √
10 HASRUL √ √ √ √ √ √
11 HENDRIYANI √ √ √ √ √ √
12 KURNIAWAN √ √ √ √ √ √
13 MUH. ASWAN AKBAR √ √ √ √ √ √
14 MUH. FAJAR √ √ √ √ √ √
15 MUH. AGUNG √ √ √ I √ √
16 MURNI √ √ √ √ √ √
17 MUTHAHIDAH √ √ √ √ √ √
18 NIKEN AYU AGUSTIN √ √ √ √ √ √
19 NUR HALISAH R √ √ √ √ √ √
20 NURHILDAYANTI √ √ √ √ √ √
21 NUR ISMA DAMAYANTI √ √ √ √ √ √
22 NUR LINDAYANI √ √ √ √ √ √
23 NURRAHMADINA √ √ √ √ √ √
24 NIURUL WAHDANIAH √ √ √ √ √ √
25 PUTRI NADILA √ √ √ √ √ √
26 PUTRI RAHAGIENA CAHYANI √ √ √ √ √ √
27 RESKYANTI √ √ √ √ √ √
28 RESTU √ √ A √ √ √
29 RINDIANI √ √ √ √ √ √
30 RISMAWATI KARIM √ √ √ √ √ √
31 ROSMIATI √ √ √ √ √ √
32 SUGIANTI SUMARDI √ √ √ √ √ √
56
33 SYUCHAIRA ASSUQI √ √ √ √ √ √
34 WAHYU NINGSI √ √ √ √ √ √
35 WALFAJRIN √ √ √ √ √ √
36 YUNIRA √ √ √ √ √ √
57
APPENDIX C
THE CLASSIFICATION SCORE OF STUDENTS’ PRE-TEST AND POST-
TEST IN LITERAL
Indicator (Main Idea)

Students Pre-test Post-test
Main idea Classifying Main idea Classifying
S-1 75 fair good 80 good
S-2 65 fair 85 good
S-3 80 Good 86 very good
S-7 68 fair good 66 fair good
S-8 50 poor 75 fair good
S-9 85 Good 96 excellent
S-10 64 fair 76 good
S-12 76 Good 75 fair good
S-14 50 poor 65 fair
S-16 78 Good 85 good
S-18 86 very good 88 very good
S-23 63 fair 70 fair good
S-29 88 very good 96 excellent
58

59
APPENDIX D
THE CLASSIFICATION SCORE OF STUDENTS’ PRE-TEST AND POST-
TEST IN LITERAL
Indicator (Details)
Students Pretest Posttest
Details Classifying Details Classifying
S-1 80 good 90 very good
S-4 79 good 80 good
S-6 76 good 76 good
S-10 80 good 80 good
S-15 75 fair good 86 very good
S-33 95 excellent 95 excellent
60

61
APPENDIX E
THE SCORE OF PRE TEST IN READING COMPREHENSION
NO MAIN IDEA DETAILS SCORE
1 75 80 77,5
2 65 55 60
3 80 88 84
4 80 79 79,5
5 70 80 75
6 78 76 77
7 68 90 79
8 50 75 62,5
9 85 84 84,5
10 64 80 72
11 80 81 80,5
12 76 75 75,5
13 55 72 63,5
14 50 55 52,5
15 68 75 71,5
16 78 65 71,5
17 78 86 82
18 86 82 84
19 75 74 74,5
20 70 63 66,5
62
21 50 70 60
22 76 87 81,5
23 63 68 65,5
24 85 55 70
25 85 70 77,5
26 70 79 74,5
27 68 56 62
28 76 70 73
29 88 85 86,5
30 65 68 66,5
31 55 78 66,5
32 78 70 74
33 91 95 93
34 65 70 67,5
35 75 80 77,5
36 80 86 83
Total 2601 2702 2651,5

63
APPENDIX F
THE SCORE OF POST TEST IN READING COMPREHENSION
NO MAIN IDEA DETAILS SCORE

1 80 90 85
2 85 70 77,5
3 86 92 89
4 88 80 84
5 80 86 83
6 86 76 81
7 66 95 80,5
8 75 85 80
9 96 86 91
10 76 80 78
11 88 90 89
12 75 74 74,5
13 75 84 79,5
14 65 65 65
15 76 86 81
16 85 85 85
17 85 95 90
18 88 82 85
19 90 70 80
20 80 76 78
64
21 62 80 71
22 86 86 86
23 70 75 72,5
24 90 82 86
25 90 78 84
26 78 79 78,5
27 80 80 80
28 85 76 80,5
29 96 86 91
30 80 80 80
31 70 80 75
32 85 68 76,5
33 96 95 95,5
34 85 75 80
35 80 88 84
36 86 90 88
Total 2944 2945 2944,5

65
APPENDIX G
THE GAIN SCORE (D) OF THE STUDENTS’ READING
COMPREHENSION
Kode Reading Comprehension

Siswa Pre-test Post-test D D2
S-1 77,5 85 7,5 56,25
S-2 60 77,5 17,5 306,25
S-3 84 89 5 25
S-4 79,5 84 4,5 20,25
S-5 75 83 8 64
S-6 77 81 4 16
S-7 79 80,5 1,5 2,25
S-8 62,5 80 17,5 306,25
S-9 84,5 91 6,5 42,25
S-10 72 78 6 36
S-11 80,5 89 8,5 72,25
S-12 75,5 74,5 -1 1
S-13 63,5 79,5 16 256
S-14 52,5 65 12,5 156,25
S-15 71,5 81 9,5 90,25
S-16 71,5 85 13,5 182,25
S-17 82 90 8 64
S-18 84 85 1 1
S-19 74,5 80 5,5 30,25

66
S-20 66,5 78 11,5 132,25
S-21 60 71 11 121
S-22 81,5 86 4,5 20,25
S-23 65,5 72,5 7 49
S-24 70 86 16 256
S-25 77,5 84 6,5 42,25
S-26 74,5 78,5 4 16
S-27 62 80 18 324
S-28 73 80,5 7,5 56,25
S-29 86,5 91 4,5 20,25
S-30 66,5 80 13,5 182,25
S-31 66,5 75 8,5 72,25
S-32 74 76,5 2,5 6,25
S-33 93 95,5 2,5 6,25
S-34 67,5 80 12,5 156,25
S-35 77,5 84 6,5 42,25
S-36 83 88 5 25
Total 2651,5 2944,5 293 3255,5
Mean 73,56 81,79 8,14 90,43

67
APPENDIX H
THE STUDENTS’ MEAN SCORE OF THE STUDENTS’ TEST
1. Mean of pretest in literal comprehension (main idea)
= 72,25
2. Mean of posttest in literal comprehension (main idea)
= 81,78
3. Mean of pretest in literal comprehension (Details)
= 75,06
4. Mean of posttest in literal comprehension (Details)
= 81,81
68
APPENDIX I
THE IMPROVEMENT OF STUDENTS IN LITERAL COMPREHENSION
1. Improvement students in literal (main idea)
P= x 100
P= x 100
P= x 100
P=
= 13,19
The students’ improvement= 13,19%
2. Improvement students in literal comprehension (Details)
P= x 100
P= x 100
P= x 100
P=
= 8,99
The students’ improvement= 8,99%

69
APPENDIX J
CALCULATING THE T-TEST ANALYSIS
Calculating the t-test analysis of reading comprehension.
NOTES : ∑ = 8,14
(∑ D) = 90,43
N = 36
− (∑ ) ( , )
2
66,26
D= = =
−
D = 1,841
=
(∑ )
∑
( )
,
=
(8,14)
,
30
( )
70
,
=
( . )
,
( )
,
=
, ,
,
=
,
,
t=
√ .
,
t= =
.
t= 6,947
71
APPENDIX K
LESSON PLAN
RENCANA PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN
( RPP I&2)
Satuan Pendidikan : SMKN 1 Limbung
Mata Pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris
Kelas/Semester : X/Ganjil
Alokasi Waktu : 4 x 45 menit
I. Standar Kompetensi : Membaca
11.1 Memahami makna dalam dalam text lisan
fungsional dan monolog pendek berbentuk
procedure dan Narrative text untuk berinteraksi
dengan lingkungan sekitar.
II. Kompetensi Dasar :
11.2 Merespon makna yang terdapat dalam
monolog sangat sederhana secara akurat,
lancar dan berterima untuk berinteraksi
dengan lingkungan terdekat dalam text
berbentuk narrative dan procedure.

72
III. Indikator Pembelajaran:
 Membaca text narative dan procedure text
dengan rasa ingin tahu.
 Menjawab pertanyaan tentang informasi
yang terdapat dalam text.
IV. Tujuan Pembelajaran
 Siswa dapat membaca dengan baik bacaan
narative text dengan rasa ingin tahunya.
 Siswa dapat menjawab pertanyaan–pertanyaan
yang terdapat dalam narrative text
V. Materi Ajar : “The Flowers From The Moon ”
VI. Model dan Metode Pembelajaran
a. Model Pembelajaran : Think-Pair-Share Technique
b. Metode :
VII. Kegiatan Pembelajaran
a. Pertemuan Pertama
Kegiatan Awal
 Membaca doa.
 Mengecek kehadiran siswa.
 Melakukan apersepsi.
73
Kegatan Inti
 Guru memberikan pertanyaan atau isu yang
berkaitan dengan pelajaran kemudian siswa
diminta untuk memikirkan jawaban dari
pertanyaan dan isu secara individu.
 Guru membagi siswa menjadi berpasang-
pasangan.
 Siswa diminta untuk saling berbagi pendapat
mengenai masalah/tugas yang diberikan.
 Guru meminta setiap perwakilan grup untuk
mempresentasikan hasil diskusi dari teks yang
telah di baca.
 Siswa menentukan ide pokok pada setiap
paragraph.
Kegiatan Akhir
 Guru dan siswa menyimpulkan materi.
 Guru menanyakan perasaan siswa selama proses
pembelajaran berlangsung.
 Guru memberikan tugas lanjutan sebagai
pekerjaan rumah.
 Guru menutup pembelajaran.

74
b. Pertemuan Kedua
Kegiatan Awal
 Membaca doa.
Kegatan Inti
pasangan.
telah di baca.
 Siswa menentukan details pada setiap text yang
diberikan.
75
Kegiatan Akhir
pekerjaan rumah.
VIII. Sumber dan Media Pembelajaran
 Sumber : - Buku lain yang relevan
 Buku text English in Focuse
 Media : Spidol, Penghapus, whiteboard
IX. Penilaian
Skor Perolehan
Nilai siswa:  100
Skor Maksimal
, 2016
Mengetahui,
Guru Mata Pelajaran Mahasiswa Peneliti
SYAIPULLAH S.
10535 5228 12
76
( RPP 3)
Satuan Pendidikan : SMKN 1 LIMBUNG
Kelas/Semester : XI/Genap
X. Standar Kompetensi : Membaca
XI. Kompetensi Dasar :
XII. Indikator Pembelajaran:

77
XIII. Tujuan Pembelajaran
 Siswa dapat menjawab pertanyaan – pertanyaan
XIV. Materi Ajar : “MUSIC”
XV. Model dan Metode Pembelajaran
b. Metode :
XVI. Kegiatan Pembelajaran
a. Pertemuan ketiga
Kegiatan Awal
Kegatan Inti
pasangan.
78
telah di baca.
paragraph.
 Siswa menentukan detail.
Kegiatan Akhir
homework.
XVII. Sumber dan Media Pembelajaran

79
XVIII. Penilaian
Skor Perolehan
Nilai siswa :  100
Skor Maksimal
, 2016
Mengetahui,
SYAIPULLAH S.
10535 5228 12
80
( RPP 4)
Satuan Pendidikan : SMKN 1 LIMBUNG
Kelas/Semester : XI/Genap
XIX. Standar Kompetensi : Membaca
XX. Kompetensi Dasar :
XXI. Indikator Pembelajaran:

81
XXII. Tujuan Pembelajaran
 Siswa dapat menjawab pertanyaan – pertanyaan
XXIII. Materi Ajar : “Tobacco”
XXIV. Model dan Metode Pembelajaran
b. Metode :
XXV. Kegiatan Pembelajaran
b. Pertemuan ketiga
Kegiatan Awal
Kegatan Inti

82
pasangan.
telah di baca.
paragraph.
 Siswa menentukan detail
Kegiatan Akhir
homework.
XXVI. Sumber dan Media Pembelajaran

83
XXVII. Penilaian
Skor Perolehan
Nilai siswa :  100
Skor Maksimal
, 2016
Mengetahui,
SYAIPULLAH S.
10535 5228 12
84
APPENDIX L
PRETEST AND POSTTEST
PRETEST
THE FLOWERS FROM THE MOON
High in the mountains live a prince whose great wish was to journey to the
moon, because he love its gentle glow. His dream finally comes true. When he
reaches the moon he discovered its light came from the moon king’s beautiful
daughter.
The two young people soon fall in love, but the worlds they come was just
too different and soon they had to part. As a sign of her great love, the moon
king’s daughter give the prince one of the smooth and lovely flowers that covered
the moon like snow and this was how the first alpine flower was bring to earth.
Anwer the question below!
1. When did the story happen?

2. Where did the story take place?
3. What did the king’s daughter give to the prince?
4. What is the main idea of the text above?
a. First Paragraph
b. Second Paragraph
85
KEY ANSWERS
1. The story happen when someone want to journey to the moon

2. The story take place in the moon
3. The moon king’s daughter gave the prince one of the smooth and
lovely flowers.
4. A. prince who have big hope to journey to the moon
B. The two young people love each other, but unable live together.
86
POSTEST
MUSIC
Music may be defined as the art of organizing sounds and silences into
meaningful patterns. Music is one of the oldest arts. In the world history, every
civilization is accompanied by any form of music. Thus, music is a part of every
civilization. There are many kinds of music, such as a classical music, waltz, jazz,
pop music, and rock'n roll music. In this text we are going to discuss about jazz
music.
Jazz began in the early 20th century as music of black Americans. It was
intended for singing, dancing, entertaining and party atmosphere. Since then, jazz
continued to develop. There are many leading singers, instrumentalists, and
composers in the world. Jazz also influenced almost every other kind of music.
Jazz represents a blending of musical elements from Africa and from Europe. Jazz
uses some European ideas of harmony and melody, but the rhythms are more
African in origin. It is irregular in rhythm.
Jazz has also developed in Indonesia. Most people in Indonesia know who
Ireng Maulana is. He and his band often appear on television. His band is one of
the leading jazz music bands
Answer the question below:
1. What is the main idea of the text above?

c. First Paragraph
d. Second Paragraph
e. Third Paragraph
2. What are the kinds of music in the text above?
3. When did the music Jazz begin as music of black Americans?
87
Key Answer:
1. a. Music is one of the oldest art who liked by many people in the word.
b. Jazz began in the early 20th century as music of black Americans
c. Jazz has also developed in Indonesia.
2. The kinds of music are classical music, waltz, jazz, pop music, and rock’n
roll music.
3. Jazz began in the early 20th century as music of black Americans
88
DOCUMENTATION
89
90
CURRICULUM VITAE
SYAIPULLAH S. was born in Ujung
Pandang, November 29, 1994. His father’s name is
Alm. H. Sdjafruddin M. and his mother’s name is
Hadrah. He is the Third child of 3 Sisters. He
begans her elementary school at SDN Bontomaero 1
and graduated in 2006, He continued his study at
SMPN 1 Bajeng and graduated in 2009,
After finishing his study in junior high school, He continued his study at
SMAN 1 Bajeng and graduated in 2012. In the same year 2012, He was
registered as a student of English Department of Makassar Muhammadiyah
University on strata one program.

23952-Full Text

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

23952-Full Text

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

THE USE OF THINK-PAIR-SHARE STRATEGY TO DEVELOP

STUDENTS’ READING ACHIEVEMENT

Submitted to the Faculty of Teachers Training and Education

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:

Dengan ini menyatakan perjanjian sebagai berikut:

1. Mulai dari penyusunan proposal sampai dengan selesainya skripsi saya,

Demikian perjanjian ini saya buat dengan penuh kesadaran.

Makassar, September 2016

Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:

Demikianlah pernyataaan ini saya buat dengan sebenar-benarnya dan saya

Makassar, September 2016

Yang Membuat Pernyataan

SYAIPULLAH S., 2016. “The Use of Think-Pair-Share Strategy to

The objective of the study is developing students’ literal reading

The research method was Pre-experimental Research. It used a purposive

In the name of Allah, most gracious, most merciful

Alhamdullilahi robbil alamin, first of all I would like to express my

chosen religious messenger, the Prophet Muhammad SAW.

I dedicated this thesis for my beloved parents Alm. H Sdjafruddin M. and

I would like to convey my high appreciation and sincere thanks to my

perspective, professional expertise, and motivation along the researcher finished

appreciation and sincere thanks to :

1. Dr. H. Abd Rahman Rahim, SE,.MM, the Rector of Makassar Muhammadiyah

4. Specially thanks to all lectures of the FKIP UNISMUH especially to the

lectures of English Department for their guidance during my study.

Unforgettable thanks to all of my friends in class E.

5. Headmaster of SMKN 1 Limbung, the English Teacher and Students of

(Dhani,Nuim, Aisyah,Safar,Shanti,Ahmad,Mia,AnnaRatnasari and Junaedah)

mention one by one.

Finally, by reciting Alhamdulillahi Robbil Alamin, the researcher has been

success to finish her thesis.

Makassar, September 2016

APPROVAL SHEET ........................................................................................ii

COUNSELLING SHEET..... ........................................................................... iii

SURAT PERJANJIAN .................................................................................... iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT..... ......................................................................... viii

LIST OF TABLE ............................................................................................ xiv

C. Objective of the Study..... .......................................................... 3

D. Significance of the Study .......................................................... 3

E. Scope of the Study .................................................................... 3

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

A. Previous Related Research Findings ......................................... 4

B. Concept of Reading ................................................................... 6

C. Definition of Reading Comprehension..................................... 12

D. Concept of Think-Pair-Share Strategy ..................................... 14

E. Theoretical Framework ............................................................ 20

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD

A. Research Design ....................................................................... 22

B. Population and Sample ............................................................. 23

C. Research Variable and Indicators ............................................. 24

D. Instrument of the Research....................................................... 24

E. Procedure of Collecting Data ................................................... 25

F. Techniques of Data Analysis.................................................... 25

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

Table 3.2 Score Classification of Reading....................................................... 26

Table 4.1 Rate Percentage and Frequency of The Students’ Literal

Comprehension in Term of Main Idea ............................................ 30

Table 4.2 Rate Percentage and Frequency of The Students’ Literal

Comprehension in Term of Details ................................................. 31

Table 4.3 The Mean Score of Students’ Literal Comprehension..................... 33

Table 4.4 The T-Test Value of Students’ Reading Comprehension ................ 34