Using Think- Pair Share Cooperative Learning strategy to

Improve EFL University Students' Achievement

Abstract
This study aims at finding whether Think-Pair Share Cooperative
Learning strategy can improve EFL University Students' Achievement.
The sample of this study is chosen from the first year students in the
Department of English Language in The College of Education for
Humanities at Tikrit University in the Academic year (2019/ 2020) and it
consists of (80) students in which (40) students are experimental group
and the others (40) students are control group .The two groups are
equalized according to certain variables. This study adopted experimental
design and the results are collected through pre-post achievement test
.The students in the experimental group are taught according to Think-
Pair Share cooperative learning strategy, while those in the control group
are taught according to traditional method. Statistical formula is used to
analyze the results. The results showed that there are statistically
significant differences between experimental and control groups in the
results of post-test in favor of experimental group. This indicated that the
EFL students' achievement is improved by using Think-Pair Share
strategy.

Keywords: Think-Pair Share_ Cooperative Learning_ strategy_

Improve_ Achievement

Introduction .1
Statement of the Problem 1.1
Students' achievement is the main goal of any teaching and learning
processes. EFL students face many difficulties in learning English
language and the students usually show a low level of achievement. The
researcher believes that most of EFL students have limited level in their
abilities that prevent them from developing their academic learning
achievement because cooperative learning strategies are usually neglected
.in EFL classes or in language learning in general

Cooperative learning is one of the active learning strategies which comes

as a reaction of traditional learning system and it can be used with
different groups of students(Zaitoun, 2013:42). This type of learning
focuses on teacher- student interaction as well as students-student
interaction and it affects on the behavior and learning styles. By using
cooperative learning, the students are given an opportunity to share ideas
with each other and it allows the students to work together in different
.cooperative groups(Nasr,2016:213)

The educational system in Iraq is still dependent on the traditional

methods and the students are mainly depend on memorization rather than
understanding in learning contexts. There is a neglecting in using of
effective teaching methods and strategies and it can be noticed that there
is a real need for Iraqi EFL students to develop their academic abilities
and learning achievement. Hence, it is important to carry out such a study
.in order to develop EFL students' achievement

Aims of the Study 1.2

This study aims at:

[Link] agreeable learning forms and empowering collaboration

among understudies in the class

[Link] the improvement of the understudies' accomplishment in

the wake of being instructed by utilizing Think-Pair Share technique.

[Link] understudies the inspiration for learning by utilizing fascinating

procedure with regards to instructing and learning.

4. Increasing the teachers' awareness toward using different and active

strategies in the class.

5. Finding out if there are any statistically significant differences between

the experimental and control group after the using of Think-Pair Share
cooperative learning strategy.

1.3 Hypotheses of The Study

The following hypotheses have formulated in order to be tested:

1 . There are no statistically significant differences between the mean

scores of the experimental group and that of the control group due to the
results of the pre-test.

2. There are no statistically significant differences between the mean

scores of the experimental group and that of the control group due to the
results of the post-test.

3. There are no statistically significant differences between the mean

scores of the experimental group due to the results of the pre-test and
post-test.

Theoretical Background .2
The Concept of Achievement 2.1
Achievement is a work that should be done by students hard work and by
using learning ability(Collins,2003:7). The objective of any educating and
learning forms is to show up to an elevated level of accomplishment. The
term (accomplishment) is gotten from the action word (achievement)
which means picking up the succeed when attempting to arrive at a
specific target by doing an exertion in a specific learning territory
.(Herrell and Jordan,2012:132)

Learning achievement is the students' character level that can show

tolerating, dismissing and assessing the acquired information as indicated
by instructing and learning processes(Hamdu,2011:244).From
Mawarsih(2013: 122) perspective, learning achievement is the learning
results which can accomplish by understudies toward the finish of
learning process. These results can be communicated by numbers or by
scores as per certain foundation framework.

Students' achievement is influenced by many factors. Some of these

factors come from the students themselves such as the motivation to learn
and these factors can be called(internal factors), while another factors
come from outside the students such as the suitable model of learning
and those can be called (external factors), (Farida and Sari, 2017:126)

Instructors need to look and research for a decent method to arrive at .

objectives of educating and learning targets. As indicated by
Bastian(2018: 3), a superior way is that one which gives the students' the
inspiration to participate and trade data with educator from one side and
.with students from the opposite side

The Concept of Cooperative Learning 2.2

Cooperative learning refers to the ways and means of active learning that
can serve a variety of strategies used to increase learning effectiveness
and providing students with the needed skills for cooperating,
collaborative, sharing and socializing(Zaitoun,2013: ). It can be defined
as any learning situation in the classes where the students of all levels and
performance can work together in an ordered groups for achieving a
.learning objectives

Dyson,et al(2010:3) characterizes helpful learning as " a unique

instructional model that can encourage various substance to students at
various evaluation levels". The students cooperate in little, organized
.gatherings to participate in a particular learning issue

Cooperative Learning shows how the students can cooperate two by

two or in gatherings and how they can share data as one group. The
helpful learning group has a gathering of players who must cooperate so
as to accomplish the learning objectives effectively (Brown,1994:9)

Working together with other students, trying to solve the problem

together, and talking through the time of the lesson together have a
benefits points as Khalifa (2016:29) says: When the students participate,
the teacher encourages, the students interact

with other students and then solve the problem and master the subject
.matter a positive environment is created and improve learning outcomes

The Elements of Cooperative Learning 2.1. 2

The elements that make learning cooperative are defined as follows by
:Johnson and Johnson (1994:37)

.Clearly perceived positive association .1

.Extensive crude (face to face) cooperation .2

Obviously perceived responsibility and moral duty to accomplish .3

.the gathering's objectives

.Frequent use of the relevant interpersonal and small-group skills .4

5. Continuous and ordinary gathering handling of current working to

improve the gathering's future adequacy.

2.2.2The Advantages of Cooperative Learning

Khalifa (2016:31) presents some advantages in using cooperative learning
strategies, some of them can be summarized as follows:
 [Link] Attendance: students will have a better attendance when they
interface with others in their social event.

[Link] Grades: students increase comprehension and certainty of the

substance in light of their dynamic interest in the class.

3. Extended Participation: students become progressively unique when

they are adding to the group.

4. The instructor turns into a facilitator as opposed to a discussion.

[Link] powerful students may help the non-dynamic one to learn better.

[Link] learning assembles the resistance among students to share

information.

The Disadvantages of Cooperative Learning 2.2.3

Some disadvantages in adopting cooperative learning strategies can
be presented as:

1. Not all students are reasonable for working in gatherings.

2 . cooperative learning groups make a noise inside the class and

the instructor may not feel great with that commotion.

3. In the event that the quantity of students is too big it will be hard
for instructor to isolate them in groups(Allen,1997:33).

4 . The instructor may require a lot of time to sort out the

gatherings where he/she should be attention to consolidate the
students who have various degrees of insights.
Think-Pair Share Strategy 2.3
Many methods, techniques and strategies can be used to help EFL
students to achieve better learning achievement. These processes can
enhance the students ability to organize their thoughts or ideas to be
active in class and can share knowledge with the other students in the
class . One of these strategies is Think-Pair Share strategy which
presented by FrankLyman(1987). Kaddoura(2015:383)states that this
strategy is an active strategy that can be used as one of cooperative
learning strategies that are used to improve students' ability for learning
.English

Think-Pair Share can be presented with three steps; thinking, pairing

and sharing. This strategy can give the students opportunity to discuss
their thoughts with other students , so they expect to be able to cooperate
together. Millis (2012:4) summaries the steps in using Think-Pair Share
strategy; when the teachers' analysis, evaluation, and giving the students
about 30 seconds or more to think and they may ask to write their
thoughts as responses on papers. After the waiting time, the students turn
to partners in order to share their responses. This step gives an enough
time for rehearsal and feedback on pairs' thoughts. The next step is the
last one when the students' responses are shared with the other team
.member or with groups in a certain class discussion

The steps of using this strategy can be summarized in a clear strategic

:way as follows

1 . The first step(The Thinking Step): the teacher presents a question

or a particular issue identified with subject of the exercise and approaches
the students to thin alone for an answer or arrangement. At that point the
teacher determines the hour of intuition as indicated by the students'
particular information, the idea of question and the degree of
difficulty(Susun,2011: 82).

2 . The second step(The Pairing Step): the teacher requests that the
students go to sets and examine musings and offer thoughts with the
understudy sitting close to him/her and attempting to make explicit
perspectives for everyone and trade perspectives so as to reach to an
appropriate answer(Christine,2011:211(.
3 . The third step (The Sharing Step): the teacher requests that the
students share their answers with another sets of students and think
together so as to spare endeavors and time for educator to talk about with
all students in the class and he/she may examine (10) sets or gatherings at
the equivalent time(Saleh and Ibrahim,2015:12(.

The Importance of Using Think-Pair Share Strategy 2.4

Some points can be drown here that show the importance of using Think-
Pair Share Strategy

1 . It gives a chance to students to be powerful in the class.

2 . It gives students sufficient opportunity to think in the initial step

"think" and reach to the reasonable answer of the question.

3. It allows all the students to talk about their considerations and thoughts
together.

4 . It gives a chance to create diverse scholarly aptitudes, for example,

thinking, composing, talking thus on(Farida and Sari,2017:128).

5 . It makes an interesting situation between the teacher and students just

as among students themselves and breaking the route(Saleh and
Ibrahim,2015:16).

6. It allows every student to communicate him/her thoughts separately

and with gathering.

7 . It gives the scholastic and learning accomplishment.

2.5The Related Studies

:Some related studies can be summarized as follows

2.5 .1 Ifamuyiwa and Onakoya(2013):

This examination targets exploring the effect of Think-Pair-Share
Instructional strategy on students' accomplishment in Mathematics. The
exploration test comprised of (120) Junior optional (JSS3) students drawn
from four co-instructive schools in Odogbolu Local Government Area of
Ogun State, using purposive and straightforward arbitrary examining
procedure. The outcomes demonstrated that there was huge primary
effect of treatment (Think-Pair-Share) on the student' accomplishment in
Mathematics for the students presented to Think-Pair-Share instructional
procedure.

:Kaddoura, Mahmoud(2015 ) 2.5.2

This study targets exploring the change in basic reasoning (CT) aptitudes
of baccalaureate nursing students who were taught using a Think-Pair
Share. Basic reasoning has been a basic result of nursing students to set
them up to give viable and safe quality consideration for patients. An
example of (91) students took an interest in this investigation. (46) (half)
of the members were remembered for the benchmark group and the
other(45), (half) were remembered for the exploratory gathering .The
participants were sophomore-level generic accelerated baccalaureate
nursing students enrolled in the same Health Assessment nursing course.
The HESI critical thinking test was the tool used before (Pretest) and after
(posttest) the course to collect data about student's CT skills. The study
used a quasi experimental design. The independent sample t- test and
Mann-Whitney test were used to analyze the data. Findings revealed a
significant increase in CT over time, throughout the 17-week course, with
the use of Think-Pair Share teaching/learning strategy. The results
suggest that Think-Pair Share is an effective strategy to foster CT of
nursing students and could be used by educators to foster learners’ CT in
.their courses
2.5.3 Hamdan, Ribhi (2017):
This study targets finding" The Effect of (Think – Pair – Share) Strategy
on the Achievement of Third Grade Student in Sciences in the
Educational District of Irbid" . Semi exploratory plan is used in this
investigation. The example of this investigation comprised of (120)
students of third grade student in the instructive region of Irbid, They
were appropriated into two gatherings: the control group which
comprised of (30) male students and (30) female students; and the test
bunch which comprised of (30) male students and (30) female students,
the results of the examination show that there are factually contrasts in
evaluations of students because of gathering variable at the centrality
level (0.05), and the distinctions were supportive of the trial gathering
and there are measurably contrasts because of sex at the essentialness
level (0.05) for females .The investigation prescribed to passage (Think –
Pair – Share) system inside the encouraging methodologies used by
students during the educating and the association of instructors in
instructional classes on (Think – Pair – Share) technique.

Procedures .3
The Experimental Design 3.1
One of the most important step in presenting any study or any work is the
selection of an appropriate design (Van Dalen, 1979: 232). Experimental
design is "the blueprint of the procedures that enable the researcher to test
hypotheses by reaching valid conclusions about the relationship between
.independent and dependent variables" (Best and Khan, 2006:77)

Design is a term refers to the attempt of getting a response to the

questions of a given research. This study has built on the pretest-posttest
equivalent groups design. The experimental group of the students is
taught by using Think-Pair Share strategy while the control group is
.taught by the traditional strategy
Population and Sampling 3.2
Population refers to the testers or examiners of a given study and it
refers to each subject under the statistical observation(Hatch, 1982 :28).
We can say that population contains all the subjects under a particular
.study(Bluman,2007:797)

The population of the current study includes (408) university students

in the Department of English at the College of Education for Humanities /
Morning Studies at Tikrit University during the academic year (2017/
.2018)

The sample of the current study is taken from the population and the
students are chosen randomly. It consists of (80) first year university
students majoring in EFL . They are divided in to two equal groups,
experimental group and control group. The experimental group is taught
by using Think-Pair Share strategy while the control group is taught by
using traditional strategy. Table (1) shows the population and the sample
.of the current study clearly

Table (1) The Population and The Sample of The Study

The Population Group No. of Students The Strategy
408 Experimental 40 Think-Pair
Share
Control 40 Traditional

3.3 Instructional Material

EFL Students' Achievement has been chosen to be improved by using
Think-Pair Share cooperative learning strategy .

The material is taken from the book in title "Select Reading: Teacher-
approved reading for today's students" which is written by Lee and
Gundersen (2011) and taught to students in first year. The experiment of
this studyhas been done in the first semester of the academic year (2017/
2018). Both groups of students began their instruction on the fourteenth
of November / 2017 and ended on the thirteenth of February / 2018 . It
continued for about fourteen weeks. The experimental group is taught by
using Think- Pair Share strategy while the control group is taught by
using traditional method.

3.4 Construction of The Achievement Test

In any teaching context or any language testing construction there
should be a test after the process of teaching to choose the suitable
learning skills for students concerning their oral or written performance
and also listening and reading ability and then judge what students can
and cannot do in a given language context (Elian,2008: 184).

According to Kautz and Heckman(2014:3), an achievement test is a tool

that can be used to measure the students' level of knowledge orthe
students' acquired skill in a given context at school or college to show the
learning progress they have made over a period of time.

In the current study two achievement tests have been used: pre test and
post test. An achievementpre-test of five questions has constructed based
on general materials and it takes place at the beginning of the study. It
was carried out in the first meeting on the first day of experimental
application and it was applied on both groups the experimental group and
the control group to be the first step at the beginning of this study. The
aim of the pre-test was to equalize the students according to two
parameters: (1) their level in English, and (2) their age.

3.5 Equivalent of The Two Groups

After choosing the sample of the two groups and before implementing
the experimental, an equivalent has been done depending upon certain
information provided by the students and other resources. This equivalent
includes the level in English of the elicit students , and their ages.

The equivalent has been estimated by applying [Link] results of the

pre- test are treated by using independent sample t-test and show that
there is no statistically significant difference between the two groups in
the mean scores concerning their learning level in English. Table (2)
shows this results clearly.
Table(2): Equivalent in Level of English Between Experimental and
Control Groups

Group No. of Mean Variance Calculated Tabulated

Students Scores t-value t-value
Experimenta 40 66.83 16.45 0.724 2.02
l
Control 40 67.23 16.65

In the pre-test the students are given an instruction to write their age
on the answer sheet. The obtained results show that the students' ages
range between (19) and (24) years. Table (3) shows these results clearly.

Table(3): Equivalent in Students' Ages Between Experimental and

Control Groups
Experimenta Age No. of Perc. Control Age No. of Perc.
l Student Group Student
Group
s s
19 27 56% 19 23 51%
20 8 23% 20 9 24%
21 2 9% 21 4 17%
22 0 0% 22 0 0%
23 3 12% 23 3 5%
24 0 0% 24 1 3%
Average Age 20.75 Average Age 21.4

3.6Construction of The Post Test

An achievement post test has constructed to be the tool of measuring the
students' achievement at the end of classroom work in order to achieve
the aims of the current study. The post test consisted of five questions
that based on teaching materials, and each question is given (20) marks in
which the total mark of the whole test is (100) mark(see Appendix).

Validity and Reliability of The Post Test 7 .3

Validity is one of the characteristics of a good test and a valid test is that
one which proved to measure what it is suppose to
measure(Harmer,2001:322). It refers to "the truth of the test when it
measure the components that the examinee intended to measure"
(Bynom,2001:13).Macky and Gass(2005,211) state that validity is the
extent in which it can be possible to make suitable generalization based
.on the obtained results from a particular measure

The final form of the test is exposed to a jury of (10) experts and
specialists for obtaining its face validity. The jurors have approved the
suitability of the items of the test and gave some notes that have been
.considered

Reliability refers to consistency of the results when the same test has been
given to the same group of students on two different
.occasions(Brown,2004:20)

Alpha Cronbah's formula is used for estimating reliability of the test

and the test is considered reliable because the calculated coefficient
.is(0.92)

Test Items Analysis 3.8

Items analysis refers to the "checking responses built by all students for
.each item included in the test"(Olivia,1988:15)

The test papers have scored and the students' scores have been ordered
from the highest to the lowest to select the highest 27% scores and put
them in one group ( the upper group) while the lowest 27% scores are
considered (the lower group). One of the important step analyze the items
.of the test is the estimating difficulty level and discrimination power

3.9Difficulty Level and Discrimination Power of The Items

of The Test
The difficulty level refers to the students' correct responses of the items
of the test and expressed as a percentage to estimate the difficulty level of
each items in the test(Backhoff, et al, 2000:6). The items that got
coefficients of difficulty less than (0.02) are considered easy and
acceptable while those which got over (0.08) are considered difficult and
.must be changed (Abdulrahman,2011:198)

Discrimination power is a tool for knowing whether individual items are

containing information according to abilities of students and goes with
the other items of the test (McNamara,2000:60). According to
Wilson(2005:92) , estimating discrimination power of an item can be
done by comparing the students who have done very well with the others
who have done poorly. Ebel (1972:399) says that for the items to be
discriminated and accepted ,they must take a power above than(0.30)
because the power less than (0.30) is considered weak and must be
.changed

Each item in the test has proved to be acceptable according to difficulty

level and discrimination power. Some items of the test have been
.changed in order to be satisfactory

3.10Statistical Means
A quantitative data analysis methods have been used in the current
study. The data analysis estimating by using (SPSS 24) andthe study used
:the following means

T-Test for two independent samples formula is used to find out the . 1
significant differences between Experimental group and control group in
the equalization of age and for finding the significance differences
.between the two groups in the post –test

T-Test for Paired sample is used to find out the significant differences . 2
between Experimental group performance in the pre -test and the post-
.test

Chi2 formula is used to find out if there is a significant differences . 2

between the experimental group and control group in their level of
.learning achievement

.Cronbach's Alpha for calculating Reliability of test . 3

Difficulty Level formula is used to calculate the difficulty level of . 4

.items of the test

Discrimination Power formula is used to calculate the discrimination . 5

.power of the items of the test
Analysis of Results .4
The collected results have been statistically analyzed after the
administration of the per test and post test and the obtained results show
:the following

Comparison Between The Performance of The Experimental 4.1

.Group and The Control Group in The Pre-Test

The calculated mean scores of the Experimental group is (28.20) and

.that of the control group is (29.93)

The computed t-value is found to be (0.052) which is lower than the

tabulated t-value which is (2.02) at (40) degree of freedom and (0.05)
level of significance and this result proves that there is no statistically
significant differences between the two groups of the study due to results
.of pre-test

Thus, the first hypothesis which states that " there are no statistically
significant differences between the mean scores of the experimental
group and that of the control group due to the results of the pre-test" ,is
accepted. This result is considered a normal one since the two groups are
related to same cultural background and nearly the same ages. Table(4)
shows that clearly:

Table(4) The Results of The Experimental Group and The Control

Group in The Pre-Test
Group No. of Mean SD DF Computed Tabulate Level of
Students Scores T. Value d Significan
T. Value t
Experimental 40 28.20 8.5 0.052 2.02 0.05
40
Control 40 29.93 8.47

Comparison Between The Performance of The Experimental 4.2

.Group and That of The Control Group in The Post-Test
The calculated mean scores of the Experimental group is (72.5) and that
.of the control group is (52.02)

The computed t-value is found to be (5.43) which is upper than the

tabulated t-value which is (2.02) at (40) degree of freedom and (0.05)
level of significance and this result proves that there is statistically
significant differences between the two groups of the study due to results
.of the post-test in favor of experimental group

Thus, the second hypothesis which states that " there are no statistically
significant differences between the mean scores of the experimental
group and that of the control group due to the results of the post-test" ,is
rejected. This result proves that the students' achievement is improved by
the using of Think-Pair Share cooperative learning strategy. Table(5)
shows these results clearly:

Table(5) The Results of The Experimental Group and The Control

Group in The Post-Test
Group No. of Mean SD DF Computed Tabulated Level of
Students Scores T. Value T. Value Significan
t
Experimental 40 72.5 18.65 5.43 2.02 0.05
40
Control 40 52.02 15.94

Comparison Between The Performance of The Experimental 4.3

.Group in The Pre- Test and The Post-Test

The calculated mean scores of the Experimental group in the pre test is
.(28.20) and that of the post-test is (72.5)

The computed t-value is found to be (3.75) which is upper than the

tabulated t-value which is (2.02) at (40) degree of freedom and (0.05)
level of significance and this result proves that there is statistically
significant differences between the pre-test and post-test scores of
experimental group due to results of the pre-test and theresults of the
.post-test in favor of the post test
Thus, the third hypothesis which states that " there are no statistically
significant differences between the mean scores of the experimental
group due to the results of the pre-test and post-test." ,is rejected. This
result proves that the students' achievement is improved by the using of
Think-Pair Share cooperative learning strategy and their abilities and
skills are developed. Table(6) shows these results clearly:

Table(6) The Results of The Experimental in The Pre-Test and The

Post-Test
Test No. of Mean SD DF Computed Tabulate Level of
Students Scores T. Value d Significan
T. Value t
Pre-Test 40 28.20 8.5 3.75 2.02 0.05
40

Post-Test 40 72.5 18.65

Conclusions .5
In the light of the obtained results, the following conclusions can be
:listed

Think-Pair Share strategy is a modern cooperative learning and . 1

teaching strategy that aims to stimulate the students' energies and abilities
and develop their thinking

Think-Pair Share strategy Can be used with all levels of students and . 2
.with all ages

Think-Pair Share strategy is a suitable strategy for teachers who used . 3

.cooperative learning strategies for the first time

Think-Pair-Share is a cooperative discussion strategy that gives the .4

students the adequate time to think in order to increase their quality of
responses. Students become actively involved in thinking about the
.concepts presented in their discussion

The success of any team or group is mainly depended on the members . 5

and their ability to complete their tasks successfully. So, by applying this
strategy the students improve their ability for implementing in a certain
.group

The students are highly developed when they making comments and . 6
.complete each other answers

Think-Pair Share Strategy increased the number of students who . 7

.participates in the class

Think-Pair Share Strategy increased students to be independent rather . 8

.than direct instruction

Think-Pair Share Strategy encourages the shy and low level students . 9
.to be more motivated toward participation and interaction in the class

:Recommendations .6
:The current study can be recommended that

Think-Pair-Share Cooperative Learning Strategy can be applied with . 1

.different language skills and different students' ages

Organizing a training courses for teachers concerning the importance . 2

.of using modern cooperative strategies

Think-Pair-Share Cooperative Learning Strategy can be applied with . 3

.different teaching and learning materials

References

Allen, E. D. and Meyer, R.(1997). Classroom Technique: Foreign Language -

.and English as a Second Language. Atlanta: Hardcort Brace Jovanich, Inc

Backhoff, Escudero; Reyna, Norma and Morales;Rosan(2000). "The Level of-

Difficulty And Discrimination Power of The Basic Knowledge and Skills
.Examination". California, Mexico

Best, J.W. and Khan , J.N.(2006). Research in Education.(10th ed). New -

.Jersy

Bluman, A.(2007). Elementary Statistics: A Step by Step Approach. Boston: -

.McGraw. Hill
Brown, H. (1994). "Principles of Language Learning and Teaching", 5th -
.edition, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice -Hall

.Bynom, A.(2001). Going the Information Given. New York: Norton Press-

Collins, H.(2003). Pocket Dictionary and Thesaurus. Glasgow G64 2QT. -

.Great Britain

Christine, K. (2011). "Developing Second Language Skills: Theory To Practice,"

.Chicago: Rand MC Nally College Publishing Company

Dyson, A., S. Goldrick, L. Jones, and K. Kerr. (2010). "Equity in Education: -

Creating a fairer education system, Manchester", Centre for Equity in
.Education", University of Manchester

Ebel, R. L. (1972). Essentials of Education Measurment. New Jersy: Prentice -

.Hall

Eliane, Kolker, Howist.(2008). Becoming a Language Teacher: A Practice -

Guide to Second Language Learning and Teaching. The University of Texas at
.Austin

Farida, Ida and Sari, Y. Priatna. (2017). Think Pair Share(TPS) to Improve -
Student's Learning Motivation and Learning Achievement. Hetika DOI:
10.15294/dp.v12i2.13561 Accounting Study Program, Politeknik Harapan
.Bersama, Indonesia

Hamdu, G., & Agustina, L. (2011). Pengaruh motivasi belajar siswa terhadap -
prestasi belajar IPA di sekolah dasar. Jurnal penelitian pendidikan, 12(1), 90-
.96

Harmer, J.(2006). "The Practice of English Language Teaching", 4th edition, -

.England: Pearson Education Limited

Hatch, E and Farhady, H. (1982). Research Design and Statistic for Applied -
.Linguistics. Massachusetts: Newbury House Publisher

Herrell, Aderienne and Jordan, Michael.(2012). 50 Strategies for Teaching -

.English Languege Learners.(4th ed.): Pearson Education. Boston, USA

Ifamuyiwa, Adebola S. and Onakoya, Sunday K. (2013). "Impact of Think- -

PairShare. Instructional Strategy on Students' Achievement in Secondary
School Mathematics." An Unpublished MA thesis. OlabisiOnabanjo
.University: Faculty of Education

Johnson, R.T. and Johnson, D. W.(1994). "An Overview of Cooperative -

Learning". In J.S Thousand, R.A. villa and A. I. Nevin (eds), Creativity and
.Collaborative Learning, pp.31-44

Kautz. Tim Humphries and Heckman, James.(2014).. The Myth of -

Achievement Test: The GED and the Role of Character in American Life.
.Chicago University Press

Khalifa,R. Mohammed(2016).The Effectiveness of Using Think- Pair - Share -

Strategy on Developing Eleventh Graders' Writing Skills in Rafah Governmental
.Schools Thesis. Al-Azhar University – Gaza

.Mackey, A. and Gass, S. (2005). Second Language Research -

Mawarsih, S. E., & Hamidi, N. (2013). Pengaruh Perhatian Orang Tua dan -
Motivasi Belajar terhadap Prestasi Belajar Siswa SMA Negeri Jumapolo.
.Jupe-Jurnal Pendidikan Ekonomi, 1(3)

.McNamara, Tim.(2000). Language Testing. Oxford University Press-

Millis , Barbara J. (2012) . "Active Learning Strategies in Face-to-Face -

courses" , IDEA paper 53 . Manhattan , KS : IDEA Center. The University of
Texas, San [Link] :2015from
.[Link]

Nasr, Mahmoud. (2016). The impact of (think, pair, share) strategy with the help of -
computer architecture and environmental engineering materials in the teaching fourth
grade primary on Achievement and retention of trend Mutual, the third scientific
.conference, the Egyptian Association for Mathematics Educations

Olivia, P.(1988). Developing The Curriculum. 2nd .ed. New York: Scott, -
.Foresmand Education

Saleh, Hossam Yusuf and Ibrahim, Hadeel Sajid. (2015). The Effect of (think, - -
pair, share) strategy on the students of Biology achievement in Algas and their
.attitude toward it. Diyala Journal of Human Research, 66.1- 19
-
Susan, L.(2011),using think-pair-share in collage classroom, center for - -
.learning and teaching excellence, Arizona state university

Van Delan, Deaboled B.(1997). Understanding Educational Research.(4th .ed.)Mc-

.[Link],I nc
Wilson, Mark.(2005).Constructing Measures: An Item Response Modeling -
.Approach. Lawrance ER/BAUM Associates, Inc. Mahwah. New Jersey

Zaitoun, Ayesh Mahmoud. (2013). Constructivist theory and strategies for -

teaching science, Dar alshrouq for Publishing and Distribution, first (ed.),
.Amman-Jordan

Appendix

The Post- Test

.Note: Answer (ALL) questions

.Q1: Give a word or a phrase to replace the following.(20_ Marks)

Spot, repaired, calculate, with raising, fragments, storey, earning, privilege,

.journalist, a reply

.Q2 : Fill in the following blanks with the suitable words:(20_ Marks)
.Ali has not made a ________ (guilty, guilt, guiltier) . 1
The puma will not attack a human being unless it is ________ (corner, cornered, . 2
.cornering)
.This cat is ________ (wildly, wild, wilder) . 3
.The clock tower should be ________ (fixes, fixing, fixed) . 4
. ________ /She/ hers/ we . 5
.A storey is ________ (something built, something eaten, something written) . 6
.Embarrassed means (felt victorious, felt shy, felt happy) . 7
. ________ Reply is a verb, and a step is . 8
.________ A phrase is . 9
.Yesterday, I _________ my uncle . 10

Q3: What are the main types of English sentences as far as the form is concerned?
.(20_ Marks)

.Q4: Rearrange the following words to have meaningful sentences: (20_Marks)

.She, a , has, letter, just, written . 1
.Train, the, into, station, came, the . 2
.Longer, wished, they, stayed, had, they, their . 3
.Every, they, catch, lobster, fish, day . 4
.Intended, she, dress, to, up ,ghost, as, a . 5

.Q5 : A/ Show whether the following words are (verbs, nouns, adverbs, adjectives)

.)Marks _10(
Manage, afraid, promontory, corporate, impatient, reluctantly, speed, crazily, fame,
.happily
.B/ Change the following verbs in to (past) and (past participle). (10_ Marks)
Join, ask, receive, smash, sleep, arrest, sing, sink, make, seek