SOUTHERN LUZON TECHNOLOGICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION, INC.
Marifosque, Pilar, Sorsogon
December 8, 2021
JOANAH PAULA Q. OLFINDO
President
Southern Luzon Technological College, Inc.
Marifosque, Pilar, Sorsogon
Dear Ma’am,
Greetings!
May I respectfully submit my action research proposal entitled, “Enhancing
Student Participation through Think-Pair-Share Technique on Grade 11
students of Southern Luzon Technological College Foundation Pilar
Inc.”Attached herewith is the action research proposal for your reference.
Thank you very much and God bless!
Very truly yours,
Mark Leo Leosala
John Paul Gomez
John Ronan Lastica
Charlotte Ortiz
Hannah Joy Supremo
Jessica Bayomo
Chit Perdiz
Laurice Anne Dela Cruz
Research Proponent/BTVTEd 4
Noted by:
CLEUS B. REAMICO,MAEd,LPT
Research Adviser
Education
LORNA MIRABEL
Field Study Instructor
DR.NILO O. BERJUEGA
BTVTEd Dean, College
of
Enhancing Student Participation Through Think-Pair-Share Technique on Grade 11
students of Southern Luzon Technological College Foundation Pilar Inc.
Context and Rationale
In the relatively few years of widespread use of the Internet for secondary
learning, its potential for providing a shared space for students to learn in groups, even
though they are geographically dispersed, has been explored with enthusiasm (Bullen,
1998). The Internet has helped to remove the isolation of learning at a distance for offcampus students and even made it possible for them to join on-campus students in
virtual campus environments (Stacey, 1997).
According to
(Bloom, B. S., 1984) student participation is a fundamental
component for active and engaged learning. Active learning makes students draw
attention in classroom activities. In a study of (Stipek, D., 2006) the relationship the
learner has with the teacher is probably the best indicator of the student’s exertion and
commitment in learning and the social component of the classroom should be
considered by the teacher in order for the students to feel acknowledge and take part
in. In a similar study of (Brophy, J., 1996) he stated that teacher might accomplish
prominent participation if they work with the person, they are comfortable with,
especially in partner or small group work.
Student participation has been linked to a variety of outcomes that can
contribute to academic success: critical-thinking skills (Tsui, L., 2002), a sense of
belonging (Eddy, 2014), and decreased anxiety about and better understanding of
course content (Haak, 2011). However, activities that promotes participation does not
generally bring a positive result. (Cohen, 2019) claimed that individual beliefs and one’s
emotional balance impacts how comfortable the students that promotes participation.
According to (Fritschner, May/Jun 2000;), one of the significant disadvantages of
student’s participation in a particular lesson is the nature of course level. He stated that
most of the lesson content that teacher prepares and present are not fitting the
student’s level of comprehension. Therefore, it is suggested to take into consideration
the students readiness and preparation aspect. (Fassinger, 1995) also stated that most
students are less participative because of intimidation from other student, or low to no
self-confidence to participate with their colleague another reason could be because of
the teachers communication variable which is consistent with the notion of the teachers
speech attention on each students and teacher position in a class discussion.
(Harasim, 1990) described the greatest strength of online education as its ability
to facilitate interaction and saw the strength of computer-mediated communication in
group activity. The social, affective, and cognitive benefits of peer interaction and
collaboration, which had previously been possible only in face-to-face situations, were
now possible with the mediation of computer communication. As a medium for
collaborative learning, computer conferencing was considered appropriate because it
provided more opportunity for “reflective and thoughtful analysis and review of earlier
contributions” (Kaye, 1992) than in a face-to-face seminar where a contribution may be
missed forever. (Henri, 1996) Described this medium as a framework for true
collaborative group work in distance education. They saw CMC providing more intense
communication than face-to-face groups, where the lack of social pressure and the
greater freedom to express their views without struggling for “the right of audience” (p.
10) enabled participants to react to the content, and not the author, with more
reflective and effective communications.
Action Research Questions
The aimed of this study is to determine student participation through think-pairshare technique on Grade 11 students of Southern Luzon Technological College
Foundation Pilar Inc. it sought to answer the following question:
1. How did student respond in think-pair-share activity?
2. How does think-pair-share technique enhance student participation?
Proposed Innovation, Intervention and Strategy
The researcher will join the online class of grade 11 students of SLTCFPI to
observe the participation through think-pair-share technique. The teacher will pair
students in to two or three groups then the instructor will pose a question at the end of
class, the group will discuss their responses. Then the students will share their answers
during class. The question should be open-ended to provoke thoughtful discussion.
References
(n.d.).
Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2-sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as
effective as one-to-one tutoring. http://web.mit.edu/5.95/readings/bloom-twosigma.pdf.
Brophy, J. (1996). Working with shy or withdrawn students.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED402070.pdf.
Cohen, M. B.-C. (2019). Think, pair, freeze: The association between social anxiety and student
discomfort in the active learning environment. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000147.
Eddy, S. L. (2014). Getting under the hood: How and for whom does increase course structure
work? https://www.lifescied.org/doi/10.1187/cbe.14-03-0050.
Fassinger, P. (1995). Professor and Students perception of why students participate in class.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1318895.
Fritschner, L. (May/Jun 2000;). Inside the undergraduate college classroom: faculty students
differ on the Meaning of Student Participation. https://doi.org/10.2307/2649294.
Haak, D. C. (2011). Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in
introductory biology.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51187214_Increased_Structure_and_Active
_Learning_Reduce_the_Achievement_Gap_in_Introductory_Biology.
Stipek, D. (2006). Relationships matter. Educational Leadership,.
http://www.ascd.org/portal/site/ascd/menuitem.459dee008f99653fb85516f762108a0c
/.
Tsui, L. (2002). Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236707091_Fostering_Critical_Thinking_Thr
ough_Effective_Pedagogy_Evidence_from_Four_Institutional_Case_Studies.
Fritschner, L. (May/Jun 2000;). Inside the undergraduate college classroom: faculty students
differ on the Meaning of Student Participation. https://doi.org/10.2307/2649294.
Leader: Mark Leo Leosala
John Paul Gomez
John Ronan Lastica
Charlotte Ortiz
Hannah Joy Supremo
Jessica Bayomo
Chit Perdiz
Laurice Anne Dela Cruz