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
