








































English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 54-65  

        https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v8i1.13992        http://journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/index         eltej@pbi.uad.ac.id  

Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation through 

Think-Pair-Share: Classroom action research in an Indonesian 

EFL context 

Bambang Widi Pratolo a,1,*, Dat Bao b,2, Suhendri Palaguna c,3 

a Department of English Language, Universitas Ahmadi Dahlan, Jl. Ringroad Selatan, Kragilan, Yogyakarta,55191, Indonesia 
b Monash University, Wellington Rd, Clayton VIC 3800, Australia 
c Department of English Language, Universitas Ahmadi Dahlan, Jl. Ringroad Selatan, Kragilan, Yogyakarta,55191, Indonesia 
 

1bambangwidip@gmail.com *; 2 dat.bao@monash.edu; 3 suhendri1900004060@webmail.uad.ac.id  

 

  

A R T I C L E  I N F O 

 

ABST RACT   

 

 

Article history 

Received 12 February 2025 

Revised 12 March 2025 

Accepted 5 April 2025 

 Improving students' reading comprehension remains a persistent 
challenge in EFL classrooms, particularly where learners exhibit low 
motivation and limited engagement. This study investigated the 
effectiveness of the Think–Pair–Share (TPS) cooperative learning 
strategy in an Indonesian secondary EFL classroom. Using a 
Classroom Action Research (CAR) design, the intervention was 
conducted in two cycles, each consisting of planning, acting, 
observing, and reflecting stages. Data were collected through a mixed-
methods approach. Quantitative evidence came from pre-tests and 
post-tests of reading comprehension, while qualitative data were 
obtained from classroom observations, field notes, and interviews. The 
findings showed substantial improvements in both motivation and 
understanding. Students' mean reading scores increased from 57.22 in 
the pre-test to 78.26 in Cycle II, with the number achieving the passing 
grade rising from three to fifteen. Variability decreased, indicating 
more consistent achievement across the class. Qualitative results 
revealed a transformation from passive and disengaged learners to 
confident and motivated participants who valued collaboration and 
peer support. The study concludes that TPS is effective not only in 
enhancing comprehension but also in fostering a student-centered and 
inclusive learning environment. Teachers are encouraged to integrate 
TPS with explicit scaffolding and adaptive sharing formats to 
maximize equity and engagement in reading instruction.  

 

© The Authors 2025. Published by Universitas Ahmad Dahlan. 

This is an open access article under the CC–BY-SA license. 

    

 

 
Keywords 

 

Think–Pair–Share 

Reading comprehension 

Student motivation 

Cooperative learning 

EFL secondary classroom 

 

 

 

How to Cite: Pratolo, B, W., Bao, D., & Palaguna, S. (2025). Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation 
through think-pair-share: Classroom action research in an Indonesian EFL context. English Language Teaching 
Educational Journal, 8(1), 54-65. https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v8i1.13992   

1. Introduction  

Improving reading comprehension continues to be a persistent challenge in EFL classrooms, 
especially in contexts where students face both cognitive and affective barriers. Research 
demonstrates that reading comprehension is not only dependent on vocabulary knowledge and 
decoding skills but also on motivation and engagement with texts. Li et al. (2022) found that reading 
efficacy, enjoyment, and vocabulary breadth and depth were the strongest predictors of L2 reading 
outcomes among Chinese EFL learners. This suggests that instruction cannot rely solely on 
mechanical decoding or isolated vocabulary teaching but must simultaneously address the 

https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v8i1.13992
http://journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/index
mailto:eltej@pbi.uad.ac.id
mailto:bambangwidip@gmail.com
mailto:dat.bao@monash.edu
mailto:%20suhendri1900004060@webmail.uad.ac.id
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v8i1.13992
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.12928/eltej.v8i1.13992&domain=pdf
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8716-028X
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4143-4951


55 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 
         Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 54-65 

 Pratolo, et al. (Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation through think-pair-share…..) 

psychological drivers of persistence and enjoyment in reading tasks. Without sustained motivation, 
comprehension strategies are underutilized and reading performance stagnates. Thus, pedagogical 
models that target both cognitive and motivational factors are essential for advancing reading 
achievement in secondary EFL settings. 

Cooperative learning has gained prominence as an instructional model capable of addressing these 
dual needs. Studies conducted in secondary and tertiary EFL contexts show that cooperative learning 
promotes collaboration, accountability, and shared responsibility for learning outcomes. Bećirović 
(2023), using structural equation modelling with EFL high school students, demonstrated that 
cooperative learning had a positive direct effect on motivation, which then mediated improved 
academic achievement. This finding suggests that the motivational gains from cooperative learning 
are not incidental but central to its effectiveness. Unlike teacher-fronted lessons, cooperative structures 
encourage active contributions from students, which can reduce passivity and disengagement. The 
implication for EFL teachers is that well-structured peer interaction is not only socially enriching but 
also cognitively productive, offering a sustainable pathway to improving reading comprehension. 

Think–Pair–Share (TPS) is one of the most accessible and widely adopted cooperative strategies 
in education (Cooper et al., 2021; Deore & Arora, 2022; Lee et al., 2025; Liu et al., 2024; Mundelsee 
& Jurkowski, 2021). Its strength lies in simplicity, requiring minimal resources yet producing 
significant shifts in classroom dynamics. TPS begins with individual reflection, progresses to paired 
discussion, and culminates in sharing with the whole class. Mundelsee and Jurkowski (2021) found 
that TPS increased the frequency and depth of student participation compared to traditional teacher 
questioning. Students were more likely to contribute answers when they had first rehearsed responses 
with a peer, reducing anxiety associated with immediate public performance. However, Cooper et 
al.(2021) argued that the whole-class sharing phase of TPS carries risks, as some students remain 
silent or feel pressured. They proposed modifications such as structured turn-taking or anonymous 
reporting to preserve inclusivity. These contrasting insights highlight the importance of context-
sensitive adaptation in TPS implementation, especially in EFL classrooms where confidence and 
linguistic resources vary widely. 

The application of cooperative learning techniques to reading comprehension has been supported 
by empirical evidence. Namaziandost et al. (2020) demonstrated that the jigsaw technique improved 
reading comprehension scores among pre-intermediate Iranian EFL learners, with significant gains 
compared to control groups. The mechanism of improvement was attributed to peer teaching and the 
need to process information collaboratively to reconstruct texts. This aligns with the logic of TPS, 
which fosters dialogic explanation and negotiation of meaning during reading activities (Deore & 
Arora, 2022; Manasa et al., 2023). Cooperative learning provides learners with opportunities to 
articulate interpretations, clarify misunderstandings, and co-construct knowledge—processes that are 
central to comprehension but often absent in teacher-centered reading lessons (Khataybeh et al., 2024). 
Despite these positive findings, direct evidence linking TPS specifically to reading comprehension in 
secondary EFL contexts remains limited, creating a need for targeted studies in this area. 

Although explicit reading strategy instruction has proven effective for improving comprehension, 
its impact on motivation has been inconsistent. Li et al. (2022) examined the effects of reading strategy 
instruction on Chinese university students. They found that while comprehension and strategy use 
improved, motivation and self-efficacy showed little immediate change. Cognitive instruction alone 
may not be sufficient to influence the affective domain. For secondary school learners, whose 
motivation is often fragile, an approach that integrates strategy application with social interaction is 
likely to be more effective. TPS offers this integration by embedding cognitive tasks in cooperative 
structures that simultaneously sustain interest and confidence (Li & Tu, 2024). Thus, TPS has the 
potential to overcome the limitations of strategy instruction by addressing both comprehension and 
motivational needs in a single design.  

Recent pedagogical innovations show that TPS can be scaled to complex learning tasks, further 
supporting its potential for reading instruction (Manasa et al., 2023; Zohrabi & Hassan, 2020). Li and 
Tu (2024) redesigned a project-based learning course for education students by embedding TPS into 
inquiry-driven activities. Their results indicated that TPS cycles stimulated creative thinking and 
deeper engagement with content. Although their study did not focus on reading comprehension, the 
evidence suggests that TPS can facilitate higher-order thinking and sustained engagement across 
academic domains. In EFL reading lessons, TPS may create opportunities for learners to process 



ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 56 

 Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 54-65 

 Pratolo, et al. (Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation through think-pair-share…..) 

authentic texts, share interpretations, and refine understanding collaboratively. This potential to 
transform passive reading into an active, dialogic process underscores TPS as a promising candidate 
for addressing persistent comprehension and motivation problems. 

When synthesizing the literature, clear patterns and contradictions emerge. Three consistent 
patterns stand out. First, TPS and other cooperative structures reliably increase student participation 
and reduce silence in class (Mundelsee & Jurkowski, 2021). Second, cooperative learning is strongly 
associated with improved motivation, which mediates academic achievement (Bećirović, 2023). 
Third, collaborative techniques in EFL contexts, such as jigsaw and peer teaching, produce 
measurable gains in reading comprehension (Namaziandost et al., 2020). However, tensions remain. 
Most TPS studies emphasize participation and engagement rather than comprehension outcomes, 
limiting their relevance for reading-focused instruction. Furthermore, the whole-class sharing phase 
of TPS can inadvertently silence weaker learners if not carefully managed (Cooper et al., 2021). These 
contradictions suggest that while TPS has promise, its direct relationship to reading comprehension 
and motivation requires context-specific investigation. 

This study addresses these gaps by exploring the implementation and outcomes of TPS in an 
Indonesian secondary EFL classroom. Unlike many previous studies that either focus on higher 
education or general participation, this research emphasizes reading comprehension and motivational 
outcomes at the secondary level. Specifically, it seeks to answer two research questions. (1) How is 
the Think–Pair–Share strategy implemented to improve reading comprehension? (2) How does the 
Think–Pair–Share strategy enhance students' motivation in learning English reading These questions 
allow for a dual focus on cognitive and affective outcomes, reflecting the intertwined challenges of 
EFL reading instruction in Indonesian secondary schools.  

2. Method 

This study adopted a Classroom Action Research (CAR) design to address problems of low 
reading comprehension and limited engagement in an Indonesian secondary EFL classroom. The 
design followed the cyclical model of planning, action, observation, and reflection. While Burns’ 
(2019a, 2019b, 2024) framework provided the foundation, the study also incorporated refinements 
from more recent CAR studies in EFL contexts (Dikilitaş, 2024; Nazari et al., 2019; Wang & Qian, 
2020). The iterative nature of CAR was considered suitable because it enables teachers to act as 
reflective practitioners and make real-time instructional adjustments to improve both learning 
outcomes and classroom participation. 

2.1. Participants 

The participants were 23 eighth-grade students enrolled in an Indonesian secondary EFL 
classroom. They were selected as the research site based on teacher reports of persistent difficulties in 
reading comprehension and low participation during English lessons. The class represented a mixed-
ability group, typical of Indonesian junior secondary schools, which ensured ecological validity. 
Parental consent and institutional approval were obtained prior to data collection. 

2.2. Data Collection Instruments 

Data were collected using both qualitative and quantitative instruments to ensure triangulation. 

Quantitative data were obtained from a pre-test and post-test of reading comprehension 
administered before and after each cycle. The test items, aligned with the national curriculum 
standards, assessed literal, inferential, and evaluative comprehension skills. Test reliability was 
examined through pilot testing, with internal consistency measured using Cronbach’s alpha, following 
recent recommendations for classroom-based assessment (Khan et al., 2025). 

Qualitative data were gathered through classroom observations, field notes, and semi-structured 
interviews. Observation sheets documented indicators of participation, collaboration, and task 
engagement during the TPS implementation. Field notes were used to capture contextual dynamics 
and reflective impressions during the lessons. Semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 
students were conducted at the end of each cycle to explore perceptions of TPS, changes in motivation, 
and perceived challenges. Using multiple instruments allowed for a more comprehensive 
understanding of both cognitive and affective outcomes, in line with best practices in mixed-methods 
action research (Creswell & Creswell, 2017; Creswell & Guetterman, 2025). 



57 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 
         Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 54-65 

 Pratolo, et al. (Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation through think-pair-share…..) 

2.3. Data Analysis Procedures 

Quantitative data from the pre- and post-tests were analyzed using descriptive statistics (means 
and standard deviations) and percentage gain scores to track progress across cycles. While the small 
sample size precluded inferential testing, improvements were interpreted against established 
benchmarks for meaningful classroom gains (Mertler, 2024). 

Qualitative data analysis followed thematic procedures. Interview transcripts were coded 
inductively to identify recurring themes related to motivation, engagement, and comprehension. The 
coding process involved three stages: initial open coding, axial categorization, and theme 
consolidation, as recommended in recent EFL classroom research (Miles et al., 2021). Observation 
notes and field reflections were triangulated with interview data to strengthen validity. 

2.4. Integration of Data 

The study employed a convergent mixed-methods strategy, integrating quantitative improvements 
in reading scores with qualitative evidence of motivational and behavioral changes. This approach 
enabled the researcher to evaluate not only the cognitive outcomes of TPS but also the affective and 
social dimensions of its classroom implementation. By combining data types, the study ensured a 
richer account of how TPS functions as a cooperative learning strategy in an Indonesian secondary 
EFL setting. 

3. Finding and Discussion 

3.1. Findings 

The findings are presented across two cycles of Classroom Action Research (CAR) that aimed to 
improve students’ reading comprehension and motivation through the Think–Pair–Share (TPS) 
strategy. Data were collected using both qualitative and quantitative methods. Qualitative data came 
from interviews, field notes, and classroom observations, while quantitative data were obtained from 
pre-tests and post-tests administered before and after each cycle. Presenting the results cycle by cycle 
shows the progression of student learning and classroom change over time. 

1) Pre-Condition (Before Intervention) 

Before TPS was introduced, students demonstrated low motivation and weak reading 
comprehension. Interviews revealed that they viewed English reading as difficult and frustrating. 
Several explained that they disliked reading texts because they lacked vocabulary and did not have 
dictionaries to support them. One student said, "I don't like to read English texts, but if the teacher 
asks me to read, I will still read them, even though I don't understand." 

Observation data confirmed this lack of motivation. Students were often distracted, chatting or 
drawing in their notebooks instead of engaging in lessons. Communication with teachers was minimal, 
and peer interaction was limited to close friends. Reading strategies were unfamiliar, and 
comprehension tasks were often approached through word-by-word translation, which produced 
confusion and disengagement. 

2) Cycle I 

a) Implementation and Classroom Dynamics 

During Cycle I, TPS was introduced in reading lessons. Students were guided through the three 
stages of “think,” “pair,” and “share.” While the novelty of the method generated interest, many 
students were unsure how to proceed at each stage. In the “think” phase, they hesitated to respond 
individually. The “pair” stage stimulated more interaction, with students discussing answers in small 
groups. However, the “share” stage remained challenging, as few students volunteered to present 
responses to the class. 

Observation notes indicated that while engagement increased compared to the pre-condition stage, 
learners frequently asked for clarification. Confusion about TPS procedures limited the effectiveness 
of peer collaboration, though the classroom atmosphere became more interactive than before. 

b) Student Voices 

Interview data reflected these mixed responses. Some learners found the method "fun" and reported 
it gave them new ways to learn, but others admitted to still being "confused about the stages." One 
student explained, “I am more motivated because this is a new method that I learned, and I can discuss 



ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 58 

 Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 54-65 

 Pratolo, et al. (Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation through think-pair-share…..) 

it with friends.” Another added, “I like it because it’s more fun and active in class, but sometimes I’m 
still confused about what to do.” These voices suggest that Cycle I functioned as an adaptation stage 
where students began to build interest but had not yet mastered TPS. 

c) Learning Outcomes 

To evaluate the impact of the Think–Pair–Share (TPS) strategy on students’ reading 
comprehension, pre-tests and post-tests were administered across the two research cycles. These 
assessments provided a direct measure of students’ progress in achieving the minimum passing grade 
of 75, as set by school standards. The results are summarized in Table 1, which presents the 
distribution of students scoring below and above the passing threshold in the pre-test, post-test Cycle 
I, and post-test Cycle II. This comparison offers a concise overview of how students’ performance 
shifted over the course of the intervention. 

Table 1.  Students’ Reading Comprehension Scores 

Test Number of Students Score ≤ 75 Score ≤ 75 

Pre-test 23 20 3 

Post-test Cycle I 23 15 8 

Post-test Cycle II 23 8 15 

 

Table 1 shows that after Cycle I, the number of students reaching the minimum passing grade 
increased from three to eight. The majority, however, still scored below 75. This suggests that TPS 
began to make an impact but required further refinement and repeated practice for stronger results. 

Table 2.  Descriptive Statistics of Reading Scores 

Statistics Pre-test Cycle I Cycle II 

Mean 57.22 69.22 78.26 

Median 60.00 72.00 80.00 

Mode 68.00 72.00 72.00 

Std. Deviation 15.13 11.97 8.77 

Range 56.00 48.00 36.00 

Minimum 24.00 40.00 60.00 

Maximum 80.00 88.00 96.00 

 

Table 2 illustrates that in Cycle I, the class mean rose from 57.22 to 69.22. The reduction in 
standard deviation from 15.13 to 11.97 suggests that performance became more consistent, though 
many learners still struggled. These results confirm that Cycle I initiated progress but left room for 
substantial improvement. 

Cycle I demonstrated that TPS could stimulate engagement and produce measurable 
improvements, but confusion and hesitation limited its impact. The cycle highlighted the importance 
of explicit modeling, repetition of instructions, and sustained teacher scaffolding to help students 
master the stages of TPS. 

3) Cycle II 

a) Implementation and Classroom Dynamics 

In Cycle II, adjustments were made to address the challenges observed in Cycle I. The teacher 
provided more precise explanations, modelled the TPS stages more explicitly, and used guiding 
questions to scaffold comprehension. Students were more confident in working through the “think” 
stage individually, actively discussed texts during the “pair” stage, and demonstrated greater 
willingness to present their findings in the “share” stage. 

Observation notes showed that students were more focused, engaged in purposeful peer talk, and 
less reliant on teacher intervention. Communication broadened beyond small friendship groups, and 



59 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 
         Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 54-65 

 Pratolo, et al. (Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation through think-pair-share…..) 

learners confidently sought clarification from the teacher. The overall classroom climate became more 
collaborative and interactive. 

b) Student Voices 

Interview data from Cycle II confirmed this progress. Learners expressed that TPS made reading 
more manageable and enjoyable. One student remarked, “I like studying in groups because it’s more 
fun, and if we don’t understand something, we can ask friends who do.” Another explained, “Reading 
the text is difficult at first, but using TPS makes it easier because we can share tasks with other 
friends.” These comments show that students not only understood the mechanics of TPS but also 
recognized its value in improving comprehension and reducing anxiety. 

c) Learning Outcomes 

Quantitative data indicated substantial gains. As shown in Table 1, by Cycle II, 15 students 
achieved the passing score, compared to only three in the pre-test and eight in Cycle I. The mean rose 
further to 78.26 (Table 2), surpassing the minimum grade standard. The standard deviation dropped 
again to 8.77, reflecting greater consistency across the class. The lowest score improved from 24 in 
the pre-test to 60 in Cycle II, while the highest rose from 80 to 96. 

 

Fig. 1. Students’ Academic Score Results 

Fig 1 illustrates the upward trajectory from pre-test through Cycle II. The steady climb highlights 
that TPS produced cumulative benefits. While progress in Cycle I was moderate, Cycle II confirmed 
significant improvements as students became more confident and familiar with the strategy. 

Cycle II confirmed the effectiveness of TPS when implemented with stronger scaffolding and 
student familiarity. Students displayed greater confidence, motivation, and comprehension. The 
classroom shifted from passive, teacher-centered instruction to an active, collaborative environment 
where learners supported one another in tackling reading tasks. 

4) Summary of Classroom Changes 

To capture the progression of student behavior, motivation, and comprehension across the research 
cycles, observational and interview data were synthesized into key themes. These themes reflect how 
students responded to reading lessons before the intervention, during the initial implementation of 
Think–Pair–Share (TPS), and after they had become familiar with the strategy. Table 3 summarizes 
the changes across pre-condition, Cycle I, and Cycle II, highlighting shifts in enthusiasm, 
comprehension strategies, task engagement, and classroom interaction. This summary provides a clear 
comparison of how TPS transformed the learning environment over time. 

  



ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 60 

 Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 54-65 

 Pratolo, et al. (Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation through think-pair-share…..) 

Table 3.  Description of Findings Across Pre-condition, Cycle I, and Cycle II 

No. Pre-Condition Cycle I Cycle II 
1 Students showed little 

enthusiasm and were often off-
task. 

Some tried to participate but were 

confused about TPS. 

Students became enthusiastic and 

confident, with a clear understanding 
of TPS. 

2 Students struggled to 

understand texts without 

guidance. 

Some used teacher questions to 

support comprehension. 

Most successfully used guiding 

questions to understand texts. 

3 Students are unfamiliar with 

reading strategies. 

Students were introduced to TPS but 

still confused. 

Students mastered the TPS stages. 

4 Students uninterested in 

reading tasks. 

Students began to enjoy reading 

activities. 

Students fully engaged and enjoyed 

activities. 
5 Students interacted only with 

close friends, rarely with 

teachers. 

Students began interacting more with 

peers and sometimes with the teacher. 

Students interacted confidently with 

both peers and teacher. 

 

Table 3 highlights the transformation across the cycles. Motivation increased, comprehension 
improved, and strategy familiarity developed from non-existent to mastery. Communication 
expanded, and engagement shifted from passive to active. Together, the qualitative and quantitative 
results confirm that TPS not only raised academic performance but also reshaped the classroom into 
a collaborative and learner-centered environment. 

The evidence from both cycles demonstrates that TPS was effective in improving reading 
comprehension and motivation. Qualitative data showed that students became more enthusiastic, 
collaborative, and confident, while quantitative data confirmed measurable academic gains, including 
higher mean scores, improved minimum performance, and reduced variability. 

Notably, the two cycles highlight that TPS effectiveness develops over time. Cycle I served as an 
introduction that sparked interest but also revealed confusion. Cycle II consolidated this foundation, 
producing mastery of the strategy and substantial academic progress. The results suggest that TPS, 
when implemented with clear guidance and consistent practice, is a powerful tool not only for raising 
comprehension scores but also for transforming the classroom into a supportive, interactive space that 
fosters motivation and confidence. 

The findings from both qualitative and quantitative strands provide strong evidence that the Think–
Pair–Share strategy improved students' reading comprehension and motivation. The qualitative data 
highlighted a clear shift in classroom dynamics, with students moving from passive and disengaged 
behavior to active participation and collaboration. Quantitative results confirmed these changes with 
substantial increases in mean scores, reductions in score variability, and higher proportions of students 
achieving the passing grade. Notably, the cyclical design revealed that progress was gradual: Cycle I 
functioned as an adjustment phase, while Cycle II demonstrated mastery and consolidation. These 
results not only affirm the effectiveness of TPS in the context of Indonesian secondary EFL 
classrooms but also raise important questions about how cooperative learning strategies operate to 
influence comprehension, motivation, and classroom interaction. The following Discussion section 
examines these findings in relation to existing research and theoretical perspectives, identifying 
consistencies, tensions, and implications for pedagogy. 

3.2. Discussion 

1) Student Participation and Comprehension Development 

The findings demonstrated that Think–Pair–Share (TPS) significantly increased classroom 
participation, which in turn contributed to comprehension gains. During Cycle I, students were 
hesitant and often confused about TPS stages, but by Cycle II, participation was widespread and 
purposeful. Students engaged in individual reflection, peer discussion, and broader class dialogue, 
which gradually transformed the classroom into a more interactive space. This pattern reflects the 
claim by Mundelsee and Jurkowski (2021) that collaboration provides scaffolding for hesitant 
students, enabling them to participate more actively in academic discourse. Participation, in this sense, 
was not a superficial engagement marker but a critical mechanism for comprehension improvement. 

Quantitative data reinforce this link. The mean reading score increased by over 21 points from the 
pre-test to Cycle II, while variability decreased, showing that participation gains were equitably 



61 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 
         Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 54-65 

 Pratolo, et al. (Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation through think-pair-share…..) 

distributed. (Rice et al., 2024). Gozali et al. (2021) argue that active student talk during reading lessons 
serves as a cognitive tool, allowing learners to articulate, test, and refine their interpretations of texts. 
The current study supports this view by showing that participation gains were strongly associated with 
comprehension growth. TPS thus functions as both a behavioral intervention—encouraging more 
voices in the classroom—and a cognitive intervention, helping learners process meaning 
collaboratively. 

2) Motivation as a Mediating Factor 

Motivation emerged as a decisive factor in shaping the effectiveness of TPS. Before the 
intervention, students described reading as difficult and unappealing. In Cycle I, modest motivational 
improvements were observed, but in Cycle II, students expressed strong enthusiasm, noting that TPS 
made reading “fun,” “easier with friends,” and “less stressful.” This trajectory reflects Li and Gan’s  
(2022) findings that reading motivation, alongside vocabulary knowledge and self-regulated 
strategies, is a key predictor of comprehension outcomes. The motivational effect of TPS appears to 
operate by reducing anxiety and promoting peer support, enabling students to sustain effort during 
challenging tasks. 

Significantly, motivation mediated the link between participation and comprehension. Students 
who reported higher motivation in interviews were also those whose test scores improved significantly 
in Cycle II. Li et al. (2022) observed similar patterns, showing that strategy instruction improves 
comprehension only when coupled with motivational gains. In the present study, TPS provided the 
interactive environment that made reading meaningful, while scaffolds such as guiding questions 
strengthened learners’ self-efficacy. Together, these elements demonstrate that TPS’s success cannot 
be explained solely by its structure; it also works by transforming students’ affective relationship with 
reading. 

3) Equity and Inclusive Learning Outcomes 

One of the most striking findings was the reduction in performance disparities across the class. Not 
only did mean scores improve, but the standard deviation decreased and the minimum score rose 
substantially. This indicates that TPS did not merely benefit stronger students but also supported 
weaker ones, narrowing the achievement gap. Such results are consistent with Namaziandost et al.  
(2020), who reported that cooperative learning techniques such as Jigsaw provided disproportionate 
benefits for lower-proficiency learners. By encouraging peer explanation and shared accountability, 
TPS gave struggling students access to immediate feedback and modelling from peers. 

The equity dimension is critical in EFL contexts where classes are heterogeneous in ability. Peng 
et al. (2024), in their network meta-analysis of comprehension interventions, concluded that 
approaches combining explicit scaffolding with collaborative learning are most effective for 
struggling readers. The findings of this study echo that conclusion: guiding questions and teacher 
facilitation provided the scaffold, while TPS created the collaborative context. Together, these 
elements raised the performance floor while maintaining gains at the top, promoting equity in 
outcomes. This suggests that TPS is not only practical but also inclusive, making it a valuable strategy 
for diverse classrooms. 

4) TPS in the Landscape of Cooperative Learning 

Positioning TPS among other cooperative strategies highlights both its strengths and limitations. 
Like Jigsaw, Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR), and project-based learning, TPS relies on 
interdependence, accountability, and structured interaction (Alsmadi et al., 2023; Early et al., 2025; 
Moin et al., 2024; Shaik, 2025). The current study found outcomes consistent with these approaches: 
improved comprehension, stronger motivation, and reduced performance gaps. However, TPS is less 
complex to implement, requiring minimal preparation while still yielding substantial results. This 
adaptability makes it attractive in resource-limited classrooms, a point also emphasized by Li and Tu 
(2024), who showed TPS’s effectiveness when integrated into project-based courses. 

At the same time, Cycle I revealed challenges in the “share” stage, where weaker students were 
reluctant to contribute. Cooper et al. (2021) caution that the share phase of TPS may suppress 
participation if not scaffolded effectively. Adaptations such as rotating roles, written share-outs, or 
anonymous reporting can mitigate these issues. Thus, TPS should not be treated as a fixed routine but 
as a flexible design that teachers can modify to fit their context. In line with Rice et al. (2024) and 
Peng et al. (2024), the findings suggest that the most potent effects occur when TPS is integrated with 
explicit scaffolds, motivational supports, and varied sharing formats. 



ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 62 

 Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 54-65 

 Pratolo, et al. (Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation through think-pair-share…..) 

4. Conclusion 

4.1. Final thoughts 

This study investigated the implementation of the Think–Pair–Share (TPS) strategy in an 
Indonesian secondary EFL classroom and its effects on reading comprehension and student 
motivation. Across two cycles of Classroom Action Research (CAR), the findings demonstrated that 
TPS not only increased classroom participation but also enhanced comprehension outcomes and 
reshaped learners' attitudes toward reading. Quantitative evidence revealed significant gains in mean 
test scores, reduced variability, and a higher proportion of students surpassing the passing grade. At 
the same time, qualitative data confirmed a transformation from disengaged and anxious learners to 
motivated and confident participants. The study highlights that TPS, when implemented consistently 
with explicit scaffolding and guiding questions, is an effective tool for addressing both cognitive and 
affective barriers in EFL reading instruction. 

The results carry critical pedagogical implications. TPS offers a flexible, low-resource cooperative 
strategy that can promote equity by supporting both weaker and stronger learners. Teachers are 
advised to provide explicit modelling of the TPS stages, incorporate guiding questions to scaffold 
comprehension, and adapt the "share" stage to ensure inclusive participation. Beyond improving test 
performance, TPS also contributes to building collaborative and supportive classroom environments, 
making it a valuable approach in contexts where student motivation and confidence are as critical as 
comprehension outcomes. Future research should extend TPS applications to a broader range of text 
genres and contexts, explore long-term retention through delayed testing, and examine its integration 
with other cooperative and project-based learning models. 

4.2. Researcher positionality 

The authorship in the project design represents a collaborative effort of diverse scholars that aims 
to enhance the value of research outcomes. Bambang Widi Pratolo is a research scholar and lecturer 
at Ahmad Dahlan University, Indonesia, and Suhendri Palaguna is a novice researcher graduating 
from the same university. Because of their hybrid identity as teacher-researchers, they had an insider's 
view of and intimate access to the classroom context, allowing them to be more sensitive in their 
interpretation of students' experiences; however, they also might have introduced bias into observation 
and analysis. To have an outsider provide an external view at the analysis and writing stage, the task 
was supported by a research scholar in Monash University, Australia, Dat Bao, to place findings within 
a wider international scholarship. In recognizing such positionalities, the analysis seeks to present a 
transparent account of how the authors' professional and cultural profiles influenced their 
interpretations. 

4.3. Limitations and future directions 

This research was conducted in the context of the Indonesian secondary EFL classroom with only 
23 participants, and thus, generalization may be limited. Although the design of the classroom action 
research allowed for detailed and context-specific findings, we again remind the reader to interpret 
our findings as indicative rather than conclusive. The ecological soundness of the environment (i.e., 
in most aspects that of a typical mixed-ability, resource-deprived classroom) indicates that the findings 
may be transferred to other similar settings, but replication is needed. 

Further studies might replicate the analysis of this construct across larger samples, different grades, 
rural and urban schools, and other cultural contexts to check the robustness of TPS. Comparative 
works could also establish their implications for various text genres and higher-order comprehension 
tasks. Research in this direction would clarify the extent to which TPS can be generalized in other 
contexts and permit a stronger external validity with consequently more convincing evidence of the 
effectiveness of TPS to reinforce reading comprehension and motivation in EFL classrooms. 



63 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 
         Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 54-65 

 Pratolo, et al. (Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation through think-pair-share…..) 

Acknowledgement 

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to the participants of this study who have provided 

all the information needed for the completion of this project. We also thank both the teacher and the 

principal who have organized the classes for this research. 

Declaration 

Author contribution : BWP was responsible for the entire research project. He led the 

writing of the manuscript and the collaboration with the second 

author, DB. SP participated in the data collection, transcription, and 

prepared the initial draft. All authors approved the final manuscript.  

Funding statement : This research received no funding from any institution. 

Conflict of interest : Both authors declare that they have no competing interests. 

Ethics declaration 

 

 

 

 

 

Additional 
information 

: We, as authors, acknowledge that this work has been written based 
on ethical research that conforms with the regulations of our 
university and that we have obtained permission from the relevant 
institute when collecting data. 

We support ELTEJ in maintaining high standards of personal 
conduct, practicing honesty in all our professional practices and 
endeavors. 

 

No additional information is available for this paper. 

 

 

 

 

REFERENCES  

Alsmadi, M. A., Tabieh, A. A. S., Alsaifi, R. M., & Al-Nawaiseh, S. J. (2023). The effect of the 

collaborative discussion strategy think-pair-share on developing students' skills in solving 

engineering mathematical problems. European Journal of Educational Research, volume-12-

(volume-12-issue-2-april-2023), 1123–1135. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.12.2.1123  

Bećirović, S. (2023). The relationship between cooperative learning, cultural intelligence, EFL 

motivation, and students' performance: A structural equation modeling approach. Sage Open, 

13(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231208975  

Burns, A. (2019a). Action research in English language teaching: Contributions and recent 

developments (pp. 1–15). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58542-0_52-1  

Burns, A. (2019b). Action research: Developments, characteristics, and future directions. in the 

Cambridge handbook of language learning (pp. 166–185). Cambridge University Press. 

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108333603.008  

Burns, A. (2024). Exploring the teaching of speaking through action research: Teachers’ voices (pp. 

53–72). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-59321-5_4  

Cooper, K. M., Schinske, J. N., & Tanner, K. D. (2021). Reconsidering the share of a think–pair–

share: Emerging limitations, alternatives, and opportunities for research. CBE—Life Sciences 

Education, 20(1), fe1. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-08-0200  

https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.12.2.1123
https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231208975
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58542-0_52-1
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108333603.008
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-59321-5_4
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-08-0200


ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 64 

 Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 54-65 

 Pratolo, et al. (Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation through think-pair-share…..) 

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed 

methods approaches. SAGE PublicationsSage UK: London, England. 

Creswell, J. W., & Guetterman, Timothy C. (2025). educational research: planning, conducting, and 

evaluating quantitative and qualitative research, 7th edition. Pearson. 

Deore, M., & Arora, S. (2022). Effective think-pair-share pedagogical strategy to improve inferential 

statistics concept understanding. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 

36(Special Issue 1), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2022/v36is1/22170  

Dikilitaş, K. (2024). Student engagement through action research. In The Routledge Handbook of 

language teacher action research (pp. 96–107). Routledge. 

https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003367352-11  

Early, K. S., Williams, J., & Saltarelli, W. A. (2025). Applying the jigsaw learning method to 

structural kinesiology. Advances in Physiology Education, 49(2), 593–598. 

https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00004.2025  

Gozali, I., Lie, A., Tamah, S. M., Triwidayati, K. R., Utami, T. S. D., & Jemadi, F. (2021). Secondary 

School Language Teachers' Online Learning Engagement during the COVID-19 Pandemic in 

Indonesia. In COVID-19 and Education: Learning and Teaching in a Pandemic-Constrained 

Environment. (pp. 363–392). Informing Science Press. 

Khan, H. F., Qayyum, S., Beenish, H., Khan, R. A., Iltaf, S., & Faysal, L. R. (2025). Determining 

the alignment of assessment items with curriculum goals through document analysis by 

addressing identified item flaws. BMC Medical Education, 25(1). 

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-06736-4  

Khataybeh, A., Al-Shadiedh, M., & Khasawneh, G. (2024). The effectiveness of  cooperative 

learning strategy for mastery in enhancing the skill performance of some gymnastics floor 

movements. Pedagogy of Physical Culture and Sports, 28(4), 292–300. 

https://doi.org/10.15561/26649837.2024.0406 

Lee, H. C., Lin, Y. J., Kuen Tai, L., Ting Ting, H., & Lai, C. T. J. (2025). Effects of cooperative 

learning on undergraduate nursing students: a quasi- experimental study. International Journal 

of Nursing Education Scholarship, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/ijnes-2024-0069  

Li, H., & Gan, Z. (2022). Reading motivation, self-regulated reading strategies and English 

vocabulary knowledge: Which most predicted students’ English reading comprehension? 

Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1041870  

Li, H., Gan, Z., Leung, S. O., & An, Z. (2022). the impact of reading strategy instruction on reading 

comprehension, strategy use, motivation, and self-efficacy in Chinese university EFL students. 

Sage Open, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221086659  

Li, M.-M., & Tu, C.-C. (2024). Developing a project-based learning course model combined with 

the think–pair–share strategy to enhance creative thinking skills in education students. 

Education Sciences, 14(3), 233. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14030233  

Liu, Y., Thurston, A., & Ye, X. (2024). Technology-enhanced cooperative language learning: A 

systematic review. International Journal of Educational Research, 124, 102314. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102314  

Manasa, M. R., Karant, C., & Bhimalli, S. (2023). A comparative study of the efficacy of “Think-

Pair-Share” method over tutorials in Pharmacology for undergraduates. Physiology and 

Pharmacology (Iran), 27(1), 28–33. https://doi.org/10.52547/phypha.27.1.8  

Mertler, C. A. (2024). Introduction to educational research. SAGE PublicationsSage UK: London, 

England. 

Miles, M., Huberman, A., & Saldaña, J. (2021). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. 

SAGE PublicationsSage UK: London, England. 

https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2022/v36is1/22170
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003367352-11
https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00004.2025
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-06736-4
https://doi.org/10.1515/ijnes-2024-0069
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1041870
https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221086659
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14030233
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102314
https://doi.org/10.52547/phypha.27.1.8


65 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 
         Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2025, pp. 54-65 

 Pratolo, et al. (Enhancing reading comprehension and motivation through think-pair-share…..) 

Moin, H., Majeed, S., Zahra, T., Zafar, S., Nadeem, A., & Majeed, S. (2024). Assessing the impact 

of jigsaw technique for cooperative learning in undergraduate medical education: merits, 

challenges, and forward prospects. BMC Medical Education, 24(1). 

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05831-2  

Mundelsee, L., & Jurkowski, S. (2021). Think and pair before share: Effects of collaboration on 

students’ in-class participation. Learning and Individual Differences, 88, 102015. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102015  

Namaziandost, E., Gilakjani, A. P., & Hidayatullah. (2020). Enhancing pre-intermediate EFL 

learners’ reading comprehension through the use of Jigsaw technique. Cogent Arts and 

Humanities, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2020.1738833  

Nazari, N., Nafissi, Z., Estaji, M., & Marandi, S. S. (2019). Evaluating novice and experienced EFL 

teachers’ perceived TPACK for their professional development. Cogent Education, 6(1). 

https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1632010  

Peng, P., Wang, W., Filderman, M. J., Zhang, W., & Lin, L. (2024). The active ingredient in reading 

comprehension strategy intervention for struggling readers: A bayesian network meta-analysis. 

Review of Educational Research, 94(2), 228–267. 

https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231171345  

Rice, M., Lambright, K., & Wijekumar, K. (Kay). (2024). Professional development in reading 

comprehension: A meta‐analysis of the effects on teachers and students. Reading Research 

Quarterly, 59(3), 424–447. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.546  

Shaik, M. G. (2025). Pedagogical approaches to collaborative learning: An analytical study. 050001. 

https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0248162  

Wang, Z., & Qian, J. (2020). Action research on flipped classroom model in Chinese context of 

English linguistics teaching. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1533(4), 042083. 

https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1533/4/042083  

Zohrabi, M., & Hassan, J. (2020). The role of think-pair-share interactional activity on improving 

Iranian EFL learners’ willingness to communicate. Teaching English Language, 14(1), 153–

182. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.22132/tel.2020.106921   

 

 

 

 

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05831-2
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102015
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2020.1738833
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1632010
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231171345
https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.546
https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0248162
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1533/4/042083
https://doi.org/https:/doi.org/10.22132/tel.2020.106921

