p-ISSN : 2745-7141 e-ISSN : 2746-1920 Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia Vol.
06 No.
December.
The Effects of Teaching Strategic and Self-Confidence on StudentsAo Speaking Competency (An Experimental in the 8th Grade Students of SMP Muslimin Panyawunga.
Dini Rizki Rahayu STIE Gema Widya Bangsa.
Indonesia Email: dinirizkir6@gmail.
Keywords:
Think-Pair-Share activity.
speaking competence.
Selfconfidence ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of the Think-PairShare teaching strategy and self-confidence on studentsAo speaking This study was conducted with 8th-grade students of SMP Muslimin Panyawungan in the academic year 2023/2024.
There were 99 students selected as the sample and divided into experimental and control groups.
The study used a post-test-only control group design.
The analysis was conducted using MANOVA facilitated by SPSS version 0 for Windows.
The results indicated that .
there was a significant effect of Think-Pair-Share on studentsAo speaking competency .
a = 189, ycy = 0.
000 < 0.
there was a significant effect of selfconfidence on studentsAo speaking competency .
a = 14.
502, ycy = 000 < 0.
simultaneously, there was a significant effect of Think-Pair-Share and studentsAo self-confidence on studentsAo speaking competency .
ahitung = 20.
938 > yatabel = 3.
INTRODUCTION
This research explores the implementation of Think-Pair-Share activities and their effect on studentsAo self-confidence and speaking competency.
It investigates improvements in studentsAo self-confidence through Think-Pair-Share activities and their impact on speaking competency (Johnson & Johnson, 2019.
Slavin, 2.
Learning a foreign language is essential in this millennial era, especially English (Jiang, 2.
In Indonesia, the government recognizes that English competencies influence global development for educational purposes (Sari & Yuliana, 2.
Furthermore, studies have shown that collaborative learning strategies like Think-Pair-Share can enhance studentsAo speaking skills by encouraging active participation and peer interaction (Kessler & Plakans, 2.
Therefore, integrating Think-Pair-Share activities in language classrooms can significantly improve studentsAo self-confidence and overall language proficiency (Hernyndez, 2.
In foreign language education, acquiring proficient speaking skills is an essential objective (Darancik, 2018.
Ghafar & Raheem, 2023.
Saptiany & Prabowo, 2.
In this field, the Think-Pair-Share strategy has emerged as an innovative pedagogical approach, promoting collaboration and interactive learning.
However, its impact is closely linked to studentsAo selfconfidence.
As these factors intersect, they can reshape language learning.
This thesis examines the synergistic relationship between Think-Pair-Share activities and studentsAo self-confidence in shaping speaking competency, unveiling insights to revolutionize English as a foreign language teaching.
When education is delivered and received properly, it enables individuals Dini Rizki Rahayu to develop professionally and contributes to national success in economy, politics, science and technology, arts, and medicine (Balan, 2.
According to the content standards for English teaching issued by Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan (BSNP).
English instruction in Indonesia aims to develop studentsAo communicative competence (BSNP, 2.
Communicative competence enables Indonesian students to interact in English with native speakers or others in everyday life.
The four core skillsAilistening, speaking, reading, and writingAimust be mastered for effective Among these, speaking is often the most critical for language learning success and achieving goals in English as a foreign language.
Speaking is a core skill in learning English as a foreign language, yet it is challenging.
Students must master elements such as fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, comprehension, and overall speaking competency.
Speaking competency involves communicating orally in clear, coherent, and persuasive language suited to the purpose, occasion, and audience.
Many students study English for years yet struggle to speak fluently due to factors like clustering, redundancy, reduced forms, performance variables, colloquial language, rate of delivery, intonation, and interaction (Brown, 2.
Low self-confidence exacerbates this, making students shy and afraid to speak.
Self-confidence is crucial for learners developing English speaking skills.
Teaching materials and activities that build enthusiasm, courage, and stimulationAisuch as when teachers encourage students to share ideasAiprevent monotonous and boring lessons.
To foster confidence in speaking, teachers need effective strategies.
English as a foreign language students require motivation, attitude, and emotion regulation to build self-confidence through interactions (Chou, 2.
Think-Pair-Share activities address this by promoting student Limited observations of 8th-grade students at SMP Muslimin Panyawungan in Bandung revealed widespread hesitation to speak in class, with few responding to questions.
This can be addressed through Think-Pair-Share (TPS) activities, which enhance self-confidence and speaking competency in EFL classrooms (Budianti, 2.
TPS improves self-confidence, higher-order thinking, and motivation to speak (Budianti, 2019.
Sampsel, 2.
It encourages active participation, enhances vocabulary and pronunciation, and offers formative assessment opportunities, proven effective for increasing involvement and speaking ability (Syafii, 2.
Indonesia ranks 74th in English proficiency per the 2020 EF EPI, underscoring the need for better English education (Zulkifli, 2.
While reading develops language skills, conversation and speaking activities foster critical thinking and confidence (Saepudin & Mentari, 2.
SMP Muslimin Panyawungan struggles with student engagement and selfconfidence in English lessons, worsened by traditional methods.
This research examines how TPS improves both self-confidence and speaking competency, filling a gap in existing studies.
It involves 64 8th-grade students from two classes at SMP Muslimin Panyawungan to assess TPSAos impact on their speaking skills and self-confidence.
Based on the background above, this research addresses these questions: How does the Think-Pair-Share activity impact studentsAo speaking competency? How does self-confidence Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
The Effects of Teaching Strategic and Self-Confidence on StudentsAo Speaking Competency (An Experimental in the 8th Grade Students of SMP Muslimin Panyawunga.
influence studentsAo speaking competency? What is the combined effect of Think-Pair-Share activities and self-confidence on studentsAo speaking competency? The objectives are to investigate the influence of Think-Pair-Share activities on studentsAo speaking competency, examine the influence of self-confidence on studentsAo speaking competency, and analyze their combined effect.
This research enhances understanding of how Think-Pair-Share activities improve studentsAo self-confidence and speaking competency.
Theoretically, the findings support these activitiesAo effectiveness in building confidence and speaking skills.
It offers teachers practical insights into strategies for boosting self-confidence and speaking competency in English
RESEARCH METHOD
This study, conducted with 8th-grade students at SMP Muslimin Panyawungan in Bandung.
West Java, employed an experimental research method to examine the impact of the Think-Pair-Share (TPS) teaching method and students' self-confidence on their speaking The research used a 2x2 factorial design, with teaching strategies (TPS vs.
and self-confidence levels .
igh vs.
as independent variables, and students' speaking ability as the dependent variable.
A sample of 64 students, divided into experimental and control groups, was selected using simple random sampling.
The experimental group received TPS treatment, while the control group used conventional methods.
Data was collected through pre- and post-tests assessing speaking skills and self-confidence, along with a questionnaire to gauge changes in self-confidence.
Statistical analysis, including normality and homogeneity tests, and ANOVA, was performed using SPSS to examine the effects of teaching strategies and self-confidence on speaking ability.
The results indicated significant differences in speaking competency, with TPS and self-confidence both having a positive impact, confirming the hypotheses tested.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Data Description In this study, three variables are examined: the teaching method and students' selfconfidence as independent variables, denoted as variable X, and students' speaking ability as the dependent variable, referred to as variable Y.
Data were collected through a combination of speaking tests to assess students' speaking abilities and questionnaires to measure students' self-confidence in speaking English.
Group of studentsAo speaking abilities taught using Think-Pair-Share Method (A.
Of the 32 sampled students who received treatment using the Think-Pair-Share Activities method, the data obtained revealed the lowest score to be 50, the highest score to be 88, an average score of 68.
16, a median of 67, a mode of 67, and a standard deviation of 11,110.
Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
Dini Rizki Rahayu Figure 1.
Histogram of the Speaking Ability of Students Taught Using the Think-PairShare Method (A.
From the histogram and polygon diagrams above, it can be concluded that most students have a score of 67, with the highest score being 88 and the lowest score being 50.
Group of studentsAo speaking abilities taught using Conventional Teaching English Method (A.
Of a sample of 32 students who received treatment using conventional methods, the data revealed the lowest score to be 40, the highest score to be 78, an average score of 59,72, a median of 60, a mode of 60, and a standard deviation of 8,978.
Figure 2.
Histogram of the Speaking Ability of Students Taught Using the Conventional Method (A.
The histogram and polygon diagrams above showed that the majority of students have a value of 60, with the highest value being 78, and the lowest value at 40.
From all the data above, it can be stated that the class taught using the Think-Pair-Share Method (A.
has an average EnglishAos speaking ability of 68,16.
Based on these results, it can be said that the EnglishAos speaking ability taught using the Think-Pair-Share Method is better.
Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
The Effects of Teaching Strategic and Self-Confidence on StudentsAo Speaking Competency (An Experimental in the 8th Grade Students of SMP Muslimin Panyawunga.
Group of StudentsAo Speaking Abilities with High Self-Confidence (B.
Of the 32 students sampled with high confidence, the data generated a minimum score of 47, a maximum score of 88, an average score of 67,81, a median of 67, a mode of 60, and a standard deviation of 1,516.
Figure 3.
Histogram of students' speaking ability with high confidence (B.
From the above histogram and polygon, it can be concluded that the majority of students have a value of 60, with the highest value being 88 and the lowest value being 47.
Group of StudentsAo Speaking Abilities with Low Self-Confidence (B.
Of the sample of 32 students with low self-confidence, the gained data displays the lowest score to be 40, the highest score to be 78, an average score of 60,06, a median of 60, a mode of 60, and a standard deviation of 8,784.
Figure 4.
Histogram of students' speaking ability with low confidence (B.
The histogram and polygon diagrams above determined that the majority of students have a value of 60, with the highest value being 78 and the lowest being 40.
From all the data above, it can be concluded that the class with a high level of selfconfidence has an average speaking ability of 67,81.
Based on the results, it can be identified that students with high self-confidence have enhanced speaking abilities.
Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
Dini Rizki Rahayu The group of students' speaking abilities taught using the Think-Pair-Share method and students with high self-confidence (A1B.
Of the 16 students selected as samples, who were subjected to the Think-Pair-Share teaching method and possessed high self-confidence, the data showed a minimum score of 67, a maximum score of 88, an average score of 76,69, a median of 78,50, a mode of 70, and a standard deviation of 6,780.
Figure 5.
Histogram of the speaking abilities of students taught using the Think-PairShare method with high self-confidence (A1B.
From the above histogram diagram, it can be concluded that many students have a value of 70, with the highest value being 88, and the lowest being 67.
The group of students' speaking abilities taught using the Think-Pair-Share method and students with low self-confidence (A1B.
Of the 16 students selected as samples, who were subjected to the Think-Pair-Share teaching method and possessed low self-confidence, the data showed a minimum score of 50, a maximum score of 77, an average score of 59,63, a median of 60, a mode of 60, and a standard deviation of 7,338.
Figure 6.
Histogram of the speaking abilities of students taught using the Think-PairShare method with low self-confidence (A1B.
From the above histogram diagram, it can be concluded that many students have a value of 60, with the highest value being 77, and the lowest being 50.
Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
The Effects of Teaching Strategic and Self-Confidence on StudentsAo Speaking Competency (An Experimental in the 8th Grade Students of SMP Muslimin Panyawunga.
From all the data above, it can be concluded that the class taught using the Think-PairShare method and students with high self-confidence (A1B.
have an average speaking ability of 76,69.
Based on these results, it can be said that the speaking abilities of students taught using the Think-Pair-Share method and with high self-confidence are better.
The group of students' speaking abilities taught using the Conventional Teaching method and students with high self-confidence (A2B.
Of the 16 students selected as samples, who were subjected to the Conventional teaching method and possessed high self-confidence, the data showed a minimum score of 47, a maximum score of 77, an average score of 58,94, a median of 60, a mode of 60, and a standard deviation of 7,750.
Figure 7.
Histogram of the speaking abilities of students taught using the Conventional teaching method with high self-confidence (A2B.
From the above histogram diagram, it can be concluded that many students have a value of 60, with the highest value being 77, and the lowest being 47.
The group of students' speaking abilities taught using the Conventional Teaching method and students with low self-confidence (A2B.
Of the 16 students selected as samples, who were subjected to the Conventional teaching method and possessed low self-confidence, the data showed a minimum score of 40, a maximum score of 78, an average score of 60,50, a median of 60, a mode of 53, and a standard deviation of 10,257.
Figure 8.
Histogram of the speaking abilities of students taught using the Conventional teaching method with low self-confidence (A2B.
Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
Dini Rizki Rahayu From the above histogram diagram, it can be concluded that many students have a value of 53, with the highest value being 78, and the lowest being 40.
From all the data above, it can be concluded that the class taught using the conventional method and students with low self-confidence (A2B.
have an average speaking ability of 60,50.
Based on these results, it can be said that the speaking abilities of students taught using the conventional teaching method in the group with low self-confidence are better.
A summary of the research data above, which will be subsequently used for the analysis process, can be observed in Table 4.
High SelfConfidence(B.
Low SelfConfidence (B.
Total Table 4.
9 Summary of Research Data Think-Pair-Share Conventional (A.
(A.
nA1B1 =16 nA2B1 =16 XA1B1 =76,69 XA2B1 =58,94 =6,780 =7,750 nA1B2 =16 nA2B2 =16 XA1B2 =59,63 XA2B2 =60,50 =7,338 =10,257 nA1 =32 nA2 =32 XA1 = 68,16 XA2 =59,72 S2A1 =11,110 S2A2 =8,978 Total
nB1 =32 XB1 = 67,81 S2B1 = 11,516 nB2 =32 XB2 =60,06 S2B2 = 8,784 nT = 64
XT = 63,94
S2T = 10,884
Data Analysis Technique Normality Test In this research the normality test used Lilliefors from Kolmogorov-Smirnov (Uyanto, 2006: .
with the assistance of software SPSS 21.
0 for Windows.
The normality test was conducted to test the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis Ho : data is normally distributed H1 : data is not normally distributed .
Test criteria:
If P-value .
) Ou .
Ho is accepted If P-value .
) < .
Ho is rejected A summary of the results of the normality test using Lilliefors with a significance level of = 0,05 .
%) for each group of studentsAo speaking ability data .
nd interactive quiz grou.
is presented as follows:
Group of Think-Pair-Share Method (A.
Presented below a table of the normality test results for the Think-Pair-Share class using SPSS 21.
0 for Windows.
Table 1.
Normality Test Result of Lilliefors Kolmogorov-Smirnov
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Normal Parameters Mean
68,16
Std.
Deviation 11,110 Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
The Effects of Teaching Strategic and Self-Confidence on StudentsAo Speaking Competency (An Experimental in the 8th Grade Students of SMP Muslimin Panyawunga.
Most Extreme Differences Absolute Positive Negative Test Statistic Asymp.
Sig.
-taile.
Test distribution is Normal.
Calculated from data.
Lilliefors Significance Correction.
This is a lower bound of the true significance.
,112
,112
-,107
,112
,200c,d Group of Conventional Teaching Method (A.
Presented below a table of the normality test results for the Conventional Teaching Method class using SPSS 21.
0 for Windows.
Table 2.
Normality Test Result of Lilliefors Kolmogorov-Smirnov
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Normal Parametersa,b Mean
59,72
Std.
Deviation 8,978 Most Extreme Differences Absolute ,137 Positive ,117 Negative -,137 Test Statistic ,137 Asymp.
Sig.
-taile.
,129c Test distribution is Normal.
Calculated from data.
Lilliefors Significance Correction.
Group of Students' Speaking Ability with High Self-Confidence (B.
Presented below a table of the normality test results for the studentsAo speaking abilities with high self-confidence class using SPSS 21.
0 for Windows.
Table 3.
Normality test Result of Students' Speaking Ability with High Self-Confidence One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Normal Parametersa,b Mean
67,81
Std.
11,516
Deviation Most Extreme Absolute ,105 Differences Positive ,099 Negative -,105 Test Statistic ,105 Asymp.
Sig.
-taile.
,200c,d Test distribution is Normal.
Calculated from data.
Lilliefors Significance Correction.
This is a lower bound of the true significance.
Group of Students' Speaking Ability with Low Self-Confidence (B.
Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
Dini Rizki Rahayu Presented below a table of the normality test results for the studentsAo speaking abilities with low self-confidence class using SPSS 21.
0 for Windows.
Table 4.
Normality test Result of Students' Speaking Ability with Low Self-Confidence One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Normal Parameters Mean
60,06
Std.
Deviation 8,784 Most Extreme Differences Absolute ,133 Positive ,133 Negative -,098 Test Statistic ,133 Asymp.
Sig.
-taile.
,160c Test distribution is Normal.
Calculated from data.
Lilliefors Significance Correction.
The group of students' speaking abilities taught using the Think-Pair-Share method and students with high self-confidence Presented below a table of the normality test results for the group of students' speaking abilities taught using the Think-Pair-Share method and students with high self-confidence using SPSS 21.
0 for Windows.
Table 5.
Speaking Skills of Students Taught with the Think-Pair-Share Method and High Self-Confidence One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
A1B1
Normal Parameters Mean
76,69
Std.
Deviation 6,780 Most Extreme Differences Absolute ,213 Positive ,213 Negative -,187 Test Statistic ,213 Asymp.
Sig.
-taile.
,051c Test distribution is Normal.
Calculated from data.
Lilliefors Significance Correction.
The group of students' speaking abilities taught using the Think-Pair-Share method and students with low self-confidence Presented below a table of the normality test results for the group of students' speaking abilities taught using the Think-Pair-Share method and students with low self-confidence using SPSS 21.
0 for Windows.
Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
The Effects of Teaching Strategic and Self-Confidence on StudentsAo Speaking Competency (An Experimental in the 8th Grade Students of SMP Muslimin Panyawunga.
Table 6.
Speaking Skills of Students Taught with the Think-Pair-Share Method and Low Self-Confidence One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
A1B2
Normal Parametersa,b Mean
59,63
Std.
Deviation 7,338 Most Extreme Differences Absolute ,167 Positive ,167 Negative -,095 Test Statistic ,167 Asymp.
Sig.
-taile.
,200c,d Test distribution is Normal.
Calculated from data.
Lilliefors Significance Correction.
This is a lower bound of the true significance.
The group of students' speaking abilities taught using the Conventional Teaching method and students with high self-confidence Presented below a table of the normality test results for the group of students' speaking abilities taught using the conventional teaching method and students with high self-confidence using SPSS 21.
0 for Windows.
Table 7.
Speaking Skills of Students Taught with the Conventional Method and High Self-Confidence One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
A2B1
Normal Parametersa,b Mean
58,94
Std.
Deviation 7,750 Most Extreme Differences Absolute ,180 Positive ,175 Negative -,180 Test Statistic ,180 Asymp.
Sig.
-taile.
,178c Test distribution is Normal.
Calculated from data.
Lilliefors Significance Correction.
The group of students' speaking abilities taught using the Conventional Teaching method and students with low self-confidence Presented below a table of the normality test results for the group of students' speaking abilities taught using the conventional teaching method and students with low self-confidence using SPSS 21.
0 for Windows.
Table 8.
Speaking Skills of Students Taught with the Conventional Method and Low Self-Confidence One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
A2B2
Normal Parametersa,b Mean
60,50
Std.
Deviation 10,257 Most Extreme Differences Absolute ,143 Positive ,143 Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
Dini Rizki Rahayu Negative Test Statistic Asymp.
Sig.
-taile.
Test distribution is Normal.
Calculated from data.
Lilliefors Significance Correction.
This is a lower bound of the true significance.
-,112
,143
,200c,d Homogeneity Test Homogeneity testing on the sample groups' data was conducted using the Bartlett test at a significance level of = 5%.
The summary of the homogeneity test results for each sample group is provided in the table below:
Homogeneity Test for Learning Method (A) The summary of the homogeneity test calculations for the mentioned groups indicates a probability value .
of 0,114.
Since the probability value .
is 0,114, which is greater than 0,05, the null hypothesis is accepted.
In other words, the samples are derived from populations with homogeneous variances.
Homogeneity Test for Self-Confidence (B) The summary of the homogeneity test calculations for the mentioned groups indicates a probability value .
of 0,066.
Since the probability value .
is 0,066, which is greater than 0,05, the null hypothesis is accepted.
In other words, the samples are derived from populations with homogeneous variances.
Homogeneity Test for All Groups of Think-Pair-Share Learning Methods and High SelfConfidence (A1B.
Think-Pair-Share Learning Methods and Low Self-Confidence (A1B.
Conventional Learning Methods and High Self-Confidence (A2B.
, and Conventional Learning Methods and Low Self-Confidence (A2B.
The summary of the homogeneity test results for all the groups shows a probability value .
of 0,356.
Since the probability value .
is 0,356 > 0,05, the null hypothesis is accepted, indicating that all four variances are equal.
In other words, the samples are from populations with homogeneous variances.
Hypothesis Test The hypothesis testing in this research was analyzed using a two-factor ANOVA to determine the influence and interaction between groups.
This ANOVA analysis was conducted using SPSS 21.
The following is the ANOVA table:
Table 9.
Anova Table Tests of Between-Subjects Effects Dependent Variable: Students_Speaking_Competencies Source Type i Mean
Sum of Square Squares Corrected 3487,625a 1162,542 Model
Intercept
261632,250
261632,250
1139,063
1139,063
961,000
961,000
Sig.
17,543
,000
3948,049
17,189
14,502
,000
,000
,000
Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
The Effects of Teaching Strategic and Self-Confidence on StudentsAo Speaking Competency (An Experimental in the 8th Grade Students of SMP Muslimin Panyawunga.
A*B 1387,563 Error
3976,125
Total
269096,000
Corrected Total
7463,750
R Squared = ,467 (Adjusted R Squared = ,.
1387,563 66,269 20,938 ,000 The study tested three hypotheses using SPSS version 21.
First, the hypothesis regarding the influence of the Think-Pair-Share (TPS) teaching method on students' speaking competencies showed a significant result, with a p-value of 0.
ess than 0.
and an Fstatistic of 17.
189, exceeding the critical value of 3.
This indicates that TPS significantly affects students' speaking ability.
Second, the hypothesis regarding the influence of selfconfidence on speaking competencies also yielded a significant result, with a p-value of 0.
ess than 0.
and an F-statistic of 14.
502, surpassing the critical value of 3.
Third, the interaction between the TPS method and self-confidence was found to significantly influence students' speaking ability, with a p-value of 0.
000 and an F-statistic of 20.
938, exceeding the critical value of 3.
Finally, a post-hoc Tukey test was conducted to examine the interaction effect between TPS and self-confidence on speaking competencies.
Table 10.
Summary of Tukey Test Results Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: Students_Speaking_Competencies (I) (J) Mean Std.
Sig.
INTER
INTERA
Differen
Erro
ACTIO
CTION
ce (I-J) Tukey
A1B2
A1BI
-17,06*
2,878
,000
HSD
A2B1
,69
2,878
,995
A2B2
-,88
2,878
,990
A1BI
A1B2
17,06
2,878
,000
A2B1
17,75*
2,878
,000
A2B2
16,19
2,878
,000
A2B1
A1B2
-,69
2,878
,995
A1BI
-17,75
2,878
,000
A2B2
-1,56
2,878
,948
A2B2
A1B2
,88
2,878
,990
A1BI
-16,19
2,878
,000
A2B1
1,56
2,878
,948
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Erro.
= 66,269.
The mean difference is significant at the ,05 level.
95% Confidence Interval
Lower
Upper
Bound
Bound
-24,67
-9,46
-6,92
8,29
-8,48
6,73
9,46
24,67
10,14
25,36
8,58
23,79
-8,29
6,92
-25,36
-10,14
-9,17
6,04
-6,73
8,48
-23,79
-8,58
-6,04
9,17
The Tukey test results show several significant differences in speaking abilities among the different teaching methods and self-confidence levels.
First, students taught with the ThinkPair-Share method and high self-confidence (A1B.
exhibited higher speaking abilities compared to those with low self-confidence or those taught using the conventional method, with a significance value of sig < 0.
Second, there was no significant difference in speaking ability between students with low self-confidence taught with the Think-Pair-Share method (A1B.
and those taught with the conventional method, with a significance value of sig > 0.
Third, students with high self-confidence taught using the conventional method (A2B.
Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
Dini Rizki Rahayu showed a significant difference in speaking ability compared to those taught with the ThinkPair-Share method, with a significance value of sig < 0.
Lastly, there was no significant difference in speaking ability between students with low self-confidence taught using the Think-Pair-Share method and those taught with the conventional method, as the significance value was greater than 0.
Discussion The influence of using conventional teaching methods and the Think-Pair-Share teaching method on students' speaking abilities.
The study reveals a significant difference in students' speaking abilities when using the Think-Pair-Share (TPS) method compared to conventional teaching methods, with an F-value 189, which exceeds the critical F-value of 3.
This confirms the first hypothesis, indicating that students taught using TPS have higher speaking abilities than those taught with conventional methods.
The study emphasizes the importance of selecting appropriate teaching methods and considering students' confidence levels in language learning.
It highlights that TPS, combined with high self-confidence, improves students' speaking skills, while conventional methods with low self-confidence show lower speaking abilities.
Cooper .
suggests that TPS enhances students' oral communication skills by allowing time for idea discussion, leading to more concise and intellectual responses.
Moreover.
TPS benefits both students and teachers by fostering an engaging classroom atmosphere where students feel motivated to express their ideas and participate actively in learning (Ageasta & Oktavia, 2.
The Influence of Self-Confidence on Students' Speaking Abilities The research results show a significant difference in speaking abilities between students with high and low self-confidence, with an F-value of 14.
502, which is greater than the critical F-value of 3.
This confirms the second hypothesis, indicating that students with high selfconfidence generally exhibit higher speaking abilities.
High self-confidence students tend to be more engaged and enthusiastic in class, view speaking challenges positively, and regard English as a skill to be mastered for daily use.
Teachers should foster self-confidence to enhance students' motivation and speaking abilities (Anjaniputra, 2013.
Derakhshan, 2015.
Imane, 2.
Strategies such as creating a supportive learning environment, providing constructive feedback, and encouraging positive self-perception can help build students' confidence (Listyani, 2.
In contrast, students with low self-confidence are often reluctant to speak, lack motivation, and view assignments as mere obligations.
The study highlights that self-confidence is crucial for effective speaking practice and that the traditional teaching methods may hinder the development of speaking skills for both high and low self-confidence According to Dornyei .
and Dornyei.
Clement, and Noels .
, selfconfidence plays a significant role in students' willingness to communicate in a foreign The Influence of the Interaction between the Use of the Think-Pair-Share Method and Self-Confidence on Students' Speaking Ability The research confirms a significant interaction between the Think-Pair-Share (TPS) teaching method and students' self-confidence, with an F-value of 20.
938, which is greater than the critical F-value of 3.
This indicates that the TPS method, combined with high selfconfidence, significantly improves students' speaking abilities.
The TPS strategy enables active Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia.
Vol.
06 No.
December.
The Effects of Teaching Strategic and Self-Confidence on StudentsAo Speaking Competency (An Experimental in the 8th Grade Students of SMP Muslimin Panyawunga.
student engagement, allowing them to take an active role in constructing their understanding and improving their speaking skills.
Research by Tristiantari .
Hedriyanto .
, and Glomo .
supports this, showing that TPS enhances speaking abilities compared to conventional methods.
The strategy fosters self-confidence by encouraging spontaneous speech and peer interaction, while the choice of topics enhances students' enthusiasm and deepens their understanding.
TPS also promotes affective, cognitive, and psychomotor development, making it more effective than conventional teaching methods (Howe, 1992.
Lyman, 1.
COCLUSIONS
This study highlights the significant positive effects of the Think-Pair-Share (TPS) teaching method, students' self-confidence levels, and their interaction on enhancing 8th-grade students' speaking competency at SMP Muslimin Panyawungan.
Key findings show substantial improvements in speaking abilities through TPS implementation, clear differences between high- and low-confidence students, and amplified gains from their combined influence, offering educators practical strategies to boost English as a foreign language proficiency.
Future studies could explore the long-term retention of speaking gains post-TPS intervention or compare its efficacy across diverse cultural contexts and grade levels in Indonesian schools, incorporating digital adaptations like online TPS platforms.
REFERENCES