Comparison of the Effectiveness of the Think Pair Share (TPS) Model and the Two Stay–Two Stray (TS-TS) Model on Senior High School Students’ Mathematical Reasoning Ability and Self-Efficacy

This study is a quasi-experimental research design with a pre-test and post-test nonequivalent comparison group design. The population of this research consists of all 10th-grade students at SMA Negeri 1 Sleman, which is divided into 7 classes. Two classes, X-A and X-D, were selected as the sample based on purposive sampling techniques. Class X-D was taught using the Think Pair Share learning model, while class X-A used the Two Stay-Two Stray model. The instruments used for data collection were a mathematical reasoning ability test (with a validity coefficient of 1.00 and a reliability coefficient of 0.69), a self-efficacy questionnaire (with a validity coefficient of 1.00 and a reliability coefficient of 0.73), and a learning implementation checklist. The effectiveness criteria for mathematical reasoning ability are as follows: (1) the average score of students' mathematical reasoning ability is greater than 75, (2) at least 75% of students achieve a score ≥75, (3) there is a significant difference (increase) in the average scores between the pre-test and post-test. The effectiveness criteria for selfefficacy are: (1) the average score of the students' self-efficacy questionnaire is greater than 87, (2) at least 75% of students score ≥87, (3) there is a significant difference (increase) in the average scores between the pre-questionnaire and post-questionnaire. A Hotelling's T2 test was used to examine the differences in the average post-test, pre-test, pre-questionnaire, and post-questionnaire scores. A paired t-test was performed to analyze the differences in the pretest and post-test scores, followed by a One-Sample t-test to assess the effectiveness of the TPS and TS-TS classes by first conducting a Hotelling's T2 test to examine the difference between the average post-test and pre-test scores. An independent sample t-test was then applied to determine which learning model was more effective. The results of the study show that: 1) Think Pair Share learning model is effective for enhancing mathematical reasoning ability and self-efficacy, 2) The Two Stay–Two Stray learning model is also effective for enhancing mathematical reasoning ability and self-efficacy, 3) There is a difference between the Think Pair Share and Two Stay–Two Stray learning models in terms of their effects on mathematical reasoning ability and self-efficacy, with the Think Pair Share model being more effective than the Two Stay–Two Stray model.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTER RESEARCH
Published
2025-09-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmcr/v13i9.06
Primary Topic
Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of the Effectiveness of the Think Pair Share (TPS) Model and the Two Stay–Two Stray (TS-TS) Model on Senior High School Students’ Mathematical Reasoning Ability and Self-Efficacy

Elly Arliani, Yosua Tumanggor
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTER RESEARCH
Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
article

Comparison of the Effectiveness of the Think Pair Share (TPS) Model and the Two Stay–Two Stray (TS-TS) Model on Senior High School Students’ Mathematical Reasoning Ability and Self-Efficacy

Elly Arliani, Yosua Tumanggor
article en

Abstract

This study is a quasi-experimental research design with a pre-test and post-test nonequivalent comparison group design. The population of this research consists of all 10th-grade students at SMA Negeri 1 Sleman, which is divided into 7 classes. Two classes, X-A and X-D, were selected as the sample based on purposive sampling techniques. Class X-D was taught using the Think Pair Share learning model, while class X-A used the Two Stay-Two Stray model. The instruments used for data collection were a mathematical reasoning ability test (with a validity coefficient of 1.00 and a reliability coefficient of 0.69), a self-efficacy questionnaire (with a validity coefficient of 1.00 and a reliability coefficient of 0.73), and a learning implementation checklist. The effectiveness criteria for mathematical reasoning ability are as follows: (1) the average score of students' mathematical reasoning ability is greater than 75, (2) at least 75% of students achieve a score ≥75, (3) there is a significant difference (increase) in the average scores between the pre-test and post-test. The effectiveness criteria for selfefficacy are: (1) the average score of the students' self-efficacy questionnaire is greater than 87, (2) at least 75% of students score ≥87, (3) there is a significant difference (increase) in the average scores between the pre-questionnaire and post-questionnaire. A Hotelling's T2 test was used to examine the differences in the average post-test, pre-test, pre-questionnaire, and post-questionnaire scores. A paired t-test was performed to analyze the differences in the pretest and post-test scores, followed by a One-Sample t-test to assess the effectiveness of the TPS and TS-TS classes by first conducting a Hotelling's T2 test to examine the difference between the average post-test and pre-test scores. An independent sample t-test was then applied to determine which learning model was more effective. The results of the study show that: 1) Think Pair Share learning model is effective for enhancing mathematical reasoning ability and self-efficacy, 2) The Two Stay–Two Stray learning model is also effective for enhancing mathematical reasoning ability and self-efficacy, 3) There is a difference between the Think Pair Share and Two Stay–Two Stray learning models in terms of their effects on mathematical reasoning ability and self-efficacy, with the Think Pair Share model being more effective than the Two Stay–Two Stray model.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTER RESEARCHVol. 13(09)
Yogyakarta State University (ID)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.