Think Pair Share Learning Strategy

Abstract

Think, pair, share (TPS) is an instructional strategy that encourages cooperative learning, meaning that students must work together to expand their knowledge, instead of working independently. The instructor poses a topic or question for students to think about, divides the class into pairs, who then discuss their ideas about the topic, and then the discussions of the pairs are shared with the rest of the class in a large group discussion. TPS has been praised for its ability to force students to engage with the material they are studying, and for its reliance on peer dialogue as a stimulus for learning rather than the traditional lecture from the instructor.

Overview

Think, pair, share is one of a number of instructional strategies that have emerged as part of a broad effort within the field of education to move away from long-standing pedagogical models that require students to passively receive information from the instructor. The traditional model developed because it is efficient—one instructor can lecture to many pupils at the same time—but over time it has become clear that it is less effective than other methods. More to the point, educational researchers have found that students learn more and retain what they have learned for a longer period when they are required to take an active role in their education, for example, through conducting experiments, discussing lessons with their peers, or collaborating on projects (Slavin, 2014).

Think. To the layperson, TPS sounds like an incredibly simple means of teaching, yet each part of the method has been carefully selected after exhaustive research into its efficacy, informed by many years of practical experience in the classroom. The first step, think, requires the instructor to present the class with the topic or question that will be the focus of the lesson, and then give students time to think about it on their own. It is very important that students be allowed time to come up with their own ideas before working with others.

Often, when students work in groups, those with the most forceful personalities share their views, and the rest of the group is reluctant to suggest their own impressions for fear of contradicting perceived leaders. This can lead to the phenomenon known as groupthink. TPS is designed to reduce the chances of this happening by giving everyone a few minutes to develop their own opinions about the topic, as well as supporting arguments, before being confronted by others with differing views (Putpuek & Kiattikomol, 2017).

Pair. The second step of TPS, pairing, has also been carefully selected to support student learning. It is common for teachers to divide students into small groups, usually consisting of four or five members, in order to work through a lesson. One drawback to this approach is the groupthink phenomenon mentioned above. Research has shown that one way of avoiding groupthink is by using pairs of students rather than small groups.

Using a dyad ensures that both students in the pair will have the opportunity to share their ideas; in a small group this is not always possible, due to the larger number of members and the limited class time available. Dyads also are more comfortable groupings for students who are shy or reluctant to share their thoughts, because they find it easier to talk to a single person than to several people at once. Furthermore, when the dyad's thinking is shared with the rest of the class, students will feel less embarrassment at providing incorrect answers since they will have a partner with whom to share responsibility for the error (Wolff et al., 2015).

Share. Sharing, the final component of TPS, refers to two different types of sharing. First, each student in the pair shares his or her ideas with the other, leading to a discussion of different ways of thinking about the issue, and hopefully broadening the perspective of each person through exposure to another's perspective. Once this intra-pair sharing is complete, the next step in the lesson is for the instructor to facilitate inter-group sharing.

Each pair of students, before concluding their discussion, agrees on which one of them will be responsible for reporting the highlights of their discussion back to the larger group. In this way, the entire class gets to hear about the exchanges that took place within all of the pairs. The end result is a class discussion of an issue that is informed by input from every student in the class (Kwok & Lau, 2015). Class-wide input is unusual for class discussions that do not use the TPS method, because ordinarily the teacher will ask a question and two or three people in the class provide responses, with the rest either too shy or too disengaged to be willing to speak. TPS provides a way for everyone to share their thoughts, while minimizing the stress and anxiety of having to speak in front of the entire class.

Further Insights

Proponents of TPS are quick to point out that it is an instructional strategy that strongly supports critical thinking. Critical thinking is the ability to resist the temptation to accept on faith whatever one is told by an authority figure or established source of knowledge. A critical thinker focuses not only on the content of information that is received, but also on the context: who is disseminating the information, why they are doing so, what they have invested in the perspective being shared, and so on. Critical thinking is an important part of becoming an informed citizen, and it has become a major area of emphasis in elementary and secondary curricula (Bataineh, 2015).

Numerous grants and research projects are undertaken every year to try to better understand how critical thinking can be taught and encouraged. Bearing this in mind, it is easy to see why TPS has been so well-received, since the very structure of TPS has been designed to steer students toward critical thinking. This is evident by considering the natural flow of steps in TPS: the instructor first shares some information or poses a question, and students are then asked to think about it individually and then discuss it in pairs, instead of recording the information in their notes, memorizing it, or taking some other action that amounts to unquestioning acceptance of it. This is the essence of critical thinking—receiving information and then evaluating it before accepting it—and TPS is effective precisely because it fosters critical thinking.

TPS is also favored by teachers because it encourages the development of effective verbal communication skills. TPS provides multiple opportunities for students to practice articulating their ideas to another person. First, within their pairs each student is asked to explain his or her views to the other person. Many students are reluctant to present their opinions to others, fearing that they are wrong or that they will express them poorly and appear foolish.

Anxiety about speaking out usually becomes more intense as the size of the audience increases; one might be able to tolerate speaking to three people, but remain terrified of speaking to thirty. To accommodate the natural anxiety that goes along with public speaking, TPS allows students to speak to the smallest possible audience, one other person. It also provides an additional opportunity for those who are less anxious about speaking up, at the point where each pair reports back to the larger group (Michaelsen, Davidson & Major, 2014). Pairs of students are encouraged to include in their discussions an agreement about which member of the pair will take responsibility for reporting out, and this is a chance for the more anxious person to defer to his or her partner. The person who does the reporting then has a chance to practice speaking before a group and summarizing the important points of the discussion—valuable skills for those who are comfortable practicing them.

Issues

Because TPS has been in use since the early 1980s, a number of variations on the practice have developed. One of these is the use of two successive sets of student pairs rather than only one pair. As with the original form of TPS, the instructor asks a question for reflection, allows a few minutes for individual consideration of the question, and then assigns each student to pair with another to share their ideas. After this, the teacher instructs the students to form different pairs and to discuss their thoughts about the question with their new partners.

Double pairing provides for richer discussions, as students are able to interact with two others instead of only one, and hear their thoughts as well. Students also benefit from having an additional opportunity to explain their own thinking. Some teachers have adapted double pairing still further by, after the first pairs have discussed the issue, combining pairs of students so that they form groups of four. This allows students to become more comfortable speaking to larger groups gradually, rather than going from speaking to one person to then addressing the whole class. The main drawback to the multiple pairing versions of TPS is that they are more time-consuming than the single pair form (Usman, 2015).

Teachers have several options as to how the pairs will be formed during a TPS lesson, and the nature of their selection is determined in large part by their instructional goals for the class. One option is for the teacher to select which students will be paired together. This method tends to be more equitable, but can also have unfortunate results if some type of random assignment is used, since there will inevitably be pairings of students who are not well-suited to work together. Some see these pairings as a necessary part of life, since there are often situations in which people cannot change who they must work with, and must therefore learn to make the best of a bad situation (Prahl, 2017).

Some educators argue that, while life will undoubtedly present everyone with difficult circumstances from time to time, it is not reasonable or productive for adults to place children in disadvantageous circumstances when they could just as easily help students to avoid them. The debate over this point generally comes down to a difference of opinion as to whether education should have as one of its goals the "toughening up" of children by exposing them to unpleasant situations and letting them figure out what to do on their own, or whether education's focus should be on providing children with information and tools to help them recognize and avoid uncomfortable situations.

Rather than pairings selected by teachers, TPS lessons may also permit students to select their own partners. This approach also has its positive and negative aspects. On the positive side, the majority of students are likely to be happy with their choice of partner, although there are likely to be a few who feel left out because their preferred partner is selected by another or chooses another. On the negative side, when students are allowed to select their own partners, the tendency is for friends to pair up, and when this happens it can interfere with the intended process for the lesson. Friends will be more likely to be distracted by other issues and not spend enough time thinking about the reflection question and discussing it (Hamdan, 2017).

Friends also tend to avoid entering into conflict with one another, by agreeing with one another rather than arguing. This can have a neutralizing effect on the quality of the conversations between partners, because instead of challenging each other to defend their views, students may prefer to remain in harmony with one another. Once this occurs, it becomes less likely that students will have discussions that enrich their understanding of the subject or force them to consider aspects of an issue that they had not previously been aware of.

A third method of pairing students for TPS is one that combines some elements of teacher selection and student selection. In this approach, the teacher chooses which students will be paired with one another, but does not do so randomly or arbitrarily. Instead, the teacher chooses pairs based upon students' personalities and learning styles, with the goal of creating dyads that will challenge each other without being at odds with one another. This can be a tall order, and it requires that the teacher be familiar with the students, so it is generally used only by more experienced teachers, and only after the teacher has worked with the class long enough to have a sense of each student's learning style and developmental needs.

When this pairing method is employed successfully, students are paired with someone they do not know well, but with whom they have some traits in common—similar interests, comparable experiences, and so forth. An additional benefit to the use of this style is that it allows the teacher to take into account any special needs a student may have, such as learning disabilities or lack of comfort with the language primarily spoken in the classroom (Shih & Reynolds, 2015). Failing to assign pairs that support these differences rather than magnify them can have serious consequences for children who already feel labeled as different.

Terms & Concepts

Cooperative Learning: A mode of learning in which students work together to build upon one another's ideas, rather than working independently and trying to arrive at the correct answer without assistance.

Critical Thinking: The ability to analyze information that one receives, to determine how reliable and trustworthy it is likely to be. TPS has been praised for its utility in fostering critical thinking, a skill the development of which is at the heart of virtually all educational standards.

Dyad: A two-person unit, or pair. Dyads are often used in collaborative learning because they allow students to work with their peers, but in groups small enough that there are fewer opportunities for distraction.

Groupthink: The tendency for individuals in a group to unconsciously avoid conflict by conforming their thoughts to the views expressed by others in the group.

Pedagogy: A theoretical approach to teaching that a teacher uses as a guide for instruction. One might have an inclusive pedagogy, a pedagogy based on learning through experience, or a pedagogy of empowerment, for example.

Scaffolding: Teachers' guidance of student learning through the provision of a framework or structure that helps students understand how to approach an activity. Teachers use scaffolding in TSP when they give students reminders about what they are supposed to do, and when they bring students back on task as needed.

Bibliography

Bataineh, M. Z. (2015). Think-pair-share, co op-co op and traditional learning strategies on undergraduate academic performance. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 5(1), 217.

Hamdan, R. A. (2017). The effect of (think-pair-share) strategy on the achievement of third grade student in sciences in the educational district of Irbid. Journal of Education and Practice, 8(9), 88–95.

Kwok, A. P., & Lau, A. (2015). An exploratory study on using the think-pair-share cooperative learning strategy. Journal of Mathematical Sciences, 2, 22–28.

Michaelsen, L. K., Davidson, N., & Major, C. H. (2014). Team-based learning practices and principles in comparison with cooperative learning and problem-based learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25. Retrieved January 1, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=98323052&site=ehost-live

Prahl, K. (2017). Best practices for the think-pair-share active-learning technique Kristine Prahl. American Biology Teacher (University Of California Press), 79(1), 3–8. Retrieved January 1, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=120630673&site=ehost-live

Putpuek, A., & Kiattikomol, P. (2017). Development of a blended online and offline learning model with think-pair-share collaborative learning and student team's achievement division competition. International Journal of Innovation & Learning, 22(2), 254–269. Retrieved January 1, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=124761454&site=ehost-live

Shih, Y., & Reynolds, B. L. (2015). Teaching adolescents EFL by integrating think-pair-share and reading strategy instruction: A quasi-experimental study. RELC Journal: A Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 46(3), 221–235. Retrieved January 1, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=111190427&site=ehost-live

Slavin, R. E. (2014). Making cooperative learning powerful. Educational Leadership, 72(2), 22–26. Retrieved January 1, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=98512141&site=ehost-live

Usman, A. H. (2015). Using the think-pair-share strategy to improve students' speaking ability at STAIN ternate. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(10), 37–45.

Wolff, M., Wagner, M. J., Poznanski, S., Schiller, J., & Santen, S. (2015). Not another boring lecture: Engaging learners with active learning techniques. The Journal of emergency medicine, 48(1), 85–93.

Suggested Reading

Cooper, F. (2018). A modification of think pair share to make it more learner-centered by using student-generated questions. College Teaching, 66(1), 34. Retrieved January 1, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=127560740&site=ehost-live

Eltom, S. O. (2017). Think-pair–share technique for enhancing students' classroom interaction. Journal of Science and Technology, 18(2).

Haug, B. S., & Ødegaard, M. (2014). From words to concepts: Focusing on word knowledge when teaching for conceptual understanding within an inquiry-based science setting. Research in Science Education, 44(5), 777–800. Retrieved January 1, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=97983063&site=ehost-live

Honeycutt, B. (2016). Flipping Large Classes: Three Strategies to Engage Students. Distance Education Report, 20(18), 6. Retrieved January 1, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=118720726&site=ehost-live

Otienoh, R. O. (2015). Implementation of pair work and group work for creation of interaction opportunities for learners in large classes: The viability of the two strategies. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(10), 171–179.

Sari, D. (2016). The effectiveness of think-pair-share in improving engineering department students speaking skill. JELE (Journal of English Language and Education), 2(1), 18–25.