A Comparison of Think Pair Share and Group Investigation: Which Cooperative Learning Model Is More Effective in Biology Education?
Abstract
Purpose of the study: This study aims to compare students’ Biology learning outcomes taught using the cooperative learning methods of Group Investigation and Think Pair Share, in order to identify which method leads to higher cognitive achievement in junior high school Biology learning..
Methodology: This study employed a quasi-experimental design using a two-group pretest–posttest model. The research instruments included a 25-item objective test, interview guidelines, observation sheets, and an item analysis tool (ANATES). Data were collected through tests, interviews, and observations, and subsequently analyzed using tests of normality and homogeneity, N-gain analysis, and an independent samples t-test.
Main Findings: The results indicate that there was no significant difference in pretest scores between the Group Investigation and Think Pair Share groups. Posttest and N-gain analyses revealed that the Think Pair Share method produced significantly higher learning outcomes than the Group Investigation method. Students in the Think Pair Share group achieved higher mean scores, demonstrated better conceptual mastery, and showed more substantial learning gains. Interview results also indicated that students were more confident, active, and focused when learning through the Think Pair Share method.
Novelty/Originality of this study: This study provides a direct comparison between Group Investigation and Think Pair Share in Biology learning, an empirical investigation that has rarely been conducted. The findings contribute to the existing body of knowledge by demonstrating that Think Pair Share offers more structured interaction, better focus, and more evenly distributed participation, resulting in more effective learning compared to Group Investigation.
References
N. Martin-Alguacil, L. Avedillo, R. Mota-Blanco, and M. Gallego-Agundez, “Student-Centered Learning: Some Issues and Recommendations for Its Implementation in a Traditional Curriculum Setting in Health Sciences,” 2024. doi: 10.3390/educsci14111179.
K. T. Nigussie, B. K. Semahagn, B. S. Mersha, and A. B. Tamiru, “Effects of paper-based problem scenarios on high school biological problem-solving skills and academic achievement,” Discip. Interdiscip. Sci. Educ. Res., vol. 7, no. 1, p. 21, 2025, doi: 10.1186/s43031-025-00138-8.
E. Triani, M. Maison, and N. Nazarudin, “Diagnosing students’ misconceptions of direct current electrical circuits using a five-tier isomorphic instrument,” J. Ilm. Ilmu Terap. Univ. Jambi, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 71–86, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.22437/jiituj.v9i1.40469.
Z. H. Sahito, F. J. Khoso, and J. Phulpoto, “The Effectiveness of Active Learning Strategies in Enhancing Student Engagement and Academic Performance,” J. Soc. Sci. Rev., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 110–127, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.62843/jssr.v5i1.471.
M. U. Zubair, M. A. Khan, M. U. Hassan, K. Ahmed, and T. Aziz, “Enhancing Student Active Engagement in Class through Game-Based Learning: A Case of Civil Engineering Education,” 2024. doi: 10.3390/su16146010.
C. W. Sia, M. bt Idress, N. A. Md Akhir, N. H. Md Jamin, and N. H. A Bakar, “Enhancing Students’ Engagement and Motivation: Exploring the Impact of Active Learning Approaches in Educational Settings BT - Proceedings of the International Conference on Advancing and Redesigning Education 2023,” M. F. bin Romlie, S. H. Shaikh Ali, Z. Bin Hari, and M. C. Leow, Eds., Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2024, pp. 206–220.
P. Bergström, M. Rönnlund, and Å. Tieva, “Making the Transition from Teacher-Centered Teaching to Students’ Active Learning: Developing Transformative Agency BT - Creating Dynamic Places for Learning: An Evidence Based Design Approach,” P. C. Lippman and E. A. Matthews, Eds., Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2023, pp. 99–115. doi: 10.1007/978-981-19-8749-6_6.
Z. Wang, D. Zou, R. Zhang, L.-K. Lee, H. Xie, and F. L. Wang, “ChatGPT-enhanced self-regulated learning in programming education: impacts on motivation, self-efficacy, and learning outcomes,” Interact. Learn. Environ., pp. 1–26, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.1080/10494820.2025.2559919.
A.-C. E. Ding and C.-H. Yu, “Serious game-based learning and learning by making games: Types of game-based pedagogies and student gaming hours impact students’ science learning outcomes,” Comput. Educ., vol. 218, p. 105075, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105075.
X. Feng et al., “An experimental study on the influence of instructional video interaction on Chinese college students’ learning: a perspective from the ICAP framework,” Acta Psychol. (Amst)., vol. 261, p. 105870, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105870.
R. M. AlAli and A. A. Al-Barakat, “Assessing the Effectiveness of Environmental Approach-Based Learning in Developing Science Process Skills and Cognitive Achievement in Young Children,” Educ. Sci., vol. 14, no. 11, p. 1269, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.3390/educsci14111269.
C. Zhai, S. Wibowo, and L. D. Li, “The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students’ cognitive abilities: a systematic review,” Smart Learn. Environ., vol. 11, no. 1, p. 28, 2024, doi: 10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7.
V. Bhardwaj, S. Zhang, Y. Q. Tan, and V. Pandey, “Redefining learning: student-centered strategies for academic and personal growth,” Front. Educ., vol. Volume 10-2025, 2025, [Online]. Available: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2025.1518602
F. Ssemugenyi, “Teaching and learning methods compared: A pedagogical evaluation of problem-based learning (PBL) and lecture methods in developing learners’ cognitive abilities,” Cogent Educ., vol. 10, no. 1, p. 2187943, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2023.2187943.
Q.-M. Zheng et al., “The effectiveness of problem-based learning compared with lecture-based learning in surgical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” BMC Med. Educ., vol. 23, no. 1, p. 546, 2023, doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04531-7.
T. Li, W. Wang, Z. Li, H. Wang, and X. Liu, “Problem-based or lecture-based learning, old topic in the new field: a meta-analysis on the effects of PBL teaching method in Chinese standardized residency training,” BMC Med. Educ., vol. 22, no. 1, p. 221, 2022, doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03254-5.
G. M. Geletu, “The effects of teachers’ professional and pedagogical competencies on implementing cooperative learning and enhancing students’ learning engagement and outcomes in science: Practices and changes,” Cogent Educ., vol. 9, no. 1, p. 2153434, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2022.2153434.
A. Møgelvang and J. Nyléhn, “Co-operative Learning in Undergraduate Mathematics and Science Education: A Scoping Review,” Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 1935–1959, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s10763-022-10331-0.
C. Onyefulu, J. Madalinska-Michalak, and B. Bavli, “Teachers’ motivation to choose teaching and remain in the profession: A comparative mixed methods study in Jamaica, Poland and Turkey,” Power Educ., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 37–65, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.1177/17577438221109907.
G.-G. Lee, D. Y. Kang, M. J. Kim, H.-G. Hong, and S. N. Martin, “University students’ perceptions of remote laboratory courses necessitated by COVID-19: differences in emergent teaching strategies at a Korean university,” Asia Pacific Educ. Rev., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 865–883, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s12564-023-09837-1.
J. K. C. Godes, A. M. B. Oledan, J. R. T. Luib, C. J. C. Saromines, and H. S. Gandamra, “The Role of Mathematical Communication Through Think-Pair-Share in Developing Problem-Solving Skills,” Int. J. Sci. Eng. Sci., vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 93–97, 2025, [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alexis-Michael-Oledan-2/publication/392390063_The_Role_of_Mathematical_Communication_Through_Think-Pair-Share_in_Developing_Problem-Solving_Skills/links/68400f62df0e3f544f5cdf24/The-Role-of-Mathematical-Communication-T
R. K. Ahmad, “Enhancing Student Engagement and Performance in Indonesian Language Learning through the Think-Pair-Share (TPS) Model with Question Card Media,” J. Educ. Innov. Curric. Dev., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 30–37, 2025, [Online]. Available: http://journals.iarn.or.id/index.php/educur/article/view/452/346
W. Muiawan, “Effectiveness of Biology Learning Using Cooperative Learning Methods Type TPS (Think, Pair, Share) Against Student Achievement,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1539, no. 1, p. 12051, 2020, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1539/1/012051.
J. Yang et al., “Quantifying causal effects from observed data using quasi-intervention,” BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak., vol. 22, no. 1, p. 337, 2022, doi: 10.1186/s12911-022-02086-z.
S. H. J. Putra, “Effect of Science, Environment, Technology, and Society (SETS) Learning Model on Students’ Motivation and Learning Outcomes in Biology,” Tarbawi J. Ilmu Pendidik., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 145–153, 2021, doi: 10.32939/tarbawi.v17i2.1063.
W. R. Shadish, T. D. Cook, and D. T. Campbell, Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Houghton Mifflin, 2002.
H. Khattib and D. Alt, “A quasi-experimental study on the advantages of digital gamification using CoSpaces Edu application in science education,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 29, no. 15, pp. 19963–19986, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10639-024-12635-w.
W. Zhang, Y. Guan, and Z. Hu, “The efficacy of project-based learning in enhancing computational thinking among students: A meta-analysis of 31 experiments and quasi-experiments,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 29, no. 11, pp. 14513–14545, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10639-023-12392-2.
E. K. Proctor et al., “Ten years of implementation outcomes research: a scoping review,” Implement. Sci., vol. 18, no. 1, p. 31, 2023, doi: 10.1186/s13012-023-01286-z.
T. H. Gezahegn and A. D. Gedamu, “Supervisors’ and supervisees’ perception and perceived practice of a process-oriented thesis written feedback: The case of Ethiopian universities,” Heliyon, vol. 9, no. 1, p. e12865, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e12865.
M. Muhasriady and S. S. Tiwari, “Examining the influence of maternal education, nutritional knowledge, and toddler food intake on nutritional status,” J. Heal. Innov. Environ. Educ., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 38–46, 2024, doi: 10.37251/jhiee.v1i2.1211.
A. Jariah, A. Bahri, S. Syamsiah, and S. B. HS, “STEM-based biology learning assisted by virtual lab gizmos to enhance critical thinking skills of students’ with different academic abilities,” J. Pendidik. Sains Indones., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 550–562, 2025, doi: 10.24815/jpsi.v13i2.44843.
S. Vijayakumar, V. Saravanan, L. R. Buckingham, Tamilarasan, and A. Catherine Anna Pushpam, “Impact of Gagne’s model on L2 online environments,” CALL-EJ, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 63–83, 2023, [Online]. Available: http://hdl.handle.net/11531/79774
L. De Backer, H. Van Keer, and M. Valcke, “The functions of shared metacognitive regulation and their differential relation with collaborative learners’ understanding of the learning content,” Learn. Instr., vol. 77, p. 101527, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2021.101527.
X. Huang and S. P. Lajoie, “Social emotional interaction in collaborative learning: Why it matters and how can we measure it?,” Soc. Sci. Humanit. Open, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 100447, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100447.
X. Yang, “A Historical Review of Collaborative Learning and Cooperative Learning,” TechTrends, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 718–728, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11528-022-00823-9.
D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson, “Cooperative Learning and Social Interdependence Theory BT - Theory and Research on Small Groups,” R. S. Tindale, L. Heath, J. Edwards, E. J. Posavac, F. B. Bryant, Y. Suarez-Balcazar, E. Henderson-King, and J. Myers, Eds., Boston, MA: Springer US, 2002, pp. 9–35. doi: 10.1007/0-306-47144-2_2.
R. E. Slavin, “Cooperative Learning and Academic Achievement: Why Does Groupwork Work?.[Aprendizaje cooperativo y rendimiento académico:¿ por qué funciona el trabajo en grupo?],” An. Psicol. Psychol., vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 785–791, 2014.
M. A. d Hertiavi, H. Langlang, and S. Khanafiyah, “Penerapan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe jigsaw untuk peningkatan kemampuan pemecahan masalah siswa SMP [Application of the jigsaw cooperative learning model to improve problem-solving abilities of junior high school students],” J. Pendidik. Fis. Indones., vol. 6, no. 1, 2010.
R. M. Gillies, “Cooperative learning: Review of research and practice,” Aust. J. Teach. Educ., vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 39–54, Jan. 2016, [Online]. Available: https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.977489802155242
Copyright (c) 2025 Sigit Wibowo, Mohd Syuja
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and acknowledge that the Journal of Academic Biology and Biology Education is the first publisher licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and earlier and greater citation of published work.
.png)
.png)
