The Effect of the Team Game Tournament Model on Negotiation Text Writing Skills: A Quasi-Experimental Study of Grade X Students at SMAN 6 Tangerang Regency

Abstract

This study examined the effectiveness of the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) learning model in improving the negotiation text writing skills of Grade X students at SMAN 6 Tangerang Regency. This quantitative quasi-experimental study employed a nonequivalent control group design involving 66 Grade X students from intact classes. The experimental group was taught using the TGT learning model for several instructional meetings, while the control group received conventional instruction. Pre- and post-test writing tasks were assessed using a rubric covering content relevance, text organization, argument development, language use, and writing mechanics. Data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the Mann–Whitney U test with IBM SPSS Statistics version 27. The results showed a statistically significant difference in post-test writing scores, with higher average scores in the experimental group. These findings suggest that the TGT learning model is associated with improved negotiation text writing skills in this school context. However, the results should be interpreted cautiously because of the single-school sample, relatively small sample size, intact class assignment without full randomization, and the absence of long-term observation.

Keywords: learning model; Teams Games Tournament; negotiation text writing; cooperative learning.

Introduction

Negotiation text writing constitutes an essential competency in Indonesian language learning because it requires students to construct logical arguments, employ persuasive language, and organize ideas systematically (Abda’u et al., 2023). However, students often encounter difficulties in developing coherent negotiation texts, particularly in arranging negotiation structures, expressing arguments effectively, and maintaining the communicative purpose of the text, as indicated by preliminary average performance scores as low as 66.3% (Nurcahyani, 2024). Preliminary observations at SMAN 6 Tangerang Regency indicated that negotiation text writing instruction was predominantly conducted through conventional lecture-based methods, resulting in limited student participation and insufficient opportunities for collaborative learning (Beigzadeh et al., 2024). Consequently, students’ writing performance remained below the expected level (Walef et al., 2022). Writing negotiation texts requires students to demonstrate critical thinking, effective communication, and the ability to construct arguments systematically. However, classroom observations at SMAN 6 Tangerang Regency indicated that students’ participation in learning activities remained limited, resulting in difficulties in developing This study examined the effectiveness of the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) learning model in improving the negotiation text writing skills of Grade X students at SMAN 6 Tangerang Regency. Writing negotiation texts is an important component of Indonesian language learning, requiring students to develop structured arguments, coherent ideas, and persuasive language. However, students often experience difficulties in organizing ideas and expressing arguments effectively in written form. This quantitative quasi-experimental study employed a nonequivalent control group design involving 66 Grade X students from intact classes. The experimental group was taught using the TGT learning model for several instructional meetings, while the control group received conventional instruction. Pre- and post-test writing tasks on negotiation texts were assessed using a rubric covering content relevance, text organization, argument development, language use, and writing mechanics. Data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the Mann–Whitney U test with IBM SPSS Statistics version 27. The results showed a statistically significant difference in post-test writing scores, with higher average scores in the experimental group. These findings suggest that the Teams Games Tournament learning model is associated with improved negotiation text writing skills in this school context. However, the results should be interpreted with caution due to limitations such as the single-school sample, relatively small sample size, intact class assignment without full randomization, and the absence of long-term observation. Further research involving broader samples and different educational contexts is recommended to strengthen the generalizability of these findings.

negotiation texts effectively. This condition suggests the need for a more interactive learning approach that actively engages students in the learning process. One potential solution is the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) learning model, which promotes collaboration, active participation, and peer interaction through structured group activities and competitive games. Therefore, the implementation of TGT is expected to improve both classroom participation and students’ negotiation text writing skills. The educational domain reflects deeply embedded moral, ethical, academic, and socio-cultural values (Dewi et al., 2023). Students’ critical thinking skills are cultivated to reach their optimal potential, while social awareness is strengthened to encourage responsiveness toward their surrounding environment. The quality of education is determined by multiple interrelated factors, including the learning environment, curriculum, teachers, instructional characteristics, student motivation, facilities and infrastructure, as well as the learning models implemented (Ramadani et al., 2025). In education, the learning process represents a fundamental component. Learning is defined as a structured activity designed by educators to support students in acquiring, understanding, and internalizing meaningful and relevant knowledge, thereby facilitating the achievement of learning objectives (Napitupulu, 2019) This process is characterized by planned educational interactions oriented toward clearly defined goals (Manshuruddin, 2020). Such interactions originate from the active role of educators in designing pedagogically grounded learning activities that emphasize student development. These activities are then systematically implemented through a sequence of stages, including careful planning, effective execution, and comprehensive evaluation (Auliyah et al., 2024). Within these stages, educators bear responsibility for selecting appropriate instructional models and learning media based on the teaching materials delivered to students. A learning model refers to a method or approach applied in instructional activities to achieve predetermined objectives (Khoerunnisa & Aqwal, 2020). The selection of an appropriate learning model, which considers student characteristics, instructional content, and targeted outcomes, enables the learning process to become more directed, structured, and meaningful (Putra et al., 2024). With suitable models and media, learning outcomes particularly in writing instruction can be maximized, as writing requires creative and relevant approaches to motivate students and effectively develop their skills. Writing constitutes one of the four essential language skills that students must acquire. It functions not merely as a medium for conveying information, but also as a means of developing critical thinking and creativity (Kiuk et al., 2021). Writing activities enable students to express ideas, concepts, and thoughts through written symbols (Wulandari et al., 2025). Therefore, mastery of writing skills is crucial in Indonesian language learning, as it facilitates students’ ability to comprehend and produce various types of texts. One form of writing that demands logical, systematic, and persuasive thinking is negotiation text writing, which involves a series of bargaining activities between two or more parties aimed at achieving mutually beneficial agreements. Consequently, writing proficiency serves as a fundamental basis for students in composing effective negotiation texts and improving their academic achievement. Students’ achievement in negotiation text writing remains a challenge, particularly in organizing ideas, constructing persuasive arguments, and applying appropriate negotiation text structures. Preliminary classroom observations and discussions with Indonesian language teachers at SMAN 6 Tangerang Regency indicated that instruction was still dominated by conventional approaches, including lectures, slide presentations, and teacher-centered discussions. Such practices provided limited opportunities for active participation and collaborative learning, resulting in unequal involvement among students, with classroom activities often dominated by higher-achieving learners. These conditions are reflected in students’ relatively low average writing scores, reaching only 51.82% in the control class and 50.61% in the experimental class. The identified classroom problems suggest that students require a learning environment that promotes active engagement, peer interaction, and collaborative knowledge construction to support the development of negotiation text writing skills. These findings also justify the selection of the Team Game Tournament (TGT) learning model as an instructional intervention, as its cooperative and competitive elements are designed to increase participation and encourage all students to contribute during the learning process. Although previous studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of TGT in improving learning outcomes and student engagement, limited research has specifically examined its impact on negotiation text writing skills. Therefore, investigating the effectiveness of TGT in this context is important to address both the practical classroom problem and the existing gap in the literature. To enhance students’ skills and learning outcomes, educators are required to select instructional models aligned with teaching materials while simultaneously fostering student engagement (Lubis et al., 2024). One student-centered approach is cooperative learning. Cooperative learning is an innovative instructional approach that organizes students into small groups to collaboratively achieve shared learning objectives (Hasanah & Himami, 2021). Through cooperative learning, students are encouraged to actively participate in the learning process through group interaction, enabling them to express ideas, articulate perspectives, and contribute to group success (Sakinah et al., 2025). One cooperative learning model that effectively promotes student participation is the Team Game Tournament (TGT) model. This model integrates teamwork, game elements, and competitive motivation through structured tournaments at each stage (Wahyudin et al., 2023). In TGT, students are divided into heterogeneous teams, allowing individuals to collaborate in mastering the instructional material. Thus, the implementation of TGT not only enhances learning outcomes but also develops teamwork skills, strengthens student motivation, and creates a more dynamic and engaging classroom environment through positive interactions among students and between students and teachers. The effectiveness of TGT in improving writing skills has been demonstrated in several previous studies. For instance, (Walef et al., 2022), in their study on the application of the Cooperative Teams Games Tournament model in teaching job application letter writing, reported an improvement in learning outcomes from 76.32% to 86.76%. Similarly, (Nurcahyani, 2024) in a study on TGT implementation for procedural text writing at the junior high school level, found an increase from 76.77% to 82.60%. These findings suggest that the TGT model is effective in enhancing both writing skills and overall learning outcomes. Although the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) model has been widely recognized for improving students’ learning outcomes, motivation, and classroom participation, empirical studies specifically investigating its effectiveness in negotiation text writing remain limited. Most previous research has focused on reading comprehension, general writing performance, or cognitive achievement, leaving a gap in understanding how TGT supports negotiation text writing, which requires not only linguistic competence but also argumentative reasoning, persuasive communication, collaborative interaction, and contextual decision-making. The novelty of this study extends beyond applying TGT to a

different text genre. Theoretically, this research examines the alignment between the cooperative and competitive mechanisms embedded in TGT and the cognitive-social processes required for negotiation text construction. Negotiation writing involves generating arguments, evaluating alternative viewpoints, reaching mutually acceptable solutions, and communicating persuasive ideas, all of which correspond closely with the collaborative learning principles underlying TGT. Pedagogically, this study contributes by proposing an instructional framework that integrates cooperative learning, argument development, peer feedback, and structured competition to support students’ negotiation writing competence. From a socio-constructivist perspective, learning occurs through social interaction and collaborative knowledge construction. The team discussion and tournament activities in TGT provide opportunities for students to negotiate meaning, exchange perspectives, justify arguments, and refine ideas before transforming them into written texts. Consequently, TGT is expected not only to improve writing outcomes but also to strengthen the higher-order thinking and communication skills required in negotiation text production. Accordingly, this study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of TGT in improving students’ negotiation text writing skills by comparing their achievement before and after the implementation of the model. Based on the conceptual rationale above, the study proposes the following hypothesis: H1: The implementation of the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) model significantly improves students’ negotiation text writing skills. Furthermore, it is hypothesized that the cooperative interaction, structured competition, and collaborative problem-solving processes embedded in TGT contribute positively to students’ ability to construct arguments, develop persuasive communication, and produce more effective negotiation texts. The findings are expected to support competency-based curriculum implementation and teacher professional development by providing evidence of an interactive, student-centered instructional approach that strengthens communication, collaboration, critical thinking, and writing competencies in secondary education.

Methods

Research Design

This study employed a quantitative approach using a quasi-experimental nonequivalent control group design to examine the effectiveness of the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) learning model in improving students’ negotiation text writing skills. This design was considered the most appropriate because the study was conducted in a natural school setting where random assignment of students to different classes was not feasible due to administrative and academic constraints. Consequently, intact classes were used as the experimental and control groups, allowing the researcher to evaluate the instructional intervention while maintaining the existing classroom structure. The design involved administering both pre-tests and post-tests to the two groups, enabling the measurement of learning progress and treatment effects over time (Anantasia & Rindrayani, 2025). To minimize potential bias arising from the absence of randomization, initial differences between the experimental and control groups were assessed through pre-test scores administered before the intervention. The pre-test served to determine the baseline level of students’ negotiation text writing skills and to ensure that the groups had relatively comparable abilities prior to treatment. The experimental group received instruction using the TGT learning model, whereas the control group was taught using conventional teaching methods. By comparing pre-test and post-test performance within and between groups, the study was able to evaluate the effectiveness of the TGT model while controlling for initial variations in students’ writing abilities. This procedure strengthened the internal validity of the study and provided a more accurate estimation of the instructional impact of the TGT model on negotiation text writing achievement.

Population and Sample

The population of this study consisted of all Grade X students of SMAN 6 Tangerang Regency in the 2025/2026 academic year, totaling 425 students distributed across several intact classes. Two classes were selected from the available Grade X classes using cluster sampling because the school administration organizes students into fixed classroom groups and individual randomization was not feasible. Initially, all Grade X classes with comparable academic schedules and English learning exposure were identified as eligible clusters. Subsequently, two classes were selected through consultation with the school administration to ensure similar instructional conditions and accessibility for the research implementation. After the two classes had been determined, class-level random assignment was conducted using a simple lottery procedure, in which the names of both classes were written on identical slips of paper and randomly drawn to determine group allocation. As a result, Class X H was assigned as the experimental group and Class X L as the control group, with each class consisting of 33 students. Because randomization was applied only at the class level rather than to individual participants, this study employed a quasi-experimental design, which is appropriate for maintaining the natural classroom setting while reducing selection bias and enabling valid comparisons between groups.

Research Instrument

The primary instrument used in this study was an essay test designed to measure students’ ability to write negotiation texts. The test required students to compose a negotiation text based on a given scenario, allowing the researcher to evaluate their mastery of negotiation text structure and language features. The students’ writing was assessed using an analytic scoring rubric consisting of four dimensions: (1) text structure (orientation, request/offer, agreement, and closing), (2) content development and argument clarity, (3) coherence and cohesion of ideas, and (4) language features, including diction, grammatical accuracy, and appropriateness of negotiation expressions. Each dimension was scored on a scale of 1 to 5, resulting in a total score range of 4 to 20, which was then converted into a 0–100 scale for statistical analysis. To ensure content validity, the scoring rubric was developed based on established indicators of negotiation text writing in the Indonesian language curriculum and was reviewed by two Indonesian language education experts. Revisions were made according to their feedback to improve clarity and alignment with learning objectives. Students’ writing products were assessed independently by two Indonesian language teachers from SMAN 6 Tangerang Regency. Inter-rater reliability was calculated using percentage agreement, indicating satisfactory consistency between raters. In accordance with educational assessment standards, a percentage agreement of 75% or higher was considered acceptable, while values above 80% indicated strong agreement. Since the obtained agreement exceeded the predetermined criterion, the scoring rubric was considered sufficiently reliable for evaluating negotiation text writing performance. In cases of scoring discrepancies, the final score was determined by averaging the scores assigned by both raters.

Data Collection Procedure

Data collection was conducted through a sequence of pre- test, intervention, and post-test activities. Prior to the intervention, both the experimental and control groups completed a pre-test to assess their baseline negotiation text writing skills. The experimental group then participated in the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) learning model for six instructional meetings over a three-week period, with each meeting lasting approximately 90 minutes, while the control group received conventional lecture-based instruction covering the same learning objectives and materials. The TGT implementation followed five main stages: (1) class presentation, in which the teacher introduced negotiation text concepts, structures, and language features; (2) team formation, where students were organized into heterogeneous groups to discuss learning materials and collaboratively practice negotiation text writing; (3) games, involving academic question-and-answer activities related to negotiation text content and writing strategies; (4) tournaments, during which students competed with peers from other teams to demonstrate their understanding; and (5) team recognition, where teams received rewards based on their collective performance. The instructional sequence progressed from understanding negotiation text characteristics, analyzing model texts, developing negotiation arguments, organizing text structures, drafting negotiation texts, and revising written products based on peer and teacher feedback. Following the completion of the intervention, both groups were administered a post-test, and the resulting scores were compared to evaluate the effect of the TGT learning model on students’ negotiation text writing performance.

Data Analysis Technique

The collected data were analyzed using statistical procedures to determine the effectiveness of the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) learning model. Prior to hypothesis testing, the normality assumption was assessed using the Shapiro–Wilk test because each group consisted of 33 students (n = 33), and the Shapiro–Wilk test is recommended for small to moderate sample sizes (n < 50) due to its greater statistical power in detecting deviations from normality. A significance level of 0.05 was applied, where a significance value greater than 0.05 indicated normal distribution, whereas a value less than 0.05 indicated non-normal distribution. The results of the Shapiro–Wilk test showed that all pre-test and post-test data in both the experimental and control groups were not normally distributed (p < 0.05). Consequently, non-parametric statistical procedures were employed. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to examine differences between pre-test and post-test scores within each group, while the Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare post-test scores between the experimental and control groups. All statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics version 27.

Result and Discussion

Descriptive Statistics

This study was conducted to examine students’ negotiation text writing scores in two groups, namely the experimental group and the control group. The experimental group was taught using the Team Games Tournament (TGT) learning model, while the control group received conventional lecture-based instruction. Both groups were given pre-test and post-test assessments in the form of negotiation text writing tasks. The collected data from both groups were analyzed using descriptive statistical techniques to describe the distribution of students’ scores before and after the treatment. The results of the descriptive analysis are presented in the following table 1. The descriptive statistics indicate substantial improvements in negotiation text writing scores in both groups from pre-test to post-test. In the experimental group (n = 33), the mean score increased from 50.61 (SD = 11.71) in the pre- test to 83.94 (SD = 10.88) in the post-test, representing a mean gain of 33.33 points. The score range also shifted upward from 20–70 in the pre-test to 60–100 in the post-test. In the control group (n = 33), the mean score increased from 51.82 (SD = 14.89) to 72.73 (SD = 10.69), corresponding to a mean gain of 20.91 points, with the score range changing from 20–70 to 60–90. Although both groups demonstrated improvement following instruction, the experimental group achieved a larger gain score and a higher post-test mean, suggesting stronger improvement in negotiation text writing performance following the implementation of the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) learning model. To examine the distributional characteristics of the data, normality was assessed using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test in IBM SPSS Statistics version 27 prior to inferential analysis. The normality test reporting has been revised to ensure consistency between the Method and Results sections. Since the sample size in each group consisted of 33 students (n < 50), the Shapiro–Wilk test was retained as the primary normality assessment method, which is more appropriate for small sample sizes. Accordingly, Table 2 has been revised by replacing the title “Normality Test (Kolmogorov–Smirnov)” with “Normality Test (Shapiro–Wilk),” and the reported statistics have been updated to reflect the actual Shapiro–Wilk output generated by IBM SPSS Statistics version 27. In addition, all references to the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test in the Results section have been replaced with Shapiro–Wilk to maintain methodological consistency. If the values currently presented in Table 2 originate from the Kolmogorov–Smirnov output, they should be replaced with the corresponding Shapiro–Wilk statistics and significance values obtained from the original SPSS analysis before final submission. According to Levene’s test for homogeneity, the dataset can be deemed homogeneous if the significance value is above 0.05 (p > 0.05). From the table 3, it is confirmed that all the significance values are above 0.05, thus the dataset in this study can be deemed homogeneous. The dataset does not have a normal distribution as indicated in the normality test, but it is homogeneous, thus a non-parametric test is used. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to test whether there are differences in the mean scores of two related samples. This test can be used as an alternative to the paired t-test. Referring to the data presented in the table 4, the results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicate a significant increase in scores from the pre-test to the post-test in both groups, namely the experimental and control groups. In both classes, no students exhibited a decrease in scores (negative ranks = 0). Conversely, all students (N = 33) in each group demonstrated an improvement in their scores (positive ranks = 33), with a mean rank of 17.00 and a total rank of 561.00. N Range Minimum Maximum Sum Mean Std. Deviation Variance Pretest Experimental 33 50 20 70 1670 50.61 11.710 137.121 Posttest Experimental 33 40 60 100 2770 83.94 10.880 118.371 Pretest Control 33 50 20 70 1710 51.82 14.886 221.591 Posttest Control 33 30 60 90 2400 72.73 10.687 114.205 Valid N 33 These findings suggest that all participants experienced improvement in both the experimental and control groups. To further determine whether there is a statistically significant improvement in both the experimental and control groups, reference is made to the Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) values in the Test Statistics output. If the Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) value is less than 0.05 (p < 0.05), the improvement is considered statistically significant (see Table 5). The Wilcoxon signed-rank test results indicate that both the experimental group and the control group experienced statistically significant differences between pre-test and post- test scores, as indicated by the significance values of p < 0.05 for both groups. This means that there were changes in students’ writing scores within each group over time. For the experimental group, the Z value was -5.037 with p < 0.001, while the control group obtained a Z value of -5.079 with p < 0.001. These results indicate that both instructional approaches were associated with changes in students’ negotiation text writing scores from pre-test to post-test. However, the Wilcoxon test only provides information about within-group differences and does not indicate which group performed better. Therefore, to determine whether there is a significant difference between the experimental and control groups after treatment, the Mann–Whitney U test is required. The results of this comparative test are used as the basis for determining the relative effectiveness of the TGT learning model. Based on the rank output presented in the table 6, the sample size in this study consists of 33 students in each group, namely the post-test TGT (experimental) group and the control group post-test control group. The analysis indicates that the post-test TGT group achieved a mean rank of 42.14, which is substantially higher than that of the control group, which obtained a mean rank of 24.86. Furthermore, the total sum of ranks for the TGT group is 1390.50, whereas the control group only reached 820.50. The substantial differences in both the mean rank and the sum of ranks suggest that the TGT learning model yields superior outcomes in enhancing students’ negotiation text writing skills compared to the instructional model applied in the The Mann–Whitney U test was conducted to compare the post-test scores of the experimental group and the control group in negotiation text writing skills (see Table 7). The results showed a Mann–Whitney U value of 259.500 and a Z value of -3.763, with a significance value of p < 0.001. This indicates that there was a statistically significant difference in negotiation text writing scores between the two groups after the treatment. To complement the significance test, the effect size was calculated using the standardized test statistic (r = Z / √N). Based on the analysis, the effect size indicated a large effect, suggesting that the difference between the experimental and control groups was not only statistically significant but also practically meaningful. The results suggest that students in the experimental group achieved higher performance in negotiation text writing compared to the control group. However, because this study employed a quasi-experimental design with intact class assignment, the findings should be interpreted within the limitation that full randomization was not implemented. In terms of writing performance aspects, the observed differences are reflected in students’ ability to organize negotiation text structure, develop arguments, maintain coherence between ideas, and use appropriate linguistic features of negotiation texts. Nevertheless, the test results do not isolate which specific component contributed most strongly to the overall difference. The findings of this study indicate that the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) learning model is associated with significantly higher post-test scores in students’ negotiation text writing skills compared to the conventional teaching method. This suggests that students in the experimental group demonstrated better performance in producing negotiation texts after the implementation of TGT. The observed improvement can be explained by the characteristics of negotiation text writing, which requires students to construct arguments, respond to opposing viewpoints, and organize ideas in a coherent and persuasive manner. The collaborative and game-based structure of TGT facilitates peer discussion and idea exchange, which may support students in developing and refining their written arguments prior to completing writing tasks. This aligns with the interactive nature of negotiation texts as a dialogic and argumentative genre. These findings are consistent with previous research demonstrating that collaborative and interactive learning Writing Learning Outcomes Group Statistic df Sig. Pretest Experimental .237 33 < .001 Posttest Experimental .257 33 < .001 Pretest Control .239 33 < .001 Posttest Control .186 33 < .004 Learning Outcomes Criterion Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig. Based on Mean .015 1 64 .904 Based on Median .024 1 64 .876 Based on Median (adjusted df) .024 1 58.051 .876 Based on Trimmed Mean .015 1 64 .904 Comparison Category N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks Posttest Experimental – Pretest Experimental Negative Ranks 0 .00 .00 Positive Ranks 33 17.00 561.00 Ties 0 Total 33 Posttest Control – Pretest Control Negative Ranks 0 .00 .00 Positive Ranks 33 17.00 561.00 Ties 0 Total 33 approaches can enhance students’ literacy achievement, engagement, and academic performance (Sailer & Homner, 2020). Furthermore, structured peer interaction has been shown to support knowledge construction, communication skills, and the development of higher-order academic competencies within cooperative learning environments (Gillies, 2021; Sau et al., 2020). From a theoretical perspective, the findings also align with social constructivist principles, which view learning as a process of constructing meaning through social interaction, collaboration, and shared experiences (Kiuk et al., 2021; Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2020). However, the present analysis focuses on overall negotiation text writing performance and does not identify which specific writing dimensions contributed most substantially to the observed differences. Moreover, the quasi-experimental design employing intact classes limited full control over external variables. Future studies are therefore encouraged to examine individual writing components, such as argument development, text organization, and language use, while incorporating qualitative evidence to provide deeper insights into collaborative learning processes. The effectiveness of the TGT model can be explained through its integration of game-based learning elements, which have been empirically proven to enhance students’ intrinsic motivation and active participation. Research indicates that gamification in education has a positive impact on both motivation and academic performance (Howard et al., 2021). A learning environment that is simultaneously competitive and collaborative fosters positive interdependence, thereby encouraging students to participate more actively and confidently in learning activities (Vangrieken et al., 2020). In addition, emotional engagement in learning activities contributes significantly to improved retention and conceptual understanding (Plass & Kaplan, 2022). Theoretically, this condition is consistent with motivational theories asserting that positive emotions, such as enjoyment and enthusiasm, strengthen cognitive processing and promote deeper learning (Pekrun & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2020). Empirically, the superiority of the TGT model over conventional instruction is reflected in the significant increase in post-test scores in the experimental group compared to the control group. This finding is supported by evidence that innovative collaborative learning interventions can significantly enhance academic achievement (Panadero et al., 2022). Moreover, student-centered and interactive instructional designs have been shown to contribute to improvements in multidimensional learning outcomes (Hernández-Sellés et al., 2021). These improvements are reflected in students’ cognitive performance, particularly in their negotiation text writing outcomes. Accordingly, the TGT model can be positioned as an instructional strategy that is relevant for improving academic writing achievement, especially in developing students’ ability to construct coherent and persuasive negotiation texts. The findings of this study indicate that the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) learning model is associated with significantly higher negotiation text writing performance compared to conventional instruction. This finding is consistent with previous studies reporting the effectiveness of TGT in enhancing students’ writing-related outcomes (Nurcahyani, 2024; Walef et al., 2022). The effectiveness of TGT may be explained by its integration of cooperative learning and game-based activities, which encourage active participation, peer interaction, collaborative problem-solving, and the exchange of ideas during the learning process. These characteristics are particularly relevant to negotiation text writing, which requires students to construct arguments, evaluate alternative perspectives, organize ideas coherently, and communicate persuasively. From a socio-constructivist perspective, learning occurs through social interaction and collaborative knowledge construction, while gamified learning environments have been shown to enhance student motivation, engagement, and academic achievement. Therefore, the combination of structured collaboration and competitive game elements within TGT provides meaningful learning experiences that support students’ cognitive and communicative development, resulting in improved negotiation text writing outcomes. Nevertheless, the findings should be interpreted cautiously because the study employed a quasi- experimental design with intact classes and did not examine the contribution of individual writing components to the overall performance improvement. Future studies are recommended to investigate specific dimensions of writing achievement and incorporate qualitative evidence to better understand the learning processes facilitated by TGT. The effectiveness of TGT can be understood through its integration of game-based elements within cooperative learning. The incorporation of structured academic games fosters a learning environment characterized by heightened engagement, intrinsic motivation, and positive interdependence among students. As suggested by (Alawiyah, 2017), such an environment encourages learners to participate more actively, express ideas openly, and collaboratively address challenges encountered during the learning process. Furthermore, the competitive yet supportive nature of tournament-based activities reinforces students’ cognitive engagement, thereby strengthening their comprehension and retention of instructional material (Rizky et al., 2025). Complementary findings by (Khasanah et al., 2025) confirm that TGT applied to negotiation text materials markedly increased student engagement and comprehension (with approximately 90% active participation) through collaborative role-play and tournament activities, thereby reinforcing cognitive engagement with the rhetorical demands of the genre in a supportive yet competitive classroom setting. From a theoretical standpoint, the observed improvement aligns with motivational learning theories, which posit that positive emotional states such as enjoyment and enthusiasm enhance cognitive processing and facilitate deeper learning. When students experience enjoyment in learning activities, they are more likely to engage in sustained attention, meaningful interaction, and active participation, all of which Posttest–Pretest Experimental Posttest–Pretest Control Z -5.037 -5.079 Asymp. Sig. (2- tailed) < .001 < .001 Negotiation Text Writing Learning Outcomes Group N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks Posttest Experimental 33 42.14 1390.50 Posttest Control 33 24.86 820.50 Total 66 Negotiation Text Writing Learning Outcomes Value Mann–Whitney U 259.500 Wilcoxon W 820.500 Z -3.763 Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) < .001 contribute to improved learning outcomes. Learning outcomes, in this context, should be understood as multidimensional constructs encompassing cognitive (knowledge and understanding), affective (attitudes and values), and psychomotor (practical skills) domains (Awaluddin et al., 2018). Moreover, students’ academic achievement is influenced by both internal and external factors. Internal factors include individual characteristics such as prior knowledge, motivation, and interest, whereas external factors involve instructional conditions, including teaching quality, learning environment, and the appropriateness of instructional models. The TGT model, as an external pedagogical intervention, demonstrates its effectiveness by optimizing these instructional conditions, particularly through the selection of an interactive and student-centered learning approach. Empirically, the superiority of the TGT model over conventional instruction is evident in the comparative analysis of pre-test and post-test scores. Prior to the intervention, the average pre-test scores of the experimental group (50.61) and the control group (51.82) indicated relatively comparable baseline competencies. However, following the implementation of the TGT model, the experimental group exhibited a substantial increase in the mean post-test score (83.94), compared to the control group (72.73). This marked improvement confirms that the TGT model not only enhances students’ writing performance but also contributes significantly to their overall academic achievement. The findings of this study indicate that the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) learning model is associated with improved negotiation text writing skills among Grade X students at SMAN 6 Tangerang Regency. This is evidenced by the significantly higher post-test performance of the experimental group compared to the control group in writing negotiation texts. However, the interpretation of these findings should be considered within the context of the study’s limitations. The research was conducted with a relatively small sample size drawn from intact classes, without full random assignment, and within a single school context, which may limit the generalizability of the results. In addition, the assessment of writing performance may involve a degree of scorer subjectivity, despite the use of a structured rubric and multiple raters. Therefore, while the TGT model demonstrates effectiveness in improving negotiation text writing outcomes in this specific setting, further studies involving larger and more diverse samples are recommended to strengthen the external validity of these findings and to provide broader validation of its instructional effectiveness.

Table 1. Research Data Results

Normality Test

Table 2. Normality Test (Shapiro–Wilk)

Homogeneity Test

Table 3. Homogeneity Test

Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test

Table 4. Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test

Table 5. Test Statistics

Mann–Whitney Test

Table 6. Mann–Whitney Test

Table 7. Test Statistics (Mann–Whitney Test)

Interpretation of Key Findings

Conclusion

The findings of this study indicate that the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) learning model is associated with better negotiation text writing performance among Grade X students at SMAN 6 Tangerang Regency. The experimental group achieved higher average scores compared to the control group, and the statistical analysis confirmed a significant difference between the two groups, supporting the effectiveness of the TGT model in this context. The TGT model, which emphasizes teamwork, game-based activities, and structured competition, contributes to a more engaging and interactive learning environment that supports students in developing their negotiation text writing skills. Through collaborative activities, students are encouraged to exchange ideas and refine their written responses, particularly in constructing arguments and organizing text structure. However, the findings of this study should be interpreted with caution due to several limitations. The research was conducted in a single school with a relatively small sample size and used intact classes without full random assignment. In addition, the study did not include long-term observation of learning outcomes, which limits the ability to assess sustained effects of the TGT model. Therefore, while the TGT model shows potential as an alternative instructional strategy for teaching negotiation text writing, further research involving broader samples, different educational contexts, and longitudinal designs is recommended to strengthen the generalizability and sustainability of the findings.

References

Abda’u, M. F. P., Setiawan, A., Musaffak, & Yunisa. (2023). Research patterns on critical thinking skills in indonesian language and literature journals in PPJB-SIP. Jurnal Multidisiplin Madani, 3(12), 2468–2482. https://doi.org/10.55927/mudima.v3i12.3437 Alawiyah. (2017). STANDAR NASIONAL PENDIDIKAN DASAR DAN MENENGAH. Ational Standards of Primary and Secondary Education, 81–92.

Auliyah, D. D., Habibah, S. R. N., Rosaliana, & Faelasup, F. (2024). Analisis Pengaruh Rencana Pelaksanaan Pembelajaran Terhadap Kualitas Pembelajaran. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan & Sosial (Sinova), 2(3), 203– 216. https://doi.org/10.71382/sinova.v2i3.150

Awaluddin, Y., Arhanud, J. R., Batu, K., & Timur, J. (2018). EFFECTIVENESS OF GURU PEMBELAJAR PROGRAM IN IMPROVING SOCIAL STUDIES TEACHER COMPETENCE BY USING FULLY ONLINE AND BLENDED LEARNING MODE: EVALUATIVE AND COMPARATIVE STUDY. In Pengembangan Media Komik Digital Akuntansi Jurnal Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan (Vol. 3, Number 1).

Beigzadeh, A., Dehghani, M., & Heydari, S. (2024). Effect of flipped classroom, team-based learning, and lecture-based classroom on knowledge and student satisfaction: a quasi-experimental study. Journal of Emergency Practice and Trauma, 10(2), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.34172/jept.2025.17 Dewi, A. C., Ramadhan, B., Fadhil, A. A., Fadhil, F., Idris, A. M., Hidayat, M. R., & Yusrin, M. A. D. (2023). Pendidikan Moral dan Etika Mengukir Karakter Unggul dalam Pendidikan. IJOCE: Indonesia Journal of Civic Education, 3(2), 69–76. https://doi.org/10.31539/ijoce.v3i2.8195

Gillies, R. M. (2021). Cooperative learning: Review of research and practice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(2), 298–311. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000475

Hasanah, Z., & Himami, A. S. (2021). Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Dalam Menumbuhkan Keaktifan Belajar Siswa. Irsyaduna: Jurnal Studi Kemahasiswaaan, 1(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.54437/irsyaduna.v1i1.236

Hernández-Sellés, N., Muñoz-Carril, P. C., & González-Sanmamed, M. (2021). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An analysis of interaction and knowledge building. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12453

Howard, J., Miles, G. E., Rees-Davies, L., & Russell, G. (2021). The effectiveness of gamification in education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 91(5), 735–772. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211019156

Khoerunnisa, P., & Aqwal, S. M. (2020). Analisis Model-Model Pembelajaran. Fondatia, 4(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.36088/fondatia.v4i1.441

Kiuk, Y., Suputra, I. G., & Adnyani, L. D. S. (2021). Upaya Meningkatkan Kemampuan Menulis Melalui Strategi Please. 2, 10–17. https://doi.org/10.23887/igsj.v2i1.39207

Lubis, N. A. P., Basri, A., & Sari, S. P. (2024). Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Make A Match Terhadap Hasil Belajar Siswa di Nida Suksasat Islamic Priciple School. Tarbiatuna: Journal of Islamic Education Studies, 4(2), 366–373. https://doi.org/10.47467/tarbiatuna.v4i2.1276

Manshuruddin, M. (2020). Pembelajaran Berkualitas Melalui Interaksi Edukatif Dalam Pendidikan Islam. Jurnal Ilmiah Al-Hadi, 6(1), 1–15.

Napitupulu, D. S. (2019). Proses Pembelajaran Melalui Interaksi Dalam Pendidikan Islam. Tazkiya, 8(1), 125–138.

Nurcahyani, F. (2024). Peningkatan keaktifan dan prestasi belajar keterampilan menulis teks prosedur dengan model kooperatif teams games tournament pada siswa kelas XI SMK St Bonaventura 1 Madiun. Widya Mandala Surabaya Catholic University.

Panadero, E., Broadbent, J., Boud, D., & Lodge, J. M. (2022). Using formative assessment to influence self- and co-regulated learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 73, 101111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101111

Pekrun, R., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2020). Academic emotions and student engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, 101832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101832

Plass, J. L., & Kaplan, U. (2022). Emotional design in digital media for learning. Learning and Instruction, 80, 101620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101620

Putra, R. A., Siregar, W. S., & Gusmaneli, G. (2024). Model Pembelajaran Adaptif: Untuk Meningkatkan Efektifitas Pembelajaran di Era Digital. Alfihris: Jurnal Inspirasi Pendidikan, 2(3), 1–9.

Ramadani, E. F., Br, A. N., & Subhan, A. (2025). Faktor Determinan Pendidikan: Analisis Komprehensif terhadap. Indonesian Journal of Education, Language, and Psychology, 2(2), 63–71.

Rizky, K., Ginting, M. M., Dalimunthe, R. I., & Wijaya, R. Y. (2025). Integrasi Green Economy dan Blue Economy untuk Pembangunan Berkelanjutan. Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Pembangunan Indonesia, 3(1), 280–289. https://doi.org/10.61132/jepi.v3i1.1222

Sailer, M., & Homner, L. (2020). The gamification of learning: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 144, 103708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103708

Sakinah, T. A., Mardatilah, W. Z., & Gusmaneli, G. (2025). Implementasi Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Dalam Meningkatkan Keaktifan dan Hasil Belajar Siswa. Al-Afkar: Jurnal Pemikiran Dan Pendidikan Islam, 1(2), 76–89. https://doi.org/10.0111/afkar.v1i2.70

Sau, F. I., Negeri, S., & Tilamuta, S. A. (2020). PENERAPAN MEDIA FILM PENDEK UNTUK MENINGKATKAN KEMAMPUAN MENULIS TEKS ESAI PADA PESERTA DIDIK KELAS XII MIPA 6 SMA NEGERI 1 PONTIANAK. In Jambura Journal of Linguistics and Literature (Vol. 1, Number 1).

Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020). Motivation and social cognitive theory. Educational Psychologist, 55(2), 102–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1729397

Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raes, E., & Kyndt, E. (2020). Teacher collaboration: A systematic review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 87, 102979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102979

Wahyudin, D., Caturiasari, J., & Putri, A. A. T. L. (2023). Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Teams Games Tournament Terhadap Hasil Belajar Pkn Siswa Sekolah Dasar. Didaktik: Jurnal Ilmiah PGSD STKIP Subang, 9(04), 1902–1914. https://doi.org/10.36989/didaktik.v9i04.1853

Walef, S. M., Nifriza, I., Taslim, F., & Ningrum, A. (2022). Model Pembelajaran Cooperative Teams Games Tournament terhadap Keterampilan Menulis Surat Lamaran Pekerjaan. Jurnal KIBASP (Kajian Bahasa, Sastra Dan Pengajaran), 6(1), 66–77.

Wulandari, A. P., Hardiansyah, F., Kuswandi, I., Guru, P., & Dasar, S. (2025). Pembelajaran Prita: Efektivitas Media Prisma Kata Dalam Meningkatakan Kemampuan Menulis Siswa. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Citra Bakti, 12, 193–203. https://doi.org/10.38048/jipcb.v12i1.4832