This research is an experimental study that aims to determine the difference in learning outcomes between students who are taught using the STAD cooperative learning model and those who are taught using the Jigsaw cooperative learning model. The population in this study was all students in class XI SMK Negeri 2 Jayapura for the academic year 2021–2022, totaling 111 people. The sample was taken using a purposive sampling technique, totaling 51 people, consisting of two classes, namely class XI, Office 3, and Class XI, Office 4. Class XI Office 3 (experimental class) is a class that is taught using the STAD cooperative learning model, and Class XI Office 4 (control class) is a class that is taught using the Jigsaw cooperative learning model. The obtained data were then analyzed using parametric statistics via a t-test. The results showed that: 1) there was no significant difference in mathematics learning outcomes between students taught by the STAD type of cooperative learning model and students who were taught by the Jigsaw type of cooperative learning model; 2) the mean of mathematics learning outcomes of students who are taught the STAD type of cooperative learning model is lower than that of students who are taught the JIGSAW type of cooperative learning model, which is 62.61 70.43.Keywords: Cooperative model, Blended learning, Statistics

One of the abilities that must be possessed and mastered by a student in the 21st century is problem solving ability. Mathematical skills are expected to be able to meet the needs of students today and in the future. The purpose of this study was to describe the results of student problem solving analysis based on the SOLO Taxonomy. This study used a qualitative descriptive approach to analyze the data. Based on the results of data analysis, it was found that students with different SOLO levels had differences and similarities at each stage of problem solving. At the stage of understanding the problem, the three subjects can identify what is known and what is asked in the problem, only the extended abstract subject adds to make a mathematical model on what is known. At the stage of planning the completion of the three subjects, they were able to mention several concepts, principles and procedures on the problem to solve the problem. At the stage of implementing the plan, the three subjects had already completed the questions based on the plans that had been made, but in the multistructural subject the answers given were not appropriate/relevant to what was asked for in the questions. At the re-examination stage, the three subjects re-examined by re-checking the formula, re-examining the work and recalculation of the results, but only the extended abstract subject could provide several different solutions.

Problem solving is a way which will be conducted someone by employing acquired skills, knowledge, and understanding in order to solve certain problem. Problem solving stages which attained in this research is according to Polya which encompasses comprehending problem, arranging plan completion, and rechecking the result. Mathematics concept understanding is required in order to solve the problem. SOLO Taxonomy classifies the subject’s ability of solving problem into five different level, prestructural, unistructural, multistructural, relational, and extended abstract. The aim of this research is to describe geometry problem solving of visualization, analysis and informal deduction according to SOLO Taxonomy. Additionally, qualitative descriptive method is used to analyze the data. Subjects of this research are subjects who possess high mathematics thinking ability of visualization geometry, analysis and informal deduction. Besides, the type of data collection technique uses problem solving geometry test and interview. According to the result of research, subjects who possess in visualization geometry thinking level to solve the problem tend to use the aspect of unistructural level of SOLO Taxonomy. Then, subjects with analysis geometry thinking level to solve the problem mostly use multistructurallevel of SOLO Taxonomy. Lastly, subjects who own informal deduction geometry thinking level to solve the problem apparently use relational level of SOLO Taxonomy.