Comparison Of The Effectiveness Between The Open Ended,

ELPSA, And Problem Solving Approaches, With The STAD

Tipe Cooperative Model System Of Linear Equations Of
Two Variables (SPLDV) Material
Agus Setiawan1, a) Irwan Akib2, b) and Hamzah Upu3, b)

Author Affiliations
1
Mathematics Education, Post Graduate Program, Makassar State University
(Jalan Bonto Langkasa, Makassar 90222 Indonesia).
2
Post Graduate Program Lecturer, Makassar State University.
3
Post Graduate Program Lecturer, Makassar State University.

Author Emails
a)
[email protected]
b)
[email protected]
c)
[email protected]

Abstract. This research aims to determine the effectiveness comparison between the open ended, ELPSA, and problem solving
approach, with the STAD type cooperative model in learning SPLDV material in class VIII of SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa.This
type of research is quantitative research. The design of this study is a quasi experimental design in the form of nonequivalent
pretest-posttest comparison group design. The population in this study were all students of class VIII of SMP Negeri 2
Sungguminasa consisting of 11 classes and the sample was determined using the double random sampling cluster technique, 3
classes of experiments will be selected, all students in the three classes are the samples in this research. The instruments in this
study were (1) observation sheet of learning implementation, (2) mathematics achievement test, (3) teaching material, (4) student
observation sheet, and (5) student response questionnaire. Data analysis techniques used in this study are descriptive statistical
analysis and inferential statistical analysis. Descriptive analysis results show that: (1) the application of the open ended approach
is effective in learning SPLDV material; (2) application of the ELPSA approach is effective in learning SPLDV material; (3) the
application of an effective problem solving approach in learning SPLDV material; (4) the results of the comparative effectiveness
respectively are the ELPSA approach, the open ended approach, and the problem solving approach, with the STAD type
cooperative model. One way ANOVA test results at 95% confidence level showed that: (1) there were no significant differences in
the learning outcomes of SPLDV students, (2) there were no significant differences in student activity, and (3) there were no
differences in students' responses significantly. Thus, inferential there is no significant difference from the application of the open
ended approach, ELPSA, and problem solving, with the STAD type cooperative model in learning SPLDV material in class VIII
of SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa.

Keywords: Comparison, Effectiveness, Open Ended Approach, ELPSA Approach, and Problem Solving Approach.
 INTRODUCTON

The achievement of educational objectives is one of them is influenced by the success of the teaching and
learning process. In a copy of the attachment to Regulation of the Minister of Education and Civil Affairs of the
Republic of Indonesia Number 22 (2016: 1), on The Standard of Primary and Secondary Education Process
explained that: "The learning process in each unit of primary and secondary education must be interactive, inspiring,
fun, challenging, and motivate learners to actively participate, as well as provide sufficient space for initiative,
creativity, and independence in accordance with talents, interests and physical and psychological development of
learners. Therefore, each education unit conducts learning planning, implementation of the learning process as well
as assessment of the process to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the achievement of graduates"
competencies.
The sistem persamaan linear dua variabel material has several activities in its learning, including: creating a
persamaan linear dua variabel (PLDV), modeling problems from two-variable linear equations, modeling problems
from a sistem persamaan linear dua variabel (SPLDV), and writing down problem solving related to the sistem
persamaan linear dua variabel related to everyday life. However, although SPLDV is closely related to daily life
there are still many students who have difficulty in the learning process.
Cahdriyana (2014), stated that some of the problems faced by students in studying SPLDV include students
difficult to remember a condition sufficient for an object to be used in terms that represent the concept, students are
less able to group objects as examples of a concept of an object that is not an example, and students are less able to
do discovery activities about modeling the story and not thorough in counting an. This was also revealed by Andhani
(2016), who revealed that if the problem is given in the form of a story problem then the learner will have difficulty
in making a mathematical model of the problem. In addition, students also have difficulty understanding symbols
and signs, as well as errors in choosing and using settlement procedures.
Based on the results of initial observations made by the author on August 13, 2019 at the Gowa District
National Education Office, the authors obtained data recapitulating the average score of the National Examination of
junior high school math subjects in Sungguminasa the last three years, which is presented in table 1 below,

Table 1. Recapitulation of National Exam Mathematics Score of SMP Negeri in Sungguminasa

Years Lessons
School Names Average
2016/2017 2017/2018 2018/2019
SMP Negeri 1 Sungguminasa 39,60 40,45 43,16 41,07
SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa 39,21 31,37 36,82 35,80
SMP Negeri 3 Sungguminasa 38,17 29,92 39,71 35,93
SMP Negeri 4 Sungguminasa 35,78 32,81 38,94 35,84
(Source: National Education Office Gowa)

Based on table 1. obtained data on the average score of the National Examination of mathematics subjects
in the last three years of Smp Negeri in Sungguminasa, which shows that SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa obtained the
lowest average score from the other three public junior high schools. So, researchers are interested in conducting
research at SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa.
Observation on August 15, 2019 through Mrs. Widya, S.Pd. and Mrs. Mardiana, S.Pd. as teachers of
mathematics class VIII subjects at SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa was informed that the average score of
mathematics learning achievement of grade VIII students in the daily exam of SPLDV material in the 2018/2019
school year was 46.71 with a standard deviation of 12.49 from the ideal score of 100. While the average score of
mathematics learning achievement in the daily exam material SPLDV school year 2018/2019 amounted to 51.83
with a standard deviation of 19.74 from the ideal score of 100. Messkipun there is an improvement in the learning
achievement of students, but the results are still not able to meet the Minimum Completion Criteria of mathematics
subjects set by the school for grade VIII which is 79.
Other information obtained by researchers related to learning, especially SPLDV material, that students of
grade VIII at SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa are less able to do discovery activities about the concept of SPLDV from
the situation presented by the teacher, in addition students are more focused on memorizing concepts and formulas
without being balanced with the understanding of the concept of SPLDV itself, in other words if the problem given
in the form of a story question then the learner will have difficulty in converting the question into several equations
in order to obtain the solution. Learners do not understand that in every variable in the equation has meaning. Thus,
when students are faced with a varied problem they will have difficulty in solving it. This is why the results of
learning mathematics, especially the material of the sistem persamaan linear dua variabel of learners are not optimal.
Suprijono (2016: 97), stated "The main foundation of active, innovative, creative, effective and fun learning
is constructivism". So in this study the author is interested in using learning models and approaches based on
constructivism. Suyono &Hariyanto (2014), stated that the implementation of constructivism in learning in general
applies broadly cooperative learning with the basis of thinking, that students will be easier to find and understand
difficult concepts if they discuss the problem with their friends in small groups.
Isjoni (2013), stated that the Student Team Achievment Division (STAD) cooperative model is one type of
cooperative that emphasizes the activities and interactions of students to help each other in mastering the subject
matter in order to achieve maximum learning achievement. Because the ability of learners in understanding the
subject matter is diverse so that several approaches are needed in mathematics learning, especially SPLDV materials
that can facilitate the ability of learners, the approach in question is an open ended approach, an experiences
language pictures symbols application (ELPSA) approach, and a problem solving approach, which will be combined
with a cooperative model of STAD type.
Nohda (2000), with the open type questions educators have the opportunity to help learners in
understanding and elaborating the mathematical ideas of learners as far and deeply as possible. Thus, this approach
solves the problem and also brings up new problems. Sriraman (2005) states that most curriculum and education
approaches ignore open views in math classes and do not apply open problems and avoid giving students the
opportunity to engage in these types of problems independently for long periods of time. . Whereas experience with
open problems gives students the opportunity to express their conceptual understanding (Mann, 2006).
The development of the ELPSA framework originated with Leibeck's idea (1984) which examined how a
child studied mathematics. Lowrie (1997) developed this idea as a basic framework in the learning of mathematical
pedagogy. Lowrie & Patahuddin (2015), One of the learning frameworks based on constructivism is ELPSA which
contains five components, namely experiences, language, pictures, symbols, and applications. This framework views
learning as an active process by which learners construct their own way of understanding a new mathematical
knowledge through individual thought processes and social interactions with others.
Polya (1973), defines problem solving as an attempt to find a way out of a difficulty in order to achieve a
goal that is not so immediately attainable. Lester & Schroeder in Kennedy, et al. (2008: 19), also revealed that the
problem solving approach is "real-life and simulated problem situations provide context and reason for learning
mathematics. Jacobsen, et al. (2009), define the problem solving approach as one approach that requires teachers to
help learners learn to solve problems through hands-on learning experiences. Hands-on learning experience means
learners interact directly with the problems provided by the teacher.
Based on the background, the following questions in this study that will be answered through a series of
research processes are as follows: (1) Is the application of an open ended approach with a cooperative model of type
STAD effective in learning SPLDV materials reviewed from the results of learning mathematics, activity and
response of students of grade VIII SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa?, (2) Is the application of elpsa approach with
cooperative model type STAD effective in SPLDV material learning is reviewed from the results of learning
mathematics, activity and response of students of grade VIII SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa?, (3) Is the application of
problem solving approach with cooperative model type STAD effective in learning SPLDV materials reviewed from
the results of learning mathematics, activity and response of students of grade VIII SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa?
(4) Is there any difference in the effectiveness of the application of open ended approach, ELPSA, and problem
solving, with a cooperative model of STAD type in spldv material learning reviewed from the results of learning
mathematics, activity and response of students of grade VIII SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa?
Operationally, to measure indicators of effectiveness and comparative results of the effectiveness of the
three treatments, it must first be known how the implementation of learning through the application of open ended
approach, ELPSA, and problem solving, with cooperative model type STAD.

RESEARCH METODS

This type of research is Quantitative Research that compares the effectiveness of the application of open
ended approach, ELPSA and problem solving, with a cooperative model of STAD type in students of grade VIII
SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa. Because there is treatment or treatment, so this research is classified into
Experimental Methods. Sugiyono (2016), stated that experimental methods can be interpreted as research methods
used to find the influence of certain treatments on others in controlled conditions. Researchers used experiments
because they wanted to manipulate variables by comparing three classes. The design in this research is quasi
experimental, which is in the form of nonequivalent pretest-posttest comparison gruoup design means that three
classes of experiments will be selected, each of which will be given one treatment with an open ended approach,
ELPSA, and problem solving, with a cooperative model type STAD.

Table 2. Nonequivalent Pretest-Posttest Comparison Group Design

Experiment Classes Pretest Treatments Posttest
I O1 Open Ended (T1) O2
II O3 ELPSA (T2) O4
III O5 Problem Solving (T3) O6
(Source: Morgan, et al. 2003)
In table 2 it can be seen that after the researchers determined the three experimental classes, then each class
would be given one treatment each whose effectiveness would be compared.
The population in the study was all students of grade VIII SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa Gowa district at
the beginning of the 2019/2020 school year consisting of 11 classes. The research sample consists of 3 classes using
Problem Posing, Open Ended Problem, ELPSA, and Problem Solving. Based on random results selected 3
experimental classes namely class VIII7, VIII9, and VIII10. All students in grade VIII7, VIII9, and VIII10 were
sampled in this study.
The instruments in this study are (1) observation sheet of learning implementation, (2) mathematics
learning achievement test, (3) teaching materials, (4) observation sheet of student activity, and (5) student response
questionnaire.
The data analysis techniques used in this study are descriptive statistical analysis and inferential statistical
analysis. Descriptive statistics are used to describe the results of students' mathematics learning, the ability of
teachers to manage learning, student activities during the mathematical learning process, and how students respond
to mathematics learning, based on learning with the application of open ended approaches, ELPSA, and problem
solving. Inferential statistics used to test research hypotheses.

RESULT OF RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION

Research Result

Comparison Descriptive Effectiveness Indicators

Descriptive analysis of the results of mathematics study of students of grade VIII10 SMP Negeri 2
Sungguminasa after the application of open ended approach of cooperative model type STAD showed the average
posttest value of students more than (KKM=79) which is 83.43 with classical completion reached 88.57%. The
average score of increasing the value of learners for the open ended approach of the STAD type cooperative model
was 0.74. Furthermore, the average activity score of learners was 3.37. The average response score of the students
was 3.33. Inferential analysis with one sample t-test on study results and gain showed that p-value = 0.001 < α =
0.05, thus H0 was rejected and H1 accepted, thus the open ended approach with STAD type cooperative model has
met all the effectiveness criteria.
Descriptive analysis of the results of mathematics study of students of grade VIII7 SMP Negeri 2
Sungguminasa after the application of elpsa approach of cooperative model type STAD showed the average posttest
value of students more than (KKM=79) which is 84.88 with classical completion reached 91.43%. The average
score of the increase in student scores for the ELPSA approach of the STAD-type cooperative model was 0.77.
Furthermore, the average score of student activity was 3.39. The average response score of the students was 3.34.
Inferential analysis with one sample t-test on study results and gain showed that p-value = 0.001 < α = 0.05, thus H0
was rejected and H1 accepted, thus elpsa approach with cooperative model type STAD has met all effectiveness
criteria.
 Descriptive analysis of the results of mathematics study of students of grade VIII9 SMP Negeri 2
Sungguminasa after the application of problem solving approach of cooperative model type STAD shows the
average posttest value of students more than (KKM=79) which is 82.51 with classical completion reached 88.57%.
The average score of the increase in the value of learners for the problem solving approach of the STAD type
cooperative model was 0.73. Furthermore, the average activity score of learners was 3.38. The average response
score of the students was 3.30. Inferential analysis with one sample t-test on study results and gain showed that p-
value = 0.001 < α = 0.05, thus H0 was rejected and H1 accepted, thus the problem solving approach with STAD
type cooperative model has met all the effective criteria.

Tabe 3 Comparison Of Descriptive Effectiveness Indicators

Average Average
Implementation of Experimental Holistic learning
Activity Respons Average
Approaches Classes outcomes
Score Score
Open Ended VIII-10 2,80 3,37 3,33 3,16
ELPSA VIII-7 2,86 3,39 3,34 3,19
Problem Solving VIII-9 2,77 3,38 3,30 3,15
(Source: Descriptive statistical analysis results)
Based on the table 3 above, it can be concluded that if reviewed from the average score of the indicators of
effectiveness, then descriptively learning through the application of elpsa approach with STAD type cooperatf
model is more effective than open ended approach, and problem solving with cooperatf model type STAD. While
learning through an open ended approach with a cooperative model type STAD is more effective than problem
solving approach with cooperative model type STAD.

Comparison Inferential Effectiveness Indicators

The indicators of effectiveness compared to the inferential analysis are student learning outcomes, activity
scores, and student responses to learning. Previously, the normality test was carried out as a prerequisite test for the
effectiveness indicators, student learning, activity scores, and student response scores were normally distributed,
then a homogeneity test was carried out to determine the homogeneity of the variance of the population of the three
approaches. Because the data is normally distributed, the homogeneity test is carried out using parametric statistics,
namely the Bartlett homogeneity test with SPSS which is carried out with the classify determinant procedure,
namely the analysis of bartlett-box prints f text statistics or commonly abbreviated as "Box's M" after fulfilling the
homogeneity requirements.
The following are the results of recapitulation of inferential statistical analysis on the effectiveness
indicators of the application of open ended approach, ELPSA, and problem solving with cooperative model type
STAD in mathematics learning SPLDV material class VIII at SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa.

Table 4. Summary of Inferential Analysis Results with ANOVA Test

SPSS Test Results on Effectiveness Indicators
No Approaches
̅posttest
𝒙 ̅ 𝑔ain
𝒙 Activity Respons
1 Open Ended
2 ELPSA 0,176 0,180 0,947 0,633
3 Problem Solving
(Source: Inferential statistical analysis results)

From the table 4 above can be seen that the test results anova posttest after the application of the open
ended approach, ELPSA and problem solving obtained p-value = 0.176 > α = 0.05, then H0 : μ1 = μ2 = μ3 received
and H1 : at least one of the μ that is not the same rejected, in other words for a confidence level of 95% there is no
difference in the average posttest score of learners after being taught with an open ended approach, ELPSA and
problem solving with cooperative model type STAD in mathematics learning in grade VIII SMP Negeri 2
Sungguminasa. Anova gain test results application of open ended approach, ELPSA and problem solving obtained
value p = 0.180 > α = 0.05, then H0 : μ_g1 = μ_g2 = μ_g3 accepted and H1: there is at least one of the μ_g that is
not the same rejected, in other words for a confidence level of 95% there is no difference in the average score of
gain of students after being taught with an open ended approach, ELPSA and problem solving with cooperative
model type STAD in mathematics learning in grade VIII SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa.
Anova test results of student activity from the application of open ended approach, ELPSA and problem
solving obtained p-value = 0.947 because the value p = 0.947 > α = 0.05, then H0 : μ_M1 = μ_M2 = μ_M3 received
and H1: at least one of the μ_M is not equally rejected, in other words for the confidence level of 95% there is no
difference in the average score of student activity after being taught with an open ended approach, ELPSA and
problem solving with cooperative model type STAD in mathematics learning in grade VIII at SMP Negeri 2
Sungguminasa.
Anova test results of learners' response to the application of an open ended approach, ELPSA and problem
solving obtained p-value = 0.633 because the value p = 0.633 > α = 0.05, then H0 : μ_M1 = μ_M2 = μ_M3 received
and H1: at least one of the μ_M that is not the same rejected, in other words for a confidence level of 95% there is
no difference in the average score of the learner's response after being taught with an open ended approach, ELPSA
and problem solving with cooperative model type STAD in mathematics learning in grade VIII at SMP Negeri 2
Sungguminasa.
Furthermore, for classical completion testing is done with a test of the similarity of two proportions, a
summary of the results of the analysis can be seen in table 5.
Table 5. Summary of Inferential Analysis Result With a Two Proportional Similarity Test
No Two proportions similarity test p-value Research hypothesis
1 Open Ended with ELPSA approach 0,261 H0 : π1 = π2 VS H1 : π1 ≠ π2
2 Open Ended with Problem Solving approach 0,452 H0 : π1 = π3 VS H1 : π1 ≠ π3
3 ELPSA with Problem Solving approach 0,078 H0 : π2 = π3 VS H1 : π2 ≠ π3
(Source: Inferential statistical analysis results)
Based on table 5. it appears that the test results are similar to two proportions or it is seen that all p-value
values > α = 0.05 so that H0 is accepted and H1 is rejected. So it can be concluded that for a 95% confidence level
there is no difference in the proportion of completion of learning of learners classically after being taught with open
ended, ELPSA, and problem solving, with a cooperative model of STAD type in mathematics learning in class VIII
of State SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa.

RESEARCH DISCUSSION

Discussion of Descriptive Statistical Analysis

Comparison Of learners' math learning outcomes

Based on the results of the learner's test on the application of the open ended approach with a cooperative
model of STAD type obtained an average of 34.37 pretest which means the ability of learners before the application
of the open ended approach is still in the very low category, this is seen from the five pretest problems given by
teachers, the correct average is the problem no. 1, directing learners to know the spldv concept. From this problem it
can be known that the initial knowledge of learners about SPLDV material actually already exists, the rest of how
the learners are able to complete SPLDV. The posttest average is 83.43. which means the ability of learners after the
application of the open ended approach is already in the high category, but nevertheless the ability of learners fully
has not reached the KKM value of 79 of which there are 4 learners who have grades below KKM, the reason why
the posttest value of learners is still not optimal can be seen from the five posttest questions given by teachers, On
average, there are 2 questions that are still difficult to answer by learners. The question is no. 4 and 5. In question
no. 4 asks learners to solve spldv problems in everyday life. In problem no. 5 asks learners to solve mathematical
problems in a special form.
Based on the results of tests of learners on the results of learning on the application of ELPSA approach
with cooperative model type STAD obtained an average of pretest 33.60 which means the ability of learners before
the application of elpsa approach is still in the very low category, this is seen from the five pretest questions given
by teachers, the correct average is question no. 1, directing learners to know the concept of SPLDV. From this
problem it can be known that the initial knowledge of learners about SPLDV material actually already exists, the
rest of how the learners are able to complete SPLDV. As for the average posttest of 84.88 which means the ability of
learners after the application of the ELPSA approach is already in the high category, but nevertheless the ability of
learners fully has not reached the KKM value of 79 where there are 3 learners who have grades below KKM, the
reason why the posttest value of learners is still not optimal can be seen from the five posttest questions given by
teachers, On average, there are 2 questions that are still difficult to answer by learners. The question is no. 4 and 5.
In question no. 4 asks learners to solve spldv problems in everyday life. In problem no. 5 asks learners to solve
mathematical problems in a special form.
Based on the results of tests of learners on the results of learning on the application of problem solving
approaches with cooperative models of STAD type obtained an average of 32.31 pretest which means the ability of
learners before the application of the problem solving approach is still in the very low category, this is seen from the
five pretest problems given by teachers, the correct average is problem no. 1, directing learners to know the concept
of SPLDV. From this problem it can be known that the initial knowledge of learners about SPLDV material actually
already exists, the rest of how the learners are able to complete SPLDV. As for the average posttest of 82.51 which
means the ability of learners after the application of the problem solving approach is already in the high category,
but nevertheless the ability of learners fully has not reached the KKM value of 79 which there are 4 learners who
have grades below KKM, the reason why the posttest value of learners is still not optimal can be seen from the five
posttest questions given by teachers, On average, there are 2 questions that are still difficult to answer by learners.
The question is no. 4 and 5. In question no. 4 asks learners to solve spldv problems in everyday life. In problem no.
5 asks learners to solve mathematical problems in a special form.
The results of the discussion comparing the learning outcomes of learners from the application of several
approaches, namely the open ended approach, ELPSA, and problem solving can be seen in the previous description,
as for the difference in learners' learning outcomes from each application of the approach, both the open ended
approach, ELPSA, and problem solving is due to the ability of diverse learners, some already have knowledge of
SPLDV material before being taught, There are also those who temporarily participate in guidance with SPLDV
materials, but there are also learners who do not know the SPLDV material at all. Of the three approaches to the
application of learning approaches and it is also affecting the learning outcomes of learners in the classroom, but it
can be seen that the average achievement of learners' learning outcomes from the application of open ended
approaches, ELPSA, and problem solving is not optimal meaning there are still some problems that are difficult for
learners, so that the average learning outcome of some learners from the application of open ended approaches,
ELPSA, and problem solving is still under KKM (79).

Comparison Of learners' Activities

The results of observations of the activities of learners at each meeting showed that there were 12 aspects
observed all in the good category. The aspects that are in active kategoti are aspects of observing the goals,
motivations and perceptions conveyed by the teacher (average score 3.00), Listening to the explanation of the
subject matter from the teacher (average score 3.33), Giving questions / responses to teachers or learners related to
the material (average score 3.17), Paying attention and recording examples given by teachers (average score 3.33),
Accept and Read open ended problems in LKPD (average score 3.33), Answering questions with various
methods/alternatives of completion (average score 3.17), making conclusions according to the direction of the
teacher (average score 3.33), Listening to information for the next meeting (average score of 3.33). The aspects of
the activities of learners with very active categories are, Forming groups in accordance with teacher directions
(average score 3.67), Discussing with group friends to solve problems (average score of 3.50), Responding and
perfecting the answers presented by other learners (average score 3.67), Working on quizzes given by teachers
(average score 3.67).
The results of observations of the activities of learners at each meeting showed that there were 12 aspects
observed all in the good category. The aspects that are on active kategoti are aspects of observing goals (average
score 3.33), motivation and perception delivered by teachers (average score 3.17), Giving questions / responses to
teachers or learners related to the material (average score 3.17), paying attention and recording examples given by
teachers, making conclusions according to the direction of the teacher (average score 3.33), and Listen to
information for the next meeting (average score 3.17). The aspects of the activities of learners with very active
categories are, Listening to the explanation of the subject matter from the teacher (average score 3.50), Paying
attention to the teacher when explaining the material from the form of the image to the representation of symbols
(average score 3.50), Forming a group according to the teacher's direction (average score of 3.50), Receiving and
Reading problems in the LKPD (average score of 3.50), Discussing with group friends to solve problems (average
score 3.50), Answering/solving problems on LKPD (average score 3.67), and working on quizzes given by teachers
(average score 3.50).
The results of observations of the activities of learners at each meeting showed that there were 12 aspects
observed all in the good category. The aspects that are on active kategoti are looking at the goals, motivations and
perceptions conveyed by the teacher (average score 3.33), Listening to the explanation of the subject matter from the
teacher (average score 3.00), Giving questions / responses to teachers or learners related to the material (average
score 3.17), Forming a group in accordance with the direction of the teacher (average score 3.33), Learners write
what is known, asked and adequacy of the elements needed in problem solving (average score 3.17), Learners
discuss to solve problems (average score 3.33), Learners double check, retest alternatives / solutions that have been
determined (average score 3.33). As for the aspects of student activities with very active categories are, Paying
attention and recording examples given by teachers (average score 3.67), Receiving and Reading non-routine
problems in the LKPD (average score of 3.50), Learners discuss to draw up a plan to solve problems (average score
3.67), Work on quizzes given by teachers (average score 3.50), Make conclusions according to the direction of the
teacher (average score 3.50).
The results of the discussion of the comparison of learners' activities from the application of several
approaches, namely the open ended approach, ELPSA, and problem solving can be seen in the previous description,
as for the difference in the activities of learners from each application of the approach, both the open ended
approach, ELPSA, and problem solving is due to the condition of learners in the classroom comes from different
backgrounds of the three classes in the application of learning approaches and it is also the Affect the activity of
learners in the classroom, but it can be seen that the achievement of learners' activity scores from the application of
open ended approaches, ELPSA, and problem solving is not optimal meaning there are still aspects of activities that
have not reached the expected criteria, but the achievement of learners' activity scores from the application of open
ended approaches, ELPSA, and problem solving is already in the good category.
Based on the description above, the application of open ended, ELPSA, and problem solving approaches
achieves effectiveness criteria and it can be concluded that if reviewed from activity indicators then the activities of
learners in the classroom taught using the ELPSA approach are more effective than other approaches. The problem
solving approach is more effective than open ended.

Comparison Of learners' Response

The results of recapitulation of the student's response questionnaire after learning through an open ended
approach with a cooperative model of STAD type showed that of the eight statement numbers, in the first statement
aspect was in the category of very positive, while the second to eighth question aspects were in the positive
category. The average response score of learners is 3.33 which means the response of learners in learning through an
open ended approach is in a positive category. However, of course, there are some aspects that still need to be
considered so that aspects that have not been achieved from the response of learners to learning in accordance with
expected.
The results of recapitulation of the student response questionnaire after learning through the ELPSA
approach with the STAD-type cooperative model showed that of the eight statement numbers, the first statement
aspect was in the category of very positive, while the second to eighth question aspects were in the positive
category. The average student response score is 3.34 which means the response of learners in learning through the
ELPSA approach is in the positive category. However, of course, there are some aspects that still need to be
considered so that aspects that have not been achieved from the response of learners to learning in accordance with
expected.
The results of recapitulation of the response questionnaire of learners after learning through a problem
solving approach with a cooperative model of STAD type showed that from eight statement numbers, in the first
statement aspect to eight all aspects were in the positive category. The average response score of learners is 3.30
which means the response of learners in learning through problem solving approaches is in the positive category.
However, of course, there are some aspects that still need to be considered so that aspects that have not been
achieved from the response of learners to learning in accordance with expected.
Based on the description above, the application of approaches, open ended, ELPSA, and problem solving
reaches the criteria of effectiveness and it can be concluded that if viewed from the response indicators then the
response of learners in the classroom taught with the ELPSA approach is more effective than the other two
approaches. Furthermore, the open ended approach is more effective than the problem solving approach.
 Discussion of Inferential Statistical Analysis

The results of the analysis of the application of open ended approaches with cooperative models of STAD
type are effective so that the major 1 hypothesis measured from the effectiveness of learners' learning outcomes,
student activities, and student responses is tested for truth. After testing the normalized posttest and gain values
using the one sample test, the value p-value = 0.001 < α = 0.05. So that H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted thus on
learning the open ended posttest approach of learners and normalized gain is categorized as effective. The
percentage of classical completion of learners in the test with a proportion test. From the results of the proportion
test obtained the value p-value = 0.001 < α = 0.05. H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted. However, it can thus be
concluded that inferentially the results of learning mathematics learners in the classroom are taught through the
application of an open ended approach with a cooperative model of STAD type in SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa
more than 85%. The activities and responses of learners are tested with a one sample test. From the results of the one
sample test obtained p-value = 0.001 < α = 0.05 so that H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted means that the activities of
learners during the learning process and the response of learners to learning through the application of open ended
approaches with an effective STAD type cooperative model.
The results of the analysis of the application of elpsa approach with cooperative model type STAD
effective so that the major 2 hypothesis measured from the effectiveness of learners' learning outcomes, student
activities, and student responses are tested for truth. After testing the normalized posttest and gain values using the
one sample test, the value p-value = 0.001 < α = 0.05. So that H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted thus on the learning
approach elpsa posttest learners and normalized gain categorized as effective. The percentage of classical
completion of learners in the test with a proportion test. From the results of the proportion test obtained the value p-
value = 0.001 < α = 0.05. H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted. However, it can thus be concluded that inferentially the
results of learning mathematics learners in the classroom are taught through the application of the ELPSA approach
with a cooperative model of STAD type in SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa more than 85%. The activities and
responses of learners are tested with a one sample test. From the results of the one sample test conducted obtained a
value of p-value = 0.001 < α = 0.05 so that H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted means that the activities of learners
during the learning process and the response of learners to learning through the application of ELPSA approach with
an effective STAD type cooperative model.
The results of the analysis of the application of problem solving approach with cooperative model type
STAD effective so that the major 3 hypothesis measured from the effectiveness of learners' learning outcomes,
student activities, and student responses are tested for truth. After testing the normalized posttest and gain values
using the one sample test, the value p-value = 0.001 < α = 0.05. So that H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted thus in
learning the approach of problem solving posttest learners and normalized gain is categorized as effective. The
percentage of classical completion of learners in the test with a proportion test. From the results of the proportion
test obtained the value p-value = 0.001 < α = 0.05. H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted. However, it can be concluded
that inferentially the results of learning mathematics learners in the classroom are taught through the application of
problem solving approach with cooperative model type STAD in SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa more than 85%. The
activities and responses of learners are tested with a one sample test. From the results of the one sample test
conducted obtained a value of p-value = 0.001 < α = 0.05 so that H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted means that the
activities of learners during the learning process and the response of learners to learning through the application of
problem solving approach with an effective STAD type cooperative model.
The results of the analysis with one way anova that there is no difference in the learning outcomes of
learners taught through open ended approaches, ELPSA, and problem solving so that the major 4 hypothesis is not
tested for truth. Because there is no difference, there is no need for further post hoc tests, meaning that the open
ended approach, ELPSA, and problem solving seen from indicators of the effectiveness of learners' learning
outcomes, activities and responses of learners are assumed to be the same result. After achieving the posttest and
normalized gain, and in all three approaches using the anova test, obtained a value of p-value = 0.17 > α = 0.05.
Thus, H0 is accepted and H1 is rejected thus in learning through open ended approach, ELPSA, and problem solving
there is no difference in posttest and normalized gain. Comparison of the percentage of the completion of the
calendar of learners used a similarity test of two proportions. From the results of the similarity test of two
proportions conducted it turns out that H0 is accepted and H1 is rejected meaning that the percentage of classical
completion of learners with the application of open ended approach learning, ELPSA, and problem solving is the
same or no difference. Comparison of activities and responses is used anova test. From the results of the anova test
conducted it turns out that H0 was accepted and H1 was rejected meaning that there was no difference in activity
during the learning process and the response of learners to learning through open ended approach, ELPSA, and
problem solving with a cooperative model type STAD.
So that it can be concluded inferentially with a 95% confidence level that effectiveness indicators: (1) there
is no difference in learning outcomes (posttest, gain and classical completion), and (2) there is no difference in
student activity and (3) there is no difference in response after applying open ended approach learning, ELPSA, and
problem solving cooperative model in SPLDV learning in class VIII SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa. This is
inseparable from the activities of learners in the three experimental classes where only the application of different
learning approaches, while the researchers control to minimize the bias of this study is as follows: (1) the material
applied to the same three classes of experiments is SPLDV material; (2) the same pretest and posttest learning
achievement tests for all three experimental classes; (3) the learning model used is the same as the cooperative
model of the STAD type; (4) The number of meetings per class is the same, which is 6 meetings, (5) observers for
all three classes of the same experiment.

CONCLUSION

The conclusions that are taken based on the results of research and discussion are as follows
1. The application of open ended approach with cooperative model type STAD effective in learning SPLDV
materials in students of grade VIII SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa reviewed from the results of learning,
activities, and responses of students.
2. The application of ELPSA approach with STAD-type cooperative model is effective in the learning of SPLDV
materials in students of grade VIII SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa reviewed from the results of learning,
activities, and responses of participants
3. The application of problem solving approach with cooperative model type STAD effective in learning SPLDV
materials in students of grade VIII SMP Negeri 2 Sungguminasa reviewed from the results of learning,
activities, and responses of students.
4. There is no difference in effectiveness between open ended approach, ELPSA, and problem solving, with
cooperative model type STAD in differential, but descriptively there are differences in effectiveness both from
the results of learning, activities and responses of learners, the order of effectiveness of approach based on
descriptive analysis is, ELPSA approach, open ended approach, and problem solving approach, with
cooperative model type STAD in spldv material learning in class VIII SMP State 2 Sungguminasa.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

1. I am deeply indebted to my supervisors, Prof. Dr Irawan Akib M.Pd., and Prof. Dr. Hamzah Upu M.Ed., for
warm support, inspiration and thoughtful guidance.
2. I am especially grateful Prof. Dr. Suradi Tahmir, M.S., and Dr. Djadir, M.Pd., for constructive criticism and
advice of my thesis.
3. I would like to thank the entire MSCEIS UPI 2021 committee for organizing an international seminar. as a
forum for publishing research results, especially in the field of mathematics education.

REFERENCES

1. Andhani, R. A. (2016). Representasi Eksternal Siswa dalam Pemecahan Masalah SPLDV Ditinjau dari
Kemampuan Matematika. Jurnal Kreano (Jurnal Matematika Kreatif-Inovatif). Received: July, 2016;
Accepted: September, 2016; Published: December, 2016 p-ISSN: 2086-2334; e-ISSN: 2442-4218.
2. Sriraman, B. (2005). Are giftedness & creativity synonyms in mathematics? An analysis of constructs within
the professional and school realms. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17, 20–36.
3. Cahdriyana, R. A. (2014). Representasi Matematis Siswa Kelas VII di SMP Negeri 9 Yogyakarta dalam
Membangun Konsep Sistem Persamaan Linear Dua Variabel. Jurnal Elektronik Pembelajaran Matematika.
Vol.2, No.6, hal 632-642, Agustus 2014. ISSN: 2339-1685.
4. Isjoni, (2011). Cooperative Learning. Meningkatkan Kecerdasan Komunikasi antar Peserta Didik. Yogyakarta:
Pustaka Pelajar.
5. Jacobsen, D. A., Eggen, Paul, & Kauchak, Donald. (2009). Methods for teaching (metode-metode pengajaran):
Meningkatkan belajar siswa tk-sma. (Terjemahan Achmad Fawaid & Khoirul Anam). New Jersey: Pearson
Education, Inc. (Buku asli diterbitkan tahun 2009).
6. Kaharuddin, A. (2017). Komparasi Keefektifan Pendekatan Saintifik, ELPSA dan Open Ended Setting
Kooperatif tipe STAD dalam pembelajaran Matematika Pada Kelas VII SMP Akreditasi A di Kota Makassar.
Jurnal Daya Matematis Volume 1 No. 1 Juli 2017. Makassar: PPs UNM.
7. Kennedy, L. M., Tipps, Steve, & Johnson, Art. (2008). Guiding children’s learning of mathematics (11th ed.).
Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.
8. Liebeck, P. (1984). How children learn mathematics: A guide for parents and teacher: Penguin
9. Lowrie. (1997). EMM409 Module 1 Mathematical Thingking and Problem Soving. Wagga Wagga. New South
Wales: Charles Sturt University.
10. Lowrie, T., & Patahuddin, S. M. (2015). ELPSA Kerangka Kerja untuk Merancang Pembelajaran Matematika.
Jurnal Didaktik Matematikia. 2(1), 94-108.
11. Mann, EL (2006). Creativity: The Essence of Mathematics. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(2),
236–260.
12. Morgan, G, A., Gliner, J. A. & Harmon, R, J. (2003). Pretest-Posttest Comparison Group Design: Analysis and
Interpretation. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. Published by Elsevier Inc.
All Right reserved.
13. Nurlidia. (2015). Komparasi Keefektifan Pendekatan Saintifik, Problem Solving, Dan Open Ended Setting
Discovery Learning Dalam Pembelajaran Matematika Materi Lingkaran Di Kelas VIII SMP Negeri 2 Sinjai
Timur. Jurnal Daya Matematis Volume 3 No. 3 November 2015. Makassar: PPs UNM.
14. Nohda, N. (2000). Learning and Teaching Through Open-ended Approacrh Method. Dalam Tadao Nakahara
dan Masataka Koyama (editor) Proceeding of the 24th of the Intenational Group for the Psychology of
Mathematics Education. Hiroshima: Hiroshima University.
15. Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia Nomor 22 Tahun 2016 tentang Standar
Proses Pendidikan Dasar dan Menegah. (Pdf, Online, https://bsnp-indonesia.org, diakses 18 Agustus 2019).
16. Sugiyono. (2016). Metode Penelitian Pendidikan Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung:
Alfabeta.
17. Suprijono, A. (2016). Cooperative Learning Teori & Aplikasi PAIKEM Edisi Revisi. Yogyakarta: Pustaka
Pelajar.
18. Suyono & Hariyanto. 2014. Belajar dan Pembelajaran: Teori dan Konsep Dasar. Bandung: Remaja
Rosdakarya.
19. Polya, G. (1973). How To Solve It, A New Aspect of Mathematicial Metod Second Edition. New Jersey:
Princeton University Press.