Main Article Content


The study aims to examine the application of the Realistic Mathematics Education (RME), the Cooperative Learning Model Team Assited Individualization (TAI) type and conventional learning models on algebra. The population in thIS study were all eighth grade SMPN 1 Masohi. The type of this study is an experimental research design with quasi experimental research. Instruments in this study using the test results, analyzed using ANOVA test and further tests using Tukey's HSD test. From the analysis of these study obtained data: (1) Based on the normality test results obtained sig. X1 (RME Learning Model) of 0.976, X2 (Cooperative Learning Model TAI Type) of 0.889 and X3 (Conventional Learning Model) of 0.906. (2) Based on the one-way ANOVA calculation with the SPSS 20.0 program, obtained a significance value of 0.003. (3) There are significant differences in algebra learning outcomes between classes using the RME learning model, the cooperative learning model TAI type and conventional learning model, and (4) The algebra learning outcomes of students used the RME learning model are higher than the students that are used cooperative learning models TAI type and the students that used conventional learning model.


Learning outcomes Realistic Mathematics Education Team Assitsed Individualization (TAI) Conventional Algebra

Article Details


  1. Afriansyah, E. A. (2016). Makna Realistic dalam RME dan PMRI. Lemma, II(2), 96–104. doi:10.22202/jl.2016.v2i2.578
  2. Alimuddin, H. (2017). Pengaruh Keaktifan Belajar Siswa Melalui Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Team Assisted Individualization (TAI) Terhadap Hasil Belajar Matematika Siswa Kelas Vii Smp Negeri 4 Satap Bungoro. HISTOGRAM: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 1(1), 61. doi:10.31100/histogram.v1i1.182
  3. Arsaythamby, V., & Zubainur, C. M. (2014). How a Realistic Mathematics Educational Approach Affect Students’ Activities in Primary Schools? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 159, 309–313. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.378
  4. Aziz, Z., & Hossain, A. (2010). A comparison of cooperative learning and conventional teaching on students' achievement in secondary mathematics. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 53–62. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.115
  5. Batlolona, J. R., Laurens, T., Leasa, M., Batlolona, M., Kempa, R., & Enriquez, J. J. (2019). Comparison of Problem Based Learning and Realistic Mathematics Education to Improve Students Academic Performance. Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif, 9(2), 185-197. doi:10.23960/jpp.v9.i2.201921
  6. Bidgood, P., Hunt, N., & Jolliffe, F. (2010). Assessment Methods in Statistical Education: An International Perspective. In Assessment Methods in Statistical Education: An International Perspective. doi:10.1002/9780470710470
  7. Clarke, D., & Roche, A. (2017). Using contextualized tasks to engage students in meaningful and worthwhile mathematics learning. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, (September), 1–14. doi:10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.11.006
  8. Gravemeijer, K. (1994). Educational development and developmental research in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25(5), 443–471. doi:10.2307/749485
  9. Ikhsanudin, I. (2014). Pengaruh Penggunaan Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Stad Berbantuan Wingeom Terhadap Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Geometri Siswa Sma. AKSIOMA Journal of Mathematics Education, 3(1), 40–49. doi:10.24127/ajpm.v3i1.380
  10. Leasa, M., & Corebima, A. D. (2017). The effect of numbered heads together (NHT) cooperative learning model on the cognitive achievement of students with different academic ability. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 795(1), 012071. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/795/1/012071
  11. Muhtarom, M., Nizaruddin, N., Nursyahidah, F., & Happy, N. (2019). The effectiveness of realistic mathematics education to improve students’multi-representation ability. Infinity Journal, 8(1), 21-30. doi:10.22460/infinity.v8i1.p21-30
  12. Nuraida, I., & Amam, A. (2019). Hypothetical learning trajectory in realistic mathematics education to improve the mathematical communication of junior high school students. Infinity Journal, 8(2), 247-258. doi:10.22460/infinity.v8i2.p247-258
  13. Ratumanan, T. G. (2015). Learning and Learning and the Factors that Affect it. Surabaya: Unesa University Press.
  14. Sembiring, R. K., Hadi, S., & Dolk, M. (2008). Reforming mathematics learning in Indonesian classrooms through RME. ZDM, 40(6), 927-939. doi:10.1007/s11858-008-0125-9
  15. Siregar, I. I., Budiyono, B., & Slamet, I. (2018). Team Assisted Individualization (TAI) in Mathematics Learning Viewed from Multiple Intelligences. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1108(1), 012073. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1108/1/012073
  16. Sitorus, J., & Masrayati, M. (2016). Title page Students ’ creative thinking process stages : implementation of realistic mathematics education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 111-120. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2016.09.007
  17. Sumirattana, S., Makanong, A., & Thipkong, S. (2017). Using realistic mathematics education and the DAPIC problem-solving process to enhance secondary school students ’ mathematical literacy. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 38(3), 307–315. doi:10.1016/j.kjss.2016.06.001
  18. Umbara, U., & Nuraeni, Z. (2019). Implementation of realistic mathematics education based on adobe flash professional CS6 to improve mathematical literacy. Infinity Journal, 8(2), 167-178. doi:10.22460/infinity.v8i2.p167-178