Inovasi Kurikulum

ARTICLE


INTRODUCTION
Education creates an agent of change that bridges or filters changes in better education.One of the changes that occur in education is the curriculum.The background to curriculum changes is policy changes, the emergence of new technology, and globalization (Nurhikmah et al., 2021).The new curriculum was created with independent learning, which aims to allow students to think freely and freely express themselves by providing a learning atmosphere that suits students' interests.Freedom to learn is a policy rolled out by the Minister of Education and Culture to improve the national education system in preparing and improving the quality of human resources as agents of educational change.
National assessment (AN) is a new educational assessment in the Indonesian curriculum.The Directorate General of P3GTK, Ministry of Education and Culture, conducts national assessment trials, character surveys, and learning environments.The trial's results showed that 46.6% of students understood the national assessment, and 53.2% did not experience it (Rokhim et al., 2021).The trials and surveys carried out will later be considered in determining subsequent policies to map the quality of education in Indonesia.National assessment (AN) is used for quality mapping and is divided into three parts: minimum competency assessment (AKM), character survey, and learning environment survey (Supriyanto & Rustyawati, 2021;Shalihah & Nugraha, 2023).AKM is one of the many tools used to evaluate students' cognitive abilities and to analyze students' learning outcomes (Nura, 2023).AKM has two minimum aspects that will be assessed: literacy and numeracy (Auliya, 2022).According to Undang-Undang Nomor 3 Tahun 2017 tentang Sistem Perbukuan, which regulates the literacy system, is a critical interpretation of information that gives every individual access to science and technology to improve that quality of life.Reading literacy is understanding, using, reflecting, and engaging with written texts to achieve goals, develop knowledge and personal potential, and participate in society and social life (Ho & Lau, 2018).Meanwhile, in PIRLS (Progress in International Reading Literacy Study), reading literacy is the ability to absorb information presented explicitly, understand it, interpret and synthesize ideas and information, and evaluate and criticize content and textual elements (Xiao & Hu, 2019).
The Character Survey is a form of national evaluation or assessment other than AKM.Collaborative character surveys are carried out to instill character values in education, later becoming the foundation for building students' attitudes at higher levels and in community life (Gunawan et al., 2020).One of the characteristics included in the assessment is the character of cooperation.The character of cooperation is a soft skill that fosters and improves collaborative skills in solving problems in social life (Ramadani et al., 2022).Cooperation is defined as collaboration that describes communicative and relational processes (Kvellestad et al., 2021).
In learning without language communication and cooperation between students and teachers, the learning objectives will not be optimally achieved.The absence of reading literacy skills in students causes empty learning, which is ineffective due to the lack of understanding, processing, and information processing skills, which are sources of knowledge.Students' low level of cooperative character and reading literacy still occurs mainly in elementary schools.The cooperative character and reading literacy of students in class V of elementary school or Sekolah Dasar (SD) 6 Gondosari, Gebog District, Kudus Regency, found several problems through observations, interviews and grade data from teachers and class V teachers, the results of which were: 1) literacy skills were still low due to insufficient ability to understand information; 2) low student reading literacy due to less than optimal use of school facilities such as school libraries; 3) low student learning outcomes in Indonesian language subjects, especially in essential competencies (KD), finding important information from historical narrative texts presented in written and oral form by obtaining an average score of 66.4; this score is included below the KKM; 4) There are still many students who are individualistic even during group discussions; 5) there is a low level of cooperative character among students; and 6) there is a there is a lack of variety and suitability https://doi.org/10.17509/jik.v21i2.69487 of learning models in the learning process.The low student cooperation in primary and secondary schools is also explained in a study that mentions poor student cooperation, which reaches only 72.82%, and student learning intensity only reaches 60.86%.Low ability to cooperate affects low and less optimal student learning outcomes (Oktavira et al., 2020).Also, based on research conducted by The Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology, low reading literacy at the school level is widespread in Indonesia, as demonstrated by the Programme for International Students Assessment (PISA) result, which assesses the reading skills of students who earn only an average score of 371 points and are ranked 72 out of 77 countries.
In connection with the problem of students' low cooperative character and reading literacy, researchers are trying to find a solution to improve students' cooperative character and reading literacy by implementing and conducting research on the IOLE-type cooperative learning model (inside-outside learning).The application of the IOLE-type cooperative learning model to enhance the character of cooperation and reading literacy was chosen because it was in line with previous research stating that the application of a STAD type cooperative learning can improve students' cooperative character and learning outcomes of primary school students (Oktavira et al., 2020).In addition, a previous study stated that applying the STAD learning model improves character values and literacy reading students.From the earlier studies, it can be said that implementing the STAD learning model can improve student cooperation and student reading literacy (Yushila et al., 2021).The application of STAD model learning, which the researchers previously studied only in the classroom, is to obtain more results in improving the character of collaboration and reading literacy students.Then, the researcher developed this study to enhance the character cooperation of reading students, the model of learning done in the classroom using STAD, and out-of-class learning live experience activities through interview activities.The combination of learning in and out of the classroom indicates the acquisition of the information required by students to know student performance in acceptance and attitude toward increased environmental literacy (Hipolito, 2021).The cooperative learning model incorporates the IOLE method (Inside Outside Learning) through interview activities to strengthen students' collaborative nature and reading literacy.Interview reports are created from the results of these activities, and students then present them.This strategy is regarded as adequate.The objective was to examine how class V students described their collaborative character and reading literacy before and after the IOLE-type cooperative learning model was implemented, as well as to assess how well the model worked in enhancing students' cooperative character and reading literacy at SD 6 Gondosari, Gebog District, Kudus Regency.

IOLE-type Cooperative Learning Model
Cooperative learning is a form of learning based on constructivism, emphasizing interactive and positive group communication.The main focus of cooperative learning is carrying out activities whose successful implementation is influenced by the group's involvement (Erbil, 2020).In the cooperative learning model, each group consists of 4-6 people, who will later hold discussions, interact between group members, and make decisions to solve a problem by emphasizing forming a social learning environment.In its implementation, cooperative learning will give students equal opportunities in the classroom (Thang & Sibanda, 2020).Five elements are essential for implementing the goals of cooperative learning.The five elements are (1) positive interdependence, (2) individual accountability, (3) promotive face-to-face interactions, (4) interpersonal skills and small group skills, and (5) group processing (Dyson et al., 2021).
https://doi.org/10.17509/jik.v21i2.69487Other than the IOLE-type Cooperative Learning Model, there is also a student team Achievement Division (STAD) type cooperative learning, which is a learning model whose primary focus is group collaboration to solve problems cognitively and practice skills to achieve learning goals and can improve students' collaborative character (Aryani, 2022;Ghufron et al., 2023).There are learning steps in the classroom (inside learning) of STAD, namely: 1) learning material delivery phase; 2) group formation phase; 3) discussion phase; 4) publication phase; 5) quiz and award phase; (6) evaluation phase; and (7) conclusion phase (Wijaya & Arismunandar, 2018).IOLE-type cooperative learning (inside-outside learning) is a collaborative learning model in the implementation process.Learning can be done in the classroom or outside the school.Learning in the classroom is learning that, in the implementation process, places more emphasis on intellectual goals (Hipolito, 2021).The learning process is carried out in the classroom through student learning activities that do not use much physical activity and focus more on fine motor skills that develop intelligence (Claudia et al., 2018).One of the cooperative learning models applied in the classroom is the STAD learning model (student team achievement division).STAD learning is a learning method in the school that presents information of an academic nature.It is given verbally and in writing by dividing students into heterogeneous groups using quiz procedures (Anjali et al., 2019).
Widiasworo, in a book titled "Strategi & Metode Mengajar Siswa di Luar Kelas (Outdoor Learning)" stated that learning outside the classroom is learning that invites students to learn by exploring to get to know the surrounding environment, which will bring about changes in behavior in students through the stages of awareness, understanding, attention, responsibility, and attitude.Exploratory activities in outdoor learning have many benefits for the development of children and adolescents.Outdoor activities are essential for children's cognitive development and growth.Apart from that, outdoor play activities also have psychological and physical health benefits, including developing fine and gross motor skills, building strength, memory, thinking abilities, and cooperation (Berg et al., 2021).Apart from that, outdoor learning is an effective means for student learning from the author's point of view; it has surpassed other learning methods.In promoting positive behavioral change, the outdoor classroom environment offers a suitable platform for transformative growth (Gray, 2018).
Based on our understanding regarding cooperative learning models in the classroom or outside the classroom, it can be concluded that the IOLE-type cooperative learning model is a cooperative learning model with a learning strategy that, in its application, combines learning carried out in the classroom and outside the classroom using exploration to increase knowledge both theoretically and practically by utilizing the surrounding environment, which can be used as a source of learning and teaching obtained directly by students through experience.The syntax for implementing IOLE-type cooperative learning is developed through the STAD learning stages in the classroom and the stages of learning outside the classroom (Wijaya & Arismunandar, 2018).The IOLE-type cooperative learning model consists of three learning stages: the learning preparation stage, the learning implementation stage, and the post-field activity stage.The implementation stage of the IOLE learning model consists of several activities, including: 1) formulating objectives and determining learning concepts; 2) surveying places used in implementing learning; 3) finding phenomena that will become the focus of discussion as learning resources; 4) making a learning implementation plan and activity sheet; and 5) preparing the necessary facilities.At the learning implementation stage, there are: 1) activities for delivering learning material; 2) forming groups, each consisting of 5-6 students; 3) group discussion activities and guiding the discussion by the teacher; 4) practical activities in the field (interview); and 5) discussion to report the results of field activities.The post-field activity stage consists of (1) activities to publish the results of group discussions, (2) giving limited quizzes individually orally, (3) giving awards to students, (4) giving evaluations, (5) making conclusions about the material and briefing and giving confirmation of learning material. https://doi.org/10.17509/jik.v21i2.69487

Collaborative Character
Character combines morals, ethics, and morals, so character is defined as universal human behavioral values that cover all social activities.These values appear in thoughts, attitudes, feelings, words, and actions based on normal religion, law, karma, culture, and customs.Education must instill character values from an early age.The success of character education in elementary school will shape students' attitudes towards higher levels of education and community life in general (Gunawan et al., 2020).Collaboration is a combination of each student's attitude and the attitudes of different groups.
Collaboration is an effort several people make to carry out a task together to achieve specific goals.Collaboration is essential in the learning process, especially in group work.By working together in groups, students will help each other complete assignments.Different experiences will teach students to exchange ideas about completing their assignments, which helps them communicate well and helps them overcome learning problems (Sandrayati, 2021).Collaboration in groups requires an active role from each individual and openness to receiving ideas or input from friends in the group (Rahayu et al., 2020).
The character of cooperation is useful for solving life's problems through soft skills working together with other people (Ramadani et al., 2022).In education, team or group cooperation and collaboration create better results.Cooperation and collaboration have goals that participants must achieve, but the process for achieving these goals is different.As they relate to design, the definitions of cooperation and collaboration clearly describe communicative and relational processes (Kvellestad et al., 2021).Students' abilities are made to be ready to work together with anyone in their lives, so collaborative activities are critical in the learning process.Collaborating and working with others can increase creativity and self-confidence and reduce students' tendencies to be alone or individualistic.By working together, students are trained to interact and communicate well, which means they can learn to relate well socially so that students become more aware of the benefits of cooperation and become more confident (Purwanti et al., 2021).
Johnson stated that understanding the character of cooperation is the same as understanding the five main elements that can support cooperation (Fauziyah et al., 2019).Therefore, not all group work can be considered cooperative learning.According to Johnson, the five parts of cooperative skills are positive interdependence, face-to-face interaction, individual responsibility, small group and interpersonal skills, and group processing.The collaborative skills that students have will shape their collaborative character.The cooperative character can be enhanced if students have already met several indicators of collaborative skill according to Lundgren's theory, which includes following agreed group rules, sharing knowledge among group members, helping and supporting each other in the process of group work, expressing ideas, actively discussing in the group and responsible for their tasks in the groups (Fauziyah et al., 2019;Oktavira et al., 2020;Praptiyani & Sulistya Wardani, 2019).

Reading Literacy
The word literacy comes from the word literate, which means read and write, as opposed to speaking illiterate (Hanin & Islamy, 2020).Literacy relates explicitly to language and language skills (Hendrowati & Faelasofi, 2021).According to Undang-Undang Nomor 3 Tahun 2017 tentang Sistem Perbukuan, it is the ability to interpret and understand information critically so that everyone can access science and technology to improve their quality of life.Thus, literacy offers more significant opportunities to obtain sources of knowledge, which makes them better able to analyze and understand the content and meaning as a whole and implicitly becomes a way to improve their quality of life (Yuliasanti & Satyarini, 2020).Reading is a necessary and critical skill at every stage of individual development that becomes https://doi.org/10.17509/jik.v21i2.69487especially important in the middle school years for career and success in adult life (Ganasan et al., 2020).According to a similar study, reading is also an interactive, active, and reflective interaction between the reader and the text (Duran et al., 2020).The reader's prior knowledge, goals, and expectations contribute to the formation of meaning.According to previous research, reading has many benefits, including increasing knowledge, opening up new information, better explaining new information, increasing concentration, and being entertained (Rintaningrum, 2019).
Reading literacy is defined as understanding, using, reflecting, and engaging with written texts to achieve goals, develop one's knowledge and potential, participate in society, and participate in society (Ho & Lau, 2018).Reading literacy in PIRLS is defined as the ability to retrieve information that is stated explicitly, direct, interpret, and integrate ideas and information, as well as evaluate and criticize content and textual elements (Xiao & Hu, 2019).In conclusion, reading literacy is the ability to understand, use, evaluate, and reflect on various texts to solve problems and improve a person's ability as an Indonesian citizen and a global citizen to contribute productively to society.According to Sani, there are four levels or stages of reading literacy competency, namely 1) The stage that requires particular intervention, where students are not yet able to find and retrieve clear information in the text or make simple interpretations; 2) Basic stage, where students can find and retrieve clear information in the text and make simple interpretations; 3) Proficient stage, where students can understand the implicit information in the text and make conclusions about the integration of information across texts; 4) Advanced stage, where students can evaluate the content, quality, and method of writing the text and think critically about the content of the text (Purwati et al., 2021).
Literacy reading students at the elementary school level are at least at the primary level, but some have already reached the speaking level.Interventions to improve student literacy include using activities such as creating reading corners and wall magazines in classrooms or inviting students to explore places full of historical texts (Museum) as a form of learning outside the classroom (Sukma, 2021).A text-rich environment encourages the student's instrumental motivation in reading.Tracey and Morrow say that students in an environment rich in text will be allowed to explore in person various types of text reading in meaningful and exciting ways (Rintaningrum, 2019).The exploration can be done in person or by interviewing the expert (Museums' guide).The results of an exploration or interview are then poured out as a simple communication medium, a wall magazine.Creating wall magazines for students is a creative centralized information processing activity that can improve student literacy (Baroroh et al., 2021), especially reading literacy.

METHODS
The research uses quantitative research methods.Sugiyono, in a book titled "Metode Penelitian Pendidikan" stated that quantitative methods are research methods that include positivist methods because they are based on the philosophy of positivism.The research design uses a quasi-experimental design with a plan nonequivalent control design.The research design used aims to obtain information that is an estimate of the information that can be obtained from experimental research without being able to control and manipulate all relevant variables.The design of the nonequivalent control group used for selecting experimental and control groups was not done randomly.This research was conducted in class V of SD 6 Gondosari as the experimental group and class V of SD 8 Gondosari as the control group.The sample in this study was all 24 students.The students were divided into 12 students from SD 6 Gondosari as the experimental group and 12 students from class V of SD 8 Gondosari as the control class.The sampling technique used was saturated sampling or total sampling.The sampling technique was chosen because the population was relatively small, less than 30 people.From the summary Table 1 of validity test results, the test and non-test instruments used in the research meet perfect criteria and indicate that they are ready to be used in research.The validity test for the AKM questions was tested on class V students at SD 6 Gondosari.The results of the AKM test questions obtained an average value of r count 0,629 > r table 0.482, indicating a high level of question validity.
The reliability test on the test instrument was tested using IBMSPSS 25 with a significance level of 5%, and the r-value obtained was rcount 0,822 > r table 0.482.According to Arikunto (2021), in a book titled Dasar-dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan, test results and instruments are considered reliable if r11 > rtable is deemed reliable.The difficulty level of each AKM question item was tested using a difficulty level test with the results of 6 questions at the easy difficulty level and four questions at the medium difficulty level.The differentiating power test for each item showed one question in the outstanding category, seven in the excellent category, and two in the good category.
Data from research on students' collaborative character and reading literacy can be obtained by applying the IOLE-type cooperative learning model (inside-outside learning) in class V of SD 6 Gondosari (experimental class).The application of the STAD learning model in class V of SD 8 Gondosari (control class) was measured by comparing the data before and after the intervention.The results of research on the cooperative character and reading literacy of fifth-grade students in the experimental and control classes used prerequisite tests (normality test and hypothesis test).The normality test is carried out using the test Shapiro Wilk because the sample is less than 50.The tested hypotheses are H0 : normal distributed data and H1 : abnormal distributed information.The Asymp Sig.(2-tailed) is α = 0.05.The hypothesis test uses the Wilcoxon, Mann-Whitney, and N-Gain tests to determine the effectiveness of the IOLE-type cooperative learning model. https://doi.org/10.17509/jik.v21i2.69487

Collaborative Character
The results of research on the character of student cooperation are the results of the prerequisite test, namely the normality test obtained through data pretest, which got a value of Shapiro Wilk 0.012 in the experimental class and 0.042 in the comparison class.The normality test results for the character of cooperation in the experimental class were 0.012 < 0.05, with the residual value category being abnormally distributed and rejected.Meanwhile, in the comparison class, the normality test results for the character of cooperation obtained a value of 0.042 < 0.05, with the residual value category being abnormally distributed and H0 rejected.The distribution of residual value data is not normal, so it was tested using Wilcoxon.The results of the Wilcoxon test in the experimental class show that the value is known as Asymp Sig.(2-tailed) as much as 0.002 < 0.05 with the conclusion that the hypothesis is accepted.Obtaining test results Wilcoxon in the comparison class, namely grades Asymp Sig.(2 -tailed) 0.002 < 0.05 with the conclusion that the hypothesis is accepted.The test results then stated differences in student cooperation in the experimental and comparison classes before and after the intervention.This means that the use of the experimental and comparison classes influences the IOLE and STAD learning models.
Testing continues with the Mann-Whitney test to determine the difference in the means of two unpaired samples (experimental and control classes).The results of the Mann-Whitney test Asymp Sig.(2-tailed) the cooperative character of the experimental class and the comparison class obtained a 0.001 < 0.05, indicating the hypothesis was accepted.The results prove differences in student cooperation between the experimental class, which intervened in implementing the IOLE-type cooperative learning model, and the comparison class, which intervened in implementing the STAD learning model.
The difference in increasing the character of cooperation in the experimental class is more influential or more effective than increasing cooperation in the control class.The results of the differences are shown by the N-Gain test by testing the difference in values pretest and posttest in the experimental and control classes, as seen in Table 2. Based on Table 2 above, it is known that the Gain score for students' cooperative character in the experimental class was 0.67, with a percentage increase of 67% compared to the control class, which only obtained a score of 0.39 with a percentage increase in the cooperative character of 39%.This means that the character of cooperation in the experimental class by applying the IOLE type cooperative learning model is more effective in improving students' character of collaboration than using the STAD learning model in the control class.The STAD learning model, in its application, prefers group cooperation to solve problems (Aryani, 2022).In-class learning does not emphasize physical activity but focuses more on developing intelligence (Claudia et al., 2018).Student creativity and collaboration will increase if combined with learning outside the classroom through hands-on experience (Agusta et al., 2018). https://doi.org/10.17509/jik.v21i2.69487

Reading Literacy
The results of the research data on students' reading literacy were obtained from the grades pretest and posttest experimental class and control class.The research uses a prerequisite test, namely the normality test of the value data pretest students' reading literacy.Normality test results Shapiro Wilk the reading literacy of experimental class students obtained a score of 0.010 < 0.05, proving that the residual value distribution is abnormal.Meanwhile, in the control class, the test results of Shapiro-Wilk students' reading literacy obtained a value of 0.011 < 0.05, which indicates that the residual value is not normally distributed.
The results of the normality test revealed that the data was not normal, and the test was then carried out by Wilcoxon, which aims to determine whether there is a mean difference in two paired samples (pretestposttest).Test results Wilcoxon show the reading literacy value of students in the experimental class, known as Asymp Sig.(2-tailed) namely 0.002 < 0.05, which indicates the hypothesis is accepted, and in the control class, the value is known as Asymp Sig.(2-tailed) namely, 0.002 < 0.05 indicates the hypothesis is also accepted.This means there is a difference between reading literacy before and after implementing the intervention in the experimental and control classes.
Hypothesis testing Mann-Whitney is done to determine whether the mean of two unpaired samples differs from the resulting data for post-test experimental and control classes.Test results from Mann Whitney students' reading literacy by comparing scores from the posttest experimental class with a comparison class with known values Asymp Sig.(2-tailed) 0.046 > 0.05 indicates that the hypothesis is accepted.This means there is a significant difference in students' reading literacy after intervention through the application of the IOLE-type cooperative learning model in the experimental class and the STAD learning model in the control class.
Average results posttest It is known that students' reading literacy using the IOLE-type cooperative learning model in the experimental class is better and more effective compared to the control class, which uses the STAD learning model.This is proven by carrying out the N-Gain test, which calculates the difference in value pretest and post-test from the experimental class and the control class, as seen in Table 3.The students' reading literacy gain score in Table 3 for the experimental class was 0.81, with a percentage of 81%.The percentage increase is in the high category.It is said to be effective compared to the control class, which only got a score of 0.51 with a percentage increase in literacy of 51%, which is in the medium category, which is less effective.This means that the character of cooperation in the experimental class by applying the IOLE type cooperative learning model is more effective in improving students' character of collaboration than using the STAD learning model in the control class.Callado found cooperative learning effective in developing social learning and interaction among students in general (Dyson et al., 2021).Cooperative learning helps students identify negative experiences by learning how to cope and behave.Learning does not always have to be in a classroom with closed windows, empty walls of artificial lighting, and no ventilation, so students have no interest in learning.A valuable learning experience must be directly exposed to the world so that students can develop critical thinking.Studying outdoors has a positive impact [on the development of children to be adopted https://doi.org/10.17509/jik.v21i2.69487(Hipolito, 2021).Building an "outdoor learning hub" will help teachers shape student character, policies, and strategies for 21 st -century student literacy learning outcomes.

Discussion
Education is an effort to bring about good changes for the quality of society.One of the changes in education is learning that has a paradigm emphasizing critical thinking skills, skills in mastering information technology, and communication and collaboration skills, also called constructivist learning (Naufal & Amalia, 2022).Constructivist learning is a learning theory by Vygotsky that states that the individual carries out the process of learning formation by being concerned with himself.Constructivist learning can be realized by collaborating with teachers and other students.Collaborative learning is an effort carried out in groups to instill the character of cooperation in students (Sandrayati, 2021).
Cooperation in learning is called collaborative learning.Creating a collaborative learning atmosphere ensures that learning is carried out effectively.Effective learning is realized if students have the essential abilities of reading and understanding reading.Reading is an essential ability to learn something simple to complex.Meanwhile, reading comprehension is processing existing reading into new information or knowledge.Understanding reading is the same as literacy activities.Literacy activities are an exciting and important form of learning for students, including reading, writing, communicating, and processing information (Hermawan et al., 2020).
The cooperative character and reading literacy of fifth-grade students at SD 6 Gondosari (experimental class) can be improved using the IOLE-type cooperative learning model (inside-outside learning).Using cooperative learning models in the classroom (which places more emphasis on intellectual goals through group formation to improve the character of cooperation and learning outside the classroom, which emphasizes direct learning activities can improve students' reading literacy.Meanwhile, for the control class, the cooperative character and reading literacy of class V students at SD 8 Gondosari increased using the STAD learning model. Regarding the character of student collaboration before conducting research, the researcher carried out a pretest to measure initial abilities before intervention, as seen in Table 4.The average pretest score for the character of cooperation in the experimental class is 1.08, with the criteria being less or very low.Meanwhile, in the control class, the average score for the character of student cooperation is 1.10, with relatively low criteria.IOLE-type cooperative learning model (inside outside learning) is a researcher's solution applied to improve students' cooperative character.Learning activities are a combination of those carried out in the classroom using group discussions and giving quizzes, then learning activities outside the classroom (Kretek Museum) using direct learning at sources of information by conducting interviews in groups, which can form teamwork so that students' cooperative character increased in the experimental class.The increase in students' cooperative character is proven by the average score of the experimental class observation assessment results by the class V teacher of SD 6 Gondosari, namely Mrs. Qorina Alfa, S.Pd., during the research activities.Meanwhile, in the comparison (control) class of class V SD 8 Gondosari, the improvement of the character of cooperation was still low, as the STAD learning model https://doi.org/10.17509/jik.v21i2.69487was implemented, where learning activities were carried out only in class with group discussions and quizzes.The increase in cooperation in the comparison (control) class was assessed through observations during the research by the class V teacher at SD 8 Gondosari, Mrs. Tri Hutami, S.Pd.Regarding the character of student collaboration after conducting research, the researcher carried out a posttest to measure initial abilities before intervention, as seen in Table 5.The assessment of the character of cooperation in the experimental class and comparison class resulted in a class average score with good criteria.However, in the experimental class that implemented the IOLE-type cooperative learning model, as shown in Table 5 above, the scores were obtained superior with an average score of 3.03 compared to the acquisition score post-test.The control class only got a score of 2.22.This relatively significant difference in scores indicates that the character of cooperation that applies the IOLE-type cooperative learning model is more improved than those that apply the STAD learning model in the control class.
The IOLE-type cooperative learning model applied in research, besides improving students' collaborative character, also increases students' reading literacy.Before intervening by applying the cooperative learning model of the IOLE type for the expert class and applying the STAD learning model for the control class, it is known that the literacy reading of the students' skills is low.This is illustrated by the fact that the class average score on the reading literacy pretest using the AKM read literacy form was achieved, as shown in Table 6.Value acquisition pretest reading literacy shows an average score of 48.75 for the experimental class and 59.25 for the control class.The criteria for average score-pretest for experimental and control class reading literacy are lacking, which means that students' reading literacy is still lacking or low.Reading literacy was low in experimental class students, who then intervened by implementing the IOLE-type cooperative learning model to increase reading literacy and the STAD learning model in the control class.criteria (B).Obtaining a score with good value criteria for both, but there is quite a difference or difference in the score obtained.The reading literacy of students (experimental class) who were given intervention implementing the IOLE type cooperative learning model obtained higher scores, and the reading literacy of students in the control class who were given intervention implementing the STAD learning model was lower.It can be concluded that the IOLE-type cooperative learning model is more effective in increasing students' reading literacy compared to the STAD learning model.The application of cooperative learning models of the IOLE type is more effective against student reading literacy because the application of learning leads more to practical experience learning done in and outside the classroom.Practical learning in the school is obtained through group discussion, in which discussion activities encourage students to focus on the knowledge given by the teacher (Hipolito, 2021).In order to perfect the knowledge acquired, students practice knowledge in the form of direct interviews with their resources carried out outside the classroom.Outside school learning improves knowledge, attitudes, and literacy skills (Fahruddin & Islamiyah, 2018).

CONCLUSION
Based on the study's results, this study has three conclusions.First, there is an improvement in the cooperative character and literacy of students reading before and after applying the IOLE cooperative learning model to the experimental class, and there is an improvement in the collaborative character in the control class that applies the STAD learning model.Second, there are differences in the character of collaboration and students' reading literacy before and after using the IOLE collaborative learning model in experimental and control classrooms, which applies the STAD learning model.Third, using the cooperative learning model IOLE in the experimental class effectively improves the students' cooperative character and reading literacy in the experimental class, and applying it in the less effective control class of STAD improves students' cooperative character and reading literacy.

Table 1 .
Data collection uses test and non-test collection techniques.The test data collection technique is a pretest and post-test related to student reading literacy.Meanwhile, the non-test data collection techniques used are observation techniques related to the character of student cooperation and documentation techniques.Data analysis techniques are analysis of research instruments and research results.Research instrument analysis is an instrument that is tested through validity tests, reliability tests, question difficulty level tests, and differentiating power tests.Validity test results from the assessment of test and non-test instruments in the form of learning tools such as ATP, teaching modules, teaching materials, worksheets, AKM question instruments, and observation sheets professional judgment.Validity Test Results in Professional Judgement https://doi.org/10.17509/jik.v21i2.69487

Table 2 .
N-Gain test results for cooperation character

Table 3 .
Results of the N-Gain test for Students' reading literacy

Table 4 .
Average scores pretest cooperative character

Table 5 .
Average scores post-test cooperative character

Table 6 .
Average scores pretest students' reading literacy

Table 7 .
Average scores post-test students' reading literacyAccording to Table7, the average student reading literacy score obtained by the experimental class was 88.83 with good score criteria (B), and the control class was 80.50, also included in the good score https://doi.org/10.17509/jik.v21i2.69487