MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166969620 · doi:10.5539/ass.v9n12p220

Problem Solving Skills and Learning Achievements through Problem-Based Module in teaching and learning Biology in High School

2013· article· en· W2166969620 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSTEM Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationGroup (periodic table)Test (biology)Product (mathematics)Problem-based learningControl (management)Class (philosophy)Achievement testPsychologyMathematicsComputer scienceBiologyArtificial intelligencePhysicsStandardized test

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of using problem-based module (PBM) in the subject of Biology on high school students’ problem-solving skill and achievement. This research used the quasi-experiment method with Non-Equivalent Pretest and Posttest Control Group Design, which involved two science classes, in which one group was assigned as control group and another one as experiment group, in a high school in Pekan Baru, Indonesia. The problem-solving ability and the product of learning were descriptively analyzed before being inferentially analyzed. To find out whether or not there is any difference in their problem-solving skill, t-Test and N-gain test was conducted on the experimental group’s and control group’s concept mastery level and product of learning. The result shows that the problem-solving skill percentage of the experimental group was 95.47% (very good), whereas that of the control group was 25.12% (low). The average of student’s achievement in the experimental group was 84.26% (good), while that of the control group equaled 79.08% (moderate). The average of the product of learning was 89.89% (good) for the experimental group, whereas that of the control group was 52.10% (low). The findings showed that PBM can actually increase problem-solving skill, students’ achievement, and students’ learning product, with the experimental group getting higher percentage in all three aspects compared to the control group by using PBM in their Biology class. The implication of this study is the increase in the quality of learning through learning innovation using learning module. The panned and organized implementation of this module by teachers will not only improve students’ thinking skills, but also increase the quality of science and technology, consistent with the aim of Indonesia education.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it