Mathematical Critical Thinking and Curiosity Attitude in Problem Based Learning and Cognitive Conflict Strategy: A Study in Number Theory course
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aims to describe and analyze result of applying Problem-Based Learning and Cognitive Conflict Strategy (PBLCCS) in increasing students’ Mathematical Critical Thinking (MCT) ability and Mathematical Curiosity Attitude (MCA). Adopting a quasi-experimental method with pretest-posttest control group design and using mixed method with sequential explanatory strategy, the study involves undergraduate students of Mathematics Education Program at a private university in Riau, Indonesia, academic year 2015/2016 enrolled in Number Theory course. Quantitative data were obtained from essay test and questionnaire whereas qualitative data were from interview and observation. The findings show that; (1) there is a difference between MCT ability taught by PBLCCS and Explicit Direct Instruction (EDI), (2) there is no significant difference between MCA taught by PBLCCS and EDI, (3) students still face obstacles in developing their critical thinking skills when solving matematical problems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it