Peningkatan Kemampuan Komunikasi Matematis Siswa SMP Melalui Pembelajaran Inkuiri Model Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research is motivated by the results of previous research which shows that students' mathematical communication ability is still not as expected. The focus of this research is to determine the improvement of students' mathematical communication ability as a result of the investigation of the Alberta model learning. This research is experimental research with the population of all students of one of the State Junior High School in Bandung. The sample of the research is the grade VII students of the school. Samples were 73 students, 36 students of experimental class and 37 students of the control class. Based on the results of data analysis, it can be concluded that: (1) The achievement of mathematical communication ability of students who gain learning inquiry model Alberta better than students who learn conventional, (2) Improve the ability of mathematical communication, the thinking of students who gain learning inquiry model Alberta better than students Gain conventional learning, and (3) there is a difference in improving the ability of mathematical communication thinking based on the category of early mathematical ability.Keywords: Mathematical Communication Ability, Alberta Model Inquiry
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".