The Dominant Factor of Teacher’s Role as A Motivator of Students’ Interest and Motivation in Mathematics Achievement
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 study aims to identify the most dominant factor of the teacher’s role as a motivator that influences students’ interest and motivation to perform in mathematics achievement. It is conducted in eighth grade of senior high school with 209 students, consisted of five state schools and two private schools from seven regencies in North Sumatera. The data collecting technique uses questionnaire about students’ interest and motivation toward mathematics and teacher’s role as motivator. Numerical data on mathematics achievement of students is obtained from school documents. The result of data with path analysis is obtained by dominant factor of teacher’s role as motivator that is factor of delivery of learning goal and learning comfort equal to 6.10%, and 6.00% is influenced by the delivery of learning objectives and variations of learning approaches, 5.17% is influenced by the delivery of learning objectives, 5.06% is due to variations in the learning approach, 4.61% is influenced by learning comfort and variation of learning approach, and 4.26% influenced by pleasant class atmosphere.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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