STUDI EVALUASI PROSES PEMBELAJARAN PRAKARYA DAN KEWIRAUSAHAAN KELAS XII MIPA DI SMA NEGERI 1 SINGARAJA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to describe the suitability of planning and learning process conducted by the teacher to the rules Permendikbud No. 22 Year 2016 and describes the suitability of doubtgiven weight to the learning plan that has been held. The evaluation study of the study include the planning and implementation process of the craft and entrepreneurial learning in SMAN 1 Singaraja, especially in class XII Mathematics. Sources of data in this study were teachers craft and entrepreneurship as well as students were selected using purposive sampling. The data collection technique used is the technique of interview, observation partisipatif,study documents, and questionnaires. Based on data analysis, obtained results of the study are: 1) variable learning plan for each teacher can be said to correspond to Permendikbud No. 22, 2016; 2) learning model in the implementation of applied learning by each teacher is different but still within the context of the same approach; 3) based on the student's perspective based questionnaires,implementation of learning each teacher reaches criteria.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".