The Influence of Social Interaction Learning Model, Learning Motivation, Social Attitude on the Student Learning Result of Geographic Subject in Public Senior High Schools in Aceh Province
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The aim of this research is to test the difference of sudents learning outcome of Geographic subject taught with social inquiry learning model, social simulation and students’ social investigation, social behavior, learning motivation of SMA in Aceh Province. Design/methodology/approach – The research methodology employed in his research was quasi-experimental with the design using a Non-equivalent Control Group Design method. The experimental class and the control of this research are selected randomly. The subject of this research is ninth grade student of public SMA in Aceh Province, Indonesia. Based on the early observation that the researcher conducts, total public SMA in Aceh is 344 schools. This study took 3 (three) study group of every SMA to be managed as a research subject, which was a class taught using a group investigation, social inquiry, and social simulation learning method. Data analysis technique is inferential analysis intended to test the research hypothesis conducted by using varians analysis technique (ANAVA). Findings – The findings that there are no differences in student learning outcomes of Geography subject taught with social inquiry learning models (A1), social simulation learning models (A2) and group investigative learning models (A3). There are differences in the learning outcome of geography subject and different social attitude, which is a high social attitude (B1) and social attitude (B2). There is an interaction between the learning model (A), social attitudes (B) and learning motivation (C). There is an interaction between learning models (A) and social attitudes (B). There is an interaction between learning model (A) and learning motivation (C). There is an interaction between learning model (A) and learning motivation (C). Originality/value – The research on the application of social interaction learning model to improve learning motivation, social attitude, and students learning outcome at the geographic subject of SMA in Aceh Province, Indonesia.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".