MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991511900 · doi:10.24256/iqro.v2i2.990

Peningkatan Motivasi dan Hasil Belajar Melalui Metode Buzz Group

2019· article· en· W2991511900 on OpenAlexaff
Hardayanti Bahning

Bibliographic record

VenueIQRO Journal of Islamic Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Character Development
Canadian institutionsBell (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarketing buzzPsychologyMathematics educationMotivation to learnMathematicsAdvertising

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research supported by the lack of motivation and learning outcomes islamic education students educated at. vocational schoolThe purpose of this research to know the learning methods he continued to buzz can increase motivation and learning outcomes in learning. islamic educationThis study research the act of class ( class room action research conducted ). cycle as much asThe subject is the muslim students xi route tourism state 1 integrated luwu ponrang 24. as the southData collection techniques used is, observation the survey and by using an instrument shaped double. about choiceData analyzed using analysis. descriptiveThe analysis of data observation students at cycle i obtained the average percentage of the students only 50.044 % ( low ) increased to percent of high 82.22 in cycle II. The spread of chief motivation students on cycle i obtained the average the percentage motivation students only of 59,75 % ( being ) increased to 71.5 % ( high in cycle ii) .Next based on hasi analysis student learning test study results obtained the average students on pre cycle of 62.167 ( less of the total value 1492 with the ketuntasan klasikal is only 29.17 % , you are an increase of cycle i with the average score of 67.667 ( less ) while the up 37.5

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIQRO Journal of Islamic EducationSame topicEducation and Character DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207