MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994882956 · doi:10.5539/ies.v13n1p11

The Effect of Biotechology Module with Problem Based Learning in the Socioscientific Context to Enhance Students’ Socioscientific Decision Making Skills

2019· article· en· W2994882956 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClass (philosophy)Mathematics educationContext (archaeology)Test (biology)Science educationControl (management)MathematicsComputer scienceBiologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This aim of the research was to train socioscientific decision making skills for the science students. Students are involved to solve the socioscientific problems by making informative and systematic decisions. The development of socioscientific decision making skills was done by applying biotechnological module based on Problem-based Learning with socioscientific cases. Quasi-experimental design was used in this research. Two science classes were employed in this research: first class for experimental class which had the treatment by applying biotechnology module based on problem-based learning and another class for control class using biology books from school. Those two classes were given the same questions in pre-test and post-test to measure socioscientific decision making skills. The research results showed that the average post-test score of socioscientific decision making skills in experimental class was 82.80 which is higher than the control class (62.32); moreover, normalized gain score in experimental class obtaining 0.745 and this is also higher than that in control class (0.434). The results of ANCOVA analysis show, that there was significant differences in the score of socioscientific decision making skills between experimental class and the control one by the value of F count (25.54), this value was higher than F table (4.075). In addition, the score of partial eta squared was 0,384, which means that the application of PBL-based module with socioscientific cases have the high level of effectiveness to improve socioscientific decision making skills. The result of assessment transcript in the decision making quality showed that experimental class has the decision supported by the justified arguments which is contains 2-4 socioscientific aspects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.407 · 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