Efektivitas Pembelajaran Investigasi Kelompok Berbantuan Peta Konsep Terhadap Pemahaman Konsep Matematis Siswa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tujuan penelitian ini adalah menganalisis keefektifan pembelajaran investigasi kelompok berbantuan peta konsep terhadap pemahaman konsep matematis siswa. Jenis penelitian ini adalah penelitian kuantitatif dengan metode eksperimen semu ( quasi experiment ). Pada kelas eksperimen siswa diajarkan dengan pembelajaran investigasi kelompok berbantuan peta konsep dan pada kelas kontrol siswa diajarkan dengan pembelajaran ekspositori. Populasi dalam penelitian ini adalah siswa kelas XI MIPA SMA Negeri 1 Ngabang Tahun Ajaran 2019/2020. Pemilihan sampel menggunakan teknik cluster random sampling , diperoleh kelas XI MIPA A sebagai kelas eksperimen dan kelas XI MIPA C sebagai kelas kontrol. Analisis data akhir menggunakan one sample t-test , uji proporsi pihak kanan, dan uji rata-rata pihak kanan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa ketuntasan individu pemahaman konsep matematis kelas eksperimen memenuhi KKM dan secara klasikal mencapai 70%. Kemudian pemahaman konsep matematis siswa pada kelas eksperimen lebih baik daripada kelas kontrol. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian disimpulkan bahwa pembelajaran investigasi kelompok berbantuan peta konsep efektif terhadap pemahaman konsep matematis siswa.
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 | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.004 |
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.
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".