MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3113276925 · doi:10.33487/edumaspul.v4i2.715

Pengembangan Program Sanggar Kegiatan Belajar (SKB) Kabupaten Enrekang melalui Model Kemitraan

2020· article· id· W3113276925 on OpenAlexaff
Ibrahim Ibrahim, Saidang Saidang, Suparman Suparman

Bibliographic record

VenueEdumaspul - Jurnal Pendidikan · 2020
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Curriculum and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysicsPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Banyak permasalahan yang sebenarnya dialami oleh SKB seperti keterbatasan dalam hal pendanaan dan fasilitas. Keterbatasan dana, dan fasilitas menyebabkan peran lembaga mitra sangat penting untuk mendukung penyelenggaraan program di SKB. Lembaga mitra baik pemerintah maupun swasta memiliki peran penting dalam penyelenggaraan dan menentukan keberhasilan program yang dilaksanakan oleh SKB. Dengan menjalin kemitraan dengan lembaga lain, SKB diharapkan dapat mengatasi kelemahan dan tantangan yang terjadi dalam penyelenggaraan programnya. Meskipun lembaga mitra mempunyai peran sangat penting, tetapi masih banyak SKB belum optimal melaksanakan kemitraan dengan lembaga lain dan hanya mengandalkan bantuan pemerintah pusat yang jumlahnya sangat terbatas dan belum dapat mengatasi permasalahan yang ada. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk : 1) Menggambarkan perencanaan program kemitraan yang dilaksankan oleh UPT SKB Kabupaten Enrekang, 2) Menggambarkan implementasi model kemitraaan yang dilaksanakan oleh UPT SKB Kabupaten Enrekang.Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kualitatif. Subjek penelitian adalah Kepala UPT SKB Kabupaten Enrekang, pamong UPT SKB Kabupaten Enrekang, staff Dinas Pendidikan Pemuda dan Olahraga Kabupaten Kabupaten Enrekang, serta pengelola PKBM Padel. Pengumpulan data menggunakan metode wawancara. Peneliti merupakan instrument utama penelitian dengan dibantu pedoman wawancara. Teknik analisis data yang dilakukan adalah display data, reduksi data dan penarikan kesimpulan. Teknik trianggulasi yang dilakukan untuk menjelaskan keabsahan data dengan menggunakan trianggulasi sumber.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.012

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEdumaspul - Jurnal PendidikanSame topicEducational Curriculum and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207