MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3147240295 · doi:10.29173/iasl7843

Ghost of National Final Exams that (still) haunts the Indonesian School Libraries' Information Literacy Activities and Students' Reading Interests

2021· article· en· W3147240295 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
L. Sulistyo‐Basuki

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Media Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndonesianClass (philosophy)Reading (process)Foreign languageDisadvantageGovernment (linguistics)Mathematics educationLiteracySociologyPedagogyPsychologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceLinguisticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Indonesian government introduced the compulsory-nation-wide National Exam (called Ujian Nasional in Bahasa Indonesia shortened to UN) since 2005. The systems required the students of class 6,9 and 12 to pass the National Exam in certain courses. This paper limits to class 12 as they will enroll to higher education. For class 12 there are threee compulsory courses, that are Indonesian Language, English and mathematics. As class 12 was divided into three departments (i.e. natural sciences, social sciences and language), each students must participate in the related-courseexams such those who choose natural sciences must take Physics, Chemistry, Biology; for social sciences the students must take Economics, Geography, Sociology while those from language department must take Indonesian literature, Anthropology and selected foreign languages (Chinese n, Japanese, German, Arab language) respectively. As the National Exam are compulsory, then the schools teach the students mostly in those subjects, sometime sacrificing other courses, the students are crammed only the required courses. Indirectly the students supported by the teachers are involved in information literacy activities albeit limited to certain subjects and usually using widely internet and google (a disadvantage for students with limited technological infrastructure and not 24 hours-electricity facilitiy). As being drilled into National Exam required courses, then the students are not really complete information literate person, they just partly information literate. Sacrificing other subjects, the students do not read literary books, they just read the novel excerps(!) This findings supported the acclaimed Indonesian poet Taufik Ismail who denoted that the Indonesian high school students since 1970s do not literary works at all. Apart from the (controversial) National Exam systems, from library point-of-view it is suggested that the school libraries actively took part in the information literacy holistically not partially in order to support the life long learning through information literacy program.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.006
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicEducational Methods and Media UseFrench-language works237,207