MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187027873 · doi:10.20961/shes.v3i4.53401

The Improvement of Civic Education Instructional Quality Throught Make a Match Model Assisted Picture Card Media

2021· article· en· W3187027873 on OpenAlexaff
Leny Shela Purnianingrum

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Humanities and Educational Studies (SHEs) Conference Series · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEducational Reforms and Innovations
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose of research to improve the quality of Civic Education Instructional Quality Throught Make a Match Model Assisted Picture Card Media. Research design used classroom action research, it conducted of three cycles with four stages: planning, running, observing, and reflecting. The techniques data collection used observation, test, documentation, interview and field notes. The techniques of data analized used Qualitative and quantitative descriptive. The research findings showed: (1) the skill of teacher improved in every cycle. In cycle I, the score was 28 with good criteria. In cycle II, the score was 32 with good criteria. In cycle III, the score was 35 with very good criteria, (2) Students activity showed improvement in every cycle. In cycle I, the score was 21,7 with enough criteria In cycle II, the score was 25,13 with good criteria. In cycle III, the score was 28,21 with good criteria, (3) Students learning outcome showed improvement in every cycle with classical comprehension in cycle I 63%, cycle II 76,32%, and cycle III 86,84%. Conclusion of the research is make a match Model Assisted Picture Card Media can improve the quality of civic education instructional.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0500.007

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 head0.324
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Humanities and Educational Studies (SHEs) Conference SeriesSame topicEducational Reforms and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207