MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4207021030 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2021.12.017

Achievement of student graduates: The role of e-readiness, e-learning and e-book

2022· article· en· W4207021030 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Agus Dudung, Uswatun Hasanah, Ibnu Salman, Sugeng Priyanto, Tri Wahyudi Ramdhan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Media Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimple random sampleMathematics educationCurriculumPsychologySample (material)Graduate studentsAcademic achievementStudent achievementStructural equation modelingPopulationComputer sciencePedagogySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to determine the effect of e-readiness, e-learning, e-book on the achievement of graduate students; and the influence of e-readiness, e-learning, and e-books on the achievement of graduate students. The research population is graduate students with a sample of 210 doctoral students in Jakarta. The sample selection method is simple random sampling. The research method is a survey method with an associative approach. The data analysis technique is structural equation modeling (SEM) using SmartPLS 3.3.3 software and the data was obtained through the distribution of online questionnaires. The results show that there was an effect of e-readiness on graduate achievement; there was an effect of e-learning on graduate achievement; and finally, there was an effect of e-books on graduate achievement. This research can indicate that the curriculum developed by the students is in accordance with the learning outcomes, especially in the implementation of the learning process.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicEducational Methods and Media UseFrench-language works237,207