Development of Science Learning Activities Using Inquiry-Based Learning Management to Improve the Academic Achievement of Secondary School Students
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this research were as follows: (1) to develop learning activities in science and technology subjects using inquiry-based learning for seventh-grade students (12-13 years old); (2) to develop academic achievement for the topic of elements and compounds using inquiry-based learning management activities to meet the 70% requirement; and (3) to assess the satisfaction of seventh-grade students who are taught with inquiry-based learning management. The target group of this study was 24 seventh-grade students on the science and technology course. The research tools included seven inquiry-based learning management plans, an achievement test, and a satisfaction assessment. The results show that synthesizing the approach to learning management using inquiry-based learning led to the formulation of learning activities. Students had better academic achievement, with a mean score of 81.45%, which was above the 70% requirement. Students were satisfied with inquiry-based learning activities, with an average of 4.75 and a standard deviation of 0.48, which is the highest level.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it