MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378188458 · doi:10.31869/mi.v17i2.4287

KORELASI FASILITAS BELAJAR BLENDED LEARNING DAN LINGKUNGAN KELUARGA TERHADAP HASIL BELAJAR BIOLOGI PADA MASA PANDEMI COVID-19

2023· article· id· W4378188458 on OpenAlexaff
Yendrita Yendrita, Opi Rahma Hidayat, Wulan Anggundari

Bibliographic record

VenueMenara Ilmu · 2023
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Curriculum and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsImmunoPrecise (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysicsMathematicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui korelasi antara fasilitas belajar pada pembelajaran Blended learning dan lingkungan keluarga dengan hasil belajar biologi pada masa pandemi Covid-19 di SMA Negeri 1 Kecamatan Lareh Sago Halaban. Jenis penelitian ini adalah penelitian kuantitatif deskriptif korelasional.. Populasi pada penelitian ini adalah seluruh siswa X IPA 1 sampai X IPA 5 yang berjumlah 177 orang siswa. Teknik pengambilan kelas sampel menggunakan teknik purposive random sampling dan teknik pengambilan sampel pada masing-masing kelas menggunakan teknik Stratified Random Sampling. Data dianalisa dengan menggunakan rumus korelasi Product Moment. Hasil uji signifikansi fasilitas belajar (x1) dengan hasil belajar (Y) diperoleh thitung =1,603 dan ttabel = 2,052 (thitung< ttabel) berarti fasilitas belajar tidak berkorelasi secara signifikan terhadap hasil belajar siswa (Y). Hasil uji signifikansi lingkungan keluarga (x2) diperoleh thitung= 2,259 dan ttabel = 2,052 (thitung>ttabel ) berarti lingkungan keluarga memiliki korelasi yang signifikan terhadap hasil belajar biologi siswa. Selanjutnya korelasi ganda dengan uji-F diperoleh Fhitung=1,222 dan Ftabel=3,380 (Fhitung

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.004

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.315 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMenara IlmuSame topicEducational Curriculum and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207