MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384203941 · doi:10.1080/17457823.2023.2232500

Ethnomathematics study in measurement of Bengkalis Malay community as mathematics resources for elementary school

2023· article· en· W4384203941 on OpenAlexaff
Rena Anriana, Gustimal Witri, Zetra Hainul Putra, Muhammad Fendrik, Dahnilsyah Dahnilsyah, Ayman Aljarrah

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnography & Education · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalayEthnomathematicsMathematics educationDocumentationQualitative researchData collectionPedagogyEthnographyMathematicsSociologySocial scienceComputer scienceAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research seeks to explore the ethnomathematical study of measurements of the Bengkalis Malay community as a study of mathematics instructional material for elementary schools. The method used is an ethnographic study which is part of the qualitative research method. The data collection techniques were observation, interview, filed notes, and documentation. The results of this study indicate that there is an ethnomathematical notion on the measurement of the Bengkalis Malay community related to measurement material for elementary school, including in the topics of measuring length, weight, area, volume, and time. Those non-standard measurement units are still used and well-known in the community. In contrast, teachers and students at elementary schools only know some terminologies and do not frequently practice them in schools. Thus, the researchers recommend incorporating ethnomathematics of measurement activities from the Bengkalis Malay community as mathematics resources for learning mathematics in elementary school.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthnography & EducationSame topicMathematics Education and Teaching TechniquesFrench-language works237,207