MENINGKATKAN HASIL BELAJAR PESERTA DIDIK MATA PELAJARAN ILMU PENGETAHUAN SOSIAL MENGGUNAKAN MODEL PEMBELAJARAN CONTEXTUAL TEACHING AND LEARNING (CTL) BERBANTU MEDIA MINIATUR LINGKUNGAN ALAM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penelitian ini mengkaji mengenai studi literatur. Metode studi literatur adalah serangkaian kegiatan yang berkenaan dengan metode pengumpulan data pustaka, membaca dan mencatat, serta mengelolah bahan penelitian. Berhasilnya tujuan pembelajaran ditentukan oleh banyak faktor diantaranya adalah faktor guru dalam melaksanakan proses belajar mengajar, karena guru secara langsung dapat mempengaruhi, membina dan meningkatkan kecerdasan serta keterampilan peserta didik. Penggunaan model Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) berbantu media Miniatur Lingkungan Alam dan Buatan memberikan pengalaman nyata, berfikir tingkat tinggi, berpusat pada peserta didik, kritis dan kreatif, pengetahuan bermakna dalam kehidupan, dekat dengan kehidupan nyata, adanya perubahan prilaku serta pengetahuan. Selain itu hasil belajar peserta didik dapat meningkat
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.006 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".