The relationship between self-efficacy and computational thinking skills of fifth grade elementary 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
Self-efficacy and computational thinking skills are necessary in this technological development age. However, only some studies still discuss the relationship between the two variables. The purpose of this study is to determine the form of relationship between self-efficacy and computational thinking skills of fifth-grade elementary school students. This study applied correlational quantitative research without accompanying the treatment of the subjects. The respondents for this study were 84 fifth-grade students from three public schools in Pekanbaru. Two types of instruments are used in this study, including questionnaires and computational thinking skills tests. The results showed a correlation coefficient of -0.036 with Sig. (2-tailed) 0.747 > 0.05. That is, there is a very low relationship, it has a negative direction, and it is not significant between self-efficacy and computational thinking skills of fifth-grade elementary school students. Self-efficacy contributes to the influence of computational thinking skills by only 0.12%, and other factors influence the remaining 99.88%. This study is expected to provide an overview of self-efficacy and computational thinking skills of fifth-grade students in Pekanbaru and is expected to be an additional reference for further study.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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