Instructional Management Through Project-Based Learning Combined with Collaborative Learning to Enhance Learning Achievement of Undergraduate Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global citizenship should acknowledge various lessons in global education emphasizing learners as the global citizens. Teaching techniques integration that is suitable for contents and the nature of learners is considered as the heart of instructional management affecting students greatly in the 21st century. This study aims: 1) to determine the quality of the learning achievement test; 2) to compare the pre-test and post-test learning achievement of students through activities of the project-based learning (PjBL) combined with collaborative learning; and 3) to study student’s satisfaction toward PjBL activities. Research method includes 4 steps: 1) data study; 2) activity design; 3) tools creation; and 4) learning activity management. A questionnaire and a learning achievement test are implied as tools. The sample comprises 40 undergraduate students and 5 experts who are selected by the purposive sampling and have experienced teaching for more than 10 years from 4 higher education institutes. Data is analyzed with mean, standard deviation, and t-test. Results indicate that: 1) the learning achievement test that has been already qualified is a 5-choice, 65 items, which are a content validity and a whole reliability value of 0.912; 2) the post-test learning achievement is higher than the pre-test with a statistical significance level of .05; and 3) an overall student’s satisfaction is at the highest level (X= 4.72, SD = 0.33).
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".