MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391065155 · doi:10.5539/jel.v13n1p150

The Development of the Ability to Solve Mathematical Problems and Academic Achievement Decimal Problem of Prathomsuksa6 Students Through Cooperative Learning Management STAD and KWDL Technique

2024· article· en· W4391065155 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chanwit Heebkaew, Yannapat Seehamongkon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematics Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMahasarakham University
KeywordsDecimalMathematics educationTest (biology)MathematicsCooperative learningArithmeticTeaching method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research aimed to achieve the following objectives: 1)Assess the effectiveness of cooperative learning management utilizing the STAD technique and KWDL technique among PrathomSuksa6 students in solving decimal problems, with a target of achieving a 75/75 criterion. 2) Enhance the problem-solving abilities of grade 6students in mathematics by implementing cooperative learning management using the combined STAD technique and KWDL technique, compared to a 75 percent criterion. 3) Improve the learning achievement in mathematics of grade 6 students in solving decimal problems through cooperative learning management, employing the STAD technique and KWDL technique, in line with a 75 percent criterion. The research was conducted with a selected group of 33 students from Prathomsuksa6/1, first semester, academic year 2022, at Ban Chiang Yuen School. The research tools employed were: 1) a cooperative learning plan incorporating the STAD and KWDL techniques, 2) a mathematics problem-solving ability test, and 3) a mathematics learning achievement test. Data analysis involved the use of percentage, mean, standard deviation, and efficiency (E1/E2). The findings of the study indicated the following: Cooperative learning management using the STAD technique and KWDL technique exhibited an efficiency of 76.14/75.45, satisfying the 75/75 criterion. The average mathematics score post-intervention was 75.76 percent, surpassing the 75 percent criterion. Mathematics learning achievement, as measured by the average score post-intervention, reached 75.45 percent, fulfilling the 75 percent criterion.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicMathematics Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207