PENGEMBANGAN PERMAINAN ULAR TANGGA DALAM BIMBINGAN KELOMPOK UNTUK MENINGKATKAN RASA PERCAYA DIRI SISWA SMP KELAS IX
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstrakPenelitian bertujuan: Untuk mengetahui bagaimana pengembangan permainan ular tangga dalam bimbingan kelompok untuk meningkatkan rasa percaya diri siswa kelas IX di SMP Negeri 1 Batujajar. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode research and development, dari 10 tahapan peneliti menggunakan 7 tahapan menyeseuaikan kebutuhan penelitian dengan langkah-langkah sebagai berikut: (1) Identifikasi Masalah, (2) Pengumpulan Data, (3) Tahap Perencanaan, (4) Pengembangan Draft Produk, (5) Validasi Produk, (6) Uji Coba Produk, (7) Revisi Produk. Hasil penelitian ini dapat dilihat dari hasil validasi ahli media yang mendapat persentase 92,00%, ahli materi mendapatkan 92,00%, dan ahli praktisi mendapatkan 90,46%. Maka dari validasi keseluruhan yang telah dilaksanakan diperoleh hasil rata-rata 91,33%, maka kualitas kelayakan produk yang dikembangkan termasuk dalam kategori “Sangat Layak”.Kata Kunci: Permainan Ular Tangga, Bimbingan Kelompok, Percaya Diri
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.011 |
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".