PENGEMBANGAN PERMAINAN ULAR TANGGA DALAM BIMBINGAN KELOMPOK UNTUK MENINGKATKAN RASA PERCAYA DIRI SISWA SMP KELAS IX
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
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 Layakâ€.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.
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 | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
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