MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399474453 · doi:10.24815/jpsi.v12i2.37609

The Influence of The Problem-Based Learning with Radical Constructivism Module on Students' Problem-Solving Skills

2024· article· en· W4399474453 on OpenAlexaff
Riza Ulhaq, Ismul Huda, Hafnati Rahmatan, Nir Fathiya, Kristina Merencillo Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Pendidikan Sains Indonesia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematics Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsLambton College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstructivism (international relations)Problem-based learningMathematics educationTest (biology)Class (philosophy)Computer sciencePsychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Problem solving skills (PSS) are one of the high-level thinking skills that must be possessed by students. This skill will help students apply scientific content to solve problems in real life. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of problem based learning (PBL) models with a radical construktivism module on PSS. Data were collected in February to March 2022. The method in this study used an experimental method with nonrandomized post test only control-group design. This research was conducted in two classes: the experimental class using PBL model learning with radical constructivism module and the control class that only using PBL model learning. The samples were 160 students. The instrument was tests to assess PSS. Data analysis used independent sample t-test to determine effect of PBL model learning with radical constructivism module on PSS. T-test results showed that value sig 0,05. The result showed that students who received PBL model learning and the radical constructivism module obtained significantly better PSS compared to students who only received PBL model learning

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.592

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Pendidikan Sains IndonesiaSame topicMathematics Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207