Peningkatan Prestasi Belajar PAI Materi Membaca Al-Quran dengan Tartil melalui Metode Demonstrasi pada Siswa Kelas IX A Di SMP Negeri 4 Trenggalek
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstrak: T Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian tindakan kelas (PTK) sebanyak dua putaran (siklus) merujuk pada metode yang dikembangkan oleh Kemmis dan McTaggart. Subjek penelitian ini adalah siswa Kelas IX A semester 2 SMP Negeri 4 Trenggalek Kabupaten Trenggalek tahun pelajaran 2018/2019. Data yang diperoleh berupa hasil tes formatif lembar kegiatan belajar mengajar. Pada pelaksanaan pembelajaran sebelum diadakan penelitian, nilai rata-rata siswa sebesar 68.92 dengan persentase ketuntasan belajar sebesar 36.00%. Pada pelaksanaan siklus I diperoleh nilai rata-rata sebesar 73.92 dengan persentase ketuntasan belajar sebesar 64.00% jauh lebih baik dari hasil pada sebelum siklus dengan peningkatan nilai rata-rata sebesar 5.00 dengan peningkatan persentase ketuntasan sebesar 28.00%. Peningkatan prestasi belajar siswa terus berkembang hingga pada akhir siklus II yang memperoleh nilai rata-rata 78.76 dengan prosentase ketuntasan sebesar 96.00%. Apabila dibandingkan prestasi pada siklus I, terjadi peningkatan nilai rata-rata sebesar 4.84 dan ketuntasan sebesar 32.00%.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".