MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Implementation of Pancasila Student Profile Strengthening Project Training for Early Childhood Teachers in Rangkasbitung District

2024· article· en· W4405768035 on OpenAlexaff
Eka Setiawati, Agustinus Tandilo Mamma, Nunung Nurhayati, Y Yusdiana, Yuyum Yuningsih

Bibliographic record

VenueSalus Publica Journal of Community Service · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Curriculum and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraining (meteorology)Mathematics educationMedical educationPedagogyPsychologyPolitical scienceGeographyMedicineMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the Pancasila Student Profile Strengthening training for Early Childhood Education teachers using the expository method. The expository method was chosen to provide a systematic and direct understanding of the Pancasila student profile concept, where participants received material through lectures and presentations delivered by the training facilitators. This research employed a quantitative approach by collecting data through post-training evaluation tests to measure the teachers' level of understanding of the presented material. The training results showed that 80% of the participants successfully comprehended the Pancasila student profile concept and were able to design activities relevant to its objectives, while 20% of the participants did not fully grasp the material. Factors influencing these differing results include participants' prior knowledge, professional experience, and the intensity of their engagement in the training sessions. Based on these findings, it is recommended that follow-up training adopt more interactive learning methods, such as group discussions and case studies, to enhance the understanding of participants who have not yet mastered the concepts optimally.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designObservational
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 venueSalus Publica Journal of Community ServiceSame topicEducational Curriculum and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207