Effect of Reciprocal Learning in Big Ball Games to Improve Physical Literacy of 12-Year-Old Junior High School Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical literacy is the development of various human movements consisting of basic movement skills and basic sports skills, so that these skills provide tools for humans to do physical activities that improve or maintain lifelong health. On average, students after school do not have time to do physical activities, this shows that awareness of physical activity is very low, in addition, in physical education learning there are still students who lack and have not optimized physical activity, so that motivation, understanding, knowledge and movement activities in children decrease. This study aims to determine the effect of reciprocal learning in big ball games in improving physical literacy in 12-year-old children at the junior high school level. The method in this study uses a randomized control group pretest-posttest design experimental study, this experimental study was conducted on a group with a control or comparison group, the research sample consisted of 12-year-old children at the junior high school level, the research instrument used in this study adopted from the measurement of physical literacy from the Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy (CAPL). The results in the independent t-test output table in the equal variances assumed section are known to have a Sig (2-tailed) of 0.015 <0.05 so that a decision can be taken that in the independent sample t-test it can be concluded that Ho is rejected and Ha is accepted, thus the results of this study conclude that there is a significant difference in the final test results of reciprocal learning in big ball games in improving physical literacy between the intervention group and the control group.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".