Pengaruh Infokus Terhadap Hasil dan Keaktifan Belajar Matematika Siswa SMPN 1 Wamena Tahun Pelajaran 2024/2025
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infokus merupakan salah satu media pembelajaran yang dapat digunakan oleh guru untuk menarik perhatian siswa pada saat guru menjelaskan materi pelajaran sehingga dapat meningkatkan hasil belajar matematika siswa dan keaktifan. Tujuan penelitian adalah untuk mengetahui apakah ada pengaruh penggunaan infokus terhadap hasil belajar dan keaktifan belajar matematika siswa SMPN 1 Wamena. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kuantitatif dengan pendekatan kuantitatif deskriptif. Teknik analisis data yang digunakan adalah statistik Inferensial dengan uji paired sample t-test menggunakan SPSS versi 23. Sampel penelitian diambil secara purposive sampling yaitu sebanyak 23 orang. Adanya perbedaan rata-rata hasil belajar siswa setelah dan sesudah penggunaan test sebesar 19,96. Berdasarkan hasil uji paired sampel t-test menunjukkan nilai 0,001 < 0,05 yang berarti ada perbedaan hasil belajar sebelum menggunakan infokus dan sesudah menggunakan infokus. Pada hasil belajar dan keaktifan belajar nilai signifikansinnya 0,000 < 0,05, maka dapat disimpulkan bahwa ada pengaruh media infokus terhadap hasil belajar siswa ditinjau dari keaktifan belajar. Berdasarkan sebaran angket yang diberikan diperoleh data bahwa 75% siswa lebih aktif saat guru menggunakan infokus.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.066 | 0.013 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".