MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412511392 · doi:10.31004/jerkin.v4i1.1756

Tingkat Literasi Fisik Siswa Kelas 5 SD Berdasarkan Hasil Pre-Test Cannadian Assessment Of Physical Literacy Second Edition (CAPL-2)

2025· article· id· W4412511392 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ai Faridah, Dian Permana

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat dan Riset Pendidikan · 2025
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSports and Physical Education Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)PsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan tingkat literasi fisik siswa sekolah dasar pada aspek aktivitas fisik. Literasi fisik merupakan salah satu indikator penting dalam upaya mewujudkan pola hidup sehat sejak usia dini. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode deskriptif kuantitatif dengan subjek seluruh siswa kelas 5 SDN 6 Nagrikaler yang berjumlah 30 orang. Instrumen yang digunakan adalah tes CAPL-2 pre-test yang meliputi aspek aktivitas fisik melalui pengukuran PACER test, plank, dan CAMSA (Canadian Agility and Movement Skill Assessment). Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa rata-rata skor aktivitas fisik siswa adalah 15,1. Berdasarkan kategori penilaian, sebanyak 1 siswa (3,3%) berada pada kategori Kurang, 9 siswa (30%) berada pada kategori Cukup, 13 siswa (43,3%) pada kategori Baik, dan 7 siswa (23,3%) pada kategori Sangat Baik. Temuan ini menunjukkan bahwa sebagian besar siswa telah memiliki tingkat aktivitas fisik yang baik, namun masih diperlukan intervensi khusus untuk meningkatkan partisipasi aktivitas fisik bagi siswa yang berada pada kategori Kurang dan Cukup. Pengukuran literasi fisik dengan instrumen CAPL-2 terbukti efektif untuk memberikan gambaran objektif sebagai dasar perencanaan program peningkatan aktivitas fisik di sekolah dasar

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.412 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat dan Riset PendidikanSame topicSports and Physical Education ResearchFrench-language works237,207